Chinooks in Irish Airspace.

Dogwatch

It has been claimed on another forum that UK Chinooks are banned from Irish Airspace.
Would anyone be able to cast any light on this claim as I am unable to verify or deny the claim.

They are known for their unreliability but I did not know of any outright flying ban imposed on them.

goldie fish

Dogwatch wrote: »

It has been claimed on another forum that UK Chinooks are banned from Irish Airspace.
Would anyone be able to cast any light on this claim as I am unable to verify or deny the claim.

They are known for their unreliability but I did not know of any outright flying ban imposed on them.

News to me.
I Have a photo of one taken in Cork Airport Circa 1995.

the monk5845

well i would assume that as a military aircraft they would be. its the same as if British army personal where to cross the boarder into southern Ireland. Iv heard a couple of PDF personal talk about sending brit helicopters back over the boarder when they crossed though im not sure if this is too reliable

goldie fish

the monk5845 wrote: »

well i would assume that as a military aircraft they would be. its the same as if British army personal where to cross the boarder into southern Ireland. Iv heard a couple of PDF personal talk about sending brit helicopters back over the boarder when they crossed though im not sure if this is too reliable

How did they send them back?

Did they stand up and wave "shoo"? Or did they tie a rope around the helicopters tail and pull it back north?

Oink

goldie fish wrote: »

How did they send them back?

Did they stand up and wave "shoo"? Or did they tie a rope around the helicopters tail and pull it back north?

Radio? That's what I'd try first anyway.

airman101

they get permission from the irish embassy or the nearest atc to fly into irish airspace, its a fairly simple process, the same if irish air corps aircraft want to cross the border into the north or the navy want to go around the top of the country (obviously the navy does not go through atc for permission)....

the monk5845

goldie fish wrote: »

How did they send them back?

Did they stand up and wave "shoo"? Or did they tie a rope around the helicopters tail and pull it back north?

em this maybe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXQp8-uJSQo&feature=player_embedded#at=73 if the radio doesn't work :P

Morpheus

only if they conveniently fly low enough for us to hit them.

RMD

It's not exactly "banned", they're not allowed enter our airspace without permission, the same for every other country pretty much. An air corps aircraft can't just fly into British airspace without permission.

AFAIK we're pretty lenient on it. We rely on the RAF to save our ass if a serious issue arises, considering our aircraft aren't capable of catching a jet aircraft.

BrianD

Dogwatch wrote: »

It has been claimed on another forum that UK Chinooks are banned from Irish Airspace.
Would anyone be able to cast any light on this claim as I am unable to verify or deny the claim.

They are known for their unreliability but I did not know of any outright flying ban imposed on them.

Have never heard of a ban. Since most Chinooks are operated by foreign military they would need permission to fly through Irish airspace.

Dogwatch

The original claim was that UK Chinooks were specifically banned because of their reputation for falling out of the sky.
The claim is not related to the military aspect but banned under all circumstances.

Manic Moran

Might want to try the aviation forum, if there's a list of 'banned aircraft', they'll probably know about it. The civil designation is the Boeing 234.

That said, I would have thought the rules would be somewhere akin to those of other vehicles. If one EU country certifies it, they all have to accept it.

NTM

Dogwatch

Just as I thought. Thank you all for your input

punchdrunk

99% sure this ain't true

andy_g

Dogwatch. Its not true the only type of aircraft restricted in Ireland is rockets that I know of on the list.

Chinnys have full rome of irish airspace and not on the restricted aircraft list under the 1998 Restriction of Aircraft usage and certification act.

Full list is on the irish avaition authorities website found at.

www.iaa.ie

BrianD

Interesting to note that according to The Irish Times, one of the Chinooks was damaged while in Dublin. The high winds damaged a rotor blade and the aircraft is still grounded. It's not clear if the aircraft was flying at the time or while it was parked.

Anybody know if it's still there?

Dogwatch

There until Monday, I believe.

Lemming

Dogwatch wrote: »

It has been claimed on another forum that UK Chinooks are banned from Irish Airspace.
Would anyone be able to cast any light on this claim as I am unable to verify or deny the claim.

They are known for their unreliability but I did not know of any outright flying ban imposed on them.

Dogwatch wrote: »

The original claim was that UK Chinooks were specifically banned because of their reputation for falling out of the sky.
The claim is not related to the military aspect but banned under all circumstances.

You have misinterpreted what was said I believe on said other forum, and oversimplified your question above Dogwatch.

andy_g wrote: »

Dogwatch
Chinnys have full rome of irish airspace and not on the restricted aircraft list under the 1998 Restriction of Aircraft usage and certification act.

