USAF Chooses AW-139 To Replace UH-1H

[SASless]

Seems the Boeing folks teamed up with Agusta-Westland and won the contract for 84 aircraft to replace the USAF Contract to replace its current fleet of UH-1 Hueys.

I suppose there shall be some sort of challenge by one or both of the competitors that were offering UH-60 Blackhawks of various models.


https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2018/09/24/the-air-force-picks-a-winner-for-its-huey-replacement-helicopter-contract/

[hihover]

What a boost for Leonardo. The 139 certainly is a lovely machine to fly.

[rrekn]

I don't think they will challenge again (Sikorsky already did (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uh-1-replacement-award-delayed-until-fourth-quarter-449048/)) as the AW139 (or MH-139 as Boeing called it) was substantially cheaper thank the UH-60s offered by Sikorsky (even with the commonality), and the refurbished machines offered by Sierra Nervada Corp.

The most interesting thing about this is that Bell and Airbus didn't bid (http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2017/10/23/competitors-line-up-for-icbm-security-helicopter-program).

[tottigol]

Bell should have bid, they had the perfect machine for the job.https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x960/fb_img_1537884975938_a21fcb97a0d19dc6231bd3138d9efab062969e5 3.jpg

[Phoinix]

EPI, that heavy underpowered beast? "It's not old, it's proven" is getting really old, really fast.

[CS-Hover]

or how happy (Bell) must be (again) of dropping the AB139 project some years ago...

[SASless]

How effective is AW/Leonardo at controlling costs on such Contracts/Programs?

Did they not have problems with the Sikorsky S-70 effort they had where they were to build and sell Licensed Blackhawks?

I do not recall that being a stellar success.

Then there is the 101 program and its cost over time.

Did not the RAF and Canadians have to cough up shed loads of money as a result of the pricing and cost over-runs or am I misunderstanding what transpired?

They were unsuccessful in the US Presidential VIP Helicopter bid either.

The USAF sure doesn't have an admirable ability to deliver aircraft programs on time and within budget do they?

Does the 139 still have CG issues in certain configurations?

[wrench1]

Will be interesting how the 139 will hold up on the mx and support side under the AF mission profiles. With the 139 Ch 4 requirements a little more complex/detailed than the N models, it could make for a bit of culture shock. I just hope the AF gets their own direct line to AW support/spares when the need arises.

[tottigol]

SAS, you are making a mess of several different programs jumbled together.
1) Westland alone was involved in the S-70 program.
2) The Canadian Cormorant has been an expensive yet successful program
3) We all know why the costs escalated in the original VH-71 program, and it was not because of the manufacturer.
4) The 139 does not have CG issues more than any other helicopter in commercial service today.
5) Boeing is the prime contractor in the MH-139 program.

[SASless]

So Boeing and AW team up with the USAF and we can expect on budget and on time performance?

I am looking out the window for some flying pigs to present themselves.

[dascanio]

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/285x285/24e1e0c6_a49f_4cb7_a6a7_28a3e2fdf87f_e53f9f08aec5cef04bd2d2b b5c9eae194ab04897.png
SASless, please, allow us to celebrate for a while. Besides, if more than 1000 AW139s have been sold, I think there is some merit also on this bird...

[SASless]

Large Glasses of Wine at Lunch in the Company Mess at Gallarate over the news?

[ShyTorque]

SAS, They should have gone for those good old "All American" aircraft, such as the SK-76 made in....China, or those with engines made in.... France, Canada etc. :E

[dascanio]

Large Glasses of Wine at Lunch in the Company Mess at Gallarate over the news?
Alcohol is prohibited. Only water and soft drinks

[noooby]

Large Glasses of Wine at Lunch in the Company Mess at Gallarate over the news?

The whole deal is done through Philly. Philly is the sub-contractor for Boeing. Philly is making all the aircraft. Philly had already reserved the slots on the production line well ahead of any decision so that they would be ready if they needed to be. And let's face it, it's not like O&G is taking up many slots on production lines these days. There is spare capacity.

I would imagine SK had done all the same things in case they won. Making sure there were production slots available so that aircraft were delivered on time and on budget.

