*Amazon Link* amzn.to/3pychxV Helicopter: Pioneering With Igor Sikorsky amzn.to/3PBBNN9 The Story of the Winged S ( Igor Sikorsky (1889-1972) MH-60R Seahawk Anti Submarine ► ua-cam.com/video/WIGS0kqOyNA/v-deo.html
ERROR AT 4:12 This helicopter can fly a L O T faster than the stated 37 kilometers/hour ( 23 miles/hour) The chart at 5:55 shows that it can fly at 195.6 miles/hour
add list to correct: 4:05 : the CH-53 family has THREE turboshaft engines. The third is located behind the rotorhub with the intake sticking out on the left-hand-side.
Michael, you are 100% correct. 3 engines like the E model, but more shaft horse power. The 53K is faster, but I don't think it has the operational range. That can be resolved with adding additional internal fuel capacity. Both are pretty awesome machines.
4:05 you made an error here: the CH-53 family has THREE turboshaft engines. The third is located behind the rotorhub with the intake sticking out on the left-hand-side.
This helicopter completed a successful air-to-air fueling test with the help of a refueling tanker. I would have been more impressed if it did it without the help of a tanker.
one can not appreciate the amount of noise that is created by this helicopter. I was a crew member many times while stationed on MCAS Futenma. It's massive!
Just think Creepy touchy feely Uncle Joey and the Demonocraps gave these away to the Taliban, including a state of the art fully equipped Airforce Base and assets, keys and everything
@@SunriseLAW Not nonsense, mostly. Just disjointed in a way common amongst writers who either don't know or don't care about the topic at hand. So yeah, garbage.
Best looking helicopters ever built Mi-24 Hind, AH-1 Cobra / Viper attack helicopters (sorry Apache) and the Sea/King Stallion heavy lift choppers. The Stallions are so damn big and massive they are just awe inspiring.
Walked off the ramp of. CH-53 delta a few times doing some jumps @ Camp Lejeune in 92’ I’ll never forget the feeling of seeing the rotor right when your walking off the ramp & thinking man that rotor would slice & dice you up lol.Semper-Fi.
A Blackhawk is high maintenance because there are a crew of inexperienced 18-19 year olds maintaining them. I was on a cruise aboard a guided missile cruiser observing a maintenance crew for the ships SH60B helicopters. The E5 or E6 level personnel knew what they were doing. The lessor ranks not so much.
Those technicians have to go to school on how to maintain jet engines and other systems so they're probably a little older than teenagers and they probably also know what they're doing since they've been trained.
@@rayjames6096 It took 2 1/2 years for me to hit the fleet. Still had more training after that. But when a CPO said you can't do it that way. I did not re-enlist. I also had 3+ years of engineering before I ran out of money. I joined to make more and go back. So yes I did know what each part was for & how it worked & how it was programmed to work. The schematics were in my head. They were not in the chiefs head. I was actually older than the chief. I would have stayed but I knew there more chiefs and officers like him. I did not need a fault matrix guess sheet. Yes I did know programming. I did know a bit of quantum mechanics. TTL and CMOS design. My brother unlike me got a free ride to his BSEE. Then my dad died. He had problems with that also. After 25 years of doing it. The government said he was not qualified. So 25 years of developing the science in the field is not the same as studying his work in a college. Studying it is better and much betterer because you gets a PhD and he did not. But here is the rub he made more after being disqualified and hiring a PhD to sign the papers as a contractor. A LOT more. One job was more than the previous 25 years.
To fly is heavenly, to hover divine. Rotary wing aviation there is simply no substitute. Thanks to all now serving, those who have, and those who will in the future. FLY NAVY!!!
I live in Stratford CT & I was lucky enough to see one of these when it was lifting off from the Sikorsky factory here. They really are massive. Even compared to the CH-47's I often see. Obviously that flying bus is bigger but for a single rotor helicopter it's crazy to see it flying.
