Re: Slow Helos in Iraq


"Guy Alcala" <g_alcala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:431676E1.C74B46@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Paul wrote:
>
>> <dumpster4@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:1125466627.549341.274010@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> <snip>
>
>> > How does the hot/high performance of the CH-46 compare to its
>> > replacement,
>> > the V-22?
>> >
>>
>> I can't compare the two exactly, since I have no experience or knowledge
>> of
>> how the V-22 performs in high / hot conditions. But I would imagine this
>> has been addressed by the USMC. I know the V-22 has single engine
>> capability, wiehter it can handle high - hot conditions is something
>> someone
>> else will have to answer.
>>
>> I do have knowledge of the CH-46E's performance in high / Hot condtions
>> from
>> my active duty time.
>>
>> The CH-46 when flying in 40+ C conditions at 29 Palms USMC base in the
>> California desert, would lose so much of their lift capability that many
>> times troop lift missions were passed off to the Light helicopter
>> squadrons
>> flying the UH-1N. On a hot day a Huey could haul 8 to 10 troops, where
>> as a
>> CH-46 could haul maybe five, if they were lucky. I remember the HMM
>> squadrons only flying missions in the morning or late in the day/night
>> for
>> just that reason. Mid- day missions when the temp was high had to be
>> flown
>> by CH-53's or UH-1N's.
>>
>> In Afghanistan the CH-46's were unable to perform any kind of decent
>> lifting
>> capability to any High altitude area's,
>> (This was told to me by a fellow crewchief from the 160th SOAR).
>
> The MV-22's spec missions require HOGE T/Os and landings at SL/39.44 deg.
> C (103 deg. F) and/or
> 3,000 ft. MSL/33.05 deg. C (91.5 deg. F), using 95% TRP. I have a HOGE
> performance chart for
> it, but it dates from several years ago and the upper altitude limit,
> 10,000 ft. PA, may be a
> flight test envelope limit applying at the time rather than an ultimate
> limit. Be that as it
> may, at 10,000 ft. PA the max. HOGE weight is only 38,600 lb., vice an
> empty weight of ca.
> 33,200 lb. or so: OWE is probably a couple of thousand higher. It's
> certainly an improvement
> on the geriatric CH-46s, but (as is to be expected) it can't compete in
> the hover against a
> helo with anything approaching similar power. I'd imagine the Marines
> don't expect to do too
> much fighting at/above 5,000 ft. I think (but am not sure) that the US
> military has never
> before had to fight as high as has sometimes been necessary in
> Afghanistan.
>
> Guy
>
>
>
So we can extrapolate that the MV-22 would be likely to be able to haul
something like a 5000lb load
at or slightly above 10,000 ft. Which is about half what a CH-47 or CH-53
can haul under the same
conditions. Which is still a hell of alot more than a CH-46 ever could do...
so it's an improvement.

Yes, I can't imagine anyone thinking it would ever be necessary to insert
troops at the 10,000+ foot SL.
I guess we don't always pick our enemies or our battlegrounds.

Paul


.

Relevant Pages