EH101 Merlin
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visionary,
You stand corrected.
It was a sales push, with perhaps 10 press releases and stops virtually everywhere. Were you asleep while it was being played?
Regarding the bragging about the "self deployment" (which is child's play in a normal helcopter), that was a quote from one of those press releases.
It was not a repositioning trip, visionary, it was a PR trip.
The free publicity works both ways, I think. That they chose to brag about the legendary trip makes them foolish enough to ge made fun of, I think.
Here is the publicity for the "repositioning" "self deployment":
Albuquerque, NM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...2285114&EDATE=
Ft. Worth Texas:
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/9975818.htm
Amarillo, TX:
http://www.amarillo.com/stories/1020...mediagot.shtml
Jackson Mississippi:
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp...8&nav=2CSfSGIg
You stand corrected.
It was a sales push, with perhaps 10 press releases and stops virtually everywhere. Were you asleep while it was being played?
Regarding the bragging about the "self deployment" (which is child's play in a normal helcopter), that was a quote from one of those press releases.
It was not a repositioning trip, visionary, it was a PR trip.
The free publicity works both ways, I think. That they chose to brag about the legendary trip makes them foolish enough to ge made fun of, I think.
Here is the publicity for the "repositioning" "self deployment":
Albuquerque, NM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...2285114&EDATE=
Ft. Worth Texas:
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/9975818.htm
Amarillo, TX:
http://www.amarillo.com/stories/1020...mediagot.shtml
Jackson Mississippi:
http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp...8&nav=2CSfSGIg
Last edited by NickLappos; 8th Nov 2004 at 16:29.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still was out there wasnt it? Was still subject to a threat, if you want to split hairs flypro then go for it
Nick, if you want to mock the RAF feel free Nick, shame they cant answer you back. The RAF have not done the trip before in a Merlin, so whats the issue?
Any chance for a pop Nick and you take it
Nick, if you want to mock the RAF feel free Nick, shame they cant answer you back. The RAF have not done the trip before in a Merlin, so whats the issue?
Any chance for a pop Nick and you take it
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EH-101 "Normal" helicopter? Nic is right.
The EH-101 has has 5 major accidents in its 55,000 hours, making its accident record worse than the R-22, and worse than any other military helicopter in European or US service.
It has also earned its reputation as a dog, requiring way to much maintenance. Notice how little time it is building each year? With a fleet of 90 aircraft, the fleet should be getting over 50,000 hours a year, not every 8 years. Each dog seems to be getting about 150 hours a year, which is 1/3 of what a "normal" helicopter gets. Crappy maintenance history, I think, and lots of groundings we do not here about.
Those "combat proven" aircraft were supported by aircraft in England working as parts bins:
London - 09 Apr 2004 "According to a story in today's Daily Telegraph newspaper, the RAF has been forced to cannibalise two Merlin HC.3s in order to keep two other aircraft operational in Bosnia."
Yep, combat proven - But what was proven, visionary?
The EH-101 has has 5 major accidents in its 55,000 hours, making its accident record worse than the R-22, and worse than any other military helicopter in European or US service.
It has also earned its reputation as a dog, requiring way to much maintenance. Notice how little time it is building each year? With a fleet of 90 aircraft, the fleet should be getting over 50,000 hours a year, not every 8 years. Each dog seems to be getting about 150 hours a year, which is 1/3 of what a "normal" helicopter gets. Crappy maintenance history, I think, and lots of groundings we do not here about.
Those "combat proven" aircraft were supported by aircraft in England working as parts bins:
London - 09 Apr 2004 "According to a story in today's Daily Telegraph newspaper, the RAF has been forced to cannibalise two Merlin HC.3s in order to keep two other aircraft operational in Bosnia."
Yep, combat proven - But what was proven, visionary?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visionary,
Can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Squirrel, pls PM me and give me your data, I think they only ("only!") lost 4.
Anybody out there confirm that?
Can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Squirrel, pls PM me and give me your data, I think they only ("only!") lost 4.
Anybody out there confirm that?
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
RAF Wing Commander Andy Turner, commanding officer of 28 (AC) Squadron and leader of the transcontinental self-deployment demonstration.
Visionary, I guess that my comments are questions on the point of the entire exercise. I am not questioning anything that the RAF are doing with this mission, simply the fact that it is being promoted as some kind of tremendous achievement and displays "superior" capability.
To suggest that the entire exercise is anything other than a marketing trip for the US-101 is simply disingenious. If you don't believe that, then check out the US-101 website.
As I read the responses to this, I feel obligated to ask the next question. Is this self deployment, from beginning to end, being funded by unknowing British tax-payers, Agusta-Westland, or Team US101? I think that the response to that question might reveal more of the motivation for the exercise, than any other?
As Team US101 has never built a 101, let alone ever even owned one, how can they demonstrate the "superior" capabilities of the helicopter without getting one to demonstrate with?
I am also genuinely interested in the airworthiness status of the fleet. The fact that the RAF has one flying in the US, but the Canadian fleet is (reportedly) restricted to emergency missions only, is hardly representative of the fleet status. I am sure an official answer to this question would go a long way to answer my own questions regarding the "helicopter’s superior capabilities and reliability."
As a veteran of many of my own incredible "self-deployments", I think I have one even greater achievement. My trips were paid from beginning to end, with commercial contracts at the destination, and in many cases were not even limited to crossing the vast stretches of the North American continent, but across numerous continents in the same trip. Oh, and at the end of it all, I was expected to go to work and be hauling passengers as soon as I arrived on site.
Must run, I have two large self-deployments in progress, and need to work out the numbers for yet another one.
To suggest that the entire exercise is anything other than a marketing trip for the US-101 is simply disingenious. If you don't believe that, then check out the US-101 website.
As I read the responses to this, I feel obligated to ask the next question. Is this self deployment, from beginning to end, being funded by unknowing British tax-payers, Agusta-Westland, or Team US101? I think that the response to that question might reveal more of the motivation for the exercise, than any other?
As Team US101 has never built a 101, let alone ever even owned one, how can they demonstrate the "superior" capabilities of the helicopter without getting one to demonstrate with?
I am also genuinely interested in the airworthiness status of the fleet. The fact that the RAF has one flying in the US, but the Canadian fleet is (reportedly) restricted to emergency missions only, is hardly representative of the fleet status. I am sure an official answer to this question would go a long way to answer my own questions regarding the "helicopter’s superior capabilities and reliability."
As a veteran of many of my own incredible "self-deployments", I think I have one even greater achievement. My trips were paid from beginning to end, with commercial contracts at the destination, and in many cases were not even limited to crossing the vast stretches of the North American continent, but across numerous continents in the same trip. Oh, and at the end of it all, I was expected to go to work and be hauling passengers as soon as I arrived on site.
Must run, I have two large self-deployments in progress, and need to work out the numbers for yet another one.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Temporarily unsure of my position
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visionary.
It aint been anywhere near bullets, that's probably why it aint been shot down!!!!!
Can you imagine the damage one little bit of lead could cause as it goes through the plastic and into a v.high tech/hugely expensive computer - without which this helo can't fly!
It aint been anywhere near bullets, that's probably why it aint been shot down!!!!!
Can you imagine the damage one little bit of lead could cause as it goes through the plastic and into a v.high tech/hugely expensive computer - without which this helo can't fly!
visionary: by all means join the general forum, but offer us a little of your background before you wade in with both barrells. Nick has shown his cards from the outset...do him the same courtesy?
The ONLY people who defend the EH101 are those (non military) with a vested interest in them, because it is the biggest box of bombs the UK forces have ever had the misfortune to inherit...NO-ONE wants it, but there's too much riding on it to 'burn the project'.
How many other more promising projects have been put on hold or scrapped to keep the Merlin airborne???
The president would have to be stark raving mad to buy one!
The ONLY people who defend the EH101 are those (non military) with a vested interest in them, because it is the biggest box of bombs the UK forces have ever had the misfortune to inherit...NO-ONE wants it, but there's too much riding on it to 'burn the project'.
How many other more promising projects have been put on hold or scrapped to keep the Merlin airborne???
The president would have to be stark raving mad to buy one!
EH Mishaps
Nick,
There were 3 Prototypes damaged during development. (PP-2 rotor brake fire, PP-4 control rod failure, PP-7 harding land after some mechanical difficulty) In addition, I beleive the RAF lost one due to a rotor brake fire, the aircraft went in the water and the most recent mishap due to a tail rotor problem that restricted the fleet.
