USMC Executive Flight Detachment (HMX-1 and Presidential Helo)

[ChuckMK23]

As a side note - the V-22 will likely be a pipeline replacement for the MH-53 Pave Low. The Personnel Recovery Vehicle project to replace the HH-60G is up for grabs right now. Sikorsky s-92 and EH-101 both strong contenders. We'll see what happens.

The V-22 with terrain following radar would be nifty.

 

[Brett327]

Indeed. Apparently I'm totally out of the loop.

I can't believe nobody took my bait.

Brett

 

[phrogdriver]

"Marine One" is whatever aircraft from HMX-1 is carrying the President. It may be the VH-3 or the VH-60 or the 101 in the future. For other missions and VIPs, the callsign changes.

As far as the V-22--here we go again...

from the Agusta-Westland website:
PERFORMANCE
Vne 167 knots
Cruise Speed 150 knots
Range 750 nm


Another website lists service ceiling as 15000.

The Osprey's Vne is more than 100 knots faster, and cruise speed over 60 knots faster. A Block A Osprey will make 750 miles without aux tanks under worst conditions (sea level), while the 101 needs aux gas to get 750. The fleet bird will have even more gas. The V-22s service ceiling is 10000 feet higher.

I think it's worth it.

 

[STARFlight145]

I read in my monthly edition of Rotor&Wing a few months back that the Air Force has already purchased Sikorsky H-92's, as has the Navy and the Marines.

 

[phrogdriver]

If so, they're only for test and eval purposes, not operational use.

 

[phrogpilot73]

If yopu are going to go woth versatility how can you leave off the H-60 series. It has proven itself in combat over the last few years. It is the only helicopter flown by All the services. The Air Farce does its initial helo training in the H-1. It is also flown by over 30 countries to include the IAF. As stated earlier it is the DAP platform for a reason. Versatility.
The MI 26 and TH-57/67 might belong on a civilian top ten list but not the military.

It's not flown by all the services, USMC doesn't fly it... It is a great helicopter, and incredibly versatile. I thought I had included it, but I guess I forgot it. If it had to replace one, it would be the TH-57/67.

I included the Mi-26 because its flown by NATO and the Russian military. I will agree that most of their customers are civilians. With that thinking in mind, shouldn't include the Chinook, because Columbia helicopters flys the hell out of them. I specifically had the TH-57/67 on the list, because of the sheer number they train. I don't think it necessarily doesn't belong on the list, because again - the H-60 is flown in civilian configurations as well... That's the reason I used the military designation.

 

[bobbybrock]

HMX-1 has I believe has 8 VH-60's. It might not be a lot but it is still a Marine owned air frame. At the present time the Firehawk Company out Forida is the only US civilian operator of the S-70. of

 

[Flash]

HMX-1 has I believe has 8 VH-60's. It might not be a lot but it is still a Marine owned air frame. At the present time the Firehawk Company out Forida is the only US civilian operator of the S-70. of

Give the man a cookie.......or something . I see HMX-1 birds all of the time at work, including the VH-60's. The HMX-1 birds look very nice, the paint jobs are quite a bit nicer than the standard Navy/Marine gray paint job. I believe they use the VH-60 because it is easier to transport. Oh yeah, I believe the H-60 is the only aircraft used by all 5 services.

 

[HeyJoe]

Presidential Helicopter under scrutiny by DoD and GAO

Presidential Helo program facing top level review by Defense Acquisition Board that may result in program restructure decision.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Criminy. This crap is exactly what's wrong with our acquisition process.

1. Buy an "off the shelf" helo because it's quicker than designing one from scratch (Merlin is used for everything from ASW to Arctic SAR)
2. Program is awarded, predictable competitor company screeching, legal action and congressional blathering ensue
3. Massive modifications ordered to the airplane after the fact, usually by people who have no idea that when you add stuff, it changes the performance of the aircraft until it can't meet the original specs.
4. Company says they'll need more time and money to meet the new specs
5. Competitors and congressman begin railing about the program being "over budget, under performing and behind schedule! Waste! Fraud!"
6. Everybody piles on until the program collapses, and we've spent a ton of money with nothing to show for it.
7. The cheese stands alone.

 

[nittany03]

Somehow, North American was able to develop the P-51 in under a year in WWII . . . and today it takes us over 20 years to field the F-22 in significant numbers. Granted, one is much more complex than the other, but still . . .

 

[HH-60H]

Somehow, North American was able to develop the P-51 in under a year in WWII . . . and today it takes us over 20 years to field the F-22 in significant numbers. Granted, one is much more complex than the other, but still . . .

Not only are the systems more complex, so are the politics.

 

[nittany03]

Not only are the systems more complex, so are the politics.

Which was my point.

 

[BigIron]

P-51 cost $51K to procure in 1945. In today's dollars, that only equates to $560,000.00, or 1/244th the cost of 1 F-22.

So, also cost scrutiny comes into play here. I think there are a lot of systems (COTS) stuff fielded to the fleet without an exorbitant amount of testing. I think a lot of those items are being funded with congressional plus ups for the GWOT. I guess Major purchases don't count, but the military-industrial complex will continue to churn. Buy your stocks now.

 

[HeyJoe]

Latest news on Presidential Helo

The VH-71 is under scrutiny with over 2,000 changes to the basic airframe configuration. Standby for being under the microscope continuously.