Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

NH-90 problems

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

NH-90 problems

Old 1st Feb 2019, 18:51
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North bound
Posts: 90
From first hand observation!

When thet get one NH90 flying, they do hot swap of crews, to be able to fly it, since it seems to be startup that it is the biggest problem.....


CB
Collective Bias is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2019, 19:00
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 54
Breakdip, agree that an advanced AFCS and modern avionics are usuefull, especially in the maritime environment / posh hovering over water. However nothing that couldnít be added to an existing proven airframe. To develop an entirely new helicopter at such huge costs to hover over the water and dip a can in is a tad over the top.
The perfect world would have as few types as possible to get comanality of parts, gain from economy of scale and have a simple training pipeline. As long as it hovers all the fancy avionics can come in subsequent upgrades as development and technology advances.
Im being naive ofcourse as these projects are self licking lollipops for governments protecting industry and jobs- Yeovil wouldíve gone down the pan long ago if this wasnít the case- itís just a shame they turn out such poorly made helicopters.
dingo9 is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 01:29
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tax-land.
Posts: 861
The Nh-90 has two engine types available, the GE T700 and the RR/TM RTM something something, what engine is being used by the Northern Lights Kingdoms?
tottigol is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 07:16
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 55
Posts: 239
Norway , Sweden and Finland run the RTM322 in their NH-90's and Denmark run it in there EH101's. Swedish UH-60M and Danish MH-60R use the GE T700-701D
Blackhawk9 is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 15:15
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Near the surface
Posts: 26
Dingo9, where the NFH stands out is the fact that all mission systems are integrated, which is a major advantage in a warfare scenario. E.g. Sweden have a highly modified TTH and added their mission systems afterwards. This has proven to be non effective unfortunately. The Germans are just unlucky with their IOC TTHs, but I have high hopes for their NFH program.
Maybe I am a bit biased with over 1000 hours in the machine, but trust me, it is a real delight to fly and very effective in a naval environment. The MH60 might be a true workhorse, but when viewed objectively, not comparable with a NH90. Plus, I have not seen the Danish operate their machine in a significant mission/exercise yet.
I am aware of some of the flaws of the machine, but it is too easy to focus on the defects. The maturity will come, as I experience some very professional engineers and crews working on that every day. Try to focus on her achievements and collaborate on the improvements. Yet again, I might be a little bit biased, sorry.

Ps. With regard to the operating costs per FH, it includes much more variables than just the flying part. For what I’ve read I cannot tell whether its comparing apples (NH90) to oranges (MH60), but I do know that my salary is just a small % of that.
breakdip is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 15:48
  #86 (permalink)  
512
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: England
Posts: 19
Snoop

Originally Posted by dingo9 View Post
Iíll make it simple for governments and procurement people. You need 3 helicopters in your arsenal.
CH47
UH60
AH64
done. ( maybe EC135/145 for trg and LUH)
questions?
Originally Posted by dingo9 View Post
Breakdip, agree that an advanced AFCS and modern avionics are usuefull, especially in the maritime environment / posh hovering over water. However nothing that couldnít be added to an existing proven airframe. To develop an entirely new helicopter at such huge costs to hover over the water and dip a can in is a tad over the top.
The perfect world would have as few types as possible to get comanality of parts, gain from economy of scale and have a simple training pipeline. As long as it hovers all the fancy avionics can come in subsequent upgrades as development and technology advances.
Im being naive ofcourse as these projects are self licking lollipops for governments protecting industry and jobs- Yeovil wouldíve gone down the pan long ago if this wasnít the case- itís just a shame they turn out such poorly made helicopters.
I'll bite at this. The biggest bugbear to Yeovil products is the tortuous and arcane MoD procurement process which adds costs, complexity and completely spurious requirements. It then, has a culture of revisiting all decisions every two years and quite often changing the design. Then, the UK operator takes delight in looking across the pond and believing they can do no wrong.
512 is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2019, 18:47
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by 512 View Post
I'll bite at this. The biggest bugbear to Yeovil products is the tortuous and arcane MoD procurement process which adds costs, complexity and completely spurious requirements. It then, has a culture of revisiting all decisions every two years and quite often changing the design. Then, the UK operator takes delight in looking across the pond and believing they can do no wrong.
I donít mean to flipantly bash Yeovil. Iím British and would love to proudly stand behind machines made in Britain. Unfortunately the machines Iíve pesonally collected from Yeovil, as a comercial pilot, have been a bag of spannerís. Consistently fail acceptance flight with basic things, radios not working- reason Ariel not connected due to cable not being long enough. Heating not working- heating pipe not conected, thatís just to get it to limp out of the factory. After 6 months in our engineers hands all the faults are rectified and they become fairly decent machines, well designed with some really good points. However I stand by my first hand experience of the initial build quality being very shoddy. Maybe Iíve just been unlucky but it sets a bad impression for me am afraid.
dingo9 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.