The UH-1 and the AH-1 are original airframes but the USMC chose to have them factory refreshed and upgraded as opposed to buying new when I served we routinely had aircraft coming from and going to the Texas factory facility it surprises me that USMC chose to buy new
yeah $50m an engine ....someone somewhere is taking the proverbial...for that much i want it to tuck me at night wake me in the morning dress me feed me and shoot down any missiles fired at me ..cant do that ...im not buying it 😂🤣
The current 53 is the most labor intensive platform we have. New or now they will require many of the same inspections, but it can lift but boy at a big cost. Hardest platform I ever worked on and Ive done them all.
It's crazy! I don't think the relatively small benefits compared to the older version justifies the development cost. In my view, it would have been better to build more of the old versions, maybe with some upgrades but not a completely new model with such a huge cost. But I guess Sikorsky are happy...
Probably why the Commandant of the Marine Corps wants to make the Corps smaller. Get rid of jobs, and people that way you can free up money for the King Stallion and F35s
It’s complete B.S. that it’s low maintenance. You can service two chinooks for every one CH 53. It’s only advantage if it’s not down for service is it’s higher speed.
@@darkknight1340 Through the whole video. The K ditches the external fuel pods resulting in looking like the MH. Fuel probe is also fully retractable too if I'm not mistaken. Hop over to Lockheed Martin's website and tell me it's not.
@michael Harris I understand what you mean but isn’t the the helicopter’s main role in transportation thus I don’t see why it would need to be too fast.
I think the guy meant that the G model is 37KM faster than model it is replacing however, understand that this mistake is understandable since he doesn't seem to know the meaning of pounds and miles per hour.
While I appreciate the videos, please don't mix Metric and Imperial units. In some places you state feet and inches then switch to cm. Since this is a US helicopter, I would suggest keeping everything in Imperial units - feet, inches, pounds and miles.
6:33 “Fother more” Text to speech has really taken a step forward being able to sound like a person by training it to sound like you or whomever, unfortunately typos can easily be missed and you get phrases like “Fother more”. Something that wouldn’t have been spoken that way if a person was actually reading it. Sometimes you have to misspell something to get it to sound right in the app, like “Firther” would have sounded like further in TTS.
most of the measurements in this video are metric when at least when I was in Army Aviation everything except fuel was done in SAE on the shadow 200 that I flew.
95 % of the world's population and probably a majority of the viewers of this video are used to the metric system so it makes most sense that way. You know, not only Americans watch US produced videos.
@@skunkjobb many viewers may not be American, but you can convert from imperial to metric just as easy as I can go the other way. It just makes more sense in a video to go with the measurements that are used in the country of origin at least to me especially sense the poster is using both systems.
@@joshuathomas8529 I think it makes most sense that as few viewers as possible have to make unnecessary conversions regardless of what unit was used where or when the object in question originated. An example where we travel in time instead of location: Imagine a video where they talk about some ancient thing. Should they use ancient units that only 0,01 % of the viewers know just because that was the unit used at that time or is it better that the producer of the video (only one person) does the conversion? I think the latter.
@@reubenmorris487 OR, the US could join the rest of the free and intelligent world and use the metric system. A system with a base 10 unit of measure which is infinitely easier to work with than the retarded SAE system.
Pretty impressive. Hard to compare the 47s I rode in to one of these monsters. But just keep in mind, the larger and slower the target … no matter how many flares, with todays ground to air missile systems, they are targets of high value.
Not really. It's slow, not armored and not armorable, a huge target with a hot engine. AC-130 works because it flies outside most non-peer adversaries range. There's a reason US doesn't really use helicopters in a gunship role and why Russia loses the most of them in relative terms compared to any other type of equipment.
Was in HC-1 in the 80s. We had 2 53Es and were the worst. Only 1 flew once in a yr. We had to let those crews fly in our H3s to get flt time. I want my money back!
At first glance, this thing seems pretty over the top in terms of cost vs. mission capability. I mean for that price, the marines could fly their own planes! Add to that, the increased 'manpad' availability, and proliferation. not to mention the probabilities of drone swarm attacks, and I wonder if this behemoth is headed for Battleship utility....not to mention vulnerability.
It's a heavy lift rotary wing.. It can lift 3x the amount the older versions could.. And it's built for the Marines. So what the hell you're posting is dribble..
