VRS = Vortex Ring state (http://www.pilotoutlook.com/helicopter_flying/vortex_ring_state_(Settlingwithpower). If you look at how fast he was going immediately prior VRS is very unlikely - it is really difficult to get a 60 into it on purpose let alone from that profile.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Blackhawk Driver Gone Bad?
- Thread starter CAMike
- Start date
Really depends on what the investigation board determines after the accident review is complete, but I know guys that are still flying after having Class A accidents. We always lead maneuvers with collective in the "A" with 700's, and I am sure during the flare the collective during this case was bottomed out. My unit is has the new 701D's, but without the extra Nr sensor or -60B transmission.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
They are putting 60B trannys in Army/AF birds now? Why?
Just curious.
Just curious.
How is the 60B transmission different? Does it have to do with the folding system?
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
I don't know. Rotor brake mount and util pump hole maybe?
Do the B/F/H/R have a common main xmsn? I honestly don't know, but I thought the B/F/H all took the same one, just with different crap bolted on.
Do the B/F/H/R have a common main xmsn? I honestly don't know, but I thought the B/F/H all took the same one, just with different crap bolted on.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
The B had the place to put the aux pump, but it had a blockoff plate IIRC. Hoist was off B/U pump.
Yeah, ok, I think that is the same thing with the S. The Block II has a utility hyd pump for the anti mine sled.
The UH-60L went operational in the late 80's. The -60B tranny can handle the power of the 701C motors, pretty much 401C's for the Seahawk. Since the transmission is also "navalized", components have a longer TBO, equals saving $$$ in the long run. The utility pump and rotor brake mounts are still there, but the regular Army is never going to buy those.
The -701D takes the -700 TGT limitations out of our mission challenges, having the extra power and somewhat cooler running engines, sadly we are now limited by the transmission.
The -701D takes the -700 TGT limitations out of our mission challenges, having the extra power and somewhat cooler running engines, sadly we are now limited by the transmission.
The AF has what we call improved durability gearboxes to go along with the 701C motors. It sounds like we (Army and AF) got them from the Navy. Some of the AF birds have rotor brakes, some do not. Our hoists run off the backup pump.
It sounds like the 701D makes the 60 perform better at high altitude versus any real gain at sea level then?
It sounds like the 701D makes the 60 perform better at high altitude versus any real gain at sea level then?
My unit inherited some UH-60 A/D from the active duty while we wait for our a/c to arrive in country. The new engines bring some extra power to the table but not much more. I've encountered one hot start in my 4000 hrs of flying H-60A/L and HH's. Since I've been here I've encountered them daily with the new engines. It is typical army. Trying to make something old new by half-assing it.
Busdriver we have the same trany in the L model and M. The M does have the rotor brake.
We are having major issues with the 701D swap as well, mainly due to having 20 other mods going on at the same time, some to me seemed rushed as we get ready for deployment. Maintenance can't keep up, even in the Navy we had a hard time with 6 or 7 aircraft (more avionics/corrosion control), but the Navy system made it happen. I don't ever remember busting a launch cycle with a down helo, came close a few times.