Most military officers who make their way to the requirements, budget, and acquisitions/procurement side of the DoD have faced similar frustrations. For example, my last assignment in the military was as the director of development for a large, multi-level security big-data and analysis system. We went all in with best-practice open source everything, from code, to analytic tools, to visualizations, to data structure/un-structure principles, modeling, etc. I had a large, secure budget with a very large and talented team and we managed to deliver both a prototype and the first increment of the system through the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of the project. We were rolling and had support and advocacy all the way through the chain up to senior civilian leadership at the Pentagon. Then, we had the honor of briefing the Professional Staff Members from the House Armed Services Committee, who heretofore were overwhelmingly supportive of us. On that day in October of 2016, everything was going well, the demo was flawless, and we were all smiling until one of the members asked if we’d engaged Amazon Web Services as part of our risk reduction efforts. We had not. He then went on a lengthy and generally pointless diatribe about their emerging toolsets, ease of use, and ability to handle big datasets with ease. I countered with the fact that, at that point, they had not proven their security model within our concept of operations (a VERY big deal, btw), and were extremely cagey about rights to both raw and processed data. Conversely, our solution suffered from neither of those issues, we had proven our functionality and performance against requirements, had met our budget during the riskiest phase of the project, and were ready to scale to full production, backed by independent program and legal analyses. In the end, it didn’t matter. When the budget was released for review that fall, we were toast, courtesy of the HASC, and the whole effort was turned over to another agency which had no familiarity at all with the program but had infrastructure ties to AWS. The project died two years later amid soaring costs and late deliveries due to architecture changeover, security problems, and, of course, data rights conflicts. The worst part wasn’t losing the project. The worst part was firing over 80 of my folks in the course of two days. I retired a bitter man for that.
Old and passionate people tend to type in stream in UNREADABLE stream of consciousness, not using paragraph breaks or the best grammar. I am an exception to that rule at age 66. Let me present the gentleman's ENTIRE post in READABLE paragraph form with most of the grammar fixed, and some necessary clarifications added. "Most military officers who make their way to the requirements, budget, and acquisitions/procurement side of the DoD have faced similar frustrations. For example, my last assignment in the military was as the director of development for a large, multi-level security big-data and analysis system. We went all-in with best-practice open source everything, from code, to analytic tools, to visualizations, to data structure/un-structure principles, modeling, etc. I had a large, secure budget with a very large and talented team. We managed to deliver both a prototype, and the first increment of the system through the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of the project. We were rolling, and had support and advocacy of the entiire chain of oversight....right up to the senior civilian leadership at the Pentagon. We had the honor of briefing the Professional Staff Members from the House Armed Services Committee, who heretofore were overwhelmingly supportive of us. On that day in October of 2016, everything was going well, the demo was flawless, and we were all smiling until one of the members asked if we had engaged Amazon Web Services as part of our risk reduction efforts. We had not. He then went on a lengthy and generally pointless diatribe about Amazon's emerging toolsets, ease of use, and ability to handle big datasets with ease. I countered with the fact that, at that point, they had not proven their security model within our concept of operations (a VERY big deal, btw), and were extremely cagey(purposely vague) about rights to both raw and processed data. Conversely, my team's solution suffered from neither of those issues. We (thought we) had proven our functionality and performance against all requirements. We had met our budget during the riskiest phase of the project, and were ready to scale to full production, backed by independent program and legal analyses. In the end, none of that mattered. When the budget was released for review that fall, we were toast, courtesy of the HASC. The whole effort was turned over to another agency which had no familiarity at all with the program, but had infrastructure ties to AWS. The project died two years later amid soaring costs and late deliveries due to architecture changeover, security problems, and, of course, data rights conflicts. The worst part wasn’t losing the project. The worst part was firing over 80 of my team in the course of two days. I retired a bitter man for that. Thanks, soulless Military bureaucracy. Not."
Food for thought. Things I WISHED I had said: "Amazon? Oh, you mean Jeff Bezos? The WONDERFUL American Patriot with no ulterior objectives or agendas. I agree. He is COMPLETLREY neutral and trust worthy. Absolutely, sir! Forgive us. We will GET RIGHT ON THAT, and read Bezos in on the most highly classified material we have to offer. Because we trust him on your word alone. THANK you, sir!! Consider your wishes DONE! (said with out the obvious sarcasm of course.) Just AGREE with these delusional monsters and TRICK their stupid asses with smoke and mirrors, while you proceed to QUIETLY doing the right thing.
Hi. My dad was Don Segner, a senior test pilot on the Cheyenne program and the Lockheed Rigid Rotor program as a whole. The project was mainly killed by Barry Goldwater who was a staunch advocate of the A-10 and the U.S. Air Force. Your analysis is pretty spot one. I wish my father was still around. He would have felt vindicated by seeing this video.
@@berchmanrichard6070 Thank you for your warm reply. So good to hear from someone who was there during that fascinating time in Lockheed's history. I'm sure my father would have had many warm memories of you. There was nothing like the Cheyenne.
My Dad was Morrie Larsen, one of the Army test pilots on the YAH-56 program. According to his report to the Army brass, "the cheyenne deviated from controlled flight within the flight envelope." While a revolutionary design, I think it was not ready for prime time.
When a senior in high school in 1968, Lockheed was doing flight testing out of Oxnard, CA. The approach path to the local airport went right over the high school campus. I remember, on more than one ocasión seeing the Cheyanne zoom over the school, pursued by a P-51 Mustang flown by one of their engineers, perhaps as a camera ship. Pretty impressive. And very fast.
In 1969 I was stationed at the army test activit at Edwards AFB. Although the Cheyenne was no longer being testes there, we still had the P-51 Mustang that was utilized as the chase aircraft for the Cheyenne. Never thought I would be in an army unit with a P-51 Mustang in 1969.
I was in high school near Thousand Oaks, about 20-ish miles as the crow flies from Oxnard. Which meant between Navy and Air Force aircraft, Super Guppies, once an SR-71, various propellor-driven cargo aircraft and helicopters (and once a Saturn V upper stage being trucked through our campus up to Port Hueneme for transport to Florida), all sorts of aircraft were an everyday event. The Cheyenne flying overhead got absolutely everyone's attention: a loud, low-pitched growl unlike everything else I ever have seen fly.
I was -11 years old your senior year lol, but I wish someone would make a movie so we could all be a fly on the wall and see the awesome minds, interactions, collaborations and creations that came out of Skunkworks.
We had one of these on static display at Ft. Campbell when I was stationed there in the 90's. Even in its relatively rough shape, the thing was immensely impressive up close.
We had one at Ft Polk when I was stationed there Jan 91 to Oct 92. Beautiful aircraft! I think it was moved from the former museum compound to be a gate guard by the airfield.
My Father worked flight test on the program. I remember watching it fly at the Yuma proving grounds and at Fort Hunter Liggett. It was impressive. I just retired from the Skunk Work after 42 years. Lockheed is a great company to work for.
Thank you for that comment I have never worked for a defense contractor but Lockheed produced the most advanced everything in is a shame that this program was canceled it was the most advanced at nearly every aspect of the game and would have come online long before the A10 did
My neighbor was a employees at Lockheed & went through so many aircraft over the year's. From 1930-1975. Gave me a lot of Lockheed books & magazines. He had a photo of Marilyn Monroe signed by her.She worked for him & friends with the wife. Nicest family.
Great analysis of the issue of "corruption," I mean lobbying. I've lived in a few places in the world where I had to explain that the United States suffers from this very nuanced form of corruption instead of the very upfront corruption one can find elsewhere. Fantastic job Simon & Co.
I enjoy explaining how I’m responsible for my retirement to citizens of another continent who’s governments are responsible. It usually ends with me asking “and you prefer / trust yours to handle this?”
@@apaulson6590 You trust your government one way or another. Your savings, your possessions, your funds could lose value, your government can force them to lose value. The only way that is robust and works at scale is the "social contract" where people that work and pay tax support people who no longer do. What also works is smaller scale version, where you make a bunch of little humans and guilt trip them into supporting you when they grow up. If you don't mess it up, works 100% every time.
True, but it is comforting to know there are enough cutting edge mil tech in the trash bin, that US mil superiority is near impossible to overcome. "Neat heli, chi-na" *Dust of trash tech* "Oops, beat you."
Lockheed produces great work but they treat their workers like slaves my dad worked there for 11 years. If I remember correctly he was working on the presidential helicopter before it was rejected during the Obama administration. Lockheed immediately laid him off and then sent him a job offer a month later at entry-level pay. He worked long hours every day for over a decade just to be screwed.
Makes me sad that the different services can’t seem to understand that all of them having the best equipment (yes including Marines) is a net positive for the nation.
They already spend over 200 billion every year on shit equipment. I can’t imagine how they’d be with the most advanced best shi ever, just look how that went for Hitler- instead of mass producing what he had which was genius- he kept making weapons of mass destruction- making their budget plummet- and in turn shoot themselves in the face.
Absolutely! just ask any aviation minded Canadian about the Avro Canada Arrow (Simon did a video), or the same people from Great Britain about the TSR2 (also a Simon video). sigh!
Oh wow, really? I love the Lynx but I did not realize it was a descendant of the Cheyenne! 😍 I must go and read about this immediately, do you know if they had to wait for Parents to expire?
@@rtreyk Yes, the one from war thunder. And apparently "rigid rotor" is far more complex that "like the Cheyenne" these days as technology has moved on in 60 years (obviously! 😂) As far as I can't tell the technology got integrated in many different ways, like in the EC135. The lynx is fast because of its BERP blades (British Experimental Rotorblade Project) which culminated in the BERP4 blade on Merlin and WildCat (Super Lynx) But you know what's really fun? The Lynx and WildCat use: Technology derived from Cheyenne (maybe/probably) Berp blades _The engines designed for RAH-64 Comanche_ Yep, it used Rolls Royce Honeywell engines! 😂 America cancelled the Cheyenne, the Comanche and _we_ got the Super Lynx!!
Blanketly bitching about politics and labeling any and all politicians as evil is absolutely pathetic and reeks is ignorance. Millions of people are involved in politics. All with varying beliefs, morality, motivations, and definitions of success. Politics developed everywhere independently of each other and every group of people in the world has some form of political structure. From the biggest nations to small tribes. Decrying the whole thing is just an excuse to remain ignorant. Why learn about policies and vote when you can just claim they're all evil and then pretend to be correct when something goes wrong while ignoring any successful political decisions?
Great video! I'm a big aviation buff but knew next to nothing about AH-56. There's a small slip-up at 15:34 in the video where you say AH-64 two times but you are referring to the AH-56. Thank you for the very thorough history of this forgotten aircraft. 👍
saying the same numbers so many times end up becoming a blur, the "64" was mentioned earlier as well, by that point numbers were just numbers i suppose lol
My dad worked at Ft Rucker during the 60's. He told me the speed of the Cheyenne was like watching a Mohawk fly by. He always thought it was stupid for the program to be canceled.
I've known about the Cheyenne for a while and how it all shook out but it's one of those stories where the first time I heard about it I was beyond impressed and having served in the Army I knew it had never entered service so I was waiting to hear about the end of the story, why, why didn't it make the cut? What was its fatal flaw? And it turns out it was basically interservice pettiness which was so incredibly rampant in the 70s and it blew my mind. You did an excellent telling of the story here with a whole bunch of detail I never knew before, great work for all involved.
well there was also the fact that it was unstable when flying at its cruising speed or the fact that it crashed 3 times the 3rd time being with the main rotor stuck the fuselage yea still trying to wrap my head around that. then when it went in to fix these problems they could only fix "most" of the issues while going overbudget.
@@berchmanrichard6070 it killed a pilot and it’s blade struck it’s fuselage the reports on this thing are not classified it is literally documented as having stability issues at high speeds and when close to the ground. Pretending to be a test pilot doesn’t help you when we can read the reports.
@@aikidodude05 Replacing the mechanical stabilizer with a 3 axis gyro computer would have solved it completely, and that system would have existed with or without the AH-56, because it was implemented on the AH-1G where it was used to eliminate the stabilizer bar on the bell rotorhead.
@@aikidodude05 If you have access to records as you say, you'll see that I was appointed lead pilot on one of the Cheyennes based at Yuma proving grounds. It did kill David Beal, who I had breakfast with the day of his death. That is part of flight test, and the problem was eventually resolved. What is your engineering background since you seem to know all about it.
In 1968, 1969 or 1970 as a young lad I drove by the Van Nuys airport and saw the Cheyanne tethered and undergoing hovering tests 2-5 meters above the ground. It was common knowledge in the airport employees that it was undergoing testing. An amazing aircraft.
Very true and one of the reason the Air Force is trying to kill the A-10 (by simply just barely keeping it relevant) instead of modernizing it like the Marines have done with the AH-1Z. The Air Force has almost no interest in providing CAS besides their fear of loosing funding to the Army if they were to rightfully assume that role with low flying fixed wing attack aircraft to supplement their helicopter fleet.
I also built one of the AH56 Cheyenne scale model kits, which I believe was from Revell. I thought it was an awesome helicopter - by looks (what does a 12 yr old know). My friends must have been on the other side (USAF), as they thought it looked dumb, ugly, etc. We lived in Canada, where the military helicopters we saw were strictly for transport, logistics and of course search & rescue.
My younger brother joined the US Army and became a helicopter maintenance tech around 1970. He'd been trained to work on the Bell AH-1 Cobras. Some time during 1971 he was deployed to Vietnam. One day I walked into a hobby store in a city near me where I spotted a shelf full of various military models. I walked over to look at the military models and spotted a kit of a very unusual helicopter that I'd never seen or heard of. It was an AH56 Cheyenne kit. If memory serves, it was a Revell model. I bought it, brought it home, and assembled it. It was so strikingly different from any other helicopter that I'd ever seen, that I became curious and tried to get more information about it. I learned that it was still in late stages of development but that the military had ordered a few hundred of the type and would soon be fielding them. Somewhere around that same time I remember seeing one of those fold-out type ads for that helicopter in Popular Mechanics magazine and could not believe the technological advancements touted in the ad. I wrote to my brother and asked him if he would be working on those eventually. "No, I heard that program has been cancelled," he wrote back. I recall feeling a bit disappointed. I enlisted a few years later in '75 and after training was stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC. Sometimes, on long weekends I would drive home to visit the family and my drive would take me through Virginia. On one such trip, I decided to stop at the Army Transportation Museum at Ft. Eustis. As I stepped out of my car in the museum parking lot I was astonished to see, on the grass lawn in front of the museum, an AH56 Cheyenne. I walked over to look at it. Once up close, I realized how large, well long actually, that helicopter was. Just sitting there it looked wickedly intimidating. What a machine it would have been if the program hadn't been cancelled. I felt sorry seeing that one sitting there all forlorn by itself with sun-weathered paint and a layer of grime deposited on it from sitting outside. As I read the information about the helicopter on a placard nearby, I thought to myself, "What a f*****g waste." For years, I'd wondered why that program was stopped in favor of the Cobra, when the Cobra didn't appear to be nearly as capable. About 8 - 10 years after I saw that chopper at the Army Transportation Museum, the Army fielded the AH64, at which time I noticed that helicopter used many of the technological advances that had originally been mentioned in that Popular Mechanics ad. Now, after watching this video, I know what really stopped the program. Over the years, I'd read various accounts of the AH56, but, though they'd mentioned the Air Force's insistence that the Army shouldn't be allowed to trespass on their turf, none of those explained it near as thoroughly as this account. It is, frankly, infuriating the amount of development grant money that's wasted every year in this country as a result of lobbyists activity and political greed. I suspect that Air Force General that was so opposed to the AH56 eventually retired and became very rich by getting hired as a "consultant" by one of the companies for which he ran interference. I won't bother to google him to find out whether it's true or not - I'll only become more infuriated if I'm right. Thank you for the work on this. Side note: A few years ago I'd read about another Lockheed project and decided to check out Lockheed's web sources. Somewhere in that search I came across something that listed what spare parts Lockheed had in its warehouse for older aircraft. There in that inventory was something that said something like, "Rotor blade, helicopter: AH56 Cheyenne, showing that there was still a small quantity of rotors left over from that project. Wouldn't it be terrific if there were other spare parts and a private buyer(s) were able to purchase one of the remaining prototypes from a museum, buy all remaining spare parts Lockheed still has, and then restore it to like-new condition and fly it again?
Maybe a video on the NEWEST helicopter concepts is in order. There's clearly historical items on these helicopters that are readily apparent on the most cutting-edge program underway in order to choose a "new airborne troop transport", aka: a helicopter that mostly drops off and picks up soldiers- think the soccer mom's minivan who is taking all her kids' friends out at once.....every morning day and night for 30 years lol. But honestly, it's to replace the tried and true Black Hawk helicopter and POSSIBLY the V-22 Osprey.
Regarding the V22: It was sized to fit the ships in service at the time when it was designed. Thus the folding blades and the wing unit rotating itself and the less than ideal size of the rotor discs. The new design doesn't have these and hopefully will make it more affordable for the US Army. Which design the service will select (the tiltrotor or the coaxial) will be interesting.
The V-22 isn't going anywhere anytime soon. But the Army is looking to replace the Blackhawk and also for a new scout helicopter. For which Bell has the V-280 Valor and 360 Invictus respectively.
If English were not my first language, I think I would get lost. He manages to use words I’ve not heard in sometime. That’s not a bad thing. It’s what makes his documentaries so enjoyable.
Thanks Simon. I saw a Cheyenne as a child at, of all places, an Army Transport museum. It didn't have much information about it. I asked the guide what happened to it, and why it never served, he just said the "Cobras and Apaches are the big boys now"...not really helpful. This was though, thanks again.
dude, positively love your commentary, and also how you deliver it. edgy, no holds barred, direct, but intelligent. it's artful and in a very intense way. please make more.
There are a plethora of channels out there spewing content but this channel is in a different league. The research, the presentation, the script, the diction simply is a cut above the rest. I think this one is the best yet. As for the content itself, the squabbling of idiots and the passing of money or favours gets under my skin. Brilliant oratory.
Dad was there when the test pilot was killed. It was, apparently, horrific. I remember Dad telling me about it ONCE. The pilot was literally bisected by the rotor. While that part of the airframe was not Dad’s part of the project - Dad was a weapons engineer - Dad always carried some guilt. As Dad tearfully told me, he was inside the hangar playing Pinocle when it happened.
David, the pilot killed, and I had breakfast together that morning, and I taxied out just behind him in my ship. Then they sent me out in a Bell to find pieces of his ship. One of the worst experiences I ever had as a pilot.
@@berchmanrichard6070 Hey Richard, I'm currently making a short documentary about my grandfather, Dave Schnitcker, who was also a test pilot on the Cheyenne program. I would love to connect with you if possible
Excellent video! An additional event leading to the cancellation likely occurred when the AH64 was being tested for the half P hop in the Ames Research Center 40 x 80 ft wind tunnel. During high speed testing for the half-P hop vibration, the rotor oscillations quickly accelerated out of control and the rotor struck the tail boom, resulting in the helicopter being pulled off the test mounting structures and depositing it at the downwind turning vanes like a crushed bug. One minor nit to pick is the mixing of imperial and metric units in the descriptions. IMO if the airplane was designed in inches and feet, those should be the primary values given, with metric values being primary for aircraft designed in those units.
I was one of the pilots on the Cheyenne program, and was at the controls when that happened at Ames. The result of that crash helped to solve the problem with the half P hop. Pieces of the aircraft came tearing thru the bullet proof glass windows, injuring a couple of guys.
I spent 12 years in Army Aviation working on helicopter engines. Mainly Black Hawks. Going through AIT the sheet metal school had a Comanche body they drilled holes in and repaired over and over and over. The Cheyenne was a cool heli but aside from it's technical issues maintenance costs were going to go up not down. WAY UP.. Retraining is normal with a airframe change but like the Comanche the retraining looked more like completely new training. One of those other factors people tend to look over. Retooling and retraining of the people who keep these ACFT in the air. A VERY general rule of thumb with helicopters is 1 hour of flight time equals 4 hours of maintenance. This doesn't mean an 8+ hour mission will down the ACFT for a day and a half. After normal maintenance there are other clocks ticking. Some parts MUST be replaced after x amount of flight hours. Pull them off and they look fine but there are stresses you can't see in these parts. So that's part of the down time. Phases are major service intervals where A LOT of parts are take off and inspected/replaced. Every other phase is pretty much a full main systems tear down. Be it in training or deployed these phases still take place. A fair amount of mechanical accidents with helicopters is bad maintenance and QC inspections. That's a lot of training and airframes too ahead of their time can be axed in part for retraining costs and material availability. Lots of amazing acft never saw production mainly for coming out in the wrong financial period. Also. The Army is FAMOUS for ording helicopters. Getting what they wanted then overloading them with equipment then saying what is up with your ACFT? This is not performing like we thought it would. Manufacturer has that look of "If I bitch slap this Gen is it worth the trouble"....... THe OH-58 Kiowa was an amazing scout ACFT. I got to work on a few before they were phased out my first year. Then the Army started tossing parts on it. And more parts. It went from a 4 seater to a 2 because the rear cabin was ALL EQUIPMENT. More parts. More power to lift the parts meant more stress and more maintenance and round and round you go till crap look at those stress fractures on the frame. Lets see here Grab my book here TM 55-1520-228-23-2 Ok... Cracks.. and tolerance said.. Humm. Just shows a picture of a beat up OH-58 in a trash bin and a Truck dropping off a shiny new OH-58.. OK... Who's up for a long lunch? I think this is where the Cheyenne would have ended up. I LOVE THE AH-64. Circled our bases when deployed. We got hit by mortars and rockets all the time. The pissed off R2D2s (CRAMS) managed to knock most of them out but some got through then the 64s flying around overhead would B-line off into one direction and soupify those firing at us. I've seen A LOT of FLIR cams on SIPRNet. (Army computers for secret data) Ever seen a video of someone recording military gun cam footage from a computer screen with a phone? Bad dog bad. NO.. NO! “Front lean and rest position… move!!!” Awesome video!!!! Sorry for getting off point. I'll run a reverse azimuth and see if I can find my way back. Speaking of off point........ OH SWEET!!! Humvee tracks!!!!!!! Subtle hint on what to look for when you and two other groups are completely lost trying to find the bonus nav point during land nav training and everyone has an idea but none of them agree as you calculate only having enough time left try one direction and a flat out run to get back before time is up. Well...These tracks are fresh. Anyone want to take bets on these being from the range cadres Humvee as they drove out to make sure the bonus Nav point was set up? WINNER!
Thank you for your service and perspective. My grandfather was on army and national guard helicopter repair crews, sounds like the training I heard as a pup. It very much translates to public machines- labor isn’t cheap when it comes to engineering. Don’t buy a super car if you maintain a repair team. The brains that design these machines and big indeed- I can only imagine more mortal mean being tasked to keep them in the same working order. Not to mention it seems all these machines are designed on the razor’s edge of tolerances- this is evidenced by the time it takes to develop such machines. Speaking of the Comanche, I was very sad to see that one not make service. I’m assuming that the Army is going unmanned- hence the lack of ATC the Army has produced in the last two decades?
This story makes me so sad every time i hear it. Even today this helicopter sounds incredibly formidable, but especially when it was created this was decades ahead of its time in terms of it's lethality. The Cheyenne really deserved a second chance, it probably could have been produced far more easily a couple decades later
Hey Simon. A couple of times you mixed up the numbers, refering to the AH 56 as the AH 64. The times i reacted to are at: 14:47, 15:33, 15:39 Otherwise it's a intressting video as usual.
I actually know a Cheyenne test pilot. He has some great stories about his time in the cockpit. His stories about his time flying in Vietnam, and being one of the first test pilots for the attack helicopter concept over there are pretty hair raising. Good video, thanks for covering this interesting helo.
Funny thing is Sikorsky, which is now a division of Lockheed, is now building the Defiant X and Raider X two helicopters with twin counter rotating main rotors with pusher props.
I remember the first time I saw one of these in person. It was at a little exhibit, it was such a odd design that it caught my eye immediately and I spent the next hour looking over it and doing research on it. It's just sad that the bird had started to fall apart. I wish I could see it in flight
I was one of the honored few to go to lockheed factory for electrical and instrumentation training on the ah56. it was the most inspiring experiences of my life, I was stationed in yuma proving grounds. After all the guys finished our training, we were on cloud nine. We were the cream of the crop, we felt. Then a few months later, our world came crashing down, when we received word that congress canceled the entire project.
Hey Simon and Co. Awesome video , Im a huge fan of all the Megaprojects, especially the aviation stuff ! I think a video of the Denel Rooivalk attack helicopter would be pretty cool, think it has an interesting history
The controls were plagued with problems and Lockheed spent years trying to figure out the mechanical controls, the military industry was on the cusp of introducing digital controls. While politics killed it, it was on life support already.
I tried the lobby a highway patrolman out of giving me a ticket they called it attempted bribery and I had to go to court to fight it I lost and I am able to reply because I'm in a low risk Correctional Facility😂😂😂🖕 lobbyist!
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD This guy goes into every video on the AH-56 within hours for years now and says stuff like this, it's clear he's air force or ex air force and has notifications for "AH-56" enabled. The AH-1 had the Bell mechanical stabilizer bar replaced with an electronic 3 axis gyro system in the mid and digital controls in the mid 70's and the mechanical stability system on the AH-56 would have been no different. They could have easily upgraded it with a three axis gyro and electronic PID control.
@@atomicskull6405 And costs would have increased. Lockheed couldn't get it done on time and allowed the project to become less relevant as time went on. Happens to the best.
I got a chance to see this helicopter at Ft. Rucker while attending WOILE a couple of years ago. They have a couple of hangars full of one of a kind, experimental helicopters. It's almost like a museum, except you're only allowed in by special invitation. That bird is huge!
I recognize the AH-56 that stands in front of the 101st Airborne Division at Ft Campbell, KY. I pulled guard duty at the museum twice after earning supernumerary status at post guard duty inspection.
Remember the first time I saw the Cheyenne, when I arrived at Ft.Rucker to begin my 67N Utility Helicopter Repairer schooling, in December 1978. Astonished to realize that it was nothing more than a museum piece, and that, somehow, the Cobra was chosen over it. When I got to Ft.Hood, 6 months later, a couple of senior Warrant Officers (pilots) in my Dustoff platoon told me the why & what killed the Cheyenne.
At Hunter-Ligett a group of ex-vietnam cobra pilots came to the airfield for a demonstration. After Tony Wilcox, the Lockheed pilot put the cheyenne thru it paces, all of those there that day became big fans of the Cheyenne and swarmed all over it afterwards. One of them said, "Man, I wish I had had one of those in Vietnam.
Having served two tours in Vietnam as an Army helicopter pilot I have a few well-founded beliefs about U.S. Airfarce close air support. If you consider a half mile close air support well the Airfarce might make it. But anyone who thinks you can drop an unguided iron bomb (all they had at the time) from a jet flying faster than 200 knots from 500 feet above ground level with any accuracy is an absolute idiot. The main reason that the AH-56 was canceled was a direct result of Congress being blindsided by the news that the Airfarce's brand new C-5A would need new wing spars because the original one's were cracking and at a cost higher than the new airplane cost. The C-5A was a piece of junk. The engines were under powered., The landing gear had major problems with every other landing. The pneumatic ducting system was always leaking and cracking. It was not uncommon for a C-5A to land out of base and be grounded for a week or two. Fly one leg, land and be grounded for another week or two. Since the aircraft were in Active/Reserve units it was not uncommon for a reserve crew to be flown back to base because the time was up and a replacement crew to be flown in to take over. Problem was this replacement crew would run out of time and another crew would be brought out to replace them. The Cobra was a skinny Huey. Same engine as the H model, same transmission as the B, C, D, E, F and H model. Same rotor system as the C and E model. The Army was in armed combat every day and we needed something "NOW" and Bell delivered while the Airfarce fought every way they could to stop the Army from protecting Americans on the ground. A grunt could call for air cover and the Army could respond with fire on the ground within seconds to minutes. Call the Airfarce and on a good day it was 15 to 30 minutes before a fast mover would show up make 4 passes dropping ordinance and RTB (Return to Base) leaving the grunts to fend for themself once again. Many of a time did I wander into an Airfarce Officers Club to get something to eat or drink. I would go to the bathroom to use a urinal. After doing my business I would generally stand there a flush 5 or 6 times. Airfarce officers would laugh and make fun of me. What those pampered turd brains did not understand was the I never saw a percaline bathroom fixture at any Army base I was stationed at. We had outhouses.
Well nothing like hearing facts from a person who actually knows what he's talking about. I thank you for speaking up. Very interesting and informative comment. It was an education. Thanks again. I think it's interesting and a bit sad that the Cheyenne could do things in 1968 that even the latest iteration of the Apache still cannot do. I think the Apache is a hell of a good weapon but it's essentially an armored dump truck with a gun and missiles attached to it. A refined flying machine it is not. When Apaches operate with the big CH-47 Chinooks we saw so much of in Afghanistan, the Chinooks have to throttle way back just so the Apaches can keep up. If the Army had the Cheyenne back in the late 60s to act as a springboard for future development, imagine what today's modern helicopters would look like and be capable of.
All I can add to your personal perspective is that the leadership of the USAF of that era made the colossally STUPID decision to stop training their fighter pilots to know dogfighting! They placed way too much trust in guided missiles, learned the hard way that there were limitations to the radars of their planes and that removing guns from their fighter planes simply wasn't worth the cost savings! I immediately saw a problem with the claim that the USAF could somehow provide all the close air support to ground troops that needed it (which you explained rather well in the fourth paragraph), but the politicians couldn't... or is it wouldn't? 😥🤦♂
Stupid political maneuvering that is all about ego. Seems like the Air Force is to disconnected from what needs to be done. Been trying to kill the A-10 for years. Questionable how useful the main gun is but it fulfilled it role perfectly.
@@patrickscalia5088 I’m sorry but aerodynamically speaking the Apache is a shit show. Have you seen how unstable that thing is? A light breeze would probably cause the chain gun to achieve a 500 MOA. Longbow and hellfire are the only reason why it’s not in the scrapyard. YET
There is a display at Ft Rucker, AL. It is quite an aircraft. When I was there for flights school I got a good respect for all the helicopters that got into the Army inventory as well as rhe ones that didnt... the RAH-66 Comanche being the more modern example.
Super vid Simon 👍👍. Have been a fan of AH-56 fore ever. It's tough considering the longevity of the AH-1 & to a lesser extent the AH-64. Got to be around 1 of the Prototypes a lot. Many thanx & best regards.
@@Dagoroth55 you are the reason i hate being Canadian, that is what stings you? something you had nothing to do with because some people from the same country made a machine, a war machine to boot ffs, that you had nothing to do with before you were born that does not affect you in any way?? that is where you have passion and anger? but not a drop for our fully violated and denied natural rights, especially our firearm and defense rights, own and carry(that all humans on earth have innately just being alive regardless if our tyrant traitor hijacked governments or their lapdog order following rights violating evil serving/protecting SPINELESS MORAL COWARD TRAITOR force arms, ie; military and law enforcement personnel, recognize and acknowledge them or not! they are called negative natural rights, look them up!) and actually we never had our real freedoms, liberties and rights recognized and acknowledged here in commie Canada, ESPECIALLY our firearm and defense rights, own and carry! we have "given slave privileges" not recognized rights! by our tyrant traitor government of parasite greedy power hungry politicians who only care about themselves, and are owned by a foreign subversive enemy and its multinational monopoly businesses that has hijacked our government and all western governments, the same hypocrite tyrant fraud politicians who are protected by teams of tax funded armed guards and police, including the military and special forces personnel, and have armored vehicles and gated hardened homes!!! ... that doesn't move your passion or anger meters but a stupid war plane from 50 years ago does!!??? wow just wow, my blood is boiling, you sheeple are the reason we have no rights, especially firearm and defense rights, own and carry, and are enslaved and will be fully enslaved one day soon!!!!!
A stealth version of this chopper would be unstoppable - especially if it had a few drones under its control and a pilot that knew what he was doing!!! Air-Wolf!!
Stealth and helicopter are laughable when radar is introduced into the equation. You would need a rotorless design, or have so much tech in the leading edge that spoofs the return from the rotors.
@@TuxPenguino actaully the we did have a stealth helicopter before. the ah66 commanche i think it was. it's radar performance was considered very good. But once again it was shoot down by brass and politicians Make a helicopter stealth isn't actually a unreasonable problem. Though it is hard then a normal aircraft for obvious reasons.
@@ALegitimateRUclipsr In addition to politics, by the time the Comanche was ready for production, the Soviet Union had collapsed and there was no longer a need for an advanced penetrating helicopter that had stealth. Now a days, I get advertisements about joining different branches of the US military and how their goals are about the future. Having a Comanche or AH56 would be beneficial for the future.
I was working for Hilti, a power tool, for construction companies. It was my second job out of college. We had engineers we provided to construction companies. Their job was to get us spec'd on jobs and provide assistance and approval for anchor hold weights on construction projects. A guy who became my best friend as I kept using him on my projects, left Lockhead, designing nuclear subs, to do that job. Working for Lockhead was so miserable, he would rather use his 6 yrs of eduaction from the University of Pitt to show up on job sites and tell the contractor that an anchor would hold, after I already did the math and told them it would. He went on to do much better things but he took that job to get away from Lockhead.
Irv Culver is the man who came up with the name 'Skunk Works' for Lockheed's Advanced Projects Division. There was a plastics factory nearby and the smell was so terrible he answered the phone one day with 'Hello, Skonk Works!' In reference to a popular cartoon of the time!
I worked for years as a programmer in the Pick Operating System, developed in 1965 at TRW to control the inventory of parts for the AH-56. I'd always assumed it was the cost of the AH-56 that doomed it. With people getting funding through it for things like ... a database management System. It's easy to imagine a lolly scramble for the money to do all sorts of projects and charge it to the AH-56.
The Cheyenne is a huge helicopter, it was displayed I front of the Ft. Campbell museum, we used to do PT where we ran the 2 miles to the museum then 2 miles back. So for a 4 mile run we’d say; “to the planes and back.”
The Cheyennes that were saved from the breakers and sent to various military museums: are they really gathering dust...or are they gathering rust? Just wondering.
Gaudi designed the Sagrada Família. Part of his design efforts included using string and bags of sand to produce a structure that had no inherent outward thrust. There were no computers to do this and he used this sandbags and string method to design one of the most incredible structures to ever be built. He was so ahead of his time I don't think anyone has caught up, yet. There are many examples of this throughout history. Eventually everyone catches on and slowly we move forward; hopefully.
And would have come online in time to be used in Vietnam basically same Armament as an A-10 but with hovering capability and 360° visual gun control unbelievable that this was ever canceled
@@davidboysel4509 program was literally killed because it wiped out the need for MANY fixed wing air role’s. = Less money for the defense budget =not good for “business”… 🙄
It failed because the A-10 wasn't allowed to fail. It would've done the same job as the A-10 and the AH-64 better than either of them, but no, the fucking Reformers had to have their worthless gun on their worthless plane.
@@CharliMorganMusic uhhh the A-10 may have its flaws but no, one of the greatest aircraft ever built and thousands are alive because of them too! Although it’s killed a plenty troops It has 11 hard points. And the gun may only Pierce armor in perfect conditions but it’s near guarantee anything that thing runs it’s gun over won’t be in for much a fight. For the way we fight it’s one of the best aircraft flying.
I remember building a model of the Cheyenne helicopter as a kid, I thought it was really cool. But I always woindered why I never saw it in use on TV, now I know why.
Great video. Regarding the AH-56's technical problems, I know many were solved during the testing process, but weren't there some (both major and minor) which remained unresolved at the time of cancellation?
Indeed it does, but given enough time, money and re-engineering it will be solved, evidence by far more problematic design with far less groundbreaking technology and multiple real world fatalities incident even when they operate on projected perfect operational condition like US Air Force B-52 Stratofortress that will serve until 2050s.
There will always be problems with aircraft developing new concepts. But as you said, most have been resolved by the time the program was cancelled. It was all about politics, the Cheyenne was one of the most impressive aircraft developed. We were flying every day at 250 straight and level. Got up to 270 in a shallow dive.
My dad worked at the Skunkworks. Worked with avionics. He told then of a test pilot he had flown with in testing having flown a Cheyenne inverted at low altitude down the runway at Lockheed Burbank. That test pilot whose name escapes me now was infamous for flying various aircraft inverted. Dad had been in a Lockheed P3 Orion sub-hunter for testing of a problem with those airframes in turbulent air. So this same pilot repeatedly flew the P3 inverted through a mountain canyon north of LA which was known for consistently very turbulent air. As a former race car driver who had conducted inverted testing of his race car with no rollover protective structure dad described his experience in the P3 as a real rush (of adrenaline). Dad worked on a number of then "black" projects such as U2 and YF12 which at the time he could not talk about. I remember a number of times going with mom and sitting in our car parked on San Fernando road at the end of the runway late at night waiting to pick up dad after his late shift. The runway lights were turned off and a dark aircraft, no lights on, would take off over our heads and the only light would be the jet exhaust. A bit after, the runway lights would come back on. The Cheyenne inverted flight was something he COULD describe because it was done in daylight in the middle of the then 3rd most populous city in the US. Out of the cancer med induced memory fog I'm thinking that pilot was called "Upside Down" Sammy Mason. Don't hold me to that, though. Aside from being between 50 and 60 years ago and me not being as young and sharp as I once was.
My uncle was a helicopter pilot for the Army in Vietnam. He spoke about interservice rivalry from the Air Force. The Air Force is the Jan Brady of the military while actually getting what they want.