@@WizzRacing Just so you know, 'junior' (just guessing here), more than one Joint Chief has made much the same observation ergo ...."drivel' my ass .. Btw, former XVIII Airborne Corps Spcl Warfare "Skydragon" here. In my day, I was attached to the old 'FORCES COMMAND' and occasionally, I used to jump out of these "Collection of Spare Parts Flying in Close Formation" (i.e. Choppers) and 'interfaced' with Marine Recon units frequently. Having said all that, I will admit this new model is quite an improvement, but still damned expensive, especially given the 'mission' which is currently, shall we say, 'evolving'.
@@seeratlasdtyria4584 The damn mission is to move shit from A- B... So what part you not get? And make an appeal to authority again. I dare you.. As It's a short bus riders argument. When they try that shit. As the Marines don't buy shit or replace shit unless they need it... Have a nice Day Junior...
Wait until you watch one chop off it's refueling boom and keep trucking. Those blades are massive and at the or speed of rotation or tip path speed, drones don't stand a chance. These things carry marines and equipment from the amphib to the shore and back along with the MEU. It's absolutely relevant.
So it has no stealth, it's slow, Yeah it can left stuff but does have hidden bays for SM2s. I am really trying to understand what it does that it cost so much? It looks like a cool cockpit but there's a whole c130 sitting over there 🤷🏿♂️
@@pctrashtalk2069 Shoot > just 1 state got enough oil to run the whole UNITED STATES 200 years > we have 50 more states Our Reserves are overflowing. But yet we buy over seas oil. Don't make any good since
@@jackwalker9492 They should have learned in High School to always check your work. When something seems wrong and stupid, it just might be because you did something wrong or stupid -- like forget a zero when you are dividing. That is what happened here. Big difference between $12.5M and $125M.
@@craigkdillon BUT! You pointed out the math. I am guilty as are many for just skimming the headline and pouncing to a conclusion without taking time for details. You pointed out the obvious and did everyone a favor. I skimmed it, thought BS, but didnt go into the details like probably many others. I relieved to hear better and thanks for doing the homework for me! Salute!
@@jackwalker9492 A friend with a bad sense of scale pointed out that civilian S-92s (a less capable heli with about 1/4th the lift) can be purchased for roughly $27 million, so getting King Stallions for an average of $12.5 million would be fantastic. Of course, getting 4x the lift on a very capable helicopter would be worth well over 4x the price, so $125 million isn't unreasonable either. Unfortunately, both the video and this commenter did their math wrong - it's a $25 billion contract, not $2.5 billion, leading to a unit cost of $125 million each, so it's just a good deal, not an amazing deal. As the production lines run and other countries buy CH-53K, the price is also subsidized, with the current 2022 actual unit cost being $91.6 million (under 1/4th a civilian S-92), not $125 million. The worst thing the military budget offices could do would be to cancel the project, realize they still need the capability - and fund the development of a new heli that will cost even more, won't be subsidized by other countries, and will inevitably itself get cancelled right as procurement begins. That's the Congress cycle. Fortunately the Marines have bet a lot on the idea of mobile forces, so King Stallion should be delivered in full.
@@Bingo_Bango_ Thank you for such a detailed reply I can not claim exerience to deccide on this iue, but wil look at your answer more closely. LOL, Rare, that on YT somebody says I must listen to this. You take care and again, I will study this advice and thank you for it.
@@mariusdufour9186 probably that’s what he meant, but not what he actually said. A friend of mine used to fly that older model of helicopter in the 1960s.
You cant measure mpg for helicopters. When hovering the mpg is infinite - going nowhere gives shit mileage. Lets just say you couldn't afford a fill-up.
That’s completely insane. Civilian S-92’s are going for $25M max, with all the bells and whistles, what makes this $75M more? A Predator cloaking device and plasma cannons? Typical military cost overruns that the taxpayer gets stiffed on once again?
Civilian helicopters don't need or have any armament, defense capabilities, need to travel over water for hours, maintenance done on a ship at night in rough seas, the ability to fold to be able to fit on the same ship, the third engine, 4 more blades, and above all the fuel capacity that weighs more than an s92 max weight.
S-92 hauls 11500lb @ 165 knots (max speed), CH-53K hauls 44122lb @ 170 knots (cruise)... that's before considering predator cloaking device and plasma cannons, maybe do five seconds of research before talking shit?
