Defence force in copters debacle
Evertonian
Thread Starter
Defence force in copters debacle
By Brendan Nicholson, Canberra
May 3, 2006
THE Australian Defence Force has started accepting delivery of a $1.6 billion fleet of French-made helicopters despite warnings that they are not safe to fly at night or in bad weather.
The helicopters have also been revealed to be underpowered, requiring the replacement of engines at an additional cost of $110 million.
The fiasco is detailed in a scathing Audit Office report on the purchase of 22 of the high-tech Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters, which were to be in service by 2004.
The aircraft are designed to carry out battlefield reconnaissance, to provide air support for troops under attack and to escort troop-carrying Black Hawk helicopters.
But the Audit Office said the first three aircraft delivered did not meet contracted specifications covering weight, weapons, navigation systems for low-visibility flying, crash resistance, flying over large bodies of water and availability of spare parts.
A test crew sent to evaluate the first of the helicopters warned it had problems that would "directly affect safe and efficient operation of the aircraft, especially in the training environment".
One helicopter would be out of action for nine months while improvements were made to bring it up to scratch.
The ADF ordered 22 Tigers for $1.58 billion in a contract with Eurocopter International Pacific in December 2001.
Opposition defence spokesman Robert McClelland said this was another example of mismanagement of a key military helicopter project.
The Defence Materiel Organisation, which handled the purchase, did not specify the weight and type of missiles to be carried by the Tiger, the Audit Office said. The contractor assumed that Australia planned to use a lighter missile than was intended. As a consequence, the helicopter underperformed when the extra weight was added.
The engines were also found to underperform in the hot conditions of northern Australia.
On a checklist detailing the airworthiness of the fifth aircraft delivered, the Audit Office marked 14 out of 15 crucial areas of the helicopter's performance with an "X" for deficiency.
The original plan was for Australia to buy an "off-the-shelf" aircraft that was already in operation elsewhere. Instead it wound up first in line and got aircraft off the start of the production line. The French military got their first helicopter four months after the ADF.
Responding to the engine problems, the Defence Department said the manufacturer was obliged to deliver engines that could produce sufficient power at no additional cost to the ADF.
The Audit Office said Defence had not produced a formal report on how it came to chose the Tiger over its rivals and recommended that in future such a report should be produced.
Defence agreed to do that but insisted that its processes met accountability and transparency requirements.
SUBMARINES
Collins Class submarine project blows out by almost $1 billion and is delayed years because of problems with noise, periscopes and combat systems. Some problems persist.
GUIDED MISSILE FRIGATES
Upgrade to improve radar and weapons systems is several years behind schedule.
HELICOPTERS
More than $1 billion spent to refit fleet of 40-year-old Super Seasprite helicopters with new technology. Project years behind schedule. Cannot operate in poor light or undertake combat exercises.
PATROL PLANES
Multimillion-dollar upgrade of P3-Orion patrol planes running four years behind schedule.
May 3, 2006
THE Australian Defence Force has started accepting delivery of a $1.6 billion fleet of French-made helicopters despite warnings that they are not safe to fly at night or in bad weather.
The helicopters have also been revealed to be underpowered, requiring the replacement of engines at an additional cost of $110 million.
The fiasco is detailed in a scathing Audit Office report on the purchase of 22 of the high-tech Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters, which were to be in service by 2004.
The aircraft are designed to carry out battlefield reconnaissance, to provide air support for troops under attack and to escort troop-carrying Black Hawk helicopters.
But the Audit Office said the first three aircraft delivered did not meet contracted specifications covering weight, weapons, navigation systems for low-visibility flying, crash resistance, flying over large bodies of water and availability of spare parts.
A test crew sent to evaluate the first of the helicopters warned it had problems that would "directly affect safe and efficient operation of the aircraft, especially in the training environment".
One helicopter would be out of action for nine months while improvements were made to bring it up to scratch.
The ADF ordered 22 Tigers for $1.58 billion in a contract with Eurocopter International Pacific in December 2001.
Opposition defence spokesman Robert McClelland said this was another example of mismanagement of a key military helicopter project.
The Defence Materiel Organisation, which handled the purchase, did not specify the weight and type of missiles to be carried by the Tiger, the Audit Office said. The contractor assumed that Australia planned to use a lighter missile than was intended. As a consequence, the helicopter underperformed when the extra weight was added.
The engines were also found to underperform in the hot conditions of northern Australia.
On a checklist detailing the airworthiness of the fifth aircraft delivered, the Audit Office marked 14 out of 15 crucial areas of the helicopter's performance with an "X" for deficiency.
The original plan was for Australia to buy an "off-the-shelf" aircraft that was already in operation elsewhere. Instead it wound up first in line and got aircraft off the start of the production line. The French military got their first helicopter four months after the ADF.
