SAS12: Marines plans rigorous cargo UAS tests

SAS12: Marines plans rigorous cargo UAS tests

The K-MAX cargo unmanned helicopter has impressed Marine Corps aviation leaders since the aircraft deployed to Afghanistan on Dec. 17, but the Marine Corps is not quite ready to give it the green light.

One would expect that Afghanistan would be the ultimate test for a cargo helicopter considering the heat, altitude and dust. However, Col. Doug Hardison, a Marine aviation official, said the Corps plans to put it through more testing after it completes its deployment to Afghanistan.

While a combat environment might be seen as the ultimate test, flying “real missions” means the Corps will not test the aircraft’s envelope too rigorously, Hardison said. For example, the K-MAX is restricted to certain flight ceilings to avoid other aircraft flying in theater. When it returns, the Marine Corps plans to test it at different altitudes, Hardison said.


The Army will keep a close eye on those tests as the service has chosen to continue to observe the Marine’s K-MAX testing rather than pursue it individually.

Lockheed Martin sent two K-MAX helicopters to southern Afghanistan that have already flown more than 250 missions. The unmanned helicopters flew over 14,000 pounds of cargo in just one day.

Lockheed Martin controllers fly almost all of the missions, but Marines have learned how they operate by watching, Matthews said. The development of the K-MAX continues, but a formal training program has not yet been developed for Marines to start flying them without the help of contractors.

The Army has not contacted Lockheed Martin to set up an agreement to lease the K-MAX to deliver cargo in Afghanistan for Army units, said Jeanine Matthews, Lockheed Martin’s business development director for Integrated Defense Technologies. Last year, engineers at the Army’s Maneuver Battle Lab held a series of user assessments on the K-MAX at Fort Benning, Ga., in the Annual Expeditionary Warrior Experiment.

Join the Conversation

Marine Corps is pushing to return the force to its amphibious expeditionary roots after working in the role of second land army for almost a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Toward that, they are trying to get lighter, and a big part of getting lighter involves operating directly from seabases, getting away from building up that steel mountain of Iso shipping containers ashore. Selective offload is key aspect of resupply from a seabase.

Before they buy deeper into K-Max, I would suspect that helo will be required to prove itself able to fly cargo resupply missions from a seabase, working in an amphibious expeditionary role. So I’d be looking for it to get certified for use on the flight deck of the USNS Lewis and Clarke (T-AKE-1) class of selective offload dry cargo ships. If it can’t do that, Marines would do better to look for something else.

Army might be looking at larger scale operations with different needs. And unmanned K-Max might not fit their puzzle as well.

So far the USMC is doing alot better with new weapons and technology program than the army. This is one point. They have a effective UAV and the Army is still thinking about it. Overall this is alot more sensible than a crappy GCV or APCV program which makes no sense. How abut making the army ranks join the Marines LOL!

So if I transfer to the Corps I can ride to war in an EFV? Oh, wait I can’t. The Marines dont’ “have” the KMAX, the contractor does. The Army is letting the Marines foot the bill for initial testing to see if they want it. The Army screwed up on FCS, but they cancelled it after 5 years instead of the Marines cancelling the EFV after 20 with only half a dozen prototypes built.

EFV was the same as the Army’s GCV. it was overpriced and many ways unneeded. Joint programs like JLTV may yet make a decent product. But EFV and GCV where to replace vehicles that did the job fine and didn’t need replacing yet. A AAV-7 upgraded like a M-113 and M-2 Bradly upgrade can do the job for the next budget cut ten year before the need to look into next gen vehicles comes.

I sure hope the engineers designed this bird with the desert environment in mind.

From my own personal experience: I’ve worked on aircraft with sophisticated sensors and ground support equipment that were designed at the tail-end of the Cold War era. Let’s just say the desert did a number on those sensors. Our supervision at the time was freaking out and getting frustrated at why these sensors weren’t working, or our ground support equipment. But these officers don’t know anything about mechanics or electronics aside from theory and didn’t realize that our operating environment is entirely hostile to electronics because we have all the things that electronic components hate: heat, dust, humidity, poor quality electrical power, and power cycling (for the preflight operational checks).

It’s no wonder why these aircraft with all the electronic techno-gizmo’s see their Mission Capable rates plummet when they go from operating stateside to operating in the desert. Ours went from 87% to 63%.

So which is it? The Corps is doing better with weapons programs or they’re making the same mistakes as the Army?

Way to stick it to the fanboy! Yeah, make up your mind!

Such a moron. Always trying to gin up competition between the services though never served a day himself.

It’s already been tested…research!

Each service has unique requirements. Different missions and different operational requirements dictate needs. Much of the Armys’ aviation needs are required to be met by the Air Force. The Marines have a requirement to be as organic as possible. The Air Force operates from fixed airfields while the Navy operates from sea and the Marines are tasked with both. Seldom will a major system or platform be a satisfactory compromise across the board.

K MAN Co.had produced in the past a great helicopter that served during the Vietnam war…the HH-43 that out climb any other helicopter in the world in the beginning.……also the HH-43 did more rescues SEA than any other helicopter used by the U.S. This was the late Charles Kman (2010) dream and more than confident this project will succeed I/A/W the CEO’s running the K-Man Co..

On the surface, a UAV trash hauler seems to be a great idea for lifting cargo loads into hot LZ’s in crapholes like Afganistan, however one of the downsides to the K-MAX platform is that it a “one-trick pony”. The USN conducted trials 10+ years ago with the K-MAX as a replacement for the CH46 in an UNREP role. The trials utiliziing manned versions went well but ultimately no purchase was made. Limited deck space necessitates that ship-based aircraft must be able to fulfil mutliple roles and while the K-Max is great for slinging cargo nets full of “bean, bombs, and bullets”, it is lacking for inserting a assault team or evacuating an embassy, etc.

Richard… What exactly are you referring to that has already been tested?

Are you asserting that L-Mart’s unmanned K-Max has already been certified for unmanned operations from the flight deck of the USNS Lewis and Clarke (T-AKE-1) class of selective offload dry cargo ships? That would be a very big step forward, would be some interesting news that I would like to read. Can you post a link to a credible source of information about that?

Thanks in advance.

Thats what the K-Max is ATTENDED For !!.….…… NOT for hauling an assault team or evacuating an embassy that is over-rated for rich idiots who want to visit these countries and get them self’s into trouble and keeping a Live Crew safe from on a re-supplying mission. I can care less about embassy’s that do nothing for me but use up my tax dollars in countries that don’t care about Americans anyway but hamper missions and military peoples Live’s.

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Become a fan on and follow us on
© 2013 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.