PDA

View Full Version : Only 2 helis that can carrry a 9 man section?



andy
9th May 2004, 08:59
Posted in the news section is the tender details for the 6 new helicopters : -

Two able to carry a section of nine soldiers. (i.e the other 4 cant !:mad: )It says the following are in for the running,

Eurocopter Ec-135
Eurocopter Ec-145
Agusta 109
Sikorsky S-76/Blackhawk.

Cutting the helicopters from 9 to 6 is bad enough, but worse is that only 2 of them can actually carry a 9 man section. The other 4 are going to have limited use!

Meanwhile the minister of defence has again announced the purhase of the PC-9's. The remaining aircraft are expected to be delivered before June:rolleyes:

morpheus
9th May 2004, 11:11
Cant find it in the news section....

where'd you get this info?

andy
9th May 2004, 14:08
Tenders being issued for six new Irish Air Corps helicopters
The Irish Independent
9-May-2004
DON LAVERY
*****************************
THE Irish Air Corps is to get six new helicopters in a mix of two types - including two able to carry a section of nine soldiers.

Helicopter manufacturers are eagerly awaiting tenders, expected to be published this week by the Department of Defence which is seeking four light utility and two larger utility helicopters.

The move comes nearly five months after Minister Michael Smith said a new fleet of light utility helicopters would replace the small Alouette, Dauphin and Gazelle aircraft.

With the Air Corps' main responsibility for search and rescue now privatised, the force is looking at providing more support to the army, including air mobility for troops. As a result, the specification for the new aircraft was changed from only one type of helicopter announced by Mr Smith last December.

The defence forces have also seen how vital air mobility is in the context of modern peace keeping, like the volatile situation in Liberia.

Elements of the Irish army battalion there have been able to conduct long-range patrols hundreds of kilometres from base using giant Ukrainian Air Force Mi-26 helicopters to carry their armoured cars and jeeps; Mi-8s to carry troops and Mi-24 gunships to provide "top cover".

Manufacturers expected to be in contention for the order include Eurocopter with its Ec-135 and Ec-145 helicopters; Agusta with its 109 helicopter, and Sikorsky with its S-76 or Blackhawk.

The six new aircraft will replace 15 light helicopters, some of which were bought in 1963.

The new fleet is also expected to be used for surveillance, inshore rescue, medivac, air ambulance, island relief, hospital transfers and training.

Meanwhile, the Air Corps will take delivery, before June, of the last of the eight Pilatus PC-9m training aircraft which have been bought for €60m.

They can be armed with heavy machine guns and rockets and are expected to play a role enforcing an air exclusion zone over Dromoland Castle and Shannon Airport for the President George W Bush visit.

andy
9th May 2004, 14:13
I posted this in news but there must have been some error:S





[b] The move comes nearly five months after Minister Michael Smith said a new fleet of light utility helicopters would replace the small Alouette, Dauphin and Gazelle aircraft

should that not be ...The move comes after years of stalling, numerous reports, recommendations, and deaths of air crew, a decision was finally arrived at to downsize the current fleet.


The defence forces have also seen how vital air mobility is in the context of modern peace keeping, like the volatile situation in Liberia.

And thats all they are going to see by the looks of this tender... 2 useful heli's for the entire army?:(

Goldie fish
9th May 2004, 21:08
Having one heli capable of carrying a full section is still an improvement on the current situation. 4 x LUH plus 2 "troop heli" is still only a beginning. Good to see Blackhawks still in the frame.
Assuming 50% availability though,is still a pitiful situation. Considering the intended roles,i expect the person responsible for tasking these new helis will require previous experience distributing Loaves and fishes among large crowds..

yooklid
9th May 2004, 23:31
Typical bullshit Irish political attitude.

"We don't actually need them, so we should just set up enough to train and then we do need them, we'll buy more".

Of course, if we were to ever need them, I doubt any would be available.

Aidan
10th May 2004, 08:37
Chances are the aircraft will all come from the one supplier, hence sensible bets would be on an Eurocopter mix. An alternative will be the A109/A139, but its much less likely.

Idealists will be suggsting the EC725 as the larger heli, bet the 'suggestions' about the Ec565* will start soon after ...

*Otherwise known as the Panther, previously known as the Dauphin.

morpheus
10th May 2004, 09:37
Just noticed, the tender mentiones the various eurocopter choppers, the augusta etc all LUH's? right?

The only MLH's mentioned are the S-76 and the Blackhawk.

S-76 isnt a military chopper!!!

http://www.eichhorn.ws/assets/images/sikorsky_h76_eagle.jpg
Thats the Sikorsky H-76 eagle.... military version, not one were likely to see though.

If you ask me, this S-76 crap smells of VIP transport... a glorified Missus H Heli. It can transport 12 passengers, would this equate to 9 fully laden troops and a loadmaster? a door gunner? a door gun? ammunition? ARGH!!!

The Blackhawk is probably the ONLY option. and probably the most likely candidate not to be selected.

Would sikorsky even touch an Irish military contract again!???

oh...this all sounds too much like election un-promises :rolleyes:

Aidan
10th May 2004, 09:58
Relax Morpheus, sounds more like journalistic licence than any sneaky plan to subvert the AC to VIP transport.

Don't see what's so special about the Blackhawk; the NH-90, the Cougar and the A139 can all do exactly the same job. Any of those 4 aircraft would be fine, and the NH-90 is the ideal. And you can forget about the fancy 'theoretical' weapons fit, all Irish helicopters will ever carry will be a MAG.

Trouble is, there are a number of helis that can theoretically carry 9 troops and are definitely not 'proper' MLH, such as the Panther, the AB412EP or the UH-1Y. They may well be contenders. They key issue in a tender document then will be range/weight (or slung load) requirements rather than passenger numbers.

paul g
10th May 2004, 14:25
Should remember that initially only 3 Alouette III were bought back in 1963, and GOING BY RECENT PRACTICES, the tender document will probably also have some reference to options for a further purchases.

Personally I hope that whatever's bought for the larger option, that its an NH-90.

Goldie fish
12th May 2004, 04:52
Those who remember the details of the last tender process,will remember there were some strange contenders. As well as the S92 and EHI01,Eurocopters CougarII,which was revealed by the media to be nothing more than a "paper helicopter" when it was being evaluated.(A very funny article,cant remember who wrote it,must try to find it,about the portugese experience in trying to deal with eurocopter).
In addition to these mainstream companies we also had Kamov,Kayman, and an Israeli company offering Mi 8s and Mi17s with western avionics fit,and most strangely,and one that made it to the final 4,CHC,who currently operate the SAR contract,offering to lease second hand Medium lift helis,and crews to the air corps.

But this is not a MLH competition by any stretch of the imagination. The speculation by the media(and thats all it is,until the tenders are published) is that 2 of the helis will be required to carry 9 troops,as well as crew.
Many non military types could do this satisfactorily,before we start talking about Blackhawks or NH90s

Bell 430
Bell412
AB139
Dauphin
All the above can carry 9 or more troops

However the current Puma type model,the EC725,is capable of carrying an entire platoon in one lift(28+3)
The NH90 could carry 20 troops
The S92(now known as the H92 Superhawk is similar in size to the above,or larger,but I think it is still patricipating in pre production testing,but has yet to secure military orders,even from the Mighty US military,who are considering the EH101(US101) to replace some of its older types of large heli,such as the Sea Knight,Sea King and CH53...

If it were up to me,i would chose the heli that could lift the most troops in one go..but thats just me..

John
12th May 2004, 11:31
The Irish Times

Opinion Thu, Mar 15, 2001

An Irishman's Diary
By KEVIN MYERS

The French company Eurocopter recently proposed its Cougar Mark 2+ for Portuguese search and rescue. Splendid, cried the Portuguese, presumably on the lines of !magnifico. Malheureusement, said Eurocopter, there is, as yet, no manual for the Cougar Mark 2+. That's all right, said the Portuguese. We'll assess your helicopter anyway.


Ah, said Eurocopter. We haven't actually got a Cougar Mark 2+ available yet for testing, but we do have a Cougar Mark 2. And the Portuguese sighed heavily in Portuguese, and said: Look, you haven't got the manual, and you haven't got the helicopter you're trying to sell us, but you have an old helicopter that you're not trying to sell us, and you want us to fly around in the old one imagining that it's the new one, and pretending to assess one helicopter by flying another. Is that right?

Reconsider

Mais oui, declared the Eurocopter bosses - at which point the Portuguese smiled tightly, made their excuses and left. Eurocopter appealed to the Portuguese Minister for Defence, who ordered the assessment committee to reconsider the Eurocopter proposal. You're the boss, said his committee, and six months later Eurocopter were finally back in the contest. But they were still using the old helicopter, which, though it has a similar name, is a radically different machine from the one they were actually trying to sell.

Basically, the new one's the same as the one for testing, muttered Eurocopter, only better.

It's not the same, snarled the Portuguese. For a start, the 2+ has got a different engine, which doesn't even exist yet.

Here! We've got a model of the engine, cried Eurocopter. Look! Imagine this, only 500 times bigger. Vroom, vroom!

It's not just the engine. The Cougar 2+ has different gears, rotors which haven't flown, a different structure, and look, you've got fuel tanks projecting beneath the winch-door, and that'll mean the winch will have to be stuck out far away from the central axis of the helicopter, and the door won't be vertically accessible, and this in a search and rescue helicopter? Absolutely bloody brilliant. Anything else you want to sell us?

A Citroen Xantia, but we haven't one with us. So would you like to try a 1979 DeuxChevaux, one careful lady owner, clock genuine, suspension needs a bit of work, what do you say to 10 million francs?

Exit one Portuguese committee, scowling. The Portuguese report on the Cougar 2+ is a model of terseness. It runs as follows: Proposal for Eurocopter Cougar 2+: Strengths? Nothing to report. Weaknesses? The helicopter does not exist yet.

Acquisition

Which is why the Portuguese will not be buying the Cougar 2+, though Eurocopter's abysmal performance didn't prevent it from accusing the Portuguese of "incompetence and corruption". The Portuguese are now thinking about suing Eurocopter for delaying their helicopter acquisition programme by a year.

Our own evaluation team has been looking for new helicopters to re-equip the Airs Corps. How, I wonder, did Eurocopter make its presentation? Did it say, Look, sorry, our Cougar 2+ isn't ready yet, but the Big Wheel at Eurodisney will give you a really good idea of how it goes up and down, and we haven't made the engine yet, but Francois here can draw it for you, if m'sieur has a pencil and a bit of paper. . ?

The Air Corps options lie between a Sikorsky S92, which is still being developed and which has no orders yet; the EH 101, which is flying with Canada, Italy, the UK and Japan, which the Portuguese evaluers loved and Lisbon is almost certain to order; and, of course, the Cougar 2+, which isn't flying quite yet, but we have a little Airfix kit here, which with a little tube of glue, comme ca, will give m'sieur an excellent impression of its capabilities - perhaps we can discuss these over foie gras and skylarks' tongues at La Tour D'Argent? And finally, there is the tender from Bond Helicopters to supply and maintain either the untried and untested S92 or a version of the Puma, so tried and tested that it is a flying Amstrad. The Bond offer would sideline and perhaps even kill the Air Corps's proud engineering traditions. Is that really what we want?

At which point, I can sense coming over the horizon the purchasing principles which 20 years ago caused us to buy a hibernicised version of the Dauphine, which turned out to be a Swiss penknife of a helicopter: it could and can do just about everything poorly, and virtually nothing well, though the reception of Lyric FM on its radio is rather good if you land on Lyric FM's roof and stick the chopper's aerial directly into the station transmitter.

Cheap options

The EH 101 is the most expensive option. It is also European, which is relevant only if it is good. As the Portuguese have discovered, it is the best. But what about cost? Well, we've tried cheap options before, and they've always ended in tears. Moreover, for both the S92 and the Cougar 2+, Ireland would almost certainly be the launch customer. In other words, whatever problems they have, we'll be the first to discover them, probably the hard and costly way. On the other hand, the EH 101, already in service across the world, looks set to equip search and rescue operations the length of the Atlantic seaboard of Europe from the Arctic Circle to the Straits of Gibraltar, excluding France. Does not a common European solution to a common European problem make common European sense?

© The Irish Times

ForkTailedDevil
12th May 2004, 12:27
Could leasing be the way to go? Does away with the initial purchase costs, though you will have to agree the rental package. The USCG lease it Augustas and the Czechs lease their Gripens.The government could enquire as to the ability of EH Industries to lease helicopters.The IAC engineers would learn how to do day to day and basic maintainence and return them to the factory for depot level maintaince.It would be IAC pilots as opposed to those from a company. The Czech have a 10 year lease on their Gripens.Get a similar lease agreement on the EH101s if it can be done and then hand them back at the end of the lease for the newest version or buy them outright after saving up for them.Wonder how many hours is on the airframe life of a 101.You outsource the Coast Guard duties currently, using some leased helicopters shouldn't be too big a jump even if it is a bit of a ding to pride.
(I picked EH101s since they are the best option in my mind)

Rental of S92 could be an option.Get a very short term option on them.Since you would be the launch customer Sikorsky would consider the performance with the IAC of great importance.If they don't work you can tell Sikorsky to stuff them and hand them back rather than being stuck with them.

fillo
12th May 2004, 12:30
It makes me laugh we I read these articles "the force is looking at providing more support to the army, including air mobility for troops." But yet we won't be able to conduct a plt strength operation.

