Armed Black Hawk (ABH) Demonstrator Completes Weapons Test Phase

(Source: Sikorsky Aircraft Corp.; issued June 15, 2009)

Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. and Elbit Systems announced today successful completion of the test phase for the Armed Black Hawk (ABH) demonstrator helicopter, also known as the Battlehawk helicopter.

Achieving this milestone clears the way for Sikorsky to begin offering production proposals for customers to convert existing Black Hawk helicopters or order new production aircraft in the armed configuration.

The testing phase was conducted to establish the safe operation of the weapons and weapons management system, as well as to gather data on the systems. An optical missile, a laser-guided rocket, and a 20-mm turreted gun were all fired successfully.

The demonstrator configuration also includes Elbit cockpit displays, a Mission Management system with Digital Map, Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) and ANVIS/HUD helmet systems with cueing capabilities integrated into the avionics suite. The demonstrator completed its first flight on Sept. 9, 2008 at the Elbit Systems’ Cyclone facility in Israel.

Sikorsky President Jeffrey P. Pino said, “The results of the live fire testing demonstrate that the utility Black Hawk aircraft platform also can serve as an attack helicopter, providing additional firepower and mission flexibility. The Black Hawk helicopter has proven its value for the last three decades in military service all over the world, and continues to evolve as a modern multi-purpose platform for all branches of the armed forces.”

The production Battlehawk helicopter will come equipped with a full suite of armed reconnaissance and attack capabilities, including an integrated helmet display and such weapons options as missiles, rockets, and fixed forward and turreted guns. These options will be available on new-build aircraft or as a kit that can be retrofitted onto existing Black Hawk helicopter platforms.

The Battlehawk helicopter will provide medium-lift capability and firepower that cannot be duplicated by current dedicated utility or attack platforms. The aircraft can be used in either combat or peacetime for such missions as troop transport, search and rescue, and disaster relief. In the modern battlefield, the Battlehawk helicopter combines unique capabilities of advanced attack and accurate weapons delivery with deployment of fast-reaction teams.

The ABH demonstrator program is a cooperative effort between Sikorsky Aircraft and the government of Israel in conjunction with Elbit Systems, as the Israeli industry’s leading representative and prime contractor for mission, avionics and weapon systems integration.

The program’s purpose is to produce an armed demonstrator for evaluation by the Israeli Air Force. An evaluation phase for that purpose will begin this month and continue through October 2009.

Sikorsky Aircraft and the government of Israel signed a memorandum of understanding in September 2005. Elbit Systems, based in Haifa, Israel, was selected to be the sub-systems supplier in February 2006 through an RFP process that was initiated in December 2005.

More than 3,000 Black Hawk helicopter variants have been delivered to 27 governments worldwide since 1978, accumulating more than 9 million combined flight hours.


-ends-

I realize I havn't even been to flight school yet so I'm a complete newbie but....

Why are they spending money on this. It sounds like a waste of money. Don't we have Apache gunships for the gunship role? I thought one of the lessons taken from Vietnam was that having one helicopter do everything is a mistake.

That it's better to have one helicopter kill things and another bring in the troops. Like I said I'm by no means an expert but from what I've read this would be a waste of money. Plus I thought there was already a an attack version that was developed. The DAP or whatever. Wasn't that good enough?

Per the article above...

quote:

The Battlehawk helicopter will provide medium-lift capability and firepower that cannot be duplicated by current dedicated utility or attack platforms.

The DAP is a 160th modification because they needed a bird that can fit the lift/attack role, it's not a standard production model.

So it will be able to carry guns and troops at the same time? If so then rock on but it seems if it does this it's performance will suffer.

If it can't do both at the same time then when it lifts troops it will still need a gunship escort and since the Apache was designed soley for that purpose an Apache would do a better job as an escort than a helicopter designed soley to lift cargo and troops turned part time gunship.

I still think that it is a waste of money better spent elsewhere. Just my .02

If they're anything like the MH-60L DAP, it is going to be BEAST...

Final Boss Fight!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by cwubullrider:
So it will be able to carry guns and troops at the same time? If so then rock on but it seems if it does this it's performance will suffer.

If it can't do both at the same time then when it lifts troops it will still need a gunship escort and since the Apache was designed soley for that purpose an Apache would do a better job as an escort than a helicopter designed soley to lift cargo and troops turned part time gunship.

I still think that it is a waste of money better spent elsewhere. Just my .02

Remember too, that not every Aviation unit has Apaches. So having a dual-role ship would give a light unit some heavier punch.

For example, until this deployment, my unit was Light Aviation. We had -47s, -60s, and -58s. As we deployed, we traded an extra Air Cav Scout Squadron we had for an Apache BN. So we are now Medium Avaition as is the unit we got the -64s from.

So if a light unit doesn't have gunships available, a Battlehawk would give that unit the capability to do more missions with a greater punch.

Matt
SPC, AV
US Army
OCS Selectee
Class 303-09

Perhaps, but this aircraft is still going to run into the same old problems it's unarmed brother has, and that is being able to accomplish its mission at a 9000 foot PA at 40 degrees C. It's mission capability versus actual hang time isn't going to be that much better than the Apache, especially since they are both using the 701C engine variants.

At best, it would be a quick retro fit, something QRF related when no REAL guns are available but I seriously doubt we will see battalions of these things starting to creep up in the near future and replace the aircraft we have in inventory.

Now, if Sikorsky could just find a replacement for the KW.....

Mad_Matt you have a good point as far as if a unit doesn't have Apaches. However I still argue that in that case using a DAP style Blackhawk would be adequate. Since it's already been developed it would save a ton of money. In our current fiscal status we need to save money as much as possible for programs that are needed. It seems to me that the Battlehawk is going to be a waste of money.

Especially during a time when you have unemployed LT's waiting for almost a year to go to flight school that are working at Taco Bell.

The U.S. isn't the only country with Black Hawks that might have a need for this "upgrade." In fact, it says Sikorsky is developing this in tandem with Israel. As it states in the article, a nice to have option is to be able to field a helicopter fleet that can, in times of peace, perform humanitarian missions. What role does a dedicated gunship have outside of combat?

When a country is at war, the aircraft can be fitted with the Battle Hawk mod. No need to stock two different sets of airframe maintenance supplies and train two sets of pilots, technicians, and maintenance personnel. More mission scope for a small country with a small fleet. More bang for the buck.

I have no loyalties to a particular airframe at this point, and I'm on the fence between 60's and 64's...

If even half this stuff trickles down to the unit level, I think there's no denying the value of its expanded mission capability. (fun factor!)

quote:

AH-60L / S-70 Battle Hawk
Article from globalsecurity.org:

Past weapons integration on the Blackhawk using the External Stores/Weapons System (ESWS) have included Hellfire missiles, 2.75-inch Rockets, Stinger Missiles and various gun pods including 7.65 mm, 20mm and 30mm cannon. One current operational configuration has dual 30mm chain guns, dual 7.65mm machine guns and Hellfire missiles and rockets, more than doubling the firepower of existing attack helicopters. The ESWS also can accommodate up to four 230 gallon external fuel pods.

The Battlehawk helicopter has a full "glass" cockpit with Rockwell Collins active matrix color LCD Multifunction Displays and CDUs. They result in a significantly smaller instrument panel with 27 degrees visibility over the nose, 12 degrees more than most attack pilot cockpits. The narrower panel also improves lateral and downward visibility using chin windows nonexistent on current attack helicopters. The HMDs and HOCAS (Hands on Collective and Stick) features of the Battlehawk helicopter enable either pilot or copilot to perform piloting, search, comm or weapons tasks while maintaining "eyes up, hands on."

The Battlehawk helicopter's 400 cubic foot cabin, along with it's performance capabilities, enable it to carry additional munition reloads, thus reducing the need to return to a forward rearming point and dramatically increasing the firepower that it can deliver, a real force multiplier. With its 9,000 lb cargo hook, it can carry the munitions for several aircraft, essentially bringing along it's own re-arming facility, another real force multiplier. The cabin also provides significant mission flexibility such as search and rescue or team insertion that dedicated attack helicopters cannot perform.

The 60 deserves this so hardcore. I'm rooting for this one. There are things that don't make sense, and I know it's not my place to question what comes down, but this makes sense.

Haha yeah the Battlehawk is for peacetime humanitarian missions, because it totally says "I bring peace". Better remember to unfit the pylons... "SIR! They keep running when we show up to drop off their relief supplies!"

350Z, Matt, Traffic, 79... y'all got to it before me, I was going to say last night this sounds easier than adding or integrating 64's into a unit and their training. Take the birds that are already doing it, and give them guns!

Now, what I'm wondering is... if guns aren't exclusive to 64's, can they still claim the title of "gun pilots"?

