[reactionkilla]

For the gunner on any attack helicopter you'd have to be a pilot, I'm not sure on the requirements on being a crew chief.

[Big P]

Originally Posted by reactionkilla

Handedness doesn't really matter in a helicopter, you have the collective in your left and the cyclic in your right no matter what hand you have dominant.

I'm not at all interested in the military, but I have always wanted to be a helicopter pilot and hope to do that in college next year. Can't wait to get started.

As far as the Apache deal, yes at this point its not a very viable aircraft. You are exactly right, it was designed and purpose built to load full of Hellfires and kill Russian tanks in eastern Europe. That didn't prove necessary, and while in the first Gulf War it was a bit more tactically efficient (because Saddam had some tanks) now it is almost moot. I hear that in the sandbox they're taking off the Longbow mast-mounted sighting system since they really don't even need them, agreeable since I recall the price of just that is about $3 or so million of the $18 million of the aircraft.

I'm also a huge fan of the Y Huey and the Z Cobra, proven airframes that now perform about as well as their counterparts in the other services. For some reason Marines hate Blackhawks.

I have heard that also, but I have not seen any come around that were former long bows yet. I know some are coming in with long bow to get them replaced with the new sensor called the vueit 2 system.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/produc...T-2/index.html

Lets the apache use UAV sensor before going into harms way. Pretty neat I think.

Yea, the Corps tends to stick with that works.

[reactionkilla]

Yea, the UAV deal is I think why they cancelled the Comanche. They can do it similarly with only monetary risk.

Marines seem to love Bell stuff, Army likes Boeing (and Sikorsky).

I know this is probably blasphemy in a US military forum, but Eurocopter makes the tip top aircraft. For civilian stuff at least, and some of their military aircraft are awesome. The AStar and the EC series of stuff is great stuff, and I've heard good things about the Tiger.

[sleepykat]

Originally Posted by reactionkilla

Yea, the UAV deal is I think why they cancelled the Comanche. They can do it similarly with only monetary risk.

Marines seem to love Bell stuff, Army likes Boeing (and Sikorsky).

I know this is probably blasphemy in a US military forum, but Eurocopter makes the tip top aircraft. For civilian stuff at least, and some of their military aircraft are awesome. The AStar and the EC series of stuff is great stuff, and I've heard good things about the Tiger.

Wasted BILLIONS and a project that did not produce a single aircraft that would do what it was designed to do in over 20 years. On top of all that, if they ever did make one the technology would have already been out of date and in need for a huge upgrade. That and coupled with the price increase killed it. UAV's do the same things cheaper and safer.

Marines have a Sikorsky aircraft, it's called a CH-53.
I worked on Cobra's and Hueys in the Corps and currently mod all the Navy/Marine aircraft in the fleet.

[reactionkilla]

The only real reason the Marines have the Super Stallions is because there's nothing thats near as big or powerful. They are really, really nice aircraft though. I've seen a training film from the 1960s/70s of a Sea Stallion doing loops and rolls, and all I can say is I would be scared ****less.

I'm not sure if they still do it, but they always had those Vertol SeaKnight helicopters, and I'm just not a fan of those. Basically a smaller/underpowered Chinook.

[sleepykat]

CH-53E's are badass, the Delta's suck. That video was an Alpha. Doing that puts tons of unnecessary fatigue on the airframe.

I think the selling point of the Cobra-Huey upgrades was the interchangeability between the two aircraft when it comes to major dynamic parts. Brings the cost to maintain down a lot.

[reactionkilla]

Yea, it was probably just a demo to show its capabilities. The E model is incredible. If I recall right its got a bit over 13,100 shaft horsepower, insane ****ing aircraft.

[sleepykat]

They are due for replacement with the Kilo model..18,000 shp....beast....

[reactionkilla]

Holy ****.

Thats still oddly short of the Mi12 prototype built which had a bit over 26,000 shaft horsepower, and the Mi26 which had about 22,500 shaft horsepower. The Ruskies sure loved having the biggest and most powerful ****.

[Big P]

Originally Posted by sleepykat

Wasted BILLIONS and a project that did not produce a single aircraft that would do what it was designed to do in over 20 years. On top of all that, if they ever did make one the technology would have already been out of date and in need for a huge upgrade. That and coupled with the price increase killed it. UAV's do the same things cheaper and safer.

