It appears that this thread is going to a different direction. My intentions were to find out if the US combat pilot is/is not better than an ordinary pilot from (for example), Israel and India. I dont understand why some people use an AWACS platforn as being “unfair” in combat situations. Israel used them during the latter part of their wars again countries who are not as technological advanced as they are….yet Israel beat them 60 or 70 to one (Bekka Valley) against Syria. Now, if we step away from that force multiplier idea, is the US pilot as good, equally good, or better than a pilot from say…Israel or India? The reason I mentioned an exercise at the start of the thread is because force multiplier are usually not taken into account. They would just dogfight and test each other when US pilots visited other countries. I dont want to go on other tangents becuase I really DONT want to talk about..”but the AWACS are soooo unfair or well what about the Chinese and what about the Pakistanis or what about the South Africans durings their campaigns against Angola?” This thread is about how great are the US pilots against another pilot from Israel and India using past excersices as examples.

Good question Dubya, this project highlights several possible outcomes and more questions in this market. Your question about the US marines having their own CH-53 replaced with this HTH concept, it probably would not happen when/if the HTH matures and reason is this. Sikorsky just finished the last company new build chopper for the Marines about 4 or 5 years ago and their CH-53 production run was for very long time….the infrastrusture and training and spare parts and logistics are already placed with years of experience in maintaining this aircraft. The US marines have kept this chopper in inventory for a while now and the only viable option is keep upgrading and improve on thier aircraft. Since the marines have continously improve the CH-53, it would be extremely difficult to completely replace this venerable chopper with a brand new design. It would be logistical nightmare! But…if the US and the Europeans co-operate and trade technolgies and share costs there is a very good possibility that the future CH-53 could incorporate some HTH technology. Just because the Us would not acquire it does not mean other countries would follow the same steps. As a matter a fact it is about time the Europeans come up with some competition in this market ever since the Super Frelon was retired from mass use. There are some countries who operate the CH-53 and have or have plans to replace it with a new design. Germany, for example, has express some feelings regarding this matter. They have an older an unimproved CH-53 and would probably make sense to replace it with the HTH. Japan uses the CH-53 in limited numbers. They use the mine clearance and I forget the other tasks, but they are going to replaced their Ch-53’s with the new EH-101. As far to your question about the US negleting other markets and incorporating new craft designed abroad, I think we would probably see more of these decisions. The army is seeking to replace their M-16 rifle and are going to use german technology for their future rifles. The navy right now is studying a new littoral craft(patrol boat) for homeland defence and the top 2 contenders are a Swedish and an English design built by American companies. The air force is seeking a platforn for the Common airborne sensor(local AEW) for homeland defence and the leading contender is Embraer with their very successful EMB-145 design. I hope I answered your questions from MY points of view and opinions. Cheers.