1. Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) Non-Chromium Implementation 17 Jan 18 USAF Non-Chrome TIM
Gene McKinley CRH Program, AFLCMC/WIH Helicopter Program Office, WPAFB (937)
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

2. CRH Program Overview
Sikorsky Aircraft Company (SAC) awarded contract for 112 HH-60W aircraft on June 2014 to support USAF combat search and rescue mission
CRH designated as HH-60W and is baselined from a UH-60M Army “Blackhawk”
SRR/SFR April 2015
PDR April 2016
CDR May 2017
Flight test projected to start 4th Qtr 2018
Required Asset Availability (RAA) planned for 1st Qtr 2020
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

3. Program Office Non-Chromium Use Implementation
(Aug 2014) Requirement Assessment
USAF specification
SAC proposal
(Oct 2014) ESOH WG Discussions
System Safety
Low 882E Risk
(Dec 2014) ACC Requested
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment (CPCO)
(Feb 2015) More Data
SAC completed field testing
Army AED accepted ECP
2 additional NAVAIR reports
(Mar 2015) AFRL/USAF CPCO Risk Assessment
Low risk exterior
Medium risk interior
Primer qualified over Chromate Conversion Coating (CCC)
Coordination with Warner Robins
WIU Chief Engineer (CE) Assessment
Concurred pending CRH inspection requirements
(Apr 2015) ESOH WG Discussions
Corrosion risk
Army implementation plan
(Aug 2015) Integrated Risk Assessment
Medium Program Risk
Accepted by SPM
(Oct 2015) Approve ECP
System Spec Change
Approve the use of Non-chromium primer on Interior and Exterior of CRH
Continue Tracking through Logistics, R&M, and ESOH WG
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

4. Legacy HH-60G Current USAF Fleet is aging HH-60G T.O. 1-1-8 Primer
(Aug 2014) Requirement Assessment
USAF specification
SAC proposal
Primers Definition:
Type I - Standard pigments
Class C1 - Barium chromate based corrosion inhibitors
Class N - Non-chromate based corrosion inhibitors
MIL-PRF Solvent-borne primer
MIL-PRF Waterborne primer
Current USAF Fleet is aging HH-60G
T.O
Primer
Exterior primer coated with (1) coat of MIL-PRF-23377J Type I, Class C1 epoxy
Interior primer coated with one (1) coat of MIL-PRF-23377J Type I, Class C1 epoxy or MIL-PRF-85582D, Type I, Class C2 epoxy.
Topcoat
Exterior painted with two (2) coats of dark gray (FED-STD-595C/36118) MIL- PRF-85285E Type I polyurethane (high solids).
Cockpit painted with two (2) coats of dull black (FED-STD-595C/37038) MIL- PRF-85285E Type I polyurethane (high solids).
Cabin interior, unless otherwise specified, shall be painted with two (2) coats of dark dull gray (FED-STD-595C/36320) MIL-PRF-85285E Type I polyurethane (high solids).
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

5. SAC Proposed Non-Chrome Solution
(Aug 2014) Requirement Assessment
USAF specification
SAC proposal
Primers Definition:
Type I - Standard pigments
Class C1 - Barium chromate based corrosion inhibitors
Class N - Non-chromate based corrosion inhibitors
MIL-PRF Solvent-borne primer
MIL-PRF Waterborne primer
Exterior HH-60W Proposed
MIL-PRF-85285
MIL-PRF Type I Class N
BSAA / Alodine T5900 reactivation*
Clad
Aluminum 7075-T6
MIL-PRF-85285E Type IV Class H polyurethane (high solids) Topcoat (Dull gray FED-STD-595C/36320 Dull black FED-STD-595C/37038) Various vendors
MIL-PRF-23377J(2) Type I Class N epoxy Primer (PPG 02-GN-084)
MIL-DTL-5541 Tri-chromium based conversion coating for surface reactivation (Henkel Alodine T5900)
MIL-A-8625 Type IC Boric Sulfuric Acid Anodized (BSAA)
MIL-DTL Corrosion Inhibiting Compound (Cor Ban 35)
Interior HH-60W Proposed
Anodize Processes:
Boric Sulfuric Acid Anodize (BSAA)
Thin Film Sulfuric Acid Anodize (TFSAA) also MIL-A-8625 Type IIB
Tartaric Sulfuric Acid Anodize (TSAA)
MIL-PRF-85285
MIL-DTL-85054
MIL-PRF Type I Class N
BSAA / Alodine T5900 reactivation*
Clad
Aluminum 7075-T6
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