Scorpy
12th May 2004, 22:34
The 139 can do the same job as the S70? Don't make me laugh! And I think you will find that the 139, S76, EC 135 and 145 are ALL CIVILIAN HELICOPTERS! Hence there will be limited equipment fits for military applications, i.e. no IFF transponder, no door gun mountings, no fastroping installation, no self defence measures, poxy civvie radios (and if military ones are shoehorned in, we end up with the same problems that the dauphin experienced for nearly 20 years). The naive idea that this is leading to an NH90 or EC 725 appearing in Baldonnel in the not too distant future is laughable, once the Corps recieves the LUH (and be under no illusion, 9 troops in the back of any of the LUH contenders will be a struggle barring the S70 or the 412) we can kiss goodbye to MLH. But I do think from what I hear that the papers got the 2 large and 4 small LUH the wrong way around.

andy
12th May 2004, 22:54
ut I do think from what I hear that the papers got the 2 large and 4 small LUH the wrong way around.

what do you mean? Is there something else on the cards?

Personally I think the EH101/Merlin is one of the best helis on the market today. We should have 2 of them and 4 blackhawks.

If not, then 6 blackhawks. Those lighter helis posted by the Irish Independent are a complete joke and waste of money. I would love to see army co-op with those toys. I wouldnt even bother taking them out of the hanger.

Scorpy
12th May 2004, 23:20
I meant that there would be 2 small LUH for trg and 4 larger LUH for ops. Your comment about the Merlin is based on what? The prowess of the Blackhawk is not to be argued with, although it's servicing is difficult and we would be lucky to see them available for half the time that we would need them.

Look, it comes down to money and history. The govt doesn't want to buy these aircraft and if they can get out of it they will. The army won't support purchase of large, expensive helicopters that they know will not be sent overseas because the govt would shit itself in case one of those nice air corps chappies accidentally got in the way of an RPG, especially when the army could put all that lovely money into loads of new pistols, better weapons, newer technology, all of which is of direct benefit to the soldier on the ground and which doesn't cost 40 million every time cpl bloggs drops it. Overseas helicopter support currently costs us nothing, because other people do it for us (however shoddily, not to cast asparagus) and a hundred million wouldn't even make a dent in the problem. So can you see their reasoning? Why over-equip the country with a helicopter force that realistically cannot be used for air ambulance and make noisy, uncomfortable VIP machines when you can buy a limited number of smaller, more civvie oriented aircraft to keep their big fat asses comfortable and safe while they flit from event to event. The attitude is criminal, but historically after 1921, can you remember it being any different?

It is always with begrudging contempt that this government (and I'll believe that any govt could be different the day they prove me wrong) will look after a military consideration that costs above what a Dail member makes in a year.

sledger
13th May 2004, 20:05
Dail Questions 13/05/2004

57. Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Defence when a decision will be made on the provision of light utility and medium lift helicopters for the Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13398/04]

Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith): The procurement process for the acquisition of new helicopters for the Air Corps has commenced with the preparation of the tender documents in my Department. Following discussions between senior officials in my Department and the military authorities, it has been decided that up to six helicopters will be acquired, two light utility helicopters primarily for Air Corps crew training purposes and four larger utility helicopters for use in support of the Army and for other ancillary uses such as air ambulance. The new aircraft will replace the current fleet of Dauphin, Alouette and Gazelle aircraft. It is expected that the relevant notice for the tender competition will be sent by my Department to the Official Journal of the European Communities shortly.

The procurement of modern light utility helicopters will provide a significant boost to the Air Corps in available flying hours at reduced maintenance costs, compared to the existing aircraft in the Air Corps helicopter wing. It will also provide increased capability in the roles currently undertaken by the existing Air Corps light utility helicopters.

My decision to proceed with the tender competition was based on the recommendations in the report of the Joint Military-Civil Board, which examined the rotary wing requirements of the Air Corps. The report of the board also dealt with the procurement of medium lift helicopters for the search and rescue service in the longer term. However, as the Air Corps will no longer be providing this service, this part of the report will not be implemented.

morpheus
14th May 2004, 08:59
Bye bye any hope of EVER getting MLH's....

ICUN
14th May 2004, 09:03
Are they going to keep the existing heli's the Air Corp has when (if?) they get the new ones?

morpheus
14th May 2004, 10:33
http://www.eurocopterromania.ro/images/photos/mari/ec635_2.jpg

Military version of the EC135, called the "EC635".

I know it says in the newspaper articles that its the EC135, but wouldn't it be nice if we actually got the military version, maybe even paint it OG rather than hi vis silver and orange??

As for the 145... i dont know about troop transport and army coop, the chopper (as far as i know) hasnt been deployed militarily, maybe someone else can find info on it if it is?? it seems to be used by other countries in a more civil order type role.

As for carrying 9 troops? I wonder if this is without gear???

From http://www.ainonline.com/Features/pilotreport03/AIN_pr_ec145.html

Inside the fuselage, refinements in the cabin have resulted in 213 cu ft of space and an unobstructed flat floor (50.8 sq ft), with four parallel tracks for mounting up to eight regular seats in a 3+2+3 seat arrangement, up to nine troop seats and various configurations with one or two stretchers. Not yet approved is an even higher-density 11-seat arrangement for parapublic use only. Compared with the BK 117C-1, cabin length has been increased from 8.4 feet to 9.7 feet and the width has increased seven inches to 5.4 feet at shoulder level. The BK 117’s popular rear clamshell doors are maintained and supplemented by large sliding doors on each side of the cabin, where the posts were removed to improve access.


The pilot flew with one passenger and goes on to say that
We were relatively light, only 6,512 pounds at takeoff (mtow is 7,904 pounds, an increase from the BK 117C-1’s 7,385 pounds), so we had plenty of available power.