No wine in the lunch room in Philly either!

[JohnDixson]

With Sierra Nevada upgrading/remanufacturing UH-60A’s, adding new engines and a new cockpit, it is curious that they didn’t win, going by my assumption that price was the weightiest factor ( from some of the USAF post decision comment ).

One might assume that the USAF had misgivings re the upgrade process but if their process were to mimic the VH-3 periodic SPAR ( Special Progressive Aircraft Rework-accomplished every 1200 hours on the 3D ), they would be in an as new condition when finished. The VH-3Ds certainly are.

Would be interesting to see the pricing data.

[ethicalconundrum]

Lockheed stepped in the doodoo with their typical whining over contract terms. The only diff in this case is that they couldn't even wait until the RFP was done and awarded before whining:

Then, in February, Lockheed Martin filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/02/20/lockheed-filed-a-pre-award-protest-of-the-air-forces-huey-replacement-competition-heres-why/) over a disagreement over technical data rights—a rare legal dispute filed before the service had decided on the winner. Lockheed argued that, in its solicitation, the Air Force used too broad a definition of “operations, maintenance, installation and training data,” which by statute is turned over to the government for its unlimited use.

Which anyone who knows Lockheed can decode as; "the customer ignored our pre-written RFQ we gave them that only Lockheed could source". Glad I don't work for them anymore, and congrats to the winning team. I hope it's a success. I've never flown the 139(way after my stick time) but have heard good things.

[FSXPilot]

So Boeing and AW team up with the USAF and we can expect on budget and on time performance?

I am looking out the window for some flying pigs to present themselves.

Lots of those flying around in helicopters every day of the week.

[SandBlaster214]

And I thought it was Bruce Willis that was going to save us from Armageddon - so much for that nonsense.

www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/27/meet-new-air-force-helicopters-that-can-defy-armageddon.html (https://www.pprune.org/www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/27/meet-new-air-force-helicopters-that-can-defy-armageddon.html)

(As before, my PPRuNe TS still isn't active so y'all will have to deal with the link in your own way)

[JohnDixson]

SB, that article is TOO GOOD not to circulate:

Meet the new Air Force helicopters that can 'defy Armageddon' | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/09/27/meet-new-air-force-helicopters-that-can-defy-armageddon.html)

You get a feel for what is coming after the writer has the Huey carrying 10,500 lbs, then puts you on the edge of your sofa when you read about the “ nifty new advances to enhance “survivability” in the 139. Alas, the article concludes prior to any news at all about either ballistic survivability or crashworthiness.

[Self loading bear]

Did I hear that correctly that a 5 blade rotor has a beter redundancy than a 2 bladed rotor?

SLB

[tottigol]

Did I hear that correctly that a 5 blade rotor has a beter redundancy than a 2 bladed rotor?
SLB

Why not, it does have three extra blades after all, they are finally learning from Gillette! :ugh:
Sorry, cannot stop laughing

[SASless]

I know some OH-6A'S flew with half the blades gone from the rotor head....it was a dire emergency but it worked.

If it were a OH-58A....the crews would have not survived.

[Copter Appreciator00]

Good evening PPRUNErs! this is my first ever post on this forum. I served in the Army 96-2000 and am an aviation enthusiast. I like helicopters, looking at them and thinking about them. Kudos to Boeing and Leonardo for the work on the game-changing/new-class-creating (Super Medium) AW139! Yeah I was hoping the Bell (I love Hueys and UH-1s, Bell 412 etc) would have placed the UH-1Y into the game, but it wasn't to be. The advantage of the Aw139 over the competition (the two companies offering UH-60 types) that I see is that the 139 has a portion of the fuselage dedicated to storage, the UH-60 does not. Supplies can be stowed and not take up seating space. The AW139 is a game changer for sure. Of course, Bell did have a super medium four decades ago - the Bell 214ST - which has a similar layout (size, seating, detached cargo compartment) but ended production and never revisited that airframe size again... until now, the Bell 525. However the Bell 525 is about 10 years late to the super medium/Oil & Gas game!
Go Boeing and Leo for their success.

