Bristol Belvedere

Remember the Chinook was not a ‘clean sheet of paper’ design concept, but the result of a line of designs from Piasecki/Vertol/Boeing that went back to the Piasecki PV-3 of 1945.

http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/boeing.html

Note some of the more interesting Chinook and other derivatives that never made service, including the giant CH-62!

So the question is really, was the Bristol Type 173 influenced by the Piasecki designs?

Edit: Pagen posted whilst I was looking up the link!

The Bristol Belvedere always struck me as one of those types that the RAF had to opertae because someone Briritish had built it!
It was derived from the Bristol 173 which in simplistic terms was the tandem version of the Sycamore, it was powered by two Leonides Major piston engines, the 192 Belvedere being powered by Napier Gazelle turbines of course. I believe it was the Avpin starter system that was the potential cause of a sudden fire in the upper cockpit area.

Also worth remembering that the US were heavily involved with tandem helicopter layouts at the time of Bristols’ efforts, especially the company Pisecki which became Vertol and eventually taken over by Boeing to become Boeing Vertol – which brings us neatly to their Chinook.

Tony T. I thought the Chinooks had problems with the rear rotor gearboxes, and one or two crashes, I know they didn’t initialy have a very good reliability
reputation.
Jim.

Lincoln .7

We still had one in the hangar on the OCU and a Sycamore outside that one of the pilots had flown, used to have to shuffle the damn Belevedere around to get all the Wessex and Pumas in at night…

The hinook wasn’t cleared to carry XYZ weight at first and we had a 25 pounder, Mobat, Wombat and a Humber Pig I think it was as underslung loads, the pig was to heavy for the cleared loads so we had to hacksaw bits off that got welded back on when we were cleared to lift the full weight

I was posted to the Mob Met Unit HQ at 38 Grp, Odiham. It was decided that I should learn about helos (in general). Whilst doing some of these ‘familiarisations’ (we ‘dropped’ a Pak howitzer on SPPTA on one notable occasion!!) I enquired, casually, about the Belvedere (this was long before Chinooks!). The more elderly of the aircrew (who had obviously been and done Belvederes) erupted into the sort of language that the delicate souls on this forum would not like their maiden aunts to hear!!!!!!!!!!!!
HTH
Resmoroh

What gear box problems on the Chinook?

Only problems we had with the first ones were exploding hyd pump motors on the APU, found to be wrong dash numbers fitted, dash number related to it having been bench run for xyz time, they only failed in a certain time period, if it passed that it was good if memory serves me correctly.

And a combining box dephasing that cut a crewman in half in Germany , they upped the bolt size in the shaft to fix that, but it turned out that the US engineers were rotating the shaft to where they thought they should mesh, putting a jacking handle against a frame and the flange on the shaft, pushing it in then popping in the bolt, instead of rotating it until it popped in itself, so the bolt was under stress and failed… that is what I was told anyway.

S.H. Pete, Yes you both did, I just happened to put my question on at a different time.Thank you both, Tony, nice story attached to your reply.;)

Moggs. Thanks for putting me right on the maker.
Did the Bristol ever have the same gearbox troubles as the Chinook?.
Jim.

Lincoln .7

I think Tony and I have answered your question haven’t we?

Don’t know for sure Moggs, you may be right, however, that apart, whats the answer to the question, it’s academic to me as to who made it, well, up to a point, it’s the aircraft/Chinook aspect that interests me.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Totally British… used to have an un-nerving habit of catching fire on start up ( Avpin Starters), so most pics you will see the pilots door open on start up so they could abandon ship very rapidly.

My late F/Sgt was on them and related an airshow tale to me,

They were tasked to do an airshow and rapidly embark a bunch of Gurkas on board, rapidly depart, then to do a run in, flare, land on and deploy the Gurkas to attack some imaginary base, first part went ok but in the rapid departure the crewman never checked the Gurkas had secured their belts, they hadn’t, as the Belverdere flared, all the Gurkas went wizzing down the **** end sliding along the nylon seats making the flare even more dramatic and stuffing the aft rotor into the ground……………… End of display 😀

Chinook though bearing a resemblance is totally different and entirely US designed.

see

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=46025

http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/bristol_belvedere.php

AAh! Bristol not Westland. It evolved out of the Bristol 173, didn’t it and went on to serve for 10 or 15 years I think. Designed and built by Bristol Aeroplane Co and I have fond memories of it at Farnborough and elsewhere in the early sixties.

Wasn’t it the Bristol Belvedere?

Moggy