2 Questions...

[CyclicRick]

Hello all you knowledgeable types.. .I have one very simple question. What the hell does 'settling with power' mean? Yes, Yes I know it's VRS but where did our American cousins get that phrase? I can't figure it out, at first I thought they meant a nice soft touch down using the engine but....? . .. .There was a topic talking about 'Blackhawk Down' recently. I don't wish to detriment the bravery and skill of anyone involved but to me it seems like asking for trouble going into a city full of people to extract (one?) man with half a million helicopters. These things make noise and lots of it, somebody was bound to notice soon enough and even a complete idiot can cause havoc with an RPG7 and an AK 47.. .I spent a while in the Royal Marines aswell as the AAC and know a tiny bit about tactics and it seems to me that the people who planned it were under a hollywood contract.. .I think the boys from 'The Regiment' would have done a fine job with 8 blokes quickly and quietly.. .It just amazed me thats all.. .Any thoughts?

[C4]

Look at the requirements for VRS. .a) Low speed. .b) high rate of descent, and. .c) High power setting. .. .Note C) High power setting... Settling with power.... .. .Answer 2. Hovering over the city??? Duh. Stay still while I shoot RPG's and AK's at you.. Definite hollywood tactics, they will never learn... .. .Smile awhile

[Rob_L]

Hey you can't criticise Hollywood tactics. The Americans always win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[helmet fire]

To Q1:. .Settling with Power is specifically not called Vortex Ring State because VRS cannot be easily confused with power settling. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .To Q2:. .. .I posted a similar question on Mil Aircrew, but the responses concentrated on the brave efforts of those (Americans) who fought, and failed to touch on the issues at all. BTW, the posted email from one of the pilots is well worth reading.. .. .Like you CyclicRick, I mean no disrespect to those who were there, rather, I would like to hear some discussion on how not to repeat the problems again. Here is what I posted:. .. .Read the book, seen the film (both recommended). But I am intrested to see what others think went wrong - possibly someone out there may have even been involved. I want to stress that I mean no offence to those involved - and I thank my lucky stars I have never been in such a situation - especially that faced by those brave infanteers. I am no expert here - that will be evident from my questions. . .. .Whilst I recognise that hind sight is the view of an arsehole, I would also like to explore the good and bad bits to learn something from the operation. In using our "arsehole's perspective" (hindsight) I recognise that I would not have done any better at the time, but that we may do things better in the future.. .. .Factors.. .1. Real Time battle view and C2. The battle appeared to be one of the earlier examples of real time viewing of the battle as it unfolded. This seemed to move a certain amount of decision making from the traditional commander on the scene to the higher level (in this case a General)at the command post. Has this introduced too many decision makers in the chain, or decision makers too far removed from the gound picture? Or has it, as was intended, provided a better situational awareness for all? Or is that we just dont have the right mix yet?. .Did this contribute to the fractured C2 (remember the convoy being given delayed directions)?. .Was this a problem here? . .. .2. Black Hawk Flight Tactics. Were the Black Hawks flying at 300 ft and 60 kts in holding patterns according to the book, (and as depicted in the film) what actually happened? Is this smart in a small arms environment, (ie circling slowly within the best small srms engagement envelope)? Was this tactic directly responsible for getting shot down? Why were they circling after the drop off anyway? Why didnt they go and circle over the ocean or airfield?. .. .IMHO, despite other minor and "normal" imperfections on an operation such as this, the shooting down of the first Balck Hawk from its holding pattern is what began the undoing of the operation, which was then compounded by a fractured C2 with too many hands in the pie.. .. .Your opinions/experiences?

