What's the fastest helicopter in the U.S. Army's inventory? - Page 2

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What's the fastest helicopter in the U.S. Army's inventory? (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:11:59 AM EDT

[#1]

I think it is the sh*t hook. I remember hearing that quite a bit when I was in.

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:13:33 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I am sure you know this, but published data on military vehicles is never correct... maybe close but not correct.

I am very aware of this The list I found was about the closest I've seen

I was a Naval Aircrewman in Sea Stallions for 18 months

Used to love getting mail from you guys out of Sigonella.

Your Welcome

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:22:01 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Does the army fly 53's? Or does the AF do the heavy lift for them?

No and No. There's nothing the Army owns that it wants to bother lifting that can't be lifted by a CH-47. The CH-53 can lift more, but everything else the Army owns weighs more than either aircraft can actually lift. So the CH-47 can lift all the lighter stuff (like a 5-ton truck or a 155mm gun), and neither aircraft can lift the heaiver stuff (like an M-1 tank).

The Army got rid of it's CH-54's in the 80's when it came out with the CH-47D. The "D" gave us enough lift power to pick up anything that was needed, and the CH-54's were getting old and expensive to support.

On Special Ops missions, there is an advantage to using the CH-53 on some hops because it has a larger cabin space (same cross secton as a C-130). The USAF Special Ops Wing provides MH-53 support for SOCOM for such uses.

Ross

Believe it or not the Skycrane (CH-54) was still in use in 1992 in the desert of California before being retired. I'm sure it was probably the Army's last one.

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:24:12 AM EDT

[#4]

CH47

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:28:22 AM EDT

[#5]

Eh, all slow compared to a mere Beech Baron

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:34:49 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
What sqaudron operates the Russian Helo's that are used in the US Forces?

They are 'in' our inventory? Some of those huge flying HINDS must be fast.

99% of those dudes that operate those helos are civilians.

The Hoplite is fun, really fun. No clue how fast it goes though.

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:37:27 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Eh, all slow compared to a mere Beech Baron

Yes, comparing the top speed of various helos is like comparing the accuracy of various pocket-pistols; it's not their purpose of existance.

I've always been enamored with the -53E. The idea of three large turboshafts just speaks to me.

Posted: 7/28/2005 10:45:07 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
What sqaudron operates the Russian Helo's that are used in the US Forces?

They are 'in' our inventory? Some of those huge flying HINDS must be fast.

99% of those dudes that operate those helos are civilians.

The Hoplite is fun, really fun. No clue how fast it goes though.

Many yearts ago, when I was stationed at Ft. Bliss, I had the pleasure of some intimate exposure with that fleet. Those are indeed some perty birds. The Hokum made the biggest impression on me, though - the rotor design was so much cooler in person thanin photos.

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:07:00 AM EDT

[#9]

Those Shithooks sure could take ALOT of fuel! Throw in a few Bawks,and its back to the fuel depot for the HEMITT!(manditory beer stop for the section chief also). 2500 gal. don't last too long!

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:13:24 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Yep, CH-47 Chinook, know this side of the Pond as the 'Wokka Wokka'

ANdy

Or as known by the RAF as the Contra Rotating Death Banana

Westland's Lynx still holds the world sspeed record though

Mark

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:23:28 AM EDT

[#11]

Everyone knows the fastest helo is AIRWOLF!!!!!!!

R

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:25:15 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Everyone knows the fastest helo is AIRWOLF!!!!!!!

R

Finally!
The Daphon is the fastest, but its a Coastie bird, not Army.

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:27:37 AM EDT

[#13]

Army shoulda ordered the Cheyenne!!!!

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:36:06 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Yep, CH-47 Chinook, know this side of the Pond as the 'Wokka Wokka'

ANdy

Or as known by the RAF as the Contra Rotating Death Banana

Westland's Lynx still holds the world sspeed record though

Mark

Yeah, but stripped down and upgraded to make the required runs.
That version will never see any service but the Guinness book.

Posted: 7/28/2005 11:42:47 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Does the army fly 53's? Or does the AF do the heavy lift for them?

No and No. There's nothing the Army owns that it wants to bother lifting that can't be lifted by a CH-47. The CH-53 can lift more, but everything else the Army owns weighs more than either aircraft can actually lift. So the CH-47 can lift all the lighter stuff (like a 5-ton truck or a 155mm gun), and neither aircraft can lift the heaiver stuff (like an M-1 tank).

