Of all modern warship innovations, this is arguably the most valuable. The ability to operate a large helicopter from a relatively small surface vessel was a real game changer.
And who better to do it than the Canadians? They operate in some awful sea states, have used ASW helos for decades, and were a crucial part of NATO's defense throughout the Cold War.
@@Chilly_Billy I used to admire the SH-2F crews flying off the tiny little flight decks of the Knox Class frigates. No Bear Trap on those. No harpoon and grating either. And no room for a mistake. I'm surprised the US Navy took so long to adopt Bear Trap.
Could you consider getting rid of the background music in your videos? I don't feel that it adds anything to the video; the content is plenty strong enough to stand up on its own. Personally I just find the music distracting.
I flew SH-3s for a while in the US Navy and was puckering tighter than a gnat's you know what watching that Canadian Sea King land in heavy weather using the Bear Trap. I never imagined the seemingly fragile landing gear on the old Sea Pig could withstand that much sideways motion on touch down, but then the deck must have been pretty wet. I never landed one on a ship in those kinds of conditions. That's hairy. The Sea King was stable but slow and plodding, perfect for ASW or SAR, but we were always careful to treat it gently. That landing was anything but. I switched from SH-3s to the CH-46. Much more fun! We used to push our CH-46s into and out of the ship's hanger by hand. No tractor or anything. We almost lost one over the side when our ship took a sudden unexpected roll. The brake rider was standing on the brakes but she was skidding on the non-skid. Chocks NOW! And chains. Caught it with a wheel inches from the combing. Whew.
I love your videos. Your narration, the archival footage, and the music remind me of the Canadian educational films they used to show when I was in school.
@@polyus_studios What I would’ve given to have your videos compared to the training films that we had to listen to which mostly were from vintage 1940s.
Just a point about Hover tension. You have it slightly incorrect. The hauldown system is not applying tension equal to the gross weight of the aircraft: if it did, it would (obviously) pull the aircraft right out of the sky, which is undesirable (to say the least). The goal of hover tension is to lower the CG of the helicopter to a point below the helicopter, which will then steady it above the trap and make landing in the trap much more certain. In the case of the Sea King, the maximum tension that could be applied was 5000lbs, which is coincidentally what the pedestal was rated for for slung loads (in a Sea King, the hauldown system and load slinging system were one and the same).
Again....the RA cable tension loads the bottom of the helo probe imparting a destablizing side load. the pilot flies to stablize the helo (all forces in line / no side loads) which puts helo probe directly over the ra bell mouth. as ship rolls / yaws etc pilot follows the cable load. hover tension is low but gives pilot some feeling. recovery tension imparts a higher RA tension / load which the pilot responds. The RA tension never exceeds the reserve lift of the helo..
This is such an underrated aviation channel. I never knew I would be excited to see the newest video on a channel that covers Canadian aviation, a pretty esoteric subject.
You know the deal everyone. Spread the video around to social media. Let's get those subscriber numbers up. The more financial support these videos get, the more likely we'll get more.
Content suggestion: how do frigate based helicopter anti-submarine operations really work? What kind of patterns and ranges and coverage etc does it give? Like the sound buoys and probe dipsticks are cool but how do you protect a thing like a carrier?
BVDS: The actual ranges of sonars, sonobuoy patterns etc are classified and should not be posted here. ASW is a complex system with all the ships, aircraft, subs, intelligence, Electronic warfare and satellites working together at all times. (old P-3 Orion guy).
I was the flight deck electrician on several steamers and frigates for the Canadian Navy. I remember the diagram you showed from courses I went on. It is a great invention and also a dangerous piece of equipment to be around at times. There is no forgiveness in the Beartrap.
I love your videos and as a fellow Canadian, they give me a sense of pride of what our armed forces and defence industries have achieved despite the lack of funding or even interest from successive governments. One small niggle….PLEASE PLEASE learn to pronounce French names such as St. Laurent (it’s “san loron” and not “saint lorent”).
Some dude commenting today wrote "... first developed by the U.S. Navy ... in 1980..." Maybe he turned off the sound before he started watching this video. This system was started around 1962 and well established in the fleet by 1965 according to the presentation. SMH. He's going to lose it if he sees videos about the variable pitch propeller and the G-suit.
