PDA

View Full Version : EC135 Equipment



FMolloy
5th June 2003, 21:53
Silver, your quote as above is interesting. perhaps you can enlighten the board as to the "toys" on board.

I think Silver is talking about the amount of equippment onboard the EC135. There was talk going around that the amount of kit installed had added so much weight that the new copper chopper's range was notably reduced.

Silver
5th June 2003, 22:52
Correct on both counts, FMolloy !

Come-quickly
6th June 2003, 12:54
Another advantage of private contract aviation in Ireland is the tendency of former A/C personnel to congregate in such employment, add the minimal level of governmental oversight of a HEMS service, et voila!
One de facto air corps reserve, FOC.

Lurk
6th June 2003, 20:52
OK Silver, you either dont want to answer, or you dont have the answer to back up your comment on the "toy's". No problem, I will ask someone else.

Lurk

FMolloy
7th June 2003, 14:33
Like I said Lurk, Silver was referring to the amount of equipment installed on the new copper chopper. It is rumoured that the weight of this extra kit has noticably decreased the heli's range.

Lurk
8th June 2003, 22:18
FM, thanks for the reply, but I have to ask, are you speaking for Silver?
You used the important word "rumoured". Thats what I want to clarify, and if Silver says the Guards 135 full of toys, let him answer and back up his comment. I have the greates respect for posts, especially Silvers, but I have no time for rumour.

Goldie fish
8th June 2003, 22:30
Have to agree. Speculation is the first step in the road to deception. Is this just another excuse to Knock the Gardai and Air Corps?

Facts please.

FMolloy
9th June 2003, 09:18
It was mentioned in some newspaper articles at the time of the helicopter's purchase, it was also mentioned on Frank's Air Corp board.

Lurk
10th June 2003, 19:23
Goldie is dead right when he mentioned excuses to Knock the Gardai and Air Corps. Franks board also contains rumour. It was said so it must be right?

Lurk

FMolloy
11th June 2003, 08:29
I'll be sure to confrim everything I hear with the Department of Defence or the CoS in future so.

Goldie fish
11th June 2003, 08:48
Originally posted by Silver


When I made the comment (re "toys"), it was to show how strongly I believe in the need for an Air Ambulance over the likes of "side-looking infra-red equipment" in our GASU helis.

Silver.


:flagwave:

What is your Problem with having a flir? It is a vital tool in police work. the Nightsun is just as important. The Uplink is vital for command and control. You remind me of the typical Garda Knocker who would complain one day about a checkpoint outside your workplace and the next day plead "where were the gardai" when some joyrider ploughs into kids on their way to school. The equipment on the GASU machines is standard on most police helis today,and all of it has a practical purpose in day to day policing.

Avoid making sweeping statements unless you can back it up with fact,or failing that, reasonable argument.
A friend of mine in the GASU has no complaints about any aircraft,and no offence,but I think he is more qualified to pass an opinion than anyone else here. The Helis have been found to be more useful in an urban environment,and their average poeration lasts 15-20 minutes,therefor range or endurance is not an issue.
The Defender on the other hand,is used over long periods in a mainly rural environment and it has excelled in this role.

Bud Fox
11th June 2003, 09:53
I can forsee the next post re Toy's for the boys...

The Air Corps helis should have been equipped for dual Army Co Op /Air Ambulance duties, as is the case in many counties.
The S91 being the most suitable of the two - Instead it is overloaded with "toys for the boys". ie the winch, flir & nite sun!!!

Silver
11th June 2003, 19:16
I have no problem with any of the equipment on the GASU helis.

However, I believe that saving lives is more important.


Silver.

Vmax
11th June 2003, 20:28
Originally posted by Bud Fox
I can forsee the next post re Toy's for the boys...

The Air Corps helis should have been equipped for dual Army Co Op /Air Ambulance duties, as is the case in many counties.
The S91 being the most suitable of the two - Instead it is overloaded with "toys for the boys". ie the winch, flir & nite sun!!!

The S-61 not S-91(SK 257) is fitted with Winch and flir,it does not have a nite sun, your facts are wrong.The so called "toys for the boys"you mention are there to save peoples lives.They have in the past and will in the future,thats a fact.


Vmax:flagwave:

Silver
11th June 2003, 23:14
May I point out, to those who do not know any better, that many UK Police forces have helis equipped with flir, nitesun, etc, which are ALSO equipped for Air Ambulance duties.

Our EC-135 is equipped with EXTRA equipment, over and above the normal police heli gear. It is this extra equipment which caused the "overweight" row between the Gardai and Air Corps authorities, and it is this EXTRA equipment that I believe was unnecessary in a country which doesn't have a dedicated air ambulance heli.

