Little J - Google is your friend.....
1. New 20220 DOT&E report redacted:
https://breakingdefense.com/2022/01/new ... nce-flaws/
While sections of the report on the Air Force’s KC-46A tanker, MH-139 Grey Wolf helicopter and HH-60W Jolly Green II helicopter contain some details about technical issues, certain information is now only available in the CUI version.
The section on MH-139 notes concerns about the cabin layout and that flight manual restrictions could adversely impact “takeoffs in crosswinds, near obstacles, in degraded visual environments, and austere landings.” But other challenges pertaining to the aircraft’s suitability and survivability are only available in the CUI version.
2. 2021 Janes article:
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... e-progress
3. GAO in 2020:
https://www.helis.com/database/news/gao ... f/?noamp=1
The program completed its critical design review in June 2019, 5 months ahead of schedule. However, the helicopter, as it is currently designed, may not be able to meet all performance requirements if the final weight of the aircraft exceeds design parameters. If an appropriate weight is not achieved, the aircraft may not be able to meet requirements for speed or range. Air Force officials stated that they expect to determine the final weight of the aircraft in December 2019.
4. 2020 DOT&E report:
https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub ... tVHQ%3D%3D
• The revised test strategy increases risk to the program.
The current STC schedule delays the MFR causing a subsequent delay to the majority of government weapons, defensive systems, and envelope expansion flight test events. This delay will limit the test data available to inform the scheduled Milestone C decision.
•Use of civil certifications instead of government developmental testing may not adequately inform some areas of military utility. For example:
- Aircraft performance and handling qualities at high altitude, hot temperatures, and heavy weight for 202 MH-139A airworthiness and certification may not accurately represent the capability of the aircraft to conduct military flight profiles at these demanding conditions.
- Contractor testing of emergency crew egress from the MH-139A-configured cabin may not reveal obstacles encountered by a fully equipped security force in the operational environment.
• Reliance on contractor data during developmental testing risks increasing the scope of the IOT&E unless conducted during military utility events.
•AFOTEC periodic reports highlighted several areas of risk in the system design:
- Expansion of the flight performance envelope is likely to stress engine components and increase maintenance requirements.
-The MH-139A cabin configuration is different than the legacy UH-1N and the layout presents challenges to the employment of a security force.
- The commercial landing gear design may not support tactical landings on unprepared surfaces in austere locations.
-The commercial aircraft’s flight manual includes restrictions on takeoffs in crosswinds or near obstacles that hinder military operations.
•Contractor testing of the gun mount has revealed multiple design deficiencies that must be corrected to ensure safe operation of the gun weapon system.
•For most expected engagement conditions, the cabin and cockpit armor did not provide the required protection against the specification threat. The armor also did not provide adequate protection against another, operationally representative small arms threat at all relevant ranges.
•The Air Force has a requirement for the MH-139A to include infrared signature suppression that is currently not part of the aircraft design.
5. …and looking back to 2018 and the collective surprise after the award, and anticipation of these risks even then:
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... copter-win