As I have been told - and I am open to correction by those from an aviation background more versed in legality than I - it's not to do with Chinooks, or British owned Chinooks. It's to do with airframe service records and Irish civilian airspace, not military.

Simply put, any helicopter that sees 'operational' service tends to have discrepancies in its service records due to a number of issues ranging from airframes being pushed past recommended operational tolerance, past recommend flight duration (where applicable; certainly a possibility case for aircrew themselves), generally being run into the ground since they're in a theatre of war, and that's before considering the fact that somebody somewhere is probably also shooting at them. If you want a flavour of what I'm talking about, go read 'Chicken Hawk'. Different war, different helicopter, same general stuff.

So as I understand it; if you or I were to go and buy a military helicopter, unless it had a service record that stands up to civilian authority scrutiny we'd be told to whistle dixie if we wanted to fly in civilian airspace.

That's not to say that foreign military helicopters - in this case Chinooks owned by the UK forces - follow the same standing as civilian owned models. Obviously there's the whole permission to enter sovereign airspace thing that has to go up the chain to be approved. It may be as simple as asking permission to enter Irish civilian airspace, but if it's not I would imagine that any wanting to enter civilian airspace may need to get the nod from higher up the food-chain again if they have airframe history discrepancies vs. those that have never seen active 'operational' service.

The last bit is guesswork and what seems 'logical' given what I've been told and understand on the matter so it is not scripture.

Dogwatch

Lemming wrote: »

You have misinterpreted what was said I believe on said other forum, and oversimplified your question above Dogwatch.



As I have been told - and I am open to correction by those from an aviation background more versed in legality than I - it's not to do with Chinooks, or British owned Chinooks. It's to do with airframe service records and Irish civilian airspace, not military.

Simply put, any helicopter that sees 'operational' service tends to have discrepancies in its service records due to a number of issues ranging from airframes being pushed past recommended operational tolerance, past recommend flight duration (where applicable; certainly a possibility case for aircrew themselves), generally being run into the ground since they're in a theatre of war, and that's before considering the fact that somebody somewhere is probably also shooting at them. If you want a flavour of what I'm talking about, go read 'Chicken Hawk'. Different war, different helicopter, same general stuff.

So as I understand it; if you or I were to go and buy a military helicopter, unless it had a service record that stands up to civilian authority scrutiny we'd be told to whistle dixie if we wanted to fly in civilian airspace.

That's not to say that foreign military helicopters - in this case Chinooks owned by the UK forces - follow the same standing as civilian owned models. Obviously there's the whole permission to enter sovereign airspace thing that has to go up the chain to be approved. It may be as simple as asking permission to enter Irish civilian airspace, but if it's not I would imagine that any wanting to enter civilian airspace may need to get the nod from higher up the food-chain again if they have airframe history discrepancies vs. those that have never seen active 'operational' service.

The last bit is guesswork and what seems 'logical' given what I've been told and understand on the matter so it is not scripture.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72342689&postcount=14307

This is the post I queried after being told that the OP "knew what they knew" and later admitted it was third hand knowledge.
How can a simple yet misinformed statement like this be misinterpreted?

Lemming

Dogwatch wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72342689&postcount=14307

This is the post I queried after being told that the OP "knew what they knew" and later admitted it was third hand knowledge.
How can a simple yet misinformed statement like this be misinterpreted?

Because the poster in question is referring to British-owned Chinooks - although fails to clarify in that post. They do clarify to whose Chinooks are referred further on in that above thread, after you challenged them on what they had said. And still you're in here misinterpreting & misrepresenting the discussion.

Most of said Chinooks are all owned by the MoD and as old as warfare with some that are serving in Afghanistan currently having also seen active service (and gotten shot at a lot) during the Falklands war .... to say that said Chinooks (UK owned lest there be another "misinterpretation") may have been pushed beyond any and all civilian tolerances is a wild, wild understatement.

cyrusdvirus

Lemming wrote: »

Because the poster in question is referring to British-owned Chinooks - although fails to clarify in that post. They do clarify to whose Chinooks are referred further on in that above thread, after you challenged them on what they had said. And still you're in here misinterpreting & misrepresenting the discussion.

Most of said Chinooks are all owned by the MoD and as old as warfare with some that are serving in Afghanistan currently having also seen active service (and gotten shot at a lot) during the Falklands war .... to say that said Chinooks (UK owned lest there be another "misinterpretation") may have been pushed beyond any and all civilian tolerances is a wild, wild understatement.