Great video about an impressive aircraft. It always amazes me what tech gets discarded for one reason or another. Small blooper when talking about the guns, Simon refers to the AH-56 as the AH-64 for that portion until talking about the hardpoints. ruclips.net/video/_6GAp8yO7l0/видео.html
The AH-56 was capable of out doing both the AH-64 and the A-10 while STILL out doing the AH-64 upgrade which itself takes from the AH-56 (rigid rotor and pusher rotor with wider wings).
That whole mechanical stability system would have been moot by the mid 70's and probably replaced by an electronic three axis gyro much like the Bell stabilizer bar on the AH-1s were. Jump to one minute: ruclips.net/video/-5Hl9uuGeoI/видео.html That would have solved basically all of the aH-56's problems
The mechanical system was moot by 1972 On the Wikipedia of AH-56 “After the cancellation, the Army conducted an evaluation of the seventh Cheyenne equipped with the AMCS flight control system. The testing showed the AMCS removed most of the remaining control problems, improved stability, improved handling, and decreased the pilot workload. With the AMCS, the Cheyenne reached a speed of 215 kn (247 mph, 398 km/h) in level flight and in a dive achieved 245 kn (282 mph, 454 km/h); it also demonstrated improved maneuverability at high speeds. Prototype #7 was the last Cheyenne to fly.[43] Lockheed had counted on the Cheyenne to establish itself in the helicopter market with its rigid rotor technology, but the ambitious project was unsuccessful. The firm did not pursue development of another helicopter.” en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AH-56_Cheyenne#Program_demise Notes “The collective boost system and gyro-to-rotor connection were changed, eliminating the half-P oscillations. Other vibrations were solved by removing weight from rotor head leading and trailing edges, and the rotation of the tail rotor was reversed to improve sidewards flight to the left below 30 knots (35 mph, 56 km/h).” en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AH-56_Cheyenne#Notes
There was one rotting in the sun at ft. Rucker. I doubt is been moved since 2004. When in asked about it, I was told it was an absolute beast that got cancelled too soon.
Another airframe was destroyed in a wind tunnel test which the army requested after the death of the test pilot. The Lockheed engineers protested but the test went ahead leading to the destruction of 10th airframe.
It was in the wind tunnel as part of the effort to solve the Half-P hop problem. Flight testing is dangerous business, and requires a lot of risk, since you're trying to solve unknown problems.
The "Cheyenne" in the first scene is now in the Army Air Museum in Fort Rucker AL. (I almost had a wreck when I first seen it out side the museum.) The last time I was there (2 or 3 years now) it was in the shop for refurbishment. I hope this will give you all a place to go to see.
Speaking of age ahead of its time, you need to cover the P-39 Airacobra and it’s big brother the P-63 Kingcobra. Center mounted engine, massive cannon in the nose, tricycle landing gear in a time of the tail-dragger. Hated by the IS but loved by the Soviets.
@@russellfitzpatrick503 I wouldn't be surprised if some are still in use, the F-4 Phantom had been in use in the Middle East until not so long ago, Iran might still be using some.
There's a reason why it was loathed by the US...it was a very poor aircraft. Pilots used to dub the P-39 "A P-40 with a Zero on its tail" because it was vastly outmatched by them. The Oldsmobile cannon wasn't great either. Sure fine for the ground attack role the Russians used it for, but again poor against aircraft due to low muzzle velocity of its 37mm round. And the centre mounted engine concept played havoc on its CoG which resulted in some nasty flight characteristics. The whole aircraft was a poor attempt of building an aircraft around a weapons system.
now I love the apache. in this order, AC130, A10, then AH64, since the Kiowa got retired, AH64 is a fantastic CAS platform. that said, I would've liked to see the Cheyenne...
What you didn’t talk about is how the technologies of the AH-56 and the Comanche have conveniently shown up in the latest offerings for the replacements of the Blackhawk and the Apache which are in many ways watered down versions of those prototypes
@@merafirewing6591 well, honestly if you had a more modern version of the Cheyenne you wouldn’t need the Apache. It can do the same thing but faster with more capacity. Add in the capabilities of the Apache and make it stealthier and you have a modern attack chopper
Back in 1980, I was going through my Advance Indvidual Training ( AIT ) in the US Army for the AH-1 Cobra, we talked about the Cheyenne. Ft Eustis had one in the museum which was the talk of our class. It was very much ahead of it's time but had a few problems that still had to be worked out. But what project doesn't. The vibration was a big one and also the gunner set turned 360 degrees, which made the gunner sick was another. But all that can be worked out in the end but not given the chance as usual. The Cobra was only to be a inter till the AH-56 could be brought online. The Cobra though did work into a great gunship but the Cheyenne would of been great. More than likely I would of gotten trained on her instead of the Corba if the Army was able to get it into production. Ether she would of been replaced by now or was able to modified into something more for todays battlefield. I think the samething happen to the Comanche as well. That would of been a great aircraft for the Army and our Allies as well.
I flew on the Cheyenne as a gunner at Yuma proving grounds, and I never got sick. I think it might have been one of the engineers who flew in the gunners station in the early days. It was an incredible machine.
Anyone who has been in the military is not shocked by this. I knew pilots who would go on to be colonels and generals, some of the most arrogant people I’ve ever known.
Having served (US Navy) 96 to 04, I can tell you this. Every service is out to claim more money and mission roles than it can. I saw this right up to Sept. 11th, 2001. All of a sudden, every service was your very best friend. EX. Steaks, Shrimp, and Beer aboard a US Coast Guard frigate in Kuwait. US Coast Guard ships are actual US Territory wherever they go. Hence legal (Budweiser). Will forever have a soft spot for the US Coast Guard!
As usual, the "experts" who are fascinated by the technical characteristics do not want to hear anything about the real cost of the technique. This cost includes: cost of production, reliability, ease of maintenance, ease of repair, ease of management. Why is there no comparison of these parameters in the video? Do not forget that you will need to arm the entire army and train a lot of pilots. The people responsible for setting budgets and allocating money are far from being stupid and greedy, as shown in the video. The final effectiveness of equipment will be determined by the tactics of warfare. The USSR has always had offensive tactics in military doctrine. This tactic determined the face of all ground forces and all auxiliary forces, including aviation. Armored vehicles were easy to transport, economical for long marches, with the most reduced armor volume to reduce the silhouette (harder to hit). Combat helicopters were heavily armored, had high speed and inertia (MI-24). Assault attacks are carried out at high speed near the ground (below the detection zone of the air defense system). US tactics have always been defensive (despite the number of wars they have unleashed). In this case, the high silhouette of the armored vehicles was even an advantage, and the high mass played a smaller role. Therefore, helicopter air support did not require high speeds. If we take into account the final cost of each helicopter, it turns out that cobras are more effective in completing tasks for the chosen military doctrine. For the same reason, the most advanced, innovative and powerful tanks could not change the course of World War II.
Yes random man on the internet now tell us all about how good the russians are doing in Ukrain right now with their "simple and cheap" weapons systems against overly complex and expensive high tech western anti armor rockets, man portable air defense and drones.
@@atomicskull6405 ever since the chip shortage for automobiles happened, I've wondered where or who supplies the chips used in these weapons and how reliable the chip supply chain is.
@@atomicskull6405 He said Soviet, not modern day Russia. Or do you lack reading comprehension? His points are valid as well. The video doesn't give us the full picture.
Idea: Guitars. Specifically electric guitars. How they got started. Innovations. The keytar. The Fly. Hollow bodies. Auto tuning keys. Hamburgers vs single coil. Designs and materials
1:08 Agreed, the future has a left-wing bias and right-wing Republicanism, Nationalism and tRumpian fascism have no place in the future that I, and everyone that I care to know, work tirelessly to materialize.
Very good presentation, as full of a history as I have seen on a video of Rigid Rotor and the Cheyanne Helicopter which I have seen in person several times at Fort Rucker, Alabama.
Sorry, but no. The Zulu is a classic case of Marines doing the best they can without money. The Apache is better in literally every way except top speed, and that is TOP speed, not acceleration, climb rate, etc. No. It's a bad helicopter.
After watching so many RUclips tutorial videos about trading I was still making losses untill Mr Montero Wayne started managing my investment now, I make $6,800 weekly. God bless Mr Montero . His been a blessing to my family.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
Most military officers who make their way to the requirements, budget, and acquisitions/procurement side of the DoD have faced similar frustrations. For example, my last assignment in the military was as the director of development for a large, multi-level security big-data and analysis system. We went all in with best-practice open source everything, from code, to analytic tools, to visualizations, to data structure/un-structure principles, modeling, etc. I had a large, secure budget with a very large and talented team and we managed to deliver both a prototype and the first increment of the system through the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of the project. We were rolling and had support and advocacy all the way through the chain up to senior civilian leadership at the Pentagon. Then, we had the honor of briefing the Professional Staff Members from the House Armed Services Committee, who heretofore were overwhelmingly supportive of us. On that day in October of 2016, everything was going well, the demo was flawless, and we were all smiling until one of the members asked if we’d engaged Amazon Web Services as part of our risk reduction efforts. We had not. He then went on a lengthy and generally pointless diatribe about their emerging toolsets, ease of use, and ability to handle big datasets with ease. I countered with the fact that, at that point, they had not proven their security model within our concept of operations (a VERY big deal, btw), and were extremely cagey about rights to both raw and processed data. Conversely, our solution suffered from neither of those issues, we had proven our functionality and performance against requirements, had met our budget during the riskiest phase of the project, and were ready to scale to full production, backed by independent program and legal analyses. In the end, it didn’t matter. When the budget was released for review that fall, we were toast, courtesy of the HASC, and the whole effort was turned over to another agency which had no familiarity at all with the program but had infrastructure ties to AWS. The project died two years later amid soaring costs and late deliveries due to architecture changeover, security problems, and, of course, data rights conflicts. The worst part wasn’t losing the project. The worst part was firing over 80 of my folks in the course of two days. I retired a bitter man for that.
Fuck Amazon
Old and passionate people tend to type in stream in UNREADABLE stream of consciousness, not using paragraph breaks or the best grammar. I am an exception to that rule at age 66.
Let me present the gentleman's ENTIRE post in READABLE paragraph form with most of the grammar fixed, and some necessary clarifications added.
"Most military officers who make their way to the requirements, budget, and acquisitions/procurement side of the DoD have faced similar frustrations.
For example, my last assignment in the military was as the director of development for a large, multi-level security big-data and analysis system. We went all-in with best-practice open source everything, from code, to analytic tools, to visualizations, to data structure/un-structure principles, modeling, etc.
I had a large, secure budget with a very large and talented team. We managed to deliver both a prototype, and the first increment of the system through the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of the project. We were rolling, and had support and advocacy of the entiire chain of oversight....right up to the senior civilian leadership at the Pentagon.
We had the honor of briefing the Professional Staff Members from the House Armed Services Committee, who heretofore were overwhelmingly supportive of us. On that day in October of 2016, everything was going well, the demo was flawless, and we were all smiling until one of the members asked if we had engaged Amazon Web Services as part of our risk reduction efforts. We had not.
He then went on a lengthy and generally pointless diatribe about Amazon's emerging toolsets, ease of use, and ability to handle big datasets with ease. I countered with the fact that, at that point, they had not proven their security model within our concept of operations (a VERY big deal, btw), and were extremely cagey(purposely vague) about rights to both raw and processed data.
Conversely, my team's solution suffered from neither of those issues. We (thought we) had proven our functionality and performance against all requirements. We had met our budget during the riskiest phase of the project, and were ready to scale to full production, backed by independent program and legal analyses. In the end, none of that mattered.
When the budget was released for review that fall, we were toast, courtesy of the HASC. The whole effort was turned over to another agency which had no familiarity at all with the program, but had infrastructure ties to AWS.
The project died two years later amid soaring costs and late deliveries due to architecture changeover, security problems, and, of course, data rights conflicts. The worst part wasn’t losing the project. The worst part was firing over 80 of my team in the course of two days.
I retired a bitter man for that. Thanks, soulless Military bureaucracy. Not."
Food for thought. Things I WISHED I had said:
"Amazon? Oh, you mean Jeff Bezos? The WONDERFUL American Patriot with no ulterior objectives or agendas. I agree. He is COMPLETLREY neutral and trust worthy.
Absolutely, sir! Forgive us. We will GET RIGHT ON THAT, and read Bezos in on the most highly classified material we have to offer. Because we trust him on your word alone.
THANK you, sir!! Consider your wishes DONE!
(said with out the obvious sarcasm of course.)
Just AGREE with these delusional monsters and TRICK their stupid asses with smoke and mirrors, while you proceed to QUIETLY doing the right thing.
Idk, was fairly clear to me. Just have to read.
