why did Chinooks just disappear suddenly and not get replaced by anything similar?

why did Chinooks just disappear suddenly and not get replaced by anything similar?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They didn't disappear. They're just quiet. They'll run em near me every now and then.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Chinook
      Quiet

      Your retarded

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        ...if they are quiet it means they aren't being used [as often]
        Not that anon, either. Holy fuck you're retarded.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not him, but yes, Chinooks are *much* quieter than they used to be. Just over 10 years ago now, the Army started upgrading them with new rotor blades with a slightly different shape. Somehow, it cut out most of the low-frequency WHOPWHOPWHOP that would rattle your windows from miles away and let you know they were coming. It was such an improvement that I could stand outside and watch a flight go by... and easily pick out which Chinooks were upgraded and which weren't. Apaches also received a similar upgrade, and they've gone from ear-shattering (back in the '80s) to slightly-louder-than-a-Cessna.

        One of the side effects is that (around here, at least) pilots appear to have been allowed to fly much lower at times than they ever did back during the Cold War. It's rather cool to watch them go by.

        https://i.imgur.com/28vP66t.jpg

        why did Chinooks just disappear suddenly and not get replaced by anything similar?

        I just watched a solo Chinook fly past my house twice today. They're still very much around. However, depending on where you live, they may or may not be as common, because the Army is shuffling them around between units as part of an ongoing reorganization. I'm just going by memory, but I *think* that outside of the 101st, all Chinooks are moving from a division-level asset to a corps-level asset (the same thing is happening to all MLRS batteries). They'll still be around for at least a couple more decades, but they might not necessarily be flying over all of the same places they used to go.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Exactly.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We still use them in Canada, they're good troop haulers. This could just be rumor but I've heard they're very high maintenance compared to a lot of other aircraft.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not sure what else you could compare it too, there's not that many heavy lift helos
      i've read the sea king and its derivatives are also maintenance intensive too
      maybe heavy lift choppers are just inherently maintenance heavy and complicated things

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The more moving part, the more mantance.

        They get accused of that because most helo mechanics compare it to the likes of the huey, cobra, skycrane, and sea stallion. The Chinook is like a 3rd generation helo. First gen was the dragonfly/hover fly, 2nd generation gave us the huey, and the Chinook was made from the lessons of the flying banana.

        So convoluted but not any more than any dual engine, dual prop.

        Though I remember something about getting the timing on the props was a hassle.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          i thought sea stallions were bigger maintenance hogs than the chinook though
          or at least that's what the cost per flight hours looks like to me
          unless boeing is just lying

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Some of them were, but it was usually because they were over stressing them. The sea stallion was replaced by the sea king, which is basically the same thing but improved. A lot of "this helicopter is a problem" came from the fact they tried to land or deliver cargo in rough sea states. We not have a system for that and can basically land in all weather.

            I don't have a link but research landing on a navy ship at sea.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Also forgive me, I'm getting my choppers mixed up

              Sea stallion=>super stallion

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yeah i was looking at the sales info for the israeli and german tenders and boeing was hyping up the cost savings both on a per unit price and on operating costs

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I'd say the Huey and Chinook are more like 3rd and 4th gen respectively. I'm not sure if there are accepted definitions for helos like there are for jets, but I'd say 1st gen are the semi-experimental late-WWII developments like the Hoverfly, 2nd gen are the more polished/capable post-war/Korea stuff like the Bell 47 and H-19, 3rd gen are the first turbine helos like the Huey and Cobra, and then 4th gen are twin turbine with more advanced avionics and rotors with more than two blades, like later Hueys and the Chinook. Not sure how you separate 5th gen after that, maybe fly-by-wire, glass cockpit, and 5+ blade rotors?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            My thoughts exactly. I would just define 5th gen as everything you said plus most of the attempts afterwards in stealth. I would call 6th gen as perpetual as I would put the "V" models as the hallmark because of the sheer difficulty in making a stable platform. I don't think we will ever have a light attack V-model because their benefit is a VTOL craft is with a long range and medium to heavy lift capacity. If you want a light attack with STOL and range you Basically get a crop duster. If you have to have hover capacity, you get a little bird.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Phasing blades is easy as shit it just takes several people.
          You can dirty phase (Full drive shaft install, no blades having both red blade horns facing forward) and actually phase them later.
          Takes a while and it sucks dick if they don't phase on the first few tries cause you have to take out the #9 driveshaft and turn the adapter then turn the blades several more times till they line up and if they don't you gotta uninstall that drive shaft again and keep doing it till it all phases properly

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >This could just be rumor but I've heard they're very high maintenance compared to a lot of other aircraft.
      No way, really? Massive tandem rotor helos?

