busdriver

Jacko is this is the article you were referring to? If so, Maj Patrick didn't fly it himself, he and his co-workers came up with some better questions to ask when evaluating a new helo.

stract, I didn't mean you. But that very same conversation was with another pilot in our unit. I don't know that it's even the least agile of the group. I haven't seen any EM diagrams for the Hook (doubt they exist) but I have talked to guys who've flown it and they didn't think it lacked agility. For-sure it's the heaviest of the group and will no doubt spend the most time on the approach. 40,000+ lbs is a lot of mass to bring to a halt. Krabs, the helo I would pick doesn't exist. I am partial to the X2 demonstrator, if Sikorsky could scale that bad boy up, I'd pick that. But that's WAY too much money for this competition. Of the three I think it's really between the 47 and the 101(71). I think the 92's spread between empty and max gross doesn't leave much room for the extra avionics/defensive systems/weapon systems/team/team gear(very heavy) without running into the same problem we have now, flying way to heavy, way to regularly and wearing out aircraft way too fast. To get around that problem Sikorsky has to do some major redesign to increase the max gross. For what it's worth, the 101(71) is going to require some redesign as well, as it was built to a different crash standard. (15g vertical vs 20) I think the 47 is getting grandfathered in since it's a legacy design, but I don't know for sure. I have to admit, when the 47 first got picked, I thought it was ridiculous, until I started to run some numbers and fill out a survey were we rank ordered what was important to us. (Basically a house of quality for you engineers) I finally came to my current opinion. I can't really decide between the 101(71) and 47 now without seeing the actual proposals. Basically most of our opinions are based on conjecture and gut feeling, with a little research. None of who will talk about it have seen the proposals, those that have can't.

Why do people continually claim the Chinook is the biggest turd in this competition? Some of these same people will in their next breath say that a new build MH-53 would be a good choice despite the fact that they are essentially the same size. I'm not saying it's perfect, none of the three choices are, but it's hardly a turd.

Gen Ryan (ret) doesn't agree with Mr Young: Ryan's reply to Young

My nerd meter just pegged. Very cool.

While strippers may be cool, it's def playing with fire given the bosses comments. Local band?

Just thought I'd add this: searching a car DOES NOT REQUIRE A SEARCH WARRANT, the fleeting nature of a car requires only probable cause. Will that presumption be brought into question in the following law suit? Of course. But the cops do not have to seek a warrant prior to searching your car after a traffic stop.

backseat, go to a local range that rents guns and try out a Glock and an XD. Whichever "feels" better to you is your answer. 9mm is a fine choice and won't leave you under gunned in any way. The arguments in caliber between 9mm, .40 or .45 are largely a red herring. ALL handgun rounds are crappy, get used to the fact that you will have to shoot a bad guy many times with a handgun, so pick something you can shoot rapidly and accurately. Practicing head-shots is a good thing.

Guess I should be known as the thread killer

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the ASE suite that is eventually developed and purchased. Not to mention the tactics used in the entire package. Complete conjecture and babbling. This is really Young's way of saying can the entire rescue community, cause we can just have the Ospreys do it when something happens. You mean aside from the opening days of Iraq and Afghanistan? What's recent? Is he advocating continuing the OAF tradition of AFSOC covering Air component PR? Plan on buying more Ospreys then, cause they don't have enough to do this job. So we should plan our future fleet based on being in Afghanistan forever? F-22?? JSF?? The Army doesn't do CSAR at all they have Medevac. The Marines train to a different tactic that is much closer to CSAR as the AF does it, but they have helos by default, and I imagine they plan to set a couple aside to recover their personnel. What assets does the CFACC have to set aside for recovery operations? Unless he plans on completely overhauling joint doctrine........ He needs to learn a little more about things before he opens his yap.

AFCAM should be about knowing you are under fire and continuing the mission. If you see someone wearing the AFCAM you know that person has stared down death and knows how that realization effects them, for better or worse. It basically says this person has been there and done that. Being on a base that gets mortared, NO. Being in a convoy that gets ambushed, YES. Flying into a DZ/LZ under fire, YES. Strafing a target while receiving return fire, YES. Defending against an IADS to include missile launches, YES. Shooting back against a no kidding ground threats, YES. Watching a MANPADS launch and reacting, YES. Being in a chow hall that receives a direct mortar hit and despite ringing ears and dizzy head, you help with caring for wounded, YES. This should be one of those things, that if you aren't 100% sure you qualify, you should be ashamed of putting yourself in for.

I know, just throwing out that that's about as close to a FDR as we get.

Hopefully, the replacement for KBR at Kandahar sucked from what I heard. KBR chow when I was at Kandahar in 06 was pretty damn good.

Not on HH-60s, we do have something similar to the HUD tapes on fighters, but you have to turn it on manually.

Air conditioning? Pansies.

Wasn't the Hog designed so that a gear up landing wouldn't cause much damage?

Freddie, another interesting read is "Shooting to Live" by Fairbairn and Sykes. They advocated the 1911 over larger calibers (like the .455 Webley) due to being a semi-auto. They felt that volume of fire was important, basically saying you should be shooting in bursts so that your handgun approximates a machine pistol. (paraphrased, but close to their words)

I just finished reading the FBI's handgun wounding paper. ( yes I know I should have read it a long time ago ) What I found interesting was that I drew a different conclusion about caliber selection than M2. He rightly found that a .45 is better than a 9mm or .40 in a single shot scenario. I got out of that report that all handgun rounds are so pathetic that the real answer is multiple hits. What I decided was that with my 9mm, I get more shots faster and more accurately.

Based on the timeline of when it will "replace" the A-10, I'm inclined to think it isn't. The A-10 is simply going to go away and the Air Force will finally be rid of the hated Hog. <-Cynic

I can only assume this was one of the tanker crews near where we were landing: Assumed comment: "I could fly a helo, looks like fun." Actual comment on ground: "Yeah I'd be fun for a few months, but can you imagine flying that thing in the desert? All the heat and sand, flying around at 500 feet, FUUUCK YOU, I want to be at 25 thousand feet."

As mentioned above, the Marines need the B model to operate off their little ships. As to the JSF replacing the Hog, good luck performing the Sandy mission. JSF as Sandy basically means Rescue must self escort.

it's officially time to move the damn CAOC back to the states. Who's up for a 365 to Tampa?

you guys don't have a NPA tube in your IFAK?

Caveman: No one with a half a brain would stand toe to toe with us now is only because we pose a credible threat. If we do not continue to advance we will pose less and less a threat, until the incentive to shut up and color won't be there anymore. On the other hand, I agree that most of the wars we will fight in the future will not be full up industrial scale conventional conflicts and we need to focus some attention on small unconventional wars. As to the cost of the F-22 and stealth. I don't really think the two are as directly connected as some people imply. A modern fighter with all the avionics of the Raptor would cost very close to what the Raptor costs. The basic shape hasn't changed much since the prototype, so I'm led to believe that the stealth aspect is a pretty known commodity, the avionics and software development is what I would think costs so damn much. But I don't really know, I'm just speculating. EDIT: for grammar

I hadn't noticed any difference in bolt size. I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about re: bolt bounce. A description would help. I do know that the piston guns have a problem with the BCG tilting due to the moment created by the piston on the "gas key." HK solved it by adding pads to the aft lower end of the bolt carrier.