@@c.n.crowther438 Yup... I understood it pretty well...
Hi. My dad was Don Segner, a senior test pilot on the Cheyenne program and the Lockheed Rigid Rotor program as a whole. The project was mainly killed by Barry Goldwater who was a staunch advocate of the A-10 and the U.S. Air Force. Your analysis is pretty spot one. I wish my father was still around. He would have felt vindicated by seeing this video.
I also was a pilot on the program, and had great respect for your father. It was all about politics, Lockheed always builds state of the art aircraft.
man thats so awesome!!!!!
@@berchmanrichard6070it would be nice if Lockheed Martin built civilian aircraft again, too.
@@berchmanrichard6070 Thank you for your warm reply. So good to hear from someone who was there during that fascinating time in Lockheed's history. I'm sure my father would have had many warm memories of you. There was nothing like the Cheyenne.
My Dad was Morrie Larsen, one of the Army test pilots on the YAH-56 program. According to his report to the Army brass, "the cheyenne deviated from controlled flight within the flight envelope." While a revolutionary design, I think it was not ready for prime time.
When you're playing as friends as little kids this is the sort of thing they say "no that's not fair!" What an incredible machine!
This is the toy that all the kids are so jealous of that they smash it into little pieces.
The same thing could be said about the AVRO Arrow.
@@BIGBLOCK5022006and TSR2. Both far superior to the American counterparts
When a senior in high school in 1968, Lockheed was doing flight testing out of Oxnard, CA. The approach path to the local airport went right over the high school campus. I remember, on more than one ocasión seeing the Cheyanne zoom over the school, pursued by a P-51 Mustang flown by one of their engineers, perhaps as a camera ship. Pretty impressive. And very fast.
Wow, two for one. That sounds awesome!
In 1969 I was stationed at the army test activit at Edwards AFB. Although the Cheyenne was no longer being testes there, we still had the P-51 Mustang that was utilized as the chase aircraft for the Cheyenne. Never thought I would be in an army unit with a P-51 Mustang in 1969.
I was in high school near Thousand Oaks, about 20-ish miles as the crow flies from Oxnard. Which meant between Navy and Air Force aircraft, Super Guppies, once an SR-71, various propellor-driven cargo aircraft and helicopters (and once a Saturn V upper stage being trucked through our campus up to Port Hueneme for transport to Florida), all sorts of aircraft were an everyday event.
The Cheyenne flying overhead got absolutely everyone's attention: a loud, low-pitched growl unlike everything else I ever have seen fly.
I was -11 years old your senior year lol, but I wish someone would make a movie so we could all be a fly on the wall and see the awesome minds, interactions, collaborations and creations that came out of Skunkworks.
Great piece!!, as always thx Simon.
We had one of these on static display at Ft. Campbell when I was stationed there in the 90's. Even in its relatively rough shape, the thing was immensely impressive up close.
Still was on display back in 2015 or so when i saw it.
@@high633 still there today, it’s had a little maintenance, not much.
In 1982, Ft Eustis had one.
steve
There's one on display here at Ft. Polk near the entrance to the airfield
We had one at Ft Polk when I was stationed there Jan 91 to Oct 92. Beautiful aircraft! I think it was moved from the former museum compound to be a gate guard by the airfield.
My Father worked flight test on the program. I remember watching it fly at the Yuma proving grounds and at Fort Hunter Liggett. It was impressive. I just retired from the Skunk Work after 42 years. Lockheed is a great company to work for.
Thank you for that comment I have never worked for a defense contractor but Lockheed produced the most advanced everything in is a shame that this program was canceled it was the most advanced at nearly every aspect of the game and would have come online long before the A10 did
Sooo are the rumors of US military owning a couple of "ufo" techs real? Haha. Been hearing a lot about those lately. Like the tr3b? XD
let me fly the tic tac damnit :(
As someone who's interested in entering the aerospace industry; I'll make a note of that.
My neighbor was a employees at Lockheed & went through so many aircraft over the year's. From 1930-1975. Gave me a lot of Lockheed books & magazines. He had a photo of Marilyn Monroe signed by her.She worked for him & friends with the wife. Nicest family.
My Dad was one of the engineers. It broke his heart when the project was cancelled.
Great analysis of the issue of "corruption," I mean lobbying. I've lived in a few places in the world where I had to explain that the United States suffers from this very nuanced form of corruption instead of the very upfront corruption one can find elsewhere. Fantastic job Simon & Co.
"nuanced" 🤣
another case of corruption and lobbying is the F-11F-1 Super Tiger vs the F-104
They basically make it more complex to the point the average citizen wouldn't care
I enjoy explaining how I’m responsible for my retirement to citizens of another continent who’s governments are responsible. It usually ends with me asking “and you prefer / trust yours to handle this?”
@@apaulson6590 You trust your government one way or another. Your savings, your possessions, your funds could lose value, your government can force them to lose value. The only way that is robust and works at scale is the "social contract" where people that work and pay tax support people who no longer do.
What also works is smaller scale version, where you make a bunch of little humans and guilt trip them into supporting you when they grow up. If you don't mess it up, works 100% every time.
When measured in dollars, Lockheed can’t avoid doing mega projects.
True, but it is comforting to know there are enough cutting edge mil tech in the trash bin, that US mil superiority is near impossible to overcome. "Neat heli, chi-na" *Dust of trash tech* "Oops, beat you."
They can't avoid pushing the technology envelope.
They stink.
They snort to many rails
@@whiskeygordon2452 how so?
Almost every single craft created by Lockheed is so advanced you'd think they hired aliens to design them.
That's under a NDA.
Nanu nanu er i mean I don’t know what you’re talking about!
some of design solutions are intentionally obfuscated, so that they are mire difficult to study and copy from debris
But once they make them it seems like a no brainier that no one els could come up with
Lockheed produces great work but they treat their workers like slaves my dad worked there for 11 years. If I remember correctly he was working on the presidential helicopter before it was rejected during the Obama administration. Lockheed immediately laid him off and then sent him a job offer a month later at entry-level pay. He worked long hours every day for over a decade just to be screwed.
Simon and Co. have been killing it in the aviation coverage lately....and I'm happy about it lol 🍻
I believe he had to update a few models after criticisms from people that actually flew them.
Really enjoy the channels and the updates
Thanks for saying so :)
@@megaprojects9649 isn't a thumbnail of rikhter video showing ah-56?
Makes me sad that the different services can’t seem to understand that all of them having the best equipment (yes including Marines) is a net positive for the nation.
They already spend over 200 billion every year on shit equipment. I can’t imagine how they’d be with the most advanced best shi ever, just look how that went for Hitler- instead of mass producing what he had which was genius- he kept making weapons of mass destruction- making their budget plummet- and in turn shoot themselves in the face.
Sometimes you have biased pricks in the branch, especially in the Air Force
@@nomercynodragonforyou9688they are air heads after all ^,^
Moral of the story: Politicians suck and deny us of sick-ass projects.
And petty generals gonna be petty.
Absolutely! just ask any aviation minded Canadian about the Avro Canada Arrow (Simon did a video), or the same people from Great Britain about the TSR2 (also a Simon video). sigh!
@@davidnoseworthy4540 if only politicians didn't exist, amiright? We'd have so many cool things.
Westland successfully used the rigid rotor design on their Lynx, which still holds helicopter speed record and is aerobatic.
Oh wow, really?
I love the Lynx but I did not realize it was a descendant of the Cheyenne! 😍
I must go and read about this immediately, do you know if they had to wait for Parents to expire?
@@MostlyPennyCat the lynx that's in war thunder?
@@rtreyk
Yes, the one from war thunder.
And apparently "rigid rotor" is far more complex that "like the Cheyenne" these days as technology has moved on in 60 years (obviously! 😂)
As far as I can't tell the technology got integrated in many different ways, like in the EC135.
The lynx is fast because of its BERP blades (British Experimental Rotorblade Project) which culminated in the BERP4 blade on Merlin and WildCat (Super Lynx)
But you know what's really fun?
The Lynx and WildCat use:
Technology derived from Cheyenne (maybe/probably)
Berp blades
_The engines designed for RAH-64 Comanche_
Yep, it used Rolls Royce Honeywell engines! 😂
America cancelled the Cheyenne, the Comanche and _we_ got the Super Lynx!!
that was the most long winded way to say "politics only benefits politicians" I've ever heard lol and i loved every scathing second of it 😎👍
Seriously, it's not like they couldn't have ordered the helicopter themselves
The A-10 killed this helicopter because it would've been better. It did the same job but better.
@@CharliMorganMusic True it came later though.
Blanketly bitching about politics and labeling any and all politicians as evil is absolutely pathetic and reeks is ignorance.
Millions of people are involved in politics. All with varying beliefs, morality, motivations, and definitions of success. Politics developed everywhere independently of each other and every group of people in the world has some form of political structure. From the biggest nations to small tribes.
Decrying the whole thing is just an excuse to remain ignorant. Why learn about policies and vote when you can just claim they're all evil and then pretend to be correct when something goes wrong while ignoring any successful political decisions?
Great video! I'm a big aviation buff but knew next to nothing about AH-56.
There's a small slip-up at 15:34 in the video where you say AH-64 two times but you are referring to the AH-56.
Thank you for the very thorough history of this forgotten aircraft. 👍
Yup. Noticed that too.
3 times, actually.
saying the same numbers so many times end up becoming a blur, the "64" was mentioned earlier as well, by that point numbers were just numbers i suppose lol
My dad worked at Ft Rucker during the 60's. He told me the speed of the Cheyenne was like watching a Mohawk fly by. He always thought it was stupid for the program to be canceled.
I've known about the Cheyenne for a while and how it all shook out but it's one of those stories where the first time I heard about it I was beyond impressed and having served in the Army I knew it had never entered service so I was waiting to hear about the end of the story, why, why didn't it make the cut? What was its fatal flaw? And it turns out it was basically interservice pettiness which was so incredibly rampant in the 70s and it blew my mind. You did an excellent telling of the story here with a whole bunch of detail I never knew before, great work for all involved.
well there was also the fact that it was unstable when flying at its cruising speed or the fact that it crashed 3 times the 3rd time being with the main rotor stuck the fuselage yea still trying to wrap my head around that. then when it went in to fix these problems they could only fix "most" of the issues while going overbudget.
@@aikidodude05 It was not unstable at any speed. Very solid flying aircrafrt. There was only one accident. I was one of the pilots.
@@berchmanrichard6070 it killed a pilot and it’s blade struck it’s fuselage the reports on this thing are not classified it is literally documented as having stability issues at high speeds and when close to the ground. Pretending to be a test pilot doesn’t help you when we can read the reports.
@@aikidodude05 Replacing the mechanical stabilizer with a 3 axis gyro computer would have solved it completely, and that system would have existed with or without the AH-56, because it was implemented on the AH-1G where it was used to eliminate the stabilizer bar on the bell rotorhead.
@@aikidodude05 If you have access to records as you say, you'll see that I was appointed lead pilot on one of the Cheyennes based at Yuma proving grounds. It did kill David Beal, who I had breakfast with the day of his death. That is part of flight test, and the problem was eventually resolved. What is your engineering background since you seem to know all about it.
In 1968, 1969 or 1970 as a young lad I drove by the Van Nuys airport and saw the Cheyanne tethered and undergoing hovering tests 2-5 meters above the ground. It was common knowledge in the airport employees that it was undergoing testing. An amazing aircraft.
Fairly sure the UD-4L Cheyenne Dropship from the movie Aliens was partially inspired by the AH-56 Cheyenne, A-10 Thunderbolt II, and AV-8B Harrier.
You can definitely see the Apache and Harrier in it
I remember the cheyenne. I read about it in magazines and built a 1/72 scale model. It was a beautiful aircraft. But politics will rule.
Very true and one of the reason the Air Force is trying to kill the A-10 (by simply just barely keeping it relevant) instead of modernizing it like the Marines have done with the AH-1Z. The Air Force has almost no interest in providing CAS besides their fear of loosing funding to the Army if they were to rightfully assume that role with low flying fixed wing attack aircraft to supplement their helicopter fleet.
I also built one of the AH56 Cheyenne scale model kits, which I believe was from Revell. I thought it was an awesome helicopter - by looks (what does a 12 yr old know). My friends must have been on the other side (USAF), as they thought it looked dumb, ugly, etc. We lived in Canada, where the military helicopters we saw were strictly for transport, logistics and of course search & rescue.
My younger brother joined the US Army and became a helicopter maintenance tech around 1970. He'd been trained to work on the Bell AH-1 Cobras. Some time during 1971 he was deployed to Vietnam.
