"H-65 drivers: Please don't hate me! I only call them the way I see them"
Now why would I hate someone just because they are wrong?
Why would I say more versatile? Because they conduct more missions in more locations and they can be placed on more vessels than an H-60, thus more versatile. You are familiar with the term?
"The H-65 is underpowered and can't hoist more than 1 or 2 people and still make it back to land."
Unlike the mighty HU-25 which can hoist how many people? I forget.
It is so sad that someone who was actually a pilot in the CG has this thought. The H-65A and the HH-65B are underpowered to a point but the HH-65C certainly isn't. It has a greater power to weight ratio than the H-60.
I have flown over 100 miles off shore, rescued four people, and returned to land in an "A" model. In a "B" model I had 10 survivors in the back during Katrina. Granted half were children it was still 10 survivors. And in the H-65C I have done things that H-60 pilots only dream of doing. So your recollection of H-65 power is a bit scewed.
"Plus, it doesn't deploy on the backs of ships, so you don't have to worry about PopDiv or ship helo."
Spoken like a true Falcon pilot. Some of us actually like to deploy on ships and do Coast Guard work. Besides there is no POPDIV anymore.
"I would go for the H-60 at all costs."
So why didn't you? I don't think there is anything wrong with any of the airframes and a new CG pilot would most likely be happy with either of them. The only problem with the H-60 is the lack of duty stations. Five vs seventeen. And if you stay to the point of becoming an OPS boss, your chance of being OPS at an H-60 unit are slim.
Don't hate me, I'm only calling it like I see it.

:laugh: