US Presidential Helicopter Bid (and Result)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fort Worth Star-Telegram: Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON - The battle to build a new presidential helicopter took a surprise turn Tuesday as the government announced that it may defer a decision until after the November election.
The politically charged battle to build the next-generation Marine One -- the executive helicopter used to ferry the president and other top government officials -- pits Connecticut-based Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. against a U.S-European consortium composed of Lockheed Martin, Fort Worth-based Bell Helicopter and AgustaWestland, a British-Italian aerospace company.
The competitors expected a decision in May after months of lobbying for one of the world's most prestigious helicopter contracts. But the Navy, overseeing the program, stunned both sides by extending the competition indefinitely to "allow the government to make a far more informed decision."
An industry source, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the competitors were told that the decision would be deferred until late November or early December, after the Nov. 2 election. The government also promised that each side would be given $10 million to $30 million more for extra design work and other preliminary costs, according to the source.
Analysts suggested that the delay might have been orchestrated by President Bush's White House to take the issue off the table during the president's re-election campaign. Sikorsky has sought to inject a strong "buy America" theme into the sweepstakes by presenting itself as an old-line company opposed by a partially foreign consortium.
The Lockheed-led group, called Team US101, is developing a presidential version of the EH-101 used in Europe. Team leaders maintain that the U.S. version would be largely American-built, pointing out that it would be assembled at Bell's Amarillo plant.
Assistant Navy Secretary John Young said the government wanted more time to work with industry on design, performance, costs and other issues.
WASHINGTON - The battle to build a new presidential helicopter took a surprise turn Tuesday as the government announced that it may defer a decision until after the November election.
The politically charged battle to build the next-generation Marine One -- the executive helicopter used to ferry the president and other top government officials -- pits Connecticut-based Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. against a U.S-European consortium composed of Lockheed Martin, Fort Worth-based Bell Helicopter and AgustaWestland, a British-Italian aerospace company.
The competitors expected a decision in May after months of lobbying for one of the world's most prestigious helicopter contracts. But the Navy, overseeing the program, stunned both sides by extending the competition indefinitely to "allow the government to make a far more informed decision."
An industry source, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the competitors were told that the decision would be deferred until late November or early December, after the Nov. 2 election. The government also promised that each side would be given $10 million to $30 million more for extra design work and other preliminary costs, according to the source.
Analysts suggested that the delay might have been orchestrated by President Bush's White House to take the issue off the table during the president's re-election campaign. Sikorsky has sought to inject a strong "buy America" theme into the sweepstakes by presenting itself as an old-line company opposed by a partially foreign consortium.
The Lockheed-led group, called Team US101, is developing a presidential version of the EH-101 used in Europe. Team leaders maintain that the U.S. version would be largely American-built, pointing out that it would be assembled at Bell's Amarillo plant.
Assistant Navy Secretary John Young said the government wanted more time to work with industry on design, performance, costs and other issues.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: oceanside
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rotorpilot, agree with almost all of your comments regarding rear ramp advantages except one point. my stepdad, a two tour combat vet from vietnam said to me once, no matter what you do never go into a LZ in a ****hook, charlie knows damn well 20 guys are going to run out the back door, take the slick, at the very least you shoot back on your way in.
i would say wise words from a voice of experience.
dr
i would say wise words from a voice of experience.
dr
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Safety,
Every now and then, I wake up with twinkies on my breath, and the cat has unexplained dents, but all in all it is a wild ride every day!
After 7500 hours of flight time, in helicopters all over the world with some of the best people who ever held a collective, I have nothing but smiles every day. After all, I could be working in some factory somewhere, drilling tail-holes in hobby horses, couldn't I?
Like Grant said at Shiloh, "We'll get them Tomorrow!"
Every now and then, I wake up with twinkies on my breath, and the cat has unexplained dents, but all in all it is a wild ride every day!
After 7500 hours of flight time, in helicopters all over the world with some of the best people who ever held a collective, I have nothing but smiles every day. After all, I could be working in some factory somewhere, drilling tail-holes in hobby horses, couldn't I?
Like Grant said at Shiloh, "We'll get them Tomorrow!"
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This cutting from a newspaper today.
