• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Replacing the Subs

On the 60 or the 92? Pretty sure either the mid-mount or high-mount ESSS will fit any -60.
Was thinking MH-60, as I don’t see a future with the 92/Cyclone.

Second thought was 2 60’s /CSC but it may be a lot more efficient to have a UAS in that extra space, I just don’t know anything about MH stuff.
 
Nor I. I’ve bounced skids off enough floaty grey things to know I’d prefer to leave it to the folks that do this stuff…
 
I have to believe that if the USN trusts their ASW in part to the 60R its probably a good bet we could too.
Helicopter requirements are generally based on the doctrine. USN doctrine is to have an SSN with Task Groups to provide the main ASW punch. They also have carriers and LPD's that carry lots of extra helicopters that can do tasks and keep up a constant ASW picket with them. As such they don't focus on surface ship ASW quite like we do. It also means they can send an 60R with just a sensor out and have another in standby with a torp on it.

UK is more like us with many ships sailing in groupings without a carrier, thus want heavier helos to backfill those gaps. So they use a Merlin. And our current helo came from the anything but Merlin contract so here we are.
 
One of the best ways to get green folks to shut up about how Aurora (and ship) crews have it “easy” is to take them on an ASW exercise :sneaky:

I’ve seen a few get as green as new TW CADPAT…as you’re eating your meal close to them thinking “we haven’t even done a MAD Comp yet”
Hercs doing tactical flying in the dark is usually good enough.

Or @Good2Golf flying NAP - one of my worst vertigo incidents even was in an old 135 near Connaught Ranges. The crew got a 7/8 for passengers being sick.
 
Back
Top