MRH90 Going, going. Gone

[Gnadenburg]

MRH-90’s gone! Blackhawk replacements coming as early as 2023.

Updated link- Australia's PM stating the fleet unsafe and unreliable. Will the French protest? Or do they still have massive serviceability issues with their own fleet?



https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-10/scott-morrison-says-the-chopper-fleet-were-unsafe/13671512 (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/taipan-helicopters-scrapped-in-switch-to-us-blackhawks-and-seahawks/news-story/98435f496a7a866fa3f806e85b6202a9)

[Going Boeing]

MRH-90’s gone! Blackhawk replacements coming as early as 2023.

Thanks Gnads, it’s not a surprise wrt the reliability & suitability of the MRH90 but it’s a surprise that the Government has acted so early in the life of the type - they are getting serious.

Your link has a paywall but I found this:
https://www.aviacionline.com/2021/12/australian-army-seeks-to-replace-its-troubled-mrh-90-taipan-with-black-hawks/

This decision (& the likelihood of the HH-60W variant for the Special Forces) is probably behind the interest in the tanker version of the C130J.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/sikorsky-hh-60w-combat-rescue-helicopter.html


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x893/5d2c4f25_fc33_446c_8ea8_7d7d5a278295_e05e1ae854dee4fdb48a685 31706ac52068ce3a8.jpeg

[DHC4]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-10/australia-dumps-troubled-mrh-90-taipan-helicopters/100688550\Australia dumps troubled European-designed Taipan helicopters for US Black Hawks and SeahawksThe Australian Defence Force will ditch its entire fleet of troubled European-designed Taipan helicopters a decade earlier than scheduled, replacing them with new Black Hawks and Seahawks imported from the United States.
Key points:

Defence will scrap all 47 European-designed Taipans used by Army and Navy
The ADF's Taipans have been plagued with poor availability and fleet-wide groundings
The decision comes three months after Australia ditched the French submarine program

Defence Minister Peter Dutton is due to announce today that the Army will follow Navy's decision to replace its locally produced Airbus MRH-90 Taipans with off-the-shelf Sikorsky-manufactured helicopters, in a move expected to cost billions of dollars.

Army currently has 41 Taipans in service, which are operated out of Townsville and Oakey in Queensland, and flown by 6th Aviation Regiment in Sydney.

MRH-90 helicopters have been in Army service since 2007 and despite some performance advantages over the Black Hawk, have been plagued with poor availability and fleet-wide groundings (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-18/defence-grounds-troubled-mrh-90-taipan-helicopter-fleet/).

The Defence Department had estimated the total cost of the MRH-90 program would top $15 billion by the time the helicopters were due to be withdrawn from service in 2037, but it has remained on the "projects of concern" list. (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-18/secrecy-surrounds-defence-most-troubled-military-projects/11218378)
https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/94e85f1edd66a3b71434a7e656c7d860?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2400&cropW=3600&xPos=0&yPos=0&width=862&height=575The ADF grounded all Taipan helicopters earlier this year due to safety and maintenance concerns.(ADF: Cameron Martin)Earlier this year the department revealed it was spending more than $37 million to hire civilian helicopters in Townsville to maintain capability while it dealt with long-running problems with the MRH-90 Taipans.

Last year Defence also admitted the door on its multi-role Taipans was too narrow to allow its gun to fire (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-27/defence-force-helicopter-cannnot-shoot-gun-while-troops-exit/12818018) while troops are descending from the aircraft.

During a visit to Sydney's Victoria Barracks, Mr Dutton will confirm the government has decided to scrap all 47 of Army and Navy's Taipans, despite Defence Chief Angus Campbell last year praising them as "an extraordinarily advanced helicopter".

Defence sources say Airbus was recently informed of Australia's decision, and the government is now approaching the United States government to buy up to 40 Black Hawks for the Army and 12 Seahawks for the Navy.

In October the US revealed it had approved the $1.3 billion export (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-09/us-to-sell-12-attack-helicopters-to-australia-aukus-/100526744) to Australia of 12 Sikorsky Romeo Seahawk helicopters, which will eventually replace the Navy's six MRH-90s.

Scrapping the Airbus helicopters comes just three months after the Morrison government sensationally cancelled the $90 billion French Attack-class submarine program in favour of acquiring nuclear boats under the AUKUS agreement with the UK and US.

Defence industry figures say the decision to scrap the Taipans, which were assembled in Australia using a European design, signals the government is determined to prioritise defence capability over all other considerations, including local manufacturing.

