U.S. Presidential Helicopter Cabins Made in INDIA ?????

[Stinger10]

YGTBSM!!!! :mad:

So much for AMERICAN MADE! .......And now we trust India more than the UK and Italy????? REALLY? What an insult to our NATO ALLIES.

Construction of US Presidential Helo Starts in India
Lockheed Martin has begun construction of the first lot of six new-generation U.S. presidential transport helicopters in India, according to a report by India Strategic. Construction of the VH 92 Superhawks' cabins began recently in collaboration with India's Tata Advanced Systems Ltd., which also will exclusively develop components such as wire harnesses. The VH 92 is a variant of Sikorsky’s S-92, selected by the U.S. Defense Department in May 2014 to replace the current presidential fleet of Sikorsky VH-69s and VH-3Ds. L-M had already been a part of that contract award, tasked with designing the VH 92’s onboard communication and electronic warfare suites. L-M’s recent acquisition of Sikorsky means it will now oversee development of that company's airframe as well.

[Sir Korsky]

And the problem is??? I'm sure the Indians will do a fine job. They'll make sure all of the rivets go in and no Friday Ford components.

[Lonewolf_50]

Stinger10, back in the 1990's when the aircraft industry was all agog with making inroads into foreign markets, the S-92 was even bragged about as being made in five different countries. Various bits and pieces were to be made in:
US
China
Spain
(India, I guess?)
Can't recall the other, I think Canada.

This was supposed to position the aircraft and company for more/better sales in overseas markets ... anyhoo, this isn't something new for the S-92.

Looks like the deal with India is new ...
In June 2009, Sikorsky Aircraft entered into a joint-venture with Tata Advanced Systems Limited (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Advanced_Systems_Limited) (TASL) for S-92 manufacturing in India (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India) for export and domestic markets. A US$200 million manufacturing plant will be operational in Hyderabad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyderabad,_Andhra_Pradesh) by 2010. Initially, TASL will supply the complete cabins for the S-92 to Sikorsky. The first cabin was delivered in November 2010.

[noooby]

If you go back a few years, AW did say that the AW101 had more US content in it that the S-92 for the Presidential bid. Seems like they might have been telling the thruth!

[Self loading bear]

Welkome to the real world.
I am sure the US government has included requirements for a minimum percentage of indigenous work/content.
Although this was practically a single source contract, these contracts are usually awarded on the basis how much local content can be offered.
Even the Dutch government has done this for their contract for the F35 jetfighters. It even seems to be the case that more money is spent on F35 parts with private Dutch companies than the Dutch Government buys on complete F35's. This way we see some of tax money back.
Apperently the required percentage is not 100% for the VH 92.
We all know the cost of the "of the shelf" casco is just a minor part of the total contract value. Do we?

SLB

[SansAnhedral]

S-92 cabins have never been built domestically. MHI was doing production for quite a while. Aside form that, Embraer was building the sponsons, AIDC was doing the cockpit, JIDC did the tail rotor pylon, and Gamesa did the transition.

I do find it humorous that the entire push for Sikorsky to partner with Tata in India was to try and get a bit of local leverage with the S-92 for the VVIP contract - which famously was awarded to AW with the 101 and subsequently turned into "Choppergate"

[terminus mos]

Sans

There was little or no margin for MHI building S-92 cabins, they wanted out of the deal and gave a short timeline for stopping production.

It was a case of looking for an industrial supplier with a quick ramp up capability that could build cabins at a price and TATA offered the best deal. It was more about cabins at the right price.

[rugmuncher]

And where do you think the Cockpits are made for your CH47Chinook ?

G.B.A. :ugh:

[Stinger10]

LONE - You Miss the point AGAIN. :ugh:

ONCE AGAIN. HYPOCRACY is ASTOUNDING and as a tax payer, I am offended. Why isn't McCain screaming now? Security is the #1 consideration for the Presidential Helicopter and its just fine that the cabin is made in India (as opposed to two NATO Allies countries like the UK and Italy) and the Tail Rotor (pretty critical component) IN CHINA!?!?! Sikorsky campaigned the S-92 as the "Made in the USA" aircraft...... Any questions? Lets not be OBTUSE.

SANS- Has anyone ever been convicted in your Sikorsky proclaimed "Choppergate" ? Ironic how you nicely pointed out that SIK had motive to have the India deal overturned........ hmmmmmm:D

[SASless]

I am wondering why the Sikorsky bashing?