"In their letter, the lawmakers said the delay amounts to another blow to Sikorsky, a division of United Technologies Corp. Last month, the Army cancelled the Comanche helicopter program, putting hundreds of jobs in jeopardy."
Not going to do Mr Bush many favours with the voters, so is this the most blatant case of "Sweeping it under the carpet for now.." yet, from the accidental president?
Would you say that perhaps this decision of delaying contract award til "hopefully later in the year" does not bode well for Sikorsky's chances of winning?
Obvious points I know Nick, but to an impartial observer, I wouldn't think Lockheed Martin are losing much sleep over this.
Also, this "blow to Sikorsky", a blow because of the loss of prestige that comes with supplying Marine One, or serious financial blow?
"In their letter, the lawmakers said the delay amounts to another blow to Sikorsky, a division of United Technologies Corp. Last month, the Army cancelled the Comanche helicopter program, putting hundreds of jobs in jeopardy."
Not going to do Mr Bush many favours with the voters, so is this the most blatant case of "Sweeping it under the carpet for now.." yet, from the accidental president?
Would you say that perhaps this decision of delaying contract award til "hopefully later in the year" does not bode well for Sikorsky's chances of winning?
Obvious points I know Nick, but to an impartial observer, I wouldn't think Lockheed Martin are losing much sleep over this.
Also, this "blow to Sikorsky", a blow because of the loss of prestige that comes with supplying Marine One, or serious financial blow?
If you can't beat them, join them?
Posted on Rotorhub today. The editorial is by David S. Harvey.
Marine One: Washington Post Weighs In On Murphey Job
John Murphey, former chaiman of Bell Helicopter has attracted national media attention with news that he will head the joint venture to build the new presidential version of the EH/US-101, if chosen.
In a column called "Special Interests," Washington Post writer Judy Sarasohn implies Murphey has eaten his words to take the job.
It is rare - extremely rare - for anything the helicopter industry does as part of its daily business to make the pages of the national press. While the intent here is to emphasise an implied double standard on Murphey's behalf (castigating foreign helicopter manufacturers and then joining them) the real story is perhaps the intensity of the lobbying effort behind VXX.
While the competition itself is in limbo until the US elections are over, there is nothing dormant about the behind-the-scenes battle for the hearts and minds of official Washington.
The column appears below:
"When it was announced last week that Bell Helicopter chairman emeritus John Murphey was named chief executive of a joint venture with two foreign companies to compete for replacing the fleet of Marine One helicopters, which carry the president, some D.C. folks went scurrying to their copies of Murphey's testimony last year before the House Armed Services Committee:
"The Europeans are coming to America with their products: products developed with substantial government funding," Murphey said as part of his testimony on the U.S. rotorcraft industrial base. "They are seeking U.S. partners to produce the products in the U.S. and they will find them. But European products manufactured in the U.S. do not do anything to develop or enhance our nation's capability in the engineering and manufacturing technologies that are so important to sustained viability in this industry. Are we headed to a point where U.S. manufacturers could simply be assembly subcontractors to European firms that develop and own the technology that was funded by European governments?"
That was March 12, 2003. Now he is chief executive of AgustaWestlandBell, a joint venture of Bell, Italy's Finmeccanica and the United Kingdom's GKN. According to a release, Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor and responsible for systems integration, while the joint venture would be the licensee of its US101 helicopter program's intellectual property and have overall responsibility for the vehicle design and support. The helicopters would be manufactured and assembled by Bell.
The joint venture is battling it out with Sikorsky Aircraft for the $1.6 billion project to replace the fleet. Both are playing up their American pedigrees, with Sikorsky dumping its foreign suppliers for its entry, the VH-92 helicopter.
So is Murphey just a pretty American face of the joint venture? He says no. The joint venture will be bringing "high-paying jobs and technology out of Europe to the United States," he said in an interview yesterday, adding, "We bring an incredible amount of ability" to the joint venture.
Murphey said what he was telling Congress last year was that the federal government needs to restore research and development funding for the industry, especially since foreign governments are investing in their helicopter industries.
Sikorsky's program director, Nick Lappos, said the Sikorsky folks "certainly back his view before Congress."
