What's new

Five US troops die in Afghan chopper crash

Five US troops die in Afghan chopper crash
By AFP
Published: March 12, 2013
KANDAHAR: Five US troops fighting insurgents in southern Afghanistan were killed in a helicopter crash in bad weather, the coalition and provincial authorities said Tuesday.
Police in the province of Kandahar said the Black Hawk helicopter came down late on Monday evening during a heavy rainstorm in Daman district.
The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) does not release the nationality of casualties, but a Western military official who declined to be named confirmed that the victims were all US forces personnel.
“The cause of the crash is under investigation. However, initial reporting indicates there was no enemy activity in the area at the time,” ISAF said in a statement.
A spokesman said that all on board the helicopter had died in the crash.
A Taliban representative in Kandahar said the militants had brought down the aircraft, although the group often makes false claims of responsibility for incidents in which Nato troops die.
Helicopter crashes are fairly frequent in Afghanistan, where the 100,000-strong international mission relies heavily on air transport as it battles against the insurgency across the south of the country.
“There was bad weather in the area and the helicopter crashed at about 10:00 pm,” Kandahar provincial police chief General Abdul Razeq told AFP. “No insurgents were there at the time.”
Daman district is one of most stable areas of Kandahar, a province at the heart of the unrest, and local officials said the crash site was not far from Kandahar city.
Last August seven American soldiers and four Afghans died when another Black Hawk helicopter crashed in Kandahar.
Monday’s crash came on the same day that two US soldiers were killed and 10 wounded in a suspected insider attack in the eastern province of Wardak by a man in an Afghan army uniform who also killed several Afghan soldiers.
The Nato mission in Afghanistan has been unsettled this week by comments from Afghan President Hamid Karzai accusing the US of colluding with the Taliban to justify the presence of foreign troops in the country.
Washington abruptly dismissed the allegations, saying the US has “spent enormous blood and treasure” in helping the Afghan people and did not support any kind of violence involving civilians.
Karzai made his comments during the first visit to Kabul by new US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who vowed that the US was working to ensure a successful handover as Afghan security forces take on the battle against the Taliban.
Combat troops from the Nato mission will leave Afghanistan by the end of next year, and many fear that poorly trained Afghan soldiers will struggle to contain insurgents opposed to Karzai’s government.
Hagel’s visit to Afghanistan was also marred by twin suicide attacks, including one in central Kabul, while he was at a nearby US base in the city.

RIH..... ....... ,,,,,,,
 
RIP to the soldiers who've lost their lives in this incident.

@gambit

My question is regarding the design of tail rotors in helicopters.Some of the newer designs incorporate the tail rotor in a disc shaped space instead of the rotor being operating in the open.Also the enclosed disc shaped design usually has increased number of blades.


  • What's the advantage of such a configuration?

  • Does the arrangement is aimed at lowering the helicopter's acoustic signature and, so, making it stealthier?

  • Or is it to save it from being damaged when under attack?


  • Even the Apache's have an open configuration.If the enclosed configuration is much more effective than the previous designs.Then why the manufacturers are still opting to continue with the open configuration design on it?


  • Or is that stealth features not required much in case of the longbow?


The Blackhawk that crashed near osama's compound had a closed disc rotor configuration and is supposed to be the stealth variant of UH-60.



I'll like to attach couple of images of the enclosed and the open configuration respectively for reference.


eurocopter-helicopters-eight-bladed-tail-rotor.jpg



apache06.JPG


Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I apologise for my nasty comments earlier, I was just in a bad mood and just realised what I said was just wrong saying that to ANY dead people.
Mods, I've deleted my earlier posts, can you delete the posts where others have quoted me.
Thank you
 
RIP to the soldiers who've lost their lives in this incident.

@gambit

My question is regarding the design of tail rotors in helicopters.Some of the newer designs incorporate the tail rotor in a disc shaped space instead of the rotor being operating in the open.Also the enclosed disc shaped design usually has increased number of blades.


  • What's the advantage of such a configuration?

  • Does the arrangement is aimed at lowering the helicopter's acoustic signature and, so, making it stealthier?

  • Or is it to save it from being damaged when under attack?


  • Even the Apache's have an open configuration.If the enclosed configuration is much more effective than the previous designs.Then why the manufacturers are still opting to continue with the open configuration design on it?


  • Or is that stealth features not required much in case of the longbow?


The Blackhawk that crashed near osama's compound had a closed disc rotor configuration and is supposed to be the stealth variant of UH-60.
The design is called the 'ducted fan'...

Single Rotor Helicopter - DJI Wiki
Ducted fan(Also called Fenestron、Fantail or Fan-in-fin)
A variant of the traditional tail rotor helicopter, with a ducted fan instead of the external open traditional propeller, the advantage is high safety, less vibration and lower noise, the disadvantage is a bigger weight and higher cost, the thrust mass ratio is relatively low.
The Abbottabad raid Blackhawk was not of the ducted fan design. Rather, it had a disc covering the hub of the tail rotor. This is to reduce (not eliminate) radar returns.

Not sure if you read my explanation on radar detection of agitated metals (RADAM) or not, but just in case not...

