Navy Helo's flipped over by storm
- Thread starter donjohnston
- Start date
Morgan3820
En-Route
I thought that they retired the MH-53
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nope. Still going.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Wild thing about this was I was at work in what we call the ‘trailer park’ (portable classrooms with the shiphandling sims) on base right nearby when it hit.
Trailers were just fine. -53s, not so much!
Stupid base Emergency Operations Center weather warning announcement went off after it hit.
Trailers were just fine. -53s, not so much!
Stupid base Emergency Operations Center weather warning announcement went off after it hit.
Or in this case, "was still..."
The Air Force retired all of theirs.
midwestpa24
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2016
- Messages
- 4,995
- Display Name
Display name:
midwestpa24
The Marines are just now taking delivery of their new -53K models, a newer, bigger, more powerful version.
donjohnston
Pattern Altitude
What were they replaced with?
CV-22 took over most of the Pave Low’s mission sets , despite not having all the same capabilities.
Zeldman
Touchdown! Greaser!
donjohnston
Pattern Altitude
Just did some googling. Looks like the only thing the Osprey does better is go faster. And the CH-53 has about 3 times the payload. Other than that, they have fairly similar specs.
Also found out the Osprey is classified as Powered Lift. I had not given much thought to the fixed wing vs. rotary wing classification.
There were valid and heated arguments in the AF about capability gaps between the CV-22 and MV-53. Let’s just say the Air Force was content to let the 160th SOAR and the MH-47 do the things that the Air Force could no longer do when when the MH-53s were retired.
Timbeck2
Final Approach
This causes issues for controllers as well as it is a gray area. There has been controversy for years as to what the Osprey is treated as for landing separation. One camp says treat it like a fixed wing and the other (which I'm in) says to treat it like a rotor craft.
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,500
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
Hopefully they come with tie-downs.
GaryM
Pattern Altitude
I'd have thought the military would be using a formula stating that for fixed wing logging purposes the pilot must multiply actual time by the cosine of the angle of the rotors above horizontal, while rotary wing time is multiplied by the sine of that angle. Or something.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,255
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
I think their flight profile on landing is closest to a helicopter so I agree, Cat I fits. Also think they could easily do visual vs distance if they’re succeeding the other aircraft. They can decel and hover as necessary so visual wouldn’t be an easy application for an Osprey.
However, I’ve always thought the 3,000 ft behind a helicopter should be changed to 6,000 ft. They take too long to exit and something like a small Cat I airplane behind an MH-53 or MV-22 is going to get rocked with wake at 3,000 ft. Fortunately those types of aircraft mixing it up on the same runway is rare.
Pinecone
En-Route
Osprey, another solution looking for a problem.
Power Lift Category came about from the Osprey and the Harrier.
Not sure why there had be a civilian Category for a group of aircraft that are only flown in the military by military pilots under military rules.
donjohnston
Pattern Altitude
The document I found said that the Osprey test pilot was the first pilot with a Powered Lift rating. The harriers predate the V-22 by about 30 years.
Flymy47
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2012
- Messages
- 227
- Display Name
Display name:
Flymy47
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,255
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Speed and range are pretty important attributes for CSAR. Payload, not so much. Even with the upgraded engines though the Osprey will always lack HOGE performance. 28 lb / sqft is hard to overcome.
https://hushkit.net/2020/09/29/v-22-osprey-a-triumph-of-money-over-common-sense/