NJJK Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 Any noticeable exterior differences between the two models? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tank Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 The biggest that I recall is the Engine Air Particle Separators (EAPS) on the D model and not on the A model. The stub wing looks different also but don't quote me on that. https://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S-65H-53D SEA STALLION.php HTH Quote Link to post Share on other sites
doupnik Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 54 minutes ago, Tank said: The biggest that I recall is the Engine Air Particle Separators (EAPS) on the D model and not on the A model. The stub wing looks different also but don't quote me on that. https://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S-65H-53D SEA STALLION.php HTH All CH-53As ended up with EAPS, but they were not initially installed early in the production run. As far as I can tell, there were few external difference, the D got an improved transmission and an automatic rotor fold. mason Quote Link to post Share on other sites
hawg53 Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 The CH-53A’s that the USAF obtained all came with EAPS. They also had the -6B engines. I remember having to be very careful when flying them out of Kirtland AFB as the engines were not very powerful. Externally, they looked just like any other H-53. Once we put the titanium rotor blades, hoist, air refueling probe and the -100 engines on them, they became very good helicopters. I landed one in the Pecos mountains one night at 12,500 feet during a rescue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
53 Marine Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 The D had “bat wings” with Large Auxiliary Fuel Tanks. The A model never did. As noted above, the EAPS barrels were added on very early in the program, especially all 53’s deployed to Vietnam. Most notable airframe difference was the rear half of each engine cowling. A model (had the -6 engines) were not flush with the exhaust and had a curved elliptical look which exposed more of the exhaust. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
YF65_CH53E Posted December 20, 2020 Share Posted December 20, 2020 Some good observations above. But also some more detail needed: Production CH-53A's were delivered to the USMC with: GE T-64-6B engines (short engine cow;. long -6B exhaust sticks out, fastest way to tell a true "A" model 53) Automatic Blade fold (Hydraulically) Automatic Tail Fold (hydraulically) EAPS not installed (But designed) No bat wings No Aux tanks CH-53D's All of the above except: GE T-64-413 engines Same transmission No bat wings No aux tanks The fleet called these 53's "slicks" or "super A's" The USMC started installing the bat wings and 650 gallon aux tanks under an Airframes Change Notice, that was approved by at that time BUAer, now NAVAIRSYSCOM. Both the fleet depot activities and the factory under the next production contract started installing the USMC bat wing/aux tank configuration. in the late 70's. The USN RH-53D, with -413 engines and later -415 engines followed closely the USAF HH-53C configuration. CH-53D's came with "wet heads" meaning the sleeve and spindle assy needed to be oiled, and also the 53D came with Elastomeric Rotor Heads (ERH) "dry heads". Only a few HMH-463 "Pegasus" aircraft out of Hawaii, MCAS Kaneohe, had a 53D slick, with an ERH installed. By the time the "dry head" was fleet wide almost the entire USMC 53D fleet had aux tanks installed. USAF HH-53B, HH-53C Super Jolly Green Giants basically a CH-53D configuration but these additions: Aerial Refueling Probe Early bat wings w/struts some with out depending on the aux tank 250 gallon low profile aux tanks 300 gallon aux tanks 400 gallon aux tanks automatic tail fold non folding MRH EAPS were apart of the contract, but I have many pictures of the EAPS not installed on 53B/C helos, but in SEA, they look to always have the EAPS installed from the pics I have and have seen. i realize the USAF birds of that time had numerous other add-ons, field modifications, avionics upgrades etc for their CSAR mission in South East Asia. But the aux tanks, the engine cowls and the dry head vs wet head really determine the variant for the services. r/Gy Dan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John B Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 So Reskit has released H-53 detail parts in 1/48 and 1/72. Among the items they've produced are wheels, tail rotor hubs, main rotor heads, EAPS, and external fuel tanks. Is this rotor head appropriate for USMC CH-53Ds and for what time-frame? -> Reskit RSU-480011 6-blade rotor head Quote Link to post Share on other sites
YF65_CH53E Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 John, This Restkit upgrade is appropriate for USMC CH-53D's. 1980's all the way to their retirement in 2008. That resin kit represents the correct Elastomeric Rotor Head (ERH) as well as the correct Main Gear Box (MGB) for USMC CH-53D's. r/Gunny Dan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.