Wessex Mk.5 Royal Navy, Booker 29/9/73

Mpacha..all said and done, do you have any info on the Atar Plus. As mentioned earlier, there was a reference on the CSIR website as I was trawling through their site. I cannot recall which section it was now, but basically it stated that the various parametres of the Atar Plus project were validated at the CSIR and that that particular section was involved in the Atar Plus project. I assumed at the time that perhaps they were doing contract work for SNECMA, but could find no refernce to it anywhere in association with them. Kurt stated that his friend does have knowledge of it and that it is a thrust upgrade. So Project Recepient in your opinion is not related to Atar Plus? (if it exists)

Wilhelm, I can’t tell you what projects CSIR or Denel are currently working on or if Atar plus does even exist, but it was certainly not part of Project Recepient.

Mpacha..the Cheetah C airframe, if indeed a Kfir, would then have been built to house the J-79 turbojet in a fatter, shorter fuselage. The J-79 requires a higher airflow than even the 9K50. How did they reduce the airflow on the C model? Did they reduce the size of the inlets down to a midway point between the 09C and J-79 to suit the 9K50?

Kurt, thanks for the PM. The Cheetah and Cava/Carver saga interests me greatly. I share your frustration over the Cheetah C secrecy!!

It is indeed a Kfir with a reworked tail section. The Kfir has other airflow inlets which are not on the Cheetah.

Yes, the Alouette has also been very reliable, but it can’t do HALF the things the Wessex can. Can it carry lots of troops – no! Can it carry a LandRover or gun underslung load – no! The Alouette is just good for liaison and SAR.

Didn’t know that a requirement for a “helicopter pioneer” was to carry heavy loads :confused: Has the Wessex got the same track record as the Alouette – no, has it had the same worldwide usage as the Alouette-no. Maybe the Alouette is a tad better than you give it credit for. :diablo:

As has already been pointed out to you, you don’t know much about the Alouette III either!

Mpacha…I’m aware of the replacement of the Atar09C with the Atar9K50. The air intakes were enlarged on the Cheetah C (Atar9K50) as opposed to the Cheetah E which was powered by the AtarO9C. I’m aware that the D’s got the 9K50 after the C.

What I’m asking now is why change the intake design to increase airflow when the original half cone splitter is/was deemed good for the Cheetah C model. It also does not explain references I have seen (and clearly Kurts friend) to a programme called Atar Plus.

The Cheetah C is not a Mirage airframe, so you would have to see how the spec’s compare with that of the Mirage. ATAR Plus is not part of “Project Recipient”

I was wondering if anybody knows anything about the upgrading/uprating of the SNECMA ATAR 9K50 fitted to the Cheetah fleet in South Africa. a few years ago I read in a journal that certain engine componants were re-engineered and improved on this engine. I was browsing IPMSSA and found this:

“During 2002 Cheetah D no 859 was used for development work with new intakes as part of “Project Recipient” to increase the airflow through the original Cheetah D intakes. The air intakes feature modifications to some areas of the intake shape to improve the airflow. Basic outer shape remains the same. The main feature of the “Recipient” upgrade is the fitment of an up-rated 09K50 engine, by improving a number of individual components of the engine. The fitment of the 9K50 engine was as a follow on project to feasibility studies carried out by DENEL in 1994 as a private venture by mating Cheetah D no 844 with 836 (a Mirage III RZ which received a 9K50 engine in a separate upgrade). Increased airflow and the up-rated engine give the “Recipient” upgraded Ds a significant increase in performance.”

The picture shows a new curved splitter plate. Picture courtesy of ipmssa.za.org.

Hate to burst your bubble, but Project Recipient came about when the original ATAR 09C was replaced with the 9K-50C-II and thus the increase in power and need to redesign the engine air intakes. This had been done previously when the 9K-50 was fitted to the R2Z. This actually had more to do with SAAF standardisation than the actual improvement in power. The South African improvements to the 9K-50 have more to do with maintenance and improved fuel efficiency than anything else.

As for the SMR-95, to quote the test pilot, it was not accepted due, “several different reasons, not because of technical problems but rather logistic support philosophies and politic’s.”

The Avon Sabre was good, the Mirage was fabulous but I can not and will not bow to the Hornet being anywhere near good! Sorry. As for my pic, the Pigs are superb, the Mirage was a miricle and the Canberra was incredible (I have seen the HARS one in a flying display, it can be thrown around the sky like a fighter, it’s amazing). I do like you pic though mate, Kudos to you for posting it!

Fishing always was better down South 😀

I’ll swap the Hornet for the Canberra but no more! Then again I could be bias :diablo: 😀 :diablo: