FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1958
1958 - 0366.PDF
382 FLIGHT, 21 March 1958 WHO BELIEVES IN HELICOPTERS?... and operational problems should not have been solved within thenext few years: but there will remain financial problems, and in the end these may prove the more formidable. All helicopters in current use on scheduled passenger serviceswere produced originally for military duties, which means that the vast majority of all helicopter development costs have beenpaid out of public funds. Today, with defence expenditure reach- ing unprecedented sums, the British armed Services are puttingfirst tilings first in face of growing public criticism. Nuclear weapons—and aircraft, ships and missiles to carry them—aretaking precedence over all else, including helicopters. Similarly, most major airlines are committed to spending farmore money than they can really afford on new jet and turboprop transports to "keep up with the Joneses." Why should theyvoluntarily throw away money by operating tiresome local services with current helicopters that are completely uneconomical? Andhow can they find cash to contribute towards the development of more advanced helicopters that might work in 1965? The exceptions are the Soviet armed forces and Aeroflot, forwhom financial considerations are less critical, and the results arc clear. At a time when there is not a single fully-developed40-seat helicopter flying in the West there are dozens of Yak-24s in service with the Soviet forces; and the 80-seat twin-turbineMi-6 has reached the stage where it has set up international load- carrying records before any comparable Western helicopter isoff (perhaps even on) the drawing boards. Just how serious this might be, at a time when our aircraftindustries are beginning to feel the loss of military orders, can be gauged from a quick survey of the part helicopters could play inmilitary and civil aviation if given the chance. Two Kinds of War.—According to Britain's Defence Minister,the R.A.F.—in common with our other Services—is being re- shaped for maximum effectiveness in preventing big wars andfighting little ones; but a study of successive White Papers and Estimates gives little reassurance that this will be achieved. The deterrent forces are there right enough—Valiants withA-bombs and H-bombs in service; Vulcans and Victors with "stand-off" bombs on the way; Thor IRBMs by the end of 1958,minus U.S. warheads; and, presumably, plenty of British war- heads for our own forthcoming superior IRBMs. If we continue to think for a moment in terms of total war,these formidable masterpieces of misguided progress are probably adequate for the United Kingdom. But they are defensiveweapons, valuable only while they are able to prevent war. If their deterrent powers fail, they become a David advancing to docombat with a Goliath clever enough to have his own sling and five times five smooth stones. There is little point in our planningwhat we should do next after both sides have used up their nuclear weapons. This may sound defeatist; but events of the past 13 years haveshown that local wars and "police actions" are not only more likely than global wars, but almost inevitable. So it is realistic toplan energetically for such campaigns and to waste little thought on what would follow the failure of our first-priority deterrents.In any case, a "broken-back" post-nuclear-phase global war would probably demand much the same equipment and tactics as a localnon-nuclear war, only on a larger scale. Both offer ample scope for the effective use of helicopters in a variety of roles. First essential is to get ground forces as quickly as possible towhere they are needed, and Suez showed how lamentably Firing an S.S.1O anti-tank missile from an 5.0.7227 D/inn. equipped the British services are to achieve this. TwentyBritannias and a few squadrons of Beverleys will form a small basis for the vitally-needed air transport and re-supply service;but there is little indication that the Defence Ministry yet under- stands the necessity of a high degree of mobility in all aspectsof modern warfare. Back in 1956 the U.S. Army gave details of what it called itsPentana concept—a plan for the integration of all modern forms of weapon (including missiles) with transport aircraft, for maxi-mum efficiency in any type of war. "Pentana" signified simply a five-sided organizational structure (PENT) and a mergedcapacity for atomic/non-atomic operations (ANA). Explaining the concept, the Army's annual Report com-mented:— "To fight successfully on the battlefield of the future, the Army mustno longer be roadbound and tied to a ponderous logistical tail. Rather it must develop improved cross-country mobility with lightly armouredpersonnel and cargo-carriers, plus increased use of air vehicles. Trans- port of units into the battle area and back and forth within the battlearea must be accomplished in large part by aircraft. Much of the supply to and within the field army must be delivered by aircraft of the assaultcargo and convertiplane type. "The increased mobility of a Pentana division comes largely from theleanness of its basic structure. Much equipment and some units have been removed and pooled at higher command levels. This strippingleaves the airborne division and battle groups of the infantry division light and completely air-transportable. Units will be able to dispersequickly to avoid detection and converge ro fight. "Pentana provides for extensive use of atomic firepower. An ever-increasing range of sizes and yields permits the firing of atomic warheads in most of the Army's missiles and some of its cannon. The atomic-bearing missile gives a commander almost unlimited flexibility and crushing firepower. His longer-range missiles have the capacity ofsupporting his far-flung and fast-ranging battlegroups over the vast distances of the atomic battlefield. This combination of range, accuracyand punch permits him to mass his firepower without necessarily massing his forces." For non-atomic warfare, "Pentana visualizes greatly increasedfirepower. Remarkable progress has been made in the design of high-explosive warheads for smaller missiles and conventionalweapons." And tg ensure the all-important good communications on the ground, new lightweight, long-range, reliable equipmentis being produced, including small radios built into the helmets (Left) A Sikorsky H-37 lifts a two-and-a-half-ton truck. (Right) A Kaman HOK-1, carrying a pilot and three fire-fighting rescue crewmen, hovers while the tire-fighting equipment is attached to the helicopter's external cargo hook. The equipment consists of two Ansul 300-lb dry chemical tanks, each with 100ft of hose, and rescue tools.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
