Originally Posted by
megan
I suspect the local work offset in construction was the deciding factor, four being manufactured in Europe, and 42 being manufactured locally by Australian Aerospace (an Airbus Helicopters subsidiary) in Brisbane. I think "manufactured" in the article I got the detail from may be loosely used.
Aussie Aerospace, yup. An EADS program, How did they go fixing the problems of the NHI product? Did that affect their bottom line?
I concur that the potential for the NH-90 was interesting. Another 4' of rotor diameter would have cured some ills. Not having parts in a new program for current operators is a bad look.
As a project, it was less frustrating than the LAMPS debacle, NZL and the USN still thank all concerned for their generosity on that score.