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I’ve seen more chinooks in real life than any other helicopter.
    And I’ve never been in the service.
    They haul shit around bases everywhere in America.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Living 30 minutes from Camp Lejeune, I see Ospreys multiple times a month. Once a day if I work out in Jacksonville. When I learned about how dangerous they were, I wondered how any Marine could stand getting in one and I offer a prayer for the crew and passengers as they fly overhead.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Same, and I'm not even that that close, but every other helicopter I see is an Osprey.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Chinooks are proven and reliable, but training for war with helicopters is dangerous as fuck.

        I don't know where they stack them today but when I was at Bragg DRMO in the late 1990s they had a row of smashed Huey fueselages stripped of parts. The most intact had the roof driven half-way to the floor by the engine/gearbox/rotor weight. No way guys didn't die in those wrecks.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >When I learned about how dangerous they were
        apparently you didn't because they aren't

        no the V-22 is already on its way to replace it. however, its saying power is based purely on it existing and not because it has an advantage. the US military is wanting to dump them on say, a burgeoning military of a close alliance that has a need for a heavy lift helicopter with internal storage capacity.

        >the chinook has served well but is being pushed into pure logistical roles, not because it is better, but because it exists.

        the V-22 can carry more solders, fly further, carry a heavier cargo load, is more fuel efficient, and has an established presence. while I think the V-22 will either be upgraded into non-recognition, or replaced by a "V-22 but not really" the Chinook can never hope to regain its place as a heavy lift transport. the engines are not even useful to be revamped to make a knock-off V-22 or be re-used in another vehicle. it is very much the A-10 of heavy lift vertical take off and landing. it is advanced enough that it will die a slow death, but it is no longer the top of the line.

        this leaves the military with three choices:
        >sell
        >burn-out
        >scrap

        they seem to have chosen to let it burn-out. I agree with this.

        this is copied from another thread
        [...]

        you're fucking retarded

        when did you emerge from under your rock?
        The V-22 is already been replaced.

        so are you

        AFAIK there are only three heavy-lift Western helis, they are the Chinook, Super Stallion, and the Osprey. Whoever doesn't use the two latter, uses the Chinook. That would mainly be the bongs, who I think operate fifty or sixty of them

        the real question you should be asking is why aren't other NATO militaries investing in heavy lift helis

        V-22 is not considered heavy lift. It's classified as medium lift.

        they're still used at large- the marines replaced theirs with ospreys, idk wtf you're on about.

        Marine Corps didn't use Chinooks, but CH-46 Sea Knights.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >V-22 is not considered heavy lift. It's classified as medium lift
          I assume because of raw lift capacity?
          On the other hand, there's room to argue that its long range and higher speed than most medium lift choppers makes it effectively a heavy lift, as it has greater throughput
          I dunno, so I erred on the generous side

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    These gays are flying over my house all the time.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's a helicopter that's still in manufacture, anon, it's not gone or being phased out or anything.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What the fuck are you talking about?

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    med. now.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no the V-22 is already on its way to replace it. however, its saying power is based purely on it existing and not because it has an advantage. the US military is wanting to dump them on say, a burgeoning military of a close alliance that has a need for a heavy lift helicopter with internal storage capacity.

    >the chinook has served well but is being pushed into pure logistical roles, not because it is better, but because it exists.

    the V-22 can carry more solders, fly further, carry a heavier cargo load, is more fuel efficient, and has an established presence. while I think the V-22 will either be upgraded into non-recognition, or replaced by a "V-22 but not really" the Chinook can never hope to regain its place as a heavy lift transport. the engines are not even useful to be revamped to make a knock-off V-22 or be re-used in another vehicle. it is very much the A-10 of heavy lift vertical take off and landing. it is advanced enough that it will die a slow death, but it is no longer the top of the line.

    this leaves the military with three choices:
    >sell
    >burn-out
    >scrap

    they seem to have chosen to let it burn-out. I agree with this.

    this is copied from another thread

    [...]

