I was qualified as a load master for the CH53. It truly is an amazing craft. The blades are so strong that even though you can stand under, it feels like they are really close to your head.
I love that satisfying moment in all the chaos of movement and noise when watching a helicopter run up when the notes change and the blades start loading and flexing up just before you see them pitch and lift the mass into the air whilst the blades in the tail all pitch to counteract it.
@@jacoballen3267 I remember we left the ship (Peleliu) late in the evening/night. The flight in was between 3-4hrs. I was sitting second from the front and had a good view of the FLIR between the pilots. We were flying LOW. Some time in the flight we all heard the 50 open up and thought we were in the shit; we weren’t, crew was function checking before we went feet dry. I remember we tried to refuel and were unable for some reason. Being behind that C-130 was otherworldly in terms of the way the 53 felt in flight, very bumpy. The next day we heard that our bird was so low on fuel that we would not have been able to do much if things went south. Anyway, the insertion went very smoothly as SEALS and Rangers had already had eyes on and most of the enemy was located up north a ways. Gen Mattis came out the next day and walked the lines. He said our insertion looked like something out of a Tom Clancy novel. I’m assuming his command/control bird was loitering as we all inserted. Good times. I sincerely miss those days and Marines.
@@benjamincheney Dude, I know the feeling. I went to the island a little over a year after your insertion. Wouldn’t trade it for the world. I’ve found and looked at the airstrip on Google Earth and wonder if we’ll have to go back and retake it because we ended up being attacked again. I worry that it WILL happen again. My brother, I thank you for doing what had to be done there. Unfortunately I did not get deployed out to there, and I’ve questioned myself a lot since, so I have sincere respect to my brothers and sisters who did. Semper Fi
I spent seven years in the Corps and the first half was with the 5th Marines. I had many opportunities to fly in the CH-53's and oh, what an experience! That was in the 80's and they have gotten much more powerful, since then.
Flew in these while in the Corps as well. Got rescued in a blizzard while in Bridgeport, CA doing the cold weather/mountain warfare training. Crazy, buried the landing gear had to get to the back gate by snowshoes pull them off sink past your waist then pull yourself into the bird. Crazy time back in the late 70’s. Great memories now!
Was with 3/5 in the 80’s as well, flew in these beast and the CH46 and had similar story up at Winter Warfare training. Jump off the back ramp and wait for the rotor wash to subside enough to be able to stand up and collect your gear.
Tail rotor on this thing is as big as the main rotor on the OH-58 I crewed in the army. Only got to work with one of these once on a joint mission but it was awesome to watch fly.
I only saw these a couple times myself while I was in the army. I was a cav scout and two of these flew over my hide. I was in my Bradley and got a good look at it with my optics. They are enormous. Make Blackhawks look small
I lived at New River Air Station in Jacksonville NC when i was a kid in the 80s. My dad was stationed at HMM 262 ugly angels. I loved watching them roar over the house with M 35's slung under them.
I find it amazing that the entire weight of that aircraft and everything in it is supported only by the main rotor shaft thrust bearings. I'd love to see that mechanism up close.
It weighs 17 tons empty There's 4 crew, 30 infantry Avg weigh is about 170 lb a man and they carry about 150 to 200 lb in gear That's 5 tons of just Marines. It can lift about 7 tons 4300 shaft horsepower turning seven main blades and four tail. $20,000 an hour to operate. Between the sound and the turbulence I thought it was going to come on done any second every second I was onboard.
@@David-wk6md that's great info, thanks. I can't imagine what it must feel like taking a ride in one of those things. Really is an awesome piece of machinery.
I live in a condo complex one mile away from Sikorsky's where these are manufactured here in Connecticut. In fact my first Accounting job was at Sikorsky's where I had to track the costs of rotor blade hubs machined at subcontractors. When they are testing these 53's, and the Blackhawks, it is a sight of beauty them flying over our complex. The sound of the rotors is amazing. Kudos to Igor Sikorsky for his ingenuity building these 100 years ago.. Hi from Bob in Connecticut
@@TheTruthKiwi Hi Truth. That was 46 years ago. However, the company I work for now we supply the main rotor and tail rotor de-icing wire to a company who then sells it to Sikorsky's. Hi from Bob in Connecticut.
@@bobkrakovich1851 Ok, keep your secrets Bob :p Haha just joking mate, nice line of work you're in there. Must be very interesting. G'day from New Zealand.
