Canada: Cormorant & Cyclone thread
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a reminder for everyone regarding the COTS/OTS discussion...
The Cyclone was proposed and bought as a "largely non-developmental aircraft". In fact, the rules of the MH competition required that the aircraft selected be "off-the-shelf to the maximum extent possible". BTW, since being announced as the winner if the competition, there has been no "spec creep" to speak of, but UTC has gone so far as to claim repeatedly in its SEC submissions since 2008 that the Cyclone is the most expansive development program in Sikorsky's history as an excuse for the delays.
The subject of S-92 development requirements was raised at the press conference in Ottawa on 23 July 2004 following the contract announcement... excerpt copied here:
"Question: Christian B, Toronto Star. Just wondering what assurance has Sikorsky given you in terms of the fact that this helicopter is not used in any other military and conversion from a civilian version which obviously has some issues. I’m just wondering, you know, Cormorant has claimed this will, you know, push it back by years.
Alan Williams: First of all the company we have selected, Sikorsky International, is one of the world renowned helicopter manufacturers. They’ve got a history of competence and capability in delivery that ranks with anybody and secondly, this model is on the production line albeit in a commercial mode but they have already sold a fair number and have produced a number. Thirdly, any helicopter that we would have acquired would have to be tailored to meet our needs. The frame is one that’s in production. The mission systems that will be integrated by General Dynamics Canada are all commercial off the shelf products. The challenge of course is the sophisticated integration. So we have absolutely no doubt that it can be done. The bid produced by Sikorsky reflects its rigorous planning of activities. They’ve submitted to us a plan that had 24 pages, 4,912 activities, each one constant, each one scheduled with required resources. We’ll be monitoring that very very closely to make sure they deliver on what they said but there’s absolutely no doubt in our minds that they have shown us that they have the capability to deliver the plan and the product that we need."
The Cyclone was proposed and bought as a "largely non-developmental aircraft". In fact, the rules of the MH competition required that the aircraft selected be "off-the-shelf to the maximum extent possible". BTW, since being announced as the winner if the competition, there has been no "spec creep" to speak of, but UTC has gone so far as to claim repeatedly in its SEC submissions since 2008 that the Cyclone is the most expansive development program in Sikorsky's history as an excuse for the delays.
The subject of S-92 development requirements was raised at the press conference in Ottawa on 23 July 2004 following the contract announcement... excerpt copied here:
"Question: Christian B, Toronto Star. Just wondering what assurance has Sikorsky given you in terms of the fact that this helicopter is not used in any other military and conversion from a civilian version which obviously has some issues. I’m just wondering, you know, Cormorant has claimed this will, you know, push it back by years.
Alan Williams: First of all the company we have selected, Sikorsky International, is one of the world renowned helicopter manufacturers. They’ve got a history of competence and capability in delivery that ranks with anybody and secondly, this model is on the production line albeit in a commercial mode but they have already sold a fair number and have produced a number. Thirdly, any helicopter that we would have acquired would have to be tailored to meet our needs. The frame is one that’s in production. The mission systems that will be integrated by General Dynamics Canada are all commercial off the shelf products. The challenge of course is the sophisticated integration. So we have absolutely no doubt that it can be done. The bid produced by Sikorsky reflects its rigorous planning of activities. They’ve submitted to us a plan that had 24 pages, 4,912 activities, each one constant, each one scheduled with required resources. We’ll be monitoring that very very closely to make sure they deliver on what they said but there’s absolutely no doubt in our minds that they have shown us that they have the capability to deliver the plan and the product that we need."
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: CYAW
Age: 39
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
She's a new bird, the one we had sitting here for the last year went back to Sikorsky a couple months ago.
Looks like she might be the first of the two birds we are suppose to get this summer to start some training on.
Looks like she might be the first of the two birds we are suppose to get this summer to start some training on.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern Canada
Age: 64
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better buy some good ear-plugs! http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/362...lying-s92.html Best of luck.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There definitely has been some limited Cyclone flying going on at Shearwater this past week; however, there seems to be a cloud of secrecy about it. Even my normally talkative Sikorsky sources decline to say anything about it. One of them did say that it has been conducting some "flight tests" aircraft and will not be being used for training. The aircraft appears to have a long nose boom fitted. Do you know what the tail number is?
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: CYAW
Age: 39
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UFO Flying Over Shearwater? No It’s A Cyclone Helicopter | Ottawa Citizen
It might as well be a UFO….or a Black Project aircraft the way the government, DND and Sikorsky refuses to discuss what is happening with the procurement. The latest claim is that more than a couple of Cyclones will be delivered to the Canadian Forces this summer. Stand by for that. But for now, here are some long-shot photos of a/the Cyclone flying over Shearwater today, taken by Defence Watch reader Paul Blaauw. Many thanks for the photos Paul.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The mystery continues. The aircraft in your photo does not have a nose boom; the one spotted on the ramp (at a long distance from across the field) appeared to have a boom (maybe it was a tow bar attached?). A zoom up on your photo reveals some orange (i.e. potentially instrumented test gear or external test markings for photo tracking and analysis). Others who have seen it in flight here last week said that it stayed over land with the landing gear was always down and one reported seeing orange on it as well.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are correct. The Cyclone seen turning on the ramp and later flying near Shearwater last week was Cyclone 806. This is the aircraft that was "delivered" to Shearwater in May 2011 and which has been parked there ever since. Last week it was conducting post-maintenance flight testing by Sikorsky test pilots following the installation of modified servo actuator valves which failed during an earlier return-to-Sikorsky flight attempt in April. The aircraft was recently safely returned to Sikorsky facilities in the US. There are currently no Cyclones in Canada.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: The land of Blue! Smurfet rocks!
Age: 44
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotorhead 124,
How did you hear it. Thought you wear deaf?
Can you help answer question on other thread. Your silence on the S&R experience and exposoure is making many of us wonder if this is true!
Smurfet is still the hottest chick!
How did you hear it. Thought you wear deaf?
Can you help answer question on other thread. Your silence on the S&R experience and exposoure is making many of us wonder if this is true!
Smurfet is still the hottest chick!
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've raised an interesting question. When Jeff Pino replaced Stephen Finger at Sikorsky in 2006, there was much pudding made by UTC about the latter's outstanding performance as Sikorsky's chief steward and also, that Stephen would be taking over the top job at P&W (UTC's plum). I've seen nothing of the same for Jeff... simply that he is retiring from his position as Sikorsky President on 1 July. Jeff Pino, at 57, is indeed a few years shy of the normal CEO retirement age in the US.
You should have heard Pino at this year's AHS CEO presentation....talk about a guy clearly on the way out taking his potshots!
I met him in person once before back in 2008 and he seemed nice enough back then.
I met him in person once before back in 2008 and he seemed nice enough back then.
When is Good Enough, Good Enough?
I hate to interject common sense in to the equation, but here goes. Sikorsky over the years has certified and delivered many aircraft with very good certified auto pilots. Some of these were developed in cahoots with quality venders. Along comes Canada, and Sikorsky promises a better mouse trap, in terms of a fly by wire system, that will be the cats pajamas of all systems. This comes on the tails of a US Army Blackhawk program that failed to deliver a quality product. Customers around the world are presently flying certified IFR S-92 aircraft with very capable systems. If you have a product that is already 90% of capable what are you willing to pay for in terms of money and delays for the remaining 10%? Are the additional capabilities actually required and beneficial to the program? 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: El Paso, Texas
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JC
I am sure the Canadians would accept the ships at the standard 92 IFR price. However, at $200M apiece it should work as advertised. Once accepted there is no going back, and all fixes to meet the original requirements will just cost more.
TC
I am sure the Canadians would accept the ships at the standard 92 IFR price. However, at $200M apiece it should work as advertised. Once accepted there is no going back, and all fixes to meet the original requirements will just cost more.
TC