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      when did you emerge from under your rock?
      The V-22 is already been replaced.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        if you are referring to the V-280, it isn't really a replacement, but a complement. it also has to spool up for production.

        the V-22 is older and has more lift capacity to the V-280, and it has more internal storage space.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_V-280_Valor
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey

        just educate yourself.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What rock have you been living under? The V-22 has not been replaced. The V-280 is not navalized, the V-22 is a much more complicated design since its wings fold for carrier storage.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That’s like saying the Blackhawk was meant to replace the chinook. Two totally different classes of helicopters you fucking retard. I hate you so much I wish I could jerk off on your face and slap you around to the point of crying so I could watch the beautiful mixture of cum and tears wash down your face

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the V-22 can carry more solders, fly further, carry a heavier cargo load
      >than the Chinook
      it absolutely cannot anon. are you confusing it with the Sea Knight, that aircraft it was intended to replace?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I fly 47's and I'm replying to tell you to never post ever again.

      Stupid question.

      Better one for those here: why the Chinook vs the Stallion? I know the Navy has a diet Chinook as well. And vice versa: did the Army ever consider the Stallion?

      Tandem rotor is better for lift since no power is lost to a tailrotor.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        quit your job. maybe then you won't post shit you have no right to say.

        > I honestly don't care about your need to compensate, but I stand by my evaluation in calling the CH-47 the A-10 of heavy lift.
        >most people consider it widely useful, they don't want to give it up, but the better option is a turbo prop with some crack-pot at the helm. they would just get rid of it but there are already too many of them.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >you have no right to say.
          lol yeah
          >but the better option is a turbo prop with some crack-pot at the helm. they would just get rid of it but there are already too many of them.
          The Osprey fills a completely different role than the CH-47F or CH-53E/K. It's not as maneuverable when landing and taking off, carries less people, carries less/smaller internal loads, and smaller external loads (and significantly worse range when conducting sling loads). They're fantastic SAR platforms but for air assaults and sling loads, are absolutely outclassed by the Chinook. Their operating cost is also something like 2-3x what the Chinook is.

          Uninstall your web browser and save everyone here from your senseless dribble.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Anon you are just circling back to the idea of:

            >let it burn out.

            This is what burn out looks like. The army is moving more towards maneuver warfare, which means sufficient reach is more important than lift. The US army has just bought all the chinooks because its doctrine doesn't require the use of the V22 even if the V22 is the better fit. The US army will slowly replace the CH 47 with the V22 until it only maintains a smaller fleet.

            >repeal and replace
            >iterative progress
            >down size
            >no new airframes

            So it won't dissapear but become less inthe fore and front.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The V-22 is not a better fit because it can’t carry anywhere near the load of the Chinook. There is no plan for the Army to procure Ospreys.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://www.military.com/defensetech/2013/10/18/will-the-army-ever-buy-the-v-22-osprey

                They infact do. But again it is just so absobanatly expensive that they are going to let the Chinook fleet slowly die off so they can justify buying V-22s or there in a close counterpart.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >”The Army, however, still doesn't plan to buy any.”

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >"Next-gen research programs have the same function in the Army bureaucracy as creating commissions on Capitol Hill -- it's their way of kicking ideas down the road,"

                Translation:
                Army broke after buying the chinook.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >kicking the can down the road
                Dennis, you absolute buffoon, a contract was awarded for a JMR derivative literally a month ago.

                The Chinook is significantly cheaper to procure and operate than the Osprey or King Stallion. That’s why they were purchased by Germany instead.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              https://www.military.com/defensetech/2013/10/18/will-the-army-ever-buy-the-v-22-osprey

              They infact do. But again it is just so absobanatly expensive that they are going to let the Chinook fleet slowly die off so they can justify buying V-22s or there in a close counterpart.

              Are you the same retard spouting this shit from the other day? If not, your reading comprehension/English are as bad as that dude. The Army is planning on using Chinooks until at least 100 years past when they were designed. The decade-old article you linked literally says "The Army, however, still doesn't plan to buy any [Ospreys]."

              >They infact do

              They do what? Have similar lift capacity? Because last time I checked Osprey max outboard cargo capacity is max 15,000 lb, Chinook is 26,000 lb. You're comparing a medium-lift to a heavy lift and talking about one replacing the other, it doesn't make any sense. They're completely different things.

