UH-1H Flight Dynamics

[Rotor Cajun]

I’m calibrating the flight dynamics of a UH-1H for personal use in MSFS 2020 and wanted to get some feedback from people with experience piloting a real, Vietnam-era UH-1H. Having flown both the Bell 206B3 and the UH-60L, I can use those as a baseline.

1. How responsive was the UH-1H? To me the UH-60 was very responsive, like a sports car. At 100-120kts it did precisely what I wanted, when I wanted.

2. How quickly did the UH-1H slow down from 100kts in a quick stop? I understand the UH-60 had quite a bit more power to really stick this maneuver.

3. How would you describe the control feel at 100kts, sluggish, sharp, etc.? Did the aircraft fly “heavy”?

Thank you!

[W E Hawn]

 

1. How responsive was the UH-1H? To me the UH-60 was very responsive, like a sports car. At 100-120kts it did precisely what I wanted, when I wanted.

The Hotel UH1 was very stable in all normal modes of flight. One could crank it around aggressively but you have to remember that it has a "teetering hub" (what was called a 'semi-rigid underslung' hub). You need to keep at least a half positive G or so to keep it from striking the mast.

 

2. How quickly did the UH-1H slow down from 100kts in a quick stop? I understand the UH-60 had quite a bit more power to really stick this maneuver.

One must use the rate in bringing the nose up that doesn't result in more cyclic climb than you want. The UH1 is almost a glider at times, exchanges airspeed for altitude pretty efficiently.

 

3. How would you describe the control feel at 100kts, sluggish, sharp, etc.? Did the aircraft fly “heavy”?

I don't recall the Huey controls ever 'feeling' any different at any speed, uniformly light in all directions. Aircraft's response is more pronounced with increasing airspeed, as one would/should expect.

Years ago, 1969-1970, I flew a lot of single ship night reconnaissance (Firefly, Nighthawk and Phantom 2 or 3- whatever the current terminology appropriate to the directing staff, G2/S2 or G3/S3.) Some of that assignment was nap of the Earth/low level base perimeter checks. The perimeter wire apron was common to the Arvin compound abutting the compound, creating dead end passes on that side. Rather than overfly the bases, illuminating the installation with my "bug light" I would do a a vertical reverse (kinda like a sloppy hammerhead) which required positioning the cyclic appropriately through the turn and nose down acceleration, keep the G positive and no problems.

[Rotor Cajun]

Thank you, W E Hawn! It's great having the perspective of someone that flew it as it was originally flown in Vietnam.