The Army got rid of it's CH-54's in the 80's when it came out with the CH-47D. The "D" gave us enough lift power to pick up anything that was needed, and the CH-54's were getting old and expensive to support.

On Special Ops missions, there is an advantage to using the CH-53 on some hops because it has a larger cabin space (same cross secton as a C-130). The USAF Special Ops Wing provides MH-53 support for SOCOM for such uses.

Ross

Believe it or not the Skycrane (CH-54) was still in use in 1992 in the desert of California before being retired. I'm sure it was probably the Army's last one.

The last time that I saw a CH-54 was in '88 or '89 in Fairbanks, Alaska. They were being used by the National Guard to attempt to "rescue" some whales that were trapped by ice. They would store them in our hangar overnight or when they needed maintenance.

They eventually moved on after a week or so and I have never seen one since.

Posted: 7/28/2005 12:04:04 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

The last time that I saw a CH-54 was in '88 or '89 in Fairbanks, Alaska. They were being used by the National Guard to attempt to "rescue" some whales that were trapped by ice. They would store them in our hangar overnight or when they needed maintenance.

They eventually moved on after a week or so and I have never seen one since.

CT Army National Guard had a unit of CH-54Bs at least as late as 1992. That unit shared the same hanger facilities as my unit's UH-1s. After that I left the state and don't know when they switched over to CH-47s.

Posted: 7/28/2005 3:18:39 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Yes Let's listen to what a contractor has to say regarding his/her product compared to the others... that's reliable... NOT!

USMC - when you need to crash an Osprey!

Shit Smith Inc. has this to say regarding their Shit Rev 2, "Our shit is the Best! Poo Poo Inc, only comes in 2nd!"

Poo Poo Inc, says "Our Doo Doo X-2 is better than Shit Rev 2"

.Gov, "Neither product passes MIL-L-5H1TS, but since Doo Doo X-2 is lower in price, we're going to buy that"

And why don't you go fuck yourself, asshole.

Posted: 7/28/2005 3:26:55 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Does the army fly 53's? Or does the AF do the heavy lift for them?

No and No. There's nothing the Army owns that it wants to bother lifting that can't be lifted by a CH-47. The CH-53 can lift more, but everything else the Army owns weighs more than either aircraft can actually lift. So the CH-47 can lift all the lighter stuff (like a 5-ton truck or a 155mm gun), and neither aircraft can lift the heaiver stuff (like an M-1 tank).

The Army got rid of it's CH-54's in the 80's when it came out with the CH-47D. The "D" gave us enough lift power to pick up anything that was needed, and the CH-54's were getting old and expensive to support.

On Special Ops missions, there is an advantage to using the CH-53 on some hops because it has a larger cabin space (same cross secton as a C-130). The USAF Special Ops Wing provides MH-53 support for SOCOM for such uses.

Ross

Believe it or not the Skycrane (CH-54) was still in use in 1992 in the desert of California before being retired. I'm sure it was probably the Army's last one.

The last time that I saw a CH-54 was in '88 or '89 in Fairbanks, Alaska. They were being used by the National Guard to attempt to "rescue" some whales that were trapped by ice. They would store them in our hangar overnight or when they needed maintenance.

They eventually moved on after a week or so and I have never seen one since.

Erickson Aircrane used thes for a lot of logging operation for a while, dunno if they still do,

Posted: 7/28/2005 3:41:24 PM EDT

[#19]

Evergreen had a Skycrane in Elko Nevada fighting fires last week as well as an unmarked Skycrane.
SO, at least two are still flying. They sure are "slow" when they take off and manuever.

Posted: 7/28/2005 4:22:59 PM EDT

[#20]

the old G-model cobra was like a flying roadster. short on frills, small and built for speed. you could really haul some ass in a G-model, or even an S model if it had all the weapons stripped off of it.

Posted: 7/28/2005 4:47:49 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Evergreen had a Skycrane in Elko Nevada fighting fires last week as well as an unmarked Skycrane.
SO, at least two are still flying. They sure are "slow" when they take off and manuever.

I hired one back in 1999 to put four AC units on a building in Athens, GA.
Pretty cool.

Posted: 7/28/2005 4:53:24 PM EDT

[#22]

i think it is the chinook

Posted: 7/28/2005 5:15:58 PM EDT

[#23]

... The US Army actually funded (10) prototype AH-56A Cheyenne helicopters back in the 70's. They had a VnE of more than 200MPH. Unfortunately the program was terminated in August of 1972.

