11 thoughts on “World’s Fastest Helicopter, Could This Be In the CG’s Future?”
Nah, take a look at the Cormorant, Canadian Coast Guard’s bird. Three engines, great range, two rescue winches, lots of room to work on survivors and did I say three engines to insure continued flight over cold nasty water?
Our current helicopters are a great mix of speed, endurance, size, and low cost. Since the Navy is moving completely to the SH-60 airframe (replacing last of the 46’s and 53’s) it makes the most sense just to stick with the supportable airframe. We already learned our lessons, just get behind the Navy and buy variants of whatever the Navy buys. It probably just makes more sense to move all of our helo’s to the MH-60’s. The only difficulty is putting the collapsible tail rotor back on so they will fit in the WMSL’s hangar and making sure the OPC and ice breaker replacements can handle the 60’s. There is no need for two airframes, in the long run it just costs more.
Both H-60s and H-65s still have a lot of life in them. Think it is going to be a while before we see a production version of this technology. Some day I think we will have the combination of fixed wing speed and range and rotary wing vertical take-off and hover. For now that only comes with the V-22, but I doubt if being under it’s down wash would be good. I’ve never seen one with a hoist.
Chuck,
Do you ever think the US Coast Guard will ever get their hands on the V-22
V-22s are relatively large and expensive to operate. They have actually proven to be relatively safe compared to other rotary wing aircraft. Boeing tried to interest the Coast Guard in the smaller tilt rotor they were trying to make commercially viable, but it never came together.
Compared to the new fixed wing, the HC-144, the MV-22 may look to be similar sized, but its empty weight and gross weight are much higher. the engines have more than three times the horsepower, so the probably also have much higher fuel consumption and it doesn’t have the range of the HC-144.
The idea of combining the search aircraft and the rescue aircraft is very appealing, particularly when you have those medivacs far at sea, but doesn’t happen that often. Plus supporting that much weight in a hover creates one heck of a downdraft.
Someday I think we will have that long range, relatively fast aircraft that can also hover, but it probably will be something smaller than an MV-22.
I think that 250 knots will only provide smaller pieces to pick up when it loses it situational awareness and impacts the ground.
That’s the one Chuck. Sure would take some of the angst out of a long overwater flight in the 17th and 13th. The guys in New England are so tough they laugh at cold water…so please Santa, Cormorants for Sitka, Kodiak, PAAS and Astoria. I can remember the relief we felt when getting the HH52’s with turbine engines, instead of the radials the HO4S had. Aircrews really do contemplate risk, lets give them the best and safest equipment we can. Similar sentiments have been sent to my congresscritters.
I really don’t see any near term changes to the helicopter fleet. The HH-65s have all been recently re-engined and the H-60s are newer and they are also being refurbished to the MH-60T standard. http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/mrr/projectdescription.asp
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Nah, take a look at the Cormorant, Canadian Coast Guard’s bird. Three engines, great range, two rescue winches, lots of room to work on survivors and did I say three engines to insure continued flight over cold nasty water?
Our current helicopters are a great mix of speed, endurance, size, and low cost. Since the Navy is moving completely to the SH-60 airframe (replacing last of the 46’s and 53’s) it makes the most sense just to stick with the supportable airframe. We already learned our lessons, just get behind the Navy and buy variants of whatever the Navy buys. It probably just makes more sense to move all of our helo’s to the MH-60’s. The only difficulty is putting the collapsible tail rotor back on so they will fit in the WMSL’s hangar and making sure the OPC and ice breaker replacements can handle the 60’s. There is no need for two airframes, in the long run it just costs more.
Both H-60s and H-65s still have a lot of life in them. Think it is going to be a while before we see a production version of this technology. Some day I think we will have the combination of fixed wing speed and range and rotary wing vertical take-off and hover. For now that only comes with the V-22, but I doubt if being under it’s down wash would be good. I’ve never seen one with a hoist.
Chuck,
Do you ever think the US Coast Guard will ever get their hands on the V-22
V-22s are relatively large and expensive to operate. They have actually proven to be relatively safe compared to other rotary wing aircraft. Boeing tried to interest the Coast Guard in the smaller tilt rotor they were trying to make commercially viable, but it never came together.
Compared to the new fixed wing, the HC-144, the MV-22 may look to be similar sized, but its empty weight and gross weight are much higher. the engines have more than three times the horsepower, so the probably also have much higher fuel consumption and it doesn’t have the range of the HC-144.
The idea of combining the search aircraft and the rescue aircraft is very appealing, particularly when you have those medivacs far at sea, but doesn’t happen that often. Plus supporting that much weight in a hover creates one heck of a downdraft.
Someday I think we will have that long range, relatively fast aircraft that can also hover, but it probably will be something smaller than an MV-22.
I think that 250 knots will only provide smaller pieces to pick up when it loses it situational awareness and impacts the ground.
Bill, Good to see you are still just a cockeyed optimist.
CGC Cormorant? do you mean Cyclone?:
http://www.casr.ca/bg-helo-ch148-cyclone.htm
No, here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_CH-149_Cormorant
That’s the one Chuck. Sure would take some of the angst out of a long overwater flight in the 17th and 13th. The guys in New England are so tough they laugh at cold water…so please Santa, Cormorants for Sitka, Kodiak, PAAS and Astoria. I can remember the relief we felt when getting the HH52’s with turbine engines, instead of the radials the HO4S had. Aircrews really do contemplate risk, lets give them the best and safest equipment we can. Similar sentiments have been sent to my congresscritters.
It’s also know as the AgustaWestland AW101 and is sometimes called a “Merlin”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_AW101. It was the candidate to replace “Marine One”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VH-71_Kestrel
I really don’t see any near term changes to the helicopter fleet. The HH-65s have all been recently re-engined and the H-60s are newer and they are also being refurbished to the MH-60T standard. http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/mrr/projectdescription.asp