[chopper2004]

Welcome MH-139 Grey Wolf the latest USAF helo.

https://twitter.com/afglobalstrike/status/1207715232421949440?s=21


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1230x625/37bb11c9_60c2_4b94_9a36_e236607e1f41_e5e99fc9d5d8e4f88589865 54937143fa0588d33.jpeg

[rigpiggy]

SAS, you are making a mess of several different programs jumbled together.
1) Westland alone was involved in the S-70 program.
2) The Canadian Cormorant has been an expensive yet successful program
3) We all know why the costs escalated in the original VH-71 program, and it was not because of the manufacturer.
4) The 139 does not have CG issues more than any other helicopter in commercial service today.
5) Boeing is the prime contractor in the MH-139 program.

#2 that must be why we bought the VH71 for spare parts. Considering how much we paid, for extended in service support........

[Saint Jack]

Way back, when the US Army started taking deliveries of their (then) new Blackhawks, there was a saying that went something like this, "When the last Blackhawk is flown to the US Army Aviation Museum, the crew will jump into a Huey to fly home." I wonder what they're saying about the AW139 / MH-139?

[Evalu8ter]

St Jack,
As we in the RAF said re the Wessex when the 'Plastic Pig' (Puma) was introduced. Guess what? The Wessex has been gone 15+ years and the Puma has at least another 5 (probably 10) to do. As aviators we are rabidly loyal to our steeds, and suspicious of the new as, firstly, it might not work, and, more pertinently, it has the tendency to partially reset the experience pyramid. I flew with several ex-Wessex guys who really struggled flying the CH-47; they just could not adapt to the speed, power and avionics the aircraft had. The UH-1 family is still a nice aircraft to tool around in, but nothing like a UH-60 (I have a passing acquaintance flying both). However, when you don't anticipate putting a machine into a complex threat environment, the sheer economies of a civil based design start to look really appealing. The civil world put cost above everything else (as long as the design meets the FAR/EASA CS) and the -139 I would imagine, over time, is significantly cheaper to fly than a reheated UH-60. I went to the AW line in Philly this year and, to be frank, was very encouraged by all I spoke to. VH-71 is an unfair comparison, brought down by ludicrous LM project 'management' and political expediency, whereas the Cormorant 'had' to be different enough for a normal EH101 to justify the political U-Turn that saw it purchased.

[industry insider]

And the amazing thing is that the enemy won't even notice the difference with the new MH139. Very stealth.


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1774x996/screen_shot_2019_12_23_at_1_17_15_pm_dc5347848402ce6316b066a 602b297d513067361.png

[Blackhawk9]

I think the MH-139 will be a pretty good replacement for the UH-1N (212), this requirement is a hash and trash role , you don't need a 60 with all its ballistic tolerance and built like a brick ****house airframe, the USAF have the HH-60M's for the war zones which need all the bells and whistles and a strong airframe, I would not take a MH-139 to Afghanistan and operate it like a HH-60 it would be dead in 3 months, simply not rugged enough, the 139 is a good airframe just not the most rugged I have worked on .
Having worked on UH-1's 212, 412, 60's, 139's amongst others the 139 is definitely the most delicate of the bunch .
the 139 is in no way an equal to a 60 in a combat role but a suitable alternate in a support role.
I laugh when I see military tenders that want a combat assault/CT role machine and the 139 or149 is put up against a version of the 60, just hope the poor buggers that end up with 139/149 never have to go to a war zone.

[[email protected]]

Evalu8ter - the Wessex didn't have the luxury of a mid-life update as the Puma has and even after the update the 'Plastic Pig' Mk2 has plenty of problems with serviceability -look how long it took to come on line.

Adapting to new avionics is just a matter of training - I'm ex-Wessex/Lynx/Sea King but the transition to 139 was very straightforward.

However, I completely agree the 139 is not a battlefield helicopter - it is far too precious with it's electrics/avionics even if it has a sh*t ton of power available.

[SASless]

All this ignores the USMC's latest version of their UH-1N....that has already been used in combat operations, would have a common parts supply chain in existence, an established training program etc.

That the USAF would also then have a fleet of Combat capable aircraft defending the Nation's primary Nuclear Deterrent should be a factor that trumps pure cost issues.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/857x534/uh_1y_850x_0822_48558230288b6571d2456c4cf57ca738ed40b4de.jpg

[tottigol]

All this ignores the USMC's latest version of their UH-1N....that has already been used in combat operations, would have a common parts supply chain in existence, an established training program etc.

That the USAF would also then have a fleet of Combat capable aircraft defending the Nation's primary Nuclear Deterrent should be a factor that trumps pure cost issues.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/857x534/uh_1y_850x_0822_48558230288b6571d2456c4cf57ca738ed40b4de.jpg

Sorry SAS, the UH-1Y was an expedient to attempt unit cost dilution for the AH-1Z by using the same powertrain on a hybrid UH-1N.
At a (implied) cost of 26.2 millions a pop is (was in 2014 dollars already) as much as 30% more expensive than a 139 after Boeing adds the "customer specific equipment", and there just is not any performance margin to justify that additional cost, matter of fact the UH-1Y does not even come close to the 139 when it comes to payload/range/speed performance combinations or OEI performance for what it matters.
If anything, the Semper Fi guys should have received H-60s, already available as a navalized aircraft in the MH-60S.

[Northernstar]

Evalu8ter - the Wessex didn't have the luxury of a mid-life update as the Puma has and even after the update the 'Plastic Pig' Mk2 has plenty of problems with serviceability -look how long it took to come on line.

Adapting to new avionics is just a matter of training - I'm ex-Wessex/Lynx/Sea King but the transition to 139 was very straightforward.

However, I completely agree the 139 is not a battlefield helicopter - it is far too precious with it's electrics/avionics even if it has a sh*t ton of power available.

Not to go off on a total tangent but re Puma Mk2 cost as a comparison when you consider mid life upgrades. Wasn’t it sold as an upgrade securing U.K. jobs, yet initially at least the work was conducted in Romania? Also at £20 million per airframe, at least what has been quoted, you could have bought the new H215 as the Spanish Air Force have done for SAR. More capability and longevity than any MLU.

Also given the RAF previously reverse engineered a South African Oryx from Makila back to Turmo power yet have now done the opposite why didn’t they also upgrade the sponsons to the larger type given more grunt? Seems a waste and a half. Where has that £20m gone apart from avionics and engines?

[BTC8183]

Not to go off on a total tangent but re Puma Mk2 cost as a comparison when you consider mid life upgrades. Wasn’t it sold as an upgrade securing U.K. jobs, yet initially at least the work was conducted in Romania? Also at £20 million per airframe, at least what has been quoted, you could have bought the new H215 as the Spanish Air Force have done for SAR. More capability and longevity than any MLU.

Also given the RAF previously reverse engineered a South African Oryx from Makila back to Turmo power yet have now done the opposite why didn’t they also upgrade the sponsons to the larger type given more grunt? Seems a waste and a half. Where has that £20m gone apart from avionics and engines?

How long before the 'Grey Wolf' becomes known as the 'Plastic Pig' too!?
As for the RAF/MOD's ex SAAF/SDF aquisitions, they were just redundant (french built) Turmo engined SA330's, not the, still currently in service,Makila engined Oryx 'licence' version.
The RAF HC.2 does seem to have been excessively expensive though.

[Jimmy.]

I think the MH-139 will be a pretty good replacement for the UH-1N (212), this requirement is a hash and trash role , you don't need a 60 with all its ballistic tolerance and built like a brick ****house airframe, the USAF have the HH-60M's for the war zones which need all the bells and whistles and a strong airframe, I would not take a MH-139 to Afghanistan and operate it like a HH-60 it would be dead in 3 months, simply not rugged enough, the 139 is a good airframe just not the most rugged I have worked on .
Having worked on UH-1's 212, 412, 60's, 139's amongst others the 139 is definitely the most delicate of the bunch .
the 139 is in no way an equal to a 60 in a combat role but a suitable alternate in a support role.
I laugh when I see military tenders that want a combat assault/CT role machine and the 139 or149 is put up against a version of the 60, just hope the poor buggers that end up with 139/149 never have to go to a war zone.