The extra equipment on the EC-135 (supplied via US govt agencies) is used in anti-terrorist, anti-smuggling missions. These missions, while important, only constitute a small part of the helis duties and therefore, IMHO, this kind of equipment should have been fitted to an AC heli, which in turn would have allowed the EC-135 to be used in the air ambulance role also.

Then again that would have required proper planning and real co-operation between the AC and Gardai, something which seems to be severly lacking, to date.
Egos getting in the way of common sense as usual.


:flagwave:

strummer
12th June 2003, 04:03
Silver, you still haven't told us what this extra equipment is. Please be more specific. Don't just post innuendo, rumour and hearsay in your responses to direct questions.

Later.

Turkey
12th June 2003, 21:00
While I do not need to rush to Silvers defence,[he is a big lad and more then capable of looking after himself], the EC-135 is overweight, [I have heard from a very realiable source].
The reality of the suitation is open to interpetation and this is mine for what it's worth.
This is a tiny country, whose leaders:D have a very high openion of themselves, which they preffer to persue at the expense of the common good.
The senseable alternative would have been to equip the Air Corps with the tools to do all these jobs; i.e. a sizeable number of suitable airframes.
This they have chosen not to do, do they have a fear of the armed forces? or is it that they are so personally inadaquate that they must be able to boast abroad, that our tiny country have 'police' Helicopters.
It's the same story with Civ SAR, it would have been cheaper and way more efficent to have provided the IAC with the proper tools, and let them get on with the job, but for some reason this seems to have been discarded with nothing that even approches a sound excuse.
Equipping the Air Corps with a decent sized fleet of modern equipment is the only sensible way to proceed, but this will not be done while the current mentality is in the Dail,[ both sides of the house,btw]
Have a better one!!!

Boomer
12th June 2003, 21:27
I must point out that some of the S-61s are in the process / are planned to get NightSun Lights. In fact I think there is one actually installed atm

Silver
12th June 2003, 23:31
strummer,
I don't have a list to hand of the extra equipment fitted to the EC-135. However, one of the items is the side-looking-infra-red system which is used to detect "underground bunkers".
The extra equipment (and it's uses) were listed in the papers around the time of the AC vs Garda dispute.


The point of my arguement (which seems to be lost on some people) is that I believe a dual Garda/ Air Ambulance heli should have been given priority of fitment of such extra equipment.

Lurk
13th June 2003, 00:06
OK, the game is up. I have to confess that I have learned what the actual difference is between the Garda EC 135 and the others in UK, American, and European police roles.

The main difference is that the Garda one is flown by Air Corps Pilots, and the Observers are Irish Police men! Yes, thats it!!!!! Although the Papers, Franks Board, the National Enquirer, and the Area 51 website say that it is equipped with gadgets that can see through the roof of your house and under your bedclothes, Garda and Air Corps Authorities have claimed that it is only a standard thermal imager (FLIR) (Forward Looking Infra Red to you folks). But remember, these are the same people that claimed we had no missile batteries aimed at the UK, and that we didnt possess any interceptor fighters. Just who are we to beleive!!

I still see no facts to back up the "toys" argument, or the lack of endurance. Pleeeeeeaaaaasssssssseeeeeee try to post a fact or two.

Lurk
13th June 2003, 00:31
FLIR with video camera

LCD flat screen display

Video recorder (VCR)

Searchlight

Gyro-stabilized binos

GPS moving street map

Night vision goggles (NVGs)

NVG compatible lighting

P.A./siren

GPS aircraft navigation

Microwave video downlink

Multi-function display

HSI

Auto-pilot

IFR Certified

Radar altimeter


Any toys here?

strummer
13th June 2003, 04:42
Thanks for the info guys. the GASU appeared after I had left Ireland, so it's all a big mystery to me, but very interesting. Silver, I wasn't trying to get on your case, just a hunger for facts. No offense meant.


Originally posted by Silver
The extra equipment (and it's uses) were listed in the papers around the time of the AC vs Garda dispute.

Can you fill me in on this dispute. Was it just a pissing contest? Was there serious issues? What was it all about?

Later.

Silver
13th June 2003, 17:30
Lurk,

The Garda authorities are hardly going to be shouting about any additional equipment in the EC-135, are they.
Hell, they don't even want the Defender to be photographed for Gods sake !

At the risk of repeating myself, I don't have the exact list of additional equipment to hand. I recall reading about the EC-135 in the papers and in Phoenix magazine.
If you're that interested, look up their archives.

This extra equipment was one of the reasons for the dispute between the AC and Gardai that delayed the delivery of the EC-135.

I suppose I'm "imagaining" that too !


N.B. - I'll will accept your apology after you have read the above mentioned archives.

----------------------------------
strummer,

The "dispute" I mentioned was when the Garda and Air Corps authorities were in disagreement over the weight of the EC-135 because of the additional equipment fitted to it.
The AC said it was too heavy for safety reasons - the Gardai said it wasn't.
They were also in disagreemnt over who would fly it - The Gardai wanted civie pilots, but they are currently prevented from this by Irish legislation.

The above disagreements resulted in the delivery of the EC-135 being delayed by 3 years.
(It was kept in storage at McAlpine Helicopters in the UK, at a cost of over €180,000 to the taxpayers !)

I trust this answers you question.


Regards,
Silver.


:flagwave:

Goldie fish
13th June 2003, 17:38
Well if its in Phoenix it must be true!

yellowjacket
13th June 2003, 18:55
What's a "side-looking-infra-red system"?

Infra-red definitely can't see underground. Are you thinking of Sideways Looking Radar?

Radar can have ground-penetrating capabilities, but the antennae required would be very conspicous. They're far more likely to be mounted on a fixed wing aircraft.


In light of this, you might want to look at your facts......

Silver
13th June 2003, 19:07
Well if the EC-135 has no extra equipment over-and-above normal police spec (i.e. Flir, Nitesun, etc) -

Why did the AC authorities maintain that it was "overweight" enough to possibly affect it's safe operation ?

Lurk
13th June 2003, 21:08
Silver, right arguement, wrong aircraft! EC 135 was ready for delivery two years ago, but for an air corps insistence to intimately examine and certify what the German and GB CAA had already certified. After all, who could be more experienced in certification!!!

Regarding your recommendation to read the Phoenix, and the newspaper archives,????????, I would rather trust a Government Press Officer than them!

As for apologies, I never have a problem with them. But no hope on this occasion.

Goldie fish
14th June 2003, 04:14
Originally posted by Silver

Hell, they don't even want the Defender to be photographed for Gods sake !
Its a surveillance aircraft..they dont mind photos being taken,but the less the scumbag crims no about its equipment the better


At the risk of repeating myself, I don't have the exact list of additional equipment to hand.
FLIR with video camera

LCD flat screen display

Video recorder (VCR)

Searchlight

Gyro-stabilized binos

GPS moving street map

Night vision goggles (NVGs)

NVG compatible lighting

P.A./siren

GPS aircraft navigation

Microwave video downlink

Multi-function display

HSI

Auto-pilot

IFR Certified

Radar altimeter


there u go ;)




They were also in disagreemnt over who would fly it - The Gardai wanted civie pilots, but they are currently prevented from this by Irish legislation.
It wasn't a disagreement,it was a tendering process,and no irish company submitted a tender,and it was after UK companies offered tenders,the legal difficulty was discovered. When was the last time you saw a taxi driver driving a patrol car? Aircraft are just the same. The only solution is to offer the pilots temporary membership of an garda siochana,and you guessed it,the only way this can happen is if you are an irish national...wheels within wheels.



:flagwave:

Silver
14th June 2003, 17:09
Air International quote -

"The Garda..are not keen on having the aircraft (Defender) photographed".


Nobody has yet explained why the AC authorities said the EC-135 was possibly overweight if it is standard police spec ?


Silver.

:flagwave:

strummer
14th June 2003, 21:42
Originally posted by Goldie fish
When was the last time you saw a taxi driver driving a patrol car? Aircraft are just the same. The only solution is to offer the pilots temporary membership of an garda siochana,and you guessed it,the only way this can happen is if you are an irish national...wheels within wheels.
:flagwave:

I believe there are civilian drivers working at Garda HQ in the Details Section, driving Garda vans and mini-buses. They are probably Civil Service employees. The contract pilots could be given some sort of Civil Service status so as not to put legal responsibilities on them as attested members of An Garda.

Lurk
15th June 2003, 00:04
Hmmmmmm, Silver, I believe there was a good article in the Phoenix on the Defender! Only joking!

It appears that the Air Corps had an auditor in the base looking at all aircraft ops etc. He came to a conclusion about the Defender (an incorrect one) that the Air Corps acted on. The auditor later withdrew his findings, and the Air Corps had a lot of egg on face.

Silver
15th June 2003, 16:04
I've had enough.
There was a time when I enjoyed posting on this board - not any more.

It seems that it's no longer good enough to post what you have read in the papers.
(And here was me thinking that this is a "discussion" board ?!)

If I ever decide to post on this board again, I will be sure to TRIPLE check my facts with the DoD beforehand !!!

over-and-OUT,
Silver.

Lurk
16th June 2003, 23:42
Come on Silver, post plenty, as you do have interesting issues. Your posts are well received by all. I get slated enough, but I keep coming back!

Lurk

Turkey
17th June 2003, 23:19
Agreed Lurk, Silver get your butt back here, we have an Air Corps to save, godamnit!!!