There's a thread over on A&A about these Chinooks as well. One of the posts is from a guy who says he was one of the crew just saying thanks for the pics etc. He stated that these machines had been in service since Vietnam

[QUOTE=Chonookpilut
]Thanks
Gentlemen and Ladies,

From the pilots of the Chinooks that you have so gracefully captured in photo and film...Thank you! This is the last mission for these 4 Chinooks. Most were placed in service in Vietnam and have flown in Gulf I, The Balkan conflicts, The original invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq, and have returned to each locale twice since. They just returned from their last combat deployment and took this farewell mission. Unless anyone objects, your photos will be kept in our company's history files. When they return to Germany, they will be shipped back to the US and be torn apart to make new aircraft. I hope you enjoyed the show!
chinookpilut is offline Report Post[/QUOTE]

Even Bravo November has had most of it's structure replaced at this stage in her career

Dogwatch

Lemming wrote: »

Because the poster in question is referring to British-owned Chinooks - although fails to clarify in that post. They do clarify to whose Chinooks are referred further on in that above thread, after you challenged them on what they had said. And still you're in here misinterpreting & misrepresenting the discussion.

Most of said Chinooks are all owned by the MoD and as old as warfare with some that are serving in Afghanistan currently having also seen active service (and gotten shot at a lot) during the Falklands war .... to say that said Chinooks (UK owned lest there be another "misinterpretation") may have been pushed beyond any and all civilian tolerances is a wild, wild understatement.

You just hit the nail on the head. the Poster in question made a blanket statement and when asked to clarify it, point blank refused.
No misinterpretation at all. When further challenged about it, the poster then started to clarify and made the statement clearer. At the time I started this thread, no clarifications were forthcoming.

Is is reasonable to assume that UK Chinooks are not banned in ROI airspace?

Lemming

Dogwatch wrote: »

Is is reasonable to assume that UK Chinooks are not banned in ROI airspace?

Re-read what I posted.

Further, which ROI airspace are you referring to? Military or civilian? Are you referring to Chinooks with airframe service record discrepancies (i.e. they've seen operational service) or ones that have never left the UK? Are you referring to UK civilian/commercially owned Chinooks if they so exist?

So which is it Dogwatch? Or would you like to try and continue with the charade of asking overly simplistic questions to try and score points elsewhere?

Dogwatch

Lemming wrote: »

Re-read what I posted.

Further, which ROI airspace are you referring to? Military or civilian? Are you referring to Chinooks with airframe service record discrepancies (i.e. they've seen operational service) or ones that have never left the UK? Are you referring to UK civilian/commercially owned Chinooks if they so exist?

So which is it Dogwatch? Or would you like to try and continue with the charade of asking overly simplistic questions to try and score points elsewhere?

I am wondering why you are getting so animated over someone else's posts and defending them. Why dont they come on here and answer the questions themselves?

A simple statement was made which, in my opinion, has been shown to be wrong.UK Chinooks are not banned in ROI airspace. I simply asked for evidence to back up a simple statement, which neither you nor Firekitten have shown. Other posters are unaware of any blanket ban.

Either they are banned or they are not.

Which is it?

That is all I want to know and I am not interested in "scoring points" as you put it. Life is too short.

Utrinque Paratus

Lemming wrote: »

You have misinterpreted what was said I believe on said other forum, and oversimplified your question above Dogwatch.



As I have been told - and I am open to correction by those from an aviation background more versed in legality than I - it's not to do with Chinooks, or British owned Chinooks. It's to do with airframe service records and Irish civilian airspace, not military.

Simply put, any helicopter that sees 'operational' service tends to have discrepancies in its service records due to a number of issues ranging from airframes being pushed past recommended operational tolerance, past recommend flight duration (where applicable; certainly a possibility case for aircrew themselves), generally being run into the ground since they're in a theatre of war, and that's before considering the fact that somebody somewhere is probably also shooting at them. If you want a flavour of what I'm talking about, go read 'Chicken Hawk'. Different war, different helicopter, same general stuff.

So as I understand it; if you or I were to go and buy a military helicopter, unless it had a service record that stands up to civilian authority scrutiny we'd be told to whistle dixie if we wanted to fly in civilian airspace.

That's not to say that foreign military helicopters - in this case Chinooks owned by the UK forces - follow the same standing as civilian owned models. Obviously there's the whole permission to enter sovereign airspace thing that has to go up the chain to be approved. It may be as simple as asking permission to enter Irish civilian airspace, but if it's not I would imagine that any wanting to enter civilian airspace may need to get the nod from higher up the food-chain again if they have airframe history discrepancies vs. those that have never seen active 'operational' service.