I know it's off topic, but your post made me think on other civilian/military helicopters, such as some of the now Airbus types. What is your toughts about the military version of the 225, 332, 365, 145, 135, 125...?

[212man]

I know it's off topic, but your post made me think on other civilian/military helicopters, such as some of the now Airbus types. What is your toughts about the military version of the 225, 332, 365, 145, 135, 125...?

My first thought is that the 225, 332 and 365 are actually civilian versions of a military type!

[noooby]

#2 that must be why we bought the VH71 for spare parts. Considering how much we paid, for extended in service support........

Canada didn't buy the VH71. They were basically a gift and the fuselages are a much later model, which Canada can use in their upcoming mid life update. It was the deal of the century for Canada. Unlike that Cyclone thing.

[Blackhawk9]

I know it's off topic, but your post made me think on other civilian/military helicopters, such as some of the now Airbus types. What is your toughts about the military version of the 225, 332, 365, 145, 135, 125...?

I admit I am bias, I generally don't like Eurotrash , but 332's are a great all round aircraft having been on them in UN ops doing mil support work (and offshore for years), never liked the 225 or 365 , 145's (117's) are good utility machines and the 125 (350's) , bit delicate for mill work but good general workhorse.

[Cyclic Hotline]

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/deficiencies-mh-139-at-risk-not-meeting-requirements-pentagon-report/MH-139, Behind Schedule, Now Risks Failing Requirements, DOD SaysJan. 23, 2023 | By Greg Hadley (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/person/greg-hadley/)The Air Force’s new MH-139 Grey Wolf (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/weapons-platforms/mh-139/) helicopter is at risk of not meeting “operational effectiveness requirements,” the Defense Department’s chief weapons tester declared in a new report.

Problems with the automatic flight control system, sensor display, and intercom system, along with its cabin layout and “restrictions on takeoffs in crosswinds or near obstacles” have raised concerns during ground and flight testing. The DOD Office of the Director of Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E) 412-page annual report (https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2022/FY22DOTEAnnualReport.pdf?ver=UBO7t2O1FkRuvrB-nJDZ-g%3d%3d), released Jan. 19, covers more than 240 programs the office reviewed in the past year. Its conclusions and recommendations on the Grey Wolf were not previously widely known.

DOT&E questioned the MH-139 program’s testing regimen, including both the amount of testing leading up to a key milestone and the enduring need for ballistic and electromagnetic testing.

The MH-139 is intended to replace the Air Force’s aging UH-1N Huey helicopters used by security forces to support the service’s missile fields and also to transport government and visiting officials around the Washington, D.C., area. Based on the AgustaWestland AW139 civilian helicopter, it is supposed to offer enhanced performance, which requires testing to prove crews can “operate up to the edge of the allowed operating envelope.”

The concerns in the report emerged only a few months after Air Force officials had voiced optimism (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/after-yearlong-delay-mh-139-ready-for-military-utility-testing/) that the Grey Wolf was regaining momentum and ready for military utility testing after months of delays.

When a team of Boeing and Leonardo first won the contract for the aircraft, initial operational capability was projected (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-grey-wolf-arrives/) for 2021. Delayed Federal Aviation Administration certification (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/faa-certification-delay-mh-139-grey-wolf/), however, pushed that timeline back.

While DOT&E found that military flight testing has been close to plan, the report said “persistent problems in acquiring technical data and some aircraft components from the contractor are delaying execution of some portions.” Meanwhile, tests conducted so far indicate problems the agency says that “represent a risk to MH-139 meeting operational effectiveness requirements.”

Among the newly identified deficiencies:


The certified envelope of the automatic flight control system does not match the expanded envelope required in the military version
Issues with sensor display availability to the crew in the cabin
Problems with the on-board intercom system that enables the crew to communicate
“The capability of the cabin layout to support employment of armed tactical response forces”
Changes to the “type of hoist [and] the location of the fast-rope insertion/extraction system bar,” along with other cabin modifications, identified by foreign users.

The Air Force is working on these issues, the report said: “The program is pursuing options to modify the cabin layout to support the tactical response forces and their required equipment while also working with [Air Force Global Strike Command] to update their concept of operations.”