[Thomas coupling]

Interesting comparison:. .Perhaps NL can describe SWP as it seems to be an americanism.... .Correction to your definition of VRS: 200'/min rod will suffice, you don't need a "high rod" to enjoy VRS <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> . .. .The quantum leap then, from VRS to Blackhawk down requires some imagination <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> . .My tenpenneth:. .I don't think the bravery of the individuals involved either on the ground or in the air, could ever be brought into question, however, when you look back over other holywood blockbusters defining glorious moments in american conflicts, one common theme prevails: the planners/managers/hierarchy all seem to have had labotomies(spelling) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> . .Perhaps they are paid by hollywood to organise cock - ups of mega proportions <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[RW-1]

I have always had it referred to as both, though I believe VRS is more proper.

[UNCTUOUS]

Why not just call it recirculation?. .. .The asymmVR characteristic of the Osprey is the same phenomenon but a wholly different problem - because the instinctive application of differential collective (opposite aileron if you will - for to pick up that dropping wing) is just what induces even greater "recirculation" and so a more rapid roll results. The end game is suddenly a flick-roll with nose pitching down - as at Marana. Some have likened it to the FW's autorotational spin entry (which is a stall exacerbated into an incipient spin by use of opposite aileron in an attempt to pick up a "dropped" wing).. .. .In addition, the V-22's ability to rotate the nacelle's to 95 degrees makes it even easier to point your downwash in a projection right down along your flight-path.... greatly facilitating recirculation. When is a pilot likely to utilise that 95 deg capability? Just like in Marana when you've misjudged slightly (i.e. overcooked your rejoin).

[CyclicRick]

Thanks for the input. I'm still happier with the description VRS although recirculation is ok but settleing with power still doesn't do it for me.. .High power setting = ok, a certain ROD is ok but where's the settleing in that? Keep going, I still believe you lot landed on the moon but this won't wash.. .. .Blackhawk down: I think the biggest problem with American tactics is that they don't let the right people do the job. As was said, the commander on the ground is 'the' man, when you start introducing a long winded chain of command where everybody has a say relying on on the spot communications, it's a recipie for disaster. Look at Vietnam, that war/conflict was run by politicians and the media and not by the Armed forces as it should be and we all know the results!. .The point was made about hovering around at 300ft/60kts in the immediate vicinity...well I ask you, what did they expect? The biggest threat to low level operations is the grunt on the ground with a rifle. Even the most revered F117 was brought down by a simple 40mm blasted in its general direction during the Kosovo campaign.. .Does anynone remember the nut that lived near Salisbury plain who used to throw things at low flying helicopters when flown over his 'house', I know he threw a hammer at a Gazelle once and even took a pot-shot with a shotgun at someone!. .Well if he nearly did it...... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

[Weight and Balance]

I'll leave the tactics discussions to the pros.. .. .About "settling with power", it was always described to me as flying the backside of the power curve, in conditions where max available power won't hold you in a hover or check your rate of descent. More pull on the collective just bleeds off Nr, and down you go. This is a very different situation than ring vortex.. .. .The 2 common ways to get into settling with power (this is theoretical, not personal experience Thank God) are trying to land at too high a density altitude, or an OEI landing at too high a weight. The only way out, altitude permitting, is to drop the nose, accelerate to speed for minimum power (also known as best rate of climb speed), and start looking for a place to run on.. .. .Just one comment on tactics, from an engineer's point of view. If the assigned task was to kill this one guy somewhere downtown, saturation bombing from 50,000 ft would have been much easier on aircraft and aircrews. Political considerations are outside of my area of speciality.

[Nick Lappos]

Cyclic Rick,. .. .1) We have used Settling with Power as another term for Vortex Ring State. For clarification, this is the flight regime where the rotor descends into its own downwash, recirculation forms that robs the rotor of thrust, and the power to produce flight thrust becomes very high. Without sufficuent power, the aircraft descends and "settles with power" even when the pilot raises the collective and increases the power a bunch. . .. .The exact rate of descent where it occurs is based on the disk loading (weight per square unit of rotor area) of your machine. The higher the disk loading, the greater the downwash speed and the higher the rate of descent that you must achieve to enter VRS.. .. .2) IMHO,the lesson of Black Hawk down is a complex one, but is mostly that A) Day missions with night tactics don't work, B) You cannot enter an armed hostile crowd without being willing and able to kill them all C) Honor and valor in combat are as often sparked by the futility of the mission and D) Like many military endevors, the mistakes of that mission are not necessarily the mistakes of those who had to fly it. I knew Ray Frank, (Durant's co-pilot), he was a friend, and a finer aviator and soldier has never graced pprune.. . . . <small>[ 26 March 2002, 10:13: Message edited by: Nick Lappos ]</small>

