Morrow Aviation Assets

[ArmySGT.]

C-23 Sherpa Model A / B

"This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over".
"This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over".
"Hey you Scouts listening to your radios, over"
"This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over".
"Mike Seven to Blackbird four, go ahead""Good to hear you Mike Seven, Black Bird 41 is inbound yours with a drop, over"
"Black Bird four one, Dee Zee is hot. Hostiles on North and East flanks with 2 plus, crew served heavy belt feds, and on Arrr Pee Gee, probable platoon strength"
"Mike Seven, this is Black Bird four one, this drop will happen in two passes. South side approach, mark your DZ with smoke. Jumpers need air ground speed and direction, over"
"Black Bird four one, did you say jumpers, over"
"Mike Seven, affirmative, Jumpers four total, say again Jumpers four total, MARS detachment".

"Black Bird four one, Roger four jumpers, MARS, air speed is still too low from the west. "

"Mike Seven, first drop in nine minutes, two pallets, will home on your location and south 100 meters."
"Black Bird four one, confirm two pallets in drop. My location plus 100 meters South, time now plus nine minutes, over"
"Affirmative, Mike Seven"

C-23 Sherpa A/B




C-23A

Data from Jane's All the World's Aircraft, 1988-1989

General characteristics

Crew: Three (Two pilots plus one cabin crew)
Capacity: 30 passengers, or 18 Litter based passengers
Length: 58 ft 0 in (17.69 m)
Wingspan: 74 ft 9 in (22.78 m)
Height: 16 ft 3 in (4.95 m)
Wing area: 453 ft2 (42.1 m2)
Airfoil: NACA 63 series, modified
Empty weight: 14,200 lb (6,440 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 22,900 lb (10,387 kg)
Powerplant: 2 -- Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-45-R turboprops, 1,198 hp (894 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 281 mph (245 knots, 453 km/h) at 12,000 ft (2,273 m)
Cruise speed: 255 mph (221 knots, 410 km/h)
Stall speed: 85 mph (73 knots, 136 km/h) with flaps and landing gear down
Range: 770 mi (670 nm, 1,239 km) passenger version, 1,966 kg payload with no reserves
Service ceiling: 27,000 ft (5,114 m)
Rate of climb: 2,100 ft/min (10.6 m/s)
Wing loading: 50.6 lb/ft2 (247 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 0.052 hp/lb (170 W/kg)

C-23B/C

Data from U.S. Army Aircraft Since 1947

General characteristics

Crew: Three (Two pilots plus one flight engineer)
Capacity: 18-20 passengers
Length: 58 ft 0 in (17.7 m)
Wingspan: 74 ft 10 in (22.8 m)
Height: 16 ft 5 in (5.0 m)
Wing area: 456 ft2 (42.4 m2)
Airfoil: NACA 63 series, modified
Empty weight: 16,040 lb (7,276 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 25,600 lb (11,610 kg)
Powerplant: 2 -- Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65AR turboprop, 1,424 shp (1,062 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 291 mph (252 knots, 468 km/h)
Cruise speed: 262 mph (228 knots, 422 km/h)
Range: 1,185 mi (1,030 nmi, 1,907 km)
Service ceiling: 28,000 ft (5,303 m)

C-23 Sherpa
Specifications
Contractor Short Brothers PLC
C-23A Sherpa C-23B Super Sherpa
Power Plant 2 Pratt-Whitney PT6A-45R turboprops 2 Pratt-Whitney PT6A-65AR turboprops
Take-off power
[Sea level static, uninstalled] 1197 shp 1424 shp
Design output shaft speed 1700 rpm 1700 rpm
Speed 218mph at 10,000ft
range 770 miles with 5000lb payload
Span 74ft 8in
length 58ft
height 16ft 3in
Weight Gross 25,500lb max
Accomodations Crew of three
up to 7000lb of freight, including 4 LD3 containers, and engines the size of F100 series
Date Deployed Entered USAF inventory 1984

[ArmySGT.]

oeKenworth two Alpha, this is Kenworth two Charlie, over. The voice came across the digitally encrypted frequency hopping radios with minimal distortion of the womans warm Midwestern tenor.
oeKenworth two Charlie, this is Kenworth two Alpha; go ahead, over Likewise answered with another womans Midwestern tenor plus some drawl in the bored tones that pilots exudes to display superior confidence.
oeKenworth two Alpha, This is Kenworth two Charlie, On Station, ready for Mission Hand off, over.

oeKenworth two Charlie, This is Kenworth two Alpha, Affirmative, Mission is yours, I am Arrr Tee Bee, dont cut to many circles out of the sky before Bravo is up to relieve you, over

oeKenworth two Alpha, this is Kenworth two Charlie, thanks, will do. Keep it above angels seven thousand. The dust storms coming up from Colorado and Kansas are kicking up fallout, over.

oeThanks Charlie, will do, Alpha, Out.

The Project discovered that the greater proportion of multi-engine off center line pilots with military and commercial experience easiest to recruit were women. The Project was looking for skills and not genders to fill roles in the desperately understaffed Morrow Project. Women had been flying various large cargo aircraft in various military non-combat roles, airborne surveillance being one.












Grumman
E-2 Hawkeye
Airborne Early Warning
And Control Aircraft

DESCRIPTION:
Although the US Navy had long desired an airborne surveillance platform, it took several years for electronics to sufficiently decrease in size to be fitted within an aircraft that could operate from an aircraft carrier. Even so, it took several more years for computers to become powerful enough that they could track and process more than a few targets at once. These conditions were finally met, however, culminating in Grumman being named the winner of a Navy contract to develop an airborne early warning and control (AWACS) aircraft.

The Grumman design featured twin turboprop engines fitted beneath a high-mounted wing. The long fuselage housed a crew of five, including three mission specialists, and featured a large rotating radome mounted on a pylon above the wing juncture. To compensate for the airflow around the radome, the tail assembly incorporated four fins on a horizontal tail with significant dihedral. This design, first flown in 1960, was originally known as the W2F-1 but was later redesignated the E-2A Hawkeye before entering service.

The Navy took delivery of 59 E-2A airframes by 1967, but these were quickly upgraded to the E-2B standard with the installation of a more powerful processing computer and inflight-refueling equipment. Shortly thereafter, Grumman began production of the E-2C model with far superior avionics and more powerful engines. These aircraft have been continuously upgraded with new radar and sensors, improved avionics, more powerful processing equipment, and software upgrades allowing the E-2C Hawkeye to track over 250 targets and control 30 interceptors at once.

In addition to protecting the US fleet, the E-2 has also been used in cooperation with law enforcement agencies to interdict drug traffickers. The E-2 has also proven popular with the French Navy and a variety of foreign air forces.

As production of the E-2C has wound down, development of a new variant called the E-2D with improved electronics is underway. The US Navy currently plans to purchase 75 of the E-2D model with deliveries beginning in 2010.

Data below for E-2C
Last modified 06 April 2011

HISTORY:
First Flight (W2F-1) 21 October 1961
(E-2C) 20 January 1971
Service Entry

(E-2A) 19 January 1964
(E-2C) November 1973

CREW: 2 pilots, 1 radar operator, 1 air control officer, 1 combat information center officer

ESTIMATED COST:

$51 million

AIRFOIL SECTIONS:
Wing Root NACA 63A216
Wing Tip

NACA 63A414

DIMENSIONS:
Length 57.56 ft (17.54 m)
Wingspan 80.58 ft (24.56 m)
Height 18.31 ft (5.58 m)
Wing Area 700.0 ft2 (65.03 m2)
Canard Area

not applicable

WEIGHTS:
Empty 37,945 lb (17,210 kg)
Normal Takeoff unknown
Max Takeoff 51,815 lb (23,505 kg)
Fuel Capacity 19,015 lb (8,625 kg)
Max Payload

unknown

PROPULSION:
Powerplant two Allison T56-425 turboprops
Thrust 9,820 ehp (7,322 kW)

PERFORMANCE:
Max Level Speed at altitude: 390 mph (625 km/h)
at sea level: unknown
cruise speed: 310 mph (500 km/h)
Initial Climb Rate unknown
Service Ceiling 36,955 ft (11,275 m)
Range typical: 1,500 nm (2,780 km)
ferry: 1,540 nm (2,850 km)
Endurance 6 hr 15 min
g-Limits unknown

ARMAMENT:
Gun none
Stations none
Air-to-Air Missile none
Air-to-Surface Missile none
Bomb none
Other none

KNOWN VARIANTS:
W2F-1 Original designation for the E-2
E-2A Initial production model; 59 built
TE-2A E-2 trainers modified from E-2A airframes; 2 converted
E-2B Designation for upgraded E-2A airframes modified with an improved computer and inflight-refueling capability
E-2C Improved model with far more capable avionics; over 150 built by 2000
TE-2C Trainer model based on the E-2C; 2 built
E-2C+ Upgrade for US aircraft including improvements to the radar, software updates, and installation of more powerful engines
E-2D New build model equipped with an improved radar system, new workstations, better satellite communications gear, and advanced cockpit displays; 75 to be built from 2009 to 2020
E-2T Former E-2B aircraft upgraded for use by Taiwan; 6 converted
C-2 Greyhound

Ship-to-shore transport aircraft derived from the E-2 airframe

KNOWN COMBAT RECORD:

Vietnam War (USN, 1965-1972)
Lebanon (Israel, 1982)
Libya - Operation El Dorado Canyon (USAF, 1986)
Iraq - Operation Desert Storm (USN, 1991)
Bosnia - Operation Deliberate Force (USAF, 1995)
Afghanistan - Operation Enduring Freedom (USN, 2001-present)
Iraq - Operation Iraqi Freedom (USN, 2003-present)
Libya - Operation Unified Protector / Harmattan (France, 2011)

KNOWN OPERATORS:

Egypt, Al Quwwat al Jawwiya il Misriya (Egyptian Air Force)
France, Aronautique Navale (French Naval Air Arm)
Israel, Tsvah Haganah le Israel - Heyl Ha'Avir (Israeli Defence Force - Air Force)
Japan, Nihon Koku-Jieitai (Japan Air Self Defence Force)
Singapore (Republic of Singapore Air Force)
Taiwan, Chung-Kuo Kung Chuan (Republic of China Air Force)
United States (US Navy)

3-VIEW SCHEMATIC:

E-2 Hawkeye


SOURCES:

Bishop, Chris, ed. The Encyclopedia of Modern Military Weapons: The Comprehensive Guide to Over 1,000 Weapon Systems from 1945 to the Present Day. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1999, p. 347.
Bonds, Ray, ed. The Modern US War Machine: An Encyclopedia of American Military Equipment and Strategy. NY: Military Press, 1987, p. 184-185.
Donald, David, ed. The Complete Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1997, p. 472, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye/TE-2/C-2 Greyhound.
Donald, David and Lake, Jon, ed. The Encyclopedia of World Military Aircraft. NY: Barnes & Noble, 2000, p. 185-187, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.
Gunston, Bill, ed. The Encyclopedia of Modern Warplanes. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1995, p. 128, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.
Laur, Timothy M. and Llanso, Steven L. Encyclopedia of Modern U.S. Military Weapons. NY: Berkley Books, 1995, p. 54-57, Hawkeye (E-2).
Miller, David, ed. The Illustrated Directory of Modern American Weapons. London: Salamander Books, 2002, p. 184-185, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye.
Mller, Claudio. Aircraft of the World. NY: Muddle Puddle Books, 2004, p. 258-259, Northrop Grumman Hawkeye 2000.
Rendall, David. Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide, 2nd ed. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 1999, p. 167, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye.
Taylor, Michael. Brassey's World Aircraft & Systems Directory 1996/1997. London: Brassey's, 1996, p. 191-192, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye and Hawkeye II.
Taylor, Michael J. H. Brassey's World Aircraft & Systems Directory 1999/2000. London: Brassey's, 1999, p. 169-170, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye, Group II Hawkeye II and Hawkeye 2000.
US Navy E-2 Fact Sheet

