PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - NH-90 problems
Thread: NH-90 problems
View Single Post
Old 25th March 2023 | 07:21
  #282 (permalink)  
pitchlink1
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 11
Likes: 1
From: UK
AUS $2,7 billion saving might be very conservative

Originally Posted by Cyclic Hotline
This is an interesting counter-view on the actions taken with the Australian fleet, and a potentially identifiable source of some of the logistical issues. It is an interesting comparison between the experience of New Zealand and Australia, which has been discussed here in detail, but doesn't fully recognize the dissatisfaction expressed by other operators outside Australia, which is also discussed here.

https://asiapacificdefencereporter.c...nce-logistics/

Helicopters-There is nothing wrong with Tiger and Taipan – the problem is Defence logistics

An Australian Army MRH90 Taipan helicopter from 6th Aviation Regiment conducts reconnaissance at Shepparton, Victoria. Credit: CoA / Carolyn Barnett
By
Kym Bergmann / Canberra

(…)

Another issue in play is the figure being used by Army that retiring the MRH early rather than in 2037 will result in a $2.7 billion saving. The problem is that this improbably large number of $200 million per year can only be achieved if things are included that have no factual basis – such as equipment that isn’t needed or upgrades that don’t exist. It feels like someone has been given the job of finding a scary number and they have worked backwards to come up with the desired result. Defence has not responded to a request for a breakdown of the figure.

(…)
.
With 47 MRH90 each flying 300 hours per year and retirement is cut short with 30 years that equals 423 000 FH. The proposed saving of $2,7 billion divided by the FH gives a saving of $6k per FH. With a reported hourly cost of MRH90 of $50k per FH (which resonates well with other 90 users) and the FH cost of Hawks is $4-6k a saving of $6k/FH seems very conservative. Hence, the saving from early retirement is not $2,7 billion but three or four times that number. Possibly higher than $15 billion. Even if you add in the procurement cost of the new helicopters of $2,5 billion the saving is very substantial. Add better availability and less frustration and you have a extremely good case.

Last edited by pitchlink1; 7th April 2023 at 06:45.
pitchlink1 is offline  
Reply