What exactly do we mean when we say "it's a great aircraft"?

What exactly do we mean when we say "it's a great aircraft"?

Well there's only 5 words in your question, so which do you not understand? :}

:{

TOG

Well there's only 5 words in your question, so which do you not understand? :}

:{

TOG

Just breaking now:

Lockheed Team Wins Presidential Chopper

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a surprise move, the U.S. Navy has chosen a
transatlantic team led by Lockheed Martin Corp. to build a new U.S.
presidential helicopter fleet in a deal valued at well over $1 billion,
several congressional sources said on Friday.

The decision was a stunning setback for Connecticut-based United
Technologies Corp.'s Sikorsky Aircraft unit -- which for nearly 50
years has
built and maintained the green and white "Marine One" helicopters that
fly
the president.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, announced the decision in a
press
release, saying Lockheed's victory would bring hundreds of new jobs to
its
Owego, New York plant.

Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier, is pushing a spin-off of a
three-engined EH101 helicopter made by AgustaWestland Inc., an
Anglo-Italian
unit of Italy's Finmeccanica SpA . Fort Worth, Texas-based Textron
Inc.'s
Bell Helicopter is the other big partner.

The contract could also give Lockheed a boost when the Air Force next
year
orders 194 search and rescue helicopters that could be worth more than
$6
billion.

In addition, the winner would have bragging rights that could help sell
another 200 helicopters to the U.S. Coast Guard and Department of
Homeland
Security, plus any overseas bounce.
--

Just breaking now:

Lockheed Team Wins Presidential Chopper

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a surprise move, the U.S. Navy has chosen a
transatlantic team led by Lockheed Martin Corp. to build a new U.S.
presidential helicopter fleet in a deal valued at well over $1 billion,
several congressional sources said on Friday.

The decision was a stunning setback for Connecticut-based United
Technologies Corp.'s Sikorsky Aircraft unit -- which for nearly 50
years has
built and maintained the green and white "Marine One" helicopters that
fly
the president.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, announced the decision in a
press
release, saying Lockheed's victory would bring hundreds of new jobs to
its
Owego, New York plant.

Lockheed, the Pentagon's No. 1 supplier, is pushing a spin-off of a
three-engined EH101 helicopter made by AgustaWestland Inc., an
Anglo-Italian
unit of Italy's Finmeccanica SpA . Fort Worth, Texas-based Textron
Inc.'s
Bell Helicopter is the other big partner.

The contract could also give Lockheed a boost when the Air Force next
year
orders 194 search and rescue helicopters that could be worth more than
$6
billion.

In addition, the winner would have bragging rights that could help sell
another 200 helicopters to the U.S. Coast Guard and Department of
Homeland
Security, plus any overseas bounce.
--

Just breaking now?

It's been posted and discussed here and in the Rotorheads Forum for almost 12 hours. ;)

Just breaking now?

It's been posted and discussed here and in the Rotorheads Forum for almost 12 hours. ;)

Now that the yanks have bought Merlin I suppose the Mk1 can kiss goodbye to it's long awaited spares as Agusta/Westlands will be bending over backwards to please it's new best friend !!!

Now that the yanks have bought Merlin I suppose the Mk1 can kiss goodbye to it's long awaited spares as Agusta/Westlands will be bending over backwards to please it's new best friend !!!

Really great news for WHL. Congratulations to the entire workforce.

Really great news for WHL. Congratulations to the entire workforce.

I knew it, its the Pilot's fault. We should fire them all, then the Engineers can work on the cabs in the hangar to their hearts content without ever having the added pressure of making the aircraft serviceable to fly. And everyone will be happy, because we can wait as long as we like for the "spares to support the intial design " to be delivered, and the parts that were hugely over-estimated in their expected life won't wear out, 'cos we won't be using them.

Yes the drivers are the true villains for expecting too much of the machine they risk their lives in.

Selecting sarcasm off, resuming Sunday afternoon.

I knew it, its the Pilot's fault. We should fire them all, then the Engineers can work on the cabs in the hangar to their hearts content without ever having the added pressure of making the aircraft serviceable to fly. And everyone will be happy, because we can wait as long as we like for the "spares to support the intial design " to be delivered, and the parts that were hugely over-estimated in their expected life won't wear out, 'cos we won't be using them.

Yes the drivers are the true villains for expecting too much of the machine they risk their lives in.

Selecting sarcasm off, resuming Sunday afternoon.

My God jungly, I thought I'd heard it all, but Merlins problems being the fault of pilots!! :confused:

What planet are you on???

My God jungly, I thought I'd heard it all, but Merlins problems being the fault of pilots!! :confused:

What planet are you on???

It seems that the "c#*p" Merlin appears to have beaten off competition from one of the worlds biggest helicopter manufacturers. Can't be that bad if they are prepared to fly George Dubya round in it! :ok:

It seems that the "c#*p" Merlin appears to have beaten off competition from one of the worlds biggest helicopter manufacturers. Can't be that bad if they are prepared to fly George Dubya round in it! :ok:

"Don't blame the procurers or the loggies......."


Good post Jungly. Spot on. Too many requirements are articulated, and hence funding dictated, without support specialist input. As approx 70% of through life costs are in the In-Service Support phase, if you get it wrong up front, it's always wrong. The recent move in DPA to be more strict and trade out performance (not just time and cost) is a direct result of what you describe.

"Don't blame the procurers or the loggies......."


Good post Jungly. Spot on. Too many requirements are articulated, and hence funding dictated, without support specialist input. As approx 70% of through life costs are in the In-Service Support phase, if you get it wrong up front, it's always wrong. The recent move in DPA to be more strict and trade out performance (not just time and cost) is a direct result of what you describe.