[kiwi grey]

In October the US revealed it had approved the $1.3 billion export (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-09/us-to-sell-12-attack-helicopters-to-australia-aukus-/100526744) to Australia of 12 Sikorsky Romeo Seahawk helicopters, which will eventually replace the Navy's six MRH-90s.
That's just wrong.
The Romeo is a warfighting helicopter, predominately anti-submarine, whereas the MRH-90 is primarily a transport helicopter.
The SH-60 variant that would be the replacement for the MRH-90 is the SH-60S ("Sierra")

When a story gets such a basic fact wrong, you have to wonder if the whole thing is either 'alternative facts' or maybe a kite flying exercise for the minister.

[rattman]

Well thats a surprise to no one,

Makes the claims of 30 incoming C-130 (24 J's and 6 KC-130) a lot stronger as well.

That's just wrong.
The Romeo is a warfighting helicopter, predominately anti-submarine, whereas the MRH-90 is primarily a transport helicopter.
The SH-60 variant that would be the replacement for the MRH-90 is the SH-60S ("Sierra")

When a story gets such a basic fact wrong, you have to wonder if the whole thing is either 'alternative facts' or maybe a kite flying exercise for the minister.

Thats a minor thing, you are just being pedantic

The new R's ordered a few weeks ago are for the new ships we are building / commissioning but they are wrong about them being R variants but sounds like (not confirmed) the 12 romeos will be replacing the 12 (now 11) navy romeos that will be hitting EOL soon, UH will be replacing the a taipans and will be will be part of the pool aircraft top operate from Canberra and supply class

The talk I am hearing the 24 ordered a few weeks ago were going onto the new surface combatants, the one announced today will be replacing the now 11 remaining on the old ones. The 11 will be modified, systems like the sonar bouy launcher removed to undertake the MH-60's roles as the mh-60'S is no longer produced

[rjtjrt]

New Zealand will be expecting an early Christmas - they will soon have most of their helicopter fleet as ex Aus military castoffs.

[rattman]

New Zealand will be expecting an early Christmas - they will soon have most of their helicopter fleet as ex Aus military castoffs.

They have thier own, honestly I cant imagine anyone buying both the tiger and taipan. Wonder if we will see then put out to pasture somewhere "just in case"

[Going Boeing]

The new R's ordered a few weeks ago are for the new ships we are building / commissioning but they are wrong about them being R variants but sounds like (not confirmed) the 12 romeos will be replacing the 12 (now 11) navy romeos that will be hitting EOL soon, UH will be replacing the a taipans and will be will be part of the pool aircraft top operate from Canberra and supply class

The talk I am hearing the 24 ordered a few weeks ago were going onto the new surface combatants, the one announced today will be replacing the now 11 remaining on the old ones. The 11 will be modified, systems like the sonar bouy launcher removed to undertake the MH-60's roles as the mh-60'S is no longer produced

The original batch of Romeos were delivered to the RAN 2013-16 so I’m sure that they are not nearing the End of Life. I believe these are additional ASW choppers to be utilised on the new ships as well as operating 2 per vessel where hangar space allows. I understand that upgrades to the Anzac frigates allow for a second helicopter to be carried.

I don’t know the plans to replace the Utility helicopter role but, some years ago, there was talk about stripping the ASW gear out of the original batch of Seahawks and using them in that role. A lot of the engine & airframe components are common with the Romeos so there was simpler logistics compared to having a separate fleet of MRH-90/NH-90’s operating off RAN vessels.

New Zealand will be expecting an early Christmas - they will soon have most of their helicopter fleet as ex Aus military castoffs.

Can the Kiwis get the Taipans & Tigers to work reliably enough to take into a war zone?

[HK144]

That's just wrong.
The Romeo is a warfighting helicopter, predominately anti-submarine, whereas the MRH-90 is primarily a transport helicopter.
The SH-60 variant that would be the replacement for the MRH-90 is the SH-60S ("Sierra")

When a story gets such a basic fact wrong, you have to wonder if the whole thing is either 'alternative facts' or maybe a kite flying exercise for the minister.

The SH-60S is no longer in production.

[rattman]

I don’t know the plans to replace the Utility helicopter role but, some years ago, there was talk about stripping the ASW gear out of the original batch of Seahawks and using them in that role. A lot of the engine & airframe components are common with the Romeos so there was simpler logistics compared to having a separate fleet of MRH-90/NH-90’s operating off RAN vessels



Believe thats what the plan is, specifically remove the a sonar bouy launcher and relegate the utility role (of the now 11 original aircraft), but leave as much as possible so if reversion is needed it can be quickly done. Much in the same way the original super hornets were wired for growler setup but no actual hardware installed

[SpazSinbad]

ARMY: BREAKING - Army to retire MRH 90 Taipans 10 years early & replace with Black Hawks | ADBR (https://adbr.com.au/breaking-army-to-retire-mrh-90-taipans-10-years-early/)
40 UH-60Ms for ARMY

$7 Billion for them: Australia to scrap Taipan army helicopters (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/australia-to-scrap-taipan-army-helicopters/ar-AAREPYE?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531)

[Going Boeing]

The Army always wanted the Blackhawk & Apache but, it was rumoured that the Defence Minister in 2004 (Senator Robert Hill) over-rode that recommendation and ordered the Taipan & Tiger. If that’s true, there has been a huge waste of tax payer money because of his decisions.

