In about 1990, I did an exercise and got the chance to ride in a B52. The plane had a tail number starting with 59- meaning built in the 59. That plane was 3 years older than me at the time, and last I heard those planes are still flying (and being upgraded) -- thats 60 years !
Funny, I was thinking the same thing. When I saw that it was an E-2 that crash my first thought was “This will be bad.”
Some of them still had patch holes from Viet Nam.I have gone on record before that UH-1s scare me to death. Good on you for flying them and still being alive to talk about it, @UHBlackhawk.
I, too, am glad this had good ending. Helicopters also need to be replaced. The Bell TH57 B/C Sea Ranger is still flying. It’s amazing that the Student Naval Aviators flying the Sea Ranger today weren’t yet born when I flew it as an instructor in the 80’s. That will change in the next couple of years as the Navy introduces the TH-73A helicopter as the new training helicopter. Here’s what it looks like:
. The main difference from the current trainer will be 4 main rotor blades and a glass instrument panel.
The Navy has been much smarter in the approach to RW training aircraft than the Army. When I went through it was the TH-55 (Schweizer/Hughes 296). It was a very forgiving trainer and cheap to operate... but they wanted a turbine. So they went to the UH-1. A great airframe, but not a great trainer. So instead of getting with the Navy and getting a joint trainer, the Army went off on its own and got... the TH-67. But recently, to save money they have now switched to the UH-72 Lakota. Apparently, it's so unforgiving that students aren't permitted to land until they have 20 hours. The -72 is the only one I haven't flown (okay, I didn't fly the TH-67 but the OH-58), but I have heard nothing good about it as a trainer. What goat roap.
More helo replacements. The Marine Corps accepted this beast last year. It is in the test and evaluation phase now. The new “sh**ers” should make their first operational deployment in the ’23-’24 timeframe. Not sure how transitioning Marine CH-53E pilots will take to not having the jettisonable auxiliary fuel tanks port and starboard. I hope the “K” rollout is smoother than the initial CH-53E rollout in the early 80’s. The CH-53E is a Cadillac to fly when everything is synced up. Here it is:That's pretty swoopy looking.
The Huey is a good aircraft. Maintenance is getting harder, and the avionics can be iffy, but the spinning parts spin pretty reliably.I have gone on record before that UH-1s scare me to death. Good on you for flying them and still being alive to talk about it, @UHBlackhawk.
I’m surprised the Marines never went with the -60 like all the other services. It’s a much better airframe for combat.
Leaks were part of the pre-flight inspection. They were assurances that at least the helicopter had some hydraulic fluid and fuel in the lines. A nice puddle meant the plane captain did their job.The only ones I have been in leaked like a sieve.
We'd always carry rags in the helo. Hated it when a VIP got a hydraulic fluid or oil smudges on their uniform or attire. I'd settle for a couple of smudges sitting on an Electra Glide though.