John,
Thanks for coming back, great to chew the fat on these topics - I've flown the -60 a bit, as well as lots of time in the -47, but, alas, not the -53 (though I keep asking.....!). At MAUM, the -53 has that slight advantage, but most USLs are not flown at MAUM - and a -53 at MAUM has a horrendous downwash thanks to that disc loading - despite being called "Big Windy", the -47 does a good job in distributing its downwash over it's larger disc area - it's certainly less violent than the Merlin/-53. I've done VertRep in a -47...some of those DD/FF decks sure are small! The Army certainly did recycle a load of A-Cs to D, but when I was at Ridley Park the consensus seems to be that only the later frames would be retained. The issues with the earlier aircraft and the F was that the airframes were built to a different standard (milled vs machined) which meant that there were subtle differences in wiring/stress paths as well as the knowledge that stripping, cleaning, inspecting, repairing and rebuilding a 30-40 year old airframe (with probable accident/battle damage in the past) was only as few $10s K cheaper than buying new. Plus, it enabled PM Cargo to sell surplus airframes through the CHAPS initiative and govt auction, some of which now fly for Columbia Helicopter. So successful in fact, that PM Utility is doing the same thing with early model UH-60s under the BEST project - I got to fly one last year with an aftermarket digital cockpit, and lovely it was too! The -53K will be a beast, I don't doubt it. But unless you absolutely need that level of payload or the ability to operate from ships, it's an enormous amount to pay out just to be "different". The German acquisition will be the litmus test for the export of the aircraft (Israel doesn't count...) - if they buy it, then, perhaps, others will follow (France still needs a heavy lift asset IMHO). However, what's better than one Ch-53K? To quote the RAF, "the answer is two chinooks".....and you can buy 3 for the cost of one Kilo.....