Now if chopper plus two crew weighs 6,512 pounds, then 9 troops with at least CEFO and weapons equipment etc and two crew will surely weigh more than the maximum weight? Thats not to take into account a lack of any kind of ECM or door weapon fit for protection.

heres a view of the cabin, equipped with just 2 x 3 troop seats... and the minister reckons we'll get nine fully equipped big blokes into it?
http://www.eurocopter.com/ec145/img/parapub2.jpg


Typical cop-out if we are getting them... toothless weak heli's for the aircorps, cramped useless transports (if u can call them that) for the army, but nice comfy flights for fat TDs.

andy
14th May 2004, 10:50
Typical cop-out if we are getting them... toothless weak heli's for the aircorps, cramped useless transports (if u can call them that) for the army, but nice comfy flights for fat TDs

My thoughts exactly, what a pathetic order, really geared up for MATS than any notion that they are actually military co-op. Complete sh1t

ForkTailedDevil
14th May 2004, 12:51
Personally I think these helicopters are a good idea for the kind of work (civil assistance) the IAC will generally find themselves doing in Ireland.But whats need is a proper seperate COMBAT helicopter unit as opposed to this other one thats more paramilitary in nature, sort of like USCG Stingrays or the helicopter component of the German Borderguards.An all-weather/24hrs a day unit of a single type of helicopter with-
-overland land and sea SAR/CSAR ability (even if it isn't used for maritme rescue)
-spec-ops (ARW) insertion capabilty
-actual armour for personel and essential systems,
-anti missle countermeasures
-some form of mounted weapons but non-standard(a door gun most likely)
-able to carry a minimum of 9, preferably 20 odd, troops with FULL kit as well as pilots, loadmaster/doorgunner
-fast roping ability
-able to be transported or land on ships such as HMS Ocean or similar (you never know, it might come in handy)
-able to land on frigate or destroyer heli pads (well, you never know, in a rescue or something it might be needed)
-ability to co-operate with NATO standard kit (since thats the same as EU standard

OK, NH90, MH60,EH101,EC725 S92etc then, the usual, expensive, suspects required then.No matter what happens we always end up getting back to those helicopters:(

FMolloy
14th May 2004, 14:45
There's no point in giving out about Eurocopter's unsuitability until the tender's winner is announced.

Scorpy
16th May 2004, 10:48
I'd love to know who is going to be making the decision, because from what I hear, there isn't even a military board with heli pilot input set up yet.

You would think that they'd ask the guys who are supposed to know.... but then again, the bean counters will win out once more, so perhaps a small, cardboard cut out heli fleet will satisfy them.

(Noises of frustration and wretching in background)

hptmurphy
30th November 2006, 21:40
Oh jesus the waltering has started..if one of these hits the ground..it will make the dauphin enquiry look like a parking ticket...nice photos..but again..they still bought the wrong machine. Bell 222s were being operated in this country twenty years ago..by Westair and Brian carpenter..we could have trained on that type of machine when most of the current pilots were still in nappies...we have taken such abig step back in time..we could have achieved the current status back in 1997 ..with second hand gear..too little too late...

The DF will fail to exist as a credible force by the time we have deployable air assests.

Looking at the TV3 report this evening we are back to the pilot shortage thing again when people are paying big bucks to go to south africa as opposed to Florida for flight training.....so how long before the new techno gods of The AC are enticed into the civil sector and deprive the AC of the skills to operate this type of machinery...and we end up with another induced tradgedy....


I'm thrilled to see all those who love to watch green helos flying about so happy..but am old enough to remember the grey and red similar euphoria....hate to say it..but yeah buy in haste..repent at your leisure..ok it took us 7 years to decide..but a generation of flight crews have passed and the hard learned yester year may not be as sharp in the minds of todays peeps

ZULU
30th November 2006, 21:58
Oh jesus the waltering has started..

if one of these hits the ground it will make the dauphin enquiry look like a parking ticket.

Bell 222s were being operated in this country twenty years ago..by Westair and Brian carpenter

The DF will fail to exist as a credible force by the time we have deployable air assests.



What waltering?

I dont see how anything could make the deaths of four defence force personel look like a parking ticket.

Are you slightly bitter about something murph?:confused:

ZULU
30th November 2006, 22:14
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a314/irishairpics/aw139_delivery/1018046M.jpg

Spot the difference

DeV
30th November 2006, 22:22
Theres a lot of differences.

Ex-soldier
1st December 2006, 01:17
That's easy......The windshield wipers!!!

hptmurphy
1st December 2006, 09:50
"With the FLIR mounted, is there much room for a hard landing before the FLIR starts hitting the ground?"

This is the waltering I refer too....

Bitter me never......just that the minister promised some thing a capable machine as to avert the type of incident that took place in 1999 in Tramore...and look what he provided the AC with..another bloody sports car instead of a multi role medium lift machine sufficent in numbers to make the AC a credible asset rather than a gentlemens flying club.

I do not take the deaths of the four who died lightly..just it was in vain..and the subsequent enquiry a white wash..with resultant promises that have never been fulfiled...this aircraft is not was percieved..this is an executive toy painted green with two machine guns to give it a quasi military look while ministers use them as taxis.

NH90 was the machine that we needed ..we've spent years at the entry level.To make our air assets a viable part of any future deployable force we need at some stage to be able to move that force by air in one go...rather than piece meal detachment movements..

As I said lovely looking..no doubt has all the gizmos required can insert a few bodies..but practically useless. Well done to all those in the purse strings.department..more tax payers money well wasted.

ZULU
1st December 2006, 10:29
http://www.mecaer.it/products/?id=89

The AW139 has hydraulic retractable landing gear. The original AW139 military version had a recessed FLIR ball in the nose and not underslung like the current mount is. This reduces the size of the FLIR the AirCorp AW139 can take. 13" takes up a fair distance between the mount and the ground in the pictures.

So no it's not a Walt question. It's an engineering design question.

The NH-90 is a medium (on the heavy side) heli. I'd bet it costs a hell of a lot more than the AW-139. AW139 is being bought by Nigeria and Japan for SAR and coastgaurd duties. The NH-90 would be more ASW from the looks of it.

www.helinnews.com

"AgustaWestland, in collaboration with Mitsui Bussan Aerospace is proud to announce that the Japanese Coast Guard has selected the AW139 helicopter to replace their aging Bell 212?s for deployment at Search and Rescue bases throughout Japan. Three helicopters have been ordered this year as the initial phase of a replacement program for up to 24 helicopters. The AW139 has been selected as the best helicopter capable of carrying out demanding maritime search and rescue and maritime patrol missions following a rigorous and comprehensive evaluation process by Japanese Coast Guard officials. The AW139 will be fully capable of all-weather, day and night operation, and ship-based operations, and will be equipped with state-of-the-art mission equipment including a rescue hoist and a high definition FLIR to maximise operational effectiveness.