@@charlieross-BRM I do not know who he was but as the USN engineer I know BEARTRAP was Canadian all the way, with Dowty developed the hydraulics. We the USN worked with the Canadian National Defence and contracted with DAF -INDAL of Mississauga to modernize the BEAR TRAP to be come the RAST system...
For VTOL jet, it would be probably possible to make them land. A shit load of problem would come with that, as for how would a cable be pull down from the jet just for an exemple. The primary problem tho would be how to make it fly again, VTOL jet still need an short runway to takeoff with some weight (so missile, bomb, a good load of fuel, ect). It would also be not really useful, I'm sure some navy would find a way to make it useful, but one or two aircraft on a ship, that can't takeoff with a combat loadout and not much fuel would be kinda dumb. For the MV-22, that would be a pretty good idea, lot less problem compare for a jet, actually useful I'm sure, what I would be scare of, is the weight of this beast and how big it is. Definitely the american would be able to find a way to do it and have a beefed up beartrap with a big landing pad capable to have 40 000+ lbs land on it, but at that point, they also already have their amphibious ships and carrier that carry them. If Canada would want some for their ship, a lot would need to be done to to welcome them safely. The new Cyclone are already a problem here because of their weight. I can't imagine putting down an osprey that is probably the double of the weight of the cyclone our ship lol Sorry long reply but great question :)
Great system. I was the hardware engineer for the US Navy when we adopted it as the RAST system. We modernized the electronic controls but did not change much else. You might add some discussion on the hrs Horizon Reference System that provides an artificial horizon to the pilot... By the way; the RA Cable induces a destabilizing force on the helo which the pilot feels and fly's to a more stable position, ie over the bell mouth in the center of the RSD.
The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) also uses bear traps. From JP, thank you for the explanation of the interesting function. 我が国の海上自衛隊（JMSDF)でもベアトラップを使用させていただいております。JPから、興味深い機能の解説ありがとうございます。
Whatever money they're paying the crewman to run out and secure the helicopter's drag line is not enough. That has got to be one of the most dangerous jobs in the RCN fleet, just short of live combat duties. Kudos to all the veterans who ever had to perform that function!
As far as I know, no helicopter ever, Ever has used water munitions to sink A submarine. However, one helicopter using rockets damaged A sub in the Falklands war.
My father was one of the men who designed the Beartrap; he was in VX-10 (as well as HS-50), and trialled it on the various ships. He joined the RAF before WW2, trained at RAF Halton, & when the war broke out was transferred to the Fleet Air Arm. He was on loan to the RCN from 1948-50, and in '52 he transferred to the RCN as an instructor. There was nothing he didn't know abut the Sea Kings. CPO Austin "Chuck" Green. RIP. Thanks for this video.
@@polyus_studios We tried it with a Kaman SH . Problem - no securing during the traverse to/from hangar. I developed a cable/winch/snatch block system but way too complex and too heavy for deck crew...The 101 has landing gear that pivot to allow helo to spin around the harpoon ...and so align for movement when ship motion is reduced.
@@marvsmoir701 I greatly admired the crews operating SH-2Fs from the really small fight decks on those Knox class frigates. Narrow flight deck and a telescopic hangar, living on a crowded frigate that must have been pure misery in heavy weather.
My Uncle Captained the Assiniboine during the Beartrap trials No...he didn't ground her That was another guy (But...there was a dock in Bermuda he scraped some rust off)
I'm planning to make one about the helicopter of the armed forces over the years and I'll have a bit there about the Choctaw. Which one was the CH-125?
@@polyus_studios Cheers, looking forward to that. I don't know anything about either but moved a H-21 and H-34 to outdoor storage at Shearwater in the 90s. The paperwork stated "CH-125" but I believe that's just the official name for the Canadian H-21. I don't know if there are any differences. All I know is they were both beautiful and I was sad at the state they were in and wished I could see them flying. Apparently they were getting restored for static display (pending funds) but I don't know what became of them. They aren't at my local aviation museum nor are they on the base.
All the other countries on earth, "Sea King is a fantastic and reliable helicopter if you update and maintain it." Canada, "These things are horribly unreliable. What's maintenance? And we're not paying to update them. They'll be replaced in a few years. I mean decades."
The FL282 isn't close to being a large helicopter and only 24 were built. It was to be used to help carry supplies from ship to ship or ship to shore. However the statement is correct, using large helicopters on ships that size had not been successful until the Canadians.
HMCS Labrador was doing similar things at the same time as mentioned in the video. 8000kg helicopters on a ship much smaller than a cruiser was a Canadian first. Thanks Sean!