[rcaf_777]

I think another good aircraft would the Grumman S-2 Tracker, and it Variants
the C-1 Trader COD, E-1 Tracer AWACS, and the Conair Firecat (Water Bomber)

[Old Fart]

F4's or A4's would be a good choice as some are still in the bone yards and still in use in some third world Air Forces. If updated with more modern capabilities (electronics) and engines these would be good backbone forces, kind of like the B-52's. On that note if it were possible for the MP procurers to get their hands on some A-6 intruders these would be the B-52's of the project.

[rcaf_777]

I am thinking if the project needs a low cost quiet low level reconnaissance aircraft they might have Lockheed YO-3 "Quiet Star"

Lockheed YO-3 "Quiet Star"

General characteristics
Crew: Two
Length: 30 ft 0 in (9.14 m)
Wingspan: 57 ft 0 in (17.37 m)
Wing Area: 180 sq. ft. (16.70 sq. m)
Powerplant: 1 -- Continental six-cylinder horizonally-opposed, 210


Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_YO-3

[ArmySGT.]

General characteristics

Crew: 1-2
Capacity: 4-5 passengers
Length: 23 ft 0 in (7.01 m)
Rotor diameter: 26 ft 4 in (8.03 m)
Height: 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m)
Disc area: 544.63 ft2 (50.60 m2)
Empty weight: 1,320 lbs (599 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 3,000 lbs (1361 kg)
Powerplant: 1 -- One Allison 250-C20B Turboshaft, 420 hp (313 kW)

Performance

Maximum speed: 160 mph (257 km/h)
Range: 230 miles (370 km)
Service ceiling: 13,800 ft (4,205 m)
Rate of climb: 1,650 ft/min (503 m/min (8.4 m/s))

Armament

four TOW anti-tank missiles, or
two 7.62mm General Electric M134 Miniguns plus ammuntion, or
four General Dynamics Stinger air-to-air missile, or
Mk 44 or Mk 46 lightweight torpedoes (ASW Version), or
two seven-shot rocket pods

[stormlion1]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.

[ArmySGT.]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.

So far the canon aircraft have all been located inside a Morrow facility, Prime Base. It would be expected that these would operate from a dedicated facility established pre-War. Even a bolt hole style with one aircraft, two crews, and a 5-10 person maintenance team.

[cosmicfish]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.

This is a great argument for the Project to limit the models for all vehicles as much as possible. It might be desirable to have a dozen different types of aircraft, but logistically that becomes much harder to support. The Project would be best served by a single multi-mission combat-capable aircraft (V-22 or H-60 perhaps) supported by a single dirt-strip-capable transport aircraft (C-130 or C-23 perhaps). I cannot see reducing the numbers any further than that and I cannot see any overreaching need that would justify any more models.

At the same time, it should be noted that electric vehicles in general have significantly lower maintenance requirements than ICE vehicles. There are a LOT fewer moving parts and that makes everything a lot easier. Your supply and support needs are going to be a lot lower for Morrow vehicles than the original versions required.

[stormlion1]

Very true, for Fourth Edition we have much more in the way of options for air assets. But there all also much more fragile-tech wise and expensive. So I think that older gear is better. Aircraft like the Huey or the Little Bird for Helicopters. Tried and true designs and C-130's for aircraft. Does the Project need anything more than those Not really.

[cosmicfish]

Very true, for Fourth Edition we have much more in the way of options for air assets. But there all also much more fragile-tech wise and expensive. So I think that older gear is better. Aircraft like the Huey or the Little Bird for Helicopters. Tried and true designs and C-130's for aircraft. Does the Project need anything more than those Not really.

I don't see any particular inherent virtue in "older" - certainly something that is brand new is going to be a risk, but (for example) the H-60 and C-23 have been around plenty long enough to be "safe". I would say that, for aircraft, a decade of use is an adequate buffer to ensure that (a) the kinks have been worked out, (b) there is an adequate supply chain, and (c) there is a supply of trained, experienced pilots. And that's a soft decade - the C-27 should certainly be in consideration! There is a tendency in this country to underestimate how long our military aircraft have been flying, and while the Project could make do with pre-Vietnam War aircraft like the C-130 or UH-1, there is not really any benefit in doing so.