Is it a Penis Envy thing for some?

We tried the 101 and it failed miserably.

The Contract was re-done and Sikorsky won it.

Yet when Sikorsky farms out part of the work they get criticized for it.

The 101 Program did this in reverse and never got criticized by those harping today.

Are some of you wanting to have your Kate and Edith too perhaps?

[Stinger10]

SAS-less or USELESS

Its a fact and an observation of the complete HYPOCRACY by Sikorsky and the NAVY for that matter. Instead of your playground BS why not offer actual ADULT level retort. Unless you really are 12 years old....?

For the record..... the AW101 is a far superior aircraft in every sense. Check it out. Simply because the US Gov't could take an already flying combat aircraft and successfully put it into service simply because it didn't say Sikorsky on the side, wasn't the fault of the 101.....


Sikorsky WON it is laughable. IT WAS SOLE SOURCE.

S-92 Tail Rotor - Made in China..... Might as well have the Transmission "farmed out" to Pakistan????

[Thomas coupling]

Stinger 10 - get a life bud. Do you walk around knuckle dragging also?

WTF is wrong with an Indian cockpit or a chinese tail rotor?

Both these countries will have overtaken yank lnad within 20 years economically and are lookijng at martian and space travel as the norm - now???

Sado.:ugh:

[Stinger10]

Thom - Aren't your knuckles dragging the UK? They just disrespected he UK by saying they trust India and China more with the Presidential Helo than the UK. But if you are fine with that, who am I to defend the UK?

[rugmuncher]

These days it's not just about the trust, it's about the dollar value cost to the part being purchased.

Labour costs are WAAAAY lower in China and India.

Quality will be reflected in the purchasers quality rating system for the supplier.

[Lonewolf_50]

LONE - You Miss the point AGAIN. :ugh: Nope. I know how this stuff really works.
ONCE AGAIN. HYPOCRACY is ASTOUNDING and as a tax payer, I am offended. Nice, your seat on the outrage bus is three rows back from the driver.

I see no reason for McCain to scream, since the "Made in India" was known about five years ago, before S-92 was awarded after the President called in the markers on the 101 ... which was very much a political move on his part to look good. When the second award happened, where the metal structures of the cabin is made apparently didn't matter all that much, did it? (Maybe that isn't the critical technology base that needs protecting under the Buy America requirement ... do you GET IT now? )

As to how annoying it is to me that it isn't made here, albeit at higher cost, that battle was lost 15-20 years ago. It is easily argued that this strategic decision by Sikorsky and UTC cost some people I know who worked for SAC job slots. The Teamsters weren't happy. Hell, UTC didn't seem to be happy with how quickly Mr Buckley was necking down the oversized labor force ... so UTC brought in a fella from Mesa ... so really, nobody was happy. It's frowns all around.

There isn't enough time to explain global markets to you: suffice to say that if you think that "pristine" is the only way anything ever gets done, take two shots of bourbon with your coffee each morning to dull the psychic pain.

Warmest Regards
Lonewolf_50
Somewhere in the Real World

[Stinger10]

Rug -I understand the business side of it. Not a problem. That's the way global business works....:ok:

One major contributing factor to the downfall of the Lockheed Martin VH-71 program was the production security requirements waged by the Navy. Drove costs through the roof and COULD NOT be compromised due to the highly sensitive nature of the mission of the Marine One helicopters. SIK and the Conn. Congressional delegation used this argument daily to try and reverse the VH-71 program ..... and ultimately they were successful. Then SIK campaigned the "made in the USA" aspect of the S-92 heavily.

Isn't this HYPOCRTICAL by both the Navy and Sikorsky? Does anyone really feel that these particular S-92's will be the same level of security having the cabins built in India and the Tail Rotors built in China, than LM having the components built in the UK and Italy? WHAT HAS CHANGED to make it less important now?

[Lonewolf_50]

Rug -I understand the business side of it. Not a problem. That's the way global business works....:ok:

One major contributing factor to the downfall of the Lockheed Martin VH-71 program was the production security requirements waged by the Navy. Drove costs through the roof and COULD NOT be compromised due to the highly sensitive nature of the mission of the Marine One helicopters. SIK and the Conn. Congressional delegation used this argument daily to try and reverse the VH-71 program ..... and ultimately they were successful. Then SIK campaigned the "made in the USA" aspect of the S-92 heavily.

