The Huey Challenge

This is a bona fide TH-1L panel from 157848. The Forest Service didn't modify it TOO much and from the looks of it just slapped a coat of paint on it. Sitting in Tallahasse at a VVA right now.

The "hole" for at attitude gyro has been greatly enlarged. The Dual Tach isn't supposed to be there, but the rest looks original, just missing parts.  Saw copy of Data Plate as CN 6443.

Regards
Steve

Got another one. 157838

"This is a photo of 157838 taken at AMARC May 9, 1987. According to AMARC records it was 7H-137, arrived Aug 4, 1983, left Oct 25, 1988 as N838GH."
bill word

Spreadsheet updated.

Regards
Steve

Found another one. 157818 (I think). Sure of all the numbers except the last "8". The MODEX of 86 shoots holes in my MODEX theroy. Anyway, shot in Aug 1970 when she was only a few months old. HT-8 at NAS Ellyson Field.

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  I didn't find that one, but I'll think twice before I believe the captions again!  THe high res pics I posted earlier came from my reference collection.  Check the first page of the Vietnam Hueys thread for the list of my Huey refs.  I just don't have them in front of me right now.  I'll give you the specifics when i dig them back out again. 

         Ray 

Ray,

Did you find this photo also?  Shows 157835 & 836 in the backyard at NWC China Lake.  I'll have to believe the caption.  Hard to tell.

Seems that NWC took posession of 5 TH-1Ls.  One went to Ventura County Sheriffs (deregistered and sent it to a Junk Yard).  One went to MCAS El Toro, then Miramar (whereabouts unknown).  2 for target practice, and one to help with the rebuild of their HH-1K.  At least thats what a little bird whispered to me.

157835 was noted at Inyokern in Aug99 at the Budd McGee Air Park collection. However, the collection was dispersed by Oct02 and 835 is "lost" again.

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  Thanks for catching that one.  That's what i get for trusting captions!  I thought tha looked like a 204 rotorhead, but it's so trashed I couldn't be sure.  The blade counterweights weren't obvious to me either.  I'll fix teh post.  Did you see the pics of the Huey firing a stinger at China Lake?  Now there's an interesting bird!

      Ray

Hey Ray.................Caught you! 

157836 as shown in your China Lake photo isn't a TH-1L at all, but a "B" model.  I think they miss identified that photo.  Unless of course they decided to repaint and re-rotor thier TARGET.

I had provided links to those in an early post also.  Tricky find though.  Thank you. 

  And yes, those dang Bellmouths get you all the time.  Theories go only so far.

I'm still trying to get up with somebody that works out there at NWC on thier HH-1K restoration.  I understand that they HAVE recieved some TH-1L parts for that.

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  A couple more China Lake birds that didn't make it:

157835:

" border="0" />

157836 (atually a B model and not 836):

" border="0" />

 Unfortunately, my particle separator hypothesis doesn't work for all HH-1K's as evidenced by this bird at China Lake in 1971:

157193:

However, I still think most HH-1K's had the separator installed like 157177:

[img]http://" border="0" />

 Anyway, chalk up two more for the TH-1L tally.

    Ray
 

New find.  157808.  This was actually found in the background of another shot I took.

Regards
Steve

Hypothesis accepted.    Sounds reasonable to me.

Steve

Steve,

  I know that particle separators and MODEX's have nothing to do with one another.  However, all UH-1L's and I believe HH-1K's came off the line with separators installed because they were Vietnam bound.  Since the TH-1L's were to be used for stateside training, they didn't require the separators immediately. I was trying to point out that TH-1L's with the separators were later retrofits, possibly about the time the 3 digit system was implemented.  Also, any training bird with the bell mouth intake should be a TH-1L since the other models had separators from the beginning.  This is just my opinion, though.  I wouldn't even call it a theory.  Maybe a hypothesis woudl be a better description.

    Ray
 

Hatter50 wrote:

Hey Aaronw, First, thank you.  I was getting the impression that N204VC was possibly gone.  I note that N204VC went to them from NAF China Lake which had first aquired it.  I also note that the bell 204s probably more pointedly the 540 rotorheaded birds had a few expensive ADs to contend with.  I think the 1996 TH-1L crash during logging ops where the verticle fin brokeoff had a lot to do with that.  Lots of civilian TH-1Ls kinda deregistered about then. And Cobrahistorian, I have a message into the Frontiers of Flight Museum to nail down that Bureau number.  Thanks for the tip on that one. Aaron, I also show another TH-1L 157827 that is, or was stored at Camarillo Airport for Ventura County, any status on that?  Have you seen anything there? Thanks all, Regards Steve

That fits with my understanding of why 204's became rare in fire use, I don't know the exact details but there were some crashes related to non-Bell parts being used and incomplete maintenance records when they transfered from the military. As a result the FAA decertified them for passenger use. I know many 205's went through complete rebuilds and so don't have the same issues, I guess the 204's were not worth the cost of rebuilding compared to a 205.   

Got another one.  157845.  Apparently this was taken prior to 1972 while still with HT-8 at NAS Ellyson Field.