Marines have a Sikorsky aircraft, it's called a CH-53.
I worked on Cobra's and Hueys in the Corps and currently mod all the Navy/Marine aircraft in the fleet.

Wow, I disagree with most everything you wrote there. Hats off to you though for your service sir.

1. They indeed produced aircraft, in fact they had two of them that can STILL out fly most things in the sky save for a Puma. The technology that came out of that project is still giving back in many ways, the LRUs that were developed were the platform for the CAAS that will be in most of the military aircraft in the next ten years, that includes the Ch-53 you mentioned

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...rt+Helicopters

That upgrade alone will add years to the life of that bird alone. It will also save Billions in hardware and training as all aircraft will have one type of hardware and software across the board. Unheard of before, but we are almost there now. EDIT: Let me add for the Army, the Marines got it right with the Y model Huey and the Z model Cobra...both wonderful machines. They tend to not mess with what works, while the Army just screws around.

2. I would not even try to guess at the number of aircraft that are flying with out of date technology in the military now, but I wont argue that if they would have produced production line aircraft, they would be due for upgrades now. That is engineering though, you always have to upgrade, so I dont see the fault there your pointing out.

3. I dont know if I you can compare UAV work to helos in that way. They have two different rolls all together.

Mind you sir, im not flaming you, just enjoying the conversation with fellow rotor heads who understand what im talking about.

Originally Posted by reactionkilla

Holy ****.

Thats still oddly short of the Mi12 prototype built which had a bit over 26,000 shaft horsepower, and the Mi26 which had about 22,500 shaft horsepower. The Ruskies sure loved having the biggest and most powerful ****.

I did not realize that the MI26 had that much shaft horsepower. Insane. Have you flown in a Ch-53? I would love to. I have only flown the Ch-47G, MH-47G, MH-60L IDAP, UH-60 (various models) and the tried and trusty UH-1.

[reactionkilla]

Nah, I haven't flown in any military helicopters, but I'm hopefully going to UND or ERAU or CNCC to train to be a pilot by this time next year.

[Big P]

Originally Posted by reactionkilla

Nah, I haven't flown in any military helicopters, but I'm hopefully going to UND or ERAU or CNCC to train to be a pilot by this time next year.

Well good luck to you.

Hey SleeyKat, really, please dont be offended, by my rants either. I love talking shop, and being that you have been around a flight line and tech shop, Im sure you do the same.

You know, Rockwell Collins lost their butt on the Y huey and Z cobra, they had been trying to get the CAAS platform in both of those and did not get the contract. They spent tons of money on that effort.

[reactionkilla]

I'm glad theres guys in here who know their **** that I can talk rotors with, I'm normally stuck with "The Comanche is so advanced it can fly upside down."

Needless to say I think I've been obsessed with helicopters for a long, long time. My dad used to run a company that flew them, thats the biggest part why. I have a million books on the subject and could either recite or easily look up most technical info on any helicopter. I want to make it my life, I love it haha.

[Big P]

Originally Posted by reactionkilla

I'm glad theres guys in here who know their **** that I can talk rotors with, I'm normally stuck with "The Comanche is so advanced it can fly upside down."

Needless to say I think I've been obsessed with helicopters for a long, long time. My dad used to run a company that flew them, thats the biggest part why. I have a million books on the subject and could either recite or easily look up most technical info on any helicopter. I want to make it my life, I love it haha.

Oh dont get me wrong, I agree with a great deal of the negative things that go with that program. I think the IDEA of the comanche was a great thing, but as with all things of this nature, it was spoiled. I wish they would taken a page out of the corps hand book and upgraded current airframes at that time, like the Cobra.

Not all the money was a waste. I remember people back then hyping the fact that an U.S. built aircraft was better then most euro copters..I guess they have never seen some of them perform. To bad they waited so long to buy a few to see how good they can be. Seeing a Puma doing duty above the heads of troops would do me just fine.

I wish you great luck in living your dream. My eyes kept me out of the flying business in the military. I love them also.