One day I walked into a hobby store in a city near me where I spotted a shelf full of various military models. I walked over to look at the military models and spotted a kit of a very unusual helicopter that I'd never seen or heard of. It was an AH56 Cheyenne kit. If memory serves, it was a Revell model. I bought it, brought it home, and assembled it. It was so strikingly different from any other helicopter that I'd ever seen, that I became curious and tried to get more information about it. I learned that it was still in late stages of development but that the military had ordered a few hundred of the type and would soon be fielding them. Somewhere around that same time I remember seeing one of those fold-out type ads for that helicopter in Popular Mechanics magazine and could not believe the technological advancements touted in the ad.
I wrote to my brother and asked him if he would be working on those eventually. "No, I heard that program has been cancelled," he wrote back. I recall feeling a bit disappointed. I enlisted a few years later in '75 and after training was stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC. Sometimes, on long weekends I would drive home to visit the family and my drive would take me through Virginia. On one such trip, I decided to stop at the Army Transportation Museum at Ft. Eustis. As I stepped out of my car in the museum parking lot I was astonished to see, on the grass lawn in front of the museum, an AH56 Cheyenne. I walked over to look at it. Once up close, I realized how large, well long actually, that helicopter was. Just sitting there it looked wickedly intimidating. What a machine it would have been if the program hadn't been cancelled. I felt sorry seeing that one sitting there all forlorn by itself with sun-weathered paint and a layer of grime deposited on it from sitting outside. As I read the information about the helicopter on a placard nearby, I thought to myself, "What a f*****g waste."
For years, I'd wondered why that program was stopped in favor of the Cobra, when the Cobra didn't appear to be nearly as capable. About 8 - 10 years after I saw that chopper at the Army Transportation Museum, the Army fielded the AH64, at which time I noticed that helicopter used many of the technological advances that had originally been mentioned in that Popular Mechanics ad. Now, after watching this video, I know what really stopped the program. Over the years, I'd read various accounts of the AH56, but, though they'd mentioned the Air Force's insistence that the Army shouldn't be allowed to trespass on their turf, none of those explained it near as thoroughly as this account. It is, frankly, infuriating the amount of development grant money that's wasted every year in this country as a result of lobbyists activity and political greed. I suspect that Air Force General that was so opposed to the AH56 eventually retired and became very rich by getting hired as a "consultant" by one of the companies for which he ran interference. I won't bother to google him to find out whether it's true or not - I'll only become more infuriated if I'm right.
Thank you for the work on this.
Side note: A few years ago I'd read about another Lockheed project and decided to check out Lockheed's web sources. Somewhere in that search I came across something that listed what spare parts Lockheed had in its warehouse for older aircraft. There in that inventory was something that said something like, "Rotor blade, helicopter: AH56 Cheyenne, showing that there was still a small quantity of rotors left over from that project. Wouldn't it be terrific if there were other spare parts and a private buyer(s) were able to purchase one of the remaining prototypes from a museum, buy all remaining spare parts Lockheed still has, and then restore it to like-new condition and fly it again?
Maybe a video on the NEWEST helicopter concepts is in order. There's clearly historical items on these helicopters that are readily apparent on the most cutting-edge program underway in order to choose a "new airborne troop transport", aka: a helicopter that mostly drops off and picks up soldiers- think the soccer mom's minivan who is taking all her kids' friends out at once.....every morning day and night for 30 years lol. But honestly, it's to replace the tried and true Black Hawk helicopter and POSSIBLY the V-22 Osprey.
The Sikorsky entry is literally the AH-56 with another rotor.
Regarding the V22: It was sized to fit the ships in service at the time when it was designed. Thus the folding blades and the wing unit rotating itself and the less than ideal size of the rotor discs. The new design doesn't have these and hopefully will make it more affordable for the US Army. Which design the service will select (the tiltrotor or the coaxial) will be interesting.
The V-22 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
But the Army is looking to replace the Blackhawk and also for a new scout helicopter. For which Bell has the V-280 Valor and 360 Invictus respectively.
Ch-46!!! Lmao Im biased though.
If English were not my first language, I think I would get lost. He manages to use words I’ve not heard in sometime. That’s not a bad thing. It’s what makes his documentaries so enjoyable.
It's the beard. To heavy for his chin, and makes him speak funny
Thanks Simon. I saw a Cheyenne as a child at, of all places, an Army Transport museum. It didn't have much information about it. I asked the guide what happened to it, and why it never served, he just said the "Cobras and Apaches are the big boys now"...not really helpful. This was though, thanks again.
dude, positively love your commentary, and also how you deliver it. edgy, no holds barred, direct, but intelligent. it's artful and in a very intense way. please make more.
When does Simon sleep? The amount of amazing videos he puts out is staggering! Keep up the great work.
There are a plethora of channels out there spewing content but this channel is in a different league. The research, the presentation, the script, the diction simply is a cut above the rest. I think this one is the best yet. As for the content itself, the squabbling of idiots and the passing of money or favours gets under my skin. Brilliant oratory.
One channel after another, Simon "factboi" Whisler will conquer RUclips!
@@michellemire8462 and I'll be there!!! Rather have facts than bs you get from some.
Dad was there when the test pilot was killed. It was, apparently, horrific. I remember Dad telling me about it ONCE. The pilot was literally bisected by the rotor. While that part of the airframe was not Dad’s part of the project - Dad was a weapons engineer - Dad always carried some guilt. As Dad tearfully told me, he was inside the hangar playing Pinocle when it happened.
Kudos to your dad. Good story.
David, the pilot killed, and I had breakfast together that morning, and I taxied out just behind him in my ship. Then they sent me out in a Bell to find pieces of his ship. One of the worst experiences I ever had as a pilot.
@@berchmanrichard6070 I am very sorry that happened. Dad only spoke of it once. It really upset him.
My Dad was in design/ testing for MML in Fla.
@@berchmanrichard6070 Hey Richard, I'm currently making a short documentary about my grandfather, Dave Schnitcker, who was also a test pilot on the Cheyenne program. I would love to connect with you if possible
Excellent video! An additional event leading to the cancellation likely occurred when the AH64 was being tested for the half P hop in the Ames Research Center 40 x 80 ft wind tunnel. During high speed testing for the half-P hop vibration, the rotor oscillations quickly accelerated out of control and the rotor struck the tail boom, resulting in the helicopter being pulled off the test mounting structures and depositing it at the downwind turning vanes like a crushed bug.
One minor nit to pick is the mixing of imperial and metric units in the descriptions. IMO if the airplane was designed in inches and feet, those should be the primary values given, with metric values being primary for aircraft designed in those units.
I was one of the pilots on the Cheyenne program, and was at the controls when that happened at Ames. The result of that crash helped to solve the problem with the half P hop. Pieces of the aircraft came tearing thru the bullet proof glass windows, injuring a couple of guys.
I spent 12 years in Army Aviation working on helicopter engines. Mainly Black Hawks.
Going through AIT the sheet metal school had a Comanche body they drilled holes in and repaired over and over and over. The Cheyenne was a cool heli but aside from it's technical issues maintenance costs were going to go up not down. WAY UP.. Retraining is normal with a airframe change but like the Comanche the retraining looked more like completely new training. One of those other factors people tend to look over. Retooling and retraining of the people who keep these ACFT in the air. A VERY general rule of thumb with helicopters is 1 hour of flight time equals 4 hours of maintenance.
This doesn't mean an 8+ hour mission will down the ACFT for a day and a half. After normal maintenance there are other clocks ticking. Some parts MUST be replaced after x amount of flight hours. Pull them off and they look fine but there are stresses you can't see in these parts. So that's part of the down time. Phases are major service intervals where A LOT of parts are take off and inspected/replaced. Every other phase is pretty much a full main systems tear down. Be it in training or deployed these phases still take place.
A fair amount of mechanical accidents with helicopters is bad maintenance and QC inspections. That's a lot of training and airframes too ahead of their time can be axed in part for retraining costs and material availability.
Lots of amazing acft never saw production mainly for coming out in the wrong financial period.
Also. The Army is FAMOUS for ording helicopters. Getting what they wanted then overloading them with equipment then saying what is up with your ACFT? This is not performing like we thought it would.
Manufacturer has that look of "If I bitch slap this Gen is it worth the trouble".......
THe OH-58 Kiowa was an amazing scout ACFT. I got to work on a few before they were phased out my first year. Then the Army started tossing parts on it. And more parts. It went from a 4 seater to a 2 because the rear cabin was ALL EQUIPMENT. More parts. More power to lift the parts meant more stress and more maintenance and round and round you go till crap look at those stress fractures on the frame. Lets see here Grab my book here
TM 55-1520-228-23-2 Ok... Cracks.. and tolerance said.. Humm. Just shows a picture of a beat up OH-58 in a trash bin and a Truck dropping off a shiny new OH-58.. OK... Who's up for a long lunch?
I think this is where the Cheyenne would have ended up.
I LOVE THE AH-64. Circled our bases when deployed. We got hit by mortars and rockets all the time. The pissed off R2D2s (CRAMS) managed to knock most of them out but some got through then the 64s flying around overhead would B-line off into one direction and soupify those firing at us. I've seen A LOT of FLIR cams on SIPRNet. (Army computers for secret data) Ever seen a video of someone recording military gun cam footage from a computer screen with a phone? Bad dog bad. NO.. NO! “Front lean and rest position… move!!!”
Awesome video!!!! Sorry for getting off point.
I'll run a reverse azimuth and see if I can find my way back. Speaking of off point........
OH SWEET!!! Humvee tracks!!!!!!!
Subtle hint on what to look for when you and two other groups are completely lost trying to find the bonus nav point during land nav training and everyone has an idea but none of them agree as you calculate only having enough time left try one direction and a flat out run to get back before time is up.
Well...These tracks are fresh.
Anyone want to take bets on these being from the range cadres Humvee as they drove out to make sure the bonus Nav point was set up?
WINNER!
You write like a schizo.
Thank you for your service and perspective. My grandfather was on army and national guard helicopter repair crews, sounds like the training I heard as a pup.
It very much translates to public machines- labor isn’t cheap when it comes to engineering. Don’t buy a super car if you maintain a repair team.
The brains that design these machines and big indeed- I can only imagine more mortal mean being tasked to keep them in the same working order. Not to mention it seems all these machines are designed on the razor’s edge of tolerances- this is evidenced by the time it takes to develop such machines.
Speaking of the Comanche, I was very sad to see that one not make service. I’m assuming that the Army is going unmanned- hence the lack of ATC the Army has produced in the last two decades?
Who told you it was ok to stop taking your medication?? Huh?? Who?? You need to get back on them forthwith!!
@@yourdaddy6030 LMAO!
This story makes me so sad every time i hear it. Even today this helicopter sounds incredibly formidable, but especially when it was created this was decades ahead of its time in terms of it's lethality. The Cheyenne really deserved a second chance, it probably could have been produced far more easily a couple decades later
Hey Simon. A couple of times you mixed up the numbers, refering to the AH 56 as the AH 64. The times i reacted to are at: 14:47, 15:33, 15:39
Otherwise it's a intressting video as usual.
I noticed that too. kept saying AH 64 instead of 56.
Absolutely brilliantly covered! Such a shame it never went into production. Thank you for covering this remarkable aircraft!
Hey Simon, just to let you know, the Cheyenne is the AH-56, and the AH-64 designation is used for the Apache.
.. ? I'm confused, doesn't he say that in the first few minutes ?
He fucked it up at about the 14:30 mark.
Yes, this confused me as well. He had been saying AH-56 and then suddenly said AH-64.
I actually know a Cheyenne test pilot. He has some great stories about his time in the cockpit. His stories about his time flying in Vietnam, and being one of the first test pilots for the attack helicopter concept over there are pretty hair raising. Good video, thanks for covering this interesting helo.
Who was he, I was also one of the test pilots, there were only 6 of us. Don Segner, Ray Goudy, Tony Wilcox, Chuck Hench, Chuck Tucker, and myself.
@@berchmanrichard6070 Dave Schnitker
Funny thing is Sikorsky, which is now a division of Lockheed, is now building the Defiant X and Raider X two helicopters with twin counter rotating main rotors with pusher props.
The real funny thing is that they are building the avionics for the other contender (that actually won) too.
Omg ty for this one! Ive been obsessed with the cheyenne! Even now it looks like a magnificent attack chopper!!!!!
I remember the first time I saw one of these in person. It was at a little exhibit, it was such a odd design that it caught my eye immediately and I spent the next hour looking over it and doing research on it. It's just sad that the bird had started to fall apart. I wish I could see it in flight
So many decades later, and so little has changed..
I was one of the honored few to go to lockheed factory for electrical and instrumentation training on the ah56. it was the most inspiring experiences of my life, I was stationed in yuma proving grounds. After all the guys finished our training, we were on cloud nine. We were the cream of the crop, we felt. Then a few months later, our world came crashing down, when we received word that congress canceled the entire project.
