Pumas. Are. Ugly.
And allegedly, aren't nearly as fast, or effective at doing VERTREP than we are.
When I was on the Arctic in 2008, we got to work with the Pumas on some of the other supply ships. Those guys are super fast at VERTREP, although not quite as accurate considering they only have mirrors and no crewman. My OIC knew a couple of the pilots because they were retired Phrog skippers, so they had a shit ton of hours and experience (making them super fast). They also don't give a shit about crew day, maintaining day/night/NVG DLQ currency, SAR training, gun shoots, flight hours or any of the other baggage associated with a traditional SAR DET.
All in all, they seemed to be the way of the future considering the headache they saved the USNS logistically.
But they're cheaper. And that's what The Man cares about.
Cheaper, yes. And that is always the bottom line, but it doesn't mean I can't want a VERTREP det aboard a sweet USNS vessel!
And as for wlawr.. I'm just repeating what was seen by guys who have "BTDT". Puma can't carry as much weight as we can. When they DO have a load, they can't sling it around/sideflare it like we can (due to being near max gross) and they aren't as fast/accurate because they don't have the crewman etc.
Cheaper, yes. And that is always the bottom line, but it doesn't mean I can't want a VERTREP det aboard a sweet USNS vessel!
And as for wlawr.. I'm just repeating what was seen by guys who have "BTDT". Puma can't carry as much weight as we can. When they DO have a load, they can't sling it around/sideflare it like we can (due to being near max gross) and they aren't as fast/accurate because they don't have the crewman etc.
That's fine...just remember that when you have the aux tank rigged your max load goes to shit (unless you want to get gas every 1+45) and "slinging it around" led to "cracked airframes". Unfortunately, the sideflare swagger that we all loved about HC and the -46 is gone. Every tail rotor aircraft blows at VERTREP once the winds get up there anyway.
Nowadays there is so much interchanging of HS and HC mentality that I'm afraid even the esprit d'corps associated with the VERTREP DETS of old will soon be missed.
Sir, I understand the sideflare is a NATOPS manuever and its applications in the aircraft. My point was that the swagger has been lost. At least some guys who have "BTDT" told me so.
Dude, calm down and slow your roll.No, it's not. We still do it. Or, at least, they are still teaching it at the RAG.
And as I understand it, the cracks were not serious or threatening to down the aircraft, were not a result of VERTREP and have since been mitigated.
The Sideflare is a NATOPS maneuver. It's still in there, and we still do it.
Dude, calm down and slow your roll.
Wlawr is a prior Sierra crewchief and has done more than his fair share of sideflares and vertrep. I'd hazard to guess that he's done a few more sideflares than you did in the RAG. What he meant was the swagger that comes from an old school HC vertrep cruise.
The cracks were serious enough to down each aircraft that had a crack. Then each aircraft had to go through a long repair process that kept the aircraft from flying for months. I never heard if they found a precise cause of the crack, but everything I read on the cracks when I was writing multiple hazreps for our cracked birds indicated that cyclical loading/unloading from landings, takeoff, and vertrep loads coming on and off was a leading contender for the cause. Sideflares themselves didn't cause the cracks, but the vertrep the sideflares were part of might have caused them.