Walter Boyne: Why everyone misinterpreted Stealth Black Hawk story

dragon models.jpgUber-aviation historian Walter Boyne happened to release a book called “How the Helicopter Changed Modern Warfare” about the same time that Osama bin Laden was exposed rather harshly to the reality of the book’s title.

That the US special forces involved in the 1 May raid of bin Laden’s compound left behind unimpeachable evidence of a secret stealth helicopter programme — which has been reported here as a bolt-on modification kit for Sikorsky MH-60Ks — seemed like sensational gravy, prompting a geyser of commercial spin-offs like a 1:144-scale model show above.

The retail version of the ‘bin Laden bump’ no doubt didn’t hurt Boyne’s book sales either, but that doesn’t mean he’s happy about all of the attention. If anything, the 83-year-old founder of Air & Space magazine and author of dozens of aviation books said in an interview on 25 March that the revelation of the stealth helicopter programme just gave everyone the wrong idea about the state of the helicopter industry.

“I think it gave [the public] a sense of pride and self-sufficiency,” Boyne said. “For me to think that the United States of America with 4.9% of [gross domestic product] devoted to defence can at best field four modified stealth helicopters when engaged in three wars is shameful.”

In Boyne’s view, the knowledge that US special operations still rely on bolt-on stealth kits reveals the US vertical lift aircraft industry is still mired in the aerodynamic and signature limitations of the Vietnam-era. The fact that one helicopter crashed during the operation allegedly due to power settling — ironically, revealing the programme’s existence — should come as no surprise, Boyne said.

The Black Hawk “is still a 30-year old design,” Boyne said. “When you put on aftermarket stealth it degrades your performance.”

Boyne cites the the experirence of the Lockheed Cheyenne high-speed helicopter. It was canceled nearly 40 years ago after suffering delays and cost overruns. But Boyne thinks the army should have stuck with it like the air force tolerated similar setbacks with each new generation of fighters and bombers. Boyne once received a letter from Willis Hawkins, Lockheed’s designer of the C-130 and the Cheyenne, who complained that if the army had only persisted it could have fielded 2,900 Cheyennes within the same time period that Boeing designed and built the significantly slower AH-64 Apache.

Instead, the US military’s rotorcraft industry has fallen into a three-decade-long rut of non-innovation, Boyne said. New helicopter programmes are launched, such as the RAH-66 Comanche, only to be canceled after requirements change and the engineering falters, with residual funds plowed back into upgrades for existing platforms.

The army is trying to break out of that paradigm now, setting an “aimpoint” in 2030 to deliver an all-new vertical lift aircraft unconstrained by the 168kt speed limit imposed by the aerodynamic law of retreating blade stall on conventional helicopters.

Boyne, however, is worried the programme is likely to follow the experience of the Comanche rather than the Apache, which actually fielded a new combat helicopter for the last time in army aviation history.


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.

10 Responses to Walter Boyne: Why everyone misinterpreted Stealth Black Hawk story

  1. jetcal1 26 May, 2011 at 3:27 pm #

    Well, it appears the Chinese are able to react fast to changes. 26 days later we have a new product on the shelf. :)

    I have wondered if the LUH-72 came on line quickly was simply because of EADS to saying “no” to the customer when they tried to make changes.

    Perhaps the contractors learn to say no.

  2. Jet_Powered 26 May, 2011 at 5:00 pm #

    I replied to an article on the left behind tail section that this was indeed a new bird not unlike the picture in this article. It just makes so much sense to have a squad sized low RCS helicopter to insert special forces with as little warning as possible.

    Clearly the RA66 at least demonstrated the radar detection performance of a stealthy helicopter and while the armed re-con mission might not have worked out, certainly a troop carrying version would have significantly reduced combat requirements. Another way of thinking is; any improvement over the Black Hawk’s billboard-sized radar profile would directly translate into saving SOCOM soldiers lives given the high risk nature of their missions.

    I’m not certain if the Night Hawk does exist but remember, the F117 was operational for several years before the Pentagon admitted its existence.

  3. fred 26 May, 2011 at 8:43 pm #

    even more interesting is that ze germans had a similar a/c to the 117 in development at about the same time. it was a mach2 fighter and it looked about the same with the exception of a conventional tail.

  4. fred 26 May, 2011 at 8:44 pm #

    more here:

  5. aeroxavier 26 May, 2011 at 9:16 pm #

    stealth hawk down

  6. S O 26 May, 2011 at 10:32 pm #

    I would rather blame the V-22 and the large share of bureaucratic public customers for Bell and especially Sikorsky products. This doesn’t tend to keep corporations fit.

    It would also be itneresting to contrast the Blackhawk / Stealthhawk with the LO NH90, a helicopter that has obvious stealth shaping and was openly developed in Europe since the 90′s.

  7. DensityDuck 26 May, 2011 at 11:50 pm #

    Haha, that kit would go quite well on my shelf, next to the Stingbat LHX that would no doubt escort it. Then they’d call for air support from the F-19. Watch out for those MiG-37 Ferrets, though!


    The thing that ultimately turfed the Cheyenne was low-speed maneuverability. As the Army developed its ideas for using helicopters in WWIII, it found that a platform for ATGM was more immediately useful than a gunship escort. The missile bird needed to be maneuverable at low speed (so that it could hide in ground clutter) and the Cheyenne was not.

    Ironically, the newer designs for high-speed helicopters are going back to the same “pusher prop” idea that the Cheyenne used.

  8. alloycowboy 27 May, 2011 at 10:49 am #

    Hey Stephen,

    I didn’t realize that you had ties to NASA and that you actually contributed to a book for them. Kudos!

  9. citation 28 July, 2013 at 4:40 am #

    If you desire to get a good deal from this piece
    of writing then you have to apply such strategies to your won webpage.

  10. page 8 August, 2013 at 8:11 pm #

    Amazing things here. I’m very satisfied to see your post. Thanks a lot and I’m looking ahead to contact you.
    Will you kindly drop me a e-mail?

Leave a Reply