Army wants new automatic sling load system for cargo helicopters

First, there never was much of a danger to begin with. In rare cases Chinooks had guys get shocked but they didn't use the static wand. In Black Hawks it is recommended but we never used it and never once did I have someone get shocked.

Second, you can always do a self hook up and land next to the load. Crew chief gets out, grabs the clevis, slides underneath the aircraft and hooks it up. If it just so happens to be the rare case of an LZ that doesn't support a landing, then the crew chief can reach down with a shepards hook, snag the clevis and pull it up to attach to the aircraft load beam.

Third, unless you're slinging heavy equipment, real world ops are drifting away from sling loads. It faster and safer to take supplies internally to a mountain site than having to place a load down in a cargo net. Also if it's special ops or anyone traveling light, well now they have an expensive and heavy cargo net to tote around.

Finally, the trend in sling loads is going in the unmanned direction anyhow. No one wants to have the added risk on their hands of having a crew hovering at high altitude in a combat zone. You're a sitting duck for sniper fire. This new sling system may work for heavy equipment or vehicles but there is no reason to reinvent the wheel when there was no real danger to ground crew to begin with. Another waste of money for the Army. They need newer more advanced aircraft like the Osprey or the Raider, not minor improvements to existing aircraft.
 
With a q-tip you don't even need a static wand.

you can always do a self hook up and land next to the load. Crew chief gets out, grabs the clevis, slides underneath the aircraft and hooks it up. If it just so happens to be the rare case of an LZ that doesn't support a landing, then the crew chief can reach down with a shepards hook, snag the clevis and pull it up to attach to the aircraft load beam.

We currently do this. Although we actually have two hooks: One in the hell hole, and another at the end of a 10-foot long 10k strap, so we really just drag the "bottom" hook to the clevis and don't even have to get under the helicopter at all. Short version of a longline, I suppose.

In my opinion, slings are only worthwhile in two cases...the size or shape of the load prohibits internal loading, or you're seriously trying to reduce time on the HLZ.

Edit: Removed my example. But my point was that depending on the composition of the load, it can be faster to slingload versus internal. Slinging is great, but only in a specific set of circumstances...and I agree that those circumstances appear less and less often.

But back on topic: This really strike me as a solution to a problem that does not exist, at least not a systemic problem. But then again, maybe the ultimate purpose is to allow drone helos to hookup to loads without ground crew doing the hooking.

The Army needs Mi-17s :D
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Mi-17s with a glass cockpit right!:D

If the customer requires a vehicle or a lot of crap in one place then a sling loads works. I found working in the mountains of Afghanistan they wanted a variety goods at different places. We could load up some 500 lb "speed balls" in the back and have guys push them out onto the LZ. That way you can carry specific items to specific operators. This comes in handy for areas that aren't big enough for a sling load. I also like the maneuverability of not having a load below me in a potential hot LZ. Of course 1 and 2 wheel landings at 8,000 ft in the middle of summer with 35 kt winds is always fun!:wink2:
 
Yeah, Mi-17s with a glass cockpit right!:D

Well, actually... :wink2:

And yeah, speedballs are the bomb, literally and figuratively!

My example were things like a couple hundred unbundled metal fence posts. :no:

Oh, and bundles of concertina wire...we've carried so much of it that I would swear there is going to be a shortage of the stuff!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top