Jump to content

Recommended Posts

uh-72alakota.jpg

Sorry, it just doesn't look like an Army helo to me

Looks like an Army helicopter to me... a European Army helicopter, that is. With the US ARMY lettering on the tailboom it reminds me of a movie prop, kind of like the AT-6 Texans painted like Japanese planes. Oh well. Hopefully it'll perform the mission well. I don't mind a goofy-looking thing as long as it does what it's supposed to do. I have lots of potential nicknames for it, most of them unpublishable. "Fugbug" might be a good one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like an Army helicopter to me... a European Army helicopter, that is. With the US ARMY lettering on the tailboom it reminds me of a movie prop, kind of like the AT-6 Texans painted like Japanese planes. Oh well. Hopefully it'll perform the mission well. I don't mind a goofy-looking thing as long as it does what it's supposed to do. I have lots of potential nicknames for it, most of them unpublishable. "Fugbug" might be a good one.

Sorry Guys, but to me it looks like something Volkswagon would build if they made Helo's..only hope its as reliable. Thats my two cents.

Paul

PS The Apache still gets my vote for the most formidable looking helo if were just going on looks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry Guys, but to me it looks like something Volkswagon would build if they made Helo's..only hope its as reliable. Thats my two cents.

Paul

PS The Apache still gets my vote for the most formidable looking helo if were just going on looks.

Volkswagen, not Volkswagon :cheers:

Why do you all don't like it ? well, okay, it doesn't look this robust like a Blackhawk, but does that matter ?

;)

Edited by Medevac71
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a saying that if an aircraft looks good, it'll fly good. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule. From what I've heard, the EC145 flies really well. Guess there's your exception to the rule.

It looks waaay too big for its spindly little skids. Kinda reminds me of Dumbo.

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, you can go ahead and throw your rotten veggies at me but I for one kind of like the design. Sure it's not so "rugged/tough" looking as the Apache or the Cobra but then again the mission it is going to perfom is entirely different. Oh well, just goes to prove the old adage, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder"....!!

And just for the record, I was just at the optometrist and the doctor said my vision was just fine.......GRIN.

Happy Modeling my comrades!

TL

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL...

No worries, Scooter. I think I have doubts more about the mission than the helicopter. The intention is to use it in stateside missions (hurricane relief, medevac, VIP transport) but as we all know, military aircraft are always pressed into roles they were never intended for. I just wonder what's gonna happen at the first Lakota unit when they get their overseas deployment orders.

The -72 is a great life-flight type helicopter, but if it starts gettin shot at, I just don't see it performing the mission.

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites
The -72 is a great life-flight type helicopter, but if it starts gettin shot at, I just don't see it performing the mission.

Which reminds me of the question, are the AH-6 and the OH-58 armoured? They are about the same class as the UH72, and I never heard of them being armored and they are still used in "hot" areas

Link to post
Share on other sites
The -72 is a great life-flight type helicopter, but if it starts gettin shot at, I just don't see it performing the mission.

Jon

Why?

If it does end up getting shot at then someone has cocked up.... Big time.

It was certainly better than the 412 or MD90.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Which reminds me of the question, are the AH-6 and the OH-58 armoured? They are about the same class as the UH72, and I never heard of them being armored and they are still used in "hot" areas

Erd,

Um... actually the OH-58 is armed and armored, as is the AH/MH/OH-6 and no, they aren't in the same class as the UH-72. Both of those are scout/light attack type helicopters with a crew of two and a means to shoot back. The UH-72 is a "light utility helicopter". It doesn't have any armor on it because it isn't intended as a combat helicopter. When the first unit gets deployed overseas (a mission it was NEVER intended for, but trust me the Army has a way of getting around that) and they start taking fire, just like our Humvees, they're gonna be bolting steel armor onto that thing in every possible place for protection.

Adding stuff like armored seats and flooring, ballistic protective fuel tanks, etc are going to up the gross weight considerably, thus reducing power available (something which is near and dear to anyone who has actually flown a helicopter).

And as far as "someone having cocked up", tell that to the Chinook crews currently overseas, who get shot at so often they primarily have to fly at night! Sure, someone will have cocked up royally if the LUH gets deployed, but I've been in the Army just long enough to know that it's bound to happen.

The EC145 isn't a better helicopter than the Bell 412 by a long shot. Its just a lot cheaper.

Jon

PS: From what I can tell, we're the ONLY country using it in a military application. That should tell you something right there. I think someone has ALREADY cocked up.

Edited by Cobrahistorian
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Eurocoptor's website doesn't advertise it as a military platform.

It was certainly better than the 412 or MD90.

How are you defining "better"? That's such a generic term that without any context to base it on, is at best subjective and at worst intentionally misleading. What makes it "better"?

Edited by Trigger
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey-

From an aquisition point-of-view, I think maybe you're expecting too much. In this era of few dollars and many programs you want the Army to spend more money (or buy less helicopters) to have a operational capability in a utility helo that may never see combat? Shouldn't the Army spend most of it's money on combat helos and as little as possible on a utility fleet?

Besides, no platform arrives fully formed out-of-the-box. How many upgrades has the Apache been through? If the Army does decide to send the UH-72A overseas, hopefully they will add the necessary equipment before they do. Call it the UH-72C Lakota Warrior.

People like to second guess the decisions made by the aquisition community, but it's got to be a really hard job to sit down with the Army (or any service) Aviation budget and decide how to spread a limited budget over so many programs.

Phil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...