Photos of Davis Monthan mothball tour

[[email protected]]

Published a few photos of a tour of Davis Monthan for those that may be
interested. Would like to know if my id of the pictured Quantico
Marine 1 is correct. Comments welcome enjoy Rich

[Dave in San Diego]

wrote in news:1112097425.065316.46530
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> Published a few photos of a tour of Davis Monthan for those that may be
> interested. Would like to know if my id of the pictured Quantico
> Marine 1 is correct. Comments welcome enjoy Rich

I don't think so. I posted a comment to the site and will repeat the
picture links here:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/vh-60n-
h3h.jpg

http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/database/aircraft/getimage.htm?id=8482

The stub wings don't match any of the H-60 pix on the Sikorsky site, and
the engine nacelles don't match either:

http://www.sikorsky.com/details/0%2C3036%2CCLI1_DIV69_ETI254%2C00.html

I know what it isn't (H-60) but I don't know what it is, yet. Still
looking.

Dave in San Diego

[[email protected]]

Actually I did not have an ID on the pic from Davis Monthan, rather my
father in law (a engineer now retired) worked on those engines and
volunteered the info. He felt sure that was it type but keep in mind
he does not see "airframes" rather he see's engine type. The confusing
thing is he felt sure that only "5 or 6" of this type were ever built.
We will have to have another extended sit down. Thanks for your
comments. Rich Dave in San Diego wrote:
> wrote in news:1112097425.065316.46530
> @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Published a few photos of a tour of Davis Monthan for those that
may be
> > interested. Would like to know if my id of the pictured Quantico
> > Marine 1 is correct. Comments welcome enjoy Rich
>
> I don't think so. I posted a comment to the site and will repeat the
> picture links here:
>
>
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/vh-60n-
> h3h.jpg
>
>
http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/database/aircraft/getimage.htm?id=8482
>
> The stub wings don't match any of the H-60 pix on the Sikorsky site,
and
> the engine nacelles don't match either:
>
>
http://www.sikorsky.com/details/0%2C3036%2CCLI1_DIV69_ETI254%2C00.html
>
> I know what it isn't (H-60) but I don't know what it is, yet. Still
> looking.
>
> Dave in San Diego

[Thomas Schoene]

wrote:
> Actually I did not have an ID on the pic from Davis Monthan, rather my
> father in law (a engineer now retired) worked on those engines and
> volunteered the info. He felt sure that was it type but keep in mind
> he does not see "airframes" rather he see's engine type. The
> confusing thing is he felt sure that only "5 or 6" of this type were
> ever built. We will have to have another extended sit down. Thanks
> for your comments.

Assume you're talking about this picture (and for the future, specific links
would be a lot more useful than hoping someone remembered the blog address
in an old post).:

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/172/3013/640/DSC04013%20OLD%20MARINE%201%20QUANTICO.jpg

If so, it's a CH-53D. This one is painted up in HMX-1 colors but the lack
of a "white top" shows it was a presidental support helo, not an actual VIP
transport. That means this was probably never Marine One, since it likely
never carried the President.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

[[email protected]]

You're correct. Never would have guessed. The original photo has a
perspective that doesn't convey the size perhaps. Did an image search
and that is indeed what it was, I'll have to have a real long "sit
down" with Dad-in-law now. I'll update my site. Thanks and excuse
the site ommission see marine 1 at http//:greenmarble.blogspot.com
hoene wrote:
> wrote:
> > Actually I did not have an ID on the pic from Davis Monthan, rather
my
> > father in law (a engineer now retired) worked on those engines and
> > volunteered the info. He felt sure that was it type but keep in
mind
> > he does not see "airframes" rather he see's engine type. The
> > confusing thing is he felt sure that only "5 or 6" of this type
were
> > ever built. We will have to have another extended sit down. Thanks
> > for your comments.
>
> Assume you're talking about this picture (and for the future,
specific links
> would be a lot more useful than hoping someone remembered the blog
address
> in an old post).:
>
>
http://photos1.blogger.com/img/172/3013/640/DSC04013%20OLD%20MARINE%201%20QUANTICO.jpg
>
> If so, it's a CH-53D. This one is painted up in HMX-1 colors but the
lack
> of a "white top" shows it was a presidental support helo, not an
actual VIP
> transport. That means this was probably never Marine One, since it
likely
> never carried the President.
>
> --
> Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
> "Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
> wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz,
1872

[Ogden Johnson III]

"Thomas Schoene" > wrote:

wrote:
>> Actually I did not have an ID on the pic from Davis Monthan, rather my
>> father in law (a engineer now retired) worked on those engines and
>> volunteered the info. He felt sure that was it type but keep in mind
>> he does not see "airframes" rather he see's engine type. The
>> confusing thing is he felt sure that only "5 or 6" of this type were
>> ever built. We will have to have another extended sit down. Thanks
>> for your comments.

>Assume you're talking about this picture (and for the future, specific links
>would be a lot more useful than hoping someone remembered the blog address
>in an old post).:
>
>http://photos1.blogger.com/img/172/3013/640/DSC04013%20OLD%20MARINE%201%20QUANTICO.jpg
>
>If so, it's a CH-53D. This one is painted up in HMX-1 colors but the lack
>of a "white top" shows it was a presidental support helo, not an actual VIP
>transport. That means this was probably never Marine One, since it likely
>never carried the President.

This one does carry the paint scheme of a non-VIP aircraft
assigned to the Presidential flight section for support.
Carrying all those extra Secret Service folk and presidential
staffers around. ;->

But it may not necessarily have been a presidential support helo
for all or most of its time in HMX-1. While one section of HMX-1
is the Presidential flight section, HMX-1 is a multi-purpose
unit. It also provides helos for TBS training [fixed wing
support of TBS is done by 2dMAW out of Cherry Point/Beaufort by
specific frag tasking to squadrons when/as needed], and also
still engages in the X work of its name, experimental, when/as
needed on helos. I think they were even involved with the MV-22
post-Pax River/pre-VMMT-204-New River.
--
OJ III
[Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.]