It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SDD uncovers significant deficiencies with CH-53K

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 10:05 AM
link   
A new schedule for IOC of the CH-53K is being drawn up. Currently it is sometime early in 2021 under the new schedule. The initial schedule had it for December of 2019. The first aircraft was delivered to the Navy in May of last year, and a number of serious issues have been found since.


The deficiencies include airspeed indication anomalies, low reliability of the main rotor gearbox, hot gas impingement on aircraft structures, tail boom and tail rotor structural problems, overheating of main rotor dampers, fuel system anomalies, high temperatures in the number-two engine bay and hot gas ingestion by the number-two engine, which could reduce available power.


The CH-53K is currently one of the most expensive aircraft programs going, with current airframe costs exceeding that of the F-35. It's only going to get worse, as the design has yet to be finalized.

www.rotorandwing.com...




posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58



The deficiencies include airspeed indication anomalies, low reliability of the main rotor gearbox, hot gas impingement on aircraft structures, tail boom and tail rotor structural problems, overheating of main rotor dampers, fuel system anomalies, high temperatures in the number-two engine bay and hot gas ingestion by the number-two engine, which could reduce available power.


Well at least there arent any MAJOR problems.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 10:29 AM
link   
It seems like taking a taxi to the next war would be safer!



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Honestly, how much more money will we need to dump into marine Corp aviation?

I know they have an impressive lobby but seriously:

The F-35B basically screwed the A and C versions with compromises
The V-22 Osprey is a marvel but way too expensive
Now the King Stallion that costs more than an F-35?

Enough. Its time to seriously reconsider the USMC's aviation needs



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Both Naval and Marine aviation outsize their utility.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS
Much win there..



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

The Marines are in the worst flying shape of any of the services. They are in the middle of a costly overhaul, but their internal aviation requirements are integral to their organization and doctrine.

And don’t blame their B model screwing over the other models, that’s widely considered to be the fault of Congress.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Business as usual..over priced...cannot meet design specifications...delayed delivery...You have to wonder when people are going to say to the MIC enough is enough...

I really do worry about the USA without a ballistic exchange being able to have the equipment to stand against a future battle against someone like China.. Yes our defense budget is several times larger than anyone else's yet we pay so much more for anything to include military spec paper coffee cups. I am personally tired of excuses, delays, cost overruns on every big bucks program....
youtu.be...



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: justwanttofly
a reply to: FredT

The Marines are in the worst flying shape of any of the services. They are in the middle of a costly overhaul, but their internal aviation requirements are integral to their organization and doctrine.

And don’t blame their B model screwing over the other models, that’s widely considered to be the fault of Congress.


Exactly !! Parts commonality same airframe was the selling point when in actuality they needed two or three different different designed aircraft..

Israel is doing a wing add on or design change to the F-35 wings was the word I got.. They usually do some changes to accommodate their own air to air missiles and software but I would be interested to know what wing changes they are doing... I got the impression it was an wing tip modification ? .. When it comes to defense and war fighting second best for Israel does not cut it.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

They're building the kits for all F-35s. They were contracted by Lockheed to build 800+ wingtip sets.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 727Sky

They're building the kits for all F-35s. They were contracted by Lockheed to build 800+ wingtip sets.


Good to know I did not know the details only that they were one of the few who were authorized to do mods on the bird. The F-35 in flight looks like it could use more wing area, but I have not seen one doing super cruise or over mach 1



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Winglets?



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

a reply to: 727Sky

The kits that they're doing are the outer wing panel, using a new technique known as Automatic Fiber Placement. It basically weaves 3mm thick fibers to create the panel.



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I can see that to be a stronger panel as the structure and orientation can be tightly controlled (45 degree layers) but would it be quicker than the traditional composite sheet layer construction over a form block?Not exactly new but cool non the less.

edit on 2-2-2019 by Blackfinger because: added

edit on 2-2-2019 by Blackfinger because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2019 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger




posted on Feb, 6 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: justwanttofly
a reply to: FredT

The Marines are in the worst flying shape of any of the services. They are in the middle of a costly overhaul, but their internal aviation requirements are integral to their organization and doctrine.

And don’t blame their B model screwing over the other models, that’s widely considered to be the fault of Congress.


The B Model forced compromises in the design that then impact the performance of the A and C models. It also added tons to the development time. Yes it is congresses fault. They should have told the marines NO.

Same story with the Osprey. Got to have it. 72 million dollar per tilt rotor

Now the King Stallion. Gotta have it. 100+ million chopper

F-35B: 115 million per. RUSHED into IOC even though its not to try to avoid its cancellation.

The NAVY / Air Force should provide air coverage for the USMC period

The internal requirements can easily be changed. They are amphibious assault troops with little amphibious assaulting to do in this day and age yet they still are around. So can their desire for internal aviation units



posted on Feb, 6 2019 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT



The NAVY / Air Force should provide air coverage for the USMC period


Yes they could "BUT" Would they get down and go toe to toe or eyeball to eyeball like a Marine or Army aviator will ? Certainly did not in Viet Nam as they in many cases had bigger missions and frag orders to comply with. Their time on station for the most part sucked except for some of the guys flying the OV-10s which were very lightly armed and not meant to provide air to ground protection.

When your friends, unit members, and acquaintances are on the ground getting their butts kicked it adds something to the scenario even if all you have are a couple of M-60 machine guns and a UH-1 for air to ground attack.

Otherwise I agree with you Fred. Our whole defense appropriations programs and the way we get stuff built needs to be severely overhauled, IMO. The F-22 is another prime example of a fine machine that cost so much we ended up with maybe 30% of the actual needed aircraft for whatever reason(s).



posted on Feb, 6 2019 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
The NAVY / Air Force should provide air coverage for the USMC period

The internal requirements can easily be changed.


The entire MEU concept is based on the Marines being able to provide an organic air capability while not depending on anyone else.

The internal requirements cannot easily be changed. It would require a full restructuring of the Marine expeditionary concept, which is not easy. There is probably an argument to be made that they could be better served with something that's almost exclusively CAS-based at the expense of high threat area survivability, but at this point the Marines are all in on the F-35.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join