Aussie MRH-90
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Queensland, Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drum stock settling time...
Drum stock settling time was (still is?): AVGAS 1 hr per foot; AVTUR 3 hrs per foot. 205 litre drum is about 3 ft tall, so 3 hours for AVGAS and 9 hrs for AVTUR. Caribou SOP/SI had a clause which read something like '...unless urgent operational circumstances prevail' but you had to have a very good reason.
It was a fuel supply issue. The helo's and crews were ready to go (and yes, there were Chinooks there) but there was not enough fuel was brought in for them to operate effectively. Same issue also applied to EMQ. A civilian helicopter company picked up the slack by flying in their own fuel. As far as I can tell, the problem occurred because the RAAF did not have enough transport assets available (so much for the inter-service crap bollocks on this thread, the RAAF is no better) and when some fuel did arrive, it was little more than the total capacity of one Black Hawk with jugs. Indeed, a civilian company was even chartered to supply a C-130 when the RAAF couldn't.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andu
Thanks. Understand all that but I thought the military were taught to think outside the square and achieve a mission, not find reason why it can't be done.
I am famil with how large an area can go under, I spend a bit of time in NT during the wet season.
"We should be flexible enough to set up FARPs - or at least the DACC equivalent to a FARP - with great ease. Should be. Plenty of ADF assets in Qld that can do that sort of thing."
I agree, something obviously went wrong and hopefully it will be picked up net time.
Question for helo pilots.
I always remember when we refueled a helo out of Drums or Bladders,
before any was put in the helo, a glass jar of fuel was held up to the
windscreen of the pilot for him to check that no water / contaminants
were in it.
Is this still the practice ?
.
Thanks. Understand all that but I thought the military were taught to think outside the square and achieve a mission, not find reason why it can't be done.
I am famil with how large an area can go under, I spend a bit of time in NT during the wet season.
"We should be flexible enough to set up FARPs - or at least the DACC equivalent to a FARP - with great ease. Should be. Plenty of ADF assets in Qld that can do that sort of thing."
I agree, something obviously went wrong and hopefully it will be picked up net time.
Question for helo pilots.
I always remember when we refueled a helo out of Drums or Bladders,
before any was put in the helo, a glass jar of fuel was held up to the
windscreen of the pilot for him to check that no water / contaminants
were in it.
Is this still the practice ?
.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by TBM-Legend
So how many MRH-90's have been actually delivered by the end of 2012 to the Army?
Originally Posted by ARRAKIS
correct me if I'm wrong, but Italian NH90's in A'stan are powered by T700-T6E1, which are not the best performer in hot&high conditions
Originally Posted by ARRAKIS
Another question are windshield cracks and floor problems
Originally Posted by ARRAKIS
The entire article sounds a little bit like "we are are happy, but don't buy". Anything to do with some tenders?
I/C
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Arm Cove, NSW, Australia
Age: 86
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Floor strength MRH90
The Huey has a quite strong floor, but is still susceptible to denting/piercing by sharpish and heavy metal objects, like mortar baseplates, etcetera. This was remedied in the early days of RAAF Iroquois ops by manufacturing a plywood overlay (also a load-spreader) with cut-outs for all the floor tie-down and other attachment points. It was secured to the floor with just a few screws and easily removed to hose out the cabin when contaminated by highly corrosive body fluids (blood, etcetera). Maybe that would also work on other types!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's just a bloody lawyer who happened to once wear khaki. I'd like to be told I'm wrong, (for the sakes of the "PBI"), but from what I've heard, I don't think there are many within the ADF who think highly of him.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jason Clare was a good operator...Interested and did his research before visiting a project. 
Unfortunately, he is let down by loyalties to the NSW Right and a REALLY bad staff...
Unfortunately, he is let down by loyalties to the NSW Right and a REALLY bad staff...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair call from Andu, perhaps I was looking too hard for an opportunity to bite.
To elaborate on my post, the pilots don't need exceptional circumstances to get the resources to go flying. In fact, Avn's support to disaster relief will not increase available flying hours. If the fleet overflies one year because of a set of disasters, then the next year's allocation will most likely be reduced. While there are enough hours available, the govt's demands for savings from Defence are hitting the DMO, diminishing their ability to manage contingencies.
