Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bell 212 -Answer to A/C Problems?

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

  • Bell 212 -Answer to A/C Problems?

    Is the (Agusta) Bell 212 the answer to Irish military helicopter needs for the moment?




    Apparently these are available for about $1m on the international market, are in widespread use worldwide, plenty of upgrades available, have a useful capacity etc. They use the PT6 engine, which will also be used in the PC9s.

    Would it be economically viable to purchase a decent number (10?) of these, upgrade/overhaul and put them in service?

    The idea would not be to use them in a civilian SAR role, concentrating on military usage.

    Downsides?
    .
    .
    .
    With 50,000 men getting killed a week, who's going to miss a pigeon?

    Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people.

  • #2
    As I've said before I'm a big fan of the idea as a replacement for the LUH fleet.
    In this role its main limitation would be a thirstier engine than is neccesary for some of the IACs"breadand butter duties".
    On the other hand if it was to be employed as an MLH, its lacks range and payload as compared to the Sea King class of helicopters.
    All that said it would be a good leap forward in capabilities.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

    Comment


    • #3
      Downsides?

      It'd cost money, which is about it.

      They'd give the AC a genuine military capacity, theres a relatively good supply of parts available from commercial (hence competitive) sources, they can perform Casevac, transport, liason and would even be very suitable for overseas deployment. Would have a useful role in SOF support too.

      8 or ideally 10 would be a nice round figure. But it'd cost money.

      Comment


      • #4
        No better way of saying it old boy:D
        But the question is how much
        "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

        Comment


        • #5
          Spend say $1.5m on purchasing decent examples. Another $1m each on upgrades.
          For 10 that still has you on $25m. What would other costs be like?
          .
          .
          .
          With 50,000 men getting killed a week, who's going to miss a pigeon?

          Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people.

          Comment


          • #6
            How much extra capablity over the A111's would they really give us? possably a silly question, I know, but induldge me a moment; would the extra expense be justified, or would we be better off retaining , and expanding the A111 fleet[if suitable s/hand examples could be obtained]?
            Then effords could be concentrated on getting something to replace the D2's, which would prefferably be a medium machine.
            Do not get me wrong, the 212 does look and sound the busness, which ironicaly enough in a bigger part of defence then most of [even] us would admit, and the power-plant commonality is not something to be sneezed at, but unless there is sufficent advantage over current equipment, to outweigh the added expense, then the idea ain't going to fly.
            BTW YJ t'is a better idea then your Air Corps splittin' post, IMHO, keep them comming!!!
            "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
            Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
            Illegitimi non carborundum

            Comment


            • #7
              Sticking my foot in it

              Just thought I'd sound out this suggestion. If SAR is not to be a main role of the Air Corps of the future, is the replacement of the A3/D2 with a single light helecopter type such as the UH-1Y not the most logical thing to do forgetting completely about ML heli's for at least 10 years or so.

              Would 10/12 of the brand new, and thus probably damn expensive UH-1Y's be financially and operationally viable, bought over 5 or 6 years? Would they satisfactorily cover the troop transport role in the absence of ML heli's?

              I'm just curious, I don't know, its probably a rubbish idea. If so say as much

              http://www.bellhelicopter.textron.co...ell_uh-1y.html

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Turkey
                How much extra capablity over the A111's would they really give us? possably a silly question, I know, but induldge me a moment; would the extra expense be justified, or would we be better off retaining , and expanding the A111 fleet[if suitable s/hand examples could be obtained]?
                They could carry a section for a start, we don't need more AIIIs, we don't need more than 8 LUHs, if we had 212s all the possible benefits of the AIII except running costs would be moot.
                I doesnt just look the business it is the business as far as meeting our needs for less than 8 figures goes.
                NEFOO: The UH-1Y is going to be a very good aircraft for its purpose but dont forget we are talking a bout a compromise substitute for S-92/Cougar type aircraft, new build UH-1Ys would cost at least a much as an IAR-330 which would be amuch better choice for us.
                YJs point is fundamentally sound, as he said its the best available solution not the best possible: 212s would give the IAC MLH operating experience , greatly enhance the mobility and safety of overseas deployments all for a minimal cost and the added benefit of shared engine economies(Don't forget the PT6 is also available for all of the Cessna replacements under consideration), the sale of Ballincollig alone would cover the procurement and training costs of a ten strong fleet and probably the first 5 years running costs as well.
                In comparison what good would another 5 or even 10 AIIIs do?
                "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                Comment


                • #9
                  xxxxx
                  Last edited by lordinajamjar; 22 November 2004, 13:27.

                  "When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive - to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love."


                  Marcus Aurelius Roman Emperor (161 to 180 A.D.)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    He sounds like lots of Irish politicians, outraged about subjects on which he is pig ignorant
                    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Sure didn't we sell some barracks a while back and get 41 million for it. We could buy them out of that.

                      (MOD: annoying caps replaced by nice lower-case letters)
                      Last edited by FMolloy; 29 November 2003, 13:17.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We could buy them without it, but we wont...
                        Anyway the prevailing mood at Franks board among the ppl who know is that the IAC just couldnt hand;leany o/seasdeployment.
                        "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Well they'd better buy something with it!!

                          (MOD: more annoying caps replaced by nice lower-case letters)
                          Last edited by FMolloy; 29 November 2003, 13:18.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Most of the difficulties put forward point to yet more organisational difficulties in the A/C. They aren't based on technial hurdles, just the seeming inability of the organisation to adapt to different circumstances, which is hardly a desirable characteristic of a military organisation.
                            .
                            .
                            .
                            With 50,000 men getting killed a week, who's going to miss a pigeon?

                            Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Did you read my suggested amendments to remedy that? I dont want to sound overly inmperious but it strikes me that such a remedy would fairly simple to implement.
                              "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X