For my rotor bretheren

[Gatordev]

My understanding is that they're working to get the 60R/S RNAV capabilities. The current version of our MPS has uneditable DAFIF points in it and there are some upgrades to our EGIs coming that will allow for RAIM monitoring and all that other stuff you need to be able to shoot a GPS approach.

I still can't believe that the 60R only has a TACAN. I've been relatively spoiled by the 60S and its ILS and VOR. And ADF for when I want to listen to ESPN while doing the water wash.

That's what I've heard, as well. What I haven't heard is any kind of timeline on when the Romeo is getting the system. It's criminal that they didn't put ILS in the Romeo. So did the R lose the HF?

Yeah. The ILS box was "too heavy" for the R.

An often quoted "fact," but one I've never actually seen confirmed. I'm wondering if Bert has any insight. My guess is that it was old-school LAMPS thinking it wasn't necessary, which helped with the "well, we'd have to integrate it properly" going away.

 

[SH-60OB]

"An often quoted "fact," but one I've never actually seen confirmed. I'm wondering if Bert has any insight. My guess is that it was old-school LAMPS thinking it wasn't necessary, which helped with the "well, we'd have to integrate it properly" going away.

We all want more/need than a TACAN. It certainly wasn't due to a lack of desire, all about the cost. Blackhawks already had VOR/ILS so no real extra cost to add/integrate into the S. Right or wrong, integration into R was deemed not worth the cost with Differential GPS approaches and JPALS being the long term solution.

 

[statesman]

But when your talking multi million dollar unit prices a few thousand dollars more per A/C and the additional airframe lifetime cost is somewhat negligible. I'm as critical as the next guy when it comes to runaway military spending, but were not talking about developing unproven technologies like vertical lift fans.

Not a rotor guy so I don't know exactly what your flight regimes look like, but I will say going out with only a TACAN would be less than ideal from where I sit. This stuff fails on a regular basis, and not having a backup would be frustrating. Hell we took a P-3 out the other day and EVERY SINGLE NAVAID failed on us. Granted each one of them had repeat MAFs in the ADB, but when you consider we have 2 VORs and a TACAN...

Now that goes to illustrate that sometimes no matter how redundant the system sometimes it's just not your day, but having no redundancy or plan B would be frustrating to me.

 

[Flying Toaster]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/07/15/359508/f-35-lrip-overrun-value-raised-to-1.15b.html

So the latest F-35 overrun on the first 28 is only 1.15B (our share 700M)... It would seem that would buy just a few of the things mentioned in this thread.

 

[statesman]

At first glance I was reading that wrong... I thought it was saying each jet costs 41 Million and change... not so much... each jet costs 41 million and change EXTRA. Frustrating.

 

[KBayDog]

So the latest F-35 overrun on the first 28 is only 1.15B (our share 700M)... It would seem that would buy just a few of the things mentioned in this thread.

I got pissed the other day when I underestimated the cost of stuff I bought at the exchange for lunch by $.08.

The first F-35 made it to Eglin yesterday. (And there was much rejoicing.) After reading this article, I was left realizing that the Air Force knows what they're doing. "Military pilots ferried the F-35, previously called the Joint Strike Fighter..." Perhaps the Marine Corps could/should have tried this approach when trying to push the Osprey through: Just changed the name of the aircraft! (Apparently it worked for the JSF...er, "Lightning II," and it worked for the F-...er, F/A-...er, F-22.)

 

[Jim123]

I got pissed the other day when I underestimated the cost of stuff I bought at the exchange for lunch by $.08.

You're an O-4 at heart

(ducking)

 

[KBayDog]

You're an O-4 at heart

(ducking)

Them's fighting words.

 

[Flying Toaster]

I got pissed the other day when I underestimated the cost of stuff I bought at the exchange for lunch by $.08.

Agreed, to me it's less the fact they get it wrong, but rather the amount they do and the fact it's always up. I guess when your goal is to outbid your competitor and the taxpayers foot the majority of the bill if you "get it wrong," there really is no incentive for getting it right.

