53s vs 60s

[BigIron]

I haven’t been on here in a while, so I hope this isn’t a topic that was recently covered in detail (I did try a quick search – didn’t find anything off hand). Anyways, I wing this July, and have been seriously thinking about 53s Norfolk. I have heard some bad things about them (i.e. no flight time, always broken, etc.) and wanted to know how much of that stuff is true. I’ve always thought 53s were bad ass, but if those guys never get to fly, or it’s a career ender, it might not be worth it. That being said, I would love to hear anything ya’ll have to say about HS, HSL, HSC, etc. Is it new platform (Sierra or Romeo) or bust, or is HS still a good deal? Is HSL as bad as it is rumored to be in the training squadrons?
Anything you can offer will be helpful. I haven’t made up my mind by a long shot, and want to hear what guys in the fleet/FRS think.

Thanks

There are 2 53 squadrons out of Norfolk now. HM-14 and HC-4. Both have a logistics mission and HM-14 has a mine countermeasures mission (towing systems through the water) as well. I have only 1300 hours total and 160 of those are "towing" hours, so it really is a small percentage of our flight time.

Currently HC-4's aircraft have been modified to use night vision goggles as well as a ramp mounted weapon system. More aircraft have been identified and funded to be modified. Without getting into excessive details, it looks decent for a continuation of that sort of mission capability.

Not all 53s are broken all of the time. The more they operate, the better they fly. It must be known that the MH-53E is now THE most expensive airframe to operate in the fleet. Our friends in the F-14 have passed that dubious honor to us now. In the nutshell version, it is very maintenance intensive (tons of moving parts, some obsolete technology, etc).

Other guys have put it well...fly what you want. If you want to lift a lot of stuff, carry 20k of fuel, have a lot of engine power, and take up a lot of room, then 53s are for you.

PM me if you want. I can fill you in on more information if you are interested.

 

[Gatordev]

Hard to convince a former 206/Huey Guy that 60s are cool. 300 pound date in a size 8 dress best describes the Bravo. The Romeo packed on a few more pounds.

I don't know how in the world you can say this. And I'm speaking -60's in general here, not the Bravo. How can you say a torque limited, slow-ass, semi-rigid aircraft is "better?" Of course, my question is more rhetorical, as I know it's all about preference, but I've done and seen things done in the -60 that are far more likely accomplished than in a Bell 2xx. Yeah, I know that the 206 is nimble and still very capable, but I'd take the 3600 SHP, almost infinite amount of torque, and general fly-home-able capability of the -60 over the 2xx any day.

Dislcaimer: I'm not talking about Snakes, for the record, as I consider them a completely different animal w/ their transmissions and T700s.

@Pags:

I know you've mentioned putting a different head on an airframe not designed for it a couple of times, and that makes sense to a point, but I'm guessing you're hearing that from w/in the Kool-Aide jug. Those outside also got to read the HAZREPS that went out, and the specifically address "other" reasons for cracks. I'll leave it at that for the sake of privelege, but you can put two and two together w/ the other posts.

 

[MasterBates]

Gator,

My preferance for the Huey/206 has to do with FMC rates and autorotational characteristics. I flew the balls out of both for 7 years, and unscheduled maintenance was few and far between. And I am not talking AT junk either, the black boxes in the bravo as you know are either rock solid, or junk, and it is totally random which one you get.

Only engine instrumentation problem I had in either was a bad TGT gauge in flight in a 206 (200 degrees @ 95%). It seems we barely go a week here without one of the birds getting a new instrumentation issue.

Torque, if you only experince was with the 57, I can see how your view of the family is so-so. They refuse to buy upgraded trannys. 5/6 206's we flew had upgraded transmissions. 100% continuous. 115% for 20 min. 130% was where Overtorques started. You normally would droop before Qmax.

I cannot even begin to think of how many non FCF flights I have had where a White Harness goes bad. Week long FCFs are not uncommon with the 60 ashore. (granted, not the norm)

For the Huey the ONLY instrument failure I had in 200+ hours was a Nr Tach Gen. But the Huey had two big differences. You could "fly by ear" a lot easier, and on autos, the Huey was not a Nr control monster. I have had 3 tach sensor failures in the 60. Granted, about 1/4 of my 60 time is FCF.

On the auto standpoint, I had a total engine failure in a Huey in a questionable part of the H-V diagram (HMU Failure). I am still here. Not sure it would have turned out so well with a 60.

60's do have the upper hand on engine reliablity, newer design, and two. There are only a few critical phases of flight where a single engine failure is dicey.

That being said, I would rather deal with stuck pedals or loss of drive in a 204/206 for 2 reasons:

1- They auto much better.
2- The throttle is on the collective, making it much easier to cut engines or manipulate throttles (PCLs) as needed.