*Amazon Link*
amzn.to/3pychxV Helicopter: Pioneering With Igor Sikorsky
amzn.to/3PBBNN9 The Story of the Winged S ( Igor Sikorsky (1889-1972)
MH-60R Seahawk Anti Submarine ► ua-cam.com/video/WIGS0kqOyNA/v-deo.html
at military tv im your no.1 fan i hope you could make a documentary video on fremm frigate and also with the mogami class frigate
Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion Cruise speed: 170 kn (200 mph, 310 km/h) new.
Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion Cruise speed: 150 kn (170 mph, 280 km/h) old.
ERROR AT 4:12
This helicopter can fly a L O T faster than the stated 37 kilometers/hour ( 23 miles/hour)
The chart at 5:55 shows that it can fly at 195.6 miles/hour
add list to correct: 4:05 : the CH-53 family has THREE turboshaft engines. The third is located behind the rotorhub with the intake sticking out on the left-hand-side.
That dropped my jaw also ..
@@paulfrancis3237 What I found in other comments is that he meant to say it can fly 37 km/hr FASTER than its predecessor
He problem meant 370kmh or 229mph
Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion Cruise speed: 170 kn (200 mph, 310 km/h) new
Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion Cruise speed: 150 kn (170 mph, 280 km/h) the old
A wholly incoherent incomplete disjointed facts with pictures that don't match the King Stallion. 💔👎
@@SunriseLAW I de-sub the channel!
.
@@SunriseLAW report for misleading!
@@SunriseLAW I know your right, I am just so annoyed by all these videos that are either gets shit wrong or is straight up click bait
@@SunriseLAW God so true so true lol
You said in you video that the 53K has 2 GE T408 engines. It actually has three T408 engines. The last 53 having 2 engines wad the D model.
They also said it can travel up to 37kmh 🤣
Michael, you are 100% correct. 3 engines like the E model, but more shaft horse power. The 53K is faster, but I don't think it has the operational range. That can be resolved with adding additional internal fuel capacity. Both are pretty awesome machines.
4:05 you made an error here: the CH-53 family has THREE turboshaft engines. The third is located behind the rotorhub with the intake sticking out on the left-hand-side.
Noticing that third exhaust I was thinking if that isn't another engine it sure is a HUGE APU.
The Echo model had the 3rd engine the A/D 's had two.
There's a bunch of bad info in this video.
This helicopter completed a successful air-to-air fueling test with the help of a refueling tanker. I would have been more impressed if it did it without the help of a tanker.
now that really would be next-generation capability!😀
Haaaa!🤣
At the 0:26 mark the cockpit shown is NOT a CH-53K. No glass cockpit. what i see are the steam gauges from earlier CH-53 models
one can not appreciate the amount of noise that is created by this helicopter. I was a crew member many times while stationed on MCAS Futenma. It's massive!
They are, however, quieter than a cobra. Semper Fi I was stationed at the same air station
Don't forget the static charge build up
Just think Creepy touchy feely Uncle Joey and the Demonocraps gave these away to the Taliban, including a state of the art fully equipped Airforce Base and assets, keys and everything
I was in the forests of Ft Bragg at night when a CH53 was flying around. It sounded like an alien space ship from a sci-fi movie
I was stationed at Hansen and often went to Futemna to get rides for training….miss the old days.
Sucks to be retired.
I would sure hope it could fly just a little faster than 37 KPH thats 23 MPH 4:12 , the marine could just about row a boat to shore faster than that.
@@SunriseLAW Not nonsense, mostly. Just disjointed in a way common amongst writers who either don't know or don't care about the topic at hand.
So yeah, garbage.
Best looking helicopters ever built Mi-24 Hind, AH-1 Cobra / Viper attack helicopters (sorry Apache) and the Sea/King Stallion heavy lift choppers. The Stallions are so damn big and massive they are just awe inspiring.
Walked off the ramp of. CH-53 delta a few times doing some jumps @ Camp Lejeune in 92’ I’ll never forget the feeling of seeing the rotor right when your walking off the ramp & thinking man that rotor would slice & dice you up lol.Semper-Fi.
Sikorsky claimed the Blackhawk was low maintenance as well. My experience says very differently.