Hey Simon and Co. Awesome video , Im a huge fan of all the Megaprojects, especially the aviation stuff ! I think a video of the Denel Rooivalk attack helicopter would be pretty cool, think it has an interesting history
Are you telling me that we almost had this amazing piece of machinery but missed out due to politics? Man I hate corruption, I'm sorry, lobbying.
The controls were plagued with problems and Lockheed spent years trying to figure out the mechanical controls, the military industry was on the cusp of introducing digital controls. While politics killed it, it was on life support already.
I tried the lobby a highway patrolman out of giving me a ticket they called it attempted bribery and I had to go to court to fight it I lost and I am able to reply because I'm in a low risk Correctional Facility😂😂😂🖕 lobbyist!
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD This guy goes into every video on the AH-56 within hours for years now and says stuff like this, it's clear he's air force or ex air force and has notifications for "AH-56" enabled.
The AH-1 had the Bell mechanical stabilizer bar replaced with an electronic 3 axis gyro system in the mid and digital controls in the mid 70's and the mechanical stability system on the AH-56 would have been no different. They could have easily upgraded it with a three axis gyro and electronic PID control.
@@atomicskull6405 And costs would have increased. Lockheed couldn't get it done on time and allowed the project to become less relevant as time went on. Happens to the best.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD not at all what happened. Simon has it as right as its going to be told publicly.
Dude..... 25cm target from 3km away is sick accuracy!!
14:46 - you mean the AH56, you say AH64. So advanced it changed designation! ;)
Not like he edits his videos, im sure he reads from a teleprompter
Outstanding video! /thoroughly enjoyed it! Simon's one-liners just make the cherry on the cake!
I got a chance to see this helicopter at Ft. Rucker while attending WOILE a couple of years ago. They have a couple of hangars full of one of a kind, experimental helicopters. It's almost like a museum, except you're only allowed in by special invitation. That bird is huge!
They own both but now both are in storage
@@alexander1485 Nice content you have on your channel.
I recognize the AH-56 that stands in front of the 101st Airborne Division at Ft Campbell, KY. I pulled guard duty at the museum twice after earning supernumerary status at post guard duty inspection.
Remember the first time I saw the Cheyenne, when I arrived at Ft.Rucker to begin my 67N Utility Helicopter Repairer schooling, in December 1978.
Astonished to realize that it was nothing more than a museum piece, and that, somehow, the Cobra was chosen over it.
When I got to Ft.Hood, 6 months later, a couple of senior Warrant Officers (pilots) in my Dustoff platoon told me the why & what killed the Cheyenne.
At Hunter-Ligett a group of ex-vietnam cobra pilots came to the airfield for a demonstration. After Tony Wilcox, the Lockheed pilot put the cheyenne thru it paces, all of those there that day became big fans of the Cheyenne and swarmed all over it afterwards. One of them said, "Man, I wish I had had one of those in Vietnam.
Having served two tours in Vietnam as an Army helicopter pilot I have a few well-founded beliefs about U.S. Airfarce close air support. If you consider a half mile close air support well the Airfarce might make it. But anyone who thinks you can drop an unguided iron bomb (all they had at the time) from a jet flying faster than 200 knots from 500 feet above ground level with any accuracy is an absolute idiot.
The main reason that the AH-56 was canceled was a direct result of Congress being blindsided by the news that the Airfarce's brand new C-5A would need new wing spars because the original one's were cracking and at a cost higher than the new airplane cost. The C-5A was a piece of junk. The engines were under powered., The landing gear had major problems with every other landing. The pneumatic ducting system was always leaking and cracking. It was not uncommon for a C-5A to land out of base and be grounded for a week or two. Fly one leg, land and be grounded for another week or two. Since the aircraft were in Active/Reserve units it was not uncommon for a reserve crew to be flown back to base because the time was up and a replacement crew to be flown in to take over. Problem was this replacement crew would run out of time and another crew would be brought out to replace them.
The Cobra was a skinny Huey. Same engine as the H model, same transmission as the B, C, D, E, F and H model. Same rotor system as the C and E model. The Army was in armed combat every day and we needed something "NOW" and Bell delivered while the Airfarce fought every way they could to stop the Army from protecting Americans on the ground.
A grunt could call for air cover and the Army could respond with fire on the ground within seconds to minutes. Call the Airfarce and on a good day it was 15 to 30 minutes before a fast mover would show up make 4 passes dropping ordinance and RTB (Return to Base) leaving the grunts to fend for themself once again.
Many of a time did I wander into an Airfarce Officers Club to get something to eat or drink. I would go to the bathroom to use a urinal. After doing my business I would generally stand there a flush 5 or 6 times. Airfarce officers would laugh and make fun of me. What those pampered turd brains did not understand was the I never saw a percaline bathroom fixture at any Army base I was stationed at. We had outhouses.
Oshkosh 2022 had a Galaxy C-5A fly in this year, massive. I would like somebody to get an AH-56 flying again and show off at Oshkosh!
Well nothing like hearing facts from a person who actually knows what he's talking about. I thank you for speaking up. Very interesting and informative comment. It was an education. Thanks again.
I think it's interesting and a bit sad that the Cheyenne could do things in 1968 that even the latest iteration of the Apache still cannot do. I think the Apache is a hell of a good weapon but it's essentially an armored dump truck with a gun and missiles attached to it. A refined flying machine it is not. When Apaches operate with the big CH-47 Chinooks we saw so much of in Afghanistan, the Chinooks have to throttle way back just so the Apaches can keep up.
If the Army had the Cheyenne back in the late 60s to act as a springboard for future development, imagine what today's modern helicopters would look like and be capable of.
All I can add to your personal perspective is that the leadership of the USAF of that era made the colossally STUPID decision to stop training their fighter pilots to know dogfighting! They placed way too much trust in guided missiles, learned the hard way that there were limitations to the radars of their planes and that removing guns from their fighter planes simply wasn't worth the cost savings! I immediately saw a problem with the claim that the USAF could somehow provide all the close air support to ground troops that needed it (which you explained rather well in the fourth paragraph), but the politicians couldn't... or is it wouldn't? 😥🤦♂
Stupid political maneuvering that is all about ego. Seems like the Air Force is to disconnected from what needs to be done. Been trying to kill the A-10 for years. Questionable how useful the main gun is but it fulfilled it role perfectly.
@@patrickscalia5088 I’m sorry but aerodynamically speaking the Apache is a shit show. Have you seen how unstable that thing is? A light breeze would probably cause the chain gun to achieve a 500 MOA. Longbow and hellfire are the only reason why it’s not in the scrapyard. YET
A new suggestion: Operation Nickel Grass. Moving that much equipment on such a short notice with complete success is truly a megaproject.
There is a display at Ft Rucker, AL. It is quite an aircraft. When I was there for flights school I got a good respect for all the helicopters that got into the Army inventory as well as rhe ones that didnt... the RAH-66 Comanche being the more modern example.
hands down my favorite video!!! I didn’t know helicopters were this insane
LOL!! At the 14:46 mark, you started referring to the AH-56 as the AH-64 (the Apache)! Again at 15:32 and 15:37! *Priceless!*
Super vid Simon 👍👍. Have been a fan of AH-56 fore ever. It's tough considering the longevity of the AH-1 & to a lesser extent the AH-64. Got to be around 1 of the Prototypes a lot. Many thanx & best regards.
The writing on that intro was next level!
don't forget Canada's own *AVRO CANADA CF-105 ARROW INTERCEPTOR*
As a Canadian, that still stings and it always will.
@@Dagoroth55 you are the reason i hate being Canadian, that is what stings you? something you had nothing to do with because some people from the same country made a machine, a war machine to boot ffs, that you had nothing to do with before you were born that does not affect you in any way?? that is where you have passion and anger? but not a drop for our fully violated and denied natural rights, especially our firearm and defense rights, own and carry(that all humans on earth have innately just being alive regardless if our tyrant traitor hijacked governments or their lapdog order following rights violating evil serving/protecting SPINELESS MORAL COWARD TRAITOR force arms, ie; military and law enforcement personnel, recognize and acknowledge them or not! they are called negative natural rights, look them up!) and actually we never had our real freedoms, liberties and rights recognized and acknowledged here in commie Canada, ESPECIALLY our firearm and defense rights, own and carry! we have "given slave privileges" not recognized rights! by our tyrant traitor government of parasite greedy power hungry politicians who only care about themselves, and are owned by a foreign subversive enemy and its multinational monopoly businesses that has hijacked our government and all western governments, the same hypocrite tyrant fraud politicians who are protected by teams of tax funded armed guards and police, including the military and special forces personnel, and have armored vehicles and gated hardened homes!!!
...
that doesn't move your passion or anger meters but a stupid war plane from 50 years ago does!!??? wow just wow, my blood is boiling, you sheeple are the reason we have no rights, especially firearm and defense rights, own and carry, and are enslaved and will be fully enslaved one day soon!!!!!
Great video! Well researched and presented in an engaging manner.
Darn, this thing is a beast even by modern standards
I saw one of these at Fort Jackson S.C. in the late '80s and it blew my young mind.
The A10 is a sky God but troops on ground need all the help they can get. who cares about overlap??
Good video, it would have been useful to describe how the rigid rotor head was different that normal helicopter rotors.
A stealth version of this chopper would be unstoppable - especially if it had a few drones under its control and a pilot that knew what he was doing!!! Air-Wolf!!
✓ out the 360 Invictus.
Stealth and helicopter are laughable when radar is introduced into the equation. You would need a rotorless design, or have so much tech in the leading edge that spoofs the return from the rotors.
@@TuxPenguino actaully the we did have a stealth helicopter before. the ah66 commanche i think it was. it's radar performance was considered very good. But once again it was shoot down by brass and politicians Make a helicopter stealth isn't actually a unreasonable problem. Though it is hard then a normal aircraft for obvious reasons.
Blue Thunder*
@@ALegitimateRUclipsr In addition to politics, by the time the Comanche was ready for production, the Soviet Union had collapsed and there was no longer a need for an advanced penetrating helicopter that had stealth.
Now a days, I get advertisements about joining different branches of the US military and how their goals are about the future. Having a Comanche or AH56 would be beneficial for the future.
I was working for Hilti, a power tool, for construction companies. It was my second job out of college. We had engineers we provided to construction companies. Their job was to get us spec'd on jobs and provide assistance and approval for anchor hold weights on construction projects. A guy who became my best friend as I kept using him on my projects, left Lockhead, designing nuclear subs, to do that job. Working for Lockhead was so miserable, he would rather use his 6 yrs of eduaction from the University of Pitt to show up on job sites and tell the contractor that an anchor would hold, after I already did the math and told them it would. He went on to do much better things but he took that job to get away from Lockhead.
Love the fact that you mentioned the political manoeuvring that brought its cancellation, and how it wasn’t the first time that it has happened 👍
Irv Culver is the man who came up with the name 'Skunk Works' for Lockheed's Advanced Projects Division. There was a plastics factory nearby and the smell was so terrible he answered the phone one day with 'Hello, Skonk Works!' In reference to a popular cartoon of the time!
I worked for years as a programmer in the Pick Operating System, developed in 1965 at TRW to control the inventory of parts for the AH-56. I'd always assumed it was the cost of the AH-56 that doomed it. With people getting funding through it for things like ... a database management System. It's easy to imagine a lolly scramble for the money to do all sorts of projects and charge it to the AH-56.
pretty much yes the officers complaints were really only the sprinkles on the problems with this craft.
The Cheyenne is a huge helicopter, it was displayed I front of the Ft. Campbell museum, we used to do PT where we ran the 2 miles to the museum then 2 miles back. So for a 4 mile run we’d say; “to the planes and back.”
Yep. We did that run several times a week
The Cheyennes that were saved from the breakers and sent to various military museums: are they really gathering dust...or are they gathering rust?
Just wondering.
Gaudi designed the Sagrada Família. Part of his design efforts included using string and bags of sand to produce a structure that had no inherent outward thrust. There were no computers to do this and he used this sandbags and string method to design one of the most incredible structures to ever be built. He was so ahead of his time I don't think anyone has caught up, yet.
There are many examples of this throughout history. Eventually everyone catches on and slowly we move forward; hopefully.
Took you a while to catch onto this one I see!
The helicopter that nearly put every jet out of business.
This thing had A-10 power.
And would have come online in time to be used in Vietnam basically same Armament as an A-10 but with hovering capability and 360° visual gun control unbelievable that this was ever canceled
@@davidboysel4509 program was literally killed because it wiped out the need for MANY fixed wing air role’s. = Less money for the defense budget =not good for “business”… 🙄
Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttttttttt goes the Cheyanne!