Regards
Steve

Ray,

Don't be including Partical Separators in your modex theories now.  Those are apples and oranges.  If it didn't come off the line with a separator, then it was just an AFC (airframes change) to be applied at the next overhaul.  If it was important enough a NARF team would visit a squadron and apply the AFC in the "field".  I don't think it happened here.  I flew aircraft without separators right up to the end.  As they were nearing the end of service life it just wasn't deemed that important.  There might not have been any "Kits" available either.

Anyway, separators have nothing to do with MODEXs.  It only shows that the AFC has been applied. 

By looking at the updated spreadsheet one finds a "pattern" to MODEXs and BNs.  Since we don't have the policy letter available to us, all we can do is draw conclusions. 

I conclude that HT-8 most likely gave the low numbers to the TH-57s and the TH-1Ls started with 35-78.  When they transfered to HT-18 in 1972, they had the 100s block and went from 136-179 for the TH-1Ls and UH-1Es, UH-1Ds used the 100-135.  That is my theory right now.

Remember that MODEXs have absolutely nothing to do with BNs.  It's easier to FIND and aircraft out on the line with large MODEX numbers than it is to look at the small tail number.  Note the Armys large local ID numbers on thier Rucker training aircraft.   

You busy moving?

Regards

Here is 157848 in Army paint.  Tallahassee FL

Regards
Steve

A few notes to update the spreadsheet:

157807 is preserved at NAS Whiting Field (last seen Apr07)

157819 is on the Aberdeen Proving Grounds MD (seen Jun00)

157824 went with the USMC from El Toro to Miramar, where it is now stored in a museum compound (last noted Oct07).

157834/N204VC went to the Aviation Warehouse at El Mirage CA from Camarillo. It was seen there JUn03-Oct03. http://www.aviationwarehouse.net/1020645.html  does not look promising here.

157835 was noted at Inyokern in Aug99 at the Budd McGee Air Park collection. However, the collection was dispersed by Oct02, does anyone now what happened to all the aircraft?

157848 is displayed in US Army colours outside VVA Post 96, at 241 Lake Ella Drive, Tallahassee FL (seen Sep07). I spoke with the Post Guru and a photo is forthcoming.

Here is a photo of 157807 at NAS Whiting Field FL.  She was damaged in one of the past huricanes and is undergoing restoration in this photo.  The guy standing there is one of the people doing the restoration. 

Regards
Steve

Hey Ray,

You had asked a question about how I knew I flew certain aircraft.  yes, my logbooks record dates and Bureau numbers flown. 

Still on the hunt.  And if you get to P'cola, the library in the Museum is terrific and they will help in any way.

Regards
Steve

Steve,

  I notice that all the birds with 3 digit MODEX's (except for the photos of 812 and 840) also have the particle separators installed, whereas the few pics we have of 2 digit MODEX's all have the bell mouth intake.  Kinda supports your idea that the 2 digit system was early and the 3 digit one was later on since most, if not all, TH-1L's came off the line with the bell mouth intake and the particle separators were installed later.

      Ray 

hey Ray,

Little tidbit I found today.  Swift kick to memory really (came when I read the headline to the photo you sent on going to the boat).    All the TH-1Ls went originally to HT-8, the sole helicopter training squadron, both basic and advanced.  March 1972 was when HT-18 was established.  That swirled around me when I was a student there but I was too busy at the time to notice much.

As Theories go, I "suspect" that the MODEXs changed at that time.  Why?  Because in the navy each squadron in a wing has a different series of number blocks, ie the 100s, another the 200s, etc. 

Note also that CO's have thier say also as I suspect happened in this photo:

notice the PAINTOVER then 100 applied?  Like it should have been 170?  Why because 170 AKA 100 is 157840.  100 would be the CO's aircraft.  Maybe it just got back from rework and "looked" the best. (from looking at that particular photo, I would dispute THAT particular claim....

Anyway, see my point on MODEXs?

Steve

Ray,

Here is a for instance.

I was there then and from what I can remember of what they were doing, it was probably an "E" model.  But you see it and think TH-1L.  Note the low MODEX also.....gets back to my theory.  (theorys get you in trouble at times)

The accident was just a simple case of dynamic rollover.  The damage came carrying it back on a flatbed. 

Sorry?  Don't you dare be sorry!  You do too good a job looking for "stuff".  Like I said, my spreadsheet is acting like a 12 gauge also. 

I updated the spreadsheet so you can see what pics ive found.  I have more but it's kinda hard to really figure out if it's a jumbled MODEX system after the fleet was diluted with UH-1Es and UH-1Ls and then painted the same. 

Steve

Steve,

  Sorry about that numbers thing.  Thanks or the pics of 812 with different numbers.  Now I see your point.  We were kinda talking past one another (actually you were just talking over my head since I' not military and I have a lot to learn).  Also, didn't realize the x's were for ships we had photos of on the thread, sorry about that too.  I'm afraid that I may have exhausted my resources at the moment, but if I get to go to Pensacola, thay probably have some photos of Limas in their collection.  Anyway, I'll keep looking.  How, by the way, do you know you flew in all  but a few of the TH-1L's?  Is there a flight logbook that records the serials or do you just have a scary memory for numbers?  Sorry, but that's one of the probably simple things I don't know.