Military aircraft go thru maintenance after every flight, the US military has personnel in the military with their MOS being aircraft maintenance.
A Blackhawk is high maintenance because there are a crew of inexperienced 18-19 year olds maintaining them. I was on a cruise aboard a guided missile cruiser observing a maintenance crew for the ships SH60B helicopters. The E5 or E6 level personnel knew what they were doing. The lessor ranks not so much.
Those technicians have to go to school on how to maintain jet engines and other systems so they're probably a little older than teenagers and they probably also know what they're doing since they've been trained.
JD, you sure as hell got THAT right.
@@rayjames6096 It took 2 1/2 years for me to hit the fleet. Still had more training after that. But when a CPO said you can't do it that way. I did not re-enlist. I also had 3+ years of engineering before I ran out of money.
I joined to make more and go back.
So yes I did know what each part was for & how it worked & how it was programmed to work. The schematics were in my head.
They were not in the chiefs head. I was actually older than the chief.
I would have stayed but I knew there more chiefs and officers like him.
I did not need a fault matrix guess sheet.
Yes I did know programming. I did know a bit of quantum mechanics. TTL and CMOS design.
My brother unlike me got a free ride to his BSEE. Then my dad died.
He had problems with that also. After 25 years of doing it. The government said he was not qualified.
So 25 years of developing the science in the field is not the same as studying his work in a college.
Studying it is better and much betterer because you gets a PhD and he did not.
But here is the rub he made more after being disqualified and hiring a PhD to sign the papers as a contractor.
A LOT more. One job was more than the previous 25 years.
at 37 KPH its not going to be catching up to a C-130 to refuel unless they figured out how to make a C-130 hover.
Yeah, I really don't know where he got that number. Maybe meant 37kph faster??? Because they fly MUCH faster than 37kph
@@Bendigo1 ya i know i was in the corps
@@allensanders5535 A hovering c-130 would be pretty cool to see though...
The Marines are extremely patient being they are used to boat speeds.:))
I remember loading this model CH-53 into a C-17. :D Pretty cool.
I appreciate setting out to make informative content, but the amount of errors in this would make me want to reconsider.
it obviously has 3 engines...
To fly is heavenly, to hover divine. Rotary wing aviation there is simply no substitute. Thanks to all now serving, those who have, and those who will in the future. FLY NAVY!!!
I’m looking forward to being able to work on these bad boys !
"It's also called the Most Expensive Helicopter in the World!"
I live in Stratford CT & I was lucky enough to see one of these when it was lifting off from the Sikorsky factory here. They really are massive. Even compared to the CH-47's I often see. Obviously that flying bus is bigger but for a single rotor helicopter it's crazy to see it flying.
Imagine seeing one of those giant Russian ones I want to see one of those in person
The UH-1 and the AH-1 are original airframes but the USMC chose to have them factory refreshed and upgraded as opposed to buying new when I served we routinely had aircraft coming from and going to the Texas factory facility it surprises me that USMC chose to buy new
4:13 Thirty seven kilometres per hour? I’d want my money back.
That bird is sturdy as hell. Worth every penny!
3 engines bro, it has 3 engines.
yeah $50m an engine ....someone somewhere is taking the proverbial...for that much i want it to tuck me at night wake me in the morning dress me feed me and shoot down any missiles fired at me ..cant do that ...im not buying it 😂🤣
okay that looks sick AF.
Thanks
4:05 WOW 37 km/hr!!! There won't be a moped anywhere on the planet that can keep up with this beast!!
Osprey and Sea Stallion, two similar platforms make Defense Inc. very happy.
Wow, this thing is faster than my neighbours dog.
The current 53 is the most labor intensive platform we have. New or now they will require many of the same inspections, but it can lift but boy at a big cost. Hardest platform I ever worked on and Ive done them all.
Jesus, I cant believe that we would actually consider paying $125 million for a helicopter.
U might if u were getting a share of the money!
It's crazy! I don't think the relatively small benefits compared to the older version justifies the development cost. In my view, it would have been better to build more of the old versions, maybe with some upgrades but not a completely new model with such a huge cost. But I guess Sikorsky are happy...
there your health care money brother think about it!!!!!!!!