There were 3 Prototypes damaged during development. (PP-2 rotor brake fire, PP-4 control rod failure, PP-7 harding land after some mechanical difficulty) In addition, I beleive the RAF lost one due to a rotor brake fire, the aircraft went in the water and the most recent mishap due to a tail rotor problem that restricted the fleet.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack,
That's five. I guess lost count
That rotor brake fire was blamed on pilot error, I read, but he flew about 200 miles with it on. Were there any indicators in the cockpit? If not, was surely not pilot error?
That's five. I guess lost count
That rotor brake fire was blamed on pilot error, I read, but he flew about 200 miles with it on. Were there any indicators in the cockpit? If not, was surely not pilot error?
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, what about me?
To: Thomas coupling
I made a lot of comments about the EH-101 and the fact that there were no catastrophic failures considered in the Safety Hazards Analysis (SHA) which was used to gain certification.
Several of the failures that have occurred on the Merlin and the Cormorant were originally considered in the SHA but were removed by the manager of the Product Support department. What did I get? A lot of vitriol from the members of this forum as well as a threat of a law suit by Agusta.
These bombs will continue to explode as the service hours build on this aircraft. The unfortunate thing is that these bombs could have been diffused during the design process.
visionary: by all means join the general forum, but offer us a little of your background before you wade in with both barrells. Nick has shown his cards from the outset...do him the same courtesy?
Several of the failures that have occurred on the Merlin and the Cormorant were originally considered in the SHA but were removed by the manager of the Product Support department. What did I get? A lot of vitriol from the members of this forum as well as a threat of a law suit by Agusta.
because it is the biggest box of bombs the UK forces have ever had the misfortune to inherit...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
junglyAEO,
Thanks for that. The Navy were told by the AW fellows that virtually all those accidents were human error, the aircraft is actually quite blameless (at least that is what a high ranking Navy person close to the selection authorities told me).
Interestingly, the cause of the latest one at Culdrose is being withheld, it is said that the cause is known, but the report will wait until after the US selection.
Thanks for that. The Navy were told by the AW fellows that virtually all those accidents were human error, the aircraft is actually quite blameless (at least that is what a high ranking Navy person close to the selection authorities told me).
Interestingly, the cause of the latest one at Culdrose is being withheld, it is said that the cause is known, but the report will wait until after the US selection.
rjsquirrel commented about the cannibalization of the Merlin. I must have missed this story at the time.
RAF strips new £34m helicopters for spares
By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 09/04/2004)
The RAF has been forced to cannibalise two of its fleet of Merlin transport helicopters, each costing £34 million, to keep the only two on operations flying. The helicopters being used for spares are in a hangar at RAF Benson in Oxfordshire. The operational Merlins are based in Bosnia, defence sources said.
The problems with Merlin spares come in the week that a National Audit Office report complained there were not enough transport helicopters to ferry troops into operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans. The reason for the lack of Merlin spares is that when the MoD embarked on the Merlin programme in the early 1990s, it decided to cut costs by not buying any spare parts, the sources said.
The RAF has only 18 operational Merlin helicopters
That decision was taken at the same time as the MoD procured eight SAS helicopters, which have never been used because they do not meet defence safety standards. The late Alan Clark was defence procurement minister at the time.
The Merlins have now been stopped from "inessential flying" by an accident last week in which a Royal Navy Merlin crashed. The crash is believed to be the result of a recurring problem with the half hub on the tail rotor, which keeps cracking.
Without spares both services have no way of keeping aircraft in the air. Both services and Westland, which produces the helicopter, are now pinning their hopes on it winning the prestigious American "VX programme" involving 500 helicopters. Twenty of the aircraft will be used to fly the US president and his entourage around. The Merlin is in competition with the Sikorski S92.
Tony Blair is expected to push the qualities of the Merlin next week when he meets President George W Bush at the White House. One source said: "In the meantime, the entire RAF Merlin programme is sublimated to supporting UK Plc in the US presidential helicopter programme.
"If Westland win it, then we will be able to reopen a line of spares that will be much cheaper. If we don't, then a whole load more Merlins are likely to be Christmas treed." "Christmas treed" is RAF jargon for the removal of various parts from a cannibalised aircraft in the same way that decorations are removed from a Christmas tree once the festive season is over.
The shortage of helicopter lifting capability was identified four years ago by an MoD study. But "work streams" that have been urgently identifying ways of saving more than £1 billion from the defence budget have recommended scrapping the RAF's Puma helicopters and the Royal Navy's Sea Kings, which make up the bulk of the helicopter transport fleet.
