Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

I am trying to figure out the genesis of the MH (transport) version of the very first Little Birds and I have been reading "The Night Stalkers" by Michael Durant and Steven Hartov.

In it they mention that Delta snipers were initially carried in the rear of the Little Birds (which I presume were unarmed OH-6As). The snipers were having difficulty shooting from the rear cabin and Ken Jacobs and Mike Hoffman came up with the early "People Planks" to allow the snipers to perch outside the helicopter and shoot. The book also mentions that the helicopters struggled to get off the ground when out-fitted with the benches and carrying the snipers.

This would seem to indicate that the OH-6A was first used in the MH-transport role, carrying two soldiers in the rear compartment and it was then converted with the "People Planks". It was then found to be underpowered and limited by the original OH-6A transmission and TF158 then purchased the more powerful Hughes 500D which became the MH-6E. Can anyone confirm if this is correct sequence of events that led to the MH-6E?

The book mentions that around twenty Little Birds were in use by TF158 in the late summer of 1980 and that six went to Eglin AFB and became the AH-6C (They would appear to be the six AH-6Cs that appear lined up on an air base ramp and are mentioned throughout this thread by GT), so were the other fourteen converted in to early MH-6 transport helicopters and EH-6Bs?

If anyone (GT, Doug or Matt?) can help with this part of Little Bird history, I would be very grateful. Thanks.

LD.

Unfortunately, there is not a book you can go by for the origins, but since I'm probably the only one "here on this forum" that was a TF158/TF160 member from the beginning, I'll try and answer as much as I can remember. A little long, but you asked.

On April 26th, 1980, just two days after the Desert One debacle, work on Operation Snow Bird and Honey Badger, the second set of plans to rescue American hostages in Iran began.

Concurrently, at the behest of Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, a Joint Task Force (JTF) was organized to conduct military operations that would counter terrorist acts directed at the United States, its interest, and its citizens, was organized at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The JTF would include members from all the services and work outside the normal chain of command.

This organization, later to become the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), would become the parent organization for all Special Mission Units [sMUs] and would include the best of all the services. The Army’s Delta Force at Fort Bragg, the Navy’s Seal Team 6 out of Little Creek Amphibious Base, Virginia, Task Force 158 (later designated 160th SOAR) Army aviation units from Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the 75th Ranger Regiment and the Air Force’s Special Operations units at Hurlburt AFB, Florida.

The Little Birds were chosen for the light assault role because of their small size and ease of transport. The Little Birds could carry only three soldiers and a single pilot, but they could land in the most restrictive locations.

Personnel at Fort Rucker, Alabama developed armed Little Birds (AH-6C) as a separate part of the project. Selected 229th personnel would team with the Fort Rucker element toward the end of the initial project as Company B, 229th Attack Helicopter Battalion and become the Little Bird organization of the Task Force.

Company A, 159th Assault Support Helicopter Battalion would provide the heavy lift element of the new organization. CH-47C Chinooks, although not as easily deployable as the other aircraft, were capable of moving large numbers of personnel and heavier payloads. The Chinooks would prove most effective in the project by establishing forward area refuel/rearm points (FARPs) for long-range operations. Together, these men and aircraft formed Task Force 158.

The 160th SOAR (A) still uses the same basic models of aircraft that were used in the initial project; however, they have undergone significant modifications to enhance mission performance.

The project began as separate training deployments. The Blackhawks were moved to Norton Air Force Base (AFB) in San Bernardino, California, on Air Force C-5 transport aircraft, while the Chinooks self-deployed. At Norton AFB, the Blackhawk aircraft were modified to increase their range and improve long-range navigation capabilities. Meanwhile, the crews were given intensive training over the California desert. Few of the aviators were qualified to fly with night vision goggles (NVG), and no one was qualified for NVG flight in the UH-60. In fact, the aircraft instruments and lighting were not NVG compatible, and modifications had to be made before training could begin.

Once the aviators completed a 10-hour NVG syllabus, they progressed to long-range navigation training. Training flights consisted of up to seven and one-half hours of night flying with AN/PVS-5 night vision goggles (NVG). Pilots who completed the designated route, known as “Black Route,†three times with the NVGs were considered qualified. The Chinooks stopped at Reese AFB in Lubbock, Texas, and Luke AFB in Phoenix, Arizona, for refueling and crew rest, and then joined the Blackhawk’s at Norton AFB.