They connected a grounding line using a stick to the wire coming out of the helicopter before they tried to touch it. Otherwise they'd be very electrocuted
@@polyus_studios An SH-3 wouldn't electrocute you but it would be a good jolt. Our SAR swimmers were very familiar with this because they would feel it whenever we hoisted them down to the water to effect a rescue.
In the 60s the USN considered using DDH's with a plan for a modified Spruance Class wirh a hanger with room for 2 SH-3 Sea King or 4 SH-2 SeaSprite but this was Canceled and all were built as regular DD's with just 2 SH-2's and later SH-60B's
Another fantastic aviation development of the Pre 70's Canadian Aviation Industry. What happened to it?It went from one of the worlds best to almost nothing. Bombardier can't even survive without Government money or partnering with a European company.
Imagine the stresses on the airframe! Not to mention the obvious white knuckle stresses on the pilots. I wonder how much maintenance the folding blades required. From my experience, whenever they were brought into our hanger, we never folded the blades. Just afraid they would become u.s. At the 9.42 time stamp, that roll must be close to 40 degrees!
@@nzs316 I know exactly how much room they take. I’ve assisted in folding them at sea many times. Lol. You said that from your experience you never folded the blades. I mentioned that you must have had a wide hanger if you put the helo in the hanger without the blades folded. Even on land they fold the Seakings rotor when they put them into a hanger or if they tow them with a mule.
@@sailorman3 For the most part they stayed outside at CFB Saint Hubert, when visiting hanger 10. It was only when they required maintenance, it’s not for nothing that they were called Sea pigs, that we brought them in.
Your videos are the best, can’t wait for the Sea King one you teased about in this video One very small comment, the position that operates the bear trap is the LSO, landing signals officer, one of the pilots in the other crew onboard, their “office” on the flight deck is called the LSO compartment More Canadian content like this !
In the US Navy we had the LSE, Landing Signal Enlisted. On the ships I deployed with there would be a pilot in a control station above the hanger taking to the helicopter on radio acting kind of like a mini-Air Boss and talking to the flight deck with a walkie-talkie. LSOs were only on carriers or LHA/LHDs.
The original "Beartraps" were operated by HP compressed air but were updated later to operate off hydraulics. This was a huge step forward as they could be "fired" a number of times with the onboard hydraulic pump without the need to recharge them with air in the event there was a need to make several attempts to secure the helicopter probe.
Awesome video. Will definitely be sending this to my Subbies when I get to my next ship. Our explaination is nowhere near this good. Edit* The only thing that you're missing is that the hauldown and bear trap are two seperate systems that can operate independent of one another. This revelation blew my mind while I was deployed last year, and I probably had run about 100 helicopter take offs and landings at that point. If anyone wants a further explaination I will happily give it, but its hard to do without visual aides.
This is cool to me as both my dad and I worked at shearwater him on the CH 124 and myself on the CH 148 Cyclone. Both aircraft were equipped with RAST equipment.
I noticed the new Chinese tyoe 055 super destroyer even has a bear trap type system. The deck has two slots in it for traversing into and out of the hangers
The Soviets/Russians had a track to move the helo in and out of their hangers of the Udaloy class and if my brain wasn't fried by too many runs in Olongapo, the Sovremenyys had it too, but that was all it was for so perhaps that is all the Chinese have. They didn't have a haul down system relying instead on a big net stretched across the landing area raised several centimeters above the deck. The landing gear wheels would get trapped by the netting so the helicopter wouldn't slide off the deck. I took some pretty good images of the then brand new Admiral Spriridonov in the IO circa 1986 as she deployed from the builders to Vlad (and already rusty with the paint gone from the bow) and you can see the tracks in the deck. They had really convoluted hangers with a roof that slid open and a ramp from the flight deck down to a lower level inside the hanger bay. The roof had to slid open to clear their rotors as the helo descended down the ramp. They needed a motorized something to move the helo up and down that ramp because the KA-32 is about as heavy as a Sea King.
Curtis Wright, American company owns Iindal, canada, concept was first demonstrated 1951 since then many updates and refinements. An American company, darling.
But concepts were much earlier, see Aurther Young a pioneer in helicopter Aviation. He helped found Bell Helicopter. Old, guy, my first helicopter instructor father was taught by.... Drum roll.. Igor Sykorsky!!