Speaking after the announcement, Renzo Lunardi, AgustaWestland?s Senior Vice President Sales & Marketing said ?We are delighted by the Japanese Coast Guard decision to buy the AgustaWestland AW139, which further builds on our extensive relationships with Japanese Government agencies and commercial operators. The AW139 is the best performing helicopter in the medium twin engine class and will provide the Japanese Coast Guard with an exceptional aircraft and operational capability.? The selection of the AW139 builds on recent AgustaWestland successes in the Japanese market with the sale of AW139 and A109 Power helicopters to the Japanese Police and the EH101 to the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force. The Japanese Coast Guard is acknowledged as a first-class and highly experienced Maritime Search and Rescue and maritime patrol organisation worldwide and their choice provides further testimony of the AW139?s performance, versatility and competitiveness. This contract increases the number of firm orders for the AW139 to over 200, making it the best selling medium-twin helicopter today. By mid-2006 nearly 50 aircraft had been delivered to customers in Europe, North America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East.


The AW139 is a new-generation medium twin-turbine helicopter designed with inherent multi-role capabilities and class leading performance. Applications for the AW139 include Law Enforcement, search and rescue, EMS, offshore, corporate and VIP transport. The AW139 is capable of carrying up to 15 passengers, or a full team of SAR technicians and survivors at high cruise speeds, in the most spacious cabin with the best power reserve of any helicopter in the medium-twin class. State-of-the-art, proven systems on board include two Pratt & Whitney PT6C-67C turboshaft engines with full-authority digital engine controls (FADEC) and the Honeywell Primus Epic? avionics system, featuring a four-axis digital autopilot and four large area flat-panel cockpit displays with the option for night vision goggle compatibility. "



I think the Tax-payers money was well spent rather than wasted by the sounds of it.

hptmurphy
1st December 2006, 11:12
The NH-90 was specifiaclly designed as a troop carrying helo for by european partners. Its Navala Capabilities are similar to the merlin which is also a larger machine...both these are far more capable than the AB139..which is merely a beefed up Bell 222.

As the AC no longer have reponsiblity for coastguard or Search and rescue duties...its not relevant who use these in the role.

The specific role was for a troop carrying medium lift capable helo. The projected capabilities of the Dauphin were along the same lines but never even came close to the operational requirements due to the amount of modifications requested by the Aer Corps.

Look at the list of operators of the NH-90..and now see the role they require it for....the AB139 cannot even come close to thses specifications....to Name just a few.....Portugal and Sweden have placed substantial orders .

Medium lift helos come in the class of the Puma and Cougar..and the NH - 90 is seen as a replacement or to worked in tandem with this size of machine...AB 139 is not even in the sme playing field.

We operated one leased Puma in the early Eighties for one year..the army raved about its capabilites but nobody had the sense to acquire more of thes or a similar sized machine throughout the years..even though it is a tried and tested and very sucessful design..we of course opt for the flashy new kid on the block with the all signing and dancing shiney kit and hope it does what it says on the box...rather than sticking with whats generally proven tried and tested. Time will tell..but I wouldn't hold out to much hope of ever having the amount serviceable to provide the operability the army need.

Just a comparison....MTOW for AB139 is just over 6,400kgs.....an Nh-90 is 10,600kg...can carry 20 fully equiped troops or twenty stretcher cases.


I think this demonstrates the different ideologies in what a meduim lift helo actually is.

ZULU
1st December 2006, 12:19
Sweden has the Luxury of going for the two extremes in performance. They're replacing their heli wing with 18 NH90's and 20 A109s. I think the choice of the AW139 was the middle ground between the two. No point having a big chopper like the NH-90 when all you need is a A109 and visa versa.


As for medium lift helis - Yes the AW139is the light side of this but CH's and Superstallions are classed as medium lift too. They have MTOW's of close on 20ton!!

ZULU
1st December 2006, 12:23
Here's the Bag for the casings on the MAG's as modelled by an A109


http://www.ailes-militaires-belges.be/images/alft/a109-mag-grosplan.jpg


And the Lift generated by a Chinook C

http://media1.yourdailymedia.com/files/CTpqnyLt54xA.wmv

Truck Driver
1st December 2006, 14:45
Would you like to land on your target to collect brass?:biggrin:

Cracking answer, lad :biggrin:

Probably for recycling purposes. Although in wartime, this would be the least of
your worries...

P.S:
Smashing photographs

Itchy
1st December 2006, 14:50
The NH-90 was specifiaclly designed as a troop carrying helo for by european partners. Its Navala Capabilities are similar to the merlin which is also a larger machine...both these are far more capable than the AB139..which is merely a beefed up Bell 222.

As the AC no longer have reponsiblity for coastguard or Search and rescue duties...its not relevant who use these in the role.

The specific role was for a troop carrying medium lift capable helo. The projected capabilities of the Dauphin were along the same lines but never even came close to the operational requirements due to the amount of modifications requested by the Aer Corps.

Look at the list of operators of the NH-90..and now see the role they require it for....the AB139 cannot even come close to thses specifications....to Name just a few.....Portugal and Sweden have placed substantial orders .

Medium lift helos come in the class of the Puma and Cougar..and the NH - 90 is seen as a replacement or to worked in tandem with this size of machine...AB 139 is not even in the sme playing field.

We operated one leased Puma in the early Eighties for one year..the army raved about its capabilites but nobody had the sense to acquire more of thes or a similar sized machine throughout the years..even though it is a tried and tested and very sucessful design..we of course opt for the flashy new kid on the block with the all signing and dancing shiney kit and hope it does what it says on the box...rather than sticking with whats generally proven tried and tested. Time will tell..but I wouldn't hold out to much hope of ever having the amount serviceable to provide the operability the army need.

Just a comparison....MTOW for AB139 is just over 6,400kgs.....an Nh-90 is 10,600kg...can carry 20 fully equiped troops or twenty stretcher cases.


I think this demonstrates the different ideologies in what a meduim lift helo actually is.

Whos walting now??:rolleyes: :eek:

New Zealand decided to buy eight including all the extras for €289m roughly €36m each. Italy placed an order for 116 choppers in 1999/2000 at roughly €27m each.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=10393834

ZULU
1st December 2006, 14:58
How much did the AC pay for the AW139s? ( Including support, extras, etc)

Itchy
1st December 2006, 15:14
4 for €49m

ZULU
1st December 2006, 15:44
I'd suspect the scenario of a NH90 going down with a 2 section would be worse than AW139 going down with 1 section.

For the price, and the capabilties, the option of two AW139s working in tandem for Army Ops is better than a single NH90. One can provide over watch while the other drops, at the very least it spreads the risk.

ODIN
1st December 2006, 16:09
There may be more helis coming on stream in the next couple of years to replace the numbers lost

pym
1st December 2006, 16:10
It's worth remembering the AW139 was a contender for the U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter Program - it is not designed to be in the class of a Merlin or NH90.

But every army in the world still has a use for a helicopter in this class, the Brits use Lynx's in tandem with heavier Chinooks and Merlins, the yanks use the Blackhawk (and soon EC-145's) with heavier Chinooks etc.

Also was it not stated on this board that the ARW preferred the 139 of the 3 contenders?

The new heli's are a massive leap in capability for the Air Corps. NH90's would be great but they're not a replacement for Allouettes or Dauphins - they're in an entirely different category of helicopter and the A3's needed replacing as soon as possible.

Craghopper
1st December 2006, 16:38
It's worth remembering the AW139 was a contender for the U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter Program - it is not designed to be in the class of a Merlin or NH90.

But every army in the world still has a use for a helicopter in this class, the Brits use Lynx's in tandem with heavier Chinooks and Merlins, the yanks use the Blackhawk (and soon EC-145's) with heavier Chinooks etc.

Also was it not stated on this board that the ARW preferred the 139 of the 3 contenders?

The new heli's are a massive leap in capability for the Air Corps. NH90's would be great but they're not a replacement for Allouettes or Dauphins - they're in an entirely different category of helicopter and the A3's needed replacing as soon as possible.

I was on a course recently and there was a pilot on the course with us..He said the Brits are having problems with the merlin.

mutter nutter
1st December 2006, 16:49
a little off topic, but is there any chance of the MLH contract ever being brought back to get a bigger helo?

hptmurphy
1st December 2006, 16:53
The ability to lift two sections in two helos is hardly is hardly a credible deployable force when you are talking on battalion scaled action....the ability to lift a company plus attachmenst is a far more credible option.

The EC135 is a credible replacement in the light role.

This is not waltering...this is realsitic..there was a commitment to a medium lift helo.after the tramore crash.Unfortunately what the civil service regards as a worthy machine falls far short of the projected requirement to move ground assests. Economy of scale..we regard our DF along the lines of the New Zealand Forces..but still they have bought NH-90s.

I'm not suggesting for one moment we get into the realm of jet fighters and MBTs ( thats waltering in the supreme) just wondering why everybody is getting so excited about a machine that we bought the fore runners too forty years ago..surely we have had the run in period in this area and should have moved past the cheap option and trying to deploy troops piecemeal rather wholesale.

The ARW considerations were far too high on the list of requirements..as they operate in unit size that can be carried in a machine of the AB139..so no problem there...Unfortunately..there is the rest of the army to consider. Yes by all means have the A109 style helo for insertion of special forces recce teams etc...if the army now have the means to move larger numbers on the ground with a proper force of APCs..why should not the AC posses the same capabilities.

Its a three to one scenario..you have to have three to make sure one is available at all times with aircraft...buy your three AB139s..but don't see them as the all singing and dancing machine. That mistake was made before with the dauphins.

In the case of the US considering buying machine of this order ..fine ..nice to see its an option..but they didn't.....why? The US can buy enough to make sure they have a surplus of machines and always have enough available for the job in hand..we don't have that option..so in this case size matters.

Buying small numbers of expensive hi tech machines has been the folly of the DF so many times in the past.

As regarding the waltering thread..cutting and pasting large sections of sale s pitch without being able to form an educated opinion..thats waltering....being able to note the failures from the past...recognise what the requirement is.......understanding what the various scenarios and being aware of whats happening else where..thats just common sense.( no intended offence to anyone in particular....just find it annoying when a link would do)

I appreciate the discussion on the subject.....I know the limitations of the DF enforced upon them.....but I refuse to be in awe of something that everybody should know is only a token offering toward what is actually required.

As I said everything within the AC seems to only be a token offering to requirements...men have died because they were forced to accept token offerings..and a workload enforced upon machines that were clearly not up the task..but looked nice in the catalogue.It is a disgrace to say that the thinking has not moved in line with proposed stratagies....not so long ago people on this forum wanted to deploy our A111s to a disaster in the Indian ocean..now they are willing to accept that a DF commited to moving troops in hostile envoirnements en masse...have two ( currently) bottom of the scale sports car shiney type helos....

How can the notion of interoperability...within any European force ever be possible while people still think in this mode.?

'The new heli's are a massive leap in capability for the Air Corps.'...no they are not...all they have done is replaced six with four.... mathematecially it dosen't work..bring on the arguements of reliabilty etc........there was only one ever photo of all the dauphins in the air at the one time...whats it going to be like this time round.

No faith..we'll be doing this all again after these machines are gone.

pym
1st December 2006, 17:37
O'Dea said himself that it would be "unlikely" for the helicopters to be deployed abroad and I see these helicopters main role as providing domestic ARW support. In this I think they are perfectly good enough.

Do they meet the airlift needs of the army as a whole? No, not nearly.
Are the comparable to the best aircraft fielded by other countries in the troop transport role? No.
Are they good enough to transport a small unit around Ireland? Yes.

I hope NH90's are on the drawing board for serious army co-op and deployments abroad, and that the 139's will be saved for domestic duties.

Will that be the case? I dont know.

DeV
1st December 2006, 18:09
The Implementation Plan called for the purchase of 4 medium lift & medium range helicopters for both SAR and army support.

X-RayOne
1st December 2006, 18:27
cracking discussion lads!

hpt makes some very good points. i think you hit the nail on the head here

"Unfortunately what the civil service regards as a worthy machine falls far short of the projected requirement to move ground assests."

so true, admins ideas of something are usually poles apart (and also much cheaper!) from the military's idea of the same thing.
so i think the AC will be wishing for true medium lift capability for many years to come.
also bear in mind that the minister has said its highly unlikely that AC helis will serve overseas so i think that is another nail in the coffin for buying larger helis.

however, i wouldn't go so far to say we are stepping backwards by buying these helis. they do have a far better capability that everything they are replacing in terms of avionics, payloads/personnel carried and range, etc. this is a step forward even if not as big a step as people would like.

also they are the ideal machine for deploying ARW around the country. this is the only unit that is really likely to need to move somewhere really quickly. and we have to be realistic the army has only ever wished to be able to deploy company size units by air, etc. this is highly unlikely to happen in the near future either.

looking at overseas, we have used other air assets on UN missions, the kiwis in east timor and plenty of MIL helis in liberia. assets for moving our units are already available to us when required overseas. the AW139's are a much better training tool for learning heli ops than the alouettes. at least now we can practice entire sections deploying rather than a few bodies in each of the older choppers.

Goldie fish
1st December 2006, 19:12
a little off topic, but is there any chance of the MLH contract ever being brought back to get a bigger helo?


Since the demise of SAR by the air corps its no longer a priority.

The purpose of the Helis is to be able to get a unit of either ERU or ARW to a location anywhere in the country as soon as possible. Even with Blue lights and siren thats not really practical with current levels of traffic congestion.

hptmurphy
1st December 2006, 22:20
The tradgedy in County meath involving the school bus last year showed the AC deploy all of its heli assets at the one time.......good work but pitiful.....

Its a bit like the MATs thing..why do we have aircraft satnding around waiting for specialist use while we could have better aircraft out doing the actual job....if the ERU or the wing need to get some where quickly...let them use whats available rather than pandering to the needs.

We seem to keep making the same mistakes every generation..getting in at entry techno level and then accepting what we have and learn as being the norm...and forgetting about the final goal.

We do this at all levels be it helos or APCs..buy off the shelf at top rate prices to make it look good to the general public....taxpayer....and move on..never backing up the promise...

Right who wants to argue the ships thing along the same lines....

Sorry to digress..some one mention the AB139 as a training tool........


Do you not think we have enough 'Tools' in the box without adding another 49m euro worth...we have been training for the last 40 years with helos..isn't it time we got something to make that traing a little more credible.

Any way...its all just where I see it from...more political lies and the DF taking it up the arse again....ho hum...


least some one saw my opinion and litsen ..thanks guys.....breathe out Murf......roll on the ships...

Goldie fish
1st December 2006, 23:06
http://www.mecaer.it/products/?id=89

The AW139 has hydraulic retractable landing gear. The original AW139 military version had a recessed FLIR ball in the nose and not underslung like the current mount is. This reduces the size of the FLIR the AirCorp AW139 can take. 13" takes up a fair distance between the mount and the ground in the pictures.

So no it's not a Walt question. It's an engineering design question.

The NH-90 is a medium (on the heavy side) heli. I'd bet it costs a hell of a lot more than the AW-139. AW139 is being bought by Nigeria and Japan for SAR and coastgaurd duties. The NH-90 would be more ASW from the looks of it.

www.helinnews.com

"AgustaWestland, in collaboration with Mitsui Bussan Aerospace is proud to announce that the Japanese Coast Guard has selected the AW139 helicopter to replace their aging Bell 212?s for deployment at Search and Rescue bases throughout Japan. Three helicopters have been ordered this year as the initial phase of a replacement program for up to 24 helicopters. The AW139 has been selected as the best helicopter capable of carrying out demanding maritime search and rescue and maritime patrol missions following a rigorous and comprehensive evaluation process by Japanese Coast Guard officials. The AW139 will be fully capable of all-weather, day and night operation, and ship-based operations, and will be equipped with state-of-the-art mission equipment including a rescue hoist and a high definition FLIR to maximise operational effectiveness.


Speaking after the announcement, Renzo Lunardi, AgustaWestland?s Senior Vice President Sales & Marketing said ?We are delighted by the Japanese Coast Guard decision to buy the AgustaWestland AW139, which further builds on our extensive relationships with Japanese Government agencies and commercial operators. The AW139 is the best performing helicopter in the medium twin engine class and will provide the Japanese Coast Guard with an exceptional aircraft and operational capability.? The selection of the AW139 builds on recent AgustaWestland successes in the Japanese market with the sale of AW139 and A109 Power helicopters to the Japanese Police and the EH101 to the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force. The Japanese Coast Guard is acknowledged as a first-class and highly experienced Maritime Search and Rescue and maritime patrol organisation worldwide and their choice provides further testimony of the AW139?s performance, versatility and competitiveness. This contract increases the number of firm orders for the AW139 to over 200, making it the best selling medium-twin helicopter today. By mid-2006 nearly 50 aircraft had been delivered to customers in Europe, North America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East.


The AW139 is a new-generation medium twin-turbine helicopter designed with inherent multi-role capabilities and class leading performance. Applications for the AW139 include Law Enforcement, search and rescue, EMS, offshore, corporate and VIP transport. The AW139 is capable of carrying up to 15 passengers, or a full team of SAR technicians and survivors at high cruise speeds, in the most spacious cabin with the best power reserve of any helicopter in the medium-twin class. State-of-the-art, proven systems on board include two Pratt & Whitney PT6C-67C turboshaft engines with full-authority digital engine controls (FADEC) and the Honeywell Primus Epic? avionics system, featuring a four-axis digital autopilot and four large area flat-panel cockpit displays with the option for night vision goggle compatibility. "



I think the Tax-payers money was well spent rather than wasted by the sounds of it.

In future can you use the quote tabs to distinguish your own opinions from something you have copied and pasted from another site? Its not very clear what you are trying to say with it all.

Scorpy
2nd December 2006, 00:51
It's not so much about equipment, it's about focus and attitude. The helicopter equipment the corps has had since year dot has had a focus of SAR. The new equipment, while capable of that, is not going to be focused on SAR. Concentration of effort on a military role and requirements from the 'customer' will dictate that you fit the peg to the hole. Irrespective of whether this was something done when the role was 'catch all' i.e. Dauphins and Alouettes, the role of SAR is not the focus. These aircraft are a military asset and should be treated as such. The capabilities of the aircraft are dictated by the customer. Items like the FLIR and other military role fits such as guns and insertion equipment are indicative of this. Consideration has been given to troops being able to talk directly to ground units from within the aircraft. Is that not an indication of a change of stance? The fitting of offensive fire support, is that not the same? Why belittle the equipment without seeing the modes of employment. Give it time and you may decide that the equipment is less important than the attitude to its use.

Aside from this, these were never meant to be medium lift. These are utility helicopters and damn good ones they are too. The roles may still catch all, but what seriously is the domestic requirement to move large numbers of men and materiel from point to point in a hurry? How much more than two tonnes do you expect to be required to shift with ONE aircraft?

If I had been a SAR dauphin skipper way back when...(misty eyed) I would have had nightmares about an engine failure while winching, because I would have known that people would have died. I am sure alouette jockeys still have nightmares about carrying troops over woods, mountains and built up areas for the same reason. With the 139, the nightmares vanish. Which is nice. Under all but the most extreme circumstances.

I wonder is nearly 44 years ago, if the forum for discussion had existed, would there have existed the same negativity towards the purchase of such an implement amongst people of the same idealogy as is found on this board?

Shame on you.

ZULU
2nd December 2006, 03:46
In future can you use the quote tabs to distinguish your own opinions from something you have copied and pasted from another site? Its not very clear what you are trying to say with it all.

Will do.

ZULU
2nd December 2006, 05:23
I'm not suggesting for one moment we get into the realm of jet fighters and MBTs ( thats waltering in the supreme)

We’re already there. A F/A-18 Super hornet is coming in at $40million (Granted bulk scale)

NH90 coming in at $35-27million. I think we’ve hit Walt Factor 9 Capt’n


The ARW considerations were far too high on the list of requirements

Agreed. I think the weighting factor should be reduced on this one


They (ARW) operate in unit size that can be carried in a machine of the AB139..

Yes by all means have the A109 style helo for insertion of special forces recce teams

But the A109 is too small for their unit size – They need the AW139. My heads dizzy – can I get of the round about now?



if the army now have the means to move larger numbers on the ground with a proper force of APCs..why should not the AC posses the same capabilities.

Because I think the AC are not trying to have a Heli Mounted infantry company. The AW139s will be used as support, special ops as an aid and force extension of the main APC company.


Its a three to one scenario..you have to have three to make sure one is available at all times with aircraft...buy your three AB139s

Buying small numbers of expensive hi tech machines has been the folly of the DF so many times in the past.
And your consideration of buying 1.3 NH90s for the same money is a viable alternative? Have you not noted the failures from the past? ( I’m getting real dizzy at all this roundabout and to-ing and fro-ing)


As regarding the waltering thread..cutting and pasting large sections of sale s pitch without being able to form an educated opinion..thats waltering

I’ll post the link in future. I have and will continue to educate my opinion. I have a high enough standard of English to filter the facts from the Sales propaganda. Those being that Nigeria, Japan, Saudia Arabia, South Africa have all bought or going to buy AW139s. The equipment listed can be verified on the website and what the AC got in their package. So don’t presume I was basing my Tax payers money well spent comment on the marketing language.


....being able to note the failures from the past...recognise what the requirement is.......understanding what the various scenarios and being aware of whats happening else where..thats (Priceless) Sorry thought it was an ad for Master card:biggrin:



( no intended offence to anyone in particular....just find it annoying when a link would do)

Take aim and don’t look as if your being discrete – I’ve got thick skin and can give as good as it gets without the indirect/direct/indirect approach:smile:


I appreciate the discussion on the subject

So do I as well as others. Especially those who note the failures of the past, understand the requirement (so long as it’s medium/heavy lift) and understand the various scenarios ( so long as it’s medium/heavy lift) and are aware of whats going on elsewhere ( So long as it’s medium/heavy lift):biggrin: :tongue:

Seriously – It’s one of the better discussions – I think. Grandads jocks might just pinch it


two ( currently) bottom of the scale sports car shiney type helos....

Don’t’ know about bottom of the scale. Weight yes, performance – to be seen
I think a better analogy would be a Merc Vito AMG against a rigid truck


'
The new heli's are a massive leap in capability for the Air Corps.'...no they are not
Agreed – More like a stride or even a hop forward.

we'll be doing this all again after these machines are gone.

Such is the nature of Technology

Peace out

DeV
2nd December 2006, 21:54
Aside from this, these were never meant to be medium lift. These are utility helicopters and damn good ones they are too. The roles may still catch all, but what seriously is the domestic requirement to move large numbers of men and materiel from point to point in a hurry? How much more than two tonnes do you expect to be required to shift with ONE aircraft?


No one is suggesting that these were supposed to be medium lift - that is still an outstanding requirement.

The Implementaion Plan and Special Report recommended that the current (at the time) helicopter fleet (consisting of Gazelles, Alouette IIIs and Dauphin IIs) be replaced by a fewer number of a single type of helicopter. The Twin Squirrel was suggested as it was being used by the GASU. There is so much money being badly spent by the Government that their is absolutiely no reason why the medium lift tender cannot be advertised again.

There is a requirement actually - many DF exercises include a rapid response element.

According to the DF Strategy Statement 2003-2005, the Army must be able to deploy & sustain a brigade anywhere within the State at 7 days notice, while the AC must complete a comprehensive study on its ablity to provide an enhanced air lift capability.

hptmurphy
2nd December 2006, 22:39
Having served during the nightmare created but the dauphins and being well aware that they were tasked with workloads above their capability, it is a fear thet the same would happen again with the new machine. I'm not doubting the abilities of the poeple operating them, but in the past the higher ups and the politicans and civil servants bought machines from brochures and expected them to perform equally as well as it said in the book...if you buy a meduim lift helo you buy it with some percieved redundancy and not with it working flat out to attain unattainable results.

Again my criticism is we have bought at the lower end of the scale to provide a very limited service, whilst spending the extra cash would have provided us with a machine with far greater operabilty...and we wouldnt have had to go into the future wondering if we will ever see the day when the army has the air lift capability that ir needs.

As regarding the movement of large numers and material..we can not even train for that role currently at home..and exercise and operational missions in Liberia that the ability to have troops being able to operate in tandem with such machines is a real time requirement.

I am not argueing this in a walter mode..I am mereley highlighting and trying to outline, to those who may see this as a major development, that its not all its cracked up to be.. and that to achieve what the army need is not going to be provided by this machine.

If the AC are happy with it ,fine, as its commitment toward better times for a service that has been badly run down..it might be a new dawn..but it certainly isn't where our future needs lie.

I take offence that some would think that I am anti progress and suggest that I may crib just because I don't understand..I understand very well, having seeing our procurement process is an unmitigated disaster....I think the AC should put forward a realistic proposal in conjunction with the forward thinking in the army and refuse to stand back until these obligations have been met. sounds like some sort of mutiny..but the army did it regarding the mowags and it worked.

ZULU
3rd December 2006, 01:28
I'm not saying that the NH90's wouldn't be a fantastic asset. The increase in effectiveness would be greatly enhanced, but to buy these we've got to buy them in numbers and I dont think that the powers are going to stretch to close on $145million for 4 NH90's


Is there any chance we can merge this thread with the other Aw139 thread?

Goldie fish
3rd December 2006, 06:48
Merged with similar themed thread..

ZULU
4th December 2006, 17:37
There are great articles in this months Flight International about Italy's new NH90's and their roles, their Gunship 129s and other helis also. All bar 2 NH90's are going to be used for ASW and other Naval related activites.

The tender for the new CSAR heavy lift heli for the US has been giving to Boeing and a new version of the Chinook. Sikorsky have not only lost out on this 7+billion contract but have also lost the Presidential Heli contact also.

DeV
4th December 2006, 17:46
The tender for the new CSAR heavy lift heli for the US has been giving to Boeing and a new version of the Chinook. Sikorsky have not only lost out on this 7+billion contract but have also lost the Presidential Heli contact also.

For which Sikorsky was offering the S-92 was it not (the aircraft that won the medium lift helicopter contract).

ZULU
8th December 2006, 02:52
Here's the article form this months flight international about the CSAR contact