So I actually agree with you Andu, there should be more money available to allow better sustainment - more hours - on all the ADF's fleets; RW, FW, Ships, tanks, subs, you name it. I don't agree with BR71's assertion that the ADF should redefine its capability requirements down to meet the current pitiful budget.
The dirty (not so) secret about Smith's tenure is that he and his cabinet colleagues have repeatedly deferred spending billions of dollars of allocated Defence funding and then claimed budget 'savings'. Anyone with a mortgage can tell you that deferring your house repayments in order to afford the school fees is going to end in tears.
To elaborate on my post, the pilots don't need exceptional circumstances to get the resources to go flying. In fact, Avn's support to disaster relief will not increase available flying hours. If the fleet overflies one year because of a set of disasters, then the next year's allocation will most likely be reduced. While there are enough hours available, the govt's demands for savings from Defence are hitting the DMO, diminishing their ability to manage contingencies.
So I actually agree with you Andu, there should be more money available to allow better sustainment - more hours - on all the ADF's fleets; RW, FW, Ships, tanks, subs, you name it. I don't agree with BR71's assertion that the ADF should redefine its capability requirements down to meet the current pitiful budget.
The dirty (not so) secret about Smith's tenure is that he and his cabinet colleagues have repeatedly deferred spending billions of dollars of allocated Defence funding and then claimed budget 'savings'. Anyone with a mortgage can tell you that deferring your house repayments in order to afford the school fees is going to end in tears.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never understood why, when defence assets and people
get used for civilian emergency's it comes from defences budget.
Can't the head hincho's request that where defence are used in civilian
situations that it doesn't then crimp on ops and training ?
I am sure it has been asked but would like to know if anyone
knows more.
get used for civilian emergency's it comes from defences budget.
Can't the head hincho's request that where defence are used in civilian
situations that it doesn't then crimp on ops and training ?
I am sure it has been asked but would like to know if anyone
knows more.
500N you are correct.
The Federal Govt (bless 'em) started a federal emergency services portfolio (wtf?) under Roxon the AG. This of course was handed over to the new guy at the weekend.
Presumably as they want to get involved in State issues to this extent, then they have a budget? And the funds could come from there...
But don't get me started, I'll just grab my coat
The Federal Govt (bless 'em) started a federal emergency services portfolio (wtf?) under Roxon the AG. This of course was handed over to the new guy at the weekend.
Presumably as they want to get involved in State issues to this extent, then they have a budget? And the funds could come from there...
But don't get me started, I'll just grab my coat
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BB
We were on limited training days for a period and then had
to help out on some civvy activity - only to be told it came
out of normal days !!! And they wondered why the lack of
enthusiasm !!!
Someone needs to cordon off trg / ops from everything else
and try and dump the cost onto someone else. It only needs
to be done once and then it will be set !
We were on limited training days for a period and then had
to help out on some civvy activity - only to be told it came
out of normal days !!! And they wondered why the lack of
enthusiasm !!!
Someone needs to cordon off trg / ops from everything else
and try and dump the cost onto someone else. It only needs
to be done once and then it will be set !
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Arm Cove, NSW, Australia
Age: 86
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australia's defence budget related to federal revenue
Hello Emergov;
This news text attributable to the Prime Minister:
The shortcomings of DWP2009 and the capabilities planning it cemented are now being acknowledged more widely among the defence commentariat; although there are some like Major General Jim Molan (Ret'd) who thinks planning for a somewhat mythical futuristic Force 2030 structure is appropriate. He is of course ignoring how the very flawed Helicopter Strategic Master Plan has substantially weakened his own parent Corps capabilities (Army Aviation).
Defence cannot expect more funding considering the share of about 8 percent of national revenue it is presently receiving (approximately $24b of $300b) - see also this interesting table re how Australia really compares with the world for defence outlay: Comparison Defense Budgets & Military Spending Top Countries. It behoves the whole organisation, both Public Service and military, to become much more efficient in managing defence planning and the conduct of operations.
