Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

MRH90 Going, going. Gone

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

MRH90 Going, going. Gone

Old 9th Dec 2021, 16:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,980
MRH90 Going, going. Gone

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

Last edited by Gnadenburg; 10th Dec 2021 at 00:31.
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 17:25
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,808
Originally Posted by Gnadenburg View Post
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...h-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...elicopter.html




Last edited by Going Boeing; 9th Dec 2021 at 17:48.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 18:48
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 63
MRH90 Going, going. Gone

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-...ers/100688550\

Australia dumps troubled European-designed Taipan helicopters for US Black Hawks and Seahawks

The 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.

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.
The 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 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 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.



DHC4 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 19:01
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Whanganui, NZ
Posts: 238
In October the US revealed it had approved the $1.3 billion export 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.
kiwi grey is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 19:08
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 583
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.

Originally Posted by kiwi grey View Post
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

Last edited by rattman; 9th Dec 2021 at 19:43.
rattman is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 19:44
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
New Zealand will be expecting an early Christmas - they will soon have most of their helicopter fleet as ex Aus military castoffs.
rjtjrt is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 20:16
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by rjtjrt View Post
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"
rattman is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 21:20
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,808
Originally Posted by rattman View Post
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.

Originally Posted by rjtjrt View Post
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?
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 21:31
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Canberra
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by kiwi grey View Post
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.
HK144 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 21:42
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by Going Boeing View Post
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
rattman is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 23:01
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 73
Posts: 2,193
ARMY: BREAKING - Army to retire MRH 90 Taipans 10 years early & replace with Black Hawks | ADBR
40 UH-60Ms for ARMY

$7 Billion for them: Australia to scrap Taipan army helicopters (msn.com)

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 9th Dec 2021 at 23:02. Reason: foamat
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2021, 23:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,808
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.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 00:05
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: there
Posts: 752
Who remembers the Seasprites?
slice is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 00:27
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: gold coast
Posts: 95
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.

Last edited by extralite; 10th Dec 2021 at 00:47.
extralite is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 00:33
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,980
Other users of these helicopters have had sustainment and availability issues.
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 01:27
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 583
Originally Posted by extralite View Post
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
rattman is online now  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 02:38
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by kiwi grey View Post
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...
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 03:38
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: the far south
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by TBM-Legend View Post
. 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



typerated is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 06:28
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 1,417
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
Old-Duffer is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2021, 07:27
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: the far south
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by Old-Duffer View Post
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!


typerated is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.