New Bruin tactic-Cut and shut

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by muhandis89, Jul 18, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Cannibalisation of parts isn't new, it's been going on for as long as i can remember, hence why there's sometimes a small percentage of airworthy aircraft, as long as it's been tested and signed off it should be fine.

    The papers seem to be jumping on everything now, the 8 chinooks and other aircraft like the merlins are currently grounded because they've not been signed off or overhauled, yet an aircraft that is signed off is deemed dodgy, they really need to make their minds up, or find an actual story.

    There have been similar work carried out on other aircraft, they're stripped right down to piece part spares, tested, built back up and put into service, it's not a quick job, and can take several years to finish, so i wouldn't use the words 'cut and shut' to describe the process.
     
  2. Yawn. Old News. The airframe was signed off on by Boeing so whats the problem ??, its been operating for over five years with no dramas. In fact its probably the newest Mk 2 Chinook airframe in the inventory.

    Happens all the time, the US Navy has an EA-6B Prowler made from two seperate jets instantly recognisable by the Frankenstein nose art and the "Frankenprowler" name .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nose_of_FrankenProwler.jpg
     
  3. In what way was the chopper being a "cut and shut" responsible for his son' death? Sound use of available parts to my ay of thinking.
     
  4. We need all the helicopters we can get, and this one works; so what's the problem?
     
  5. Non-story. Basic airframe engineering.
     
  6. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Old story been happening for years
    During the war it wasn't unusual for Spitfires to have a different set of wings from two other aircraft
    The Chinook bolocks has been going on for years
    They were scavanging for parts before Kosavo to get frames flying
     
  7. Fugly

    Fugly LE DirtyBAT

    What a cack story. How the hell are the two issues even related? Does he think that if we had 2 unserviceable aircraft, instead of 1 serviceable (and a load of other parts back in the spares system), then his son wouldn't have been killed? Or is this just the BBC writing any old bollocks with a tenuous link?

    :roll:

    I saw a fair few pictures of the airframe in question as well, an exceptional set of engineers put that back together.
     
  8. Nonsense news. If we'd scrapped the frame it wuld have been a considerable waste of money - we would have been unlikely to get another one to replace it. This airframe has been around for years and has been subject to the same airworthiness procedures as any other aircraft on our inventory. It does the job, what is the problem?
     
  9. IIRC all the UK variant of the Chinook are "stretched" (a section added into the middle to lengthen the aircraft) which duly prevented a problem with its original US variant of the rotors getting out of synchronisation and colliding with catastrophic consequences. It also increased its troop carrying capability considerably.

    Can anyone in the know confirm this?
     
  10. Can't see a problem with this.
    It is done properly and not exactly a job performd by Bodgit and Scarper in a back street garage.
     
  11. What a load of twoddle. Yes, it has an increased payload but just think about what you've written regarding the mod to lengthen the fuselage to prevent blade synch problems. :roll:

    As for the article? If we binned all our aircraft that were 'cut and shuts', we'd have fucking none whatsoever! Who writes these stupid articles? Are they just comparing aircraft to a D reg Sierra?? *********.
     
  12. lol its in another thread about using captured equipment against their former owners

    suppose we had better not mention sabre = scorp hull, fox turret
     
  13. Well I fail to see the relevance of how this helicopter would have affected the death of his son, that doesnt mean to say I dont see where the poor chap is comming from, I mean you lose a child in what is deemed as cack equipment not fit for purpose, being a civvie ive heard the landrovers described as such, and then you hear instead of the government buying us new helicopters they are sticking two that are written off together... sure it may have been signed off but it would be like buying a new car and finding out its been welded together from two seperate motors, it might work but you will feel duped when you find out!

    I for one feel you guys who have served or are serving deserve nothing but the very best in both equipment and support!!!
     
  14. Stories like this p*ss me off. It detracts from and waters down the real issues (i.e. we don't have enough helicopters, of any sort!).