- Reaction score
- 21,842
- Points
- 1,260
Yup, SOF will always have requirements for some items that aren't necessarily the best option outside that niche.
I was trying to be somewhat vague in the other posts about those roles.
Yup, SOF will always have requirements for some items that aren't necessarily the best option outside that niche.
I was trying to be somewhat vague in the other posts about those roles.
LiveFightMove
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 380
The Bell Helicopter FSR’s at my Squadron had this coaster and asked us if we could make a decal from it. Looks pretty cool. Thought I’d share.
Australia ditches MRH-90 in favor of U.S.-built Black Hawks
Australia will ditch its European-built MRH-90 Taipan helicopters in favor of U.S.-built Black Hawks.
verticalmag.com
One can dream.
- Reaction score
- 21,842
- Points
- 1,260
One would wonder why the Aussies dumped them so late game, and opted for the 60 now - rather than suffering for a year or two and waiting for FVL to find winner - and then either getting cut rate hawks - or the more capable FVL winner.Australia ditches MRH-90 in favor of U.S.-built Black Hawks
Australia will ditch its European-built MRH-90 Taipan helicopters in favor of U.S.-built Black Hawks.
One can dream.
As much as I like the Hawk - I wouldn't be cheering for Canada to dump the Griffon at this junction to buy 60's.
Better to see what comes out of the Bell/Sik FVL submissions IMHO
30, 20, even 10 years ago yeah it made sense to get 60's - now not so much.
- Reaction score
- 18,570
- Points
- 1,280
Back to what they know?
The ARA and RAN flew them prior to the MRH-90s, and still do now. The Army flies S-70 Black Hawks while the RAN flies SH-60R Seahawks.
- Reaction score
- 21,842
- Points
- 1,260
That makes it even more odd -- I know the Aussie SOAR ran 60's - but never interacted with their regular army - so I didn't know the history.
One really wonders why one would dump the Hawk for the 90 in the first place.
- Reaction score
- 18,570
- Points
- 1,280
From what I've read, the overarching idea was to replace them all with a common platform between the Army and Navy.
Guess how well that turned out.
- Reaction score
- 21,842
- Points
- 1,260
About as well as the Griffon
The S-70A is just the Export version of the 60, I'm surprised the Aussies didn't get the full US version - considering the S-70B was the export SeaHawk variant, and it looks like the Aussies had the actual Seahawks.
The mind boggling crap of export markets sigh.
About as well as the Griffon
The S-70A is just the Export version of the 60, I'm surprised the Aussies didn't get the full US version - considering the S-70B was the export SeaHawk variant, and it looks like the Aussies had the actual Seahawks.
The mind boggling crap of export markets sigh.
Slight correction S-70 is the Sikorsky model number. This is internal to the company and all their products have some S- designation. H-60 (ie UH-60, MH-60, HH-60 etc) is the US DoD Designation. Sometimes foreign operators use the S- model number sometimes the US DoD model. Another couple examples the Sikorsky Sea King is S-61 is the US DoD H-3; the Sikorsky S-80 is the US DoD H-53E etc..
A US Army UH-60A/L/M etc is referred to internally at Sikorsky as a S-70 variant.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 21,842
- Points
- 1,260
Agreed
I just found it odd that the Aussies referred to the Army Hawks as S-70A and their Navy Hawks as SH-60 SeaHawks - which led me to believe that they had been acquired differently.
The main difference being that "Commercial Export" versions can't have some integrated aspects (direct on bird weapon power etc.)
OceanBonfire
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 392
- Points
- 1,080
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,044
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 18,570
- Points
- 1,280
The better question is if it's better or worse than being in the field in MarchHow cold is it sitting in the door gunner position in a Griffon in March?
- Reaction score
- 21,942
- Points
- 1,360
Depending on how many of the three integral layers of fire-retardant goretex flying clothing the DG is wearing, I'd go with "quite bearable." Notice that the air force allows people to wear gloves with all sorts of different headgear...How cold is it sitting in the door gunner position in a Griffon in March?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,044
- Points
- 1,160
Depending on how many of the three integral layers of fire-retardant goretex flying clothing the DG is wearing, I'd go with "quite bearable." Notice that the air force allows people to wear gloves with all sorts of different headgear...
You fool! Look what you've done now
- Reaction score
- 16,964
- Points
- 1,010
As others have already said: it depends.How cold is it sitting in the door gunner position in a Griffon in March?
I have hung out in the backdoor of a helicopter for large portions of my career. Wearing the winter flying pants and jacket (even the green legacy stuff), it was tolerable. The weak point for me was hands because preferred to wear standard flying gloves for dexterity.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 8,269
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 16,964
- Points
- 1,010
I still have a set of those on issue, but I really need to return a bunch of stuff…
- Reaction score
- 18,570
- Points
- 1,280
I'd rather not have gloves/mitts on strings flying around near rotor wash, but that's just me.
Similar threads