Probably why the Commandant of the Marine Corps wants to make the Corps smaller. Get rid of jobs, and people that way you can free up money for the King Stallion and F35s
Nah. ...Jesus no need CH53K.
Just the Beast to put a rapid reaction force full equipped in place .
It’s complete B.S. that it’s low maintenance. You can service two chinooks for every one CH 53. It’s only advantage if it’s not down for service is it’s higher speed.
CH53K has 3 engines just like the CH53E
Can it fly at 37 mph?
I think there may have been a small error in the presentation.
@@christopherrobinson7541 This haapens often with this channel
A good pilot could get that down to zero mph.🤣😃
That thing is HUGE!
Right On
Where's the king stallion then?.The video shows current versions of the MH-53.
It shows the CH-53K...
@@imswiney56 Where?.
@@darkknight1340 Through the whole video. The K ditches the external fuel pods resulting in looking like the MH. Fuel probe is also fully retractable too if I'm not mistaken. Hop over to Lockheed Martin's website and tell me it's not.
5:52
The first foreign operator will be the IAF, courtesy of the US taxpayer, not that they had any say in the matter.
Military TV likes to put the development cost in the tagline as the per unit sticker cost:)
Pretty slow says at 4:11 it does 37km/h I could ride my bike faster then that when I was 9.
CH-53K the ability to fly 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) faster than its CH-53E predecessor.
@michael Harris I understand what you mean but isn’t the the helicopter’s main role in transportation thus I don’t see why it would need to be too fast.
@@Military-TV spec sheet says 150 knot
@@grunt1705 that's it's top speed, not it's cruise speed
Noobie this helicopter designed to carry loads not for racing
There is a channel named "Tech Vehicles" stealing your content. You should do something about it.
Thank God, I will buy one for myself
Very nice
Cheers from west Africa
🦅
With a name like Sikorsky I legit expected this to be a Russian brand, but I was wrong. Learn somethin new every day
Gog and Magog
Hills to the southeast of Cambridge.
Love love
I think the guy meant that the G model is 37KM faster than model it is replacing however, understand that this mistake is understandable since he doesn't seem to know the meaning of pounds and miles per hour.
Them robovoices are getting pretty good, took minutes while before I realized I was listening to a voicesynth.
Robots don’t take breaths.
While I appreciate the videos, please don't mix Metric and Imperial units. In some places you state feet and inches then switch to cm. Since this is a US helicopter, I would suggest keeping everything in Imperial units - feet, inches, pounds and miles.
This must be able to land on sea a unique capability of most expensive helicopter
How does its lifting compare with Osprey?
Saw similar birds around Baltimore the other day...Martin State Airport
That is the cleanest shitter I’ve ever seen
6:33 “Fother more”
Text to speech has really taken a step forward being able to sound like a person by training it to sound like you or whomever, unfortunately typos can easily be missed and you get phrases like “Fother more”. Something that wouldn’t have been spoken that way if a person was actually reading it. Sometimes you have to misspell something to get it to sound right in the app, like “Firther” would have sounded like further in TTS.
Imagine how many drones they could have for that amount of money 💰
most of the measurements in this video are metric when at least when I was in Army Aviation everything except fuel was done in SAE on the shadow 200 that I flew.
95 % of the world's population and probably a majority of the viewers of this video are used to the metric system so it makes most sense that way. You know, not only Americans watch US produced videos.
@@skunkjobb many viewers may not be American, but you can convert from imperial to metric just as easy as I can go the other way. It just makes more sense in a video to go with the measurements that are used in the country of origin at least to me especially sense the poster is using both systems.
@@joshuathomas8529 I think it makes most sense that as few viewers as possible have to make unnecessary conversions regardless of what unit was used where or when the object in question originated.
An example where we travel in time instead of location: Imagine a video where they talk about some ancient thing. Should they use ancient units that only 0,01 % of the viewers know just because that was the unit used at that time or is it better that the producer of the video (only one person) does the conversion? I think the latter.
@@joshuathomas8529 Just a little bit of math and a separate google page for the conversions...yes...
@@reubenmorris487 OR, the US could join the rest of the free and intelligent world and use the metric system. A system with a base 10 unit of measure which is infinitely easier to work with than the retarded SAE system.
what a machine!
