PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Sikorsky rolls out CH-53K (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/539201-sikorsky-rolls-out-ch-53k.html)

Always a Sapper 6th May 2014 20:19

From chopper2004's link


mission radius of 110 nautical miles
What are they going to use it for? Short hops across the fleet when at anchor or summit?

hoodie 6th May 2014 20:44


Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 (Post 8466379)
VX: I'd need to look at some more images of the BERP. Various manufacturers have been messing about with blade tips for decades.

BERP has always been far more than just the tip.

Willard Whyte 6th May 2014 21:02


mission radius of 110 nautical miles

What are they going to use it for? Short hops across the fleet when at anchor or summit?
With 27,000 lbs of kit slung underneath. One would hope the mission radius is a little more when not carrying so much stuff...

tartare 7th May 2014 00:43

Holy sh1t - I hadn't seen that barrel roll video.
I have heard it said that in terms of hands on cyclic and collective and feet on pedals, the big machines can feel surprisingly nimble to fly.
Spoke to a chap in NZ flying a Mil 8 on a logging op and he said `Mate, it's just like pole-ing a Squirrel around.'
Any Stallion drivers reading who could comment?
And yes Alf - had also heard that when one lifts off, it can blow you off your feet if you are watching nearby and not ready.

Lonewolf_50 7th May 2014 14:26

The few times I got to fly a CH-53E, under the watchful eye of a USMC Aircraft Commander, I found it smooth and very responsive to the controls. Great bird. :ok:

Haraka 7th May 2014 14:50

My late father, who was on EH101 design before moving on from Westlands, watched a CH -53 come in ,then depart, from the field in Yeovil many years ago .
His comment to me :

" Just what do we think we are playing at ? "

Boudreaux Bob 7th May 2014 18:01

Alls sorts of barbs have been slung at Sikorsky various threads at pprune.

Yet when we look around the Western World and many of the other parts as well....we see the SK Products in inventories doing Yeoman work every single day in every kind of climate and environment.

I see those Critics as suffering from something akin to Penis Envy.

NutLoose 7th May 2014 18:17


alfred_the_great

Don't try and stand near one as it either lands or takes off......
Many moons ago a French man was flying his little 152 to near Paris, but the weather got bad so he diverted to Le Touquet, an hour or so later, lost and running out of fuel he stuffed it down into a plowed field in Kent! He made a perfect forced landing with no damage, but it needed shifting from the field so it could be flown out, the USAF kindly sent a CH-53 to lift it and promptly blew it inverted, finally managing to do what the Frenchman couldn't... It came to us and we eventually rebuilt it, including replacing the whole of the rear fuselage.

Lonewolf_50 7th May 2014 19:46

When the CH-53E was being introduced into the Fleet, back in the 80's, they reckoned that with the hurricane force winds that the downwash produced, the LSE directing the bird over the deck in a hover needed to have his person attached to a tie down via chain and hook. :eek:

Also, the grounding wand was a pretty healthy piece of equipment! :ok:

NutLoose 7th May 2014 20:27

Of course if you get a gear stuck then it's underneath and pull it out

http://www.uflymike.com/media/personal/Jammedgear.jpg


Would be a good caption comp entry too

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/foru...-this-at-home/

NutLoose 7th May 2014 20:38

And of course the movie, same thing, different location



Lonewolf_50 7th May 2014 20:47

:ok: Nice job, loved the video. :D

RAFEngO74to09 7th May 2014 21:02

Wow - great video. Obviously before the days of Health & Safety bolleux !

The Sultan 13th Jul 2014 23:13

And Sikorsky Rolls It Back In
 
Sikorsky announced at least a six month delay in flight of the 53K due to a transmission design problems. How long was the first delay of the Canadian 92's?

The Sultan

Boudreaux Bob 13th Jul 2014 23:38

How far behind schedule was the Osprey, Ding Dong?:ugh:

The Sultan 14th Jul 2014 01:42

Osprey first flight was basically on schedule.

The Sultan

Boudreaux Bob 14th Jul 2014 03:35

Basically? No groundings along the way either i guess?

Lonewolf_50 14th Jul 2014 18:30

I suspect that this set back was discussed in detail and agreed with the Program Manager. Not a surprise, but a disappointment. :uhoh: One would have thought that with the years of putting these things together and the known pitfalls in design, and as noted above, the recent experience with S-92, this design effort over the past few years would not have been caught out.

Then again, the entirety of helicopter design involves tradeoffs and compromises, and nowadays a bit of risk. Sometimes, that risk shows up in a "no, it won't work out" result.

Press on, team, and grind it out. (Wait, maybe not the best choice of words for a transmission issue. :eek: )

The Sultan 15th Jul 2014 02:19

BB,

How can there be a grounding before first flight? Kind of a Sarah Palin moment for you!

Also no one with a passing hint of the 53 would try to compare its early (or later) safety record as a yard stick for how it is to be done.

The 53K is a derivative, but the revolutionary in every way V-22 was contracted in 1983 and first flew in 1989. The K was contracted in 2006 and will still be sitting on the ground in 2015 or beyond. Get someone to do the math for you.

The Sultan

cornish-stormrider 15th Jul 2014 17:16

All I know is I was on the top deck servicing a mighty puma :ok: at Benson when a Pave Low came taxiing by, festooned with guns and stuff, I had to duck and hang onto the engine to not be blown off the deck......

As Arnee once said " Get to Tha Choppa....."


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:25.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.