Breckey Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I saw a presentation from Redstone, that mentioned the Block 2.5 -60U's will be built to the MH-60M standard with a couple other doo-dads. From what i gathered it will be converted on the same assembly line, which means there won't be 200lbs of extra wiring chilling in the baffles of the aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEflyer Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I saw a presentation from Redstone, that mentioned the Block 2.5 -60U's will be built to the MH-60M standard with a couple other doo-dads. From what i gathered it will be converted on the same assembly line, which means there won't be 200lbs of extra wiring chilling in the baffles of the aircraft. Does that mean they're going to add the AR probe, radar, etc.? Saw this article a few months back, but it didn't offer much. http://www.theredstonerocket.com/content/air-force-receives-modified-black-hawk-helicopter By SEDRIC PENNINGTON For the Rocket 　 This was a classic example of one military service helping another. The Army delivered the first of three utility helicopters to the Air Force in a ceremony Sept. 7 at the Prototype Integration Facility. The modified Black Hawk UH-60M represented the Air Force’s first new helicopter in 14 years. The other two aircraft will be delivered by the end of this year. The helicopter will be used in combat search and rescue missions for day and night personnel recovery operations in hostile environments. Renamed the HH-60U, it has an improved airframe, navigation, avionics and propulsion system. The Air Force will also use the aircraft for civil search and rescue, medical evacuation, disaster response, humanitarian assistance, security cooperation/aviation advisory, NASA space flight support and rescue command and control. The joint project started last October when the Air Force Materiel Command, Aeronautical Systems Center and Rapid Development Integration Facility contacted the PIF about a team effort to design, develop and deliver a new helicopter to meet the Air Force’s immediate requirements. The Utility Helicopters Project Office worked with the Prototype Integration Facility, part of the Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center. The work was completed at the Madison County Executive Airport in Meridianville. The helicopter arrived in March with the actual work starting in June and was completed by the end of August. The PIF either bought or built all parts that were needed to upgrade the aircraft to meet Air Force requirements. During the ceremony, utility helicopters project manager Col. Thomas Todd presented the helicopter’s keys and logbook to Col. Clair Gilk, the Air Force chief of headquarters ACC, Personnel Recovery Requirements Division. "This project is about two important things – teamwork and lives," Gilk said. "The teamwork between the Air Force, PIF and the UHPO was essential in completing the project. The aircraft is important because it saves lives in combat situations. It has the capability to be downrange and bring war fighters back from very bad situations." The Prototype Integration Facility is working on the second HH-60U at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and will start on the third in October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardie9e Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 1/26/2012 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- More than 30 potential civilian contract companies were in attendance during Industrial Days sponsored by the Aeronautical Systems Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, Jan. 9-11. The event, hosted by the Air Force Combat Rescue Helicopter Program, gave potential contractors a glimpse into the service's plans to replace the aging HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters. "The CRH's primary mission is to recover isolated personnel from hostile or denied territory, but it will also conduct humanitarian, civil search and rescue, disaster relief, and non-combatant evacuation missions," Maj. Ian Kemp, Chief, Combat Rescue Helicopter Requirements Branch, said. During the three-day event, an open session was conducted with all potential companies the first day. The following two-days were dedicated to one-on-one sessions with potential prime contractors and their subcontractor teams that had previously requested a meeting. "The 'Industry Days' focused on maintaining an open dialogue with industry and providing them with an overview of the program, to include the preliminary acquisition strategy, contract strategy and program timeline," Dave Schairbaum, Director, Rotary Wing Branch, said. "Additional details were provided on the requirements for airworthiness, test and evaluation, training systems and product support." The CRH program will continue to seek feedback from industry to ensure the elements of the Request for Proposal are clear and well understood, said Lt. Col. Dave Jeter, Program Manager, Combat Rescue Helicopter. Release of a Draft RFP is planned by the end of Feb. 2012. (Courtesy of Air Force Public Affairs Agency) Saw this online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEflyer Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) HH-60U paying a visit to Nellis during Red Flag. Anyone out there get an update? Edited February 10, 2012 by NEflyer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) A little AW101 pron from AgustaWestland Edited March 1, 2012 by Breckey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEflyer Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 Even though I love 60's, I must admit I saved all the AW101 propaganda before they took their site down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/air-force-budget-cuts-stall-plan-replace-helo-030412/#.T1SqB_1jCw0.facebook last two paragraphs...the company that manufactured our refueling probe went out of business and at least at my base we're short a probe now (we mitigate that by removing the probe of the bird going into phase and slapping it on the bird coming out of phase); how do they expect to turn a Lima into a Golf and have compatible components? I can see this being a MX nightmare... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Couldn't they use the ones manufactured for the MH-60M? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 but it's a different setup that the rest of the probes in our community, and now there would be issues with MX dissimilarity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brock Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 What is the general feeling in the community? It seems like the 101 or 92 would be a good fit. Of course that is in a perfect world. If the Air Force goes all in with some version of the Mike model they need to look at what the 160th is using for a piower plant. The HH-60M's the regualr Army has are starting to see some power issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 If the Air Force goes all in with some version of the Mike model they need to look at what the 160th is using for a piower plant. The HH-60M's the regualr Army has are starting to see some power issues. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the 160th is having issues with those hot-rodded engines (uncontained failures, low TBO ["low" meaning hours/cycles counts in the low hundreds], over-torquing). I'll try to find the link to the story and post it later... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victory103 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 We haven't seen any major issues with our -701D's in the last 2+ yrs, then again we are not flying around max gross like SOAR with 2000+shp motors. How much more would you guys need to do to a basic Army borrowed Lima for your mission, besides armor, G/EGI, robbies, ESSS mounted external hoist, at least to fill the gap on your hightime G's until the U's are built/delievered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 the entire avionics package, to include Q-29 FLIR, SADL, MATT, radios, TACAN, INS/GPS/DOPPLER + CDU (Nav system), EFQI, remove ESSS and HF, install refueling probe and internal aux tanks (and their associated plumbing), defensive systems (EGMS, RWR, MWS), rescue hoist (we don't mount ours to the ESSS)... Do your Limas have full-up 701Ds including the beefed up XMSN? Wide chord blades? Those are further differences that would have to be accounted for or de-modded. Even if these Limas were given to one unit so that only that unit had to deal with the differences ops- and mx-wise (assuming no de-mod), in the long run it would be hard, as all the units share aircraft to even out the UTE rates. We've borrowed A/C from the Guard/Reserve in the near-recent past at home and downrange and I don't see that ending anytime soon. Realistically what I see happening is a complete gut down to the 308 beam and then a rebuild as a carbon copy of a G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCRIMP Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) The Merlin (AW101) is pretty limited at the lower ends of an approach. They evidentally can't be more than X number of degrees nose high below X feet. I know that doesn't help a whole lot, but I know that it was pretty limited. Very long drawn out approaches for the end game. It doesn't sound nearly as agile as the 60. I hear they don't have a great MX rate either. They are supposed to be great to fly though. Edited March 7, 2012 by SCRIMP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brock Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 We haven't seen any major issues with our -701D's in the last 2+ yrs, then again we are not flying around max gross like SOAR with 2000+shp motors. How much more would you guys need to do to a basic Army borrowed Lima for your mission, besides armor, G/EGI, robbies, ESSS mounted external hoist, at least to fill the gap on your hightime G's until the U's are built/delievered? The MH-60M doesn't have the 701D engines. It uses the YT706 which produces a lot more shaft horse power. I haven't seen a problem with the 701D either but they just aren't strong enough for the operating weight of a MH/HH model. When I say HH I mean the AF SAR version. The Army HH guys would probably prefer something with a a little more power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hookdriver Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 2600SHP. Damn that is an upgrade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 The 706 motor is creating a lot of problems with part durability as was mentioned. The Air Fore will never buy off on the 160th's solution which last I heard was to just just replace things more often, not cheap when you're talking about the transmission. Unfortunatly I think we really do need a larger helicopter, the Blackhawk just can't carry enough specialized equipment and still pick anything up. The 101 does have some strange limits with regard to nose up attitudes at low altitude due to the first thing that hits the ground is the tail rotor, oops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Level, cushion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 that's what tail stingers are for! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hookdriver Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 that's what tail stingers are for! Amen. We can drag the 58D's stinger all day long doing autos. Hell, I saw an aircraft pole vault off of one the other day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It lives! Been renamed CRH (Combat Rescue Helicopter). The FedBiz link lists a timeline of proposals in to Wright-Patt 3 Jan 13, and a tentative award date of 28 Sep 13. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123323178 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slackline Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) Oh, don't toy with our emotions! Edited October 23, 2012 by slackline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breckey Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Oh sure. You gucci 60 guys get a new helo and us Huey bubbas get second fiddle! On a serious note, hope it goes off without a major hitch. US101 maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slackline Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Oh sure. You gucci 60 guys get a new helo and us Huey bubbas get second fiddle! On a serious note, hope it goes off without a major hitch. US101 maybe? Please no! Speaking from experience with Eurocopter's military helicopters, if their contracts are anything like what Europeans or Australians get, that's a nightmare we don't want to engage in. I know it won't exactly be Eurocopter, but it won't exactly not be either. They are ridiculous with the rights they demand to retain in order to keep a "warranty".Oh sure. You gucci 60 guys get a new helo and us Huey bubbas get second fiddle! On a serious note, hope it goes off without a major hitch. US101 maybe? Please no! Speaking from experience with Eurocopter's military helicopters, if their contracts are anything like what Europeans or Australians get, that's a nightmare we don't want to engage in. I know it won't exactly be Eurocopter, but it won't exactly not be either. They are ridiculous with the rights they demand to retain in order to keep a "warranty".Oh sure. You gucci 60 guys get a new helo and us Huey bubbas get second fiddle! On a serious note, hope it goes off without a major hitch. US101 maybe? Please no! Speaking from experience with Eurocopter's military helicopters, if their contracts are anything like what Europeans or Australians get, that's a nightmare we don't want to engage in. I know it won't exactly be Eurocopter, but it won't exactly not be either. They are ridiculous with the rights they demand to retain in order to keep a "warranty". EDIT: tapatalk seems to be wiggin' out on the iPad. If this is triple posted sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vno Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now