On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 21:08:15 +0100, NY wrote:

Excellent flying as well, not only close to the dam but also
hardly any
lurch upwards when they drop a couple of bags...

Yes I was amazed at how well the pilot was able to compensate the amount
of lift as he let go of a ton of ballast. I wonder how much "autopilot"
type assistance the pilot gets in maintaining a constant height as the
load varies and if there are any gusts.

Don't know if a Chinook has any such automatics. In some ways I be
surprised if they do, such automatics have a habit of not letting you
"push the envelope" which an aircraft in a combat zone may wish to
do... It's also added complexilty thus something else to go wrong.

Being RAF it won't be the first time they have dropped underslung
loads and they'll know the aircraft very well and how much to reduce
the pitch of the rotors for a given weight loss. I guess that they
don't reduce the pitch until they feel the weight go rather than on a
count, just in case the release doesnt happen...

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 21:08:15 +0100, NY wrote:

Excellent flying as well, not only close to the dam but also
hardly any
lurch upwards when they drop a couple of bags...

Yes I was amazed at how well the pilot was able to compensate the amount
of lift as he let go of a ton of ballast. I wonder how much "autopilot"
type assistance the pilot gets in maintaining a constant height as the
load varies and if there are any gusts.

Don't know if a Chinook has any such automatics. In some ways I be
surprised if they do, such automatics have a habit of not letting you
"push the envelope" which an aircraft in a combat zone may wish to
do... It's also added complexilty thus something else to go wrong.

Being RAF it won't be the first time they have dropped underslung
loads and they'll know the aircraft very well and how much to reduce
the pitch of the rotors for a given weight loss. I guess that they
don't reduce the pitch until they feel the weight go rather than on a
count, just in case the release doesnt happen...

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the Sea-Kings
even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable as kestrels,
and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that pilots have the
reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have some sort of
inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about this at a county
show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all manual. But perhaps he
was winding me up.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a086969.pdf
says they do and its used for ASW ops when its hovering
dipping submarine detectors in the water, with two
modes, barometric pressure and radio altitude hold.

newshound wrote:
On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 21:08:15 +0100, NY wrote:

Excellent flying as well, not only close to the dam but also
hardly any
lurch upwards when they drop a couple of bags...

Yes I was amazed at how well the pilot was able to compensate the amount
of lift as he let go of a ton of ballast. I wonder how much "autopilot"
type assistance the pilot gets in maintaining a constant height as the
load varies and if there are any gusts.

Don't know if a Chinook has any such automatics. In some ways I be
surprised if they do, such automatics have a habit of not letting you
"push the envelope" which an aircraft in a combat zone may wish to
do... It's also added complexilty thus something else to go wrong.

Being RAF it won't be the first time they have dropped underslung
loads and they'll know the aircraft very well and how much to reduce
the pitch of the rotors for a given weight loss. I guess that they
don't reduce the pitch until they feel the weight go rather than on a
count, just in case the release doesnt happen...

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.


He was. They had an auto-pilot system to help with holding a hover in
difficult conditions.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 21:08:15 +0100, NY wrote:

Excellent flying as well, not only close to the dam but also
hardly any
lurch upwards when they drop a couple of bags...

Yes I was amazed at how well the pilot was able to compensate the amount
of lift as he let go of a ton of ballast. I wonder how much "autopilot"
type assistance the pilot gets in maintaining a constant height as the
load varies and if there are any gusts.

Don't know if a Chinook has any such automatics. In some ways I be
surprised if they do, such automatics have a habit of not letting you
"push the envelope" which an aircraft in a combat zone may wish to
do... It's also added complexilty thus something else to go wrong.

Being RAF it won't be the first time they have dropped underslung
loads and they'll know the aircraft very well and how much to reduce
the pitch of the rotors for a given weight loss. I guess that they
don't reduce the pitch until they feel the weight go rather than on a
count, just in case the release doesnt happen...

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.


He was. They had an auto-pilot system to help with holding a hover in
difficult conditions.

So a typical "top gun ******" helo pilot then.
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 08/08/2019 00:06, newshound wrote:

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.

If its fly by joystick then it will probably do it automatically.

The position sensors only cost about 20p these days as they are fitted
in phones.

Then you can use a downward looking camera as well like they do on mice.

On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 12:18:55 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the Sea-Kings
even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable as kestrels,
and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that pilots have the
reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have some sort of
inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about this at a county
show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all manual. But perhaps he
was winding me up.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a086969.pdf
says they do

The forsaken Australian asshole looked it up again! LOL I say, you piece of
**** got NOBODY to talk to in real life, simply because you ARE a piece of
****, senile Rodent!

--
Keema Nam addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You are now exposed as a liar, as well as an ignorant troll."
"MID: .com"

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 08/08/2019 00:06, newshound wrote:

Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the Sea-Kings
even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable as kestrels,
and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that pilots have the
reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have some sort of
inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about this at a county
show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all manual. But perhaps he
was winding me up.

If its fly by joystick then it will probably do it automatically.

Choppers dont have joysticks, they have a collective and cyclic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helico...light_controls

The position sensors only cost about 20p these days as they are fitted in
phones.

Thats not how you hover a chopper.
And the SeaKing is decades before phones.

Then you can use a downward looking camera as well like they do on mice.

Thats not how the Sea King hovers either.

