Negative. LCS-3 is currently deployed with an MQ-8B. MQ-8C is still in test and has not deployed.
-
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
Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
- Land on a small boy flight deck
- Be traversed on a small boy flight deck
- Absorb yaw rates during shitty CAT I FRP boost-off landings without ripping off the tailwheel
- Dump fuel from AUX tanks
- Jettison AUX tanks
- Auto transfer fuel
- Never have fuel split issues
- Carry torpedos (not done by 60H, but could've been with software and a few wires)
- Give mission system SA of any sort to the crew chief
- Be easily preflighted in the rain on a ship while wearing a vest
I also prefer the 60B/F/H/R pitot-static system to that of the 60A/L/M/S.
Not trying to be a smartass, and I realize many of the above bullets can be rolled into 2 specific systems, but I do think we lost a lot in marinizing a Blackhawk instead of building a new Seahawk.
The Navy's original plan was for the Marine Corps to get V-22's and then the Marines' CH-46E's would replace the Navy's UH-46D's. Big difference. The Marine BullPhrog had two GE T-58-16's making 1870 HP each, bigger fuel tanks (4400 pounds) and a max gross weight of 24,300 pounds. The Navy's UH-46D's had two GE-T58-10 pushing 1,400HP each, smaller fuel tanks of about 2,600 pounds total and a max gross of 22,000 pounds - (numbers off the top of my head, its been a long time). A stripped CH-46E would be a hell of a lifting machine and perfect for vertrep. The whole plan fell apart when the V-22 ended up a decade late.
Those '46E's were well cared for - dynamic components and avionics were quietly shored up even in 2000's. The result was a whole fleet of viable well maintained, corrosion free machines in the boneyard. These marinized aircraft would be ideal - hence the intrest from DynaCorp and other players for contract work.
There are commercial operators looking at the feasibility of replacing the foldable rotor head with newly manufactured non folding heads.
There are commercial operators looking at the feasibility of replacing the foldable rotor head with newly manufactured non folding heads.
Ripped off tail wheels? Never seen a tailwheel ripped off, just a lot of broken locking pins. We've got a guy with a necklace of 7 bent or broken pins. He flies like an inverted rock and he hasn't ripped a tailwheel off yet. But then again, there was a dept head at one of the HSLs back in the late 80s that smashed ESM antennas while practicing boost-off to a runway. Amazing landing considering he got the ESM antennas without damaging the APS-124 radome or rotor blades.
The 206 family may be getting some very innovative rotor blades - perhaps new lease on life is possible for the TH-57
http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/The-evolution-of-a-rotor-blade
http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/The-evolution-of-a-rotor-blade
I've heard some other people who share your opinion. What's the story behind the Bell hate?
I went through SERE with a bunch of Cobra pilots 15+ years ago and they had nothing but bad things to say about Bell. The story they used as example was of a Marine crew that went to the Bell factory to pick up a bird after mod/depot and refused to fly it after trying to preflight it, the bird was in no condition to safely fly. After a big brouhaha between Bell and the Marines the CO backed his pilots and they left without the helo. Then the Bell civilian crew that was supposed to fly it declined and Bell took it back to fix the things that were broke on it. That was just one of several stories they related (we had a 'weather day' and did nothing but BS all day in the classroom).
I am sorry to hear things haven't changed.
Multiple issues with the Bell production line with regards to the upgrades (Y/Z) transition. The list is too long to really go into detail and to be honest not really something I think needs discussed on this forum but long story short somebody in the Bell QA department needs to do a better job. They say things will be back on track soon, but I (and many other skid pilots) remain cautiously optimistic.
Sounds like what I was told over 15 years ago?
20 years ago, a Cobra being picked up from the factory after maintenance had a dual engine rollback, crashed and killed the crew. Bell is not the only one this happens too. Likewise, a CH-53E being flown from the factory had a swashplate seizure and crashed. From personal experience, we were picking up a brand new S-76C++ from the factory and ended up not accepting it as it could not pass its AFCS checks. Whether a full rebuild or factory fresh, be meticulous when accepting a bird.
Wasn't there a 60R TR / drive failure on a delivery out to the west coast? Think there was video.
Years ago did the squadron A pro on the first block 2 60S when it showed up @ NZY - the acceptance crew flew from Stratford to NZY without a drop of hyd fluid in the utility hyd pump. Am shocked nothing happened.
Years ago did the squadron A pro on the first block 2 60S when it showed up @ NZY - the acceptance crew flew from Stratford to NZY without a drop of hyd fluid in the utility hyd pump. Am shocked nothing happened.