Pretty impressive. Hard to compare the 47s I rode in to one of these monsters. But just keep in mind, the larger and slower the target … no matter how many flares, with todays ground to air missile systems, they are targets of high value.
Exactly. How quickly can these be replaced?
I don't think these fly into enemy air defenses
Does it have a howitzer for a main Gun or what
Ever heard of mi-26 , it can carry twice the payload of the stallion
They are $80 million with costs coming down as production ramps up.
Unique 💕 👌 gorgeous!!!
1:39 nothing sexier than a lady leaning over heavy lift helos🤤
Thanking the engineers
damm that heavy breathing
When It flyes near me. I can hear it 3 plus minutes before it passes by.
4:05 two? are you sure it is not three engines?
37 km per hour? That's not exactly a speed devil. Beautiful chopper though.
Freedom units would be helpful too. Thanks
Even though it's a airlift chopper would be one hell of a gun ship
Not really. It's slow, not armored and not armorable, a huge target with a hot engine.
AC-130 works because it flies outside most non-peer adversaries range.
There's a reason US doesn't really use helicopters in a gunship role and why Russia loses the most of them in relative terms compared to any other type of equipment.
radar altimeter is showing msl ?
Possible when the 2 are the same...
Was in HC-1 in the 80s. We had 2 53Es and were the worst. Only 1 flew once in a yr. We had to let those crews fly in our H3s to get flt time. I want my money back!
At first glance, this thing seems pretty over the top in terms of cost vs. mission capability. I mean for that price, the marines could fly their own planes! Add to that, the increased 'manpad' availability, and proliferation. not to mention the probabilities of drone swarm attacks, and I wonder if this behemoth is headed for Battleship utility....not to mention vulnerability.
It's a heavy lift rotary wing.. It can lift 3x the amount the older versions could..
And it's built for the Marines. So what the hell you're posting is dribble..
@@WizzRacing Just so you know, 'junior' (just guessing here), more than one Joint Chief has made much the same observation ergo ...."drivel' my ass ..
Btw, former XVIII Airborne Corps Spcl Warfare "Skydragon" here. In my day, I was attached to the old 'FORCES COMMAND' and occasionally, I used to jump out of these "Collection of Spare Parts Flying in Close Formation" (i.e. Choppers) and 'interfaced' with Marine Recon units frequently.
Having said all that, I will admit this new model is quite an improvement, but still damned expensive, especially given the 'mission' which is currently, shall we say, 'evolving'.
@@seeratlasdtyria4584 The damn mission is to move shit from A- B...
So what part you not get?
And make an appeal to authority again. I dare you.. As It's a short bus riders argument. When they try that shit. As the Marines don't buy shit or replace shit unless they need it...
Have a nice Day Junior...
Wait until you watch one chop off it's refueling boom and keep trucking. Those blades are massive and at the or speed of rotation or tip path speed, drones don't stand a chance. These things carry marines and equipment from the amphib to the shore and back along with the MEU. It's absolutely relevant.
But the king stallion has three engines not two.
Why don’t they put two of the ch53 k engines on a shinook
So it has no stealth, it's slow, Yeah it can left stuff but does have hidden bays for SM2s. I am really trying to understand what it does that it cost so much? It looks like a cool cockpit but there's a whole c130 sitting over there 🤷🏿♂️
It is excellent for spending money :-)
So an upgraded Cargobob?
Aka King Cargobob
Looks like a big fat target... And at that price per unit, losing just a few is going to hurt big time.
A Fuel Guzzler.. Just what we need RIGHT? Our government used fuel like its WATER. While We The People SUFFERS
And we have plenty of oil reserves but choose not to develop them.
@@pctrashtalk2069 Shoot > just 1 state got enough oil to run the whole UNITED STATES 200 years > we have 50 more states Our Reserves are overflowing. But yet we buy over seas oil. Don't make any good since
The US Military Industrial Complex its really something isnt it
Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion Cruise speed: 170 kn (200 mph, 310 km/h) new
Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion Cruise speed: 150 kn (170 mph, 280 km/h) old
And to think the USMC complains that it doesn't have as much money as the US Navy yet can afford these!
That thing is a tank!!