On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 19:43:04 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH another auto-contradicting session by the pathological senile
auto-contradictor

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

In article , Jim K..
writes
bert Wrote in message:
In article , Jim K..
writes
"Dave Liquorice" Wrote in message:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 21:03:52 +0100, bert wrote:

I wonder how much they are costing. A ton of ballast is normally
£35
to £40.

Peanuts compared to the cost of the chinook, the national reslience
highvolume pumps and the some what larger other pumps that have now
been brought in, and the new road...

Are they actually ballast (as commonly understood), or are some
sand
and some stone?

I'd expect them to be something similar to MOT1 ie a mix of stones
down to dust. Packs together tightly.

You offering to go up with a whacker plate?


The bags may deteriorate when exposed to day light. The dumpy bags
for the slate chippings started to have no strength after a year of
exposure. The bags that the fire logs come do not noticeably weaken
after several years.

I think they'll have to be removed, you don't know whats underneath
or how well bedded they are. The concrete that they are pouring
between them to stabilse the mass might present more of a problem.

Won't they just be left there, and subsequently concreted over?

See above...

Shurely once the damn is emptied to 25% they'll be rebuilding it
properly?

A load of bags of heavy **** dumped from a helo does not sound
like a proper repair.....


Not likely to need rebuilding. It is a very simple construction built
before whacker plates were invented.

So you think a few hundred builders bags of aggregate and a bit of
skim concrete (finished with a wet finger?) is all that will
happen?

What will happen is not the same as what is necessary.
The original dam is made of material that did not need a whacker
plate, the "repair" is totally different...
The core of the dam appears to be undamaged. But no doubt the experts
will report soon. It will be a brave person who says no need to a
rebuild.
--
bert

bert Wrote in message:
In article , Jim K..
writes
bert Wrote in message:
In article , Jim K..
writes
"Dave Liquorice" Wrote in message:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 21:03:52 +0100, bert wrote:

I wonder how much they are costing. A ton of ballast is normally
£35
to £40.

Peanuts compared to the cost of the chinook, the national reslience
highvolume pumps and the some what larger other pumps that have now
been brought in, and the new road...

Are they actually ballast (as commonly understood), or are some
sand
and some stone?

I'd expect them to be something similar to MOT1 ie a mix of stones
down to dust. Packs together tightly.

You offering to go up with a whacker plate?


The bags may deteriorate when exposed to day light. The dumpy bags
for the slate chippings started to have no strength after a year of
exposure. The bags that the fire logs come do not noticeably weaken
after several years.

I think they'll have to be removed, you don't know whats underneath
or how well bedded they are. The concrete that they are pouring
between them to stabilse the mass might present more of a problem.

Won't they just be left there, and subsequently concreted over?

See above...

Shurely once the damn is emptied to 25% they'll be rebuilding it
properly?

A load of bags of heavy **** dumped from a helo does not sound
like a proper repair.....


Not likely to need rebuilding. It is a very simple construction built
before whacker plates were invented.

So you think a few hundred builders bags of aggregate and a bit of
skim concrete (finished with a wet finger?) is all that will
happen?

What will happen is not the same as what is necessary.
The original dam is made of material that did not need a whacker
plate, the "repair" is totally different...
The core of the dam appears to be undamaged. But no doubt the experts
will report soon. It will be a brave person who says no need to a
rebuild.

Or someone who has no clue...
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 05/08/2019 14:19, John Rumm wrote:
On 05/08/2019 13:45, Bill Wright wrote:
I'm just musing.

The bags appear to be standard one ton bags. Hundreds of them. Where are
they coming from?

Probably the nearest quarry... either that or all the local builder's
merchants are have a good week!

Early on they were saying the local quarry was donating them.

--
F

On 08/08/2019 08:47, Jim K.. wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.


He was. They had an auto-pilot system to help with holding a hover in
difficult conditions.

So a typical "top gun ******" helo pilot then.


Their autopilot is cleverer than just set altitude. When they are
dunking anti-submarine sonar they have to hold a constant altitude
_above_ _the_ _sea_. Which is a bit interesting on a rough day!

Andy

On 08/08/2019 21:26, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 08/08/2019 08:47, Jim K.. wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
newshound wrote:
On 07/08/2019 21:15, Dave Liquorice wrote:
Watching those "rescue" films, I'm amazed at the "hover" of the
Sea-Kings even in obviously gusty conditions. They look just as stable
as kestrels, and even though they are massive it seems remarkable that
pilots have the reflexes to achieve this. I'd always assumed they have
some sort of inertial control system. I asked a Sea-King pilot about
this at a county show about 20 years ago and he claimed it was all
manual. But perhaps he was winding me up.


He was. They had an auto-pilot system to help with holding a hover in
difficult conditions.

So a typical "top gun ******" helo pilot then.


Their autopilot is cleverer than just set altitude. When they are
dunking anti-submarine sonar they have to hold a constant altitude
_above_ _the_ _sea_. Which is a bit interesting on a rough day!

Andy
laser or radar rangefinder

BUT I dont believe they do that anymore - sonobuouys are cheap as chips
and you can carpet a whole area with them


--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:26:39 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:

Their autopilot is cleverer than just set altitude. When they are
dunking anti-submarine sonar they have to hold a constant altitude
_above_ _the_ _sea_. Which is a bit interesting on a rough day!

Easier when it's calm. As the Dambusters managed...

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor