• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Sikorsky flying crane projects

rotorheadtx

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Jemiba said:
... and in RAF Flying Review 1/62 there were two helicopter types, unknown to me :
a flying-crane version of the S-60 and a Lockheed four-seat helicopter without any
designation :
Do you mean the S-61 (Sea King)??

The S-60 was a flying crane from the get-go, although it was piston-engined, using the dynamic components of the S-56/H-37 Mojave.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
Yes, but in this drawing it's obviously turbine powered, I think.-
 

elmayerle

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,252
Reaction score
8
Jemiba said:
Yes, but in this drawing it's obviously turbine powered, I think.-
Wonder if the source had a confusion between the S-60 and S-64?
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
Don't think so, as the S-64 was mentioned in this article, too.
 

mcs

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I would venture a guess and say there was a typo in Flying Review and that it should've stated it was a flying crane version of the S-61.

From looking at the drawing, the length appears to be closer to that of the S-61/H-3 as opposed to the S-60. The shape of the doghouse and the fact that it has a five blade tail rotor also appears to indicate that it was a S-61 derivative.

I've seen engineering data on the S-60. One of the documents dated prior to 1/62 illustrates a turbine version of the S-60 and the layout was identical to that of the S-64.

The S-60 still survives, albeit in many pieces, at the New England Air Museum:

http://www.neam.org/inventory/airprofile.asp?ID=123

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0569663&WxsIERv=Fvxbefxl%20F-60%20Fxlpenar&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Fvxbefxl%20Nvepensg&QtODMg=Jvaqfbe%20Ybpxf%20%28Unegsbeq%20%2F%20Fcevatsvryq%29%20-%20Oenqyrl%20Vagreangvbany%20%28OQY%20%2F%20XOQY%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Pbaarpgvphg&ktODMp=Ncevy%2029%2C%202004&BP=1&WNEb25u=Qry%20Ynhturel&xsIERvdWdsY=A807&MgTUQtODMgKE=Pbpxcvg%20nern%20bs%20gur%20F-60%20va%20fgbentr%20ng%20gur%20Arj%20Ratynaq%20Nve%20Zhfrhz.%20Gur%20shfryntr%20vf%20nyfb%20va%20fgbentr.%20Guvf%20nvepensg%20jnf%20vaibyirq%20va%20fbzr%20glcr%20bs%20nppvqrag%20va%201961%20juvpu%20cerfhznoyl%20pnhfrq%20gur%20frcnengvba%20bs%20gur%20pbpxcvg%20sebz%20gur%20shfryntr.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=1033&NEb25uZWxs=2004-05-03%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes&width=1500&height=1012&sok=JURER%20%20%28ZNGPU%20%28nvepensg%2Cnveyvar%2Ccynpr%2Ccubgb_qngr%2Cpbhagel%2Cerznex%2Ccubgbtencure%2Crznvy%2Clrne%2Cert%2Cnvepensg_trarevp%2Cpa%2Cpbqr%29%20NTNVAFG%20%28%27%2B%22F-60%22%27%20VA%20OBBYRNA%20ZBQR%29%29%20%20beqre%20ol%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=1&prev_id=&next_id=0513311

One of these days, I need to contact the museum to see if I can get some close up photos of it.
 

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,363
Reaction score
43
Is that a real proposal or someone's kitbash?
I think this is not a real proposal
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
In Aviation Week 1967 17-22, there was a concept, just called "Heavy-Lift
Logistic System", that, judging the artist's impression, could have been based
on the CH-53, although it bears not much resemblance to the other picture
 

Attachments

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
204
I always thought that CH-53E is Super Stallion...
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
72
Sentinel Chicken said:
hesham said:
Hi,

The Sikorsky CH-53E as a high speed crane helicopter.
Is that a real proposal or someone's kitbash?
It is a kitbash for a heavy lift. It's not going to lift a lot with all that wing surface in the downwash. The 'high speed' is rather silly too since the flat plate drag on the external cargo will eat up the aircrafts power margin at anything above 120 knots... if that.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
When I was searching for the CH-53 crane (is it or is it not ?), I found another
Sikorsky crane heli concept, with a MTOW of nearly 43 ts and a payload of 21.5ts,
intended for carrying an ICBM. Novelty would have been the 11-blade rotor with
the large lenticular hub fairing and twin tail rotors (from Aviation Week 1968 19-26).
The dynamic system would principally have been the same, as in the S-64 project,
shown in Flugwelt 8/1958.
 

Attachments

Jos Heyman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
2
With reference to the mention of the CH-53 in the previous posts, I think we really mean the CH-54. This was the Sikorsky S-64 Tarhe which was based on the S60 design of 1959. The first S64 flew on 9 May 1962. Six pre production aircraft were ordered in June 1963 as YCH 54A-and serials 64-14202/14207, whilst serial 64-4256 probably represents a cancelled order of the YCH-54A. 54 CH-54As production aircraft were built with serials 66-18408/18413, 67-18414/18431 and 68-18432/18459.
The CH-54B was a heavier version with dual main wheels and T73-P-700 engines and 37 were built with serials 69-18460/18484, 70-18485/18490. 71-18491/18498. The 22 universal pods that were used in conjunction with these aircraft were serialled separately as 68-18578/18599. The first of these was accepted on 28 June 1968 and they were fitted with all support systems and could accommodate 45 combat troops. They had an interior length of 27’5”, 8.36 m, a width of 8’10”, 2.69 m and a height of 6’6”, 1.98 m.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
This picture comes from an advert by Sikorsky in Aviation Week 1970, showing
a design for a 23t heavy lift helicopter.
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,872
Reaction score
922
Hi,

on archive film about Sikorsky and his helicopter aircraft and projects,
I saw a very large flying crane helicopter project developed from S-64,
with four big legs,and it look like the Boeing HLH of 1970,does anyone
know it ?.
 

