HU-34 v. HU-1

[Madbob]

I suppose I could get my question answered by a PM to SASless but prompted by a recent re-read of "Chickenhawk" I thought I wouls ask if anyone has done a comparison of these two venerable support helos and their contribution to the war in Vietnam.

On first pass they are of similar vintage, both single engine (one piston the other turbine), both two pilot (plus crew in the back) and if anything, the Choctaw (HU-34) had the edge over the Huey in load-lifting and internal cabin size.

The real question is which was the preferred mount by their crew (and pax) and which offered greater "survivability" when being shot at? Personally, as a pilot I think I would prefer having a big radial engine in the front as at least it would be able to take hits better than a perspex chin bubble which is what would have been in the way when flying the same profile in a Huey!

I appreciate you won't be able to compare the earlier HU-34 against the Wessex with twin Gnomes, oodles of power and twin-engine reliability but the Wessex seems to have done a good job in NI, the Falklands and other places as a good SH platform though it was never produced in comparable numbers.

I hope that this stirs up some fond memories and provokes a comment or two over something more that the merits of wheels v. skids!

MB

[SASless]

Sort of hard to compare the two....the old 34 had an autopilot with altitude hold...big ol' radial engine that sounded great....had a single door....sat high on wheels...had a fully articulated rotor head and was smooth as glass when tracked right. A real pilot's machine. If it had been updated with a good strong turbine engine it would have beat the Huey in all regards. (My opinion!)

The Huey was next generation design in some ways....dependable Lycoming turbine engine (some had GE's) and was a very simple machine to maintain. It had lots of problems early on but has matured to being an Icon.

Politics rather than technical issues made the Huey the success it was.

[Shawn Coyle]

UH-34 had a lot of magnesium - evidently a tracer round would light it up pretty quickly.
Having flown a piston engine UH-34 recently, there is simply no comparison between the it and a UH-1 in terms of complexity of operating, noise, and just overall ability to do the combat support mission. UH-1 wins hands down.
No issue with ground resonance, UH-34 without AFCS is a bear to fly (and evidently the AFCS failed pretty often in very unusual ways).

[SASless]

The 34 flew combat missions for many years in Vietnam, Laos, and other areas....flown by the USMC, Air America, and the VNAF.

Air America later operated quite a number of S-58T's in Laos.

The Huey is stable without any SAS/AFCS and the 34 feels a bit slippery without it....but nothing that would cause any problems but would add to the workload.

I never met a longtime 34 or 58T pilot that did not love them.

34's were known as being "flying road flares" for their quick transitions from aircraft to cinder piles following a crash of any kind that resulted in an avgas fed fire. You could get one of those during engine start on the PW Radial engine if you over primed the old girl....but never heard of one actually turning into toast that way....but have seen some interesting ramp fires.

Saltwater and Magnesium have an interesting reaction to one another too....maintaining the things in a maritime salt laden environment must have been fun.


Madbob,

Now if you like the 34.....you would have loved the 37...Mojave.

Two Pratt and Whitney R-2800 radials with 2100 shp each.....and put out a roaring great racket!

http://nam.wz.cz/images/ch-37_1.jpg

[Brian Abraham]

You fly the Mojave SAS? Be interested to hear what she was like as a mistress. Flew both the Huey and 34. No comparison really in my mind. Both did great service in Vietnam, but the 34 would have been far more maintenance intensive. The Huey was simple and rugged. I don't think the 34 main blades would have taken kindly to chopping down trees as we had occasion to do in the Huey, which raises the issue of size - the 34 was a fair hulk of an airframe. The piston engine would have held up to battle damage better than a turbine, but as has been pointed out, magnesium and avgas? Both lovely to fly, but if I had my choice it would be the 34 just for the experience - sound of the piston, smell of high octane and hot oil - and sitting way up there. Seem to recall the 34J had a hydraulic throttle and on start you never knew the throttle position, so could be closed or full open. You soon found out when she roared into life, as an overspeed could shed the cooling fan blades and sever fuel lines etc. For this reason it was a two person cockpit with the left seat fella guarding the mag switch (which was on his side) ready to snap them off in the event of an likely overspeed. The G model was manual and no big deal, even had the mag switch on the pilots side (right). Do I remember right SAS, has been a long, long time.

[piggybank]

Madbob

I worked maintenance on the Huey in the Dhofar, Oman troubles in 1973 and can certainly vouch for its sturdiness.

I remember one called out to a woman in labour at sunset. On descent to the village the helicopter took fire, probably from AK47. The pilot, Colin H, decided to cancel the visit and was fired upon as he once again climbed over the mountain edge. At Salalah I helped shut the engine down as the electrics at the centre windscreen had been shot out.

In all I counted 37 entry holes including some through the roof of the cabin area. Colin was lucky that he only caught a ricochet on the collective that broke a finger.

Our machines had the Lycoming T53-X I think we started off at -11 and its only oddity was if it took a round through the exhaust, which did happen, the N2 could become unstable.

As to worrying about taking a hit through the chin bubble, nothing up the front was strong. Even the glass fibre armour plates on the floor and doors were only held on by AN4- bolts and would not necessarily stay in place when hit.

The main blades at that time were made by more than one manufacturer but could take two or three bullet holes without trouble. It would sound like a steam engine coming into Salalah. The repair kits were not very much use on the blades and the patch may come off in one flight or it would last quite a few trips.

