Has anyone tried a Chinook?  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       



All Forums >> RC Helicopters >> Scale RC Helicopters >> Has anyone tried a Chinook? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 8/15/2006 5:22:12 AM   
crazyplane1


 

Posts: 8
Joined: 2/14/2005
From: Algonquin, IL, USA
Status: offline
Has anyone ever tried to build a scale CH-47 Chinook. I've ridden in one a couple of times and they are fun. I got some pics from a ride.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize
       Post #: 1

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 8/15/2006 3:52:41 PM   
BarracudaHockey



Posts: 10993
Joined: 7/13/2003
From: Orange Park, FL, USA
Status: offline
Hirobo makes one, I think its about 3 grand or so for the kit.

http://www.modelrectifier.com/search/product-view.asp?ID=3441

_____________________________

Andy - Helicopter Forum Moderator
AMA 77227 http://www.jaxrc.com

(in reply to crazyplane1)
       Post #: 2

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 8/28/2006 1:28:21 AM   
cobramech


 

Posts: 44
Joined: 4/15/2003
From: Fayetteville, GA, USA
Status: offline
I just recently purchased a ch-46 sea knight from ms composit. It is electric and I bought it for $800.00, including all electronics....Mixer, 6 servos, 2 gyros and speed control. The kit came with an outrunner motor and scale 3-blade rotor heads. It is super cool. I am making mine a marine corps version, as I was a plane captain in the marines on cobras(Ah-1J's). I flew on Ch-46's many times and always loved how the front of the heli always becomes airborne before the rear. It sorta dragged its butt until the pilot pushed forward on the cyclic. I miss flying in the military.

(in reply to BarracudaHockey)
       Post #: 3

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 8/28/2006 3:27:51 AM   
Mustang Fever


 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 11/30/2003
From: Cadillac, MI, USA
Status: offline
I was a powertrain mechanic with the 34th GSG, and the "Hook" was always my favorite. I'll never forget the one that made an emergency landing in the James River while I was in training at Ft. Eustis. The hull plugs had been left out and it sank until only the rotors and engines were showing.

I remember reading somewhere that without a flight computer of some kind, the A/C wants to go end over end due to unbalanced lift from the separate rotor assemblies. Hirobo and others have evidently solved that problem. Their unpainted Hook is $2500 on the modelrec.com website.

Anyone flown one of these, that or the 46 version? I'd really like to know. I fly fixed wing, but this could get me into rotary someday.

_____________________________

Bob Hunt

(in reply to cobramech)
       Post #: 4

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 8/30/2006 1:33:15 AM   
cobramech


 

Posts: 44
Joined: 4/15/2003
From: Fayetteville, GA, USA
Status: offline
Yes, they seem to have solved that problem....In the instructions for my ms composit sea knight, it states that when setting it up you need to check that when the elevator stick is pushed forward, that the forward swash plate increases pitch slightly, while the aft swashplate decreases pitch slightly. This helps prevent the end over end problem you talked about. The mixer also adds the necessary left /right roll to the swashplate to compensate for the forward twisting forces generated in forward flight. I know it sounds confusing....but just keep in mind that the mixer does most of the work for you. You only need to adjust your transmitter according to how the model flies. No model will have the same characteristics. You first get it hovering the way you want it, and than you set it up for forward flight. It doesn't sound easy, but the results are ALWAYS worth the effort! Be sure to check all the sites like runryder and scalercheli.com for the latest updates and changes....

(in reply to Mustang Fever)
       Post #: 5

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/9/2006 5:18:37 PM   
47steve


 

Posts: 48
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: enterprise, AL, USA
Status: offline
That's interesting how they have the fore and aft rotors responding. I know in our helicopters, they react the opposite. You mention end over end....in our aircraft, the actual tendency is for both of the rotor disks to fly parallel, not go end over end. It makes sense as they both want to fly. When the computers are turned off, much more pedal input is required to keep the aft end from coming around.

I want to build a 47 model and have a good idea of how I am going to go about it, just reading about what others are experiencing.



< Message edited by 47steve -- 9/9/2006 5:23:15 PM >

(in reply to cobramech)
       Post #: 6

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/20/2006 7:31:28 AM   
Hookpilot


 

