-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
New Blackhawk
- Thread starter Gatordev
- Start date
That was initially the general consensus, but I think there was more to it. Bert and others went into it in more detail in another thread, I think it was back in the summer of '06 (I remember because I ran into my old Det chief over at HSC-2 when I was up there TAD and we talked about the cracks).
There isn't a simple answer to this - to quote (approximately) Rev. Lovejoy: "Short answer is yes with a 'but'.... Long answer is a no with a 'maybe'.....".
We (meaning old -46 guys) do somewhat fly them like we did the -46. Hell, the R has a 35 kt sideward limit and I still sideflare it IAW with that limit. The combination of sideflares, plus loads, plus the fact that the S's body type (roof down construction vice floor up) was not bought/tested under that type of loading means that old -46 guys are likely to be part of the problem. Having said that, landing loads for Navy are different from those of the Army when you factor in moving decks.
None of which would totally explain the R's cracking problems - which can all be traced back to other issues (more or less).
On the bright side, if you put a doubler on a stress-prone point, then the stress that caused that crack will go away, right? (After all, it couldn't possibly just flow downstream to the next weak point....). Luckily, I will retire long before we get 10 hour NDI's and the equivalent of the -46, pre-DCUP flight restrictions.
That was what was initially thought and the the rumor continues to be spread by other 60 guys (HS and HSL) who think the sideflare is gonna kill us (60S pilots) all. There are a lot of factors at play, but a 60S is not a 60A, not a 60B, not a 60F, and not a 60L. While there is a lot of similarity between it and the Army birds, there is enough of a difference to make it a different aircraft with it's own problems. Like I said, testing has shown that the highest loads are experienced in areas where they weren't expected, like the landings and the bottom of the auto.
Interesting you say that, since the cracks are showing up on birds that are on SARDETs that might do 2 vertreps a cruise, plus the previously mentioned Rs that are cracking... I'll buy the ground-air-ground cycle way before I'll buy the sideflare argument.
Bert, I read in the chicken little brief something about milled parts vs. riveted parts and the resultant inflexibility in the former that was a contributing factor - that still the case?
It's been awhile since I saw the crack tracker, but I think it's largely a Blk I phenom.
I've seen that - part of the issue is that Navy (in general or specific entities) and SAC/LMSI don't always agree on the causes of problems (cracks or otherwise). I honestly don't know what info is being passed to the fleet in general on this topic so barring other issues you can roger me up for whatever 299 is telling you.
It isn't always by block, but a number of the mitigation steps have been imposed on the production line as well - as with post crack mitigation steps, the stress is still there, it is just going to flow downstream.
From what I understand, major differences between the flight controls in the Army and Navy model 60s is the addition of yaw trim (electrically driven), which allows for the three-axis autopilot, along with useful things such as turn coordination, heading hold, couplers, etc. etc.
We have a hydroelecrical yaw trim servo along with FPS but nothing is coupled on A/L 60's. We also lack collective trim. We have no auto pilot per say. Just like a good airplane you can trim yourself up pretty well and fly almost hands off. I didn't relize how much I missed it till I went through the Instrument Examiners Course flying the TH-67. Then I started flying the UH-1 in my guard unit as well as 60's and relaized how much help the 60 gives you, especially during a precission approach.
Now thwe 160th bubbas have TA/TF which takes this one step further and can be used tactically.
GatdorDev are PJ and Tom still at the sim at Wheeler? I was there from 99-03.
Agreed. I was under the impression that the ECPs were there to move the stress to a predictable location, vice remove it.
Honestly, I have no idea. The last time I was there was spring 2005, and my interaction was limited. I got to play around w/ some stashes in the sim, but I had enough connections in Ops to still do my annual flights in the real aircraft. By the time I left, most guys were getting their instrument checks in the Wheeler sims. Mine was w/ the XO in the real goo and an AFCS that liked to program forward and then fail. I'm not sure who had the better deal.
gatordev,
Way after my time. I was at Wheeler back in 1999 to 2003. Goodtimes. I actually had a real deal lost commo on my last instrument ride in Hawaii. I was IMC over the Molakai VOR. A testament to the sweet radio package in the UH-60L.
Way after my time. I was at Wheeler back in 1999 to 2003. Goodtimes. I actually had a real deal lost commo on my last instrument ride in Hawaii. I was IMC over the Molakai VOR. A testament to the sweet radio package in the UH-60L.
I wouldn't do it very often, but sometimes I'd pick up Center going from Lanai back to Oahu. I usually went lost comms about 2 minutes later, but it would eventually come back. Don't think I would want to be lost comms, in the goo, and around those mountains.
Did you guys have an integrated UHF/VHF radio set? I can't remember, but I thought there was something funky about yours. Unless it was a real old one, ours had two radios that could do either.
Did you guys have an integrated UHF/VHF radio set? I can't remember, but I thought there was something funky about yours. Unless it was a real old one, ours had two radios that could do either.