...I kid. I'm just poking fun. I realize this is an off-the-shelf'ish way to meet new mission needs, as it's not waves of Russian tanks.

cwubullrider, sir, I think you are forgetting to consider unit cost of 60s vs 64s. In terms of value, and ease of augmenting existing units and their aircrews to expand their mission capability... wouldn't it be smarter to spend 20 million on Battlehawk kits vs. 1 Apache... or procurement of a new bird.

As for the McDonald's job... welcome to the enlisted life! I feel for ya. I'm also in a holding pattern and having difficulty making ends meet. I think your plight increases your cred.

I see this wait time as an 'overworked system' thing, not so much a budget shortage... or, the amount of money it would take to solve the problem is more than what can be expected to be available in the first place.



for your consideration: MH-60L DAP videos
youtube.com/watch?v=EbMb_QZxbEA
youtube.com/watch?v=xbwK1idecbI
youtube.com/watch?v=DKP3kAjOi8Y
youtube.com/watch?v=NYHehqt**** (lol last 4: kilo, oscar, [capital]charlie, kilo.)
youtube.com/watch?v=EcWFsXkdl4E

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mr_Motivated,

Mr. Motivated, I have been in the 64 community for a while now. You wouldn't like it. Just jump that fence and go "Hawk"...

Yo! Bushmaster, please explain. You're still set on 64's, correct?

What do you see about me, that I don't.

...or do you just think I'm an ass and you want to steer me away. (understandable)

Wanna know something funny... my Bank of America card... I picked the one with the Apache on it. What a noob move. At least it isn't a tattoo. I'm thinking about having it changed to something else before I show up at Rucker.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr_Motivated:
Yo! Bushmaster, please explain. You're still set on 64's, correct?

What do you see about me, that I don't.

...or do you just think I'm an ass and you want to steer me away. (understandable)

Wanna know something funny... my Bank of America card... I picked the one with the Apache on it. What a noob move. At least it isn't a tattoo. I'm thinking about having it changed to something else before I show up at Rucker.

It is all about eliminating the competition brother, all about eliminating. I might as well start now since they get 2-3 64s per class compared to 12-13 60s... If I convinced you already, that is success...

No GO on the BoA though, when are you thinking to drop that useless, non-military friendly bank... What happened to good ol' USAA?

By the way, how come your posts don't show in the "WOFT Emergency" thread. You are posting and then retracting the statements? The two were inspiring so far...

2-3 per class, you say? Those are GREAT odds. Here I was, determined to make do with just ONE

I retract a lot of posts, because I worry they may not sound right. I didn't realize it was making a mess of my post history.

I'm gonna drop BofA asap. I don't like the way they handle transfers, out of state purchases, and direct deposits. ...hah everything.

I'm keeping an open mind about the missions, and I like the 60's versatility. I also like the idea of... I don't know what to call it (I don't mean to imply it's exclusive to the 60's)... teamwork? The company? The cooperation? Shared experience with the crewchief, or passengers, or cargo.

It could go either way, but I plan to have my pick!

I have a question you could help me with... what's the ... nevermind, I think it would be better to ask someone in person. A maintainer-turned-WO. I'll find YOU

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mr_Motivated,

quote:

Originally posted by Mr_Motivated:
..I like the 60's versatility....[the] Shared experience with the crewchief, or passengers, or cargo.

HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! A whopping 12 people and a max single point of 8000 lbs (at sea level on a standard day). If you want interaction with an enlisted crewman, pax, and cargo, that's the wrong place for it.

Your mission is: Hey F---er, can I get a ride to _______???

Your answer: Oh, sorry, man. I have 3 CPT's with laptops and bags. I am maxed out for this mission.

Weak. But I'm not biased or anything.

quote:

Originally posted by trafficmp:
Weak. But I'm not biased or anything.

Whaddya mean? We hang TWO people on the outside, in front of our engines.

quote:

Originally posted by trafficmp:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr_Motivated:
..I like the 60's versatility....[the] Shared experience with the crewchief, or passengers, or cargo.

HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! A whopping 12 people and a max single point of 8000 lbs (at sea level on a standard day). If you want interaction with an enlisted crewman, pax, and cargo, that's the wrong place for it.

Your mission is: Hey F---er, can I get a ride to _______???

Your answer: Oh, sorry, man. I have 3 CPT's with laptops and bags. I am maxed out for this mission.

Weak. But I'm not biased or anything.

Errr....post fail...care to try again?

Couldn't resist the chance to bust balls.

Danger Will Robinson....danger!!!