The reality is unit acquisition and support costs of replacement hardware are soaring so streamlining of force structures will be essential to remain within publicly acceptable budgeting. As I see it, it would be best to freeze all ongoing defence planning and then review whether it is more economical to retain and optimize some assets intended for disposal to enable some aspects of operations to be conducted more cost-effectively.
If present planning proceeds and higher operating costs become overriding, there will simply not be enough flying in some air functions for aircrew to maintain adequate skills. This will probably become starkly obvious when the real costs of operating Tiger and MRH90 crystallize.
So I actually agree with you Andu, there should be more money available to allow better sustainment - more hours - on all the ADF's fleets; RW, FW, Ships, tanks, subs, you name it. I don't agree with BR71's assertion that the ADF should redefine its capability requirements down to meet the current pitiful budget.
In her speech last month, Ms Gillard said spending on national security needed to be examined. "National security absorbs some 8 per cent of what the federal government spends on behalf of the Australian people, and the priorities for that expenditure should be defined," she said.
Defence cannot expect more funding considering the share of about 8 percent of national revenue it is presently receiving (approximately $24b of $300b) - see also this interesting table re how Australia really compares with the world for defence outlay: Comparison Defense Budgets & Military Spending Top Countries. It behoves the whole organisation, both Public Service and military, to become much more efficient in managing defence planning and the conduct of operations.
The reality is unit acquisition and support costs of replacement hardware are soaring so streamlining of force structures will be essential to remain within publicly acceptable budgeting. As I see it, it would be best to freeze all ongoing defence planning and then review whether it is more economical to retain and optimize some assets intended for disposal to enable some aspects of operations to be conducted more cost-effectively.
If present planning proceeds and higher operating costs become overriding, there will simply not be enough flying in some air functions for aircrew to maintain adequate skills. This will probably become starkly obvious when the real costs of operating Tiger and MRH90 crystallize.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 5th Feb 2013 at 23:01. Reason: Title added plus dollar numbers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Corrigible
Didn't get that sense from the report. Just a matter of fact field report from a operator rather than another marketing spiel from a sales guy.
Originally Posted by Ian Corrigible
Originally Posted by ARRAKIS
The entire article sounds a little bit like "we are are happy, but don't buy". Anything to do with some tenders?
The entire article sounds a little bit like "we are are happy, but don't buy". Anything to do with some tenders?
I may have now a slightly different perspective. Polish Air Force/Army/Navy are in the process of changing their helicopter assets. The tender is now for 70 medium multirole machines, but more to come in the future. AW was chosen as the representative of NHI to promote NH90. It ended up (French press point of view):
Pologne : comment Eurocopter s'est fait rouler par AgustaWestland
We are now with S-70 vs EC725 vs AW149.
This is why I am just carefull about what is being published, as there may be more than meets the eye.
Regarding floor/windshield cracks, those problems were known for quite some time, and AFAIK solutions were found, so I was surprised that nothing was done on Italian NH90s before sending them to A'stan. Maybe I got it wrong.
Arrakis
Last edited by ARRAKIS; 14th Feb 2013 at 10:08.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Arm Cove, NSW, Australia
Age: 86
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The essential utility helo role.
Hello Arrakis. Dialogue in several forums has indicated a European leaning toward medium capacity helicopters; but past lessons of war-fighting are not being adequately heeded in my view.
The cabin layout of Iroquois from UH-1D onwards has not been bettered for platform battlefield support capability/flexibility. Regrettably, it was not emulated in the UTTAS competition so Blackhawk and other types also have internal obstruction problems with inboard armament stations, such as experienced by the Italians with the NH90.
General Tolson's reference to a light, agile machine is pertinent. The modernised Huey II is around half the weight of Blackhawks, NH90, UH-1Y and the like; acquisition costs of the heavier machines perhaps 10 times more than the Huey II and operating costs are many times higher.
Another lesson of the Vietnam conflict was the necessity for a 4 man crew in utility helos as the overwhelming majority of utility helicopter missions were conducted unescorted and usually as a single aircraft necessitating integral weapons capabilities.
It was simply not cost-effective then, and moreso now, to provide escort for all helo operations, yet several nations are envisaging unarmed so-called light utility helicopters (LUH) to perform the most essential of intimate battlefield support roles. Light observation helicopters (LOH) were extensively employed in Vietnam being mostly unarmed, but they fell far short of the versatile capabilities of the Huey.
