First MH-60R squadron is established!

[bert]

Why did the Navy choose to go with the aft tail-wheel placement on the 60S? Does the Navy style placement adversely affect slope/landing limits?

It would have been excessively expensive to move the tailwheel. For all the similarity in shape, the L/S and the B/R's have very different structures.

 

[hscs]

The 60S is IFR and there is a way to trick f-ck the kneeboard moving map to play on the mission display on the 60S. As for terrain following radar -- well, only SOCOM has paid for that, so until they buy a navy squadron -- that isn't going to happen.

The added power of the 401D's would be nice, but I don't think they really add that much. Bert might be able to speak to that.

 

[bert]

While very similar, I don't believe the Army and Navy engines are identical (though I couldn't say what makes a 701C different from a 401C). The L has T-700-701C's compared to the 701D in the Mike and SAC advertises a 4% power increase from the L to the M. There really isn't a 401D yet.

GE and their engines are an alphabet soup like everybody else, but try this to sort them out: http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/military/military_20050613d.html

 

[HeyJoe]

HSC-71 and the Helo Master plan

See more on ongoing transformation of the "60" community from the latest "official" Navy new release

 

[busdriver]

By the comments about cracks, I assume the B/R does not have 308 beam crack problems? I always assumed ours were due to the probe, guess not.

 

[Bevo16]

The issue is that the entire strike syllabus is designed primarily for CSAR, not NSW overland missions. The mission planning is much different and much more complicated. Even the NSW cards in the NSW syllabus drive towards a CSAR mission with NSW support. I don't really see the HS community as being able to plan a long range mission to infil/exfil, fly the route, find an LZ without any markings, and be on the deck within 30 sec of planned TOT. They just don't train to that. With some folks filtering back into the HS community, this can be changed. In fact, we should focus more on NSW type missions -- as those are the ones that are more likely to happen while deployed (a la HS-5).

How long ago did you do your syllabus? None of the NSW cards that I flew were CSAR related. They were NSW specific. I wonder if it is an East/West coast thing. Seriously, this comment would have people looking at you like you had 3 heads if you said it in our ready room.

Saying that we do not train to fly long range infil/exfil missions is simply not current or correct. At least 1/3 of our flights were dedicated to this exact type of training the last time we were in Fallon. I am 100% certain that my squadron could have executed this mission on deployment.

 

[Gatordev]

By the comments about cracks, I assume the B/R does not have 308 beam crack problems? I always assumed ours were due to the probe, guess not.

The Bravo's cracks were more due to fatigue life. Sometimes you'd find cracks in the overhead beam under the transmission (don't remember the frame number) and a lot of the times there would be cracks on the strut brace for the gear, usually due to how we operate on deck on the small boys. Firm landings coupled w/ the twisting of straightening maneuvers would add up.

 

[MasterBates]

Yeah. The cracked Main Beam was a Fatigue issue. Normally addressed during PMI and cracks were measured every 30 hours (or 60, forget).

 

[Gatordev]

Yeah, the gear strut (Drag Beam...damn, that's been bugging me...couldn't remember the name) was done on phases because you had to pull the wheels off. Not something you had time for on a 60 hour.

 

[bert]

The 60S is IFR and there is a way to trick f-ck the kneeboard moving map to play on the mission display on the 60S.

Forgot to comment on this earlier, but hanging the map over the MD is a half-assed solution at best. We really screwed that one away, but at this point I can't see anybody spending the $ to fix it.

And the cracks are in new-build R's (though there is a fix in work).

 

[hscs]

Bert -- heard that there was a way to go from the kneeboard to the DVR to the display driver of the MD. Haven't seen it, but heard that was a workaround for what you can get on any new car priced over $30k.

 

[hscs]

Bevo -- per the current HS syllabus there are 2 HRST events with no requirement to run a route (e.g. card can be signed off with elevators), 1 kduck, 1 HVBSS, 1 SOF support for PR, and 1 ins/ext to be LEVEL 3!. The way I see it, there is only one event to evaluate where you can actually get guys into an LZ that you have only seen on imagery within 30 sec of your TOT to deteremine whether or not you should be a level 3. That is not enough to train to or fair to an upcoming level 3 candidate.

I didn't really learn to plan until I got to my current squadron. In the squadrons, most didn't really know how to plan and were happy to be led around by the RMC. Unfortunately, the lack of knowledge base for planning was a major issue with the HS-7 SIR. While it could have happened to anyone, the way I was taught to plan at my current squadron - a wire strike would have been a lot less likely.

 

[bert]

Haven't heard or seen the map workaround, but if you have any more info on it I would be very interested.

 

[hscs]

I have only heard about it -- would have to see it in my own eyes to believe it. It would be pretty cool -- I am guessing that someone at VX-1 would know for sure.

 

[Bevo16]

I didn't really learn to plan until I got to my current squadron. In the squadrons, most didn't really know how to plan and were happy to be led around by the RMC. Unfortunately, the lack of knowledge base for planning was a major issue with the HS-7 SIR. While it could have happened to anyone, the way I was taught to plan at my current squadron - a wire strike would have been a lot less likely.

It sounds like the culture at our our squadrons is very different. We have been very SWTI heavy for a long time, and everyone in the front office and O-4's have been very good instructors to the JO's. Our guys learn how to plan, and are good at it. We also do a lot of NSW training that is not for cards. I guess that is a luxury of having a hangar that is about a mile from SEAL central and BUDS.

I really think that culture has ton to do with how a squadron trains. We see it a lot with the transition. Some of the former HC guys don't want anything to do with tactics. They don't want to hear about them, they don't want to learn them, they don't want to hear tactics talk in their presence. It is very strange coming from a squadron where the front office was very forward leaning and always trying to expand the missions. Often with great success.

I lost a very good friend in that HS-7 wirestrike. We were RI partners in the HT's. From what I remember from the writeup of that mishap, planning was very poor. I am sure you know what I mean.