Marine One: Washington Post Weighs In On Murphey Job
John Murphey, former chaiman of Bell Helicopter has attracted national media attention with news that he will head the joint venture to build the new presidential version of the EH/US-101, if chosen.
In a column called "Special Interests," Washington Post writer Judy Sarasohn implies Murphey has eaten his words to take the job.
It is rare - extremely rare - for anything the helicopter industry does as part of its daily business to make the pages of the national press. While the intent here is to emphasise an implied double standard on Murphey's behalf (castigating foreign helicopter manufacturers and then joining them) the real story is perhaps the intensity of the lobbying effort behind VXX.
While the competition itself is in limbo until the US elections are over, there is nothing dormant about the behind-the-scenes battle for the hearts and minds of official Washington.
The column appears below:
"When it was announced last week that Bell Helicopter chairman emeritus John Murphey was named chief executive of a joint venture with two foreign companies to compete for replacing the fleet of Marine One helicopters, which carry the president, some D.C. folks went scurrying to their copies of Murphey's testimony last year before the House Armed Services Committee:
"The Europeans are coming to America with their products: products developed with substantial government funding," Murphey said as part of his testimony on the U.S. rotorcraft industrial base. "They are seeking U.S. partners to produce the products in the U.S. and they will find them. But European products manufactured in the U.S. do not do anything to develop or enhance our nation's capability in the engineering and manufacturing technologies that are so important to sustained viability in this industry. Are we headed to a point where U.S. manufacturers could simply be assembly subcontractors to European firms that develop and own the technology that was funded by European governments?"
That was March 12, 2003. Now he is chief executive of AgustaWestlandBell, a joint venture of Bell, Italy's Finmeccanica and the United Kingdom's GKN. According to a release, Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor and responsible for systems integration, while the joint venture would be the licensee of its US101 helicopter program's intellectual property and have overall responsibility for the vehicle design and support. The helicopters would be manufactured and assembled by Bell.
The joint venture is battling it out with Sikorsky Aircraft for the $1.6 billion project to replace the fleet. Both are playing up their American pedigrees, with Sikorsky dumping its foreign suppliers for its entry, the VH-92 helicopter.
So is Murphey just a pretty American face of the joint venture? He says no. The joint venture will be bringing "high-paying jobs and technology out of Europe to the United States," he said in an interview yesterday, adding, "We bring an incredible amount of ability" to the joint venture.
Murphey said what he was telling Congress last year was that the federal government needs to restore research and development funding for the industry, especially since foreign governments are investing in their helicopter industries.
Sikorsky's program director, Nick Lappos, said the Sikorsky folks "certainly back his view before Congress."
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
Introduce new European technology to the USA????
......and technology out of Europe to the United States," he said in an interview yesterday,
I worked in Germany for a company that formed an alliance with a top of the line American Company that designs and builds hydraulic servos among other things. The alliance was to be a two way street that required technical information interchange. It turned out to be a one-way street and once the German firm got the American companies design handbooks the street was closed to traffic.
Last edited by Lu Zuckerman; 13th May 2004 at 21:30.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After more then a decade Canadians to decide on new chopper
2 firms vie to replace aging Sea Kings Winner may be named within days
Toronto Star 2004 July 16 - Chopper contract landing soon?
Toronto Star 2004 July 16 - Chopper contract landing soon?
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
Yeah but can they land on a Canadian frigate?
Last night on the Canadian Discovery channel they had a segment on the Seaking and the problems involved in landing on frigates. They were doing research on the wind currents generated by the superstructure and the various technical appendages attached to the ship. It was proven that installing a radar antenna or other projection could significantly alter the wind disturbances and this could seriously interfere with the pilots’ ability to land a Seaking on the flight deck.
Another point brought up by the speaker who is an ex Seaking pilot and now a test pilot for the research facility was the movement of the flight deck. He indicated that the Canadian frigates operate in rougher waters than any other naval service and that the upward and downward movement of the flight deck in rough seas could be as high as 800 feet per minute.
In light of this I believe they should demonstrate the ability of the Cormorant (EH-101) and the H-92 to operate under these conditions prior to releasing a contract. If they don’t it might come back to bite them.
