Precious Black Hawk

[RickC Sniper]

I love IMDB.COM because of the fun "trivia" insights.

From that site about "The Duelist"

During the scene where D'Hubert asks Adele to marry him, she starts to laugh. This laughter was not intentional. According to director Ridley Scott, she actually has a hard time keeping a straight face since one of the horses has a huge erection.

:p

[Dowly]

I love Ridley Scott's movies. Really a great director. And yes, the BHD's Behind the Scenes was a great look too.

[Skybird]

Okay, movies, fine, but - any answer to my question on the Black Hawk's availability?

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Okay, movies, fine, but - any answer to my question on the Black Hawk's availability?

You write too long posts. I only read the first 3-4 lines. :rotfl:

[Skybird]

Next, reading the first 3-4 paragraphs would be an improvement!

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Next, reading the first 3-4 paragraphs would be an improvement!

I try.

EDIT: Righto, read it. No idea, but yes, it does seem abit silly if the BH is that big of a secret, only used for military purposes. I'm 100% sure tons of private companies would like to buy a civil version of the BH.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Okay, movies, fine, but - any answer to my question on the Black Hawk's availability?

The Sikorsky S-70 is a medium-lift military helicopter family manufactured by Sikorsky. In the U.S. military, it is operationally known with the US military designation H-60. Civilian versions are also produced under the S-70 model designation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_S-70


Sikorsky S-92 - Civilian medium-lift derivative of the Black Hawk.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_S-92

Btw. Finland was about to order Black Hawks two months back when the delivery of the NH-90 helicopters was late two years. They got money back and an maintence centre in Finland for NH-90 so the Black Hawk deal didnt go through.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

Btw. Finland was about to order Black Hawks two months back when the delivery of the NH-90 helicopters was late two years. They got money back and an maintence centre in Finland for NH-90 so the Black Hawk deal didnt go through.

Dang! I would've wanted BHs, they look much better than the NH90.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Dang! I would've wanted BHs, they look much better than the NH90.

Maybe but NH-90 can take over double the load of UH-60, half more passengers and has a longer range also.
It should also have very modern avionics suit and very good survivability in all conditons. But offcourse we will see what it is made of in the years to come.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

Maybe but NH-90 can take over double the load of UH-60, half more passengers and has a longer range also.
It should also have very modern avionics suit and very good survivability in all conditons. But offcourse we will see what it is made of in the years to come.

True that.

[bookworm_020]

Australia has both Black hawks and Sea Hawks in it's armed forces. We are also getting the NH-90 as well (around 40 of them)

[kiwi_2005]

Originally Posted by RickC Sniper

I love IMDB.COM because of the fun "trivia" insights.

:p

Yea i visit IMDB for reviews on movies but it can be misleading, like if 9 ppl vote a movie and give it an above average score then its displayed as 9/10 for example yet it could very well be a flop.

[Takao]

Back when the movie was made, there were a only a handful of Blackhawks being operated by other nations. IIRC, you don't even need your thumbs to count them on your hands.

While the Blackhawk is a fine helicopter, it is expensive to own and fly. With many compbrable helicopters already on the market, there wasn't a need for a civilian Blackhawk. The Huey can do much the same job, costs a lot less, but usually requires more maintenance. Besides there are several Soviet models to choose from. Besides, in the civilian market, why would Sikorsky produce a competitor to their successful S-76 Spirit?

[AntEater]

The global arms market is a strange place, especially when it involves US or European manufacturers.
If you want US military hardware, just forking over the cash doesn't quite cut it anymore, not even if you're a close ally. You get a lot of contractual obligations on how to use the hardware or who you can resell it to. Also, I don't know a single US arms deal in the last few years that actually resulted in any form of profit for the US contractor directly from the customer. The money was made from the US government.
"Cash and carry" works with russians or chinese hardware, but not with US or EU stuff.
Usually it seems the US basically does not sell arms, but gives them away for political leverage.
Austria did buy Black Hawks but the countersale proposals were so hefty the US got zero profit out of it.
Recently, it was a subsim headline that the landing ship India got from the US (a 20+ year old clunker) is forbidden to take part in combat operations.
I suppose the only country that can use US weapons without (or at least with the least) restrictions is Israel.
I suppose one reason most european countries "go european" is that this means full control over your weapons.
Germany still has to pay license fees for the source code of the software of the Patriot missile system and will enter similar obligations with the MEADS system.
I suppose restrictions for AMRAAM and Standard missiles are similar.
I've heard the greeks did go russian for their air defence for the simple reason that they want SAMs that work when the Turks attack, and do not get turned off because Turkey is more in favor with Washington than Greece.

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by AntEater

If you want US military hardware, just forking over the cash doesn't quite cut it anymore, not even if you're a close ally. You get a lot of contractual obligations on how to use the hardware or who you can resell it to. Also, I don't know a single US arms deal in the last few years that actually resulted in any form of profit for the US contractor directly from the customer. The money was made from the US government.
"Cash and carry" works with russians or chinese hardware, but not with US or EU stuff.
Usually it seems the US basically does not sell arms, but gives them away for political leverage.

I wouldn't say that, look at what we paid for 11 Seasprite Helicopters (Around $1 Billion AUD) After a decade of wait problems and cost blow outs (Almost double the price comparied to what was agreed to) The progam wa scraped. The 9 Helicopters that were delivered (but never flew one op due to equipment problems) are been returned to the maker and are going to be sold for spares. What is the government going to get back for this?? Just 40 Million dollars!