Should the CH-53 replace the UH-60 as the USMC transport helo?

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2005-11-17 23:39

Resjah · Post by **Resjah** » 2005-11-17 23:43

why replace it?

just have different maps with the different copters

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2005-11-17 23:43

Because the USMC doesn't use the Blackhawk

GRB · Post by **GRB** » 2005-11-18 00:45

Agreed.

Although, sometimes the Marines do use the HH-60 Pavehawk provided by the USAirforce. Still though, the CH-53 would suit the marines much better. Plus, its a lot bigger, much more comparable in size to the MEC transport. The Blackhawk was a mistake by EA Games in my opinion.

Post by **IRONxMortlock** » 2005-11-18 00:50

'[R-PUB wrote:GRB']Agreed.

Although, sometimes the Marines do use the HH-60 Pavehawk provided by the USAirforce. Still though, the CH-53 would suit the marines much better. Plus, its a lot bigger, much more comparable in size to the MEC transport. The Blackhawk was a mistake by EA Games in my opinion.

I suspect they were going for that "blackhawk down" kind of atmosphere - except they allowed guys with spanners to repair it mid flight faster than anti-tank rockets can damage it!

It doesn't really bother me much but I always like to see new vehicles in the game - CH-53 would be nice.

USAF-Marshall · Post by **USAF-Marshall** » 2005-11-18 01:31

I agree 110%. At least put it on some maps, gotta admit the BH is okay sometimes but I would much rather fly the Super Stallion than anything else (Aside from the Little Bird of course)

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-11-18 02:08

how about a 'do what is realistic' vote?

GRB · Post by **GRB** » 2005-11-18 02:59

USAF-Marshall wrote:I agree 110%. At least put it on some maps, gotta admit the BH is okay sometimes but I would much rather fly the Super Stallion than anything else (Aside from the Little Bird of course)

What about gun it?

Have you seen the armament that thing can consist of? Infantry beware!

Dirkyd23 · Post by **Dirkyd23** » 2005-11-18 07:47

Well, BF2 is set in the future and well it will only be a matter of time before the army hands down there Blackhawks to the Marines cause they have something better

. But I think it would be sweet to see the CH-53 in some maps.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2005-11-18 08:23

Dirkyd23 wrote:Well, BF2 is set in the future and well it will only be a matter of time before the army hands down there Blackhawks to the Marines cause they have something better . But I think it would be sweet to see the CH-53 in some maps.

The Marines have repeatedly demonstrated that they do not want the H-60 for anything other than presidential transport (VH-60N). Their near-future utility helicopter is the UH-1Y, and it looks quite promising by all accounts, especially considering the parts commonalities with the upcoming AH-1Z. Be advised, the BF2 "future war" scenario may not always be around in PR.

It has been repeatedly stated that the USMC will not be the only representation of US forces in the game and there will be maps with service/unit-specific equipment and vehicles depending on the types of units represented.

That having been said, I will say once again (since this has been brought up quite often), that a CH-53E Super Stallion in game is a distinct possibility and we would also like to do a UH-1N to replace EA's alleged HH-60H Seahawk (the actual aircraft of that designation only superficially resembles the one in game) on certain maps.

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2005-11-18 10:25

Either way there is a need for a dedicated troop transport that is more heavily armoured than a littlebird but doesnt have any deathrays equipped.

I dont care if that is an unarmed blackhawk or a new helicopter.

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2005-11-18 11:01

Just for the hell of it, here are some of the features on the UH-1Y

1. Payload is 125% higher than the UH-1N, allowing the commander to move more troops and materiel, with fewer sorties.
2. Range and maximum cruise speed have been increased by almost 50% over the UH-1N delivering combat assets to their objective faster.
3. High G loads can be sustained in tactical or evasive maneuvers.
4. Significantly reduced vibration provides pilots better responsiveness and agility.
5. A fully integrated, night vision goggle (NVG) compatible “glass” cockpit, maximizes situational awareness, by easily delivering critical navigation, threat, communications, and aircraft system data to the crew.
6. An advanced electronic warfare self protection (EWSP) suite, and ballistically hardened components protect it from a broad range of modern threat weapons.
7. A proven crashworthy fuel system to reduce the risk of fire and fully stroking energy attenuating seats to protect crewmembers and passengers from injury, in the event of a crash.

Mad Max · Post by **Mad Max** » 2005-11-18 12:33

Go for the merry old proven Huey... or the less than great (they have quite a bad reliability problem according to many rports) Stallions. They're old, I think the newest airframes are from the 70's or something, like our Seakings (hense replacing them with Merlins). I don't think they've made an all new Stallion for quite some time. Just retrofits. Huey's on the other hand, I think they've been in pretty much continual production since 'Nam which is why they're such a great chopper with a good record. I think they have a better safety/reliability record than Hawks on a number made:failed ratio. I may be wrong though, but the Marines don't tend to use tat, they let the Army test it before deciding (like how they didn't bother with the Stryker).

Post by **Hitperson** » 2005-11-18 12:46

I have to say that realisum should be the way to go and also i found this cool pic.

Mad Max · Post by **Mad Max** » 2005-11-18 12:48

They left a floater! Wonder if thats actually floating or it has something under it? Looks like it's been ditched actually.

GRB · Post by **GRB** » 2005-11-18 15:50

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']The Marines have repeatedly demonstrated that they do not want the H-60 for anything other than presidential transport (VH-60N). Their near-future utility helicopter is the UH-1Y, and it looks quite promising by all accounts, especially considering the parts commonalities with the upcoming AH-1Z. Be advised, the BF2 "future war" scenario may not always be around in PR.

It has been repeatedly stated that the USMC will not be the only representation of US forces in the game and there will be maps with service/unit-specific equipment and vehicles depending on the types of units represented.

That having been said, I will say once again (since this has been brought up quite often), that a CH-53E Super Stallion in game is a distinct possibility and we would also like to do a UH-1N to replace EA's alleged HH-60H Seahawk (the actual aircraft of that designation only superficially resembles the one in game) on certain maps.

What he said...^^

^^

Like i said, the Marines DO use the HH-60 sometimes, but its usually only for practicing or executing water evacs...So i dont think it has any particular role in BF2..

UH-1N *drools*

SiN|ScarFace · Post by **SiN|ScarFace** » 2005-11-18 18:40

Cool picture of what looks like seals preforming a halo jump.

http://pao.navair.navy.mil/press_releas ... s/halo.jpg

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-11-18 18:50

the Naval variations of the '53 do float the botom is specially sealed water tight so it CAN float,

as far if there still making them i believe the Air Force PaveLow is a much newer make than some of the other variations, i could be wrong but i believe there alot more hightech and durable than the Navy/Marine versions,

as for the title of this thread i dont think it would be good to replace the BH with a '53, its too big or bulky and to big of a target, id rather see it replaced with a Huey variant but i definetly would love to see it on some maps

DocGJ · Post by **DocGJ** » 2005-11-18 18:54

I realy want to se the huey

love that chopper

Stu007 · Post by **Stu007** » 2005-11-18 19:46

would love to see merlin for the british

(thinks of the awesome thunderous noise it makes, ahhhhh)