[slice]

Who remembers the Seasprites?:}

[extralite]

I heard the reason for the reliability issues was more to do with bureaucracy within RAAF/Army/USA. I don't know the specifics but no doubt someone else will and correct me as it was a quick conversation But something along the lines that the maintenance software used by the Army/RAAF is based on the CAMS=FM which is American. The Taipan maintenance doesn't mesh into that, and so spares were often not around. Routine maintenance hard to plan etc. The actual aircraft apparently is pretty good. But Army also just wanted Blackhawk from the start. This info came from an Army pilot who seemed to think it was a lot more about bloody mindedness on the part of armies full of bureaucrats and god help us if we had to fight a war type of thing and a giant waste of money scrapping them early. That would certainly be consistent with pretty much every other acquisition Australia has had over the last 20 yrs.

[Gnadenburg]

Other users of these helicopters have had sustainment and availability issues.

[rattman]

I heard the reason for the reliability issues was more to do with bureaucracy within RAAF/Army/USA. I don't know the specifics but no doubt someone else will and correct me as it was a quick conversation But something along the lines that the maintenance software used by the Army/RAAF is based on the CAMS=FM which is American. The Taipan maintenance doesn't mesh into that, and so spares were often not around. Routine maintenance hard to plan etc. The actual aircraft apparently is pretty good. But Army also just wanted Blackhawk from the start. This info came from an Army pilot who seemed to think it was a lot more about bloody mindedness on the part of armies full of bureaucrats and god help us if we had to fight a war type of thing and a giant waste of money scrapping them early. That would certainly be consistent with pretty much every other acquisition Australia has had over the last 20 yrs.

They were just an overly complicated aircraft. The last grounding apparently was because gearboxs . Australia was a not monitoring / measuring individual parts and they were needing to scavenge parts due ti supply shortages. this so during a check this was picked up and every gearbox had to be returned. There are issues with the software as well, also we apparently put a lot more and harder hours on ours compared to europeans so parts lifes were shorter

Norway is looking at replacements for coast guard / SAR work due to MRH-90 limitations, germany is buying apaches, not comment as to what happening with their tigers


Also the aircon took them 5 years to fix, the ramp couldn't be used for a many years as deployment of the ramp flexed the airframe as the floor was not strong enough. This forced the infrantry out the doors, problem was you couldn't have a door gunner as there was not enough room

[TBM-Legend]

That's just wrong.
The Romeo is a warfighting helicopter, predominately anti-submarine, whereas the MRH-90 is primarily a transport helicopter.
The SH-60 variant that would be the replacement for the MRH-90 is the SH-60S ("Sierra")

When a story gets such a basic fact wrong, you have to wonder if the whole thing is either 'alternative facts' or maybe a kite flying exercise for the minister.

Get your facts straight. The MH-60S Seaknight is no longer in production. Australia has purchased more Romeos without the ASW gear fitted but could be. They will be configured in a utility role and have commonality with the rest of the fleet os Seahawks. NZ should not be commenting on defence matters...

[typerated]

. NZ should not be commenting on defence matters...

Oh come now - we are very thankful that Austraila pays for our defence - we are happy to hold your coat while you go and fight

and also it gives you a chance to be good at something seeing that you are a bit crap at sports :)

[Old-Duffer]

typerated,
As an Englishman, I could not support the view that the aussies are 'crap at sport' - they're doing a good job against the village cricket team sent out recently from UK!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old Duffer

[typerated]

typerated,
As an Englishman, I could not support the view that the aussies are 'crap at sport' - they're doing a good job against the village cricket team sent out recently from UK!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old Duffer

I think you might find they play to different rules than you do.

Australians are the sons of convicts and at best unsporting and usually cheating - Underarm bowling, sandpapering the ball!

But even if you are whitewashed in the Ashes don't take it to heart.

There will be merriment soon to be had.

Australian captains never last too long and almost always are disgraced and leave in floods of tears and regret – oh how they fall!

[extralite]

Glass houses if written by a pom :)
Bur we love yous all the same.

[henra]

They have thier own, honestly I cant imagine anyone buying both the tiger and taipan. Wonder if we will see then put out to pasture somewhere "just in case"
If they are almost for free? At worst use them for spare parts or backup airframe for the own fleet. Would be a clever move IMHO.
Maybe another NH90 operator is clever enough to use this opportunity.

[chopper2004]

The Blackhawk itself has been in service for just over 3 decades in service first of all in the RAAF before all battlefield RW assets handed over to the AAAC, in the early 1990s. The S-70B Sehawk has been in service for 3 decades with the navy ....

Does anyone see a touch of irony here? The MRH-90 meant to replace the Blackhawk and now it finds itself beinf replaced by Blackhawk airframe albeit the 21st century one Uh-60M or S-70i International Blackhawk.

Latest customer for the NH90 is the SPanish Air Force which had theirs delivered last year to replace the AS532 Cougar for CSAR.

i have read and heard from my varous sources that the Tiger debacle was partly to do with Hawker Dehaviland (?) assembling the Tiger in house and the supply chain was a little bi skewered. Laughingly the German Bundeswehr supply chain with supporting their NH90 TTH does not work as it was used to support the legacy UH-1D Huey and had not been upgraded,/tailored/thought ahead hence wher some of the fleet reliability brought into question..

Cheers

[kiwi grey]

I heard the reason for the reliability issues was more to do with bureaucracy within RAAF/Army/USA. I don't know the specifics but no doubt someone else will and correct me as it was a quick conversation But something along the lines that the maintenance software used by the Army/RAAF is based on the CAMS=FM which is American. The Taipan maintenance doesn't mesh into that, and so spares were often not around. Routine maintenance hard to plan etc. The actual aircraft apparently is pretty good. But Army also just wanted Blackhawk from the start. This info came from an Army pilot who seemed to think it was a lot more about bloody mindedness on the part of armies full of bureaucrats and god help us if we had to fight a war type of thing and a giant waste of money scrapping them early. That would certainly be consistent with pretty much every other acquisition Australia has had over the last 20 yrs.

There is definitely something odd going on here.
Recent public reports are that the RNZAF is really quite pleased with their NH90 helicopters, with good availability and that they now have the world-wide high time airframe, despite getting them a long time after some other customers.
Why is the ADF's reported experience with the NH90 so markedly different to the NZDF's?


And yes, I'm sure the NZDF would be delighted to pick up some Taipan airframes at a fire-sale price from the ADF.
Once they had performed their Kiwi Magic on them to make them reliable (enough) they could use maybe four to six to take over a lot of the flying training load. Perhaps another half-dozen to be used as spare parts donors, and maybe one or two more to be used as maintenance trainers at Blenheim.

[golder]

It will be interesting to see who we sell our euro choppers to and how much we get. I can see them being bought and stripped for parts, for an existing user.

[rattman]

It will be interesting to see who we sell our euro choppers to and how much we get. I can see them being bought and stripped for parts, for an existing user.

Yep but the are still flyable with some years of life left. Maybe just fly them out to mount isa or a ayrs rock and park them there as our own mini boneyard. No buyer for the blackhawks, F-18 buyer fell through, cant see anyone wanting the taipans or tiger at a reasonable price

[Going Boeing]

Australia has purchased more Romeos without the ASW gear fitted but could be. They will be configured in a utility role and have commonality with the rest of the fleet os Seahawks.

TBM, do you know if they retrieved the ditched Romeo? There may be a few ASW components that are still usable after the soaking to go into one of the new ones when they are delivered. Also, they probably don’t want that technology sitting on the seabed waiting for someone to come along and retrieve.

NZ should not be commenting on defence matters..

You use good bait when you go fishing!

[TBM-Legend]

TBM, do you know if they retrieved the ditched Romeo? There may be a few ASW components that are still usable after the soaking to go into one of the new ones when they are delivered. Also, they probably don’t want that technology sitting on the seabed waiting for someone to come along and retrieve.


As far as I know Davey Jones is custodian...

[henra]

Yep but the are still flyable with some years of life left. Maybe just fly them out to mount isa or a ayrs rock and park them there as our own mini boneyard. No buyer for the blackhawks, F-18 buyer fell through, cant see anyone wanting the taipans or tiger at a reasonable price
What benefit would such a boneyard of types not used any more bring? Selling them for scrap price+x would be a win-win for both sides.

[rattman]

What benefit would such a boneyard of types not used any more bring? Selling them for scrap price+x would be a win-win for both sides.

If you generally believe the next big war is going to happen soonish, then that war will be fought with what you own, the supply chain required to build modern hardware will lead to massive disruption to the already anemic production. Its not like WW2 where any tom dick and harry can suddenly start building spitfires.

Keeping the aircraft in a fairly controlled and maintained storage for future requirements seems more prudent to me than effectively giving them away or selling for 'scrap'

[charliegolf]

I Its not like WW2 where any tom dick and harry can suddenly start building spitfires.


Worked for the PPE suppliers in UK. Oh, wait...

CG

[Bengo]

If you generally believe the next big war is going to happen soonish, then that war will be fought with what you own, the supply chain required to build modern hardware will lead to massive disruption to the already anemic production. Its not like WW2 where any tom dick and harry can suddenly start building spitfires.

Keeping the aircraft in a fairly controlled and maintained storage for future requirements seems more prudent to me than effectively giving them away or selling for 'scrap'

If you have withdrawn kit because there are no spares then there will still be no spares come the showdown.

Nor will you have any current operators or maintainers.

N

[dadruid]

New Zealand will be expecting an early Christmas - they will soon have most of their helicopter fleet as ex Aus military castoffs.
Look down your nose at us why don't you.....

[rattman]

Look down your nose at us why don't you.....

A legit quote considering other kiwi assuming they are going to be getting them, hell almost begging for them

[rjtjrt]

Look down your nose at us why don't you.....
I wasn't looking down my nose at NZ at all. Quite the reverse. They are canny buyers of kit and get much more bang for buck than we do.

[Going Boeing]

Look down your nose at us why don't you.....

Not looking down my nose at our close neighbours but I always admired how they maximised their defence dollars. If they were involved with an ASW exercise, the RNZAF P3 (the one in the worst condition) would arrive at RAAF Edinburgh a few days early and take all their analogue components to the electronic workshops and use equipment that they didn’t have at their base to calibrate all their gear. By the time the exercise started, it was the best aircraft in their fleet.

I won’t mention whose sonobuoys they used during the exercise.

[minigundiplomat]

It will be interesting to see who we sell our euro choppers to and how much we get. I can see them being bought and stripped for parts, for an existing user.

I reckon the entire fleet would sustain 2 aircraft for the PNGDF.

[golder]

I reckon the entire fleet would sustain 2 aircraft for the PNGDF.
They might make a better chook house.

[JeanKhul]

Could it be that the problems might come from the local maintenance performance ? Other countries seem to be very happy.
France has been using them in Chad and Ami for a couple of years, and a lot NATO Navies do enjoy them.

[Going Boeing]

This article gives an idea of how expensive it had become to operate & the last paragraph summed it up well.

A final note. While it may be tempting to hang on to the MRH-90 in some kind of disaster-relief or bushfire-fighting role, that siren song must be avoided. The MRH-90 has been costing $35,000 per hour to operate. Last financial year that ballooned to $50,000 and it was probably the final straw. Even if that could be halved by stripping out military capabilities, it would still be orders of magnitude more than a civilian firefighting or emergency services helicopter. Despite the sunk cost, trying to repurpose the MRH-90 will merely extend the drain on resources. We’ve made the decision; walk away, don’t look back.

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/dumping-the-adfs-mrh-90-helicopters-is-the-right-call-but-why-now/?fbclid=IwAR1NJCZTZt4Qnl2HJAwwMP_Yp-e1JdF6MNo-8WSfp6DJioLVMotWqn5oVrw

[Could be the last?]

How many ac is the NMH contract looking for…….if it is still going ahead?

[golder]

Could it be that the problems might come from the local maintenance performance ? Other countries seem to be very happy.
France has been using them in Chad and Ami for a couple of years, and a lot NATO Navies do enjoy them.
It is done by the EU company in Australia. Australian Aerospace, a unit of Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters)

[rattman]

This article gives an idea of how expensive it had become to operate & the last paragraph summed it up well.



https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/dumping-the-adfs-mrh-90-helicopters-is-the-right-call-but-why-now/?fbclid=IwAR1NJCZTZt4Qnl2HJAwwMP_Yp-e1JdF6MNo-8WSfp6DJioLVMotWqn5oVrw

The eventually retired Black hawks have been discussed about being made available for firefighting, know someone who flys a huey firebomber and being ex blackhawk pilot and said his company is looking at tendering to buy a few if the casa hurdles can be jumped. Taipans have zero chance of competing in any sort of commercial work, they are great chopper to fly according to him, probably one of best he has flown. But the cost per hour is rediculous

[chopper2004]

The RAN MRH-90 were more for VERTREP and carrying the Marines so I guess the AAAC CH-47F will be doing this from now on?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh-HE2n_0HI

Cheers

[rattman]

The RAN MRH-90 were more for VERTREP and carrying the Marines so I guess the AAAC CH-47F will be doing this from now on?

Cheers

Never seen a chinook do SAR/winching, so that might be one missing role.

[ROTOR BLAST]

Since the MRH was introduced Defence have flown close to 40000 flying hours on the fleet.
If the cost per hour is what the article states plus the acquisition and the replacement cost of a different frame - then how dare they waste the tax payers money to that extent.
I have not read anywhere where this colossal waste has been revealed to the public.

