Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AC S92 contract

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

  • AC S92 contract

    Originally posted by Galloglass View Post
    The Aer Chór should "absorb" the Coastguard helis into a "Maritime Squadron" with a "Naval Co-Op" Flight (with appropriate helis) tasked with developing Heli-ops from suitably equipped naval assets.....In an ideal world of course (they could also help with UAV depolyments)
    The Air Corps balked when they tried to buy some S92s in the early 2000s. I doubt a private company based outside the state is just going to hand over theirs.

    Were you alive at all in the period 1984-2000? We tried the "Naval Co-Op". It failed.
    Horribly.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Galloglass View Post
    The Aer Chór should "absorb" the Coastguard helis into a "Maritime Squadron" with a "Naval Co-Op" Flight (with appropriate helis) tasked with developing Heli-ops from suitably equipped naval assets.....In an ideal world of course (they could also help with UAV depolyments)
    Also are the S 92's fitted with folding rotors and all the other needed maritime features? There wouldn't have been a need for CHC to pay for those features.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
      Also are the S 92's fitted with folding rotors and all the other needed maritime features? There wouldn't have been a need for CHC to pay for those features.
      More Bollocks

      The S92s in service with coast guard are second hand with no specific features such as folding bits!
      Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
        The Air Corps balked when they tried to buy some S92s in the early 2000s.
        In fairness I'd say it was a lot more to do with DoD (and the resultant legal action)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
          And how much would we need we need to pay the private company to buy out the helicopters?

          I thought the helicopters were Government property right now. .......Apparently they are leased as part of "the package" from a private company.
          Still being paid for by govt..( assume the company is making a profit).....Let the DoD lease them and form a Maritime Squadronin Aer Chór.
          Last edited by Galloglass; 6 July 2015, 12:26.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Galloglass View Post
            As far as I know the helicopters are Government property right now. [ATTACH]8021[/ATTACH]
            Don't think so

            The new helicopters which come with a retail price tag of about €40million each, are being leased as part of a package which includes operations crews, from CHC Helicopter, one of the world’s largest providers of such services.
            The cost of the package is €55m a year before vat. Under the deal the Coast Guard gets a minimum of 65 hours per month, at each of the four bases, which are located as Dublin, Waterford, Shannon and Sligo.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
              The Air Corps balked when they tried to buy some S92s in the early 2000s. I doubt a private company based outside the state is just going to hand over theirs.

              Were you alive at all in the period 1984-2000? We tried the "Naval Co-Op". It failed.
              Horribly.
              Nothing to do with the Aer Corps baulking whatever that means but more to do with the Minister at the time interfering with the tendering process with offsets, Eurcopter threatening legal action and then the Minister baulking and cancelling the contract!

              Comment


              • #8
                What he said. its true. sikorsky offered to use the then team aerlingus building for maintenance of the types in ireland or some such offset - Eurocopter kicked up and said that they didnt know offsets were allowed ... i think!.
                "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
                "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by morpheus View Post
                  What he said. its true. sikorsky offered to use the then team aerlingus building for maintenance of the types in ireland or some such offset - Eurocopter kicked up and said that they didnt know offsets were allowed ... i think!.

                  http://www.irishtimes.com/news/smith...ract-1.1055033

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Pure Hover View Post
                    Nothing to do with the Aer Corps baulking whatever that means but more to do with the Minister at the time interfering with the tendering process with offsets, Eurcopter threatening legal action and then the Minister baulking and cancelling the contract!
                    The whole thing was a disaster.
                    As I understood, the Air Corps wanted the EH101/Merlin. Eurocopter, who had a long(though not necessarily good) relationship with the Air Corps offered an enhanced Super Puma that had yet to be built in even prototype form, and Dublin North wanted the Sikorsky product.
                    The Minister didn't interfere. Sikorsky offered offsets. Eurocopter kicked a fuss because they didn't know that was an option. Minister said "if you kids don't keep it down I'm turning this car around and going home again". We bought more Mowags with the money allocated for the Helicopters.
                    The Air Corps failed in preparing the tender.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I remember the controversy over the MLH project in the early 2000s. Could have been a completely different AC if they had managed to get them at the time... But what I'm interested to know, is how

                      Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                      The Air Corps failed in preparing the tender.
                      This isn't a dig or a jibe, just wondering if/how the AC got something wrong from their side? The Sikorsky/Eurocopter spat sounds like it was civil/political issue - offsets = jobs, therefore politicians say buy X rather than way - so would have been outside military thinking on the procurement. Yes/No? Thanks for any info, interested to know anymore of the back story on this.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I cannot understand how the Eurocopter was the preferred choice from the expert panel. It was a paper aircraft. They showed a Super Puma to the buyers and said "well it will look a bit like this, except different" when offering the Super Cougar. It had first flown in 2000.
                        The fact that numerous providers who neither sell nor build helicopters also reached the latter stages of the process show how flawed it was. How was that supposed to work? Though they didn't make the final cut, an Israeli company was offering Russian built airframes with western avionics.
                        No matter what we ended up with, we would have been the military launch customer for all, something the Dauphin experience should have put us off. The Failure of the MLH project was actually in the end a good thing for the Air Corps. If they had gone through with it, there was a good chance the Gazelle/Alouette/Dauphin would not have been replaced. It was not on the horizon at all in 2000 (Even though many external consultants had recommended replacing all 3 with one type, preferably something similar to what the GASU were using at the time, the Squirrel).

                        Getting back to the point, the Naval tender. The RFP specified exactly what the Naval service was looking for. Only when submissions had been accepted were successful bidders permitted to tender for the build. The tender also managed to spread payment out over the duration of the construction, which in hindsight was a fantastic plan, as the economy collapsed some months later, and we had the Troika in, telling us where to make cuts and who to sack. But here we are, with the final stages of the procurement within sight, even though there has been difficulties. But the NS is playing the long game, and has not been afraid to tell the builder "No!" when things are not right.

                        Its a long way from the old days of the provider dictating to the DF what it would provide.
                        That is how the AC failed where the NS succeeded.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                          I cannot understand how the Eurocopter was the preferred choice from the expert panel. It was a paper aircraft. They showed a Super Puma to the buyers and said "well it will look a bit like this, except different" when offering the Super Cougar. It had first flown in 2000.
                          the S92 was a brand new aircraft and still at prototype stage, at least the Super Cougar was based on a mature design

                          The fact that numerous providers who neither sell nor build helicopters also reached the latter stages of the process show how flawed it was. How was that supposed to work? Though they didn't make the final cut, an Israeli company was offering Russian built airframes with western avionics.
                          the OEM isn't necessarily the supplier

                          No matter what we ended up with, we would have been the military launch customer for all, something the Dauphin experience should have put us off. The Failure of the MLH project was actually in the end a good thing for the Air Corps. If they had gone through with it, there was a good chance the Gazelle/Alouette/Dauphin would not have been replaced. It was not on the horizon at all in 2000 (Even though many external consultants had recommended replacing all 3 with one type, preferably something similar to what the GASU were using at the time, the Squirrel).
                          +1
                          Except it took a long time

                          The tender also managed to spread payment out over the duration of the construction, which in hindsight was a fantastic plan, as the economy collapsed some months later, and we had the Troika in, telling us where to make cuts and who to sack. But here we are, with the final stages of the procurement within sight, even though there has been difficulties. But the NS is playing the long game, and has not been afraid to tell the builder "No!" when things are not .
                          It's actually the duration of the build and beyond (JJ won't be fully paid for till 2017) and it has pushed up the final price

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I remember updated Kamov Ka-28s being mentioned as an option at the time of the MLH tender, sounded like one of the weirdest options to fill the role... Not sure if Mi-8s ever made it there though.

                            There mightn't have been a tender out for the Alouette/Gazelle/Dauphin replacement at that point, but it was definitely always mentioned* anytime I saw equipment updates for the AC being discussed. (* Mentioned not necessarily meaning that we're definitely going to proceed with it.) Although the AW139 mightn't be the perfect military helicopter, I think they got the process to select it (and the 135s correct), although maybe they could have gone for the Blackhawk instead.

                            Sorry for dragging off in another direction. Best of luck to the NS with P62, hopefully everything gets resolved with it soon.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The Army wanted the Don to buy Blackhawks and there was a core of Donners up for this but this was shot down as "too warry" (genuine exact words used by a DoD civil servant,as told to me by someone on that scene). They were offered the Kamovs by McEvaddy, who was trying to offload a bunch of them,but there was no continuity of supply of spares,so it was treated as facetious nonsense by the DoD. The MI-8 and Cougar were also offered (more joke candidates) but The Army changed aim and looked at the Merlin and EH 101, which were having their own share of troubles at the time and the S-92 cropped up,but was having issues also. When the Donners and the Army saw the size of the cabin space of the S-92, they were well impressed, as well as it's ramp......the Don ultimately ended up with the hairdresser's Porsche and the civvies got the S-92............

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X