Isn't this HYPOCRTICAL by both the Navy and Sikorsky? Does anyone really feel that these particular S-92's will be the same level of security having the cabins built in India and the Tail Rotors built in China, than LM having the components built in the UK and Italy? WHAT HAS CHANGED to make it less important now? If you know all of that, then you sounding off here is just a load of noise.

[Stinger10]

LONE -
2 replies

1. The cabin as mundane as that may seem, over the life of the helicopter, a structural failure can occur after thousands of fight hours, however well short of their design life. So while not a dynamic component, a key one nonetheless. So Pres. BO won't have to deal with fallout from his, and the NOW SecDef's, political decision. But then again, "YOU KNOW HOW THIS STUFF REALLY WORKS."

2. The future L/M company, SIK, is leaving Conn and the NE piece by piece. Its just a matter of time. So all the politics helped in the short run only.

As for "sounding off here".... isn't the what chat forums are for? Turn the channel then.... If your condescending attitude will allow you ?

[rugmuncher]

"Rug -I understand the business side of it. Not a problem. That's the way global business works...."

Thanks Sting. Glad we both have a common understanding.

BTW, figured out the CH-47 cockpit yet?;)

[Lonewolf_50]

LONE -
2 replies
1. The cabin as mundane as that may seem, over the life of the helicopter, a structural failure can occur after thousands of fight hours, however well short of their design life. Indeed, and I am familiar enough with the Presidential program to know that they go in for regular/scheduled maintenance. I even know a thing or two about helicopter maintenance: from unit level to I level to Depot level, been involved with all three.
So while not a dynamic component, a key one nonetheless.
Sure it is, it's a structure. But then again, "YOU KNOW HOW THIS STUFF REALLY WORKS."
Yes I do, thanks. Your all caps is, by the way, bad manners on the net.

2. The future L/M company, SIK, is leaving Conn and the NE piece by piece. Its
just a matter of time. So all the politics helped in the short run only.
Heck, with how expensive labor is in CT, it's no surprise they are looking for a lot of places to make helicopters cheaper ... hmmm, like back in the late 90's, there was a shut down of new CH-53E production in CT and migration to Troy, Alabama, to go with their overhaul/battle damage repair facility there. (Been a few years, I'd need to get up to date on what's happened since). See how Boeing moved to South Carolina? Well, Sikorsky is probably going to have to do something similar. A shame, that the home of helicopters may have to move ... oh well, that's how the old corporate cookie crumbles. :( We'll see what LM does with all of that neat new kit Sikorsky has in their plant.
As for "sounding off here".... isn't the what chat forums are for? Turn the channel then.... If your condescending attitude will allow you ?
1. Outrage, all caps, whinging: sure, come on by and whinge, but don't expect anyone to buy that line.
2. Your more sober offerings in this last response is the kind of dialogue professionals tend to engage in.
3. Signal to noise ratio: it's an interesting concept.

[Stinger10]

Rug- Don't want t sound condescending, but Is our President going to fly in a CH-47F? If not, its not relevant. I am only highlighting the hypocrisy between the two programs.

I personally have flown CH-47F's "two palm tress .... a dumpster" and the S-92.

[Stinger10]

Lone- Is it whining? Is that what you meant to write?

Deal. I'll stop whining, if you stop condescending like everyone you offer your opinion to is a 10 year old? Saying that as professionally as I can muster right now.

I know how the aircraft are unusually maintained and have enough of a past to know they do not have the ability to catch that kind of airframe issue we are talking about, if one were to occur.

More importantly. Nobody has mentioned the T/R from China...... Pretty critical component. No worries about that for a Presidential Aircraft?

ps- no caps either :ok:

[whoknows idont]

More importantly. Nobody has mentioned the T/R from China...... Pretty critical component. No worries about that for a Presidential Aircraft?

If everything is built to specification then it doesn't matter where it is built. And it can be verified if something was built to spec. Rest assured there will be excellent QA for production of every component.

Do you think they will just order a complete TR assy on alibaba, stick it on the new helicopter and take the president on the first test flight? Or do you expect the Chinese intelligence to reach for world domination by having tail rotors with a carefully engineered hidden flaw delivered for Marine One?

[Stinger10]

You said it. I didn't.

That was the worry about our Italian and British friends on the VH-71 program...... We just trust the Chinese and India more then?

