Dear George, About your new helicopter ..........
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lucky George!
In case he would have to settle for the Blackhawk it would probably be the latest version - with all new electronics.
The Austrian Airforce had 3 coming down because of these electronics - heared through the vineyard, but down they came!
Nick, know something about?
3top
In case he would have to settle for the Blackhawk it would probably be the latest version - with all new electronics.
The Austrian Airforce had 3 coming down because of these electronics - heared through the vineyard, but down they came!
Nick, know something about?
3top
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lost in thought
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta thow in my two bits here on a few items....
Big problem with the VH-60 still remains that the prez can't stand in the door and wave to the crowd. The PR guys don't want the prez to have to duck as he walks from the helicopter..... not good for his image. So it's gotta be a big bird.
For those who cry about unfair access to the US market - excuse me!!! But the US has opened its government procurement to foreign competition more than anywhere else. Yes US stuff is in all kinds of foreign countries, but not when the country has an equivalent, internally-grown capability. In contrast... the US coast guard has Dauphins. They beat out Bell and Sikorsky for that. The Marine Corps flies Harriers (I don't care if MD makes 'em - It's still a BAE design). The Canada / US defense sharing agreement put a lot of Canadian-built hardware in US inventory. There are Israeli-built displays and avionics on the V-22. There are lots of other examples.
Can you imagine the French government buying Bells, or Boeings for that matter. Can you imagine Collins or Honeywell on an Airbus flight deck (Rather than the government sponsored Thales ne Sextant ) Or how about the Brits buying S92s over 101s. Ever think that'll happen? The Sikorskys there now wouldn't be there without the relationship with Westland. The same can be said about Bells in Italy, if it weren't for the licensing.
As for the prez's aircraft. I'd say that's one place where it's O.K. - for once - to stop being so bent over trying to play fair to keep everyone happy.
Live with it.
As far as any part of the AB-139 every being built by Bell in the US (or Canada) (mentioned earlier in the thread) - I ain't hold'n my breath for that either. Other than having the original concept for the aircraft design (a.ka. the Bell 442 which fell off the drawing board) Bell will have as much manufacturing or design content in the AB-139 as Car Max has in the Toyota it sells.
Just goes to show.. ya can't believe everything ya read in the press.
Big problem with the VH-60 still remains that the prez can't stand in the door and wave to the crowd. The PR guys don't want the prez to have to duck as he walks from the helicopter..... not good for his image. So it's gotta be a big bird.
For those who cry about unfair access to the US market - excuse me!!! But the US has opened its government procurement to foreign competition more than anywhere else. Yes US stuff is in all kinds of foreign countries, but not when the country has an equivalent, internally-grown capability. In contrast... the US coast guard has Dauphins. They beat out Bell and Sikorsky for that. The Marine Corps flies Harriers (I don't care if MD makes 'em - It's still a BAE design). The Canada / US defense sharing agreement put a lot of Canadian-built hardware in US inventory. There are Israeli-built displays and avionics on the V-22. There are lots of other examples.
Can you imagine the French government buying Bells, or Boeings for that matter. Can you imagine Collins or Honeywell on an Airbus flight deck (Rather than the government sponsored Thales ne Sextant ) Or how about the Brits buying S92s over 101s. Ever think that'll happen? The Sikorskys there now wouldn't be there without the relationship with Westland. The same can be said about Bells in Italy, if it weren't for the licensing.
As for the prez's aircraft. I'd say that's one place where it's O.K. - for once - to stop being so bent over trying to play fair to keep everyone happy.
Live with it.
As far as any part of the AB-139 every being built by Bell in the US (or Canada) (mentioned earlier in the thread) - I ain't hold'n my breath for that either. Other than having the original concept for the aircraft design (a.ka. the Bell 442 which fell off the drawing board) Bell will have as much manufacturing or design content in the AB-139 as Car Max has in the Toyota it sells.
Just goes to show.. ya can't believe everything ya read in the press.
Or how about the Brits buying .......
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sikorsky S76 to transport HM the Queen?
The Brits have already done it, John. The Queen has used a civvy S-76C since 1998.
S-76 in the Queen's back garden.
It replaced the two ageing RAF Wessex HCC4s of 32 (The Royal) Squadron which had been in continuous service since 1969.
The Royal Household awarded a ten year contract to Sikorsky and Air Hanson (as then was) to provide the Queen with an S-76 and crew. Buckingham Palace claimed at the time the privatisation would save the taxpayer at least £1.8m on the annual bill for the two Wessex - making the deal a snip at a mere £2.8 million per annum.
I think 32 Squadron possibly still operates a Twin Squirrel but I don't know for sure, or who flies in it if they do.
Although I'm a fan of the S-76 (total time logged 1 hour
) I think taxpayers' money should be spent on a 'home' product whenever possible.
The 'Royal' helicopter should be British or European (we're in the EEC, for better or worse) and the Presidential helicopter(s) should be American.
The Brits have already done it, John. The Queen has used a civvy S-76C since 1998.
S-76 in the Queen's back garden.
It replaced the two ageing RAF Wessex HCC4s of 32 (The Royal) Squadron which had been in continuous service since 1969.
The Royal Household awarded a ten year contract to Sikorsky and Air Hanson (as then was) to provide the Queen with an S-76 and crew. Buckingham Palace claimed at the time the privatisation would save the taxpayer at least £1.8m on the annual bill for the two Wessex - making the deal a snip at a mere £2.8 million per annum.
I think 32 Squadron possibly still operates a Twin Squirrel but I don't know for sure, or who flies in it if they do.
Although I'm a fan of the S-76 (total time logged 1 hour
) I think taxpayers' money should be spent on a 'home' product whenever possible. The 'Royal' helicopter should be British or European (we're in the EEC, for better or worse) and the Presidential helicopter(s) should be American.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 14th Aug 2003 at 03:50.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, it was way way back in the summer of 2003 it happened......
They were real good friends then one day Flying Lawyer wrote a post saying the Queen of England shouldn't be flying around in a Sikorsksky. Folks tried to explain London had a record heatwave that summer and the sun probly got to FL's head, but no good. Nick never spoke to him again. 
They were real good friends then one day Flying Lawyer wrote a post saying the Queen of England shouldn't be flying around in a Sikorsksky.
Folks tried to explain London had a record heatwave that summer and the sun probly got to FL's head, but no good. Nick never spoke to him again.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bronx,
I must say, FL and I are great friends, and he is entitled to his opinion, of course!
I helped develop the procedures that Queen's Flight uses, and got a chance to work with the fellows who fly the machine. They have a first class operation, in every way.
I toured Buckingham Palace during the initial operations, it is certainly the finest heliport I have ever seen!
Regarding the main subject of this thread, and relative performance of the EH-101 and the S-92, I have some data that I will post later on, comparing the payload, range and speed of the two aircraft. Makes for interesting reading!
I must say, FL and I are great friends, and he is entitled to his opinion, of course!
I helped develop the procedures that Queen's Flight uses, and got a chance to work with the fellows who fly the machine. They have a first class operation, in every way.
I toured Buckingham Palace during the initial operations, it is certainly the finest heliport I have ever seen!
Regarding the main subject of this thread, and relative performance of the EH-101 and the S-92, I have some data that I will post later on, comparing the payload, range and speed of the two aircraft. Makes for interesting reading!