The Little Bird bugs me for a different reason - it is too little. It is fine for observation and even light attack, but if it cannot transport a typical MARS or Recon team, along with standard crew including a door gunner or two, then it is going to be too limited in the missions it can handle. It would be fine as part of an assortment of helicopters, but an assortment of helicopters is what the Project should avoid.

[mmartin798]

I always try to reign in the "Oooo... Pretty! Me Want!" reaction by thinking how it would fit into the reconstruction plan. When I apply this to aircraft, I keep coming back to a short list for my manned depot/manufacturing incubator base. There are two VTOLs that usually make the list, CH-47 and V-22, and the C-130. I can make a good case for the C-27 as well. All these aircraft are proved, some with a shaky start, and have reconstruction uses as well. The CH-47 makes for an suitable sky crane, carries 10 tonnes and has the ability to transport many patients as an air ambulance. V-22 is much faster than the CH-47 with half the payload. The C-130 can carry a newly rebuilt or manufactured CNC Mill in the cargo bay for delivery to a plant with an improvised runway far way. The fact that all these aircraft are multi role from early warning, in-flight/ground vehicle refueling, vehicle and troop transport to support MARS operation is good too.

I think this is a needed conversation. It is completely unreasonable to assume the Project would not have air assets. But I keep going back to thinking why they would have them first and then picking airframes that make sense.

[stormlion1]

I don't see any particular inherent virtue in "older" - certainly something that is brand new is going to be a risk, but (for example) the H-60 and C-23 have been around plenty long enough to be "safe". I would say that, for aircraft, a decade of use is an adequate buffer to ensure that (a) the kinks have been worked out, (b) there is an adequate supply chain, and (c) there is a supply of trained, experienced pilots. And that's a soft decade - the C-27 should certainly be in consideration! There is a tendency in this country to underestimate how long our military aircraft have been flying, and while the Project could make do with pre-Vietnam War aircraft like the C-130 or UH-1, there is not really any benefit in doing so.

The Little Bird bugs me for a different reason - it is too little. It is fine for observation and even light attack, but if it cannot transport a typical MARS or Recon team, along with standard crew including a door gunner or two, then it is going to be too limited in the missions it can handle. It would be fine as part of an assortment of helicopters, but an assortment of helicopters is what the Project should avoid.

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger. Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.
Of course a Little Bird and any helicopter is just fine five years after the nukes, but a 150 showing up in one really isn't the way to recon a settlement.

[ArmySGT.]

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger. Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.
Of course a Little Bird and any helicopter is just fine five years after the nukes, but a 150 showing up in one really isn't the way to recon a settlement.

Either 5 years or 150 it is still excellent for reconnaissance of roads, highways, bridges, rivers, railroad.......

It can take video or still images for assessment and using milimeter wave radar or LIDAR make accurate measurements for assessing areas to rebuild.

[cosmicfish]

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger.

I am not sure what you are talking about here - are you suggesting that this helicopter be issued as an auxiliary vehicle for Recon teams in addition to their regular MPV In addition to their other skills, they are supposed to have a couple of experienced helicopter pilots Chopper pilots don't exactly grow on trees, you know.

And it has twice the footprint of a Stryker, so I am not sure how you figure fitting one into a bolthole is going to be easy, but then again boltholes aren't standardized anyway.

Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.

That doesn't change that it is one of the least versatile helicopters out there. It can carry a six man team, but only 4 can then dismount and fight (2, if you insist on the helicopter being protected as it leaves), and they can't really bring anyone or anything back with them. Even without passengers it has a minimal cargo capacity. Unless the Morrow aerial inventory is large enough to permit this kind of specialization, something that can do all this stuff and carry an actual team or their MPV or large sensor pods or serve as a medevac might be a better choice.