-
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
The role of HIFR in 2023
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
An example of unnecessary, arcane requirements placed upon surface ships that no one questions (to include HSM who supports). Sort of like the requirement to have an SGSI to get a night flight deck cert despite the fact that the entire free world lands with NVGs at night. Thankfully, the SGSI requirement should be going away.
Problem is with ATG and NAVAIR that determine what is required for a ship to operate. This should not be a requirement. The sad thing about this picture is that the sailors on the flight deck will move from this worthless evolution to a DC event to watch and hopefully bag something more than a few minutes of sleep.
Why we are accepting the risk of low, extended flight in salt spray to prove we can execute an antiquated fueling procedure is beyond me.
Problem is with ATG and NAVAIR that determine what is required for a ship to operate. This should not be a requirement. The sad thing about this picture is that the sailors on the flight deck will move from this worthless evolution to a DC event to watch and hopefully bag something more than a few minutes of sleep.
Why we are accepting the risk of low, extended flight in salt spray to prove we can execute an antiquated fueling procedure is beyond me.
Flight decks.
@hscs can correct me, but I'm guessing he's getting at the point that all of our Air Capable ships can now support landing all of our regularly ship-deployed helicopters (and most of them can support a -53). In the ye olden days, many of the ships weren't compatible with the H-3, or later, the H-60 for landing.
I can understand his argument. At my first squadron, a crew needed to HIFR for a long range MEDEVAC out of HI, but I believe the ship was some sort of AO. I'm not smart on currently underway AOx ships, but I think all of them can take a H-60 now. Given hscs' day job now, I'm guessing he knows the answer.
How many ships have a deck too small for an H-60, and sufficient equipment and pumping pressure to pull this off?
Seems like that Venn diagram would be… not many.
Seems like that Venn diagram would be… not many.
I was brought up to believe HIFR was an emergency procedure for taking fuel if the deck was fouled for some reason and you had nowhere else to go. Many people told me that you would burn fuel as fast as you would take it on but that didn’t really make sense to me if you were getting the advertised rate of flow from the ship.
Don't forget the amazing lunches too: baked beans and rice on a paper plate with no utensils...
Exxxxxactly.
I once had a DDG take a solid 10 minutes to give me hot gas after hooking up. Slowest...pump...ever.
Back when this procedure was more common (70s?), there were way more diverse classes of ships out there and not all were compatible with every aircraft. Since the ~80s when the 60B was commonplace, most ships have a deck that can support any H-60 variant. It's of variable utility though, as you are burning a lot of fuel in a sustained hover and the ship's tired pump may not be giving you enough fuel pressure to offset the burn. Lowering the hover altitude into an In Ground Effect Hover can reduce the power required/fuel burn, but is then more workload intense.
TLDR: holdover from the Cold War that's still in the manual
EDIT: Oh and the Coast Guard does it regularly since some of their cutters are old and can't land an H-60T, only an H-65.
Me too!!