Pilots selected for the Little Bird helicopters were sent to the Mississippi Army National Guard Aviation Support Facility at Gulfport, Mississippi, for two weeks of training on the OH-6A helicopters. Following aircraft qualification, the Little Bird aircraft and crews were loaded on Air Force C-141 aircraft and moved to Fort Huachuca, Arizona, for two weeks of mission training. Armed OH-6 aircraft would join the training program later in the fall of 1980. Ultimately, aircrews would perform missions over routes as long as 1000 nautical miles. Little Birds would load on C130 transports and move to appropriately located forward staging areas to train for their role in the mission.

All of the units continued extensive training throughout the summer and fall of 1980 in desert environmental skills and long-range, close-formation precision navigation with NVGs in preparation for the unspecified mission. Late in the fall, the aircrews were asked if they wished to volunteer to continue with the project. As expected, most volunteered to remain. At this time, the volunteers were given their first formal briefing on Operation Honey Badger, which was to be the air component of a second attempt to rescue the U.S. hostages from Iran.

On 20 January 1981, the hostages were released, and Operation Honey Badger was cancelled. The men of Task Force 158 expected to disband and return to their former units; however, Army leadership determined that the unit was needed to meet future contingencies. The new unit, soon to become the 160th Aviation Battalion, consisted of a Headquarters and Service Company (HSC), a Light Assault Company (MH-6s), and a Light Attack Company (AH-6s). With the addition of two Blackhawk companies and a company of Chinooks, Task Force 160 was formed.

Standard OH-6A are to confined and cant' carry the weight to effectively act as sniper platforms, however, the planks were added to the MH's (500D's) so we could carry the pax outboard. I've personally carried six/three pax on each side using 500D's with no problem. Approach to a hover, however, can get interesting with the collective up under your armpit. Whoaaaa! People Planks were never used on the OH6A's. And the original five bladed T Tails were not OH6A's converted. They were fresh a/c off the Hughes line or repo's. They even had left hand drive. Pilot sits in the right side in an OH6A. Civilian model 500D's have pilots controls and start swithches, etc. on left hand side. The older OH6s were returned to the Mississippi NG after we began to receive the newer ones. Just kept a couple for Green Platoon.

Whew. More than you asked for, but...hope you enjoyed the ride.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GT, thanks for that very detailed information on the birth of the 160th SOAR. Once again, there is probably more accurate information in your last post than all the books recording the history of the 160th so far!

Thanks as well for clearing up the full story on the development of the MH-6 Little Birds. It is fascinating to hear that you flew with three people on each bench on the MH-6E. I didn't think the 500D/MH-6E had enough power to lift that load. That must mean that the MH-6J was an incredible helicopter to fly and the newer MH-6M MELB must be a complete rocket ship! Thanks.

:salute:

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
GT, thanks for that very detailed information on the birth of the 160th SOAR. Once again, there is probably more accurate information in your last post than all the books recording the history of the 160th so far!

Thanks as well for clearing up the full story on the development of the MH-6 Little Birds. It is fascinating to hear that you flew with three people on each bench on the MH-6E. I didn't think the 500D/MH-6E had enough power to lift that load. That must mean that the MH-6J was an incredible helicopter to fly and the newer MH-6M MELB must be a complete rocket ship! Thanks.

:P

LD.

Yes, the new birds were pretty powerful, after flying straight 6's. The new civilian versions actually had the injection system and auto re-light system. I don't think Ray has posted some of the photos on this thread, so here are some of the "original" militarized versions. These were all off the assembley line, and had these beautiful Magnum PI paint jobs under the OD. Enjoy, GT

sep81.10.JPG

sep81.8.JPG

sep81.9.JPG

sep81.11.JPG

sep81.2.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
GT,

Thanks for all that info on early TF158/160 history. This thread should definitely be the first stop for any early Littlebird fans. Thanks so much for sharing your experience (and pics) with us all.

Ray

Gotta find a way to pin this... There is no other souce out there, either print or web, that has as much info and pictures on the early Nightstalkers as does this thread.

Fascinating stuff.

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great info, GT!

We used to fly the flight test 'Sixes with anthropomorphic dummies on the "plank" (usually 3 on a side, just as GT says). This was, of course, to get performance and handling qualities data.

We had quite a few of these dummies and one of our mechanics was quite the joker and one day decided to construct a 'diorama' with the dummies. One was driving the tug, two were in the cockpit of the 'Six, but some were on the planks in some "unusual" positions. He was still in the process of doing this when the Chief of Maintenance caught him.