Uh, no -- it's a helicopter! LOL!!
It pisses me off how much these things cost.
$2,500,000,000 divided by 200 helicopters = $12,500,000 each.
One tenth of what they say.
I think they forgot a zero, or used one too many.
I sure as hell hope you are right! Thanks for the point. I can't imagine even DOD paying that much for a helicopter
@@jackwalker9492 They should have learned in High School to always check your work.
When something seems wrong and stupid, it just might be because you did something wrong or stupid -- like forget a zero when you are dividing. That is what happened here. Big difference between $12.5M and $125M.
@@craigkdillon BUT! You pointed out the math. I am guilty as are many for just skimming the headline and pouncing to a conclusion without taking time for details. You pointed out the obvious and did everyone a favor. I skimmed it, thought BS, but didnt go into the details like probably many others. I relieved to hear better and thanks for doing the homework for me! Salute!
@@jackwalker9492 A friend with a bad sense of scale pointed out that civilian S-92s (a less capable heli with about 1/4th the lift) can be purchased for roughly $27 million, so getting King Stallions for an average of $12.5 million would be fantastic. Of course, getting 4x the lift on a very capable helicopter would be worth well over 4x the price, so $125 million isn't unreasonable either.
Unfortunately, both the video and this commenter did their math wrong - it's a $25 billion contract, not $2.5 billion, leading to a unit cost of $125 million each, so it's just a good deal, not an amazing deal.
As the production lines run and other countries buy CH-53K, the price is also subsidized, with the current 2022 actual unit cost being $91.6 million (under 1/4th a civilian S-92), not $125 million.
The worst thing the military budget offices could do would be to cancel the project, realize they still need the capability - and fund the development of a new heli that will cost even more, won't be subsidized by other countries, and will inevitably itself get cancelled right as procurement begins. That's the Congress cycle. Fortunately the Marines have bet a lot on the idea of mobile forces, so King Stallion should be delivered in full.
@@Bingo_Bango_ Thank you for such a detailed reply I can not claim exerience to deccide on this iue, but wil look at your answer more closely. LOL, Rare, that on YT somebody says I must listen to this. You take care and again, I will study this advice and thank you for it.
I thought it was spelled "Siorskiy" until now lmao
You said that the speed of the helicopter is 37 km/h. Roughly translated, that means about 25 mph. I have a bicycle that goes downhill that fast.
Probably more like 370 km/h
@@mariusdufour9186 probably that’s what he meant, but not what he actually said. A friend of mine used to fly that older model of helicopter in the 1960s.
It has been clarified that they meant it flys 37 kph (25 mph) faster than its predecessor. The actual specification are listed @5:53.
A F-35? Surely it's AN F-35?
And a huge target
So every taxpayer in the US paid $1 for this helicopter. Seems like a bargain.
How is mpg?
gpm?
@@christopherrobinson7541 miles per gallon
You cant measure mpg for helicopters.
When hovering the mpg is infinite - going nowhere gives shit mileage.
Lets just say you couldn't afford a fill-up.
@@pd4165 it's a joke!
That is not a helicoper, that's a deceptecon..
That’s completely insane. Civilian S-92’s are going for $25M max, with all the bells and whistles, what makes this $75M more? A Predator cloaking device and plasma cannons? Typical military cost overruns that the taxpayer gets stiffed on once again?
Civilian helicopters don't need or have any armament, defense capabilities, need to travel over water for hours, maintenance done on a ship at night in rough seas, the ability to fold to be able to fit on the same ship, the third engine, 4 more blades, and above all the fuel capacity that weighs more than an s92 max weight.
S-92 hauls 11500lb @ 165 knots (max speed), CH-53K hauls 44122lb @ 170 knots (cruise)... that's before considering predator cloaking device and plasma cannons, maybe do five seconds of research before talking shit?
Hear me out, rapid dragon system on this
FUCK YEAH
When they will launch Bell V-280 Valor ??
It has the win the competition between the sikorsky helicopter first
Beautiful costly machine! It has to go faster than 37 KMph! see stats at 4:12 + Maybe it goes 370 KM/H ?
And I have difficulty spending seven dollars because it's a lot of money for me
"TWO ENGINES "! Come on.