6. Exterior HH-60W Proposed
(Dec 2014) ACC Request
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment
Exterior – Assessment
Exterior HH-60W Proposed
Primers Definition:
Type I - Standard pigments
Class C1 - Barium chromate based corrosion inhibitors
Class N - Non-chromate based corrosion inhibitors
MIL-PRF Solvent-borne primer
MIL-PRF Waterborne primer
MIL-PRF-85285
MIL-PRF Type I Class N
BSAA / Alodine T5900 reactivation*
Clad
Aluminum 7075-T6
MIL-PRF-23377J(2) Type I Class N epoxy Primer - PPG 02-GN-084
US Navy has decided NOT to implement change because production is ending
US Army depot has been using the same materials above on the external airframe [with the exception of using CARC as the topcoat] since 2008.
Sikorsky has sent ECPs to the US Army to implement non-chromated primer on the Outer and Inner Mold Line (OML and IML) for production aircraft
The US Army has identified that they will soon transition to this coating stack-up for production aircraft
US Air Force has evaluated this coating system but has not implemented on any weapon system as proposed
January 2019, around “W” production time, Class C1 primer material expected to be banned for use in the European Union and other countries with similar laws.
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

7. Interior HH-60W Proposed
Interior - Assessment
(Dec 2014) ACC Requested
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment
Interior HH-60W Proposed
Same proposed coating system as on Exterior
Same Primer
Additional CorBan 35
MIL-PRF-85285
MIL-DTL-85054
MIL-PRF Type I Class N
BSAA / Alodine T5900 reactivation*
Clad
Aluminum 7075-T6
MIL-PRF-23377J(2) Type I Class N epoxy Primer - PPG 02-GN-084
US Navy has decided NOT to implement change because production is ending
Army Aviation Engineering Directorate in process of agreeing to accept SAC’s transition plan to non-chrome interiors - Class 2 change to non-chrome interiors
US Air Force has not implemented on any weapon system as proposed
US Army and US Air Force production aircraft are facing EU legislation banning Hexavalent Chromium – further supports commonality between UH-60M and HH-60W
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

8. Sikorsky Testing
(Dec 2014) ACC Requested
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment
Tested in lab tests and in various airframe components of the IML for Navy MH-60 field evaluations
Lab testing indicates type I non-Cr6+ primer had better adhesion than baseline Cr6+ with equivalent corrosion performance
Field evaluation of 8 aircraft-no corrosion or adhesion loss observed on any of the components with the MIL-PRF Type I Class N primer after 1500 flight hours (~4years)
Galvanic corrosion – non-Cr6+ primer performed equivalent to the Cr6+ baseline; validates lab tests
Lab tests indicate the non- Cr6+ primers perform better over non- Cr6+ conversion coatings; identified as possible adhesion issues
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

9. Sikorsky Testing
(Dec 2014) ACC Requested
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment
HH-60G
Proposed HH-60W
Corrosion Protection
Chromic acid anodize
Boric sulfuric acid anodize
Equivalent
Alodine 1200
Alodine T5900
MIL-PRF Class C1 or C2
MIL-PRF Class N
Limited MIL-PRF clear coat
MIL-PRF clear coat
Improved
Sealant
AMS 3265 Corrosion inhibiting sealant
Limited wet install of fasteners
Wet install of fasteners
Limited fluid film fog
Cor Ban 35
AV-Dec gaskets
85582-I-C II-C I-N II-N
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

