Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news

[Notanaviator]

I’m pretty close to the action on this issue.

FVL is nothing like JSF. Adding blade fold wing stow is nothing like adding a lift fan.

One of the great features new aircraft are being built with is open architecture. Adding sensors and weapons will be like adding apps to an iPhone, not massive integration problems.

With luck, the army will prove out FVL. Everyone else will just customize it.

For the USMC, no one really knows what’s next. General Berger is full of surprises

For the record, this was a more thoughtful and interesting response than my smartass remark merited!

Agree that the open architecture piece is really exciting- that said, still we face a pretty hard road with regard to acquiring exquisite hardware. The new scope the Army just picked is probably a good example. Amazing Swiss Army knife sort of kit, but wonder what the over under is on number of microchips/software, etc in each unit?

My normal caveat applies- unlike many on here, no direct exposure to any of this equipment, and always happy to learn. Strong opinions, weakly held and all that.

 

[phrogdriver]

I’ll believe that when we see it. FD2030 is currently dead in the water from the programmatic standpoint. Large swaths of Marine Aviation funding cut in order to reinvest in new programs only to have the majority of it taken by the other services.

The biggest problem with FD2030 is that it doesn’t take account for the realities of the the POM process. You literally can’t trade force structure for modernization. Congress (and DOD) will just say “Thanks for the personnel savings,” and then not give anything back. Naïveté is half the problem with FD2030. You don’t bargain with giving up force structure as your opening bid.

 

[Gatordev]

Aren't there *many* delilvered and unused MH-60R and MH-60S in storage that are excess - I get the feeling Big Navy will be on the R and S until like 2050 or something....

They weren't "unused," they were cycled. So the same airframe wouldn't sit in pres for more than a PMI cycle. And now, they're not really available anymore. With the standup of -79 and the planned standup of -50 (plus one or two that went swimming), those extra airframes have been tasked.

 

[IKE]

Aren't there *many* delilvered and unused MH-60R and MH-60S in storage that are excess - I get the feeling Big Navy will be on the R and S until like 2050 or something....

I think 2035 is the going number.

 

[SynixMan]

HSC is already being trimmed at the CVN squadron level. Wouldn’t surprise me if airframe lifecycle was a big consideration.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Bring back Phrogs. I'm attempting to do just that...

 

[IKE]

HSC is already being trimmed at the CVN squadron level. Wouldn’t surprise me if airframe lifecycle was a big consideration.

You might be right, but I thought it was mostly an Air Wing of the Future & CVN parking problem.

 

[red_stang65]

HSC is already being trimmed at the CVN squadron level. Wouldn’t surprise me if airframe lifecycle was a big consideration.

Airframe lifecycle might have been an unintended benefit of the decision, but it was definitely more about space for AWoTF.

Curious to see how the MH-60R/S reductions shape up though, as more CSGs/CVWs actually employ it. See RDML Martin’s take on CARL VINSON and CVW 2 (first F-35C deployment):

"The Navy has started reducing the number of helicopters it sends in an air wing, Martin said, which could free up room for more jets — but he said he had 19 helos and 'we needed all of them.'"

Three takeaways from the US Navyâs first F-35C deployment

Aircraft carrier Carl Vinson returned home Feb. 14 after a six-and-a-half-month deployment to the Indo-Pacific, in the U.S. Navy’s first deployment of the “air wing of the future.”

www.defensenews.com

 

[number9]

Bring back Phrogs. I'm attempting to do just that...

View attachment 34511

Can't wait to see what it looks like when it's finished!

 

[jmcquate]

Bring back Phrogs. I'm attempting to do just that...

View attachment 34511

That comes with its own set of issues.

 

[ChuckMK23]

That comes with its own set of issues.

Beautiful model though!

 

[DanMa1156]

HSC is already being trimmed at the CVN squadron level. Wouldn’t surprise me if airframe lifecycle was a big consideration.

Shockingly, most of our airframe health (in my squadron) and (from I've been told) across the fleet is relatively good. And there are some S's going into pres and others that have been there already AFAIK. Getting to 2035 and beyond may be a stretch, but I'm under the impression that it's not airframe health, it's CVN real estate and prioritizing missions.

 

[jmcquate]

Beautiful model though!

Not one that I built. Bought it pre-assembled, Not a fan of Helo models. I think I have 2 in my stash. A border patrol MH-60 and a SH-60B.

 

[SynixMan]

Airframe lifecycle might have been an unintended benefit of the decision, but it was definitely more about space for AWoTF.

Curious to see how the MH-60R/S reductions shape up though, as more CSGs/CVWs actually employ it. See RDML Martin’s take on CARL VINSON and CVW 2 (first F-35C deployment):

"The Navy has started reducing the number of helicopters it sends in an air wing, Martin said, which could free up room for more jets — but he said he had 19 helos and 'we needed all of them.'"

Three takeaways from the US Navyâs first F-35C deployment

Aircraft carrier Carl Vinson returned home Feb. 14 after a six-and-a-half-month deployment to the Indo-Pacific, in the U.S. Navy’s first deployment of the “air wing of the future.”

www.defensenews.com

I’m not at all surprised a 7th Fleet CSG wanted more organic ASW and ELINT. As I’ve said before, when HSC couldn’t decide if it wanted to lazily collect per diem in Bahrain or cosplay SOAR, HSM Jody-ed them and slid into the DMs of the CSG and Flags.

 

[red_stang65]

With CV NATOPS requirements and “last tactical mile” LOG requirements, CSGs and CVWs are also recognizing how many more Sierras they need for daily business. How many CSGs have been willing to try workups at a reduced Sierra footprint before losing them? Not many.