An emergent big issue mentioned earlier is being able to sustain an adequate level of operations for both Tiger and MRH90 in ADF service to maintain aircrew currency, due to high operating costs per flying hour. This problem will doubtless be encountered by other nations.
My view is aircraft manufacturers have lost sight of true utility helo functions and are pricing their much heavier more complex substitutes beyond affordability for general intimate battlefield support. The Italian experience in Afghanistan indicates the NH90 has about the same payload capacity at altitude as the Huey II which prima facie beats it for hot and high performance. European manufacturers would have been far wiser had they more or less cloned the single-engined Huey II.
'The Army's decision to standardize on a utility tactical transport helicopter has far-reaching implications on every operation from its planning to its execution. Literally hundreds of our key battles could not have been fought without a light, agile machine that could go into improbable landing zones at a critical time. Had the Army chosen to build its airmobile tactics around a "platoon carrier," different and less flexible tactics would have been forced on our commanders. As we move to replace the Huey fleet, we must never lose sight of the essential characteristics that made the Huey invaluable to the Infantry commander. Technology offers so many tempting alternatives that one can easily forget the basic problems of squad tactics. The vital lessons which we learned in the"sizing" of our helicopter fleet dare not be forgotten.' - Lieutenant General John J. Tolson, US Army from the study Air Mobility Vietnam 1961-1971.
General Tolson's reference to a light, agile machine is pertinent. The modernised Huey II is around half the weight of Blackhawks, NH90, UH-1Y and the like; acquisition costs of the heavier machines perhaps 10 times more than the Huey II and operating costs are many times higher.
Another lesson of the Vietnam conflict was the necessity for a 4 man crew in utility helos as the overwhelming majority of utility helicopter missions were conducted unescorted and usually as a single aircraft necessitating integral weapons capabilities.
'During this period of time, opinion varied on the necessity for door gunners on transport helicopters. Generally speaking, those not close to the action favoured elimination of the door gunner for the additional weight and space, while the transport helicopter pilots favoured the retention of the door gunner, without exception.' - Air Mobility Vietnam 1961-1971.
An emergent big issue mentioned earlier is being able to sustain an adequate level of operations for both Tiger and MRH90 in ADF service to maintain aircrew currency, due to high operating costs per flying hour. This problem will doubtless be encountered by other nations.
My view is aircraft manufacturers have lost sight of true utility helo functions and are pricing their much heavier more complex substitutes beyond affordability for general intimate battlefield support. The Italian experience in Afghanistan indicates the NH90 has about the same payload capacity at altitude as the Huey II which prima facie beats it for hot and high performance. European manufacturers would have been far wiser had they more or less cloned the single-engined Huey II.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 18th Feb 2013 at 23:45. Reason: Addendum
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MRH-90 use in Flood Relief
The very simple reason that MRH-90's have not been used in any of the disaster relief efforts recently is that they had not been cleared by the ADF Airworthiness Authority to do so. The Introduction Into Service process is very laborious and rigorous, and if the re is not an Airworthiness Instrument in place to allow certain activities, then that aircraft will not do it.
The MRH90 received a recommendation last week from the Airworthiness Board for issue of an Australian Military Type Certificate (AMTC). This is a huge milestone and comes only after the ADF can demonstrate compliance with many safety, supportability and operational utility requirements. We will see a lot more of this aircraft now that the shackles have been removed.
Well done MRH-90 !
The MRH90 received a recommendation last week from the Airworthiness Board for issue of an Australian Military Type Certificate (AMTC). This is a huge milestone and comes only after the ADF can demonstrate compliance with many safety, supportability and operational utility requirements. We will see a lot more of this aircraft now that the shackles have been removed.
Well done MRH-90 !
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bluengreen
Well said! Maybe the sight of these modern, and incredibly capable aircraft finally allowed to show what they are able to do will stop the endless "but it's not a Blackhawk,Huey, (insert any other old aircraft here)"
Well said! Maybe the sight of these modern, and incredibly capable aircraft finally allowed to show what they are able to do will stop the endless "but it's not a Blackhawk,Huey, (insert any other old aircraft here)"