Analysis of radar detection of agitated metals (RADAM)
It has been observed that the radar returns from moving multielement metal targets often exhibit an unexpected modulation that has both random (or noise-like) and semicoherent components. One possible mechanism for producing this effect is the modification of the current distribution on the target that results when electrical contacts between target elements are altered intermittently by the forces associated with target motion. Such intermittent-contact modulation must be considered in the design of a radar for detecting or identifying a target exhibiting this effect. Depending on the application, the observer may wish to enhance or suppress the observation of the effect, or it may be important that the effect itself be enhanced or suppressed in the object being observed. To accomplish any of these, the effect must be well understood, and we have therefore undertaken a program of research to study the radar detection of agitated metals (RADAM). This report summarizes our progress during the second year of the program. The overall objectives of our RADAM research program are to (1) identify and isolate the physical processes and mechanisms that contribute to a RADAM signature, (2) identify and explain important recognizable features of the signature, and (3) determine means for separating the significant identifying components of the signature from nonmeaningful components.
Basically, RADAM algorithm looks for complimentary signals:

- Upper/Lower
- Right/Left
- Front/Rear
- Increasing Doppler/Decreasing Doppler

If you look at the main rotor assembly or 'disc', if you have one rotor blade moving away from you, then there must be one blade coming towards you. So now you have two Doppler signals that are complementary to each other and in a cluster. RADAM algorithm will flag this as a probable helicopter related set of signals.

For the tail rotor, if you see an upper blade, there must be a lower blade. If you have a signal going to your left, there must be a signal going to your right. So if your radar sees this and also in a cluster, it will also flag this as a probable helicopter related set of signals.

The Abbottabad raid Blackhawk had a disc to cover only the tail rotor hub to make it more difficult (not impossible) for any RADAM capable radar systems to flag it. Difficult, not impossible.

I apologise for my nasty comments earlier, I was just in a bad mood and just realised what I said was just wrong saying that to ANY dead people.
Mods, I've deleted my earlier posts, can you delete the posts where others have quoted me.
Thank you
Do not bother. Your character is consistent with most of the Chinese members that passed through here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That was a comprehensive reply.Thank you sir for your time and attention.

The Abbottabad raid Blackhawk was not of the ducted fan design. Rather, it had a disc covering the hub of the tail rotor.

This is to reduce (not eliminate) radar returns.

Uh my bad ,i mixed that up and was lazy to look it up once more before posting.Pardon that mistake.

This Fenestron tail also looks a safer option because it's enclosed with in the body.So, it'll be highly unlikely to cause any accidents hence safer for the personnel.Am i right here?
 
Five less passengers going back to Amerika on the commercial jets.

Save money. Save fuel.
 
That was a comprehensive reply.Thank you sir for your time and attention.
Yer welcome...

This Fenestron tail also looks a safer option because it's enclosed with in the body.So, it'll be highly unlikely to cause any accidents hence safer for the personnel.Am i right here?
Correct. But as the source also stated, such an enclosure increased tail weight, which increases overall weight, and the higher weight in the tail section make attitude changes a bit more demanding. More fuel cost is inevitable. The ducted fan assembly also create a little bit of a vacuum effect. All ground personnel are careful around the tail section no matter what.
 
Nice is not my middle name.

I am all for fighting for my country and being patriotic and all. But they were not fighting for their country. They invaded another country.

These guy are cowards. Killing their enemies from a distance with hi-tech weapons. Then they brat about how invincible they were, how powerful they were. Did these know how their enemies felt, how they suffered? I don't think they did.

They can kiss my ***.
 
Nice is not my middle name.

I can see that :laugh:


I am all for fighting for my country and being patriotic and all. But they were not fighting for their country. They invaded another country.

These guy are cowards. Killing their enemies from a distance with hi-tech weapons. Then they brat about how invincible they were, how powerful they were. Did these know how their enemies felt, how they suffered? I don't think they did.

They can kiss my ***.

You know we were in Afghanistan too, don't you? Who knows whether these guys ever killed anyone.

Anyways, believe what you want.

You're in a cat house? Did they legalize that here yet?
 
I apologise for my nasty comments earlier, I was just in a bad mood and just realised what I said was just wrong saying that to ANY dead people.
Mods, I've deleted my earlier posts, can you delete the posts where others have quoted me.
Thank you

Why would the evidence of your opinions be deleted? Your comments were deplorable and disgusting, quite frankly I am surprised you are not banned right now.
 
We? Yes, you meant those idiots. Steven Harper et al. Too bad, I got cluded in that group only because I am a Canadian. Could we say no. May be. Did you have the guts to say no? No. We are the Amerika *****. They can do us whichever way they want and we say I enjoy it.

I live with my cat. He is the boss. I don't live in those cathouses *wink*wink*
 
Nice is not my middle name.

I am all for fighting for my country and being patriotic and all. But they were not fighting for their country. They invaded another country.

These guy are cowards. Killing their enemies from a distance with hi-tech weapons. Then they brat about how invincible they were, how powerful they were. Did these know how their enemies felt, how they suffered? I don't think they did.

They can kiss my ***.
Right...And your Canadian military does not want and do the same? The Canadian Army still uses swords and shields and the Spartan phalanx formation in honor and respect to the enemy? :lol:

Your middle name may not be 'nice', but 'intellectually dishonest' is appropriate.
 

Back
Top Bottom