Nonetheless, some photos were taken, and one of the flight test engineers decided (as a joke) to put one of the photos of the dummies on one plank "shooting the moon" on the draft flight test report being sent around for review. One of the Test Section Chiefs went ballistic when the report got to him and ordered all the photos confiscated. Sure wish I still had them!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta find a way to pin this... There is no other souce out there, either print or web, that has as much info and pictures on the early Nightstalkers as does this thread.

Fascinating stuff.

John

Consider it done! This thread is a treasure trove of information, letting it get buried would be a shame.

Cheers,

Alby

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the new birds were pretty powerful, after flying straight 6's. The new civilian versions actually had the injection system and auto re-light system. I don't think Ray has posted some of the photos on this thread, so here are some of the "original" militarized versions. These were all off the assembley line, and had these beautiful Magnum PI paint jobs under the OD. Enjoy, GT

Hi GT,

Just out of curiosity, do you have any idea what those red placards on the fuselage sides are all about? Kinda defeats the purpose of that slick low-viz black paint scheme.

Were these the MH-6 version that were used to rescue Kurt Muse from that prison in Panama or did they use later versions for that mission?

Regards,

John

PS - Thanks for pinning this Alby!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi GT,

Just out of curiosity, do you have any idea what those red placards on the fuselage sides are all about? Kinda defeats the purpose of that slick low-viz black paint scheme.

Were these the MH-6 version that were used to rescue Kurt Muse from that prison in Panama or did they use later versions for that mission?

Regards,

John

PS - Thanks for pinning this Alby!!!

No, perhaps Ray can zoom in and see what they say. Perhaps it was "watch your head" LOL, and BTW, what is "pinning", is it like capturing all the stuff in one document? I'd like to see everything in on document, or something, and then we could start to fill in the blanks that perhaps were not detailed in sufficient "historical" amount. Just let me know. I'm trying to bring my other "brothers" into the fold here to share their recolections as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GT-

Pinning the topic means that this thread will always be at the top of this forum, as opposed to it being moved further down the topic list and being buried several pages back from inactivity. It makes it much easier when folks want to add a post, keep the discussion going, or are researching the topic at hand.

Cheers,

Alby

Link to post
Share on other sites
GT-

Pinning the topic means that this thread will always be at the top of this forum, as opposed to it being moved further down the topic list and being buried several pages back from inactivity. It makes it much easier when folks want to add a post, keep the discussion going, or are researching the topic at hand.

Cheers,

Alby

Thanks Alby, I'll always be available for you guys if you guys have questions. Keep up the good work. Please remember that my Army history goes back, for you all to my earlier Cobra days in RVN, so we have lots of stuff to "pin."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for pinning this one, Alby. As for the red placards, I'm afraid I can't read em either.

Ray

I looked again, using my PhotoShop, to look at the little red boxes, but I can't read them. Seems to me it said "Warning" Don't stand up on the pod!, or something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GT, while you're in a generous mood, I have a few more questions that you might be able to answer.

1. Could you shed some light on the photo posted by Ray of the AH-6Cs with the M158s parked up at Hurlburt Field (It's in post #137, I can't link it into this post, for some reason). It looks like this photo features helicopters involved in some kind of fly-off competition between the OH-6A and the OH-58A in the selection process to choose a "Light Combat Helicopter" for TF158. Am I way off or is this how the OH-6A came to be chosen for service with your unit ahead of the OH-58A?

2. Also, were the unarmed versions of the OH-6A used in the early transport role (1 Pilot + 3 Delta Operators) also called the JOH-6A before the MH-6E arrived on the scene?

Thanks again.

LD.

Edited by Loach Driver
Link to post
Share on other sites
GT, while you're in a generous mood, I have a few more questions that you might be able to answer.

1. Could you shed some light on the photo posted by Ray of the AH-6Cs with the M158s parked up at Hurlburt Field (It's in post #137, I can't link it into this post, for some reason). It looks like this photo features helicopters involved in some kind of fly-off competition between the OH-6A and the OH-58A in the selection process to choose a "Light Combat Helicopter" for TF158. Am I way off or is this how the OH-6A came to be chosen for service with your unit ahead of the OH-58A?

2. Also, were the unarmed versions of the OH-6A used in the early transport role (1 Pilot + 3 Delta Operators) also called the JOH-6A before the MH-6E arrived on the scene?

Thanks again.

LD.

LD,

I think I am correct that the "J" means it is a test aircraft, such as JUH-1H.

Ray

Link to post
Share on other sites
LD,

I think I am correct that the "J" means it is a test aircraft, such as JUH-1H.