[rattman]

On another place I go, someone claims that a sweden is considering abandoning thier NH90 due to obscene flight cost, was announced on a radio news show so I have no way to confirm the truth of the claim or not

Wonder where I have heard that before

(thanks mod who moved it, posted in the wrong thread by accident)

[HK144]

Sweden has also purchased the UH60M.

[HK144]

Since the MRH was introduced Defence have flown close to 40000 flying hours on the fleet.
If the cost per hour is what the article states plus the acquisition and the replacement cost of a different frame - then how dare they waste the tax payers money to that extent.
I have not read anywhere where this colossal waste has been revealed to the public.

Most of the open source Defence and Aviation journals have posted the flying hour costs as well as some News articles in the general media. One thing to remember, whilst we have the upfront costs of the UH60M, over the life of the fleet they will cost just under $2B less to operate than the MRH90.

[Doors Off]

Most of the open source Defence and Aviation journals have posted the flying hour costs as well as some News articles in the general media. One thing to remember, whilst we have the upfront costs of the UH60M, over the life of the fleet they will cost just under $2B less to operate than the MRH90.
Mathematics appears simple at the basic level. Statistics are merely an interpretation of preferred facts.

The figures that are being published need to be put into context. How many soldiers can each platform carry? How much airframe corrosion maintenance is required when embarked? What is the corrosion penalty? What extra infrastructure is required for the new platform? What are the Maintenance Tooling costs? The list goes on! Let us stop the BS, please!

There are strategic requirements, which are valid. There are also cultural brand allegiance desires, which are not valid. Let us recognise the difference.

[golder]

Mathematics appears simple at the basic level. Statistics are merely an interpretation of preferred facts.

The figures that are being published need to be put into context. How many soldiers can each platform carry? How much airframe corrosion maintenance is required when embarked? What is the corrosion penalty? What extra infrastructure is required for the new platform? What are the Maintenance Tooling costs? The list goes on! Let us stop the BS, please!

There are strategic requirements, which are valid. There are also cultural brand allegiance desires, which are not valid. Let us recognise the difference.
If it was just Australia complaining about the NH-90 and the Tiger. You may have had a point. Unfortunately, given that other nations are complaining and that Thales is a major defense supplier in Australia. I don't think you do.

[melmothtw]

Could it be that the problems might come from the local maintenance performance ? Other countries seem to be very happy.
France has been using them in Chad and Ami for a couple of years, and a lot NATO Navies do enjoy them.

Norway is considering leasing a commercial solution because its NH90s aren't up to the embarked coast guard role. Sweden is considering replacing its NH90s. Belgium has scaled back its NH90 operations due to high costs.

I don't know how 'happy' France or the other operators are, but it is certainly a programme with serious ongoing issues.

[HK144]

Mathematics appears simple at the basic level. Statistics are merely an interpretation of preferred facts.

The figures that are being published need to be put into context. How many soldiers can each platform carry? How much airframe corrosion maintenance is required when embarked? What is the corrosion penalty? What extra infrastructure is required for the new platform? What are the Maintenance Tooling costs? The list goes on! Let us stop the BS, please!

There are strategic requirements, which are valid. There are also cultural brand allegiance desires, which are not valid. Let us recognise the difference.

How very condescending of you. We are not alone in having issues with the MRH90 and/or Tiger platforms. Multiple countries are also planning early replacements or have already done so. If the 'Mike' does the job so be it. The MRH90 may carry a couple more troops and both the MRH90 and Tiger may be newer; however, rather pointless when they are not able to fly. As for 'cultural brand allegiances' what rubbish.

[typerated]

Yet NZ is happy with the NH-90!
But you also managed to make even more of a mess of the Seasprites - Australian procurement is world leadingly awful!

While the Army might be much more happy to deploy with Blackhawks, Perhaps the military should still field the NH-90 for the biggest and most imminent threat facing the country:
Bushfires!

[SRFred]

Yet NZ is happy with the NH-90!
Perhaps the military should still field the NH-90 for the biggest and most imminent threat facing the country:
Bushfires!

Well they do have a track record of starting a good bushfire!

[rattman]

NHI (airbus australia) are apparently going to throw a lot of money at choppers to try and convince the govt to keep them.

2019 they had an availability rate of 37%, 2020 they got it up to a 39%. They hope to have an availability rate of 65% mid 2022, dunno how 65% compares to others like the blackhawks, but from memory 65% for jet fighters is considered not great. The F-22 still managed a 55% operational rate compared to a 39% for MRH-90

[typerated]

Well they do have a track record of starting a good bushfire!

Sharp! forgot about that!

[rattman]

Yet NZ is happy with the NH-90!
But you also managed to make even more of a mess of the Seasprites - Australian procurement is world leadingly awful!