[reactionkilla]

Even after all that, I still think the Black Hawk is a good helicopter, but if you gave me a choice I'd take a Super Puma.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Big P

. My eyes kept me out of the flying business in the military.

me too

I would give anything to be able to fly a jet or heli

[sleepykat]

Your right they made two "prototypes" but from my understanding they were just that, prototypes that didn't touch all the requirements of the platform. Even then they aren't all that great in terms of performance. The Cobra out performs it in range, speed and climb rate. On top of that armament which is pretty important. Which brings me to my next point. The aircraft was designed to fill a armed reconnaissance role. That is why I say UAV's filled that role better than a maned helo. I would rather put a robot in the sky for recon, and put two pilots in a light attack helo to blow crap up (like a cobra) but that is just me.

As for 53's I like flying in the Delta's better, they don't have the mechanical stops that a Echo has so the Delta pilots are a little more yank and bank than Echo pilots.

[Big P]

Originally Posted by sleepykat

Your right they made two "prototypes" but from my understanding they were just that, prototypes that didn't touch all the requirements of the platform. Even then they aren't all that great in terms of performance. The Cobra out performs it in range, speed and climb rate. On top of that armament which is pretty important. Which brings me to my next point. The aircraft was designed to fill a armed reconnaissance role. That is why I say UAV's filled that role better than a maned helo. I would rather put a robot in the sky for recon, and put two pilots in a light attack helo to blow crap up (like a cobra) but that is just me.

As for 53's I like flying in the Delta's better, they don't have the mechanical stops that a Echo has so the Delta pilots are a little more yank and bank than Echo pilots.

All good points man. Its a shame it never seen the production line. I suspect that it may have been a fine aircraft if it was not killed by the I want this on it folks.

UAVs....I would love to work with them. Our company has a contract to do some UAV work, but nothing work leaving where im at for.

You know, as I was saying eariler, the ARH program is suffering from scope creep also, but has the chance to be a great aircraft. Its the same as a bell 400, but of course with all the mil spec stuff thrown on top for flavor. It was SUPPOSED to carry people in the back, but that may be gone now since they keep packing **** into it. Dont know if you ever looked inside a Kiowa before, but there is NO room in that bloody thing.

The ARH is suited for an armed recon role, light, fast and armed OK. Not a true gunship in the sense, but a GAU on the side and a few rockets is better then nothing.

I like guys who hank and bank. The Big Army 47 guys tend to be a bit by the book when we fly with them, but the SOA guys at the task force tend to enjoy their stick time.

[Legumeofterror (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Big P

Well the only two comanches that were developed to fly were both here in my lab for some time. They have left to be put on display though...but to a point I have to disagree with you on that one.

The comanche program was killed by scope creep. Meaning that people kept tacking on extra requirements before the baseline of the mission was finished. My program was started with what we call comanche termination funds and equipment. 85% of the technology that was developed is still being developed for use on other aircraft, or has been deployed into the aircraft fleet. The money was not wasted there so much at that point.

I feel if if they could have developed and deplyed a base model if you will, THEN started expanding its role, it would have been one of the best aircraft ever built.

One such technology that was developed from the comanche is the CAAS sysem, (Common Avionics Architecture System) being produced by Rockwell Collins.

Like I said though, I disagree to a point. I think the Army themselves were the main cause of the death of the comanche program. The new ARH program is heading that way pretty quick, but in this case, they cant let it because they know that the current fleet of Kiowas cant remain operationl much longer.

the guy who took me to fly the simulator worked on the Comanche project. from what he told me after they changed its role to an armed scout, they decided it would be better to apply all the new tech they had developed to existing aircraft and scrap the project. he said something along the lines of it not being a significant enough improvement to justify a whole new aircraft. though i imagine he didn't know much about why or why not they cancel projects, he just has to design the electronics they tell him to. the last thing he worked on that he could talk about was a surveillance pod for the F-16. you say you work in a lab. where? what do you do there?

[Big P]

I have three labs I work in. Two mobile labs, one is at Bell Helicopter in Tx dedicated to the ARH program, and the second mobile is here in Alabama with us. That combined with our fixed lab and we are a systems integrations lab. We test and integrate new hardware, software and weopons platforms for current, and prototype aircraft. We are out on Redstone. Our project was started with Commanche termination funds and hardware.

[Burninator]

anything in the western houston area? i could use a new job. lol