Ray

This is correct. J is the prefix for temporary test aircraft. This is generally assumed to mean that the modifications to the aircraft aren't so drastic as to make it unreasonable to modify it back to the standard configuration at the end of the day. The prefix N is the prefix for permanent test aircraft (such as the NH-3A), which are so heavily modified that it is not deemed feasible to return the aircraft to their original configuration. No specific modification is indicated by either prefix, only that the base aircraft is modified. That is to say that there could be four JOH-6As with no modifications in common, but there would not necessarily be different nomenclature.

Edited by thatguy96
Link to post
Share on other sites
GT, while you're in a generous mood, I have a few more questions that you might be able to answer.

1. Could you shed some light on the photo posted by Ray of the AH-6Cs with the M158s parked up at Hurlburt Field (It's in post #137, I can't link it into this post, for some reason). It looks like this photo features helicopters involved in some kind of fly-off competition between the OH-6A and the OH-58A in the selection process to choose a "Light Combat Helicopter" for TF158. Am I way off or is this how the OH-6A came to be chosen for service with your unit ahead of the OH-58A?

2. Also, were the unarmed versions of the OH-6A used in the early transport role (1 Pilot + 3 Delta Operators) also called the JOH-6A before the MH-6E arrived on the scene?

Thanks again.

LD.

LD,

I would defer to our friend here on the forum, EDWMatt. I believe those are his photos: Earlier he wrote about the 158's; "GT's right, we used 158 pods during airworthiness testing at Edwards. The pods were merely "shapes" to provide representative drag, so we had several old unserviceable 158 pods that were no longer suitable for live fire that we used on test aircraft. I dropped a whole bunch of old junk 158's when we were doing asymmetric stores jettison testing on the Apache." I bevieve the pictures from Hurlburt were done sometime in early 1980. TF160 accepted the six orignal AH-6C's with the new 260 seven shot pods.

Here's a photo from the early day's when we used to go to Gulfport and fly the OH-6A's. Usually single pilot during training. As we were still in a training mode, still learning to fly full faceplate under goggles, we didn't carry passengers till later on. When we got the first T Tails, then we really started hauling all sorts of "operators."

Gulfport%20MS.jpg

To answer the question of why one over the other, I would have to say it came down to 1. transportability - the 58 is very labor intensive to off/onload. and 2. the visibility, on goggles, in the 58 basically sucks. We actually had both the 6's and the 58's at Campbell, but no one wanted to fly at night at all in the 58's . Flying goggles in a 58 is about as scary as flying a Cobra with goggles in the backseat. No viz! I don't know how 58D guys do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is correct. J is the prefix for temporary test aircraft. This is generally assumed to mean that the modifications to the aircraft aren't so drastic as to make it unreasonable to modify it back to the standard configuration at the end of the day. The prefix N is the prefix for permanent test aircraft (such as the NH-3A), which are so heavily modified that it is not deemed feasible to return the aircraft to their original configuration. No specific modification is indicated by either prefix, only that the base aircraft is modified. That is to say that there could be four JOH-6As with no modifications in common, but there would not necessarily be different nomenclature.

Let me amplify on this a bit, since I spent a lot of time in the test community. AFI16-401 "Designation and Naming of Military Aerospace Vehicles" defines the "J" Status Prefix as "Special Test (Temporary) Aircraft in special test programs by authorized organizations, on bailment contract with a special test configuration, or with installed property temporarily removed to accommodate a test." Besides that strict definition, the Army tended to use the J prefix in other ways. One was to designate modified platforms before a formal designation was approved by the Air Force (which administers the designation program). For example, the AH-6C was initially a "JOH-6A" when we had it.

J also was a "catch-all" for small batches of modified aircraft even when there wasn’t an intention to ever remove the mod. Examples are the JUH-1Hs with the Bell fire suppression kit provisions or the JUH-1H Hind Surrogate Hueys at NTC. The JOH-58C LCH’s probably fell in this category also. The purpose here was to denote that these were modified aircraft, but the mods were small enough that they could easily be removed.