My only question is why don’t they use the bear trap system which after all was developed by the Canadians.
Another point brought up by the speaker who is an ex Seaking pilot and now a test pilot for the research facility was the movement of the flight deck. He indicated that the Canadian frigates operate in rougher waters than any other naval service and that the upward and downward movement of the flight deck in rough seas could be as high as 800 feet per minute.
In light of this I believe they should demonstrate the ability of the Cormorant (EH-101) and the H-92 to operate under these conditions prior to releasing a contract. If they don’t it might come back to bite them.
My only question is why don’t they use the bear trap system which after all was developed by the Canadians.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: England
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the bear trap system do you have to have any matelots on the deck to hook up the wire? With the Merlin harpoon and Type 23 Frigate deck handling system I think you can get the aircraft into the hangar without anyone having to go out on the flight deck.
GF
GF
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: the hills of halton
Age: 71
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/h...0407171538.htm
Someone still likes sea kings !
and this from toronto star
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...tacodalogin=no
Jul. 16, 2004. 01:00 AM
DARRELL OAKE/CP
The crash of a Sea King, above, on the deck of HMCS Iroquois last year added to the federal government's embarrassment over its aging, trouble-prone helicopter fleet.
> Thomas Walkom
Chopper contract landing soon?
2 firms vie to replace aging Sea Kings Winner may be named within days
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU
OTTAWA—Canada's new defence minister may be quick off the mark next week and announce some long-awaited good news for the military — a replacement for the aging fleet of Sea King helicopters, sources say.
One scenario has the new minister making the announcement just two days after the Liberal cabinet is sworn in Tuesday.
"It's probably 50-50 whether they blast off within days," said one government source. "But it's something that will happen in the near term."
The government called for tenders last December and under the original timetable, an announcement on the replacement chopper was expected sometime this summer.
There are indications the Liberals are reluctant to let the controversial selection process, which has dogged them for more than a decade, drag on any further.
"Everything we hear points to a quick announcement," said one industry official involved in the bidding process.
The preliminary winner could be announced within days or weeks, with the defence department then taking the rest of the summer to hammer out final pricing and contract details.
Two companies are in the running for the $3 billion contract to supply the Canadian Forces with 28 maritime helicopters for anti-submarine patrols, surveillance and ship-borne duties.
Sikorsky Aircraft, teamed with General Dynamics Canada, is offering the H-92, a variation of a civilian helicopter. If selected, Canada would be the first nation to pick this helicopter for naval duties.
AgustaWestland, an Anglo-Italian consortium, is offering the Cormorant, a variation of the EH-101 helicopter rejected as an unaffordable "Cadillac" by former prime minister Jean Chrétien in 1993.
In one of his first acts as prime minister, Chrétien tore up a $5.8 billion contract signed by the Brian Mulroney government to buy the sophisticated EH-101 choppers, dismissing them as a waste of money. Cancelling that deal cost $500 million.
And it added to the government's embarrassment as the fleet of 1960s-era Sea Kings suffered through close calls, breakdowns, emergency landings and harrowing crashes. After the spectacular crash of a Sea King on the deck of a destroyer in 2003, pilots were given extra training on how to ditch in the ocean and fly on one engine.
The replacement selection decision hinges on more than just the capability of the two choppers and includes the investments each consortium is promising for Canada and a touch of politics, too.
In 1998, the Liberals came under fire after awarding a $593 million contract to AgustaWestland to buy 15 Cormorants for search-and-rescue work — just four years after it cancelled the other deal. But the fact Canada already has Cormorants doing search-and-rescue work could give that consortium an edge.
Ironically, the two companies are squaring off south of the border as well in a fierce competition to provide the helicopters used to shuttle the U.S. president.
Someone still likes sea kings !
and this from toronto star
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...tacodalogin=no
Jul. 16, 2004. 01:00 AM
DARRELL OAKE/CP
The crash of a Sea King, above, on the deck of HMCS Iroquois last year added to the federal government's embarrassment over its aging, trouble-prone helicopter fleet.
> Thomas Walkom
Chopper contract landing soon?
2 firms vie to replace aging Sea Kings Winner may be named within days
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU
OTTAWA—Canada's new defence minister may be quick off the mark next week and announce some long-awaited good news for the military — a replacement for the aging fleet of Sea King helicopters, sources say.