[whoknows idont]

I quoted and answered your question.
I'm not familiar with the details of the kestrel program (although what I read over the last years was plain comical).
I think you can certainly make a case that it's ridiculous to transfer the jobs away from the domestic market for a project like that. But if a company like Sikorsky can have a proper and safe helicopter built in the US, why shouldn't they be able to have it built elsewhere?

[Thomas coupling]

Stinger - seriously, what planet are you from? This is the 21st century not the 19th century.
Do you honestly think chinese or indian built stock for the presedential limo is inferior to anything you can produce?

Are you a redneck or something?

[Bravo73]

More importantly. Nobody has mentioned the T/R from China...... Pretty critical component. No worries about that for a Presidential Aircraft?


The President probably uses a 'phone which was manufactured in China. Does that worry you too?

[Lonewolf_50]

Lone- Is it whining? Is that what you meant to write? I am conversant in both US English and British English, so I use whinging or whining depending on what I feel like using. Deal. I'll stop whining, if you stop condescending like everyone you offer your opinion to is a 10 year old? Saying that as professionally as I can muster right now. We can toss mutual respect at one another. Works for me. I know how the aircraft are unusually maintained and have enough of a past to know they do not have the ability to catch that kind of airframe issue we are talking about, if one were to occur. Hmm, you spent time in Stratford with the VH-3? More importantly. Nobody has mentioned the T/R from China...... Pretty critical component. No worries about that for a Presidential Aircraft?
Not an unfair question.
Here's a pointer to where the answer lies:

How robust is the Sikorsky surveillance program and oversight for flight critical components for this sub?
Does the Sikorsky rep note that the process for blade manufacture and assembly meet the Sikorsky process standards that they do at home? Yes or no?
Government oversight question: has the DCMA office charged with oversight on this contract had a look at these plans that relate to Critical Safety Items per public law?
What oversight program does NAVAIR have in place, as I think NAVAIR has at least implementation authority on this contract? (As I've not read it, may not have that right).

I don't know the answer, but someone in the program office sure as hell better.

When you get to flight critical components, I'll suggest to you that someone in Sikorsky has a serious interest. (A replay of the Blackhawk spindle issue back in the early 90's, which seems to have been the trigger for the "flight safety parts" program the Army put into place, is not desired ... )
ps- no caps either :ok:Hurrah!

[Stinger10]

All excellent questions-
•How robust is the Sikorsky surveillance program and oversight for flight critical components for this sub?
•Does the Sikorsky rep note that the process for blade manufacture and assembly meet the Sikorsky process standards that they do at home? Yes or no?
•Government oversight question: has the DCMA office charged with oversight on this contract had a look at these plans that relate to Critical Safety Items per public law?
•What oversight program does NAVAIR have in place, as I think NAVAIR has at least implementation authority on this contract? (As I've not read it, may not have that right).
I don't know the answer, but someone in the program office sure as hell better.

When you get to flight critical components, I'll suggest to you that someone in Sikorsky has a serious interest. (A replay of the Blackhawk spindle issue back in the early 90's, which seems to have been the trigger for the "flight safety parts" program the Army put into place, is not desired ... )

All that being said the S-92 STILL has had some MGB issues too. I would think with as much scrutiny as the VXX program has gone through, why wouldn't they avoid the issue and find U.S. suppliers for critical components?

Again, I didn't make the rules but I know the rules that were strictly enforced the last time around and this is the polar opposite.

[Stinger10]

BRAVO - Bravo
The President probably uses a 'phone which was manufactured in China. Does that worry you too?

Does the President fly on his cell phone? Could it fatally crash?

Am I missing something?:ugh:

[Stinger10]

Thomas - Lets not call names.
Stinger - seriously, what planet are you from? This is the 21st century not the 19th century.
Do you honestly think chinese or indian built stock for the presedential limo is inferior to anything you can produce?


I would think you would have supported your UK based VH-71 program, from which SIK only took jobs and money away from your country......?

[JohnDixson]

( Need to start this by making clear that I retired 10 years ago, first, and second, that I haven't checked this subject out with anyone at SA )

According to the processes that I assume are still in place for the qualification of a US military helicopter, the VH-92 will require, among other flight testing, a flight loads survey covering the entire flight envelope specified by the contract, and additionally, a structural flight demonstration according to Mil D 23222. See: Demonstration Requirements for Helicopters (http://mil-spec.tpub.com/MIL-D/MIL-D-23222A/)

I should add/clarify: FAA qualification requires a thorough flight loads survey, but does not require a structural demonstration as specified by the military.