The last bit is guesswork and what seems 'logical' given what I've been told and understand on the matter so it is not scripture.

http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/rotorhub/boeing-delivers-1st-mk3-chinook-to-uk-royal-air-force/4875/

one third of UK Chinooks are new. The original RAF ones from the early 80s are no longer in service.

Boeing Delivers 1st Mk3 Chinook to UK Royal Air Force

December 18, 2009

A total of eight UK Chinooks will be converted to the fleet standard -- the remaining seven are on schedule for delivery this month and in 2010.



The RAF operates the largest fleet of Chinook Support Helicopters after the US Army, with a total of 34 HC2s, 6 HC2As and 8 HC3s. The Chinook Wing, which forms the heavy-lift element of the Joint Helicopter Command (JHC), is based at RAF Odiham in Hampshire. Odiham supports three operational squadrons, No 7 Squadron, No 18 Squadron and No 27 Squadron, and the Operational Conversion Flight.

Utrinque Paratus

Lemming wrote: »

Because the poster in question is referring to British-owned Chinooks - although fails to clarify in that post. They do clarify to whose Chinooks are referred further on in that above thread, after you challenged them on what they had said. And still you're in here misinterpreting & misrepresenting the discussion.

Most of said Chinooks are all owned by the MoD and as old as warfare with some that are serving in Afghanistan currently having also seen active service (and gotten shot at a lot) during the Falklands war .... to say that said Chinooks (UK owned lest there be another "misinterpretation") may have been pushed beyond any and all civilian tolerances is a wild, wild understatement.

quote
Most of said Chinooks are all owned by the MoD and as old as warfare with some that are serving in Afghanistan currently having also seen active service (and gotten shot at a lot) during the Falklands war.


.....Thats total bs, the mark 2s which are the oldest operated are from the early 90s. The last one that operated in the Falklands was decomissioned in 2002. There are also 22 new ones to boost the fleet.

The Mk2s are being upgraded.


http://www.whitehallpages.net/news/archive/284626

"The arrival of these aircraft is further evidence of the measures we have taken to strengthen our Support Helicopter force and follows my announcement three weeks ago that we plan to buy up to 22 more Chinooks."


Chinooks, with the first 10 being delivered by 2012 /13;
a £408M upgrade to the existing Chinook fleet with new engines and digitised cockpits;

Buffman

Utrinque Paratus wrote: »

quote
.....Thats total bs, the mark 2s which are the oldest operated are from the early 90s. The last one that operated in the Falklands was decomissioned in 2002. There are also 22 new ones to boost the fleet.

No, Bravo November, the Falklands veteran and probably the most famous Chinook, is still going strong.

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/RafsBravoNovemberReturnsFromAfghanistan.htm

Pic from a few months ago.

Local-womanizer

The pilot of Bravo November only got the medal for that Afghan mission where he caught a ricochet in the head and manage to keep flying to safety.

Mike Brewer was on that chopper on that show of his awhile back, amazing stuff. And the Pilot received a medal not too long ago.

That chopper has some amazing stories attached to it, as well as good luck, or what limited amounts you can have in a war-zone!

cyrusdvirus

I have to wonder one thing though. Just how much of the Bravo November that escaped the Atlantic Conveyor sinking is on the airframe that was on that programme.

I'd hazard a guess at it being not much more than the skeletal frame work and manufacturers plate.

Buffman

gatecrash wrote: »

I have to wonder one thing though. Just how much of the Bravo November that escaped the Atlantic Conveyor sinking is on the airframe that was on that programme.

I'd hazard a guess at it being not much more than the skeletal frame work and manufacturers plate.

Ye, the MOD say that themselves in the article I linked.

Bravo November has been subject to numerous upgrades during her service and with upgraded engines and avionics is now the impressive HC2 version.
Having been rebuilt several times during her service, few parts of the original aircraft survive today, but the main fuselage, the manufacturer's data plate in the cockpit and the RAF's serial number ZA718 clearly emblazoned on the rear of the aircraft remain ever present.

kowloon

Bravo November reminds me of this (from Only Fools and Horses):

I've mantained it for 20 years. This old broom has had 17 new heads and 14 new handles in it's time

How'd the hell can it be the same bloody broom?

Well here's a picture of it what more proof do you need?

Buffman

kowloon wrote: »

Bravo November reminds me of this (from Only Fools and Horses):

I've mantained it for 20 years. This old broom has had 17 new heads and 14 new handles in it's time

How'd the hell can it be the same bloody broom?

Well here's a picture of it what more proof do you need?

Yep, I see where you're coming from but the main fuselage is still the original, and for me anyway that is a significant part of the aircraft.