Posted: 7/29/2005 3:55:23 AM EDT

[#24]

Erickson Aircrane used thes for a lot of logging operation for a while, dunno if they still do,

When Skycrane parts got hard to find, Erickson bought the rights to build the aircraft from Sikorsky. They can actually build any part they need, and even produce new Skycranes.

The engines were turbojets out of a fighter that had power recovery secitons added to the rear of them to provide the shaft drive.

I thought the whole thing with the people pod was cool, as was the rearward facing control station. They were the only Army helicopter with an actual crane, not just a hook.

Posted: 7/29/2005 3:58:27 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
CH-47 Chinook

Yep, CH-47 Chinook, know this side of the Pond as the 'Wokka Wokka'… very fast, and flown from Royal Navy Carriers and Assault Ships in the Heavy Assault role…

…something the US Navy has yet to master.

ANdy

What do you think we have you for?

Sgatr15

Posted: 7/29/2005 4:03:25 AM EDT

[#26]

CH-53 on some hops because it has a larger cabin space (same cross secton as a C-130

Um, no.

Posted: 7/29/2005 4:06:56 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
CH-47 Chinook

Yep, CH-47 Chinook, know this side of the Pond as the 'Wokka Wokka'… very fast, and flown from Royal Navy Carriers and Assault Ships in the Heavy Assault role…

…something the US Navy has yet to master.

ANdy

Why do they need -47s when the USMC have CH-53s?

Hell even the USAF have master -53s.

Posted: 7/29/2005 4:10:11 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
the old G-model cobra was like a flying roadster. short on frills, small and built for speed. you could really haul some ass in a G-model, or even an S model if it had all the weapons stripped off of it.

The "G" was easily the best flying Cobra. The "S"s were kinda heavy, even with the 703. A stripped mod-S with 747 blades would cook along no doubt, but once we got to the fully modernized, with the C-nite thermal (Tow sight out of a Bradley crammed in front) and all the rest of the crap, they were a bit heavy.

Posted: 7/29/2005 4:11:40 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
CH-53 on some hops because it has a larger cabin space (same cross secton as a C-130

Um, no.

Um, no it's not a larger cabin space or Um, no it's not the same cross section as a C-130 (i.e. height and width)?

Posted: 7/29/2005 4:39:22 AM EDT

[#30]

Both. A Herk is much larger than a 53.

Hummers can fit in a Herk. They can not in a 53.

MH-6's broken down can fit in a Herk along with 58's.

A Herk's cargo space is roughly 123 inches wide at it's widest ( not near the wheel well) and almost 41 feet long (non stretched models).

A 53 is only about 25-27 feet at it's tallest, a Herk is 38.

The fuse width of a Herk is over 14 feet wide.

Edited for spelling

and pic

Impressive photo when you think about what is going on...

Posted: 7/29/2005 5:02:27 AM EDT

[#31]

Sure enough I checked the dimesions:
CH-47 and CH-53 both are about 90Wx78H

C-130 cargo space is about 10ft (your 123inches) x 9ft (108inches) high

I stand corrected, I must have been thinking about the Caribou or something.

Posted: 7/29/2005 5:19:15 AM EDT

[#32]

I got a leg up on you man, used to fly center seat

Posted: 7/29/2005 5:41:37 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
I got a leg up on you man, used to fly center seat

I flew small stuff (mostly Hueys), and in all my years in the Army I'd actually never been in a C-130! We either flew ourselves wherever, or rode in the top shelf of the C-5 that had our aircraft in it.

Posted: 7/29/2005 2:08:24 PM EDT

[#34]

I flew small stuff (mostly Hueys), and in all my years in the Army I'd actually never been in a C-130! We either flew ourselves wherever, or rode in the top shelf of the C-5 that had our aircraft in it.

Ross, BTDT, except one time. We had to break down some Medivac UH1-V's (?) that were attached to us. Then we put them in a C-141.That was a major PITA. I was the division AVIM PC officer/huey test pilot at the time. I kept getting asked by the chain of command of the supported unit why it took so long for us to rebuild and test fly the C 141 transported birds vs the C-5 transported birds.

BTW, on that deployment, the C-5 that I was riding in "crash landed". The impact desroyed all the Hueys and one Cobra on board. We were all ok, though. The C-5 was kinda trashed, too (ripped one or two sets of the main landing gear completly off and left them about 1/4 mile prior to the beginning of the runway.The fusalage had some major damage, too).

Posted: 7/30/2005 7:26:39 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Impressive photo when you think about what is going on...

... Very!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What's the fastest helicopter in the U.S. Army's inventory? (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us