U.S. Presidential Helicopter Cabins Made in INDIA ?????
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
U.S. Presidential Helicopter Cabins Made in INDIA ?????
YGTBSM!!!! 
So much for AMERICAN MADE! .......And now we trust India more than the UK and Italy????? REALLY? What an insult to our NATO ALLIES.
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.
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.
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 ...
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 (TASL) for S-92 manufacturing in India for export and domestic markets. A US$200 million manufacturing plant will be operational in Hyderabad by 2010. Initially, TASL will supply the complete cabins for the S-92 to Sikorsky. The first cabin was delivered in November 2010.
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
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
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"
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"
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LONE - You Miss the point AGAIN. 
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
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
Last edited by Stinger10; 22nd Oct 2015 at 14:28.
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?
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?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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????
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????
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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.
Labour costs are WAAAAY lower in China and India.
Quality will be reflected in the purchasers quality rating system for the supplier.
Nope. I know how this stuff really works.
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
ONCE AGAIN. HYPOCRACY is ASTOUNDING and as a tax payer, I am offended.
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
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rug -I understand the business side of it. Not a problem. That's the way global business works....
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?
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?
Rug -I understand the business side of it. Not a problem. That's the way global business works....
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?
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?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sky
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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 ?
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 ?
"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?
Thanks Sting. Glad we both have a common understanding.
BTW, figured out the CH-47 cockpit yet?
So while not a dynamic component, a key one nonetheless.
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.
just a matter of time. So all the politics helped in the short run only.
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 ?
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.