Jump to content

AH-6C, MH-6 photos from AH6C-SIP-PICS ARE BACK!


Recommended Posts

Fantastic series of shots. 

 

If you have Photoshop, run them though the Shadows/Highlights filter, you would be amazed at what you can see.

 

The CARC paint plays hell with the sensors and film before that.

 

Regards,

 

Bryan Wiblurn

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 980
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Associated with that training exercise in LA, this cool picture made the news.   Love to see a closer view of that nose art, looks like they are still rocking that "No Fear" logo.  Quad tube NVG's on the operators are noteworthy...

 

message-editor%252F1549589647686-dy18wuu

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, hawkwrench said:

I wonder if the 160th has flown using the quad-NVG's?

 

Tim

You would think at some point these things would be flight-rated.   The really cool advance in night vision is color enhancement.  Looks just like day time, no more 50 shades of green....

Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea if they are using these things for flying duties but they are becoming more common as the technology improves.  I gotta believe that if they aren't flight-rated yet, it's only going to be a matter of time.  

 

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25803/this-is-what-color-night-vision-looks-like-and-it-stands-to-be-a-game-changer

 

BTW, it's worth checking out The Drive.  They get slagged by some of our "experts" on this site but IMO, they break some very interesting stories, often on subjects that are typically well hidden in the classified world.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, 11bee said:

You would think at some point these things would be flight-rated.   The really cool advance in night vision is color enhancement.  Looks just like day time, no more 50 shades of green....

 

AN/AVS-10 Panoramic NVGs (PNVGs) have been out for a while. I have flown with them and do not like them as much as the AVS-9s. They block out any ability to look "over" the goggles due to the platform, the tubes are not as adjustable, and they weigh more. Finally they have a "shadow" on the field of view where the images from the tubes are combined in your brain. The AVS-9s have better fidelity and once a scan pattern is developed they are just as good as the AVS-10s.

 

050426-F-0000S-001.JPG

 

Edit: It also looks like the pilots are using SPH-4 helmets vs the standard HGU-56.

Edited by Clinstone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ground Panoramic NVG were derived from the aviation goggles. Having used a fair number of NODs (-5, -7, -14, -15, -21, -31, F5050, F5032, GPNVG, ANVIS-6, NYX, TYTO, Mini-N/SEAS etc.),  I’m not a fan of GPNVG, especially when driving a vehicle with doors/windows fitted. You bump the goggle into the window when trying to scan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Clinstone said:

Edit: It also looks like the pilots are using SPH-4 helmets vs the standard HGU-56.

That's interesting.  Wonder why they'd be using the older helmets.   Do pilots have the option to go with whatever flight helmet they prefer (I wouldn't think so but maybe the 160th is a bit more relaxed)? Otherwise, I'd be curious as to what advantage the old helmets would provide compared to the current -56's.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're talking about the A-10 driver, that is not an SPH-4 helmet....

 

I have my old unit I used in the 70's-80's and commercial mountain oil exploration work in the 80's and it decidedly does not look like what the A-10 driver is wearing...

 

Bryan

 

PS: We also had possibly two of the VERY few OH-58A's with Oxygen system in them, that's what the white bayonet clips are for.  We had two UH-1H's and two OH-58A's with O2.  We eventually used a Navy system that went to the bayonet fittings vs the snap on fittings 

BWDenver_SPH-4.jpg

Edited by BWDenver
add
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BWDenver said:

If you're talking about the A-10 driver, that is not an SPH-4 helmet....

 

I have my old unit I used in the 70's-80's and commercial mountain oil exploration work in the 80's and it decidedly does not look like what the A-10 driver is wearing...

 

Bryan

 

PS: We also had possibly two of the VERY few OH-58A's with Oxygen system in them, that's what the white bayonet clips are for.  We had two UH-1H's and two OH-58A's with O2.  We eventually used a Navy system that went to the bayonet fittings vs the snap on fittings 

BWDenver_SPH-4.jpg

No, I was referring to Clinstone’s comment above on the MH-6 pilots.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I would say that looks like an SPH-4, the ear cups on the RH pilot look too sharp, not as flat as an SPH-4.  

 

The LH pilot does look like he's actually wearing a different helmet, ear cups look a bit more contoured but the camouflage marking on the helmet are doing it's job.  Looks very much like the Gentex HUG-56/P

 

- Bryan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot of SOF guys have gone away from the quad-tubes in favor of PVS-31s due to weight and size concerns, as well as some of the issues mentioned above in this thread.

 

As for who it was in the pic I've heard it was one of the SFGs, not SEALs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to information on this page, 68-17357 was a "Special Ops Communications bird" due to its unusal radio mounts.

 

https://slideplayer.com/slide/1661852/

 

I have 68-17358 down in my list of references as being an "EH-6B" but either this is possibly another EH-6B or there is confusion regarding which of the two was a Spec Ops Little Bird. Apparently NASA required it for some test or other in 1973.

 

LD.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/3/2014 at 5:16 PM, 11bee said:

Has there been much released about the role Littlebirds played in GW1? I haven't been able to find much online, just a few vague references to "scud hunting". I would think by now some of the details would start being de-classified.

 

On 2/3/2014 at 11:39 PM, Loach Driver said:

It seems that the Little Birds in Iraq on scud-hunting missions is generally accepted to have happened but I guess they want to keep these missions in the dark for whatever reason. There is little or no mention of Little Bird missions in the first Gulf War in Michael Durant's book either. Someday we might know more.......

LD.

 

I have long been interested in special operations, and I have heard of only one operation by Little Birds during the Gulf War : supporting the lone Ranger operation to attack a communications facility.

 

In the USSOCOM history : https://fas.org/irp/agency/dod/socom/2007history.pdf

 

Quote

On 26 February, SOF attacked a radio relay site: first, AH-6 attack helicopters peppered the radio relay compound with mini-gun and rocket fire; Rangers then secured the compound and set charges to destroy the 100-meter tall tower.

 

The only detailed account I have read of that operations is in Daniel Bolger's book Death Ground, it makes several pages with two sketches of the flight route and the facility itself. He says that four AH-6Gs involved (don't hope for serial numbers). Nice, though not so exciting, reading.

 

Bolger cites among his sources : John W. Partin, 75th Rangers and 160th SOAR (A) Scud Hunters, MacDill AFB, USSOCOM History and research office, 9 December 1997. I wish I could read it...

Edited by Rob1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 9:13 AM, Loach Driver said:

Greetings Liam, good to see you are still on the quest for the elusive EH-6.  In 1980 there two a/c that got SATCOM radios for use by the flight leads, but I don't remember designating them as EH-6's.  

 

According to information on this page, 68-17357 was a "Special Ops Communications bird" due to its unusal radio mounts.

 

https://slideplayer.com/slide/1661852/

 

I have 68-17358 down in my list of references as being an "EH-6B" but either this is possibly another EH-6B or there is confusion regarding which of the two was a Spec Ops Little Bird. Apparently NASA required it for some test or other in 1973.

 

LD.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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...