I got to fly on these a couple times for Nuclear, Biological, Chemical Defense School to go out for simulated chemical attacks and do sample testing in MOPP level 4. It is shocking how hard they can put you in your seat when they take off. To this day I still can't believe their power.
@@TheWorldsOkayestUSMarine Not at this school, but I heard at the MOS NBC school the officers walk up to a nerve agent with a rabbit while in MOPP level 4 and watch the rabbit do the funky chicken then die.
When I was a kid living in Yokosuka Naval base. One of these flew low over the houses and landed in our school play ground. They let us check it out while waiting for a fuel truck.
Cool. The same thing happened at my high school football field in 87, except it was an Australian Army Kiowa. My friend and I ran out of class to go check it out. We talked to the pilots and they let us have a good gawk at the controls. Later our teacher gave us detention. Worth it :)
Scary - Fierce - Tough. 2 pilots, 1 cabin crew + 21 parachutists, complete with individual equipment. I've flown with the CH 53 before. I like it on. Thank you US NAVY. 👍👍
So couple inaccuracies in your comment. 1 we never fly with 1 crew chief unless in and FCF status. This was our aircraft off the 24th MEU working with the Brits. We generally fly with a mix of crew chiefs and aerial observers. Secondly this is not a naval aircraft it’s a Marine aircraft. The Naval version is the MH-53 Sea Stallion which has largely been phased out and replaced by the MH-60 for minesweeping anti sub operations. Just wanted to clear that up, as someone who still currently flies on these big irons at just passed about 2200 flight hours.
@@GDub356 Thank you Mr. Robert Wills. Look, Indonesia doesn't have the Chinook Super Stallion Helicopter yet. When I was a volunteer in Aceh after the Tsunami Disaster. Boarded CH 53 on the USS Abraham L.
I wrote what I saw and knew, of course I don't understand the CH 53 variant, between US Navy interests and USMC. Comment before this due to limited word count, recorrect, USS Abraham Lincoln.
Great Video 👏👏 I was with HSL-40 (HSM-40 as of 11/01/2009) in Mayport, Florida . Such a smooth ride because of it's weight. Thank You for taking the Video.
Even with several years as a Crew Chief on A-10s, I can't decide which I love more; The A-10 or the CH-53E - especially the PAVELOW models. Just incredible machines. Although after talking with rotor mechs, they say that the H-53s and H-3 leak oil inside like it was its primary job.
I consider the H-53 the A-10 of the rotorwing world. A hulking roaring *beast.* who is ugly to outsiders, and beautiful to us who love aviation. Military or otherwise. My top 3 alltime favorite helicopters.
This thing is powerful and a serious workhorse. Flew in 57's in the 101st and i got blown off the top of a truck while slingloading to the CH-57. Lots of static electricity too.
@@peterpetruzzi Blades beating against air molecules generates loads of static electricity. Airplane props do it too. Landing gear have a grounding strap that dissipates the charge, but in slinging operation the man on the ground is the first point of contact. They use a grounded rod for grabbing the hook on the helicopter, cause if you dont you get one hell of a hit
Did you mean to say you flew in CH-47 (aka Chinook) while in the 101st? I'm assuming since you're army airborne and the army doesn't have these, although the air force (in addition to the Marine Corps & Navy) does, and in many cases are the ones providing aviaton (especially if/when their ops require fixed-wing) assets in support of the army's operations, flying soldiers & their equipment, usually whenever logistics require the capacity to accommodate larger sized and/or heavier weighted payloads, the capability to travel longer distances; in-flight refueling; moving troops & equipment to be airdropped, especially en masse; as well as responsible for handling aspects such as recon, surveillance & Intelligence gathering; communications, radar, early-warning capabilities & also electronic warfare; the vast majority of (the primary) air-to-air warfighting & defense against airborne threats; the vast majority of their close air support, air strikes/precision strikes, & the capacity to more precisely deliver usually (much bigger, heavier & more powerful) ordinance, especially over longer distances & in far greater numbers... Also many of their forward air controllers/combat controllers, not to mention search-rescue/recovery and especially PJs (aka ParaRescue men) are all courtesy of USAF. And Im sure I still failed to mention yet other assets but you get the idea. But yeah anyways my bad I got WAY off the original question/subject... You said CH-57s, so I guess I just wasn't sure if you meant to say either US army CH-47 Chinooks, or if you were maybe even flying aboard a USAF CH-53 (particularly if it was a Pavelow)?? As both are the top 2 biggest, heaviest, most powerful rotor-wing aircraft in the entire US DoD inventory, and while they're drastocally different than one another, probably most of all in appearance, they also share many similar characteristics, one of which is the ability to sling-load heavy or oversized equipment from the belly of the aircraft, so that's the main reason I guess I couldn't discern which one you meant
The first minute 30 was like watching a clown car in reverse. The soldiers just kept coming, heading to the back, and disappearing into the belly of the beast. It's crazy just how many people you can cram into that thing.
The one thing that sucks with this video is that one cannot truly grasp what this helicopter truly sounds like... you can feel the noise when boots-on-ground... AND IT'S INTIMIDATING!!!!!! Thanks for capturing this and sharing!
I love the idle / flat-pitch sound, same with the MV-22 Ospreys - it’s kinda sinister as they chop through the air waiting for that collective movement lol. Then boom, you’re lifting a small house 🤣
High maintenance, due to 1970’s technology. They don’t like to sit, get them up and running and run them hard. FYI, Sikosky is building the successor, the CH-53K, still high maintenance, should come down once the bugs are worked out. Of the two types, I prefer the E, as I was a lot younger and tougher then, lol 😆
These are the size of a bus. A Greyhound bus. I got the privilege of directing one of these to land in an open field in Camp Lejeune back in the 90s. Truly an awesome experience.
Good ole' hurry up and wait Marines. Long pre-flight check. Flew in these many times back in my Marine Corps days. I love the smell of hydraulic fluid in the morning! Super cool! Semper Fi my Marine Corps brethren!
Back in the late 80s I lived about one mile from the United States marine helicopter Air Station in Tustin California. I loved it. They flew sea knights, chinooks and superstitions. The sound from the 53s is my favorite.
I'm a single engine pilot and was ATC in the Army. I've been aboud a lot of 64's and 60's, these, not so much. The freaking tail rotor is huge, in inself.
It was almost comical the way the troops kept coming in from the right of the screen, almost like they were entering from one side and leaving on the other in a continuous loop.
@@pimpinaintdeadhoThe feminism and political correctness that has infected American society keep pushing for it. Women soldiers are a possibly lethal distraction who would dangerously weaken infantry & other frontline forces. They cannot physically & mentally endure on the battlefield, and fight as ultimate warriors, against male opponents and physical environments determined to kill you.
I was an avionics tech rep on this model with the Navy's first helicopter squadron (HC-1) on NAS North Island from 1984 to 1987. The best and most interesting job I ever had. This helo can lift 32,000 pounds and go 50 miles with it. It had much of the drive train that was originally designed for a more powerful Skycrane, the Army's CH54 Tarhe. The Marines wanted to originally only buy 49 of these models for a few special heavy operations so they didn't want to spend a lot for a whole new helo design just modify the older two engined CH 53D. Not much time and money was spent to make it a high reliability and ease of maintenance helo either by the USMC since only 49 were required and were not going to be used very often. later the USMC decided they want many more. They did have several flaws that were eventually worked out, as most new models of anything do.
@@NotParticularlyAmused I was the avionics Sikorsky rep at Tustin for a few months at Tustin near the end of 1987. I replaced Harry Macelroy. Do you remember the AFCS problem that occured to many but not all the CH53Es around 1985 or 86? One of your fellow Marines called it morning sickness. I was sent from a Navy squadron in North Island San Diego to fix this problem that was plaguing a few helos on the USS Okinawa. I got on the ship at Perth Australia and got off in Hong Kong. Were you on that deployment?
My friend made a career out of flying these things in the Navy. He told me they were easy to fly because they weren't twitchy and were very predictable. Much easier than a Blackhawk he said.
Why is this design better than the Chinook’s? If the Chinook doesn’t need a tail rotor and devotes more energy to lift, then why did this design win? Why not just have a bigger Chinook?
@@ryanm9371 A single rotor helicopter can not have a mid air collision with itself. But yes, the twin rotor is more efficient. If the twin rotor has a failure of the sync shaft, the aircraft and crew are a dead before they hit the ground. If a single rotor has a failure of the tail rotor drive shaft, an autorotation can be performed.
@@gigsnsht it's the same thing with very mi or differences. It's not like they are totally different designs. Blackhawk or Seahawks or tarantulahawk I know what the dude meant.
watching blades downward slope deflecting down adding slight downpresure, to level, to deflecting slope upward supporting lifting the weight. no doubt without the centrifugal forces the fragile blades wouldn't be able to support the massive weight of the bird +fuel and the heavy cargo. kinda neat
I witnessed an amazing sight when I was stationed aboard the U.S.S. New Jersey, steaming off the coast of Lebanon, the pilot of a departing CH-53 put the engines to max power and pulled the collective up as fast as he could that bird lifted off as if it was rocket powered, the pilots must have pulled some major g's
I remember when they went on their first cruise. Flew off my ship back to the states for separation leave. You are so right, they'll pin you into your seats!
I was most fortunate at ages 19-26...this bird along with the CH-46 was my transportation going into LZ,s..first time on a mission in one was in the Philippines in 1981...U.S.M.C. 0311, Rifleman/ or better know as a Grunt..
I was part of the crew while serving in the Marines 72-76 1st MAW Futenma Okinawa, I am fascinated by anything that flies. Futenma supplied all of the helicopters for the Saigon evacuation, in April 1975. Watching the embassy video those helicopters came from Futenma, Ch46, HMM-164 I was present in that bird many times on Okinawa.
@@MissionaryForMexico I went to boot camp in San Diego. I guarded nukes at NSB Bangor WA and eventually went to 3/5 at Camp Margerita at Pendelton. Interestingly, one of my buddies while I was in was born at Parris Island and his dad was a Sgt Major there. Munford was his last name.
@@sssbob was never there very long accept for one year, beautiful and tropical. Most of our time aboard ship in south east Asia. And did to fly aways in Okinawa at camp Hansen as first air alert battalion. I rode around entire island during memorial weekend, took two days, about 140 miles.
While in theC Marines from 1975 until 1987 I got to fly on the Ch-53C Sea Stallion, the CH-53D Sea Stallion, and CH54E Super Stallion. Those great birds to be on
I remember stallions choppers they are the best and always willing to be the best I hope they don't put them out of service that was my best chopper I ever flown it's good for maneuver incapacity nice video
I flew in at least one of these birds when I was a sailor. Flew off of the Eisenhower to a base in Italy. I spent about 8 hours on a C-130 and about 19 hours on a C-141 Starlifter flying from The West Coast all the way to a base in Europe. I must have spent at least a total of 50 hours in the C-9. I also flew on a 747 that was booked by our Skipper just so we could smoke on the airplane and watch movies and chill. Commander Flynn was my favorite Skipper. That was the only time I have been to NY. But I did not leave the plane. It was a refueling stop and we could smoke on the plane.
Used to handle variants of these at RAF St Athan in the mid 90s transiting from Germany to Castle Martin. Two man see in. One to marshal and one to hold the marshaller upright.
Very cool.....it looks very similar to dartmoor here in the UK.....the us marines probably train there too... but it probably isn't.....still cool video...
O thanks for letting me know...I work on dartmoor doing stone walling etc..and thought that look like dartmoor stone walling in foreground........cool video..hope the us marines have a good enjoyable deployment here...
Right? I've been aboard one of these and lived under the approach vector for the Marine base where a bunch of these were based. When they fly over, the whole place reverberates from those massive blades, and you wonder if that black smoke rolling off of them might not be coal instead. They just look like some kind of steampunk monstrosity, and I love em.
Want to hear the sound of a GOD? Stuck in the bush and lightly armed. Down comes a complete lunatic armed to the teeth. PJ hooks me up and after a really short touch and feely exam we burst through the canopy. That was my ride home.
That is a fixed angle, meant to help with balance as well as its primary job of canceling torque. Air force A's and B's were smaller and did not have the canted tail
The canted tail adds a significant portion of the total helo lift capability - having that lift percentage coming from the rear allowed the engineers to offset the main rotor to achieve better overall balance and efficiency. I believe the RAH-66 was one of the first to really do this in practice, though Airbus did it around the same time with canted fenestrons.
@@EstorilEm I like too that they took some pitch out of the main rotor shaft on the M's so they will have a more level hover. Should help with visibility and to lessen tail strikes
Since I counted 30 troops with combat gear boarding the one rotorcraft, they must be able to transport a rifle platoon between the two. Impressive. Beats swimming ashore.