The expanded flight envelope may present maintenance issues by straining powertrain components, and testing is still ongoing on the helicopter’s armor and fuel system against ballistic threats.

Yet amidst these issues, the DOT&E report notes that the Air Force is still planning on reaching a Milestone C decision—whether or not to enter production—for this month.

“Due to the limited time between the start of government-led flight testing and the Milestone C decision, there are limited opportunities to collect operationally representative performance data to inform the decision,” the report said. It recommended more time for such testing before committing to production.

The Air Force did not immediately respond to a query from Air & Space Forces Magazine as to whether it it is still planning on a Milestone C decision this month in light of the report.

The report also made recommendations involving the helicopter’s survivability, urging testing for both electromagnetic pulses and ballistic threats.

[SASless]

Gee....surprise...surprise...surprise!

The USAF could not buy the Bell or Sikorsky aircraft that would have fit the mission perfectly......and have all of the benefits of commonality AND a proven record each.

[The Sultan]

Yet again Boeing seems to “break” something that was acceptable on legacy aircraft.

[Hot_LZ]

Sounds all too strangely familiar for a Leonardo aircraft. The issues mentioned sound exactly the same as those on a larger member of the family.

LZ

[Twist & Shout]

Sounds all too strangely familiar for a Leonardo aircraft. The issues mentioned sound exactly the same as those on a larger member of the family.

LZ

It’s beyond comprehension that they can’t fit a serviceable winch to an AW189.
The Italians seem to be providing product support, that makes the French look good. An incredible feat.

[Errwolf]

Having some experience working procurements with the USAF, its not a big surprise that they ordered the most expensive item on the menu. These things happen with big DoD budgets and taxpayer money.

The AW139 is a wonderful aircraft and pilots love it, but it has never had a great reputation for parts availability or ease of maintenance. I believe the State Department operated some on contract in Afghanistan, I suppose they have some stories.

Good luck boys. Sometimes stone hammer simple is a better solution but time marches on.

[helispotter]

I know some OH-6A'S flew with half the blades gone from the rotor head....it was a dire emergency but it worked...

Surely not 'shot off' while in flight. So does that mean a full set of 4 serviceable blades wasn't available so two opposing blades and associated links were removed? I guess at same RRPM, if collective pitch is roughly doubled the remaining 2 blades could generate the same lift as 4... but I would love to see any photos of an OH-6 doing that!

[EESDL]

While DOT&E found that military flight testing has been close to plan, the report said “persistent problems in acquiring technical data and some aircraft components from the contractor are delaying execution of some portions.” Meanwhile, tests conducted so far indicate problems the agency says that “represent a risk to MH-139 meeting operational effectiveness requirements.”
Air and Space Forces - deficiencies MH139 (https://www.airandspaceforces.com/deficiencies-mh-139-at-risk-not-meeting-requirements-pentagon-report/)

They don't even have to embody Defensive Aids Suites for heavens sake.
Now that would be 'fun'..............

[chopper2004]

The first USAF Boeing MH-139A Grey Wolf is entering final assembly

https://onfirstup.com/boeing/BNN/articles/photos-grey-wolf-strides-through-production-1?bypass_deeplink=true

https://assets.socialchorus.com/production/1632/images/f7396efe-5d99-4be9-9e12-77ce32b12310.jpeg

https://assets.socialchorus.com/production/1632/images/a1b353fe-403c-4464-9a36-1b72051f5cb2.jpeg





cheers

[rrekn]

Where is the Weather Radar going? or did they decided that isn't required on a military helicoper?

[chevvron]

If the project gets binned, will they be sold to the RAF as a Puma replacement?

