Helo News game related.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

If we're talking about the OH-58D, just had it in my head that all NG units were separated/or designated from regular USA units in the OOB. What can I say but it's been a longtime since I've "been in the game" and you know what I mean. But if you think that's good wait until my next post!?!

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Might try my little "trick" of using an "*" in the name of NG only units the way I do USN ones in the USMC OOB.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I've watching this one for years now just to see it get to this point but, as JANE's is reporting CH-53K will reach Initial Operating Capability or IOC in 2019 but as I pointed out with the F-35B this really means nothing. The important factor is in achieving Full Operating Capability or FOC and that unfortunately won't be until 2029. The CH-53K has paralleled the F-35 program in many ways with technological, material, testing etc. delays and another factor is related. Simply they're the design is from the ground up and these example completely new airframes. And allowing for inflation, actually costs more then the F-35A.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...f-ch-53k-costs

Oh I hear you, well what about the AH-1Z VIPER or the UH-1Y VENOM how did they reach FOC so fast? The answer is one of the easiest response to any question I've faced out here, simply speaking, architecturally the airframes were already available just somewhat modified for both. Very few as compared the total number to be manufactured were brand new airframes but mostly modified existing ones. It does both save time and money by using a known operational and battle tested airframe.

We've already had to push FOC back a couple of times for the F-35 and I suspect it'll have to be done at least once more by a year or two. That being said, it'll still get in the game by 2020. But for this helicopter it just doesn't bode well when that date is four years past game end time. And very rarely do these issues go backwards in time, though 2029 would be a conservative guess by and let's not fool ourselves in thinking it comes from anywhere other then NAVAIR.

I've invested a fair amount of time with this project and will continue to watch it but, I can't say it looks good for the CH-53K right at this time. And most know there's no bigger "vocal" advocate for these in the game or in their play-ability within it. That hasn't changed.

Here's the ref./the next is also a "fresh" story on the F-35 they hit a "milestone" and wait to you see what it was you might just go...huh!?!
http://www.janes.com/article/69314/c...yment-decision
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...n-seat-435792/

FOC is in no way any different in meaning than Fielded/or Fielding is to land equipment either in this game or the real world.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

My real question is ... what do they plan to do with the CH-53K?

In the Navy/USMC the CH-53 is almost always used as a heavy cargo and mass troop transport not a "combat assault" one ... that's what the MV-22 is for. It rarely sees the front lines, too few of them, too valuable as a cargo lifter.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

It sounds like from NAVAIR it's designed also for direct assault operations as well of troops and equipment. From NAVAIR...
"Mission
The CH-53K will transport Marines, heavy equipment and supplies during ship-to-shore movement in support of amphibious assault and subsequent operations ashore."

Not surprising this helo will/does carry an advanced EW system, ground avoidance radar and should game wise, probably have at least a TI/GSR 50. This does also have obvious Special Ops applications as it'll be easily able to carry a couple of their special purpose vehicles and teams with no problems for deep penetration ops.
http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm...1-3DD82B1DDB0F

We're not going to use something because of it's cost, we're not going to see the F-35 just sit on an airfield or carrier. What would be the point of having them then? No piece of modern equipment is "cheap" any longer when a tank can easily run over 10 million dollars a copy for some.

It's the era we live in and for better or worse the one we play in here. I would hope we NEVER exclude a piece of equipment for cost reasons (And I know we won't.) that's for the player to decide on what and how to use their resources. We just make it available and design it to the best of our abilities to make as realistic as the "real world" counter part.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

It's not a matter of cost but of numbers available.

Maybe (probably) perspectives have changed.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

This will be my last on the CH-53K for awhile but, I wanted to leave you with what's probably the most detailed/updated resource on the topic at hand. It's the first one I used a very long time ago and you'll understand why when you look at it. Simply though, they stay with the topic and keep updating as needed.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...updated-01724/

I need to hit the rack-take care!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

From WillianB's thread "Israeli AH-64's with Spike" further info provided about Columbia's AH-60L IV. This is a very advanced AH with all the "bells and whistles" it is a very capable helo and it goes beyond the "stat" sheet I present below. The first ref. will show what we might've missed for this OOB for this helo and possibly previous marks.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...e-money-03392/
http://defence-blog.com/news/the-col...-arpia-iv.html
http://www.army-technology.com/news/...usiness-office







Thanks "WB", I would've missed this if it wasn't for your Thread.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

From WillianB's thread "Israeli AH-64's with Spike" further info provided about Columbia's AH-60L IV. This is a very advanced AH with all the "bells and whistles" it is a very capable helo and it goes beyond the "stat" sheet I present below. The first ref. will show what we might've missed for this OOB for this helo
Regards,
Pat

Pat.....the reason we " missed " this is because we do not have Columbia as a nation in the game.....

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

All I can say is "Well, well"...huh crap! New Zealand all over again!?! That time it was when I submitted the NH-90 for them in a Patch Post a few years back.

Well two for two, non exist OOB's and both helos, at least I'm consistent!?!

Sorry Don and everyone but at least there were pictures!!

Regards,
Pat