• 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

"New" Air Force CSAR Helicopters

As an HH-60 guy I'd have to say the mods will be more in line with the MH-60M. I personally feel this is a bad choice. The MH-60 even with bigger engines has some power issues. Plus they get no upgrade with the cabin space.
Don't get me wrong. I love the 60, but for this mission the Air Force should have gone with a different airframe.
 
It will probably get the FLIR, the PLS and the hoist from the HH-60M and lose the medical interior...ie no moving litter pans and no AMOGS. It will probably retain the gunners doors that are present on the UH-60M but absent in the HH-60M.

Also, the 701D engines of the M will allow it to hover single engine at 140' on a hot Ft.Rucker afternoon. (16,000 lb gross weight).
 
Good on them. The one Pave Hawk crew I spoke to said an improvement was much needed. I.e. 386 computers still out back.

CSAR-X was supposed to be that, but but the 'Hawk master race continues on. Why is does the U.S. hate the S-92 so much, but has a huge affinity for the S-70?
 
I don't think the U.S. hates the S-92, I think its more of a combination of a proven airframe and the overall cost of the entire helicopter fleet....with the H-60 costing less.
 
I'd have thought an HH-47 would bring the high-hot-heavy capability that they were looking for in the original search.
 
SynixMan said:
Good on them. The one Pave Hawk crew I spoke to said an improvement was much needed. I.e. 386 computers still out back.
Click to expand...

Ahh, those poor guys. Try a Commodore 128...oh wait, we were "upgraded." Now it's a Commodore 256!
 
phrogdriver said:
I'd have thought an HH-47 would bring the high-hot-heavy capability that they were looking for in the original search.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the original bidding called for a medium lift (blackhawk size) helo for the mission.
When Boeing sent in a H-47, it won the contract due to the high altitude capability. That started the whole protest since a 47 is not medium lift.

I would think they would want to PR helos, a medium lift purchased in larger numbers and a small purchase of heavy lift. Kind of like how the USCG went with two helos (60 & 65) to cover their SAR requirements.
Have two helos mix allows you to have a higher number of helos as compared to all heavy lift but still give you the capability to do larger extracts or high altitude work.
 
Gatordev said:
Ahh, those poor guys. Try a Commodore 128...oh wait, we were "upgraded." Now it's a Commodore 256!
Click to expand...

Soon to be a Commodore 412... I don't even know if that exists, only in LAMPS would we not go to the next double, 512. I'm sure THP 25 (what the upgrade is designed for will work as flawlessly as 23)
 
helolumpy said:
Unfortunately the original bidding called for a medium lift (blackhawk size) helo for the mission.
When Boeing sent in a H-47, it won the contract due to the high altitude capability. That started the whole protest since a 47 is not medium lift.

I would think they would want to PR helos, a medium lift purchased in larger numbers and a small purchase of heavy lift. Kind of like how the USCG went with two helos (60 & 65) to cover their SAR requirements.
Have two helos mix allows you to have a higher number of helos as compared to all heavy lift but still give you the capability to do larger extracts or high altitude work.
Click to expand...

If you're thinking in those terms... I'd say they have the CV-22. I'll throw in my support for having a single helo airframe.
 
VetteMuscle427 said:
If you're thinking in those terms... I'd say they have the CV-22. I'll throw in my support for having a single helo airframe.
Click to expand...

Last briefing I saw has the V-22's going to AFSOC to replace the PaveLows. The PaveHawks belong to ACC, and that is who I think should work on having a mix of helos to increase their capabilities.
 
bobbybrock said:
Don't get me wrong. I love the 60, but for this mission the Air Force should have gone with a different airframe.
Click to expand...

SynixMan said:
CSAR-X was supposed to be that, but but the 'Hawk master race continues on. Why is does the U.S. hate the S-92 so much, but has a huge affinity for the S-70?
Click to expand...

It is not that the US hates the S-92 or that we are obsessive over the H-60, it was just probably the easiest and least painful solution for the USAF right now. The CSAR-X competition didn't even include the H-60 but when both losers protested the decision and won the USAF then tried to restart the competition but failed. So now they are stuck with aircraft that are getting older and they took the easy road instead of a new competition that could have delayed things yet again for a few years, just like the KC-X.
 
Circle K said:
Soon to be a Commodore 412... I don't even know if that exists, only in LAMPS would we not go to the next double, 512. I'm sure THP 25 (what the upgrade is designed for will work as flawlessly as 23)
Click to expand...

I'll split this as necessary, but...

Hadn't heard this. So they're going to put in a new circuit/memory board? So now we'll have three different board configurations. As you said, that worked so well with THP 23 and having two cards/boards.
 
helolumpy said:
Last briefing I saw has the V-22's going to AFSOC to replace the PaveLows. The PaveHawks belong to ACC, and that is who I think should work on having a mix of helos to increase their capabilities.
Click to expand...

Does it really matter where they come from? As long as they come to get me before I get my head cut off on Al Jazeera, I really don't care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top