[chopper2004]

Malstrom gearing up for deliveries

https://scontent-lhr8-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/418962094_693154792998470_878758998986186138_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1 03&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=3635dc&_nc_ohc=qxpIOSxe76sAX8ij8ik&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&oh=00_AfAKKnzBHPws_oN9B9poxoq-ST1uzONBouRSyMJMNBhg5Q&oe=65BFFEEC

https://scontent-lhr6-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/418973769_693154802998469_1835138973455399169_n.jpg?_nc_cat= 104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=3635dc&_nc_ohc=cvnBbuzbAXcAX9UPeiE&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr6-2.xx&oh=00_AfAUXX8ftWjFrKWpYGWulY7fggQGpNjGQphQrLCNcludrg&oe=65BEAB6F



https://www.airforcetimes.com/air/2024/01/30/boeing-expects-grey-wolf-helicopter-deliveries-to-air-force-this-year/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=air-dnr

deliveries later this year

cheers

[Sir Korsky]

MTOW of 14330 lbs - that's 6500kg. These machines not upgraded to 7000 kg ?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

MTOW of 14330 lbs - that's 6500kg. These machines not upgraded to 7000 kg ?
I mean, it does say "more than"... (but it also says "vastly comparable to" so....)

[josephfeatherweight]

Most of the words in that "advertisement" make no sense at all...

[Robbo Jock]

I am wondering what "vastly comparable" means. And as for "absolutely inherent"...

[Tango and Cash]

Resisting the urge to contact 341MWPA and offer my services as editor/proofreader...

[212man]

I am wondering what "vastly comparable" means. And as for "absolutely inherent"...
At least they don’t say “irregardless”!

[639]

J-F-C, Is that an example of Gen-z level composition and grammar or AI?

[grizzled]

Chopper2004, PLEASE tell me you made up those images and words as a joke. If so, you did a fine job!
If not, I'm astounded -- flabbergasted -- at the kindergarten level of the text. It looks like an ad for a kids' Lego model version of the MH-139.

And I can't even bring myself to comment on "vastly comparable" and "absolutely inherent".

On the other hand, perhaps some 8 year old readers will be surprised and enlightened to learn that infrared radiation typically originates from a heat source.

[Winnie]

Someone I talked to on my course stated they would more than likely operate above the 7000Kg level. These guys were the test pilots for the program

[Phoinix]

7t TOM gets it right to a sea level platform... that's it. If it's not too warm.

[SASless]

Now had they gone to an off the shelf UH--60L/M......interoperability bonuses, commonality of parts, compatible training.....but then the DOD has never let commonsense get in the way of buying things.

[Lonewolf_50]

I remember from some discussions about this a few years back that USAF felt that it didn't need a 19,000-22,000 pound helicopter for this mission. They wanted/needed a smaller one. So that's what they got.
(Do not disagree with your point on parts commonality, etc)

[SASless]

When does the taxi service turn into a combat assault aircraft?

One of the missions is to transport Special Reaction Teams in the event of hostile attacks upon a missile site or related facility.

When the bullets start flying....I would much rather be in a Blackhawk than the AW-139.

Likewise....come crashworthiness and redundancy of systems...I bet the UH-60 is far more resilient than the 139.

[212man]

Likewise....come crashworthiness and redundancy of systems...I bet the UH-60 is far more resilient than the 139.
It may be, but I don’t think the 139 has any issues. There have been several crashes where it has demonstrated admirable crashworthiness. The Kenyan Police one comes to mind, but there have been others.

[chopper2004]

Maxwell AFB welcomes first active duty flying training unit since end of WW2 with the Detachment 3 of the 58th Special Operations Wing https://www.kirtland.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3664053/maxwell-welcomes-first-active-duty-flying-training-unit-since-1945/

[RVDT]

Hope they have plenty of hangar space!

[tottigol]

When does the taxi service turn into a combat assault aircraft?

One of the missions is to transport Special Reaction Teams in the event of hostile attacks upon a missile site or related facility.

When the bullets start flying....I would much rather be in a Blackhawk than the AW-139.

Likewise....come crashworthiness and redundancy of systems...I bet the UH-60 is far more resilient than the 139.

May want to explain that to those who spent taxpayers' money in converting UH-1Ns to UH-1Ys rather than getting "pret-a-porter" MH-60S, however in this case the 139 beat the '60 in just about every check mark of the requirements.

[tottigol]

7t TOM gets it right to a sea level platform... that's it. If it's not too warm.

And the Air Farce initially pushed for 7,200Kg.