The F-35 might be LO in the air, but it's financial footprint certainly isn't and that will be its downfall. When they are talking about cutting 1.5-4T over the next decade and 400B+ from defense, one program that accounts for 700B to 1T makes for a mighty appealing target. The people who want wholesale cuts are always going to be there, but it makes life a lot harder for them when that 700B is extended over numerous projects, like continuing production lines, design studies, upgrading radars, sensors, etc. Or better yet, not combining the replacement for the F-15, F-16, F-18, Av-8, and A-10, into one giant project.

As long as these mismanaged and massively expensive procurements for critical weapons systems are allowed to happen, they will continue to be the first things cut. As a result the real waste which is much smaller and hidden over a much larger area, will get a pass, and our military will gradually become a giant bureaucracy with no actual capabilities.

 

[KBayDog]

...our military will gradually become a giant bureaucracy...

No comment.

(Which, as George Carlin famously said, is a comment.)

 

[Flying Toaster]

No comment.

In hindsight the phrases "more so" or "to a greater extent" might have been worthwhile additions.

 

[Gatordev]

We all want more/need than a TACAN. It certainly wasn't due to a lack of desire, all about the cost. Blackhawks already had VOR/ILS so no real extra cost to add/integrate into the S. Right or wrong, integration into R was deemed not worth the cost with Differential GPS approaches and JPALS being the long term solution.

So what's "long term?" What's the guy who has to do a medevac or has to get to his ship before deployment/workups but can't because he can't legally file an alternate (has happened to me)? The GPS addition to the Romeo was only just "approved," mostly because everyone has been bitching so much about having some sort of system that was useful for the last couple of years. In all the Romeo propaganda I've been hearing over the last 13 years, I never was told that RNAV approaches was the plan.

And how do you have a common cockpit system and not be able to integrate a system that's already in an airframe that has the common cockpit? That's more a rehetorical/theory based question, as I know it comes down to cash, but putting ILS into the Romeo can't be that hard. We have Hotel HUDs in our ancient Bravos, which has got to have at least as many technical problems if not more than an ILS in a Romeo.

 

[SH-60OB]

So what's "long term?" What's the guy who has to do a medevac or has to get to his ship before deployment/workups but can't because he can't legally file an alternate (has happened to me)? The GPS addition to the Romeo was only just "approved," mostly because everyone has been bitching so much about having some sort of system that was useful for the last couple of years. In all the Romeo propaganda I've been hearing over the last 13 years, I never was told that RNAV approaches was the plan.

And how do you have a common cockpit system and not be able to integrate a system that's already in an airframe that has the common cockpit? That's more a rehetorical/theory based question, as I know it comes down to cash, but putting ILS into the Romeo can't be that hard. We have Hotel HUDs in our ancient Bravos, which has got to have at least as many technical problems if not more than an ILS in a Romeo.

Good questions all

 

[phrogdriver]

^^^ WRT reduced/no vis a reliable velocity vector would be money IOT help id drift during the part where you're coming to the dust and can't see anything so you're squared away during that fleeting moment at the bottom when you can. Like you, I'd much prefer that to the coupling the a/c and letting it land itself.

Since I've had the pleasure of neither I'll let somebody else chime in that has. I think the V-22 has both options but the coupled system takes a while to get in deck as you need to be within certain parameters for it to take. Either way, I'm typing out my ass here so I'll let an Osprey guy explain it and let me know how AFU I am.

That's a fairly accurate description of the two general methods we have, actually. You can also do a coupled approach all the way inbound to a waypoint, terminating in a hover at the selected altitude, plus some other subtle variations on those. The more coupling one does, the longer it takes--George flies a pretty conservative profile. Each software iteration has gotten better with this, though, so I think the coupled option is eventually going to become more and more prevalent. Being that RVLs have claimed many more rotorcraft than enemy fire, anything that takes the human out of the equation is going to be desirable from a leadership point of view.

 

[KBayDog]

Being that RVLs have claimed many more rotorcraft than enemy fire, anything that takes the human out of the equation is going to be desirable from a leadership point of view.

For those of us steam-gauge, stick-and-rudder-types, can you provide a little insight into the cockpit and crew resource management required to terminate such an approach without convening the AMB? How much flying are you actually doing on a RVL (i.e., do you "set it and forget it," or are you still at least going through the motions, and letting HAL direct the 'trons as required?)