Talk:Sikorsky HH-60 Pave Hawk

WikiProject Military history

(Rated B-Class)

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Additional information... This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

Updated references

From USAF AFA Air Force Magazine 2007 Almanac. Ops section needs refs. LanceBarber 17:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Name?

Why is it called Pave Hawk? What's Pave? --AW 03:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Pave is a Air Force program name relating to electronic systems. see PAVE. — DanMP5 03:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

MH-60G replaced by V-22?

I recall reading somewhere that the V-22 was going to replace the MH-60, but I'm not 100 percent sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.231.239.198 (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

A V-22 version for search & rescue has been studied. The downwash from the V-22's rotors is considered too strong for rescue operations. The Air Force started a replacement program called CSAR-X. That's been ended or put off. For now they will order a few new H-60s. See Air Force CSAR should grow, not shrink for more details. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Ref location

An inline citation should be defined at it's first instance in a page (i.e., Ref #1), and not in the middle somewhere. It makes it difficult to find. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 15:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I might have just left that ref where it was initially. But can't remember. Anyway that's a good point. -fnlayson (talk) 17:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

CSAR-X, etc.

I propose adding a "Replacement" section here that will link to all the goofy aircraft that have been proposed over time as replacement. With any luck the Marines will just take over CSAR and the newest competition ( http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/04/26/355936/usaf-to-open-2.6-billion-in-helicopter-contracts-to-competitive.html ) can be canceled just like all the previous attempts. Hcobb (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Well it's a cancelled program. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 22:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not just one canceled program, it's one failure after another to replace this helicopter. Should we just have a FAIL header under the USAF article that lists this, the tanker, etc, etc, etc? Hcobb (talk) 23:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)