Pave-Exile

The mighty PAVE Low should never be confused with anything as small and wimpy as a BlackHawk (the Hawk maxes out at around 21K Lbs, the -53 at 57K...) The confusion is often in the "PAVE" part: it's actually a designator for the avionics system (PAVE Tac was a laser designator used on fighters in VN, for example) In this case, PAVE Low was the "package" of mods made to a H-53 helo to create the greatest helicopter ever! For more in depth info: http://www.thepavecave.com/pages/History/p...ow_history.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-53_Pave_Low (though I contest their initial line that it was a "serch and rescue" helo, it was a SOF helo that did SAR in places no one else could...) Great mission, huge amount of fun, best crews I ever had the honor to fly with. v/r Geoff

Why, as a matter of fact.... Were you out at Moldyhole? I was at the 21st from 97-00. ( I only ask 'cause your Login makes me suspicious ) Punched out in 01, been wandering the earth since...

Actually, many of the extra ways to fail are a direct result of the aerodynamics of rotary-wing flight. Power settling, vortex ring state, loss of tail rotor effectiveness, retreating blade stall, et al, are not available to f/w folks. And while a neglegent pilot can increase your chances of ending up in one of those situations, factors outside the pilot's control can be causal as well. There are a lot more moving parts as well: every lifting surface doubles as a control surface and requires constant motion (the angle of attack of each main rotor blade changes continually as it rotates), so any mechanical failure is potentially bad (helos have catastrophic rotor issues far more often than wings fall off airplanes) I am saying that helos have a LOT of failure points: mechanically, environmentally, and from the nature of the mission. This is the danger inherent in a helo. And this is all before you get into the capabilities (or lack thereof) of the crew. How's their instrument currency (or even their background... lots of helo pilots are weak on instruments) NVGs? I don't takeoff in the daytime without a set (just in case I'm out late... I'm scared of the dark :-) BUT, if you don't have really good training and practice, they can scare you (or worse, give you a false sense of confidance) NVGs "Don't turn night into day", they work in a different spectrum, which can throw folks. Harry Reasoner said it best: The thing is, helicopters are different from planes. An airplane by it's nature wants to fly, and if not interfered with too strongly by unusual events or by a deliberately incompetent pilot, it will fly. A helicopter does not want to fly. It is maintained in the air by a variety of forces and controls working in opposition to each other, and if there is any disturbance in this delicate balance the helicopter stops flying immediately and disastrously. There is no such thing as a gliding helicopter. This is why being a helicopter pilot is so different from being an airplane pilot and why, in general, airplane pilots are open, clear eyed, buoyant extroverts, and helicopter pilots are brooders, introspective anticipators of trouble. They know that if something bad has not happened, it is about to. Harry Reasoner, February 16, 1971 v/r Geoff

Thanks! Didn't really mean to get spooled up with my first post. I survived a crash and burn (literally) due to rampant paranoia on my part and always training for the worstcase... So I want everyone to think and train for fire, underwater egress, etc. Always in the back of your mind: What'll I do if... It's about going home at the end of the shift. v/r Geoff

OK, outside the FW camparison, allow me to restate: A helicopter is an inherently dangerous form of transportation. While it is mechanically reliable, mission and environment combine to create hazard which is mitigated (somewhat) by pilot skill and crew training. Sorry to seem touchy, but the assumption of safety leads to complacency which is VERY bad in helo ops. Heck, I know folks who willingly wear polyester while flying.... v/r Geoff

Actually, I have to disagree here (as the admitted "new guy" :-) Helicopters ARE inherently more dangerous than fixed wings. While the aerodynamics are "sound" they have more ways to screw up (F/W can only stall in one direction, helos can stall in several). Then there is the environment they are operated in... While I agree that mechanical issues aren't a primary cause of accidnets, it's only one part of a "system" . If it weren't for the fact that helos can do really cool things, I'd never set foot in one. And I fly the dang things for a living. v/r Geoff