A subtlety of the J prefix in the Army is that it essentially removed the aircraft from the active inventory by designating the aircraft as unsuitable for combat operations. We used this to our advantage in the test community. Often, flight test aircraft tend to ‘castoffs†– aircraft that have a history of being maintenance headaches or in poor condition. The test activities would spend a lot of effort to fix these aircraft up and then the operational guys would ****** them back. We applied for J designators for all of our assigned instrumented test aircraft, as it prevented them from so easily grabbing our aircraft back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LD,

I would defer to our friend here on the forum, EDWMatt. I believe those are his photos: Earlier he wrote about the 158's; "GT's right, we used 158 pods during airworthiness testing at Edwards. The pods were merely "shapes" to provide representative drag, so we had several old unserviceable 158 pods that were no longer suitable for live fire that we used on test aircraft. I dropped a whole bunch of old junk 158's when we were doing asymmetric stores jettison testing on the Apache." I bevieve the pictures from Hurlburt were done sometime in early 1980. TF160 accepted the six orignal AH-6C's with the new 260 seven shot pods.

Sorry, guys, but can't shed any light on those pics or why the 'Sixes are carrying 158's, as they aren't mine. I was simply commenting that we tended to use a lot of 158's in flight test at Edwards (including on the JOH-6A/AH-6C) , as they were essentially 'throw away' pods at that time as everyone preferred the 260's

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gulfport%20MS.jpg

Photo courtesy of GT

GT, Ray and Matt, thanks for all the great info. Thanks as well for posting the latest photo. It is interesting to see the contrast in colours between the regular 6s and the TF158 OH-6s. Is it true the base commander was really p1ssed off when you and your colleagues arrived to take over his entire Loach fleet? If not, it sounds like a great story!

LD.

Edited by Loach Driver
Link to post
Share on other sites
Gulfport%20MS.jpg

Photo courtesy of GT

GT, Ray and Matt, thanks for all the great info. Thanks as well for posting the latest photo. It is interesting to see the contrast in colours between the regular 6s and the TF158 OH-6s. Is it true the base commander was really p1ssed off when you and your colleagues arrived to take over his entire Loach fleet? If not, it sounds like a great story!

LD.

Remember LD, the TF160 aircraft had been repainted with the low reflective IR paint. The OH's in these Gulfport pictures are vanilla versions from the National Guard.

Don't know if the guy was po'd, but better to po'd off, than po'd on, and he would have been if he hadn't approved what we were doing. GT

Edited by AH6C-SIP
Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember LD, the TF160 aircraft had been repainted with the low reflective IR paint. The OH's in these Gulfport pictures are vanilla versions from the National Guard.

Don't know if the guy was po'd, but better to po'd off, than po'd on, and he would have been if he hadn't approved what we were doing. GT

Thanks for clearing up that little story. It was mentioned in "The Night Stalkers" book that the Commanding Officer at Gulfport wasn't too happy when the orders came down that his OH-6 fleet had to be turned over to TF158. Here are a few more questions that you might be able to help with, this time on the EH-6B:

1. When was conversion work started on the EH-6B?

2. Was it going to be used during "Operation Honey Badger" or did it come into use after January 1981? (The answer to this might be of a classified nature, but if you can give some details, thanks.)

3. Is the EH-6B based on the base-line, unarmed JOH-6A (with the C-20B engine, Blackhole IR suppressors and Omega navigation system) or was it based on a standard OH-6A airframe?

I think Doug mentioned earlier that the EH-6B was "nothing special" but did have Satcom gear and a FLIR added. Thanks again for all your contributions to this thread and for answering the never-ending list of questions.

LD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for clearing up that little story. It was mentioned in "The Night Stalkers" book that the Commanding Officer at Gulfport wasn't too happy when the orders came down that his OH-6 fleet had to be turned over to TF158. Here are a few more questions that you might be able to help with, this time on the EH-6B:

1. When was conversion work started on the EH-6B?

2. Was it going to be used during "Operation Honey Badger" or did it come into use after January 1981? (The answer to this might be of a classified nature, but if you can give some details, thanks.)

3. Is the EH-6B based on the base-line, unarmed JOH-6A (with the C-20B engine, Blackhole IR suppressors and Omega navigation system) or was it based on a standard OH-6A airframe?

I think Doug mentioned earlier that the EH-6B was "nothing special" but did have Satcom gear and a FLIR added. Thanks again for all your contributions to this thread and for answering the never-ending list of questions.

LD.

Answer as best I can recall:

1. Don't know, but we had, I think two originally for Command and Control.

2. As Doug mentioned the only thing different about the EH was the SATCOM configuration. No FLIR on the early version. That didn't happen till way later. No black hole stuff, didn't even have Omega Nav. That was only peculiar to the AH-6C's and it wasn't worth a flip... Omega needs six or seven minutes to know where it is. Not much good when you are off loaded and need to fly away in three minutes. We didn't use it much. If you havn't prepared a map,, then you were not going to get there.

3. Original was based on the OH-6 standard airframe.

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...