WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

948

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt (edited )

Uke flag soy is clearly a fcking clown then. This is from the first article i searched of an actual Navy Seahawk pilot -

'In the case of the SH-60F, the Navy addressed this at least partially by giving it a massive fuel capacity, with a 590 gallon main tank, 105 gallon permanently installed internal auxiliary tank, and a standard configuration of a single 120 gallon external drop tank, resulting in a total max fuel load of 815 gallons, or approximately 5,500 pounds of gas.

In normal ops, we'd burn about 1,000 pounds an hour, so we would regularly operate with a 5.5 hour endurance at takeoff. In lieu of the permanently installed internal auxiliary tank on the SH-60F, the MH-60S is configured to take removable internal auxiliary tanks as required. This makes internal cargo and passenger operations in the MH-60S much more convenient if the internal auxiliary fuel tanks are not installed. Because the MH-60R has such extensive internal mission equipment, it is unable to take internal auxiliary fuel tanks, but has hardpoints and plumbing for two external drop tanks.

5.5 hours endurance at take off !! - 2 hrs of 'patrolling/ observing stable at low altitude', 3.5 hrs for flight time. Seriously - 'the turbines will fail after 2 hours ' ??? Like what ??. Dont give these shills attention.

EDIT: They also have an inflight re-fueling probe.

[–] 0 pt (edited )

Thank you for digging that up!

Pretty much suspected there are configs to maximize flight time, cargo space, # of disco balls as long as the customer is willing to pay. And for clandestine operators, money is not an issue. White taxpayers are on the hook for that.

Edit: White taxpayer is a redundancy, if there ever was one. ;)

[–] 1 pt (edited )

No problem. I seriously had to laugh at the outlandish suggestion military helo turbines (or even civilian helo's for that matter) will fail after only 2 hours of flight/ 'hovering'.