The modest proposal....The USAF should consider bringing back the Jolly Green Giants in the form of the CH-53K for their Para-Rescue Mission.
If the pivot to the Pacific is real, and if over water rescue of aircrew, not to mention the nightmare scenario of a C-130 or other large transport going down in the water, then its time for something larger than a UH-60.
The issue for the Marine Corps is obvious. The CH-53K won't survive in this budget environment unless another service buys. Whether that's the USAF for the rescue mission or the US Navy for mine hunting and heavy lift, its going to need partners.
I've got a few buddies who are PJ's and friends in AFSOC, this would be a welcomed platform for sure! I spoke with a few people that were involved in the review of the 47's for csarx, they liked it. Surprisingly maneuverable for such a large helo. And power for days... The guys that fly the 60's, like them. They'd just like a little more room (cabin) to work in, and they're a little under-powered with all the extra shit the AF throws on them. Otherwise, the 60's are well liked. Having been in 53E's, I'm a fan, it's another surprisingly maneuverable large aircraft. And a decent sar & casevac platform.
ReplyDeleteThey'd be in competition with the MV-22. A few ppl inside afsoc are saying they can do the csar/maritime sar missions with the 22's. They'd probably argue that the MV-22 replaced the older Pavelows, and they've been there-done that... "bigger-higher-faster" the true AF way! I'm eager to see the 53K succeed.
yeah but AFSOC has a problem. the MV-22 puts down some tremendous rotor wash and i believe it was ruled out as a rescue platform just because of its performance in hover. either way though i believe big Air Force told AFSOC to pound sand and that the SAR mission would stay with Air Combat Command.
DeleteSpot on. I remember doing some CSAR exercises with marines flying -53s and thinking what an awesome platform that was in terms of payload and range. Your critic of the v-22 for CSAR is totally valid too... I mean, it would be great for rescue as long as they were getting someone in a wide open field at sea level...
DeleteSpot on. I remember doing some CSAR exercises with marines flying -53s and thinking what an awesome platform that was in terms of payload and range. Your critic of the v-22 for CSAR is totally valid too... I mean, it would be great for rescue as long as they were getting someone in a wide open field at sea level...
DeleteTrue, acc has the mission. The one's championing the 22 are within afsoc and acc. But they are, or were, making the argument for using it for the mission. I'd rather see the 53K. To me, it sounds like a great replacement for the aging fleet of 60's.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty confident that Sikorsky was just awarded the Combat Rescue Helo for a 60 variant.
ReplyDeleteThe Army's pleased with CH-47.
The Navy's decision will likely be tied to the COD replacement. If they go V-22 route, it could eliminate the 53's role in the Navy.
USMC might have this one on their own.
The post Cold War USAF helo decision was never about capability. The U.S. could sustain 3 new, smaller helos for the price of the big one. SOLD ! Today? Many USAF decisions are not about true combat capability.
ReplyDeleteIs the 53K sold overseas? There would be a few allied countries that would like that sort of lift capability.
ReplyDeleteOne of the few countries would be Germany.
DeleteGerman army once had more than 100 CH-53G. The youngest was built in 1975. Germany operates also small APC/AWC that fit right inside the CH-53: Wiesel I and Wiesel II.
I think the CH-47 would be a better and much cheaper solution for Germany.