The RAF has 22 Merlin transport helicopters, of which 18 are operational and based at 28 Squadron in Benson. The Merlin is highly regarded by those who have flown it. They say it is an excellent aircraft. But the problem with the tail rotors combined with the lack of spares leaves it struggling to prove its worth.
The RAF Mk 3 variant is better regarded than the Royal Navy anti-submarine warfare Merlin Mk 1 which was originally costed at £3.6 billion for 44 aircraft, effectively £82 million per aircraft.
But it was five years late in entering service and then it was discovered that it could not use its sonar at night or in low visibility when the pilot was flying on instruments alone. The eventual cost of the programme was £4.65 billion, making the individual cost of each aircraft £106 million.
RAF strips new £34m helicopters for spares
By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 09/04/2004)
The RAF has been forced to cannibalise two of its fleet of Merlin transport helicopters, each costing £34 million, to keep the only two on operations flying. The helicopters being used for spares are in a hangar at RAF Benson in Oxfordshire. The operational Merlins are based in Bosnia, defence sources said.
The problems with Merlin spares come in the week that a National Audit Office report complained there were not enough transport helicopters to ferry troops into operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans. The reason for the lack of Merlin spares is that when the MoD embarked on the Merlin programme in the early 1990s, it decided to cut costs by not buying any spare parts, the sources said.
The RAF has only 18 operational Merlin helicopters
That decision was taken at the same time as the MoD procured eight SAS helicopters, which have never been used because they do not meet defence safety standards. The late Alan Clark was defence procurement minister at the time.
The Merlins have now been stopped from "inessential flying" by an accident last week in which a Royal Navy Merlin crashed. The crash is believed to be the result of a recurring problem with the half hub on the tail rotor, which keeps cracking.
Without spares both services have no way of keeping aircraft in the air. Both services and Westland, which produces the helicopter, are now pinning their hopes on it winning the prestigious American "VX programme" involving 500 helicopters. Twenty of the aircraft will be used to fly the US president and his entourage around. The Merlin is in competition with the Sikorski S92.
Tony Blair is expected to push the qualities of the Merlin next week when he meets President George W Bush at the White House. One source said: "In the meantime, the entire RAF Merlin programme is sublimated to supporting UK Plc in the US presidential helicopter programme.
"If Westland win it, then we will be able to reopen a line of spares that will be much cheaper. If we don't, then a whole load more Merlins are likely to be Christmas treed." "Christmas treed" is RAF jargon for the removal of various parts from a cannibalised aircraft in the same way that decorations are removed from a Christmas tree once the festive season is over.
The shortage of helicopter lifting capability was identified four years ago by an MoD study. But "work streams" that have been urgently identifying ways of saving more than £1 billion from the defence budget have recommended scrapping the RAF's Puma helicopters and the Royal Navy's Sea Kings, which make up the bulk of the helicopter transport fleet.
The RAF has 22 Merlin transport helicopters, of which 18 are operational and based at 28 Squadron in Benson. The Merlin is highly regarded by those who have flown it. They say it is an excellent aircraft. But the problem with the tail rotors combined with the lack of spares leaves it struggling to prove its worth.
The RAF Mk 3 variant is better regarded than the Royal Navy anti-submarine warfare Merlin Mk 1 which was originally costed at £3.6 billion for 44 aircraft, effectively £82 million per aircraft.
But it was five years late in entering service and then it was discovered that it could not use its sonar at night or in low visibility when the pilot was flying on instruments alone. The eventual cost of the programme was £4.65 billion, making the individual cost of each aircraft £106 million.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomas, please dont patronise me with the "sunny boy", I was refering to Nick and his ability to turn any conversation into a sales pitch.
Just as a matter of interest Thomas, whos fault is the lack of supplies with the Mark 3 and the need to "Christmas Tree" aircraft? Looking at the post from Cyclic, its the British DoD procurement policy.
Let the best helicopter win, just lets hope its not a political decision and in fact, one based on merit.
Just as a matter of interest Thomas, whos fault is the lack of supplies with the Mark 3 and the need to "Christmas Tree" aircraft? Looking at the post from Cyclic, its the British DoD procurement policy.
Let the best helicopter win, just lets hope its not a political decision and in fact, one based on merit.