    Ray

here is 157812 as #41

here is 157812 as #142

Steve

Ray,

Your using a big gauge shotgun there Ray.    Apples and Oranges!  But..............you are getting on track. 

1.  If you look at my spreadsheet. 
      a.  I have been keeping track of the photos with x's under navy for Navy photos.  Civ for civilian.  Might need to update those. 
      b.  Flown has x's for all I've flown.  Missing 812, 818, 833, 843.  We have a pic of 812.
      c.  From baugher's serial number website, the FAA registry, and a few more places, I patched together enough info ofr the list of Bureau numbers and Construction numbers. 

2.  MODEX Numbers
      a.  I noted a pattern of MODEX numbers with only a few exceptions that could be caused by any number of things.  Intergation of UH-1Ls, UH-1Es, Commanders perogitive.  Only one squadron was using the aircraft.
      b.  Your find of those B&W photos, I've seen them before but not recently, show the Bell demo photo of the first model, 806. 
      c.   There "appreared" to be another MODEX sequence early on.  When they shifted, who knows.  The number 42 (behind me in the photo) and your 41, show me the early pattern.  They were all built 69-70 (reasonable guess here).  I first saw them in '72 with what now appears to be the dual didget MODEX.  I didn't see them again until '77 when they had 100 series MODEX.
      d.  Nothing in the "rulebook" that says a MODEX is married to a BN forever.  MODEX's can change, as we see here.
      f.  Nothing in the rulebook that says that MODEXs have to follow a BN series.  
      g.  You asked about 157.  yes that is a coincidence.  Look at the spreadsheet.  Every BN has 157 in it and my "theory" list has just one 157 and it HAS to fall onto a 157 BN. 
      h.  Part of my THEORY is that HT-18 did keep MODEXs linked to BNs.  Since they owned ALL TH-1Ls, why not?  Be easy enough to do. 

3.  Stories?  I know what you mean.  I know that stories can fire passions.  I don't think there were too many earth shattering stories here.  These aircraft saw a LOT of men and women pass through them.  The first women helicopter pilots flew them in training.  Many of the astronaughts came through and flew them.  I don't have the squadrons records, so I can't tell you those stories.

4.  My purpose is to just FIND photos of them ALL while in service or afterwards, in civilian hands or in museums.  I would even like to see the hulks in the bone yards. 

5.  You added a few to my list.  They will be noted on the spreadsheet.  made it a lot easier to just make a photo of the changes.

6.  I will show at least one photo for each in this thread when I get them all, fair enough?

7.  I appologise for that crazy spreadsheet.  My color codes dont have a legend to them.  Gotta keep some secrets you know?

See Ray, as a Dinasour guy I KNEW that you had it in you to do this thing.  You came through with some hard ones.

Regards..............pulling buck shot out of my backsides.
Steve

Steve,

  you said:

  "The shot of me standing in front of the number.....Looks like "42" to me, but that interferes with my number "theory". "

That would be the number theory I was talking about.  I assume that the number on the door is also the number on the nose of the aircraft as in this pic:

" border="0" />

As you can see, this is 157812 but it has 41 on the door and the nose, therefore, the 4 visible behind you doesn't conflict with your idea about the numbers.

Here's what I got so far.  First, the very first TH-1L off the line 157806:

[

Did you fly this one?

Here's 829 and another bird I can't make out:

[img]http://" border="0" />

Here's 157827:

[img]http://

Is it just coincidence that the 157 on the door and nose are the first three numbers of the serial? 

I think you may want to start a running tally at the beginning of the thread so we can keep track of new birds we find.  Also, I personally would be very interested to hear any stories you have about the individul aircraft.  It's the history that makes them come to life after all.  This was a great idea and will definitely force me to learn more about Navy Hueys.

  Ray
 

hey ray,

Not sure just which "Theory" your talking about.  MODEX (side numbers) rarely match Bureau Numbers.  MODEXs are a block of numbers assigned by the Wing, or higher HQ. 

Now when the aircraft comes from the factory, for instance 157840, would have 7840 in large numbers in the vert fin.  The full BN under it.  That is not the MODEX.

Clear as mud?

Steve

Steve,

  Your "number theory" is still alive and well.  I will explain with pics soon.  In the meantime, check the pics of 840, 839, 1nd 847 posted earlier. You'll note that the numbers on the doors don't match tail codes at all.  Any idea why?

      Ray

Ray,

yeah, I thought you had been snoozing or something.  The shot of me standing in front of the number.....Looks like "42" to me, but that interferes with my number "theory".  Back when it was taken (1971), don't know if they had the surviving UH-1Ls yet and don't know if they had any UH-1E's.  You can see that there are "borrowed" UH-1Ds from the Army in the background.

Regards
Steve

empeter,

Actually, pretty good shots.  Like mine, the Tail shot offers proof. 

Thank you. 
Steve