[SASless]

Brian,

I got to fly in a 34 twice....and that was in 1968....I vaguely remember getting into the left hand seat and watched mysterious things happen as it all got noisy.

As to the Moe Jay Vee....again I was talking ballast in the left hand seat while a very experienced 37 pilot did an air test one night. He did trust me to push throttles upon precise command. Hanging about Hanchey Heliport at Fort Rucker in those days could be informative.

We took off with 8,000 pounds of concrete blocks with the Chinook....the Moe took off with one 55 gallon drum of concrete.....but lots of avgas!

In the Summer you could watch the H-19's trundle off down the runway....disappear off the end and drop off down the hill below eyesight....to finally appear a mile later climbing out at a max rate of about 150 fpm....maybe.

There were even a few H-21's around yet....rare to see one of them in the air.

[Brian Abraham]

Even the glass fibre armour plates on the floor and doors were only held on by AN4- bolts and would not necessarily stay in place when hit.
Oh yes they do. Or you talking of a different set up?

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/babraham227/t0001-1.jpg

[SASless]

Brian,

When .51 caliber Whiz Bangs passed through....things jumped about a bit. I once returned a Chinook that had a pedal what looked like a Jet Ranger's.

Where the brake pedal and associated bits departed to remains a guess but it was somewhere about the Vietnam-Cambodia border.

The very good news was my foot which was resting upon the pedal at the time remained in place....Aussie boots were good kit I submit! Alas, they did not survive the Triage Nurse.

[B Sousa]

Having a few hours in both there are a few things I remember which stand out.
1. My first Broken Tail Wheel locking Pin ( cost= One case of beer)
2. CH-34 in autorotation had a super rotor head and plenty of rpm. Easy to spot.
3. Always transfering fuel in the 34 was a pain in the ass, but very necessary for changes in CG.

None of the above listed were found in the Huey. As to the Mojave in Autorotation, that thing fell out of the sky faster than a greased Safe. Had a few rides in them also.

Sasless, do you owe me a beer or do I owe you one? See ya in Anaheim..

[SASless]

Bert my dear boy.....you owe everyone a beer!

Next to Nick Lappos....you have the second deepest pockets and second shortest arms.

[mustangpilot]

what about my beer? Come fly a real mans bird. HH-43F

[SASless]

Yer Cobra....Corsair...Mustang....TBM maybe!


Who gets to fly that one at the Father's Day Airshow?

[mustangpilot]

forget the rest. You aint sh!t unless you have flown an an old original Intermesher! The few of us that have had that wonderful experience know. In a 60 MPH wind it auto's opposite of the "greased safe", as a matter of fact, I'm not sure if it will even come down in a high wind in auto....

[Brian Abraham]

Some 34 drivers on "L" plates Ellyson Field, Pensacola 1968
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/babraham227/batc0005.jpg

[SASless]

Mustang Pilot....dear boy....you might want to do an inventory of your tea bags....someone has slipped something into your tea.


Wooden Intermeshing rotor blades controlled by wires warping things hanging off them....well...let's say that is a concept that only a Polish Engineer could come up with.

The US Navy had one of the things on Midway Island once....lowest time aircraft in the inventory...as it kept losing rotor blades to Goony Birds (feathered type). The lead mechanic said he never saw the aircraft actually leave the ground on purpose as each time they got the tracking and balancing done on the thing.....yet another Gooney managed to find its way into finely tuned intermeshing rotor system and instantly turn it into junk. He opined the Gooney's had more time in the 43 than did any of the pilots.

[SASless]

Mustang Pilot....dear boy....you might want to do an inventory of your tea bags....someone has slipped something into your tea.


Wooden Intermeshing rotor blades controlled by wires warping things hanging off them....well...let's say that is a concept that only a Polish Engineer could come up with.

The US Navy had one of the things on Midway Island once....lowest time aircraft in the inventory...as it kept losing rotor blades to Goony Birds (feathered type). The lead mechanic said he never saw the aircraft actually leave the ground on purpose as each time they got the tracking and balancing done on the thing.....yet another Gooney managed to find its way into the newly finely tuned intermeshing rotor system and instantly turn it into junk. He opined the Gooney's had more time in the 43 than did any of the pilots.

[mustangpilot]

:}SAS, BTW there is no dynamic balancing on intermeshers. Static only. No inflight mechanic tracking either. That is all done by the in flight tracking switches on each flight.

So, that Navy guy must have been a bird lover! Also, I don't believe the Navy had any HH-43B/F's. You can correct me if I'm wrong :} I am an expert. I have 16.2 hours in one!

[eagle 86]

Issue me another Mid - this one is split!!
GAGS
E86

[Brian Abraham]

You realy gotta give up the drink 86. Would a schooner be a suitable replacement for your spilt middy? Or you on Darwin stubbies now? ;)

[SASless]

Mustang Pilot,

http://www.h43-huskie.info/HOK-HUK/146304-KamanPhoto2502-1-600.jpg

The Navy did not have HH43's....they called them HUK-1's.

There were in fact HUK's at NAS Midway Island.

NAS Midway

146307 assigned from 06 Jul 1960 until 28 Apr 1961
146314 assigned from 16 Jul 1961 until 31 Jul 1963
146317 assigned from 20 Dec 1963 until 27 Aug 1964

307 became N11119 and died in Louisana in 1975.
314 was destroyed while assigned to the USMC.
317 became N6175.