Posts: 19
Joined: 8/25/2005
From: Honolulu, HI, USA
Status: offline
I would suppose that the aerodynamics of a large model of a Chinook would be very similar to the full-sized machine. If that's true, the stability problem is not end-over end, but yaw control. I have 3500 hours in A,B,C and D model Chinooks (full sized that is) the A models had a SAS system that could be switched off. When off you had your hands, or should I say feet full. The tendency was for the helicopter to swap ends at 100 knots. We practiced SAS-off flight and it was doable, but you had to be READY for it to come off. Also, Chinooks do not tilt the swashplates forward under pilot stick inputs to go faster. When you push forward on the cyclic, the aft swashplate increases pitch in the blades, the aircraft tips forward and the thrust vectors for the two rotor systems moves forward. the swashplates do tilt forward as airspeed increases, but that is done with a system called LCT (longitudinal cyclic trim) It automatically programs the swashplates forward as airspeed increases and starts to do this at 60 knots. They are fully programmed at 160 knots. This system's function is to relieve stress in the aft vertical shaft and relieve stress in the aft rotor blades and maintain a level flight deck which reduces aerodynamic drag. The LCTs retract as you slow down and are fully retracted as you pass back through 60 knots. Dual AFCS systems (advanced flight control system) are incorporated in the latest versions of the Chinook. You cannot turn the systems off. The Chinook and its baby brother the Sea Knight both are highly unstable without a bunch of black boxes to make it feel like a conventional helicopter. Pilot workload would be overwhelming without them. One system overcomes an odd characteristic of tandem rotor system, that of zero stick gradient. Without this system, as you push the cyclic forward and increase speed, normally you would have to hold the stick forward to maintain that speed, as in a Huey, say. But the Chinook cyclic does some funny stuff without this black box we call the licorice stick. Lets say you push the cyclic forward and hit 140 knots. Without that system, you would find yourself pulling the stick back to zero or center, and you are still whistling along at 140 knots. So to have positive stick gradient, this box electrically extends the length of a control tube in the pitch axis and drives the cyclic stick forward proportional to the airspeed. This is just a pilot-convenience feature. It doesn't move the flight controls in either rotor head. I'm wondering if your models have the same aerodynamics and no compensation for it? The Chinook has no inherent stability in any axis and there is no cross-coupling which means that it can be rolling left, yawing right and pitching aft, all at the same time, and this is with no pilot inputs, (SAS off) There are several documented accidents where A model Chinooks swapped ends at cruise airspeed tearing work platforms off and putting a few non-military wrinkles in the skin because of a dual SAS failure.

The forward twisting motion mentioned above does not happen in the full sized machine. I don't know what you mean by "forward twisting motion." You mean roll induced by forward speed? I worked with an RC helicopter company building computers for tandem rotor models and they had a problem with the aft end of the helicopter dropping as the machine started to transition into forward flight. If this is characteristic of all model tandem rotor designs, your suggestion to program a little pitch in the forward swashplate is puzzling as this would aggravate the tail droop problem. It doesn't happen in the full sized Chinook. Interesting stuff.

Hope this sheds a little light on tandem rotor design and flight characteristics. I'd love to see someone take on the challenge of building a large scale twin turbine Chinook model. That would be impressive! See pictures of the full sized helicopter working out on my website at: http://homepage.mac.com/hookpilot/PersonalPage.html

Mike in Honolulu

(in reply to 47steve)
       Post #: 7

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/20/2006 1:53:35 PM   
heli_Rod



Posts: 619
Joined: 12/29/2005
From: Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
Status: offline
Hi Mike,

That was an interesting post on the "Hook". You answered a lot of questions I had about how they flew. I am a civilian pilot and learned to fly helis in an old brantley B2B with time in an Enstrom F-28 and Bell Jet Rangers.

The "HOOKS" are a most impressive heli inflight. I'd love to get to try on out. What an awesome ride!

heli_rod

< Message edited by heli_Rod -- 9/20/2006 1:54:47 PM >


_____________________________

AMA# 113287, Amateur Radio WA9H, Synergy N9, Fury Extreme 90, Stinger 50, T-REX 450SE V2, JR & Spektrum Radios

(in reply to Hookpilot)
       Post #: 8

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/20/2006 8:33:12 PM   
47steve


 

Posts: 48
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: enterprise, AL, USA
Status: offline
Mike,
Funny you should post as I have seen yuor site before. Very impressive and interesting stuff. A B C and D!!! You're likely an icon in our community, which I am new to myself! Did some single progressed to dual AFCS off in the clouds today.....sim at least I was also a bit confused about the "twisting motion" and how the mixing apparently works the fore and aft discs seemed backwards. I'm guessing you called the dash the licorice stick or the CCDA?? I am starting to draw out plans for a model with systems classes in mind. There is a guy that sells a computer board that he uses to mix the flight controls and he even refers to the -10. Looks to be a very stable platform. The only thing is that all models are 2 bladed....do any have crossing of the tip path planes? Existing 3 blade rotor heads are very expensive so I'll have to figure out something for that.

(in reply to heli_Rod)
       Post #: 9

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/21/2006 7:13:15 AM   
Hookpilot


 

Posts: 19
Joined: 8/25/2005
From: Honolulu, HI, USA
Status: offline
Steve:
I worked with a group building a small tandem electric helicopter. They also sell the mixing controls. I think they called their heli the Drangonfly. We had many excellent technical discussions about overcoming some odd characteristics of scale tandem machines. Their videos are very impressive and it seems they've overcome the instabilities.

