53s vs 60s

[Gatordev]

Just for the record, the HAZREPS I was refering to had nothing to do w/ cracks in beams. I have no knowledge or info on said cracks.

As for 53 vs 60...why would I want to fly a -53? I mean, you've got to start 4 engines, and obviously I don't have time in my day for that kind of non-sense. Three? Yeah, I can fit that in.

 

[ChunksJR]

I can't belive I got lectured by the kid who posted a pick of himself smoking a pipe on line.

There is nothing wrong with a little "hubbly-bubbly"...and I wasn't lecturing...mearly hoping that CNN wouldn't quote an anonamous "official" that we penetrated, deeply and forcefully, Iranian Airspace.

 

[Fly Navy]

There is nothing wrong with a little "hubbly-bubbly"...and I wasn't lecturing...mearly hoping that CNN wouldn't quote an anonamous "official" that we penetrated, deeply and forcefully, Iranian Airspace.

Admit it, you just wanted to say "deeply and forcefully".

 

[Pags]

Admit it, you just wanted to say "deeply and forcefully".

If you're gonna be quoted and start an international incident, it might as well be a funny quote.

 

[eddie]

If you're gonna be quoted and start an international incident, it might as well be a funny quote.

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm going to log that away as a GOLDEN piece of advice.

 

[1rotorhead]

Sorry I missed all the fun. I've heard both sides for a while about the cracks. I've flown with HC guys and seen their side flare first hand. I don't know much, but I'm pretty sure that side flaring an aircraft at 40kts and not being able to read your displays because the aircraft is shaking/vibrating so bad can't be good for the airframe.

 

[ChunksJR]

I've flown with HC guys and seen their side flare first hand.

I give up. I've lied.

The aircraft will fall apart on the 154th (and final) sideflare. This is fact. There's no other time when helicopters shake ("sikorsky shuffle" is actually a nickname for the dance of your typical "violent HC pilot")

NATOPS limits don't matter...they never tested it. A few guys, in white lab coats, went to the bar one day with their pet monkey and said: "How ever many shots our pet monkey "Timmy" can do...THAT'LL BE THE LIMIT ON SIDEWAYS FLIGHT!!!"

"1...2...3...!!!! GO TIMMY GO! 4............40? Is that it?! We'll tell the pilots that Timmy was off his game...they can fly anyway they want...it'll be great!"

At least...that's the story that those crazy sikorsky engineers tell me...:icon_rage

 

[1rotorhead]

Easy big fella. I'm not taking sides. Just shedding a little light on the matter. Don't be so defensive.

 

[Gatordev]

Hey, Chunks (or whomever), just for my education (not trying to set you up, honest), what's the sideward/rearward flgiht limit on the Sierra? Still 35 or did they increase it since you're lighter?

 

[ChunksJR]

Hey, Chunks (or whomever), just for my education (not trying to set you up, honest), what's the sideward/rearward flgiht limit on the Sierra? Still 35 or did they increase it since you're lighter?

45 kts (interpretation opportunity...if you're truely sideways going 45 kts...do you use ground speed???? is it 45 KIAS before you can initiate sideward flight? or do you have to be less than 45 when you're 90 degrees out of flight path?...if the latter is true, you can probably start kicking the tail around 60kts...) or 35 with external load (agian, left to interpretation because the pitot static system is unaccurate less than 40 kts...)

So yes. And no.

 

[squorch2]

Urgh. Sounds like a NATOPS check question. "What does 45 knots sideways REALLY mean?"

 

[BigIron]

Hey, Chunks (or whomever), just for my education (not trying to set you up, honest), what's the sideward/rearward flgiht limit on the Sierra? Still 35 or did they increase it since you're lighter?

Is this an airframe stress issue for the H-60? The 53's rearward limit is 30 Kts and 35 laterally. That is because of tail rotor authority.

 

[Gatordev]

It's a T/R issue for the Bravo (and I assume the F/H). It was 35 for both lateral and aft for us as well.

 

[MasterBates]

Hovering sideways in a 45 kt wind sucks. And yes, had very tenuous tail rotor authorty. A GUTTED (read- 1-2K below NORMAL operating weight)60B is definitly running out of it quickly there. I WOULD NOT reccomend exceeding the 35kt limit unless "Operational Neccesity" or a life or death situation exists.

*ATTN NATOPS NAZI'S*
This was during JTF Rita, and the only way to get into where I was landing (on a bridge) was to go sideways and come straight down.

 

[ChunksJR]

Secondly, the tail rotor authority between the legacy SEAHAWK and 60S is damn near doubled on the latter. Sikorsky based this off the ability of a lighter airframe to tolerate higher side loads...something that the Blackhawk has demonstrated since it was introduced in the 70s.

Is there an echo?