Responding to the engine problems, the Defence Department said the manufacturer was obliged to deliver engines that could produce sufficient power at no additional cost to the ADF.
The Audit Office said Defence had not produced a formal report on how it came to chose the Tiger over its rivals and recommended that in future such a report should be produced.
Defence agreed to do that but insisted that its processes met accountability and transparency requirements.
SUBMARINES
Collins Class submarine project blows out by almost $1 billion and is delayed years because of problems with noise, periscopes and combat systems. Some problems persist.
GUIDED MISSILE FRIGATES
Upgrade to improve radar and weapons systems is several years behind schedule.
HELICOPTERS
More than $1 billion spent to refit fleet of 40-year-old Super Seasprite helicopters with new technology. Project years behind schedule. Cannot operate in poor light or undertake combat exercises.
PATROL PLANES
Multimillion-dollar upgrade of P3-Orion patrol planes running four years behind schedule.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Beach
Age: 48
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash-worthy? They demo-ed the crash-worthiness of the machine up in Townsville as part of the sales pitch.
Sounds like between their airliners and their combat heloes, the French are remaining consistent.
The SeaSprites were ordered for a ship the RAN has never actually taken delivery of. They are useless now.
Sounds like between their airliners and their combat heloes, the French are remaining consistent.
The SeaSprites were ordered for a ship the RAN has never actually taken delivery of. They are useless now.
There are a number of perfectly understandable reasons for all this.
1. Cumbersome purchasing procedures. By the time the specification has been written, the requirements have changed.
2. Internal politics - the guys that know whats what don't get to make the decisions, as well as cost pressures.
3. Lack of engineering skills - like the ^&**%$ moron who specified flexible fuel injection pipework for the Westralia.
4. Careerism, as in "Would I like to go to Switzerland to check out PC9's or the Wamira at Fishermans Bend in Melbourne?"
Sorry, I think I've forgotten to take my anti cynicism pill this morning.....
1. Cumbersome purchasing procedures. By the time the specification has been written, the requirements have changed.
2. Internal politics - the guys that know whats what don't get to make the decisions, as well as cost pressures.
3. Lack of engineering skills - like the ^&**%$ moron who specified flexible fuel injection pipework for the Westralia.
4. Careerism, as in "Would I like to go to Switzerland to check out PC9's or the Wamira at Fishermans Bend in Melbourne?"
Sorry, I think I've forgotten to take my anti cynicism pill this morning.....
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TooFiddy
The SeaSprites were ordered for a ship the RAN has never actually taken delivery of. They are useless now.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ex Douglas Driver
But the one type they did buy, has a hangar designed around the Seahawk anyway.....
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which is quite funny considering I was on the commissioning crew for 01 and we had to do our first of class flying trials with a Seaking because there wernt no Sea Sprites or SeaHawkes available.
Also invited a brand new USMC AH-1 doing trials to park for a while but he declined and just buzzed us for 10minutes or so with his older model AH-1 buddy before doing high speed passes and then back to Twentynine Palms. Played rugby with them later and got to crawl all over those magnificient beasts. Wouldnt let us fly them tho...
...but we got a cricket score against them in rugby and beer drinking.
Also invited a brand new USMC AH-1 doing trials to park for a while but he declined and just buzzed us for 10minutes or so with his older model AH-1 buddy before doing high speed passes and then back to Twentynine Palms. Played rugby with them later and got to crawl all over those magnificient beasts. Wouldnt let us fly them tho...
...but we got a cricket score against them in rugby and beer drinking.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sunfish
Careerism, as in "Would I like to go to Switzerland to check out PC9's or the Wamira at Fishermans Bend in Melbourne?"
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess that's sort of technically true Obiwan, though I was told after seeing the prototype Wamira that the delays were as a result of the ADF continually moving the goalposts - something which I find highly likely to be the truth. The same thing still happens nowadays. Goalposts are moved, or in many cases, they are never installed properly in the first place.
What Sunfish wrote is both cynical and factual, unfortunately. BTW the Wamira was a beast up close!
What Sunfish wrote is both cynical and factual, unfortunately. BTW the Wamira was a beast up close!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BPA
I thought the two versions were the A10 and A20.
Originally Posted by DutchRoll
I guess that's sort of technically true Obiwan, though I was told after seeing the prototype Wamira that the delays were as a result of the ADF continually moving the goalposts - something which I find highly likely to be the truth. The same thing still happens nowadays. Goalposts are moved, or in many cases, they are never installed properly in the first place.
What Sunfish wrote is both cynical and factual, unfortunately. BTW the Wamira was a beast up close!
What Sunfish wrote is both cynical and factual, unfortunately. BTW the Wamira was a beast up close!
