On USAF UH-1P and UH-60A they were as I described when I worked on them.
The UH-60A may have changed over the years. I was in the first USAF unit to get
them.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired




Being qualified in both the UH-1H/V and UH-60A, also currently flying the
UH-1, I beg to differ about the static port.

When the UH-1 went to roof mounted pitot system the static ports were
removed from the sides of the aircraft and are part of the pitot tube now.

The UH-60A with the wedge mounted pitot tubes are the same way.

It has been a long time since I flew the CH-47 and I am pretty sure they are
the same way except the static port hole is in the bottom of the nose
mounted tube.

Just my two cents and I am going to check with the flight instrument guys
the next time I am over at the flight facility.

Fred
"B2431" wrote in message
...

Folks - When I bought my Tcraft, all that existed of the static port
was a length of rubber tubing running parallel to the ram air port
(which was there). Do I need to terminate that piece of hose in a
static port of a precision size? - Mike

The only requirements for a static port is the hole(s) be flush to the
aircraft
such that there is no air forced in or sucked out by the local airflow in
flight. You don't want the hole too small or you will get lag when
changing
altitude. You may not ever notice the lag, but it's there. You don't want
it
too big or critters my think you built them a home.

The static ports on big aircraft such as C-130s have a salt shaker
appearance
and have half a dozen or so holes around .032". Helicopters like the H-1
and
H-60 don't have static ports. They leave the static holes on the ASI, VVI
and
altimiter open to cockpit pressure.

Aircraft Spruce sells a single hole port.

You want a smooth surface within a few inches of the port.

That's as complicated as they get


Good luck with your project.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired