Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Helicopters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I think that rule has been in effect since the congo mission in the 60's
    It is only by contemplation of the incompetent that we can appreciate the difficulties and accomplishments of the competent.

    Comment


    • #47
      At the signing ceremony in Baldonnel for the AB139s last year, or early this year, the minister was asked if he ever saw them being used abroad. He replied: no.
      Last edited by FMolloy; 30 May 2005, 19:03.
      www.twitter.com/mickthehack

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Dublinmick
        At the signing ceremony in Baldonnel for the AB139s last year, or early this year, the minister was asked if he ever saw them being used abroad. He replied: no.
        Sure they cost a lot of money why should we use them for there intended purpose.

        YA HEAR THAT RANGERS YOU CAN LOOK AT THEM BUT THATS ALL.
        Last edited by FMolloy; 30 May 2005, 19:03.
        It is only by contemplation of the incompetent that we can appreciate the difficulties and accomplishments of the competent.

        Comment


        • #49
          So tell us bam-bam....what is their (note correct use of spelling) intended purpose?


          Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by SPOOKY
            Perhaps the AC should concentrate on building a NATIONAL effective military service before it starts going for more complicated & risky INTERNATIONAL missions, no?
            That's exactly what they're doing, anything else is just speculation.


            Originally posted by SPOOKY
            A single helicopter type -twin engined for safety- for rapid reaction (whether infantry ATCP, or SOF CT) tasks is an achievable target...........
            Again, that's the plan.


            Originally posted by SPOOKY
            why then can the many myriad AC transport aircraft, not then be replaced by a single -twin engined for safety & training- transport aircrfat type for whatever duties the CASA & PC-9's can't do e.g. parachute training, rapid airlift of stores, airambulance, island relief, on island VIP transport etc. ?
            There's not 'many myriad' of AC transport craft - there's only the Cessnas and the King Air (when it's not doing MATS), the Gulfstream and the Learjet can't be classed as transport.

            The Cessna's are due for replacement in the next couple of years, the theory is that they'll be replaced by a smaller number of a more capable type.


            Originally posted by SPOOKY
            My suggestion is that the AC already use one rotary wing type for training and garda support - why not buy a small quantity of Nomander ISLANDER twin engined types, already in service with the garda air support unit to furfil this same goal in the fixed wing role?
            One example of a more capable type.


            Originally posted by SPOOKY
            Is this an achievable goal?
            Yes.
            "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

            Comment


            • #51
              Given the reliability problems of the Defender/ Islander type it can hardly be judged as a good replacement for anything.

              In terms of the AC doing the air sea rescue job. The role has evolved very much from what was envisaged back in the early 1960s when the Allouettes were purchased.

              If the governement were prepared to finance larger machines...fine but its seems that they are ever unlikely to buy any thing of the order of the size of the machine required.

              Given the increase in maritime activities and our increased responsiblities in the SAR role in our own home waters we can no longer depend on 5-6 seater helis.

              So who can provide the machines required..looks like the current type of operation is the only currently viable operation.?

              Should the AC return to being the primary suppliers of the SAR role?

              I don't beleve so because of past expierience with the logistical nightmare associated with different helis and associated crewing problems.

              I think the line has been drawn in the sand for the future requirements of SAR ops in this country for the forseeable future and this should release the AC for more of the type of training the army require to be a truly mobile deployable force.

              It has been proven in Liberia that we have no requirement to deploy AC machines abroad...but again this type of operation has proved that our troops need to be airdeployable...on a larger scale and this underwrites the opinion that the current type of machine on order is practcally too small except for small force insertion or advanced crew training.
              Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

              Comment


              • #52
                I wonder am I alone in thinking that the AC made a dogs dinner of the rotary side of the business:-

                A. In that they lost the function of providing SAR for the State over inter agency turf wars.

                B. That the Dauphin was the wrong spec.

                C. That the new Bell_Augusta looks like compounding the error buying what looks like a civilian
                executive transport and may well be just a MATS job.

                What happened to the Heli wing and who was responsible. Certainly not the guys who got it right with the Allouettes?

                Comment


                • #53
                  In that they lost the function of providing SAR for the State over inter agency turf wars.
                  Turf wars were part of the propblem, as was poor admin within the AC, but the main issue was the fact that the AC were never going to get the resources to run a service properly (not without some serious internal shakeups-to the extent of giving up almost all other rotary ops), let alone purchase the helicopters.

                  SAr, and the AC, are better off with the current situation. The

                  That the Dauphin was the wrong spec
                  A problem borne mainly of funding difficulties (they wanted 330s, after all) and hobsons choice when it came to being told what aircraft they were getting.

                  That the new Bell_Augusta looks like compounding the error buying what looks like a civilian executive transport
                  When painted green (or whatever) and set up to meet the tender spec, its just as 'military' as any helicopter of this size (UH-60 aside), but its a new design so is cheap to run, and has outstanding payload/range characteristics.

                  If the AC are going to get something larger, then that'll mean a new competition, until then, the 139 is a good place to start 'proper' military heli ops. The only question for now is how many will be purchased.

                  In the medium term, the NH-90 would be ideal, but thats a whole different argument.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Gunner Who?
                    What happened to the Heli wing and who was responsible. Certainly not the guys who got it right with the Allouettes?
                    I'd say the people responsible for choosing the Allouettes currently reside in the graveyard, and have for quite some time

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by hptmurphy
                      Given the reliability problems of the Defender/ Islander type it can hardly be judged as a good replacement for anything.
                      Disagree.

                      Reliability problems where due to equipment overload and safety certification with GS, in relation to the AC's single type. (see thread)

                      Islanders work well for very diverse range of roles, just ask those in the Western Isles, or off the Irish west coast.

                      Dash4/8 is a better aircraft, but more expensive.
                      What others twin engined types are light enough to furfil the role?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Same problem as the DAUPHIN THEN...OVERLOADED !

                        the islander / defender as used has spent more time in maintainance than it has in the air. Buying aircraft piecemeal is a waste of time. Aircraft should be bought in a minimum number of three..one used for training..one operational..one in maintaince.
                        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          we'll have 4 ab 139's

                          one in maintanence
                          one in MAT duty
                          one for the Chief of staff and his aides
                          one for training pilots how to fly ministers and the C.o.S around.
                          It is only by contemplation of the incompetent that we can appreciate the difficulties and accomplishments of the competent.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            The MTOW of the AB139 is considerably greater than the dauphin,and it has already been designed to take its "accessories",and still do the job.

                            At risk of repeating myself At risk of repeating myself At risk of repeating myself At risk of repeating myself

                            The order has been placed,the contract has been signed. Lets wait until its in service before we start criticing an aircraft that none of us has seen or flown in?


                            Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by hptmurphy
                              Same problem as the DAUPHIN THEN...OVERLOADED !

                              the islander / defender as used has spent more time in maintainance than it has in the air. Buying aircraft piecemeal is a waste of time. Aircraft should be bought in a minimum number of three..one used for training..one operational..one in maintaince.
                              2001 2002 2003
                              Squirrel 837 flying hrs 587 flying hrs 633 flying hrs
                              Defender 240 flying hrs 537 flying hrs 514 flying hrs
                              EC-135 N/a 46 flying hrs 626 flying hrs

                              Source: DF Annual Report 2003

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                just to back up Goldie's point, the 139 is in service with several other militairies and police services, so it can't be that bad
                                Dr. Venture: Why is it every time I need to get somewhere, we get waylaid by jackassery?

                                Dr. Venture: Dean, you smell like a whore

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X