It failed because the A-10 wasn't allowed to fail. It would've done the same job as the A-10 and the AH-64 better than either of them, but no, the fucking Reformers had to have their worthless gun on their worthless plane.
@@CharliMorganMusic uhhh the A-10 may have its flaws but no, one of the greatest aircraft ever built and thousands are alive because of them too! Although it’s killed a plenty troops
It has 11 hard points. And the gun may only Pierce armor in perfect conditions but it’s near guarantee anything that thing runs it’s gun over won’t be in for much a fight. For the way we fight it’s one of the best aircraft flying.
I remember building a model of the Cheyenne helicopter as a kid, I thought it was really cool. But I always woindered why I never saw it in use on TV, now I know why.
Great video. Regarding the AH-56's technical problems, I know many were solved during the testing process, but weren't there some (both major and minor) which remained unresolved at the time of cancellation?
Indeed it does, but given enough time, money and re-engineering it will be solved, evidence by far more problematic design with far less groundbreaking technology and multiple real world fatalities incident even when they operate on projected perfect operational condition like US Air Force B-52 Stratofortress that will serve until 2050s.
There will always be problems with aircraft developing new concepts. But as you said, most have been resolved by the time the program was cancelled. It was all about politics, the Cheyenne was one of the most impressive aircraft developed. We were flying every day at 250 straight and level. Got up to 270 in a shallow dive.
My dad worked at the Skunkworks. Worked with avionics. He told then of a test pilot he had flown with in testing having flown a Cheyenne inverted at low altitude down the runway at Lockheed Burbank. That test pilot whose name escapes me now was infamous for flying various aircraft inverted. Dad had been in a Lockheed P3 Orion sub-hunter for testing of a problem with those airframes in turbulent air. So this same pilot repeatedly flew the P3 inverted through a mountain canyon north of LA which was known for consistently very turbulent air. As a former race car driver who had conducted inverted testing of his race car with no rollover protective structure dad described his experience in the P3 as a real rush (of adrenaline). Dad worked on a number of then "black" projects such as U2 and YF12 which at the time he could not talk about. I remember a number of times going with mom and sitting in our car parked on San Fernando road at the end of the runway late at night waiting to pick up dad after his late shift. The runway lights were turned off and a dark aircraft, no lights on, would take off over our heads and the only light would be the jet exhaust. A bit after, the runway lights would come back on. The Cheyenne inverted flight was something he COULD describe because it was done in daylight in the middle of the then 3rd most populous city in the US. Out of the cancer med induced memory fog I'm thinking that pilot was called "Upside Down" Sammy Mason. Don't hold me to that, though. Aside from being between 50 and 60 years ago and me not being as young and sharp as I once was.
My dad worked on the Cheyenne and also told the story of the test pilot that flew one inverted.
My uncle was a helicopter pilot for the Army in Vietnam. He spoke about interservice rivalry from the Air Force.
The Air Force is the Jan Brady of the military while actually getting what they want.
🤣🤣🤣 Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!
Simon, you and your crew are doing some outstanding research. Nicely done. As always, looking forward to more :)
Great video about an impressive aircraft. It always amazes me what tech gets discarded for one reason or another. Small blooper when talking about the guns, Simon refers to the AH-56 as the AH-64 for that portion until talking about the hardpoints. ruclips.net/video/_6GAp8yO7l0/видео.html
WHAT? No CF-105 Arrow in the intro?
The AH-56 was capable of out doing both the AH-64 and the A-10 while STILL out doing the AH-64 upgrade which itself takes from the AH-56 (rigid rotor and pusher rotor with wider wings).
That whole mechanical stability system would have been moot by the mid 70's and probably replaced by an electronic three axis gyro much like the Bell stabilizer bar on the AH-1s were.
Jump to one minute: ruclips.net/video/-5Hl9uuGeoI/видео.html
That would have solved basically all of the aH-56's problems
The mechanical system was moot by 1972
On the Wikipedia of AH-56
“After the cancellation, the Army conducted an evaluation of the seventh Cheyenne equipped with the AMCS flight control system. The testing showed the AMCS removed most of the remaining control problems, improved stability, improved handling, and decreased the pilot workload. With the AMCS, the Cheyenne reached a speed of 215 kn (247 mph, 398 km/h) in level flight and in a dive achieved 245 kn (282 mph, 454 km/h); it also demonstrated improved maneuverability at high speeds. Prototype #7 was the last Cheyenne to fly.[43] Lockheed had counted on the Cheyenne to establish itself in the helicopter market with its rigid rotor technology, but the ambitious project was unsuccessful. The firm did not pursue development of another helicopter.”
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AH-56_Cheyenne#Program_demise
Notes
“The collective boost system and gyro-to-rotor connection were changed, eliminating the half-P oscillations. Other vibrations were solved by removing weight from rotor head leading and trailing edges, and the rotation of the tail rotor was reversed to improve sidewards flight to the left below 30 knots (35 mph, 56 km/h).”
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_AH-56_Cheyenne#Notes
There was one rotting in the sun at ft. Rucker. I doubt is been moved since 2004. When in asked about it, I was told it was an absolute beast that got cancelled too soon.
Another airframe was destroyed in a wind tunnel test which the army requested after the death of the test pilot. The Lockheed engineers protested but the test went ahead leading to the destruction of 10th airframe.
It was in the wind tunnel as part of the effort to solve the Half-P hop problem. Flight testing is dangerous business, and requires a lot of risk, since you're trying to solve unknown problems.
The "Cheyenne" in the first scene is now in the Army Air Museum in Fort Rucker AL. (I almost had a wreck when I first seen it out side the museum.) The last time I was there (2 or 3 years now) it was in the shop for refurbishment. I hope this will give you all a place to go to see.
As Simon reels off one feature after another, one gets the impression of a childhood savant annoyingly obsessed by arcane helicopter statistics
Not complaining about all the awesome aviation coverage!
Speaking of age ahead of its time, you need to cover the P-39 Airacobra and it’s big brother the P-63 Kingcobra. Center mounted engine, massive cannon in the nose, tricycle landing gear in a time of the tail-dragger. Hated by the IS but loved by the Soviets.
Hated by the IS???? Hell, that aircraft was welll before its time
@@russellfitzpatrick503 I wouldn't be surprised if some are still in use, the F-4 Phantom had been in use in the Middle East until not so long ago, Iran might still be using some.
There's a reason why it was loathed by the US...it was a very poor aircraft. Pilots used to dub the P-39 "A P-40 with a Zero on its tail" because it was vastly outmatched by them. The Oldsmobile cannon wasn't great either. Sure fine for the ground attack role the Russians used it for, but again poor against aircraft due to low muzzle velocity of its 37mm round. And the centre mounted engine concept played havoc on its CoG which resulted in some nasty flight characteristics. The whole aircraft was a poor attempt of building an aircraft around a weapons system.
now I love the apache. in this order, AC130, A10, then AH64, since the Kiowa got retired, AH64 is a fantastic CAS platform. that said, I would've liked to see the Cheyenne...
What you didn’t talk about is how the technologies of the AH-56 and the Comanche have conveniently shown up in the latest offerings for the replacements of the Blackhawk and the Apache which are in many ways watered down versions of those prototypes
The requirements for the AH-64 were intentionally dumbed down to keep the USAF off their backs the second time around.
I wonder if the Cheyenne and Apache be an interesting combination?
@@merafirewing6591 That’s kind of what they did but with a more stealthy profile
@@7gmeister no, like work together?
@@merafirewing6591 well, honestly if you had a more modern version of the Cheyenne you wouldn’t need the Apache.
It can do the same thing but faster with more capacity.
Add in the capabilities of the Apache and make it stealthier and you have a modern attack chopper
Back in 1980, I was going through my Advance Indvidual Training ( AIT ) in the US Army for the AH-1 Cobra, we talked about the Cheyenne. Ft Eustis had one in the museum which was the talk of our class. It was very much ahead of it's time but had a few problems that still had to be worked out. But what project doesn't. The vibration was a big one and also the gunner set turned 360 degrees, which made the gunner sick was another. But all that can be worked out in the end but not given the chance as usual. The Cobra was only to be a inter till the AH-56 could be brought online. The Cobra though did work into a great gunship but the Cheyenne would of been great. More than likely I would of gotten trained on her instead of the Corba if the Army was able to get it into production. Ether she would of been replaced by now or was able to modified into something more for todays battlefield. I think the samething happen to the Comanche as well. That would of been a great aircraft for the Army and our Allies as well.
I flew on the Cheyenne as a gunner at Yuma proving grounds, and I never got sick. I think it might have been one of the engineers who flew in the gunners station in the early days. It was an incredible machine.
Anyone who has been in the military is not shocked by this. I knew pilots who would go on to be colonels and generals, some of the most arrogant people I’ve ever known.
Having served (US Navy) 96 to 04, I can tell you this. Every service is out to claim more money and mission roles than it can. I saw this right up to Sept. 11th, 2001. All of a sudden, every service was your very best friend. EX. Steaks, Shrimp, and Beer aboard a US Coast Guard frigate in Kuwait. US Coast Guard ships are actual US Territory wherever they go. Hence legal (Budweiser). Will forever have a soft spot for the US Coast Guard!
As usual, the "experts" who are fascinated by the technical characteristics do not want to hear anything about the real cost of the technique. This cost includes: cost of production, reliability, ease of maintenance, ease of repair, ease of management.
Why is there no comparison of these parameters in the video?
Do not forget that you will need to arm the entire army and train a lot of pilots.
The people responsible for setting budgets and allocating money are far from being stupid and greedy, as shown in the video.
The final effectiveness of equipment will be determined by the tactics of warfare.
The USSR has always had offensive tactics in military doctrine. This tactic determined the face of all ground forces and all auxiliary forces, including aviation.
Armored vehicles were easy to transport, economical for long marches, with the most reduced armor volume to reduce the silhouette (harder to hit).
Combat helicopters were heavily armored, had high speed and inertia (MI-24).
Assault attacks are carried out at high speed near the ground (below the detection zone of the air defense system).
US tactics have always been defensive (despite the number of wars they have unleashed). In this case, the high silhouette of the armored vehicles was even an advantage, and the high mass played a smaller role.
Therefore, helicopter air support did not require high speeds.
If we take into account the final cost of each helicopter, it turns out that cobras are more effective in completing tasks for the chosen military doctrine.
For the same reason, the most advanced, innovative and powerful tanks could not change the course of World War II.
Ah, a Pierre Spray fanboy. 😂
Yes random man on the internet now tell us all about how good the russians are doing in Ukrain right now with their "simple and cheap" weapons systems against overly complex and expensive high tech western anti armor rockets, man portable air defense and drones.
@@atomicskull6405 ever since the chip shortage for automobiles happened, I've wondered where or who supplies the chips used in these weapons and how reliable the chip supply chain is.
@@atomicskull6405 He said Soviet, not modern day Russia. Or do you lack reading comprehension? His points are valid as well. The video doesn't give us the full picture.
I like Simon he makes me feel so warm
Why does Simon keep saying AH64 when he means AH56? - Someone really needs to properly proof read his scripts before planting them in front of him.
Shut up. He does a great job.
Idea: Guitars. Specifically electric guitars. How they got started. Innovations. The keytar. The Fly. Hollow bodies. Auto tuning keys. Hamburgers vs single coil. Designs and materials
1:08 Agreed, the future has a left-wing bias and right-wing Republicanism, Nationalism and tRumpian fascism have no place in the future that I, and everyone that I care to know, work tirelessly to materialize.
What is fascism??
You've confused me for Microsoft's Copilot. My purpose is not to uplift Republicans from educational poverty, you do you. @@brentmonkhouse6638
Very good presentation, as full of a history as I have seen on a video of Rigid Rotor and the Cheyanne Helicopter which I have seen in person several times at Fort Rucker, Alabama.
And those poor marines are still using the ah1... Which has been updated to be arguably the best attack helo in the world currently. Glory to the Z!
Sorry, but no. The Zulu is a classic case of Marines doing the best they can without money. The Apache is better in literally every way except top speed, and that is TOP speed, not acceleration, climb rate, etc. No. It's a bad helicopter.
@@CharliMorganMusic is the concept of Deck Space irrelevant to you?
Whoever is doing the scripts needs a raise.
*Investing in crypto now should be in every wise individuals list, in some months time you'll be ecstatic with the decision you made today.*
After watching so many RUclips tutorial videos about trading I was still making losses untill Mr Montero Wayne started managing my investment now, I make $6,800 weekly. God bless Mr Montero . His been a blessing to my family.
Montero_wayne
he's active on Telegram 👇👇
@Sophia Jackson Here you go ☝🏻🇺🇲
And boom now it’s gone