One scenario has the new minister making the announcement just two days after the Liberal cabinet is sworn in Tuesday.
"It's probably 50-50 whether they blast off within days," said one government source. "But it's something that will happen in the near term."
The government called for tenders last December and under the original timetable, an announcement on the replacement chopper was expected sometime this summer.
There are indications the Liberals are reluctant to let the controversial selection process, which has dogged them for more than a decade, drag on any further.
"Everything we hear points to a quick announcement," said one industry official involved in the bidding process.
The preliminary winner could be announced within days or weeks, with the defence department then taking the rest of the summer to hammer out final pricing and contract details.
Two companies are in the running for the $3 billion contract to supply the Canadian Forces with 28 maritime helicopters for anti-submarine patrols, surveillance and ship-borne duties.
Sikorsky Aircraft, teamed with General Dynamics Canada, is offering the H-92, a variation of a civilian helicopter. If selected, Canada would be the first nation to pick this helicopter for naval duties.
AgustaWestland, an Anglo-Italian consortium, is offering the Cormorant, a variation of the EH-101 helicopter rejected as an unaffordable "Cadillac" by former prime minister Jean Chrétien in 1993.
In one of his first acts as prime minister, Chrétien tore up a $5.8 billion contract signed by the Brian Mulroney government to buy the sophisticated EH-101 choppers, dismissing them as a waste of money. Cancelling that deal cost $500 million.
And it added to the government's embarrassment as the fleet of 1960s-era Sea Kings suffered through close calls, breakdowns, emergency landings and harrowing crashes. After the spectacular crash of a Sea King on the deck of a destroyer in 2003, pilots were given extra training on how to ditch in the ocean and fly on one engine.
The replacement selection decision hinges on more than just the capability of the two choppers and includes the investments each consortium is promising for Canada and a touch of politics, too.
In 1998, the Liberals came under fire after awarding a $593 million contract to AgustaWestland to buy 15 Cormorants for search-and-rescue work — just four years after it cancelled the other deal. But the fact Canada already has Cormorants doing search-and-rescue work could give that consortium an edge.
Ironically, the two companies are squaring off south of the border as well in a fierce competition to provide the helicopters used to shuttle the U.S. president.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 July 22
Graham to announce 'copter deal
2004 July 23
Sea King successor set to be named
2004 July 23
Sikorsky wins 'copter contract from Ottawa
Graham to announce 'copter deal
2004 July 23
Sea King successor set to be named
2004 July 23
Sikorsky wins 'copter contract from Ottawa
Last edited by RotorPilot; 25th Aug 2004 at 17:49.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by RotorPilot; 25th Aug 2004 at 17:49.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not much positive there, RotorPilot!
Would it surprise you to know that the H-92 carries more payload, goes farther and goes faster than the EH-101? It isn't a lesser choice, at all, according to the published performance of each. Additionally, an EH costs about 50% more to buy, and to operate.
Publishing only the negative exerpts infers that you don't believe the serving officers who made the decision. Oh well.
Would it surprise you to know that the H-92 carries more payload, goes farther and goes faster than the EH-101? It isn't a lesser choice, at all, according to the published performance of each. Additionally, an EH costs about 50% more to buy, and to operate.
Publishing only the negative exerpts infers that you don't believe the serving officers who made the decision. Oh well.
Nick,
For an aircraft that the FAA says has to use contingency power to meet routine performance, I am sure that when you add all of the promised equipment it will really be a great performer.
As to your previous message. Your arguments are moot as as previously "Nick Sez" relative to the 92 versus V-22 that speed does not count and range doe not count. Now apparently value and development risk does not count.
By the way, what product do you have that can go 1500+ miles in 6 1/2 hours including refueling and pilot pit stops. The V-22 does it routinely.
The Sultan
For an aircraft that the FAA says has to use contingency power to meet routine performance, I am sure that when you add all of the promised equipment it will really be a great performer.
As to your previous message. Your arguments are moot as as previously "Nick Sez" relative to the 92 versus V-22 that speed does not count and range doe not count. Now apparently value and development risk does not count.
