Flying Lawyer

Sikorsky has stepped up the pace in its bid with a new website telling America why the President should fly in the VH-92 - and not in the AgustaWestland EH-101.

VH-92

Gregg

To be fair- here is the link to the web site for the other option.

http://www.teamus101.com/

rjsquirrel

The "US-101" workers are on strike, we see!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...et/3224303.stm

Autorotate

I was always under the impression they wouldnt allow the Pres of the US to fly on an A model of anything. Is this right or wrong.

rjsquirrel

There is no "They" autorotate, just us. The old rule about "never fly the A model of anything" is roughly akin to "never do anything "

The most successful businesses have done the "impossible" and the most successful pilots have done the "difficult". Remember the idea for FEDEX was given a C- grade in business school.


Follow the old rule you quote into the murky mists of mediocrity.

RotorPilot

2004 February 16


Battle for helicopter contract tests lobbying skills

RotorPilot

2004 February 17


Presidential helicopter war

DodgyOpsGuy

Hi

In my boredom last night I sat reading some of the threads on this "Rotorhead" forum.

I got to reading much about the "S-92", visiting relevant Websites etc. I am left with two questions:

1. Will the S-92 be completley ready for delivery to HMX in 2007 should the contract be awarded?

2. Whilst I appreciate its an artists impression, how does the winch door work? It seems to wrap against the sponson, or does it have a gap in the door to accomodate the sponson?


http://www.sikorsky.com/Images/SAC_S.../H92_0003L.jpg

Edited to fix your link.

RotorPilot

2004 february 21

Battle for helicopter contract tests lobbying skills of Congress, companies

NickLappos

DodgyOpsGuy,

In order:

1) Yes, completely ready in 4 years is a slam dunk. The S-92 program is in full swing, the first year is fully sold out and the second is going that way. First aircraft will be delivered in a few weeks, and lots more are running down the line at Bridgeport CT right now.

2) That door has a sliding section that telescopes as the door slides against the sponson, and the sponson has a slot against the fuselage. Kind of like some of those doors we see on trains and the like, where the mechanism allows them to fold into impossibly small spaces. Works nicely, all in all!

RotorPilot

46Driver

I've got a number of friends flying George W. up at HMX-1 and they seem to really want the US-101 to replace the H-3, they think its a fantastic helicopter and would also be a great replacement for my beloved CH-46E in the assault role.

(However, you are not allowed to speak out against the Osprey in the Corps unless you want to be stationed in Antarctica.... )They also said the H-92 has a lot of potential.

With Sikorsky in Connecticut (and consistently voting Democratic) and Bell in Texas (voting Republican), I'm betting on the 101.

RotorPilot

This is an interesting "technological" characteristic I was not aware of (I do not follow the US elections - too complicated)

RotorPilot

2004 March 01


Stakes increase for Sikorsky in Marine One competition

RotorPilot

2004 March 05


WASHINGTON — Connecticut’s federal legislators have asked that Sikorsky Aircraft forego layoffs at its Comanche plant in Bridgeport until May, when the Marine Corps is scheduled to award a new contract for its presidential helicopter fleet.

Sikorsky won’t promise layoff delay

aspinwing

Since "foreign content" seems to be part of the issue; whatever happened to the page on the Sikorsky site that showed a an exploded view of the S-92 and the countries who built the sections. I have forgotten which country did what but as I recall the list included Brazil, China and Spain. I think the tail section came from Spain. It couldn't be that suddenly all of this work has been repatriated

Just wondering.

widgeon

Yep one of the early articles said that Sikorsky had made a deal with all the partners that would alow them to offer a totally Made in USA solution. Probably has to have its share of small , disadvantaged and minority owned business content to make the grade.

widgeon

http://www.teamus101.com/news13.cfm

So the question is , is 90% US content enough ?. Will the UK get any benefit from supporting Shrub ?.

rjsquirrel

The politicization began at the first shot, guys! The the US content concept was started by the EH-101 crowd, as I recall, with some claim about 65% US, and the political battle was laid when the Agusta-Westland folks had Blair write Bush directly to ask him to buy the EH-101. Not much technical content in those tactics!

The Sikorsky counter with an all US composition, raising the stakes of a political decision. Switching Vought for the offshore airframers has been done before, I think Vought specializes in airframe sub structural manufacture. The word is that every part and piece of airframe will be made in the US, from scratch. The rotors transmissions and blades are made in the Sikorsky main plant in Connecticut.

In contrast, reports from Yoevil say that the US-101 for Presidential delivery will be built in England in sections, shipped to Texas and assembled at Bell, so the US physical content will be quite small, but the claim "Made in the US" could be made, with an asterisk or two. Getting to 90% of the cost in the US as the LM people now claim could be an interesting trick, if the airframe, rotors, transmissions are worth 10%, maybe we should all start buying EH-101 kits!!

I would bet the US Navy folks who are scoring the competition could care less about exactly where the machine came from, in the end, their review will surely be tech based. Friends at PAX told me there were two RAF EH-101's presented by Agusta-Westland for the brief trials, with about 40 maintainers. The Sikorsky folks used one S-92 with 4 crew, I heard. Observers in the hangar said the S-92 never had to change a part, they mostly inspected. Rumor has it both aircraft did well, but the testers have not showed any partiality.

I saw a press release where the S-92 they used had a full VIP interior, with video conferencing, extra soundproofing and extra vibration treatment (the US reporters who flew it said it was the quietest helo they ever flew in). The cockpit had EGPWS, weather radar, TCAS, dig map, and two kinds of SATCOM (including a tracking INMARSAT antenna). They had a TV camera that displayed on the pilot's MFD to show precise wheel placement for the White House lawn landing. Word was the test pilots had bets who could place the gear within a 1/4 inch of the desired landing point.

The Sikorsky team extended the cabin about 5 feet, so the cabin is actually longer that the EH by 2 feet. They did it in about 3 months, in Florida, it is said. Lockheed Martin folks said it was a "90 day wonder!!"

The RAF EH101's flew around DC for a few weeks afterward, with some impressed reporters. One rumor has it that a whole planeload got sick when one passenger barfed, because a guest pilot got a bit energetic at the controls with a plane full of people.

I know two HMX pilots, and some former ones, they seem to think the Sikorsky the favorite, 46driver. One guy really resented the Prime Minister trying to push the EH into the Marine inventory.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...1234951052.jpg

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...mbc10703110012

This one shows the new back airstair door:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...mbc10703110012

RotorPilot

Mr. rjsquirrel

You are dead wrong.

The politization of the American military procurement has existed since the US has Armed Forces, its NOT something new...