MH-60G question. Sal, are you out there?

Only if you were going to do a "what if?" bird or an initial test bird. While the MH-60G (and HH-60G for that matter) was designed and sold with the ETS system (not ESSS but more like what you see on the MH-60K), it has never operationally been used. As a matter of fact, I've never even seen it used in training. The 422TES boys out of Nelis might have done some testing with it but it was never adopted as it limited visibility, gun azimuth, operations in and out of the aircraft, airspeed and performance. In fact that's where we got the internal Aux tanks. While they limit our internal load capacity, the new upgrades make up for it by mounting the ammo bins outside the aircraft (above the main gear sponsons) along with the external gun mounts.

Sorry for upsetting your plans but that's just the way it is.

BUT........if for some reason the ETS was used, you'd be correct in assuming that we would drop the internal Aux tanks.

Now, I can tell you that there's actually two internal Aux tanks, and sometimes (like my most recent deployment to Afghanistan) we only used one internal tank. This was due to the many FARPs around the country and the high temps/high density altitudes we were working at.
Hope that helps.

Thanks Sal. I got basically the same response over at HeliKit News as well. Guess I will go with my MH-60G without the ESSS and external tanks.

One more question. The internal hoist w/jungle penetrator and the .50 cal door mounts in the Academy kit, are these used? I haven't seen the .50 cals and am pretty sure the hoist w/jungle penetrator isn't used either. Is the jungle penetrator still carried on board though? It seems to be a pretty effective piece of equipment.

The only time I've seen the .50's in the rear was during a CSAR exercise down at Hurlburt, back when the 55th SOS was flying MH-60G's. The tactics for the mission were to operate in a two-ship with the high bird (with the .50's in the rear) providing cover, and the low bird making the pick up. Now while we still use the same tactics (high bird cover, low bird recovery), I've never seen the .50's mounted in the rear. The main reason is that you don't want to commit either bird to one role. What if the low bird takes a bad hit and has to exfil, what if the roles change? Now you've got that big pile of hardware dorking up you're infil/exfil from the Helo.
With the new external mounts (and depending on the mission/AOR) we can mount a .50 on one side forward for extended range (especially in the sand box) and semi-hard targets, and a GAU-2B on the other side for soft targets and high volume supressive fire. If I remember correctly, the Hurlburt bird with the .50's in the rear had the ammo bins up against the internal aux tanks with the feed chutes going out to the guns. But that's from memory.
Yeah, we still carry the penetrator as standard gear along with a stokes litter and strope. Fast ropes only when missions dictate.
And beleive it or not we occasionally carry the internal hoist, and train with it. Don't ask me why since we almost always use the external hoist. I'll talk to our FE Chief and try to find out for you. It really does take up a lot of space, which is always a problem on the Pavehawk. Bring on the -101!!!!! An H-3 on steroids albeit not a Sikorsky bird.

You know, as far as mounting the ETS (External Tank System), 50's in the rear or the internal hoist, it really comes down to what you want to represent. If your going for realism, then reference my replies. If you're going for something that you have your mind set on, then go for it. That seems to be one of the most time occupying considerations I seem to read about with reference to modeling. That and how accurate is accurate. Personally, I think some folks can go WAY overboard when it comes to realism, but even I like to get it as close to the real deal as possible. But I'll also say "enough is enough" every once in a while.

Good luck and let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.
I'm thinking of posting a bunch of images on photobucket or some other free site. My last contribution to ARC went unanswered and unposted.

Sal,

Some really good info! Thanks for sharing. It seems to me a buddy in the National Guard who used to have Black Hawks said there was fatal crash that involved a bird with ESSS and external tanks and the main reason for the fatalities was burns from the fuel from the external tanks trapping the crew and personnel. So they quit using that set up.

Are the mods about the external ammo storage and gun mounts in the works? I'm sure you will get us some pictures as soon as you can.

Thanks again!

Sal,
I'm with Mel, some new Pave Hawk pics would be peachy. I have one pic of an HH-60G with the new mounts and external ammo bin, but it isn't close enough to make out the details. The same pic also shows plume detectors on the nose (and same radar fairing as seen on the MH-60L), and some extra Chaff/Flare buckets on the fuselage. Looks like a lot of work will be needed to bring the Shitaleri Pave Hawk kit up to current standard.

An aside, someone asked Chris Miller if there are any plans for an upgraded MH/HH-60G detail set that would include the EGMS /SPS update and a few other much needed tid bits.

Here's a link to thread;
http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=163130&messageid=1105419637

That would be just fabu as well.

Cheers,

Thanks Sal. Just looking to make a current, accurate bird.