Sikorsky Wins

Fully Art.

I expanded the panel photo and got vertigo all over again!! :eek:

Nice, who was the smart arse that put the 'plate" on?? pretty well states the fact doesn't it. Can't get anymore definite than that.

Sorry my snafu on the dip height. You are of course correct. It's been awhile and I've forgotten so much, I can't remember how must I've forgotten! :blink:

Y'all be careful out therenow, ya hear??

BR
 
RE: Sea Kings.

Unless I am mistaken, everybody is assuming that the Sea Kings have FAA certification as civilian aircraft.

Country of origin is the USA, and as such they have the final say as to where the Sea Kings will be sent.

As far as the Canadian government is concerned they have no say as to the disoposal of military assests bought from the USA.

Hate to through an offset monkey wrench into the discussion.


Cheers, Don

PS: Normally military asests can only be sold to another country ok'd by the US State Department.
 
You’re a little off the mark B-Mack.

Only 401, 402, 403, & 404 were built in the USA. The rest were built in Montreal by P & W. The US state department has no say over where these go, the Canadian Govt has total control of them.

BTW the manufacturer's plate just inside the door says that they are "S-61B" models.

They have absolutely no civil certification (as well, neither do our pilots :huh: )


NB. The pilot thing remeinds me of a flight I was on in the eighties when I was still a TACCO. We flew a pilot trainer from CYAW to CYQM so the pilots could write their INRAT exams. The WX was IFR as it is wont to be in the maritimes. We flew the apoproach to minimums (ADF) :eek: in Moncton. The drivers went downtown to write their exams. As it turned out the Aircraft Captain absolutley 'tubed' his INRAT and was assessed a 'fail'. :wacko:

The MOT examiner asked how he expected to fly home now that he had not achieved the ticket... "IFR" of course, was the reply. :shock:

The poor gent from MOT could not believe it, and try as he might he could not prevent us from going back on the Military ticket. Despite some similarities, we are really in different worlds. Most Mil pilots don't have a flying licence. :up:
 
Very interesting about the INRAT fail, probably lucky that it was the eighties and not the nineties. My understanding of the CAF system is that if a CAF pilot fails his ticket RIDE and also holds a civilian instrument rating then TC is supposed to be notified of the fail and both ratings will be suspended until a successful re-ride is flown. Not sure about the written exam though, but a fail on it does preclude you from flying an instrument ride with a TC examiner - correct me if I'm wrong.

Then again maybe the guys shouldn't have told the TC examiner that they had flown up, the less a Bin Rat knows the better.

More importantly, how did you feel flying in the clag with the guy after he failed - "absolutely tubed" - the exam?

Maybe CAF pilots should have valid licenses and instrument ratings since more and more of the equipment is of civilian registration.
 
FA: Sea Kings:

I am possibly way of mark about the Sea Kings.

Normally aircraft built for military purposes can be built in other countries OK'ed by the DOD.

As the US government pays the bill for the original research and developement for most military aircraft, the drawings are owned by the State Department, not the manufacturer.

The Twin Heuy's could have been sold to another countries military for military use only.

The Twin Huey's could also have been traded in on the civilian certified 412, upgraded for military use.

Where do you think the Lab's are going, if you said Columbia Helicopters you might be right.

The only helicopters that I know of (ex-military) that were used in the
civvy market, were S58,Vertol 42/44, Bell 47G and Hiller 12E.

One of the stipulations in the Lancaster contract was that no ex-military aircraft that did not have a TC or FAA approval, be sold in Canada.

I know, because I wrote the contract.

Military aircraft can be sold in the USA to state governments for policing etc., not so in Canada.

With the proliferation of bogus parts and ex-military parts being used in area's that are not readily noticeable, the best thing that could happen to ex-military aircraft is that they be melted down.

IMHO

Cheers, Don
 
that last statement will surely get the EBAY sellers/purchasers all in a huff. What will they base their livelyhoods on if their supplies dry up??? :rolleyes:
 
Maybe the "fat lady" is about to sing

.http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1098136210441
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Cormorant Operating Costs
Replies
4
Views
1K
sharkbait
S
E
National Guard
Replies
3
Views
926
cap
C
H
A Perfect Flying Bomb" (Whereabouts Unknown)
Replies
1
Views
763
dockjock
D
E
Powerful Americans
Replies
6
Views
1K
Elvis
E
D
Local Heroes Global One
2 3
Replies
36
Views
5K
Dan
D

Latest posts

Back
Top