Quite right, german fulcrums were donated to Poland. I don’t see the US having any need for second hand french MF1s. Only as a “middle man” to pass them over to Iraq or Afghanistan, but still, why wouldn’t France itself pass it over?

Because they are being purchased with US aid money… part of a larger re-arming of those nations.

All of the equipment purchased through the program becomes the property of the US before it is transferred to the recipient nation.

It did? The caption on the photo of the aircraft in flight indicated it was a successful test.

This comment was also attached to the photo in the website:

Comment by: Nikolaos I. Hantzis on Apr 6, 2006 04:44 AM
Yep, this is true. I was lucky to work at Sikorsky in Stratford C.T. from 1987 to 1989. Jimmy Kay was the Sikorsky test pilot who was flying at the time this photo was taken ( I have a signed black and white copy at home) He said that they had a slight vibration @80knts and around 110 knts but everything else was smooth flying.

Care to share your source for your comment?

Note also that the F-15, designed for primarily Air-to-Air combat, and for dogfighting, preceded the F-16 into service.

The first F-15A Eagle to be delivered to an operational USAF unit was TF-15A 73-0108, formally accepted by the 555th Tactical Fighter Training Squadron of the 58th Tactical Training Wing at Luke AFB, Arizona on November 4, 1974 in a ceremony presided over by President Gerald Ford.

This is only 19 months after delivery of the first F-5E.

I agree with the other comments, I love the HH-3 it always seemed to be a nice size..and that’s what I see the S-92 as replacing.
I haven’t compared the numbers, so I might be off there.
Who knows, maybe some of the S-61T technology will rub off and they’ll make a new batch…I don’t think there are many left at AMARC, so they’d probably have to be new-build.

Yes, the S-92 was aimed at the CH-3/HH-3/Sea Knight (CH-46) replacement category… but just seems (from all I have read) to be less rugged and more fragile than those earlier helicopters… better suited to non-demanding civilian operations than to military ops.

Perhaps a re-designed, beefier version…

Personally, a modern version of the HH-3E would be perfect.

Yes, the H-60 replaced the HH-3 for USAF CSAR & USCG SAR, but the HH-3 had a greater passenger number and weight capacity. And one other thing… (see 2nd pic below)
The main advantages for H-60 were speed, better reliability (modern engines & systems), and that the HH-3 airframes were getting worn out.

Build new ones with modern, more powerful/fuel-efficient/reliable engines, up-to-date blades & transmission, composite materials replacing non-critical structures to reduce weight, etc… and it would meet what the USAF wants.

I remember reading in an aviation magazine or book ( i cannot remember which, damn middle age ) that there was a fly-off between the Super Tiger and the F-104. I don’t recall if the context was the German order or the U.S. order, maybe someone with readily accessible date/version information can tell us if the Super Tiger was a contemporary of the F-104G or F-104C.
What stood out was an account of a takeoff and climb-to-hight test in which the F-104 had already reached 60,000ft whereas the Super Tiger was still struggling to clear 30,000ft. Maybe the wing of the Super Tiger wasn’t as efficient as some think?

No, it is simply that, among other factors, that they weren’t “fitted with the same engine”.

F11F-2 (later redesignated to F11F-1F): J79-GE-3B; 9,600 lb (14,800 lb)

F-104A: J79-GE-7; 10,000 lb (15,800 lb)

That 7% difference in thrust, and the lower drag of the F-104 (due to its thin, short wing {no tip tanks at that time}) would account for quite a bit… it also depends on their relative weights at take-off, etc.

Note that the F-104S got the J79-GE-17; 11,430 lb (17,860 lb)

Also, for the USN, the A-5A/RA5C Vigilante had two J79-GE-8; 10,900 lb (17,000 lb)

Here. Link is directly from the US embassy. Hope thats good enough for you!

😉

http://islamabad.usembassy.gov/pr-10021501.html

“Our Navy SEALS have enjoyed a close training relationship with the Special Services Group – Navy for a number of years now; but this relationship is on the verge of a new era. We are building a new training facility at Gharo Creek and will have an enduring presence to work full-time with your SSG-Navy.”

Thanks.

Never know… it could have been like the reports of India being offered Kitty Hawk… 😉

1 mile (“statute” or “land”) = 1760 yards = 5,280 feet = 1.609344 kilometers

1 nautical mile (nm) = 2,000 yards = 6,000 feet = 1 nautical mile = 1.85200 kilometers