This data will, I assume, be summed with existent FAA structural loads data that is applicable, and the respective component lives and replacement times will be established.

I used the word " assume twice so far, and recall as a junior Lt., I was taught never to assume anything, and that good advice applies here.

It would appear, therefore, that the system is in place to ensure any new parts get a thorough test qual.

BTW, a review of the test conditions and maneuvers required by 23222 makes for interesting reading for pilots and engineers.

[Stinger10]

I'm not familiar with the details of the kestrel program (although what I read over the last years was plain comical).
I think you can certainly make a case that it's ridiculous to transfer the jobs away from the domestic market for a project like that. But if a company like Sikorsky can have a proper and safe helicopter built in the US, why shouldn't they be able to have it built elsewhere?

Again, I didn't make the rules but I know the rules that were strictly enforced the last time around and this is the polar opposite.

WHY? What has changed?

[tottigol]

The politicians pocketing the bribe.

[SASless]

I am thinking Sultan has an evil twin in Stinger....they both sure seem to have the same attitude towards anything Sikorsky.:rolleyes:

[Set1SQ]

You certainly have an agenda. The tail rotor blade issue is not an issue because the TRB is not made in China as you assert. The tail rotor pylon is made in China. Pretty benign. Keep swinging. Put those terrible folks from another company trying to advance the industry in their place. I really don't get the hating.

[Ascend Charlie]

So, in Stinger's ideal world, this all-amurrican presidential machine has every part made in the gosh-darn Hew Hess Hay and is a gleaming example of truth, justice, and the amurrican way.

And then he puts some fuel into it, which comes from ....an arab country! :{

[SASless]

Well, actually, we do have a little bit of that Oil stuff in our own country. Except for the policies of the current Occupant of the White House and his cronies....we would be exporting the stuff we got from Canada.

[The Sultan]

SAS

You are shooting dusty wads. No connection to Stinger. Do not really care about the presidential helicopter as it will be cancelled for gross overruns. Much more fun to point out the disasters of the CH-53K and S-97.

Only 5 weeks to go to get the 53K in the air to the new schedule. As a tax payer I hope they are ground running by now with a hover safe gearbox.

The Sultan

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Oh Dear God!!!

I've spent a lot of the last couple of years at Sikorsky seeing through the production of a couple of VIP machines we have on order for a European customer. Parts are made all over the world, shipped to SA and put together. Exactly the same way that Boeing do it (In fact Boeing undercarriages are made about twenty five miles from where I am in the UK)

The quality control and audit process is outstanding, including in the countries who supply the parts (all overseen by SA and FAA and I would expect for the Presidential 92 the Pentagon), The production line is a busy place with a lot of really good people making sure everything goes together properly.

It all comes down to expertise and cost. If someone in China/India/Uk/Canada or Outer Mongolia has made the investment in a specific area of technology and can produce the right kit, to the right standard, at the right price then that has to be the sensible way to go.

As an overseas customer of SA the biggest bugbear has to be ITAR, that really does cause a massive level of frustration.

So its' not all American, who cares because neither is the Statue of Liberty:E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Liberty

SND

[Stinger10]

You ALL miss my point.

GOOD LORD! Stop with the lectures on benefits on the global market place. I work in it! I support it! :ugh:

I don't care one bit what parts are made where..... That is business and better for the consumer price-wise.

MY quote:

I didn't make the rules but I know the rules that were strictly enforced the last time around and this is the polar opposite.

WHY? What has changed?

When the solution for the New Marine One Presidential helicopter was the Lockheed Martin - AW101. Entirely sourced from the UK, Italy, and the US, the Navy helped kill the program with out of this world production security requirements. NAVY rationale; Its a Presidential aircraft. Leading cause of cost overruns.

WHY IS IT NOT AN ISSUE THIS TIME? WHAT HAS CHANGED? Is it simple hypocrisy because Sikorsky finally got the contract?

[Lonewolf_50]

Stop with the lectures on benefits on the global market place. I work in it! I support it! :ugh:

When the solution for the New Marine One Presidential helicopter was the Lockheed Martin - AW101. Entirely sourced from the UK, Italy, and the US, the Navy helped kill the program with out of this world production security requirements. NAVY rationale; Its a Presidential aircraft. Leading cause of cost overruns.

WHY IS IT NOT AN ISSUE THIS TIME? WHAT HAS CHANGED? Is it simple hypocrisy because Sikorsky finally got the contract? Why are you back to all caps and shouting?

I will suggest that the program setback from losing the AW101 didn't make the VH-3's any younger or less long in the tooth. A new bird does need to be procured. It appears that other eligible players tired of the game and chose not to play. (Can't say as I blame them, given what happened with AW101).

I will not comment on your overly simplistic description of the end of AW101, but the factors you cite surely contributed to it. The old requirements creep happened again, for reasons that those in the program know and I don't.

Just curious: have you written to your Congressional and Senatorial reps and inquired likewise?
Have you contacted the US DoD 1-800 Waste/fraud/abuse hotline?
If so, what was the response?

Just a note about using the net: Keyword hypocrisy in a rant in all caps is red flag material for more noise than signal.
Do you own shares in AW?
What is your vested interest in this?

@Set1SQ: thanks for setting it straight about the TR blades, I shared in the error there. :O

[Stinger10]

LONE-

Frustration. Sorry. I have been saying the same thing over and over and it must be my poor communication skills as to why my point is being missed.

Although I will admit, I didn't realize that "hypocrisy" was a 4-letter flag-able word. It just accurately and factually describes the situation so not sure why its considered noise? This is where we come to discus all things rotary-wing, regardless of whether you agree with the subject or not, No?

As for my stock in AW...... I have had the good fortune to fly just about everything rotary-wing (except V-22) including the S-92. The 101 is one of the best a aircraft I have ever flown. Proven itself in combat in very tough places. What happened to it, and how it was slandered, not to mention a complete waste of $3B tax payer money, has never sat right with me. Never will. I agree the VH-3 absolutely has to be replaced immediately. It's never going back to an AW101 either, but you cannot reward bad behavior by letting things just slip by without comment.

[Stinger10]

Set1SQ -

The tail rotor blade issue is not an issue because the TRB is not made in China as you assert. The tail rotor pylon is made in China. Pretty benign

Benign huh? The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S-92A helicopters. This AD requires inspecting the tail rotor (T/R) pylon for a loose or missing fastener, a crack, damage, or corrosion and adding an internal doubler to the aft shear deck tunnel assembly.

This AD was prompted by the discovery of cracks in T/R pylons. The actions are intended to detect a loose or missing fastener, a crack, damage, or corrosion on the T/R pylon and, if present, to repair the T/R pylon and install a doubler on the aft shear deck tunnel assembly or to replace the T/R pylon and install a doubler on the aft shear deck tunnel assembly.

The actions are intended to prevent failure of the T/R pylon or other T/R components, which could lead to the loss of control of the helicopter.


How's things in Stratford, Conn today?

[Lonewolf_50]

LONE-
Frustration. In honesty, I share it. I am (for my own reasons) disappointed that the Presidential fleet has not been upgraded in the case of Marine 1. We have a robust rotary wing industry, and when it comes to systems integration some awesome capability on the national level. And even if the better offer is the Merlin variant, that too comes from a solid background in rotary wing production.
It just accurately and factually describes the situation so not sure why its considered noise? It's root is political. What in politics isn't hypocrisy? The older I get, the more cynical about it I become.
As for my stock in AW...... I have had the good fortune to fly just about everything rotary-wing (except V-22) including the S-92. The 101 is one of the best a aircraft I have ever flown. Proven itself in combat in very tough places. What happened to it, and how it was slandered, not to mention a complete waste of $3B tax payer money, has never sat right with me. Never will. Not the first program to make a meal out of itself. I suppose it's wishful thinking that it will be the last. (glances nervously at the F-35 thread ...). Let's see, how many billions finally went into A-12 before that program went south? The comparison isn't very apt, as A-12 was a lot of new stuff and VH replacement was a proven bird with a whole lotta stuff for a mod.
I agree the VH-3 absolutely has to be replaced immediately. It's never going back to an AW101 either, but you cannot reward bad behavior by letting things just slip by without comment.
I'll suggest that the root of the behavior lies in Congress, but I also think a few folks in DoD, DoN, and NAVAIR made errors our system is supposed to be able to identify and correct. It's not like "requirements creep" is a new term as of five years ago. :mad:

That the cabin is made in India is well beyond the matter of how the VH replacement program self immolated. I try not to take rhetoric as substance, though that "buy America" meme can have some interesting detail behind the bumper sticker, not all of it pretty.

[Hilife]

Stinger

For those of us fortunate enough to ‘walk upon England's mountains green’, we know only too well that Remembrance Day is fast approaching.

As such this would be a fitting time to highlight to you that during WWII, the number of Indian men who joined up to fight alongside the British was greater in number than for the sum of every other Empire/Commonwealth country put together, so we Brits have much to thank the Indians for (at the time, the same could not be said for the Italians), not to mention their wonderful contribution to our language, with words like Blighty, pukka, tiffin, and for that much loved British favourite, the good old Ruby Murray.

For a nation of workers and engineers capable of building anything from the Taj Mahal to the Chenab railway bridge, let alone ICBM’s and space rockets, I don’t suppose banging rivets into a collection of sheet metals, formers, longerons and castings etc. should prove to be too taxing, especially as they have been building the cabins for close to five years now.

Add this to the S-92 airframes flaw tolerant design, HUMS monitoring and a fleet which must be fast approaching a million flight hours (so the problems have mostly already been identified), I don’t think the President has too much to fear about the quality of the cabin section whilst up and about in their very low usage airframes.

As for the main and tail rotor hubs and blades (I stand to be corrected by those from Sikorsky past and present), but it was my understanding that these were either made in-house, or within the UTC/UTAS group, so where did you get the idea that the Chinese are building the tail rotor assembly?

[SASless]

Lone,

For the current occupant of the Big House....a Bell 47J would be more appropriate....t it was good enough for Eisenhower.

[IFMU]

UTAS has limited content on Sikorsky helicopters. Legacy Hamilton Standard supplies FCC's and AVC computers. Legacy Goodrich owns the HUMS and some air data. Legacy Sundstrand supplies almost nothing, though they did make the Raider prop gearbox in Rockford, IL. I believe Sikorsky has retained tail rotors and other critical dynamic pieces.

[terminus mos]

Add this to the S-92 airframes flaw tolerant design, HUMS monitoring and a fleet which must be fast approaching a million flight hours (so the problems have mostly already been identified), I don’t think the President has too much to fear about the quality of the cabin section whilst up and about in their very low usage airframes.

At least 2 aircraft with TATA cabins have been delivered with misalignment meaning they cannot be fitted with a winch without significant rework and modification.

[Lonewolf_50]

At least 2 aircraft with TATA cabins have been delivered with misalignment meaning they cannot be fitted with a winch without significant rework and modification. Interesting to know.

[rugmuncher]

"At least 2 aircraft with TATA cabins have been delivered with misalignment meaning they cannot be fitted with a winch without significant rework and modification."

Modification of the Winch Assy or the Airframe?

[Stinger10]

Hilife et al: I will repeat. Personally I have no problem where things are manufactured. I live and work in the global market place. No offense intended. During the last Presidential helicopter program there was tremendous scrutiny placed on the Italian and UK suppliers. Clearly, the Navy has had a complete change in perspective THIS time.

Right from Sikorsky's website. The cabin work was shifted to TATA in India when Sikorsky tried to win the Indian VIP program:

•Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (7.5% - main cabin) IN YELLOW
•Spain's Gamesa Aeronautica (7% - main rotor pylon, tailcone/transition section and composite interiors),
•Peoples Republic of China's Jingdezhen Helicopter Group (2% - tail pylon and horizontal stabilizer) IN GREEN
•Taiwan's Aero Industrial Development Corporation (AIDC) (6.5% - Cockpit Structure)
•Brazil's Embraer (4% - sponsons complete with fuel system and landing gear).


Fact based, as was the AD about the Tail pylon (previously posted) when someone claimed it was a benign part......

http://www.sikorskyarchives.com/images/images%20S-92/S92-4.jpg

[Lonewolf_50]

http://www.sikorskyarchives.com/images/images%20S-92/S92-4.jpg Thanks for finding that picture, it looks similar to the one I saw years ago.

IIRC, that Green one was planned to be made in China since the late 90's or early 00's. (I'll let any Sikorsky person refine that). Back then, a lot of people (me not included) were bending over backward to be nice to Big China ... who has never liked us. On an emotional level, I get how you feel, and probably feel similarly ... I was in the opinion group who thought that the Spratly Islands were not getting enough attention in about 1992 ... :mad:

The "Government oversight" authority people are either happy, or are not, with whatever surveillance and quality plan Sikorsky has for that component. I don't recall that it was Italian or British parts makers that were the core problem in AW101 being cancelled. Whatever scrutiny they were put under seems to have been passed.