Not a record holder. Perhaps, “ a facilitator “ might be more accurate. This was the second set of altitude records achieved by the CH-54. We had upgraded JFTD12A-4A engines with an additional 500 ship each. SA was to perform a short flight test in advance, due to:

1. Installation of bootstrap pressurized flight control hydraulics ( the CH-54A had basically the H-37’s hydraulic system, which was unpressurized and vented to atmosphere. The estimated altitudes to be achieved raised the possibility of pump cavitation, and this solution addressed that issue and needed a short but thorough look-see.
2. P&W had concerns re the compressor section going trans-sonic at the in-flight temperatures expected, and produced a paper chart with temperature corrected N1 limits, to be treated as superseding the other engine/transmission limits. Another thing to pay attention to.
3. The altitudes were smack in the middle of some of the airline descent routes into KJFK and we had done some coordination with NY Center over on Long Island, as this was VERY controlled airspace and wanted to ensure this part of the plan worked.

On the first check flight, I flew with Charlie Reine, and we had a calculated climb profile which specified a 40 KIAS climb speed, which accounted for a couple of things among them being the pitot tube angular error. Promptlyupon applying max power to climb, we found that the high rate of climb rendered the 40 KIAS approach unplayable, and in fact after trying several other “ indicated “ speeds, we gave up on that approach and continued the climb simply setting a normal pitch attitude for climb ( the airspeed indicator read zero ). Decided to end this flight and re-evaluate the climb solution.

Prior to the next flight, the US Army pilots arrived and it was decided that CW-4 Jim Ervin would fly with me. meanwhile, we got a best guess attitude from the flight test and aero branch troops re a best attitude to fly for the climb, and armed with that, our clipboard N1 limit chart oxygen masks, parachutes etc, off we went. The climb attitude ( cannot recall that value ) seemed to work well as the time to 10k ft was well ahead of the record so we kept on going, with the intent to get to a service ceiling ( 100 rpm climb ). However, along the way a few events took place:

1. The large floodlight that was installed so as to allow video recording of the instrument panel exploded somewhere around 20,000 ft. It was mounted on the aft cockpit bulkhead and the glass splinters got down both Jim’s and my necks. Best we could do was not move very much.
2. Getting close to 30,000 ft the N2 actuator on one of the engines ( the way you matched torque on that aircraft ) froze, which had the impact of not getting all the power out of that engine.
3. Finally, we had one of the hydraulic systems overpressurize ( as I recall, the A model Crane had one at 2000psi and one at either 1500 or 3000. I am pretty sure it was the 2000 system that went to 3000psi, raising the distinct probability of quite increased fluid temperature. This was Mil 5606 and flammable, so this was the end of the flight. We had reached somewhere between 33 and 34000.

BTW, the story re the airliner is true and occurred on this flight. It was an Air Canada pilot who made the comment.

Anyway, we fixed these problems and the US Army took over and did a masterful job of achieving all the records that were in the plan. ( there was yet a third record series of flights flown by Army pilots at Stratford in 1972, utilizing a B-model Crane with the JFTD12A-5 engines, and they too achieved their goals ).

CW-4 Jim Ervin made a number of friends during his short sojourn at Sikorsky, and we were very sad to receive the news some years later, that Jim had lost his life flying a commercial S-64E in Alaska. A good pilot and a gentleman.

The CH54/S64 is a very impressive helicopter in many regards.

The first time I saw this helicopter with its system of interchangeable pods I thought it was a great idea, apparently not, what was the problem?

You Tube