              TLDR; Chinook isn't going anywhere, the Army still has and uses a shit-ton of them, and this thread is retarded.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Absolutely retarded post
      The only the the V22 can do is crash and fly faster than the Chinook lmao

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        V-22 crashes less. Individual Chinook crashes are almost as fatal as all Osprey crashes combined

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why would anyone enter into such a death trap ?

    car engine stops ? you decelerate until you park safely

    plane engine stops ? you glide until you land safely

    heli stops ? autorotate until you land safely

    chinook fails ? you die

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what exactly stops the Chinook from autorotating like any other helo?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nothing, he’s retarded and doesn’t understand the principles of flight

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Cause it's a twin engine helicopter

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I saw one flying over my neighborhood a couple of days ago when I was driving back home.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    thyme

    AFAIK there are only three heavy-lift Western helis, they are the Chinook, Super Stallion, and the Osprey. Whoever doesn't use the two latter, uses the Chinook. That would mainly be the bongs, who I think operate fifty or sixty of them

    the real question you should be asking is why aren't other NATO militaries investing in heavy lift helis

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      heavy lift helos are more of a expeditionary force thing. most NATO countries are home guard only and so rely on cheaper options... like a medium lift helicopter. at best the US has convinced a few smaller nations to buy a couple odd black hawks. the best efforts to sell the Chinook, mostly revolve around selling the engine to be put into a different air frame. this is the bulk of the cost and would allow the frames to be scrapped to make new V-22s and V-280s.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >live near a national guard unit
    >hear a chinooks at least once a week flying around
    why do you think they disapeared again?

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Chinooks just disappear suddenly
    They're still around. They haven't been replaced.

    >but what if they are being replaced?
    UH-60 and that new osprey-looking Bell Valor

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    See them all the time, what are you talking about?

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yet another OP with absolutely no fuckin idea what he is even on about

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they are still good and get modernised. hell germany is buying like 60 of them as the replacement

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      :DD

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        benis :DD

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          :DDDDD

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      germany new trash place

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >why did Chinooks just disappear suddenly and not get replaced by anything similar?
    ^
    Single line bot post. No one with the slightest clue would have made it so it was not made by a human. It fits the slide thread pattern,

    It's time for a rule that questions should be at least six lines and sufficiently detailed simple bots can't post them plausibly.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Have we sent it to Ukraine yet so it can annoy people there?

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So now US has
    >V22 for marine and ship use
    >V280 for army
    >Chinook for army
    None are replaced by the other, correct?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      AF and Navy also use the V22 now

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >AF also uses the V22 now
        Oh cool

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Stupid question.

    Better one for those here: why the Chinook vs the Stallion? I know the Navy has a diet Chinook as well. And vice versa: did the Army ever consider the Stallion?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I know the Navy has a diet Chinook as well.
      The navy and marines phased out the sea knight a while ago.
      Now it only lives on with a few civil opera and confusingly, the department of state.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Chinook is cheaper and a proven machine. The King Stallion is better if you're limited by space (like on ships) because they can carry more, but in other cases it makes more sense to just buy a larger number of Chinooks.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I saw a chinook flying around about three months ago

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Real shit I have seen these lift main battle tanks and carry them miles away.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was several working together, stupid and dangerous with shifting loads and keeping the load balanced between multiple choppers. Putting all choppers at risk if just one has a problem since they needed all of them to lift that payload and just the cable shifting weight could overload one and take it down crashing all choppers connected at once.
      But watched it done multiple times.
      3 did it and 4 did it. Carrying mbt from one base to another miles away.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I was in the Army and these are still in use.
    Really fun to ride in.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are you fucking high? When did the chinook “disappear”?

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i see and hear them frequently here in britain

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because that didn't happen, retard.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >disappear suddenly
    They still fly around JBLM almost fucking daily

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how come they never made a chinook that just doesn't have the big holes in the fuselage that make it unfun to fly in

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > I've been in a Chinook 28 times in the last 60 days

    What did he mean by this

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They fly over me at least once a week. There's like 20 in the air at any given time over the US if you check the flight trackers.

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm in the Guard and a unit on my base uses Chinooks.

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they're still used at large- the marines replaced theirs with ospreys, idk wtf you're on about.

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because china has no nooks

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because their incredibly small disc loading means they have 10x the hover performance of tiltrotors, in exchange for speed and range

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    THICCC

  36. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >why did Chinooks just disappear suddenly and not get replaced by anything similar?
    Stealth Chinooks

  37. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Literally used in the Bin Laden raid among many other (if not all) recent conflicts in the GWoT era.

  38. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    WTF? I'm near Ft. Hood. Those window rattlers are literally no bullshit shaking the dishes in my cupboard as I type this.. it's dark as fuck out there but NOTHING makes the heavy thudding rotor beat of a Shithook... Huey's came close, but those I haven't seen since the 80's in any numbers.. Those CH-47's are buzzing around here morning noon and night.

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they will replaced with bells

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Test

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *