PPRuNe Forums


Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th Feb 2010, 22:55   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Beyond the black stump!
Posts: 1,134
NH-90 problems

Seems the Germans aren't very happy with theirs!

Anyone hear anything more about this machine, it appears to be suffering with a variety of problems.

Germany not happy with NH90 helicopter - UPI.com
Cyclic Hotline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th Feb 2010, 23:46   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 94
From what I hear from Australian Army sources (and this is a rumour so qualifies for the network), they are not happy with their NH90's for the same reason - apparently allergic to soldiers and weaponry.

Another good buy
sunnywa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Feb 2010, 00:10   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 69
Posts: 1,123
Perhaps Sikorsky should offer up more Blackhawks....at least they work as advertised.
SASless is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Feb 2010, 00:47   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: pointy end
Posts: 31
Looks like Australia will not be buying the NFH-90 without a competition from the MH-60R. Press release below from 25th February 2010

New Naval Combat Helicopter
The Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, today announced that the Government has given first pass approval for a major project to provide the Australian Defence Force with a new naval combat helicopter.

Project AIR 9000 Phase 8 is included in the Defence Capability Plan to provide naval warships with a new combat helicopter.

Senator Faulkner said that two potential helicopters had been identified. “The Government has decided that the new helicopter will be either the Sikorsky-Lockheed Martin built MH-60R sourced through the United States Navy, or the NATO Helicopter Industries NH90 NFH sourced through Australian Aerospace”.

Senator Faulkner said that a competition would be held between the two helicopter options which would be cost-capped by the Defence Materiel Organisation through the tender process.

“The new naval combat helicopter will enhance the Royal Australian Navy’s ability to conduct a range of maritime operations. It will be capable of undertaking anti-submarine warfare and will be equipped with air-to-surface missiles,” Senator Faulkner said.

“This fleet of combat helicopters will form the centerpiece of naval combat aviation to beyond 2040.

“The new helicopter will greatly extend the eyes and ears of our surface fleet and allow the conduct of combat and support operations in the complex and demanding maritime environment.

“They will replace the current fleet of Seahawk anti-submarine warfare helicopters and fill an operational need left by the cancellation of the Seasprite project,” Senator Faulkner said.

The procurement of the new naval combat helicopters as a matter of urgency was announced in the 2009 Defence White Paper. This decision demonstrates the Government’s commitment to this important Defence capability.

Sufficient helicopters will be acquired to provide at least eight helicopters concurrently embarked on ships at sea, which under the White Paper requires a fleet of 24 helicopters.

“The competitive process would commence in the next few months with the Government making a final decision about the new helicopter in 2011,” Senator Faulkner said.

“This schedule will enable the new helicopters to be delivered from 2014.

“Any decision Government makes in 2011 will take into account all relevant considerations including capability, cost, interoperability with other ADF capabilities, Australian industry opportunities, risk and value for money,” Senator Faulkner said.

The Minister for Defence Personnel, Materiel and Science, Greg Combet, said that the decision to progress the project via a competitive tender was consistent with the Kinnaird and Mortimer procurement reforms.

The tender will allow the companies to offer innovative solutions that satisfy the capability, cost and schedule requirements and detail what opportunities they will offer local industry.

“A competitive process will ensure value for money for the tax payer and ensure the project's acquisition strategy provides the Government with the best possible information to support a decision for this vital capability,” Mr Combet said.

Last edited by ifsknt; 26th Feb 2010 at 03:49.
ifsknt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Feb 2010, 20:42   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 1,722
It sounds like they bought it by mail order and didn't bother to check the spec's at all!


Although my real thoughts are that this is a result of the weight reclamation/rationalisation in the later design modules.

...or possibly a classic case of Human Factors as any troops who were sent to sit in it for publicity purposes had no chance to voice an opinion.

So...how many training/light freight helicopters do you need?
Rigga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th Feb 2010, 06:07   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: lost
Posts: 18
@ ifsknt you totally reversed the quote there, not buying the MH-60R through FMS, without a competition. Also I'm hearing the MRH90 is performing really well, MRH90 Swoops In - Royal Australian Navy
fleebag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th Feb 2010, 07:11   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: pointy end
Posts: 31
Fleebag

It wasn't a quote.

I thought Australia was always going to go for the MRH 90 (for Army and 6 Navy to replace Sea Kings) followed by the NFH 90 for the Navy.

The German report on the operational assessment of the aircraft would seem to be at odds with the assessment your link provided.
ifsknt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th Feb 2010, 10:05   #8 (permalink)
gnz
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: OMAD
Posts: 70
What's the variant Germans are worried about (IOC, IOC+, upcoming FOC...)?
Germany is the only country wich received the "Step 1" chopper named IOC in
December 06, with limited, (but anounced & accepted) capacities.
It was such a pitty that they ordered an extra 42 more TTH 6 months later

What are the concerns for italian, nordics or Oman customers? Any complain?

I've heard the German navy is searching infos about Super Seasprite
gnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th Jun 2011, 06:44   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 502
Looks like the MH-60R won the day....

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Australian Government had approved the acquisition of 24 MH-60R Seahawk ‘Romeo’ naval combat helicopters at a cost of over $3 billion.
The 2009 Defence White Paper committed the Government to equipping naval warships with a new combat helicopter capable of conducting a range of maritime misions with advanced anti-submarine warfare capabilities and the ability to fire air-to-surface missiles.
This announcement delivers on that commitment.
The new helicopters will replace the Navy’s current combat helicopter capability provided by 16 Seahawk S-70B-2 helicopters and will also provide the air to surface strike capability which was to have been provided by the cancelled Seasprite program.
This decision follows a 15-month competitive acquisition process involving the Sikorsky-Lockheed Martin built MH-60R and the NATO Helicopter Industries NH90 NFH assembled by Australian Aerospace.
This competitive process has ensured value for money for the tax payer.
The Australian Government has chosen the ‘Romeo’ helicopter because it represents the best value for money for taxpayers and was the lowest risk option.
The ‘Romeo’ is a proven capability currently operated by the United States Navy. The United States Navy has accepted around 100 ‘Romeos’ which have accumulated 90,000 flying hours, including on operational deployments.
Interoperability with Australia’s Alliance partner, the United States, is also a significant advantage of this helicopter.
The helicopters are largely military off-the-shelf built by Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin and will be purchased through the Foreign Military Sales process from the US Navy.
Defence has signed a Letter of Agreement for the acquisition with the United States Government.
The first two helicopters will arrive in mid-2014 for testing and evaluation with operations expected to commence in mid-2015.
Acquisition of 24 ‘Romeos’ means that Navy will have the capacity to provide at least eight warships with a combat helicopter at the same time, including ANZAC Class frigates and the new Air Warfare Destroyers. The remainder will be based at HMAS Albatross in Nowra, New South Wales, and will be in various stages of the regular maintenance and training cycle.
They will be equipped with a highly sophisticated combat systems designed to employ Hellfire air-to-surface missile and the Mark 54 anti-submarine torpedo.
industry insider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th Jul 2011, 21:48   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 58
Posts: 4,893
23 June 2011, Italian Navy gets it first NH90

(From Flightglobal.com)
Quote:

NH Industries will hand Italy its first naval NH90 helicopter.
"The Italian navy's first NFH90 is the ninth helicopter to be delivered to navies," said Domenico Vaccari.
"NH Industries will deliver three more NFH90 MOC each to France and the Netherlands, while a total of, respectively, five and six will be delivered to the Italian and Norwegian navies," said Vaccari. Naval NH90s have accumulated more than 900-flying hours, he added.
To put this into perspective ... The first NH90 prototype had its maiden flight in December 1995. Deliveries began in 2006.

Compare to the following maritime helicopter ...
In early 1978 the Navy selected Sikorsky's S-70B design, which was designated "SH-60B Seahawk". The first production version SH-60B achieved its first flight on 11 February 1983. The SH-60B entered operational service in 1984, with first operational deployment in 1985.

By 1987, thousands of hours had been flown by SH-60B helicopters, operationally, and thousands more in training and work ups.

Here in the US we often complain about how long it takes to get aircraft, heck, any weapons system, from concept to operation. The folks in the NH90 program have made me feel slightly better, but I feel awful for those folks who have been waiting for this bird to arrive.

Anyone flown the aircraft?

I'd hope it's a good flyer, given all the time and effort that's been put into it.
Lonewolf_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Jul 2011, 15:22   #11 (permalink)


Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: holland
Posts: 1
Dutch aren't happy either

On the first of june the newpaper 'Trouw' revealed that the Dutch Helikopter Command (DHC) are not happy with the performance of the NH90.

According to a internal report DHC finds the NH90 to heavy and limited deployable. Also DHC says the helicopter has a limited range in hot temperatures and can't carry specified number of persons.

Nieuwe heli defensie presteert ondermaats - MSN NIEUWS (dutch)
jant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 14:33   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: All over the place
Posts: 155
Does anyone have a link to the full contents of these reports?
rotor-rooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 15:20   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Publicity on ANY government aircraft will ALWAYS find the users (government employees) and manufacturers saying what a fantastic machine it is (if they value their jobs and/or ever want to get promoted) which is why PPRuNe is such a valuable tool in trying to sort out the wheat from the chaff (BS from the facts).

Take the V-22 for example....
Dan Reno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd Nov 2011, 23:46   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Or the Sikorsky MHP?
zalt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Nov 2011, 15:19   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Dan

With the greatest respect, this thread (titled NH90) has been running for 18 months and your first contribution was 3 days ago, so your view that
Quote:
This tread [your spelling] was discussing an operational aircraft not a developmental aircraft such as the MHP.
is simply an opinion carries little weight.

You introduced the V-22 into a discussion on NH90. I introduced the MHP because NH90 was one option for MHP. It is worth considering that if you order a helicopter, get it in service and have gripes, they are generally less than if you order a helicopter (like the Crown did with the MHP) and are still waiting for it and having to keep an elderly earlier type still in service.

Quote:
unless of course you're just 'baiting-up'
A touch of paranoia there or perhaps you are the one hooking on worms?
zalt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th Nov 2011, 17:25   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
This tread was discussing an operational aircraft not a developmental aircraft such as the MHP. BIG difference unless of course you're just 'baiting-up' like you've done elsewhere here.
Dan Reno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th Nov 2011, 18:25   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 539
Quote:
Publicity on ANY government aircraft will ALWAYS find the users (government employees) and manufacturers saying what a fantastic machine it is (if they value their jobs and/or ever want to get promoted) which is why PPRuNe is such a valuable tool in trying to sort out the wheat from the chaff (BS from the facts).
How does this make ANY sense whatsoever when the previous posts in this very thread cite publicity that the Dutch Helikopter Command (DHC) are not happy with the performance of the NH90 and Germany is not happy with NH90 helicopter.

So that certainly flies right in the face of "ANY government aircraft ALWAYS finding its users claiming it is a fantastic machine"...especially when both Germany and the Netherlands are a part of the NHIndustries consortium!



But nice try in taking yet another unwarranted stab at the V22 in a totally irrelevant thread.
SansAnhedral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th Nov 2011, 19:28   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
SANS,

You're right as I should have said US government funded aircraft. It appears foreign governments are more truthful.
Dan Reno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th Nov 2011, 22:42   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 58
Posts: 4,893
Dan Reno
Quote:
SANS,
You're right as I should have said US government funded aircraft. It appears foreign governments are more truthful
Why not settle back under the bridge over the Osprey Freeway, Dan.

We can stick to the NH-90 with no fear that your pet peeve will not get its share of consideration and discussion ... in that thread.

For the record, I wonder how much hyperbole is included in the February Article covering German disappointments with NH-90. See the bold and italicized bit ... and call me skeptical.

Quote:
Germany has ordered 122 NH90 for the army and the air force for around $6.2 billion but the testing of the pre-serial model revealed several deficiencies.
Clearance is so limited that soldiers have trouble getting in and out of the helicopter; the rear ramp is too weak to support fully equipped soldiers; the plane's floor is so sensitive that it can be cracked by boots; and the seats are unable to accommodate more than 240 pounds. The fact that modern infantry equipment weighs 55 pounds means that larger and more muscular soldiers will have to stay out.
Germany not happy with NH90 helicopter - UPI.com
Lonewolf_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th Nov 2011, 02:19   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
You're both right. Ha! Ha!
Dan Reno is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 13:27.


© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1