Blackhawk's replacement

[vlavalle]

WGARA?

Yes, I saw Blackhawk, clicked on it, and laughed at myself for assuming it was a different one than I thought. And I went forward and contributed.

It's okay. We can discuss anything we want here.

This is a a fun thread. No reason to get our depends in a wad.

Great response!

 

[Hvymax]

What exactly would you suggest?

More mission focused easier to maintain platforms. The whole tilt wing has proven almost impossible to make functional and unbelievably expensive to maintain. Better use of mission specific platforms would save money and enhance readiness. Sending in helicopters with ground support escorts would be safer for everyone involved. Everyone could focus on their job instead of everyone trying to do 10 things. A few passes by the planes to soften an LZ etc .

 

[Hvymax]

Look at the pre F4 fighters. They were literally missiles with a stick. Small light and fast. We had the P category for more Fighter Bomber missions etc. Look at the farce that the Littoral fighting ships turned into. We need to get back to KISS.

 

[gjgalligan]

[H1]Blackhawk's replacement[/H1]

When I first saw this thread title I thought Ruger was discontinuing the Blackhawk and was replacing it with a new model.
I mean after all this is a Ruger forum.

 

[caryc]

[H1]Blackhawk's replacement[/H1]

When I first saw this thread title I thought Ruger was discontinuing the Blackhawk and was replacing it with a new model.
I mean after all this is a Ruger forum.

AAAWWWWWW you poor baby. I hope my post didn't almost give you a heart attack.

 

[Johnny-Baseball]

Well, I am informed that the Army wants a helicopter that will (a) carry the same, slightly greater, payload than the UH-60, (b) have greater range than the UH-60, and (c) have higher airspeed than UH-60. Both competitors (Bell and Sikorsky) met those three requirements.

Why the greater speed and range, you say? Artillery. The range of the UH-60 means it must be flown from a base that is within the range of the bad guys' current artillery batteries. Greater range = safer distance from bad guys' artillery. Greater speed is, I think, obvious.

The UH-60's maximum airspeed is at about the maximum achievable airspeed for a traditional single-rotor helicopter (i.e., a dual-rotor helicopter - the MH-47 Chinook, for example - can fly faster but those twin rotors require a larger landing zone - not good).

Remember, the Army wants the new helicopter primarily for Special Ops and similar missions - meaning it's for the 160th SOAR plus, perhaps, some flight companies within Airborne Combat Aviation Battalions (e.g., 101st Airborne and 82nd Airborne) who frequently support Spec Ops missions (e.g., Rangers, or airborne units).

The "pickup truck" Blackhawks will NOT soon be phased out - too expensive to do so, and no mandate for an improved performance envelope.

You have my $0.02 worth.

 

[caryc]

Look at the pre F4 fighters. They were literally missiles with a stick. Small light and fast. We had the P category for more Fighter Bomber missions etc. Look at the farce that the Littoral fighting ships turned into. We need to get back to KISS.

At one of the aircraft job shops where I worked, the owner had lots of spare aircraft parts in his junk yard. He also had a whole F86. It was complete except for one thing...it had no engine. I remember standing in front of the thing and it had one big hole from it's nose to it's tail. I basically got the thought that the pilot was just riding on top of a jet engine.

 

[Jeepnik]

Look at the pre F4 fighters. They were literally missiles with a stick. Small light and fast. We had the P category for more Fighter Bomber missions etc. Look at the farce that the Littoral fighting ships turned into. We need to get back to KISS.

Obviously you’ve never been up close and personal with several of the century series. The F-102, F-105 and F-106 were not small. And every time someone develops a pure fighter, think F-16, it gets turned into a bomb truck.

 

[Hvymax]

Obviously you’ve never been up close and personal with several of the century series. The F-102, F-105 and F-106 were not small. And every time someone develops a pure fighter, think F-16, it gets turned into a bomb truck.

My point exactly. A fighter should have enough armament to engage a half dozen or so other planes. A dozen AA would cover it at Mach2+. Air to ground A10 or similar and then half as many billion dollar Swiss Army Knives with wings. Helicopters with proper escorts etc. Ground versions of the tail hook and truck mounted launchers could get planes in the air with minimal airstrip requirements.