Attachments

circle-5

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
46
Scanned from an old Sikorsky promotional calendar, some color renderings of the HLH and S-64B (3-engine Skycrane).
 

Attachments

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,666
Reaction score
35
Does anyone have any specifications for the S-64B?


Regards
Pioneer
 

circle-5

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
46
Concept model of the Sikorsky DS-160 (DS- for Design Study) early crane helicopter project. Horizontal tail rotor is noteworthy. Factory 3-view drawing came with the model (copies can be obtained from another source -- just search DS-160 on SPF).
 

Attachments

circle-5

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
46
Another picture of the DS-160 model, with wheel undercarriage and passenger pod attached. This feature that would be offered on the later Skycrane.
 

Attachments

JohnR

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
353
Reaction score
2
Were there any planned replacements/successors for this aircraft?

I know that in terms of role they were replaced by CH53's and Chinooks, but I was wondering more in terms of concept; an aircraft with minimal airframe intended to carry underslung loads.

I always felt that the concept of the aircraft being able to carry fitted out modules; such as operating theatres or command facilities was a good one (Maybe I was to much of a childhood fan on the Eagle Transporters in Space 1999).

I wondered if the concept was such a "one hit wonder" because it was limited to transporting underslung loads?

Regards.
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
There was a CH-54B that was significantly larger than the CH-54A. Sikorsky pitched it to the Army, which was not interested. Then the Army asked for an upgrade to the 54A which was designated the 54B. Put another way, the 54B that was actually built was not the same as the original 54B that was proposed.

There were a few similar concepts, but they never got very far. Although the concept of saving weight by just building the frame and not a heavy cabin seemed logical, in actual military operations, there was a lot greater need for a cabin that could also transport troops. The CH-54 was not as versatile as the Army wanted.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
85
an aircraft with minimal airframe intended to carry underslung loads
Boeing's HLH (XCH-62A) was exactly that, though it was a huge helicopter. Unfortunately the program was canceled before the prototype was complete.

Oh, by the way... could a moderator change the title for "Tahre" to "Tarhe"? It will help further searches in the search engine. Thanks!
 

JohnR

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
353
Reaction score
2
Thanks for the info.

Any specs on the original CH54B?

Regards.
 

frank

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
4
Why not add the dash between CH & 54 to correct the designation while you're at it?


Stargazer2006 said:
an aircraft with minimal airframe intended to carry underslung loads
Boeing's HLH (XCH-62A) was exactly that, though it was a huge helicopter. Unfortunately the program was canceled before the prototype was complete.

Oh, by the way... could a moderator change the title for "Tahre" to "Tarhe"? It will help further searches in the search engine. Thanks!
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
JohnR said:
Thanks for the info.

Any specs on the original CH54B?

Regards.
Yeah, I'll post them. Also have some artwork. It looks like a 54A, only somewhat longer. I think I have a side by side comparison.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
85
frank said:
Why not add the dash between CH & 54 to correct the designation while you're at it?
Sure. If I had my way, I'd go correcting all these annoying typos in the titles, believe you me!
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
Here are two images, along with the statistics. Sorry these are not better. I have the artist image of the CH-54B lifting the tank as a color print, but can't scan it because it's framed.
 

Attachments

elmayerle

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,252
Reaction score
8
Is it just me, or does that CH-54B seem to bear a distinct resemblance to the H-53? As I remember, the CH-54 is the S-64 while the H-53 (the twin-engined verions, anyway) is the S-65. I could see some design data crossover; it also give an idea about how to go modelling a Ch-54B.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
172
Not sure, as no designation is given, but this picture from Aviation week 17/67
could show the C-54B, too, I think.
 

Attachments

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
85
I think the S-64 and S-65 were designed at about the same time and are indeed quite similar in a number of ways.
Also, I recall the original S-65 design was not produced. What we know as the H-53 series is the S-65A and S-65C.
 

JohnR

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
353
Reaction score
2
Blackstar,

Once again thanks for the info. and the images.

What was the intended powerplant?

Stargazer2006,

With regard to the S-64 and 65, I had wondered if there were any proposals for this concept based on the powerplant and rotor arrangements of what became the CH-53. (Aren't you proud I used dashes)

Regards.
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
Powerplant would have been either three GE T-64-16 engines or three Lycoming T-55-11 engines.
 

circle-5

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
46
The attached photo shows a basic model of Igor Sikorsky's sesqui-rotor layout, which would evolve into the DS-160 crane helicopter study. This model is dated 1948, which suggests the DS-160 was designed that same year at the earliest, not in 1945 as described elsewhere.
 

Attachments

Caravellarella

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
112
Dear Boys and Girls, here is part of an article in French about the Sikorsky UTV (Universal Tactical Vehicle) helicopter "project" which was a proposed flying crane version of the Sikorsky S-61L. It is part of a larger article about Sikorsky flying crane helicopters in general......

The article comes from the 3rd February 1961 issue of Les Ailes......

Terry (Caravellarella)
 

Attachments

Top