While the Army might be much more happy to deploy with Blackhawks, Perhaps the military should still field the NH-90 for the biggest and most imminent threat facing the country:
Bushfires!

Why would you pay 30K an hour when you use a Bell 205 for about $1500 a flight hour

[typerated]

Well it does lift more!

I wasn’t seriously suggesting having the fleet of NH-90s for fighting fires though!

I was just pointing out Australia is spending a lot of money on defence.
and only a tiny fraction of this on fire fighting machinery.

Seems more aligned to the politics of your current leadership rather than a risk analysis or common sense

[rattman]

Well it does lift more!



Believe it limited by the size of the bambi buckets, from what I have been told the 205 and all the medium lift choppers all use the same size

[Buster Hyman]

I was just pointing out Australia is spending a lot of money on defence.
and only a tiny fraction of this on fire fighting machinery.
We seem to have a few this season. https://www.nafc.org.au/fleet/

[dagenham]

Genuine question - why does Australia have so many issues with procurement what do we have so far seasprite, tiger, the 90 and the subs ?

i know the Uk with nimrod x2 and the current tank fiasco is no better so not throwing stones

[rattman]

Genuine question - why does Australia have so many issues with procurement what do we have so far seasprite, tiger, the 90 and the subs ?

i know the Uk with nimrod x2 and the current tank fiasco is no better so not throwing stones

Not to make this a pissing match of who is better or worse, the UK record is bad as well (Ajax, Challenger, warrior upgrades, SA-80, astute, dreadnought, QE class). I see the same issues with both countries, for australia there 2 major and 1 minor issue. The major issue the desire to australianise everything, I do think we have seen the light on that and it appears that we are just buying off the shelf with minor changes, secondly the desire to make everything made / assembled in australia damn the cost. We appear to be moving to a more selected and targetted program, maybe more forced than chose that action as a lot of the new stuff is american and they dont play that game. The last and minor we have a champagne lifestyle on a beer budget

[HK144]

Well it does lift more!

I wasn’t seriously suggesting having the fleet of NH-90s for fighting fires though!

I was just pointing out Australia is spending a lot of money on defence.
and only a tiny fraction of this on fire fighting machinery.

Seems more aligned to the politics of your current leadership rather than a risk analysis or common sense

So we are spending on Defence. So the region is rather benign and facing no uncertain geopolitical threats? Oh that's right, so NZ will look the other way and hope everything goes away.

[typerated]

So we are spending on Defence. So the region is rather benign and facing no uncertain geopolitical threats? Oh that's right, so NZ will look the other way and hope everything goes away.

Thanks we appreciate it!

Actually you will find we are spending on defence - it's to keep climate refuges out from the West Island!
But - have you ever thought how venerable you are to using your flammable environment as a weapon against you?
Perhaps too scary to consider?
So maybe fire fighting equipment might be part of your defence?

[Gnadenburg]

Thanks we appreciate it!

Actually you will find we are spending on defence - it's to keep climate refuges out from the West Island!?

What’s with the climate agenda? And don’t make me laugh, my family made a fortune selling Waiheke Island holdings to CCP goons. No CGT, profits funnelled into US businesses for other tax purposes. Your PM is in a tantrum over it behind closed doors though can’t get past the local government loopholes. NZ is tradable. And not a cent going to Kiwis in many circumstances.

Back to helicopters? French serviceability and cost issues with NH 90 researchable online.

[rattman]

Back to helicopters? French serviceability and cost issues with NH 90 researchable online.


Theirs is the same as ours at around high 30's. Dunno how we define our servicability rate in australia but in france it looks to be if it can carry out it mission in 6 hours, its servicable

[Nicholas Howard]

Dunno how we define our servicability rate in australia but in france it looks to be if it can carry out it mission in 6 hours, its servicable

In the UK we had some very interesting definitions and very different ones for AVAILABILITY and SERVICEABILITY, but it never ceased to surprise me how many people could mix them up. They may have changed since my time though.

AVAILABLE was defined as being in the forward fleet, ie not in depth maintenance or modification and was usually a contracted output from industry (assuming industry were conducting depth/depot maintenance, as they were for most major fleets after DLTP)

SERVICEABLE was defined as being ready to fly a sortie (for the planned role) or being capable of being made ready in a certain period. This was usually the responsibility of the front line command and depended on lots of factors (role equipment, spares, reliability, tools, maintainer SQEP and numbers, command priority, tech information, infrastructure, GSE, ASSE, etc), many of which were outside of the ability for industry to deliver. Hence, industry was almost never held responsible for SERVICEABILITY rates (except for contracts like DHFS).

