UH-60A (UTTAS) Original PID Specs/ Original RFP
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: NC
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UH-60A (UTTAS) Original PID Specs/ Original RFP
Howdy everyone,
On a mission to find the original Prime Item Development Specs (PIDS) for the UH-60A (UTTAS)...... or perhaps the original RFP (and attached docs) that was released in January 1972 for the UTTAS Program. I'm conducting research to challenge the FAA and it's subsequent restrictions as they pertain to the UH-60 vs Restricted Category Aircraft designation. The PIDS would spell out the requirements of the UH-60. These requirements will help me marry the comments asociated with the "Airworthiness and Flight Characteristics Evaluation UH-60A Helicopter'" (which I have a copy of). Hoping someone out there might be able to help me with this research.
SHarris62
On a mission to find the original Prime Item Development Specs (PIDS) for the UH-60A (UTTAS)...... or perhaps the original RFP (and attached docs) that was released in January 1972 for the UTTAS Program. I'm conducting research to challenge the FAA and it's subsequent restrictions as they pertain to the UH-60 vs Restricted Category Aircraft designation. The PIDS would spell out the requirements of the UH-60. These requirements will help me marry the comments asociated with the "Airworthiness and Flight Characteristics Evaluation UH-60A Helicopter'" (which I have a copy of). Hoping someone out there might be able to help me with this research.
SHarris62
Administrator
Just a quick note: we occasionally get insights on the UTTAS program from a gent who was in on the ground floor; look for posts by JohnDixson.
I have moved this post to the Rotorheads forum, from the Military Aviation forum, in hopes that he, and others familiar with that program who now and again post here, may be more likely to see it.
I have moved this post to the Rotorheads forum, from the Military Aviation forum, in hopes that he, and others familiar with that program who now and again post here, may be more likely to see it.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't help you find the documents, but here are the document numbers.
Request for Proposal, DAAJOI-72-R-02S4(P401), "Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System," 30 December 1971, revised 10 March 1972.
Prime Item Development Specification for Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System, Specification No. AMC-CP-2222-31000, I March 1976.
Request for Proposal, DAAJOI-72-R-02S4(P401), "Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System," 30 December 1971, revised 10 March 1972.
Prime Item Development Specification for Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System, Specification No. AMC-CP-2222-31000, I March 1976.
As T28B says, JohnDixson was involved with the UTTAS testing, and the NASA NTRS report has much of his activity. There is also a lot more that he was involved in that doesn't come up in that particular document. He responds to private messaging and is a wealth of knowledge.
I advised Brother John he had been called out by a Mod....let's see how quickly he responds!
I neglected to specify that it was in search of assistance to further the discussion however!
I neglected to specify that it was in search of assistance to further the discussion however!
Sharris62 see PM
Sharris62: Just advised that your PM box is full and cannot accept my PM with contact info.
Sharris62: Just advised that your PM box is full and cannot accept my PM with contact info.
Last edited by JohnDixson; 9th Jun 2022 at 01:33.
The air loads report which has a lot of JDs effort involved I believe would be a good supporting point
1. Pre fly-off with Boeing
2. Maturity Phase, i.e, the production machine
3. ESSS ( wings/tanks ) System installed.
4. Inlet Particle Separator system ( limited data points ).
NB The FAA does not require anything close to the military structural demonstration testing, but does have some fixation on some somewhat out of date subjects ( when considering the presence of sophisticated modern helicopter AFCS systems ) like longitudinal static stability that can be thorny when working with the FAA.
Then later on there was substantial structural testing done with the L model, the composite rotor blades etc. What I’m saying is that the original data is a starting point, but the aircraft improvements/upgrades have been the subject of substantial further testing and those efforts need to be taken into account when evaluating the current M model offerings.and derivatives. Just one “ little “ example that I think was noted recently in answer to a related discussion was that in qualifying the composite rotor blades, the ballistic testing as originally done on the Ti spar blades was all replicated 23MM HEI real ammo etc on the composite rotor-all the original angles etc.
Have not had any contact from Sharris62 yet so am left wondering if that was a serious query.
John: I suspect it was, I think that new members have limits on their PM amount.
If so, LW, then they will be needing official and current data and will only be able to obtain that data from S A. Original A and L model Pids are “ interesting “ for background, but no longer define the aircraft.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: NC
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chief Bottle Washer
Regards
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: NC
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SHarris62,
Check your email....sent you a message with a point of contact that might be able to answer some questions for you.
Check your email....sent you a message with a point of contact that might be able to answer some questions for you.
Had a chat with Sharris62 and have hopefully put him in contact with two very experienced folk who can assist in his endeavor. Thanks to all who have assisted-it sounded like the direction he is headed was worthwhile.