[T28B]

May want to explain that to those who spent taxpayers' money in converting UH-1Ns to UH-1Ys rather than getting "pret-a-porter" MH-60S, however in this case the 139 beat the '60 in just about every check mark of the requirements. Bell was originally to produce UH-1Ys by rebuilding UH-1Ns, but ultimately built them from scratch instead. In 2008, the UH-1Y entered service with the Marine Corps and also began full-rate production. The aircraft replaced the USMC's UH-1N Twin Huey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_UH-1N_Twin_Huey)[color=#202122] light utility helicopters, introduced in the early 1970s. The final UH-1Y was delivered in 2018. Wasn't a conversion, in the end. (I had to look that up, though).

[JohnDixson]

Like to offer a clarification to this phrase quoted from Tottigol:

” however in this case the 139 beat the '60 in just about every check mark of the requirements “

Not close in the Ballistic Survivability and Vulnerability and Crashworthiness areas. ( But I understand-its going to be an admin aircraft etc ).

[212man]

Wasn't a conversion, in the end. (I had to look that up, though).
The whole programme paid lip service to the expression ‘upgrade’ and I think the only components that stayed were the cockpit doors and nameplates! The key point was the funding and overall programme process was administered in a totally different manner to a tender for a new type, so was a quicker and more streamlined “purchase”, with fewer hurdles to jump over.

[Lonewolf_50]

The whole programme paid lip service to the expression ‘upgrade’ and I think the only components that stayed were the cockpit doors and nameplates! The key point was the funding and overall programme process was administered in a totally different manner to a tender for a new type, so was a quicker and more streamlined “purchase”, with fewer hurdles to jump over. As was the F-18 E/F. ;)

[212man]

As was the F-18 E/F. ;)
of course. Why invent the wheel?

[SASless]

This might document might be of interest.

It is a 2022 Acquisition Report for FY 2022 and discusses the 139 Program.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2022_SARS/MH-139A_SAR_DEC_2022.pdf

[chopper2004]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2024/03/15/air-forces-first-grey-wolf-patrol-helicopter-arrives-at-malmstrom/

https://www.airforcetimes.com/resizer/Uu_mDRfOTkwGaD0YbUUkIoezBcs=/1024x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/7XLMPSXGXVC57MU2UOR4UJSFYQ.jpg



https://www.airandspaceforces.com/usaf-cuts-mh-139-helicopter-fleet/?fbclid=IwAR2rTxIt8xWMMtq2UcMSl5gCNXg99AaQ5vvCyX4t1G6XPsznJs vdpD0CHkE_aem_Aat3YCFxhC6ALGyDpVL9AmKw62wwLPxmCzJbJXc4aSXRBP nh3EQx5to7TcZN5h6R_JN37TYoMj-xifzyzNSq_sK6

so looks like JBA and Yokota won't get theirs

cheers

[Copter Appreciator00]

The article says the prog of record has been revised. So the total # of H-139s isn't going to be 80-84 airframes, and now will be 30-36. Does this imply the UH-1N (64 copters) will sustain for more years than planned in a mixed fleet alongside the 139?
If so, the Ns will receive upgrades, the same way the Spanish Navy upgraded their N models a few years ago, and as the Canadian Army is upgrading their Bell 412s?
Or will the UH-1N be phased, and maybe the UH-72 or H145 fill up the rest of the fleet?

[chopper2004]

Another seven on order

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=131423&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1hePGz7QMKeC8rwgbG4htg-o8EdqUIndOSI6sOiVrZ9ClDgZ0aT9_egBk_aem_AbSegCqOGkXvVnWBBGZkt Ky1rkwhlpIP-5JBR_vgBI2Cl7euiOvV2LVVq0SeUkcLcoAtQlioRSsX43W40WurHKeU

cheers

[Lonewolf_50]

. Does this imply the UH-1N (64 copters) will sustain for more years than planned in a mixed fleet alongside the 139?
If so, the Ns will receive upgrades, the same way the Spanish Navy upgraded their N models a few years ago, and as the Canadian Army is upgrading their Bell 412s?
Or will the UH-1N be phased, and maybe the UH-72 or H145 fill up the rest of the fleet? Heard a rumor that the UH-1N is getting extended yet again, not that they are getting upgrades. (Why USAF didn't replace them with Blackhawks remains a mystery to me, but I guess the USAF has their reasons).