We didn't much bother with RELIABILITY rates, ie how often did it COMPLETE its planned tasking, which used to surprise me; especially with some of the helicopters fitted with complex mission kits.

ISTR that serviceability (measured as a %age of the departmental (whole) fleet) used to average somewhere between 35-45% (regardless of type, age, role or support contract), forward fleet average serviceability was usually around 50%, but deployed serviceability rates were usually in the 70-90%. As ever, "statistics and damn lies" can be made to answer pretty any question how you want it to look!

Hope this helps. Best of luck to the Aussies with their H-60 plans

Nick

[Doors Off]

No matter the outcomes of the NH90 in Australia, it was doomed from the start.

Strategically, it makes absolute sense to go with COTS US stuff however, culturally they will try to teach the yanks how to operate Blackhawk and Apache and turn both into RPT IFR Airliners and fly close form at the bottom of the valley.

[typerated]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51001819682_3de31daaa9_h.jpg

NZ getting good use of theirs

[TBM-Legend]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51001819682_3de31daaa9_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2kGRE7E)

NZ getting good use of theirs


SWEDEN'S VIEW OF THE NH90 POS

​​​​​​Sweden joins a growing number of dissatisfied users of the European made NH90 helicopters. NH90 first flew in 1995 and entered service in 2007. The manufacturer is a consortium of French, German, Dutch and Italian firms that promised to fix all the problems and eventually did, mostly. But some problems have proved intractable. Sweden pointed out that its 18 NH90s cost over $24,000 an hour to operate while its American made UH-60s cost only $4,500 an hour. Moreover the Swedish NH90s had a low readiness rate, about half that of the UH-60. Sweden had similar experience to other NH90 users and, unlike the naval versions of the UH-60, the naval version of NH90 had even more problems. In desperation Sweden ordered 16 UH-60s to fill in until the NH90 is fixed. Getting the NH90 to be comparable in performance to the older UH-60 appears to be perpetual problem.

[DHC4]

NHI (airbus australia) are apparently going to throw a lot of money at choppers to try and convince the govt to keep them.

2019 they had an availability rate of 37%, 2020 they got it up to a 39%. They hope to have an availability rate of 65% mid 2022, dunno how 65% compares to others like the blackhawks, but from memory 65% for jet fighters is considered not great. The F-22 still managed a 55% operational rate compared to a 39% for MRH-90

NHI, is not Airbus Australia. You knew that though.

[rattman]

Yes meant airbus helicopters

[golder]

Established in 1992, NHIndustries was formed as a partnership between Eurocopter of France, Germany and Spain (now Airbus Helicopters), Agusta of Italy (now Leonardo) and Stork Fokker Aerospace of the Netherlands (now Fokker Aerostructures).
...................
The main facilities of Airbus Helicopters are at its headquarters in Marignane, France and in Donauwörth, Germany, with additional production plants in Brazil (Helibras), Australia, Spain, Romania, UK and the United States. The company was renamed from Eurocopter to Airbus Helicopters on 2 January 2014.

[EESDL]

NHI = No Helicopter Intended........if you're not one of the founder members with priority ;-)

[DHC4]

Established in 1992, NHIndustries was formed as a partnership between Eurocopter of France, Germany and Spain (now Airbus Helicopters), Agusta of Italy (now Leonardo) and Stork Fokker Aerospace of the Netherlands (now Fokker Aerostructures).
...................
The main facilities of Airbus Helicopters are at its headquarters in Marignane, France and in Donauwörth, Germany, with additional production plants in Brazil (Helibras), Australia, Spain, Romania, UK and the United States. The company was renamed from Eurocopter to Airbus Helicopters on 2 January 2014.

The plants in the UK & Australia are not production facilities, they are maintenance.

[golder]

The plants in the UK & Australia are not production facilities, they are maintenance.

"The MRH-90 Taipan is a twin-engine, advanced medium-lift, multi-role helicopter produced by Australian Aerospace, a subsidiary of Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters)."

[rattman]

"The MRH-90 Taipan is a twin-engine, advanced medium-lift, multi-role helicopter produced by Australian Aerospace, a subsidiary of Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters)."

The first 4 were built and assembled in margane france, the rest were built in france and assembled at australian aerospace in brisbane

Also germany is not happy with tiger and a MH-90 servicability
https://outline.com/qP7Lea

[Going Boeing]

Norway is also very unhappy with NHI, threatens to cancel the order.

Norway NH90 (https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/norway-threatens-cancellation-of-nh90-helicopter-contract-over-upgrade-delays/147436.article)

[golder]

Spain has recently ordered some. God knows why.

[chopper2004]

Spain has recently ordered some. God knows why.

Their first Air Force ones were delivered the other year

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2020-10-first-nh90-delivered-to-the-spanish-air-force-for-search-and-rescue

cheers