10. USAF/Lockheed Martin Evaluations
(Dec 2014) ACC Requested
AFRL assessment
USAF Corrosion office assessment
C-130J
Lab testing of tri chrome pretreatments (TCP) over thin film sulfuric acid anodized (TFSAA) indicates corrosion performance equivalent to chromate control
Lockheed Martin reports use of BSAA instead of TFSAA should have no impact to corrosion performance
Lab testing of PPG 02-GN-084 over TFSAA has equivalent or better adhesion and corrosion performance when compared to chromate control
“low chrome” systems performed no better than non-chrome systems
Validation testing for PPG 02-GN-084 primer indicated the manufacturer skipped necessary induction time requirements, leading to poor adhesion
F-22 uses a BSAA seal and is lab testing PPG 02-GN-084 as well as 3 others for IML use; Currently using PPG 44-GN-098 (NCr epoxy primer) on OML
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

11. Navy Testing NAS PAX River
(Feb 2015) More Data
SAC completed field testing
Army AED accepted ECP
2 additional NAVAIR reports
2024 Aluminum
Scale qualitative
Anodized with Type I Cl N – 1.0
Anodized with Chrome Primer – 0.5
CCC with Type I Cl N – 1.0
CCC with Chrome primer – 0.0
Sikorsky Proposed
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

12. Navy Testing NAS PAX River
(Feb 2015) More Data
SAC completed field testing
Army AED accepted ECP
2 additional NAVAIR reports
7075 Aluminum
Scale qualitative
Anodized with Type I Cl N – 1.0
Anodized with Chrome Primer – 0.0
CCC with Type I Cl N – 1.2
CCC with Chrome primer – 0.0
Sikorsky Proposed
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

13. Navy Testing NAS PAX River
(Feb 2015) More Data
SAC completed field testing
Army AED accepted ECP
2 additional NAVAIR reports
Alodine 1200S (CCC) and BSAA were the best performing surface treatments with BSAA slightly outperforming Alodine 1200S
PreKote and BoeGel were the worst performers and not recommended for US Navy or Marine Corp
Chromated Primers (solvent-borne and water-reducible) were the best performers followed by PPG 084
All Primers are centered close to the mean undercut rating
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

14. AFRL/CPCO Risk Assessment
(Mar 2015) AFRL/USAF CPCO Risk Assessment
Low risk exterior
Medium risk interior
Primer qualified over Chromate Conversion Coating (CCC)
PPG Non-Cr primer qualified over CCC (not BSAA)
Recommend Sikorsky wet install fasteners because
Machined surfaces no longer have BSAA
Fasteners dissimilar metals
Exterior coatings can be repaired easily when damage is visually identified; low risk of increased corrosion
Interior coatings can be inaccessible and can remain on the interior surfaces for the life of the system; medium risk of increased corrosion.
Undetected damage can impact availability and drive extensive maintenance costs
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

15. CRH Program Risk HH-60W Program Risk Generated and Accepted by SPM
(Aug 2015) Integrated Risk Assessment
Medium Program Risk
Accepted by SPM
HH-60W Program Risk Generated and Accepted by SPM
If corrosion on the aircraft interior occurs with the use of non-chromated coatings, then increased maintenance cost could occur
Risk Closure criteria: no change in performance compared to HH-60G (Legacy)
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

16. CRH APPROVAL
(Oct 2015) Approve ECP
System Spec Change
Approve the use of Non-chromium primer on Interior and Exterior of CRH
HH-60W 1st USAF platform to approve the use of complete Non-chromium coating system stackup for Interior airframe
CRH System Specification changed
Expect to carry moderate Program/Airworthiness risk until enough field data verifies assessment results (~2025)
Annual Corrosion Prevention Advisory Board to oversee performance under the purview of Aircraft Structural Integrity Program
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW

17. QUESTIONS Thank You Helicopter Program Office POCs:
- ESOH: Gene McKinley (937)
- Corrosion: Luis Diaz-Rodriguez
(937)
Distribution A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Case 88ABW