CH-53K likely will fall short of external payload requirement

The program department for the CH-53K is saying that the aircraft likely will fall about 2,000 pounds short of the external lifting requirements. The target is 30,000 pounds over 110 nm unrefueled. The minimum they'll accept is 27,000 pounds over the same range. An early analysis of the aircraft puts it somewhere between the two for lifting capacity.

So far the aircraft has lifted just short of 11,000 pounds externally. As the program goes on, and the program office has a better idea what the actual lifting capacity is, changes, if any, will be decided upon and made.

The US Marine Corps ideally wants its new Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion to carry 13.6t (30,000lb) externally over 110nm (204km) unrefueled, but early analysis indicates that it will fall approximately 907kg short of that “objective” key performance requirement.

The minimum target is 12.2t (27,000lb) over 110nm in high, hot environments, which US Naval Air Systems Command officials expect the in-development aircraft to comfortably achieve. However, CH-53K integrated product team deputy Col John Neville says it is too early to tell exactly what external load target the CH-53K will meet or what programmatic steps the NAVAIR might take to bump up the aircraft’s performance to the objective requirement.

“From an acquisition and requirements standpoint, that’s the trade space,” Neville said during a teleconference briefing at the 72nd annual American Helicopter Society (AHS) International meeting in West Palm Beach, Florida on 19 May. “The engines are extremely powerful, but one of the things we do know is right now we’re probably somewhere in-between those two values [of 27,000lb and 30,000lb].

www.flightglobal.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Why not just remove the body and call it an S-64?😊
If lifting is its business, duel Pratt&Whitney engines should do 💪

S-64 has a max take off weight of 42k lbs💪

Weak spot in transmission,engine torque or blade design?

a reply to: Blackfinger

Probably either torque or the new gearbox.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Blackfinger

Probably either torque or the new gearbox.

It may as simple as adding more washout if not torque limited.

a reply to: Bigburgh

It also weighs just shy of 20000lbs empty. The new 53 can carry more. In fact, 27000lbs is really very impressive on it's own right.

originally posted by: Caughtlurking
a reply to: Bigburgh

It also weighs just shy of 20000lbs empty. The new 53 can carry more. In fact, 27000lbs is really very impressive on it's own right.

Buy Chinooks.

a reply to: buddah6


Depending on the model the newer chinooks only carry 16-26k externally.

originally posted by: Caughtlurking
a reply to: buddah6


Depending on the model the newer chinooks only carry 16-26k externally.

I thought it was up to 28 to 30 K.

I would have loved to fly either one...LOL!

a reply to: buddah6

The CH-47F is up to 25,000 pounds externally, but uses the same triple hook system for stability.

I read about a Chinook that was in competition for USAF combat rescue. Was it the HH-47H? It was several years ago and I saw only drawings

a reply to: buddah6

They never gave it a model designation I don't think, just the HH-47. It was a bastardized -47F, MH-47G, and all new version.

a reply to: Zaphod58

My love for the Chinook knows no bounds.

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Zaphod58

My love for the Chinook knows no bounds.

I have never had the chance to fly one but I have ridden in them several times. My favorite time was watching an early model taxi with it's rear wheels on the ground and the mains 4 feet off the ground. Another one is of Chinooks making water landings to pick up a rubber boat.

A video posted today about the K: