Onbekende (stealth) helikopter betrokken bij aanval compound Bin Laden?

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Another Stealth Chopper in the Osama Raid?

By David Axe

May 20, 2011  | 
10:31 am  | 
Categories: Spies, Secrecy and Surveillance

By now we know that the two helicopters that deposited the 23 U.S. operatives (and their dog) into Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2 were no standard-issue Army rotorcraft. Rather, they were stealth modifications of the MH-60 Blackhawk, optimized to reduce their noise, infrared and radar signatures.

But there's a growing belief that other stealthy choppers might have been present, as well. It's the latest in a series of revelations regarding the sophisticated tactics and techs behind the high-stakes raid.

We know about the pair of radar-evading Blackhawks because one of the elusive birds — dubbed "Silenthawks" by the media — crashed inside the bin Laden compound, leaving behind an intact tail rotor that photographers documented the following morning and aviation geeks used to infer the aircraft's overall configuration.

That crash, plus the dicey politics surrounding the CIA-led assault, offer up circumstantial evidence of an even more secretive "silent" helicopter: a possible variant of the twin-rotor MH-47 Chinook, sporting the same stealth treatments as the Silenthawk and operated by the same 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment.



As he did with the Silenthawk, aviation journalist David Cenciotti commissioned artist Ugo Crisponi to produce concept art depicting this alleged copter. (See artwork, above.)

Early reporting, including our own, proposed that Chinooks likely participated in the raid, for purely mathematical reasons. Twenty-four Navy SEALs and one dog would max out the capacity of a pair of H-60s. A single H-47, never mind two, could carry the whole assault force with room to spare.

That assumption was challenged on May 3, when CIA chief Leon Panetta said the assault birds were definitely "Blackhawks." The same day, the photographic evidence surfaced of those choppers' special mods. From that, observers concluded that the operation was conducted without Pakistani approval, and indeed against their wishes, using H-60 helicopters capable of slipping past Islamabad's radars.

That seemed to definitively rule out the big, loud, radar-reflecting Chinooks. "I don't believe that 'normal' MH-47s were involved," Cenciotti wrote on May 6, owing to "considerations on the stealthiness of the formation."

Then, this week, off-the-record government sources told the Associated Press that three Chinooks indeed supported the Abbottabad operation, as a reserve force. The school-bus-sized aircraft — normally used to haul platoons in Afghanistan's mountains — "land[ed] in a deserted area roughly two-thirds of the way to bin Laden's compound."

The reserve choppers carried two dozen reinforcement Navy SEALs, in case the original assault team needed rescuing. With room for around 40 troops in each craft, that left plenty of room for the back-up Chinooks to exfil the SEALs in the compound — a contingency that proved necessary when one of the Silenthawks went down.

Cenciotti connected the dots, from the need for stealthiness to the confirmed presence of H-47s. "I believe that there must be also a modified MH-47 flying with the 160 SOAR," he concluded on May 18. "Unlike the Blackhawk, we have no photographic evidences of it, but I think that their existence is somehow confirmed.... "

It's plausible. Sikorsky, maker of the Blackhawk, surely had a hand — alongside the Army and Lockheed Martin — in producing the Silenthawk, perhaps relying on techniques it refined while developing the now-canceled RAH-66 Comanche stealth scout copter.

Boeing, which manufactures the Chinook, was Sikorsky's partner on Comanche, and has since used that chopper's heat-absorbing paint on its own V-22 Osprey tiltrotor.

That said, the stealthy Chinook is by no means a certainty. It's possible that the reserve force, trailing behind the attackers, had less need for stealth while approaching Abbottabad. But considering the cascade of amazing tech that has emerged from the hit on bin Laden, a radar-evading heavylift chopper would hardly defy belief.

Illo: David Cenciotti's Weblog

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/another-stealth-chopper-in-the-osama-raid/

[Cigarz]

Filmpje

[Nikehercules]

Zojuist schetste men bij het NOS journaal de situatie dat er een Amerikaanse militair langs de dode Bin laden was gaan liggen om de lengte te verifiëren, Obama zou daarop gezegd hebben ''We verspillen een helikopter van 60 miljoen dollar, was er echt geen geld meer om een meetlint te kopen'' (of iets in die trant) 

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Silent Hawk took
Laden raid men in

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3565870/Silent-stealth-Black-Hawk-took-Bin-Laden-raid-men-in.html

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Mission helo was secret stealth Black Hawk

By Sean D. Naylor - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday May 4, 2011 18:08:39 EDT

The helicopters that flew the Navy SEALs on the mission to kill Osama bin Laden were a radar-evading variant of the special operations MH-60 Black Hawk, according to a retired special operations aviator.

The helicopter's low-observable technology is similar to that of the F-117 Stealth Fighter the retired special operations aviator said. "It really didn't look like a traditional Black Hawk," he said. It had "hard edges, sort of like an ... F-117, you know how they have those distinctive edges and angles — that's what they had on this one."

In addition, "in order to keep the radar cross-section down, you have to do something to treat the windshield," he said. If a special coating was applied to the windshield it is "very plausible" that would make the helicopter more difficult to fly for pilots wearing night-vision goggles, he said. The helicopters carrying the SEALs arrived over the bin Laden compound at about 1 a.m. Monday local time. One crash-landed in the courtyard and was so badly damaged it was unable to take off again.

That crash landing might have been caused by a phenomenon known as "settling with power," which occurs when a helicopter descends too quickly because its rotors cannot get the lift required from the turbulent air of their own downwash. "It's hard to settle with power in a Black Hawk, but then again, if they were using one of these [low-observable helicopters], working at max gross weight, it's certainly plausible that they could have because they would have been flying so heavy," the retired special operations aviator said, noting that low-observable modifications added "several hundred pounds" to the weight of the MH-60, which already weighs about 500 to 1000 pounds more than a regular UH-60 Black Hawk.

The special operations troops on the bin Laden mission destroyed the stricken aircraft — most likely using thermite grenades — but the resultant fire left the helicopter's tail boom, tail rotor assembly and horizontal stabilizers intact in the compound's courtyard.

Photographs of the wreckage taken the next day raced around the Internet, creating a firestorm of speculation among military aviation enthusiasts because the tail of the helicopter did not resemble any officially acknowledged U.S. military airframe.

This was to be expected, the retired special operations aviator said. "Certain parts of the fuselage, the nose and the tail had these various almost like snap-on parts to them that gave it the very unique appearance," he said. He and another source referred to the disc-shaped device that is seen covering the tail rotor in the photographs as a "hubcap."

If the radar-evading technology worked, it "would be a true statement" to say that the use of the low-observable Black Hawks was evidence that the United States gave Pakistani authorities no advance warning of the mission, the retired special operations aviator added.

The low-observable program started with AH-6 Little Bird special operations attack helicopters in the 1980s, said the aviator. During the 1990s U.S. Special Operations Command worked with the Lockheed-Martin Skunk Works division, which also designed the F-117, to refine the radar-evading technology and apply it to the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment's MH-60s, he said. USSOCOM awarded a contract to Boeing to modify several MH-60s to the low-observable design "in the '99 to 2000 timeframe," he said.


Discuss:

The secret stealth Black Hawk

Initial plans called for the low-observable Black Hawks to be formed into a new unit commanded by a lieutenant colonel and located at a military facility in Nevada, the retired special operations aviator said. "The intent was always to move it out west where it could be kept in a covered capability," he said.

USSOCOM planned to assign about 35 to 50 personnel to the unit, the retired special operations aviator said. "There were going to be four [low-observable] aircraft, they were going to have a couple of 'slick' unmodified Black Hawks, and that was going to be their job was to fly the low-observables."

SOCOM canceled those plans "within the last two years," but not before at least some of the low-observable helicopters had been delivered to the Nevada facility, the retired aviator said. "I don't know if it was for money or if it was because the technology was not achieving the reduction in the radar cross-section that they were hoping for," he said. In the meantime, MH-60 Black Hawk crews from the 160th's 1st Battalion, headquartered at Fort Campbell, Ky., would rotate to Nevada to train on the stealthy aircraft, he said.

The low-observable MH-60s were armed with the same sort of door mini-guns as standard MH-60s, he said. "There was not a DAP conversion," he added, referring to the MH-60 variant known as the Direct Action Penetrator, which is equipped with stub wings upon which can be fitted a variety of armaments.

The early versions of the low-observable Black Hawks were not fitted with air-to-air refueling probes, the retired special operations aviator said. "The probe would disrupt the ability to reduce the radar cross-section," he added. "There was no way to put some kind of a hub or cowling over the probe that would make it stealthy." However, he said he did not know whether the models that flew the bin Laden mission had been equipped with such probes.

USSOCOM spokesman Army Col. Tim Nye said his command had no comment for this story.

Marcus Weisgerber contributed to this story.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/05/army-mission-helocopter-was-secret-stealth-black-hawk-050411/

[Poleme]

Allemaal leuk en aardig zo'n steelse wentelwiek, maar ik denk dat deze heli's geen waar voor hun geld bieden.  Zo zou de geannuleerde RAH-66 Comanche gevechtsheli in de jaren 90 USD 60 miljoen per stuk gaan kosten, dus wat kost een grotere vervoersheli van Black Hawk formaat dan wel niet.
In maart 2007 sloegen de Tamil Tigers voor het eerst toe vanuit de lucht met zeer laag vliegende Zlin lesvliegtuigjes bewapend met bommen.
De Sri Lankaanse luchtmacht was niet in staat om deze langzame kistjes te onderscheppen met de conventionele middelen.
Ik heb toen aan SL luchtmachters het voorstel gedaan om hun uitgebreide mobiele telefoon netwerken als opsporingsmiddel te gebruiken.
Ik werd uitgelachen, maar dat veranderde al snel toen ze de gelegenheid kregen om in een land te komen kijken met zo een systeem.
Het is een passief systeem wat de reflecties van luchtvaartuigen lager vliegend dan 1.000 voet / 305 m. opvangt.
Hoger vliegende steelse luchtvaartuigen kunnen gemakkelijk opgespoord worden door VHF radars of passieve radiogolf opvang systemen die de reflecties van radio, TV, satcom etcetera gebruiken en steelse kisten tot op 200 km kunnen opsporen.
Ik vraag mij ook af hoe steels deze helikopter is.  Is de steelsheid net als die van een F-22 Raptor of B-2 Spirit, dus steels 360 graden rondom en tegen een brede frequentie band.  Of is deze heli beperkt steels a la F-35 LightningII.  Dus grotendeels in het frontale vlak en alleen effectief tegen bijvoorbeeld Ku en X-band?
De Israeliers sloopten een kern reactor in september 2007 met toestellen waar geen steelse structuren aan te pas kwamen en hun tegenvoeters zagen niets.

[Elzenga]

Een opvallend verschil is de plaatsing van de tailrotor rechts versus links.

Die bevinden zich beide aan de rechterzijde toch??

Dat klopt, maar op de tekening blijkt het anders; de tekening wijkt dus af van de werkelijkheid.

sorry Lex, maar ik zie hem op de tekening op beide toestellen aan de voorzijde (bij de onderste maakt de draaiende weergave dat wat minder duidelijk)..De knik van de staartrotor was ook een eerste indicatie dat het hier om een Blackhawk variant ging...toen details van de hoofdrotor werden getoond bleek ook dat overeen te komen.

Alleen het hoofd landingsgestel blijft voor mij ongeloofwaardig in de schets..gezien de beperkte ruimte voor een intrekbare variant en de structurele functie ervan binnen het gehele frame. Ik vermoed dat die meer lijkt op die van de UH-60...maar mogelijk wel iets meer ingetrokken kan worden of ook omgeven wordt door een afschermend omhulsel.

De schets is trouwens vernieuwd...

http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/mh-x4-new.jpg

[Lex]

Een opvallend verschil is de plaatsing van de tailrotor rechts versus links.

Die bevinden zich beide aan de rechterzijde toch??

Dat klopt, maar op de tekening blijkt het anders; de tekening wijkt dus af van de werkelijkheid.

[Nikehercules]

Een opvallend verschil is de plaatsing van de tailrotor rechts versus links.

Die bevinden zich beide aan de rechterzijde toch??

[Lex]

Een opvallend verschil is de plaatsing van de tailrotor rechts versus links.

[Lex]

Niet voor niets heb ik mijn commentaar in vragende vorm gegoten en zit er geen slotje op het topic.  Hier mogen Lex en Ros ook even over nadenken.....

Rob
Forumbeheerder

Ik heb hier geen problemen mee.
Lex
Algeheel beheerder

[Nikehercules]

Roger

[KapiteinRob]

Waarom niet? hoewel er vooralsnog weinig bekend is over het apparaat lijkt het hier toch wel degelijk te gaan over een nieuwe ontwikkeling. In ieder geval voor de buitenwereld.

Niet voor niets heb ik mijn commentaar in vragende vorm gegoten en zit er geen slotje op het topic.  Hier mogen Lex en Ros ook even over nadenken.....

Rob
Forumbeheerder

[Nikehercules]

Op zich kan ik me wel vinden in een apart topic over de helikopter in deze, maar om nu te spreken over iets dat thuishoort in "nieuwe ontwikkelingen op defensiegebied" terwijl de topicvraag is voorzien van een vraagteken?

Rob
Forumbeheerder

Waarom niet? hoewel er vooralsnog weinig bekend is over het apparaat lijkt het hier toch wel degelijk te gaan over een nieuwe ontwikkeling. In ieder geval voor de buitenwereld.

[KapiteinRob]

Als dit topic in stand wordt gehouden is het misschien verstandiger alle bijdragen hierover uit het andere topic over te hevelen?!

Op zich kan ik me wel vinden in een apart topic over de helikopter in deze, maar om nu te spreken over iets dat thuishoort in "nieuwe ontwikkelingen op defensiegebied" terwijl de topicvraag is voorzien van een vraagteken?

Rob
Forumbeheerder