Merlin Loses Out To S 92

[MightyGem]

Canadian government chooses the S92 (http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040723.wseakings0723a/BNStory/National/) to replace the Sea King.

[MarkD]

So the sizeable deposit from the aborted Merlin order goes begging. Very nice.

[Magoodotcom]

Amazing decision. :confused:

Nothing against the S-92, but now Canada will have two different types of large helicopter (S-92 and Cormorant)in service instead of one (and a bit), meaning double the logistics chain, double the crew training, double the support costs! :ooh:

Magoo :ok:

[KENNYR]

Nobody said you had to be logical to be Canadian!!!!! They wont be available for 5 years, so the crews still have to fly the deathtrap. Too many Canadian manufacturers are being contracted to produce parts for the S92. Not a wise choice, in my humble opinion.

[MarkD]

Politics. Same reason the S-92 for Ireland got shot down coz the politicos wanted side benefit (Sikorsky at DUB) without specifying that it was a valid thing to put in the bid for the others.

It seems the spite vs Mulroney lives on even in the Martin admin. Not a good sign.

[Leprechaun]

KENNYR

"Deathtrap"

Justify that please!

[mbga9pgf]

Suppose they prefer a helecopter that doesnt shed tail rotors after only a few thousand hours. makes perfect sense to me.

[12 PSI]

Kenny, I'm with Leprechaun! Are you saying the Seaking is a death trap - if so why?

[Leprechaun]

12 PSI
Thanks for the support but I think he's slagging of the Merlin!

mbga9pgf

What's a helecopter? Is it similar to a Helicopter?
Perhaps being able to spell the subject of your scorn would give your argument more weight!
Probably not though!:E

[KENNYR]

justification lies in the history of these ancient beasts. These helicopters have been in service since Pontius was a pilot. Surely the strength of the airframe must be reduced every year that the heli is in service. Salt water has that effect on metal you know!

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Ours seem to keep chugging on by without any major mishaps.......fingers crossed:ok: ..........are yours any differant?

all spelling mistakes are a"df" alcohol induced

[Cyclic Hotline]

KENNYR,

I guess you have never spent any time operating a Sea-King then?

I think you are reading too much EH Industries crap? Of course, both Westland and Agusta have also built this despicable "death-trap", and many of their examples continue in service today - and most likely for decades to come?

You obviously are unfamiliar with the concept of maintenance specifically programmed for a particular operating environment? These aircraft can be maintained to operate economically for many years yet, as there are any number of modifications that will permit them to remain viable for a long time.

In fact, if I am not mistaken, Westland is having greater success selling used Sea-Kings (a sound, licence built, Sikorsky product) to the Indian Navy, than the 101 sales team is, in moving it's line?

But then again, what would I know?

[KENNYR]

You are correct.......I have never spent time operating Sea Kings or any other maritime helicopter. I am also not a technician so all my observations are from a newspaper. My experience with maritime operations was restricted to landing on the decks of ships in my Army Gazelle or Scout.

I have no affiliations with EH or Sikhorsky. I could not give a damn which helicopter the Canadian Forces choose, but I dont like to see aircrew get shafted for political gains. Maybe someone in the know could tell me why the Seahawk was not considered..........a battle proven machine and in use in US Maritime service.

[sprucemoose]

mbga - ref your comment that Canada must "prefer a helecopter that doesnt shed tail rotors after only a few thousand hours"; how many S-92s are there out there with even a few hundred hours logged?

The EH101 now has over 50,000 flying hours with (ironically) 92 aircraft delivered, and it's already performing well in Canadian service.

Good luck as launch user Canada!

[goates]

Ours seem to keep chugging on by without any major mishaps.......fingers crossed ..........are yours any differant?

The Canadian Sea Kings have developed a reputation of being somewhat unreliable, but they are 40 years old. There have been been a few deaths attributed to maintenance problems. I read a story a couple of years ago about how the military was going to take a reporter for a flight in one. Four helicopters later they finally found one without any problems.

I think all Canadians realise that the men and women who maintain and fly them are doing a great job with what they have. Our government on the other hand seems intent on playing political games with the military. Selecting the S92 smells far too much like more political meddling based on the history of the issue. Maybe we'll all be pleasantly suprised, and the S92's will be far better. Only time will tell.

Maybe someone in the know could tell me why the Seahawk was not considered
I would like to know this as well. There was some mention a long time ago that the Seahawk wasn't large enough for what they wanted, but I could be remembering that incorrectly.

goates

[12 PSI]

Now I'm confused!:confused: Who's slagging off what? As far as I'm concerned both the Seaking and 101 are splendid machines - yes I've flown both - I know not about the S92 so can't comment.

[Cyclic Hotline]

KENNYR; with all due respect, I wouldn't believe too much about this issue that you read in the papers.

It has unleashed a programme of misinformation and rhetoric, that is without compare - with mysterious "industry sources" proclaiming all kinds of horrors regarding the Sea-King and before it, the Labrador.

You shouldn't be too concerned about it, as this propaganda assault was designed to do exactly what occurred in your instance - flavour public opinion on an issue that has been in the public eye for a very long time now. The fact that you can hold a conversation with the man on the street anywhere in Canada, on this topic, shows it's success.

I think that I would concur with 12 psi, that all of these helicopters are indeed superb pieces of equipment, but that at some point they become due for replacement, and at some point a decision must be made as too what equipment fits the mission and go from there. You have to remember that we went through all this before when the initial contract was cancelled.

Time is the only test if the choice is the correct one.

[MarkD]

Are the figures of 30 hours maintenance per flying hour one sees in the rags about the Canadian SK kosher?

see here:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1067945000908_18?s_name=&no_ads=