The comparison of the V-22 to the CH-53 is not relevant on so many levels. It is incredible that it keeps coming up over and over. This recent discussion does however answer some questions asked earlier, and proves some statements being made repeatedly to be false:
JD was asked:
Do you believe if the CH-53 was in the same scenario as the Marana V-22 a CH-53 could have recovered? (none of the other CH-53 drivers I have spoken to believe it would have been survivable, but perhaps there is some empirical data we are not aware of?)
The question referred to the survivability of a -53 in a 2500+fpm increasing ROD from 285ft while reducing forward airspeed to zero with a light quartering tailwind.
FH1100 repeats over and over:
At least a '53 would have hit upright (like the Lead V-22, Nighthawk 71 did), not inverted and ensuring that it would be unsurvivable…
No, I don't know how hard a CH-53 can hit vertically and still be survivable. But I do know that it's better for ANY aircraft to hit upright to allow the landing gear and structure to do the job it was designed for than to crash inverted.
The response to that was:
If they "hit upright" but do not survive, I fail to see the benefit.
And it is now noted:
On 9 May, 1996, a CH-53E crashed at Sikorsky's Stratford plant, killing four employees on board. That led to the Navy grounding all CH-53Es and MH-53Es
JD says:
1996 53E Accident This was a brand new aircraft on a production hover test flight... The aircraft fell in from approx. 200 ft, but hit upright. Sikorsky crew.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Conclusion:
The difference between the CH-53 and V-22 accidents above is mechanical vs. aerodynamic (both are now being avoided by design and training/instrument warning modifications that have eliminated repeat accidents to date). The comparitive point is that when dropping from 200ft at a high rate of descent in a Ch-53 hitting upright has been demonstrated (unfortunately!) to be fatal for all on board, just as a V-22 rolling inverted from above that altitude at a high rate of descent has been shown to be fatal for all on board. Is anyone surprised?
This thread goes endlessly round and round unfortunately. To help eliminate the clutter it would be nice if incorrect comparitive claims that have been proven false are eliminated from the discussion. Based on the emotional and other interests I predict this will not happen.
Keeps life interesting I guess...
21stC
Last edited by 21stCen; 20th Jun 2012 at 19:19.