I think the Dragonfly is set up much like the full size Chinook with overlapping rotor systems. They don't use 3-bladed heads as you indicated you'll be using. I sent him some -10 links off the Internet and that's what you probably saw. I was very impressed with their helicopter design and reasonable price.

Based on your location, I guess you might be going through CH-47 Q-course. If so, enjoy flying the greatest helicopter ever made. It floats, it goes fast, (the Apache pilots can't keep up with us) it makes great sounds when working hard, and it provides a nice big dry place to sleep when everybody else is in tents. We call it the Boeing Hilton... It's been a few years since I flew the Hook, I though you couldn't turn off both AFCS systems. Refresh my memory. I'm sure in the sim you can fail both systems. The last Hook I flew SAS off was the C model and that was a lot easier than the old A model. The A didn't have the strakes along the fuel pods and the aft pylon was teardrop-shaped (no flat cut-off tail) this dramatically increased yaw stability during SAS off flight. I imagine the C and D fly the same with stabilization off.

Since you are starting your career, you'll have the fun of flying the F model. We got excited when we picked up our Ds, That was the first Army helicopter many of us had flown with an autopilot. I did fly the CH-34 many moons ago and it had an autopilot -of sorts. It was very strange to take your hands off the controls and sit back and actually relax. The glass cockpit will bring the Chinook into the modern digitally integrated battlefield. But, it's still a HOOK, two turnin', two burnin', bends in the middle and goes C H U G!

Keep in touch

CW4 Mike Jones
hookpilot@msn.com


(in reply to 47steve)
       Post #: 10

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/21/2006 7:57:10 AM   
Hookpilot


 

Posts: 19
Joined: 8/25/2005
From: Honolulu, HI, USA
Status: offline
Rod:
Yes, the Hook is a great machine to fly. There is something intoxicating about grabbing the thrust lever and pulling in power as you lift a 20,000 pound load. The blades cone, the engines begin a strange high pitch whine as the compressor section spools up, and the helicopter starts to shuffle, shiver and shake. I imagine it was a lot like the engineers who ran big steam locomotives. You know when you are working a Chinook hard. She talks back. I flew in an Army Chinook flight demonstration team for many years and we amazed even ourselves with what we could do in them. One maneuver was a max performance vertical climb with full rudder input. We could peg the IVSI indicator at 3000 FPM - straight up. We knew we had a good spin going when the oil in the aft transmission got slammed to one side of the transmission case causing a LOW OIL PRESS caution light to come on for a few seconds. After the first practice fights, our flight engineers learned to strap in for the demo. We'd go zero Gee and do other whacky stuff they probably wouldn't allow these days. Like they say "Mastering the prohibited maneuvers in the operator's manual is the best insurance you can have."

We also played around with seeing what the Chinook could do 0 to 60. Mind you that we are talking about a machine with 2, 3750 hp engines and an operating weight of just over 30,000 pounds, empty. So, with our flight engineer seated in the jump seat, stopwatch in hand, we found out! the chief said "go" and 7 seconds later we were passing 100 Kts! That's quick for a big machine like the Hook. It was pretty exciting to do - pull in thrust to the torque limit, jam the cyclic forward and hold on. Essentially what we were doing was convert 20,000 pounds of useful load carrying into 10 tons of thrust to propel us forward, almost instantly.

What other twin engine helicopter can take on a 3 ton load, crank one engine, pick up to a stable hover and fly off with it... We use to pull engines on our pilots during checkrides just after takeoff from a pinacle with an 8000 pound concrete block on the cargo hook. The Chinook was able to not only gain altitude, it would accelerate too. This was done in a mountainous environment, 4000 feet up. Engine failures are a yawner in the Hook, unless you were really heavy, say 42,000 pounds or more, or there was an associated engine fire. then you had to put down the Playboy and tend to business.

Keep your rotor in the green and the shiney side up.

Mike


(in reply to heli_Rod)
       Post #: 11

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 9/21/2006 10:15:19 PM   
47steve


 

Posts: 48
Joined: 9/8/2006
From: enterprise, AL, USA
Status: offline
Mike,

The model I was referring to is the twin-rexx. http://www.tech-mp.com/twinn_rexx.htm Elsewhere on his page, he sells the electronic mixing boards so a DIY is that much easier at a reasonable price. Very interesting stuff to read about his progression and related building issues.

-Steve

(in reply to Hookpilot)
       Post #: 12

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 11/25/2006 5:37:48 AM   
straitnate14


 

Posts: 208
Joined: 9/10/2004
From: bloomington, IL, USA
Status: offline
if your in IL thoes are probly from the unit i just joined?

_____________________________

oh #@$#!

(in reply to 47steve)
       Post #: 13

RE: Has anyone tried a Chinook? - 1/4/2007 11:11:48 PM   
Pro-E



Posts: 42
Joined: 12/2/2003
From: Lewisville, TX, USA
Status: offline
Here is a