IN SHORT:

The Huey is cool, but has some shortcomings (I have never flown the twin engine version)

The 60 is not a POS. But, it is not the zenith of helo developent either. It is a mid 70's airframe with some minor upgrades. (Active vibe absorbers and such in the R)

 

[Gatordev]

Yeah, I understand all your points. I was an FCF ***** as well, but I have to say, it sounds like you had more than your share of bad luck incidents. I also thinking you're equating the "-60" with our lovely 20 year old models. There's much more to it than just old aircraft in a salt environment. One huge improvement is the design itself. It might be from the -70's, but they took all the bad things from the Huey, and made it much more survivable when it got hit. Yes, autos are more challenging, but think about the damage that can be inflicted on a -60 and have it still fly. The Vietnam era Hueys certainly did alright w/ battle damage, but Sikorsky did a lot to improve that. I mean an RPG in the oil cooler (Black Hawk Down), that's impressive.

As for Tq, those are interesting stats on the upgrades. I didn't know that, but I was also basing my commnets on the UH-1N, which is notorious for being slow and Tq-limited.

I know this is all academci, but an interesting discussion, nonetheless.

 

[MasterBates]

The -N, belive it or not is SLOWER. Yes, it has more power, but has an additional gearbox (the C-Box) and weighs more.

The A-E models could lift their own weight. Tha A & B models could lift 1000# MORE than their own weight. That was out of the box. We upgraded them.

The A models weighed just over 4000# and came with a 870hp engine. We STC'd ours and put in 1300hp Engines. They look a little odd. The A-Model we called "Short Bus" if you looked at them the fueslage was about 2-3 ft shorter in the cabin. B models were stretch (normal) Hueys. Akin to the visual difference beteen a 53D and 53E.

 

[Pags]

@Pags:

I know you've mentioned putting a different head on an airframe not designed for it a couple of times, and that makes sense to a point, but I'm guessing you're hearing that from w/in the Kool-Aide jug. Those outside also got to read the HAZREPS that went out, and the specifically address "other" reasons for cracks. I'll leave it at that for the sake of privelege, but you can put two and two together w/ the other posts.

Well, ChunksJR has also mentioned it, so don't be confusing me with him. But, I'm sure there are myriad other reasons for there to be cracks, I just don't think they can all be solved with the blanket statement of "phrog guys breakin em". of course, its not all covered by my choice explanation. if i get a chance i'll ask a few folks around the sqadron and see what they have to say...I'm sure the ASO will point me to the HAZREPs, which I'd be interested to read.

 

[Gatordev]

Some of them are just growing pains w/ having to learn how to live w/ a new airframe. The irony is that for some of the HAZREPS, it was like they didn't know there were 2 other communities that have been doing it for the last 20 years already. I'm sure there's at least one "doghouse blows away" message in there. I say that not to break confidentiality, but because it happens to everyone at least once.

 

[Pags]

Some of them are just growing pains w/ having to learn how to live w/ a new airframe. The irony is that for some of the HAZREPS, it was like they didn't know there were 2 other communities that have been doing it for the last 20 years already. I'm sure there's at least one "doghouse blows away" message in there. I say that not to break confidentiality, but because it happens to everyone at least once.

yeah, it's been interesting to hear the HS guys talk about the HC way of doing business.

 

[MasterBates]

Pags,

What me and gator have been talking about, is that these airframes are more similar than they are different. Not trying to piss in your wheaties, but if I am remembering right you are a H2P/FRP. Me and Gator are both HACs and FCPs with a good chank of experience.

Remember, we do VERTREP and SpecOps insertions as well. Look at the airframes side by side. The main beams are the same. Transmissions Same. Heads same save for the biflars.

 

[Pags]

Pags,

What me and gator have been talking about, is that these airframes are more similar than they are different. Not trying to piss in your wheaties, but if I am remembering right you are a H2P/FRP. Me and Gator are both HACs and FCPs with a good chank of experience.

Remember, we do VERTREP and SpecOps insertions as well. Look at the airframes side by side. The main beams are the same. Transmissions Same. Heads same save for the biflars.

Sorry if I've come across as antagonistic or as a know it all, just trying to talk some helos. I guess I might be letting the kool-aid go to my head, but am not trying to say that you guys are wrong.

 

[1rotorhead]

You should think about lifestyle as well. Living on a smallboy is far different than living on a carrier or gator. Also, the only place HSL does inserts is in Bruce Willis movies.

 

[Brett327]

You should think about lifestyle as well. Living on a smallboy is far different than living on a carrier or gator. Also, the only place HSL does inserts is in Bruce Willis movies.

Oh, Snap! It's funny because it's true.

Brett

 

[S.O.B.]

The choice is simple.

 

[1rotorhead]

If you like hauling things around.

 

[S.O.B.]

^^ I have considerable time in both. Nothing with a rotor on it compares to the 53. Sorry.