By the way, what product do you have that can go 1500+ miles in 6 1/2 hours including refueling and pilot pit stops. The V-22 does it routinely.
The Sultan
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RotorPilot,
You can chose to follow the one quote from an enlisted maintenance technician (a certain Sgt. Phil Moffitt) who managed to get picked up by all the newspapers or you can try to believe the serving officers who selected the aircraft. Many on the selection board are long time experienced pilots, several with engineering degrees, and in my opinion, all of them working to buy the best helicopter available.
It's your choice who you believe, but Sgt. Phil Moffitt seems to have cornered the naysayers market.
You can chose to follow the one quote from an enlisted maintenance technician (a certain Sgt. Phil Moffitt) who managed to get picked up by all the newspapers or you can try to believe the serving officers who selected the aircraft. Many on the selection board are long time experienced pilots, several with engineering degrees, and in my opinion, all of them working to buy the best helicopter available.
It's your choice who you believe, but Sgt. Phil Moffitt seems to have cornered the naysayers market.
Last edited by NickLappos; 25th Jul 2004 at 20:55.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The quoted Sgt is an experienced sensor operator but no offence to him, he is a back ender and when the crappola hits the fan I sure hope the machine is chosen by and built for pilots. You can put gizmos in any old truck for the GIBs (guys in back) but you need a great ride to do it well and survive harsh operational and combat environments. So thanks for the input Sgt M but we'll listen to the drivers who chose the 92.
As for chosing an airframe we already have there is some validity to that, many common things, money savings in training and all however when the Cormorants all get grounded, where would that leave us or our SAR capability on our coasts. As it is our aging Sikorskys do yoeman service now on SAR alert every time the Cormorants are down.
There are numerous advantages to the 92 over the 101. I've trapped a Sea King on the back of our frigates and I sure as hell wouldn't want to do it at 33,000 pounds. Our ships are small and the 101 in my opinion is just too big for us. As for new and untested, can't think of a better place to test the 92 to her limits than Canadian ship ops.
While it is true there are some items that need to be addressed for our use, I remain confident in Igor's team to have the machines delivered as requested.
One does have to wonder about the 101, a machine that only military or para military outfits have purchased to date. Three engines and quite heavy with a dissappointing payload. Not quite big enough to compete against 53s or 47s yet too big to compete against 61s and Pumas. Looks to me like EH has created it's own niche market. All the best lads.
As for chosing an airframe we already have there is some validity to that, many common things, money savings in training and all however when the Cormorants all get grounded, where would that leave us or our SAR capability on our coasts. As it is our aging Sikorskys do yoeman service now on SAR alert every time the Cormorants are down.
There are numerous advantages to the 92 over the 101. I've trapped a Sea King on the back of our frigates and I sure as hell wouldn't want to do it at 33,000 pounds. Our ships are small and the 101 in my opinion is just too big for us. As for new and untested, can't think of a better place to test the 92 to her limits than Canadian ship ops.
While it is true there are some items that need to be addressed for our use, I remain confident in Igor's team to have the machines delivered as requested.
One does have to wonder about the 101, a machine that only military or para military outfits have purchased to date. Three engines and quite heavy with a dissappointing payload. Not quite big enough to compete against 53s or 47s yet too big to compete against 61s and Pumas. Looks to me like EH has created it's own niche market. All the best lads.
Corax you are absolutely right about the 101 - it was designed as a heliliner with rig transfers in mind and has been bastardised and marketed as everything from ASW to SH. The RN seem to like it but probably because the avionics and software are good - the recent grounding may have taken the shine off the airframe for them.
Sadly the harsh reality of the British Military is that we will continue to write blank cheques for BAesystems and Westlands despite the indifferent and very costly products they provide. So, much as I congratulate Nick and the boys for getting the contract, I am saddened by the knowledge that we will get the Cormorant as our Sea King replacement instead of the S92.
Sadly the harsh reality of the British Military is that we will continue to write blank cheques for BAesystems and Westlands despite the indifferent and very costly products they provide. So, much as I congratulate Nick and the boys for getting the contract, I am saddened by the knowledge that we will get the Cormorant as our Sea King replacement instead of the S92.