[John Eacott]

FWIW, I've understood 'settling with power' to be more of a reference to situations such as occur with the SA365 and similar helicopters, where the fixed collective stop prevents further power application, even when power is available, and ROD exceeds the pitch stop's ability to slow the beast down.. .. .The Victoria PAW had a prime example early in their ownership of their first 365C, which finished up punching the stbd oleo through the floor due to the hard landing. Power to slow the ROD was available, but couldn't be used because the collective was hard against the pitch stop.. .. .I had a 'firm' landing due to the same effect, plenty of Tq unused, but not available due to the pitch stop. In my case, I was following a practised approach for a film shot, which went wrong when we increased the AUW by 200kg with the actors on board, and power required exceeded that which the pitch stop would let me use. Absolutely no doubt in my mind that we were in controlled flight, but the artificial limit imposed by the 365C's design moved the goalposts <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" /> . .. .Quite different to Vortex Ring, IMHO.

[helmet fire]

Nick,

Thanks for the insight into the Black Hawk down mission. I had not considered the night tactics angle, but that certainly fits the 60 KIAS/300 ft scenario, especially since the unit involved is an almost exclusive night operator (and one of, if not THE, best night assualt helicopter units in the world).

You also said:
>>Like many military endevors, the mistakes of that mission are not necessarily the mistakes of those who had to fly it. <<

I totally agree. Forgive me if my initial question gave any other impression. Again, I express my admiration of all the brave soldiers who fought in that battle - one in which the mission was achieved (capture of warlord hierachy).

I am still intrested in any reaction you might have to my question about the command structure of the mission, especially given that Comanche is very much designed to provide the real time battle picture to higher level, more rearward echelon commanders.

[Nick Lappos]

Helmet,
The real issue was not C&C, it was the confusion in the mix of missions, really the "mission creep," that took over. An index of how serious the problem became is that the senior brass felt that the lack of armor was the reason the mission was a disaster. Lack of armor! We went there to pass out food, became embroiled in the internal politics, started attacking selectively, then got stuck to the tar baby.

We didn't learn in Lebanon, and lost many good men in the barracks in Beruit. If you are a peacekeeper, don't attack anyone, don't get down to enter the frey. How can you have a double mission - pass out food to people, and also shoot some of them?

Here goes a controversial point of view:

This is a lesson that nobody can learn in Israel, or Northern Ireland. In modern time, conventional military methods can't work in urban guerrilla operations. The only military answer is to either stay away, or kill everyone. Otherwise, seek political answers, use police and the courts, and the ballot box to win the populace.

I wonder if the Israelis will figure out that using tanks and F-16's on their own people will not work. Probably not.

[helmet fire]

Agreed,

Peacekeeping is a tough mission. As soon as you use force to protect one side, you have declared hostilities against the other. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.

Your point about urban ops is well made. I too doubt the Isrealies will figure that out. An urban insurgency will always have a difficult hand to beat when using conventional weaponry - but that doesn't seem to stop the brass giving it another shot.

-----------------------------------------

I seem to have lost my fire when we changed to the new server.....

[CyclicRick]

Thanks to everyone for all the info. My only real question was where they got the phrase from but I think we got there in the end.
Talking of Americanisms 'oriented'? Does that mean you've been had by the orient? I was taught that it was 'orientated' at school many moons ago.

[MightyGem]

Yes, I had wondered about the increasing use of "oriented". Looked it up in my dictionary and it gave it as an alternative to "orientated" common in the US!

[CyclicRick]

What are they doing to our language?:(