SCRATCH 1 HELO

SCRATCH 1 HELO (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Larry Bond's Harpoon - Commander's Edition

Message

EXRANPO -> SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/5/2008 12:13:32 PM)
Folks, Not sure which is the right place for this thread - but what I am seeing in the press today is that Australia's new Minister for Defence has cancelled the very, very troubled Seasprite Program - at a cost of probably in excess of AU$1 billion and whatever contract termination costs there are on top of that. Guess the database will need to be updated at some stage, although it may be fun to leave it in? Rod

trader -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/5/2008 1:20:07 PM)
That is the best news I have heard in months, and have been waiting several years to hear it. Not too sure how the penalty/cancellation situation will work out. Given the project has not delivered a single combat ready airframe after a delay of more than 6 years, one would hope we can keep most of the money for the replacement. Even if we don't, better to cut our losses now. The SH-2G was a flawed choice from the beginning. It lacked something which is critical to a naval helo, range/endurance and payload. Without those, it doesn't matter how many modern toys they glued on to that 60's airframe. The Seahawk upgrade is also massively behind schedule, and even on completion will not significantly boost the capability of those 16 airframes. If the government has any sense, they will order NH-90 NFH models now to replace the SH-2G, and a second batch to replace the S-70(B)'s. With a decent number (presumably a 1-for-1 replacement of 11 + 16 = 27) of airframes, it will also allow for local assembly/production. Combined with the MRH-90 replacing the SeaKing from the amphibs, that will reduce the naval aviation force from 3 (SH-2G, S-70B, and SK50) totally different airframes to just 1 airframe - in 2 variants (naval and trooplift/logistics). There will have to be a saving from a training and logistics POV. Warm Regards, trader

CV32 -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/5/2008 2:29:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EXRANPO Guess the database will need to be updated at some stage, although it may be fun to leave it in? I don't delete platforms in the HCDB. It would screw up scenarios already created with that platform, and retaining that integrity is far more important. I should add that there's nothing wrong with a hypothetical scenario where the SH-2G(A) actually 'works' as advertised, and in the meantime, we'll wait to see whether the RAN goes with an upgrade of the Seahawk or buys the NFH90, I suppose.

EXRANPO -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/6/2008 11:42:00 AM)
Folks, I believe that a couple of flying airframes had been delivered, however they did not work in a manner to which the RAN actually wanted? Rumour has it that if they are left in the one place for two long some Chief Petty Officer will get his troops to paint them white to match the other immovable objects you would find on a military facility - you know - rocks, buildings, officers........ I actually worked on the RAN Helicopted Project when they were buying the SH-70B's - they really were a very capable aircraft and I have a WHOLE lot of RESPECT for the senior management team who made the choice - and I suspect that part of the problems the services are having with identifying suitable helo's (apart from political interference that is) is that all three services (as I understand it) have a common aircraft/helo purchasing project and try to buy something that will really fit all three services rather than a single service. I absolutely agree that the fewer different aircraft types that we have, the better it is for all the right reasons. Just wish that we could be more of them as well so that when we don't get the usual 10 years notice of an impending conflict, we don't have to go out and buy a lot of second hand weapons from who has them to spare. Personal thoughts only and not meant to upset anyone or criticise government policy! I am picking that the Government may actually seek damages from Kaman on this one? Cheers and beers, Rod

Terminus -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/6/2008 12:49:05 PM)
Just as long as the Aussies don't buy the Merlin/EH-101... Bad bird, that one...

JRyan -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/6/2008 5:26:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Merlin/EH-101... Bad bird, that one... Why?

Terminus -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/6/2008 5:57:07 PM)
Very low ready-to-fly/down-for-maintenance ratio with most of its users.

CV32 -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/6/2008 6:23:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Terminus Very low ready-to-fly/down-for-maintenance ratio with most of its users. Thats interesting, because I had understood that the RTM322 powerplant (such as that installed in your Danish variants) was decently reliable. I might be wrong on that. [&:]

Klahn -> RE: SCRATCH 1 HELO (3/16/2008 10:25:28 AM)
This is from the wikipedia article for what it's worth.... Royal Danish Air Force In 2001, the Royal Danish Air Force announced the purchase of eight EH101s for SAR duties and six tactical troop transports. The last of the 14 EH101s was delivered March 1st 2007 and the first SAR EH101s became operational in late April 2007. The Danish Mk 512s have a MTOW of 15,600 kg.[8] In 2007 the British Ministry of Defence acquired the six troop transport Merlins to alleviate a shortfall in British operational helicopters. In exchange the British have ordered six new-build helicopters from AgustaWestland as replacements for the Royal Danish Air Force. On January 28 2008 one Danish EH101 broke the drive shaft from one engine to the gear box and made an emergency landing at Billund Airport. Following this incident the Danish fleet was grounded as a security precaution. The incident caused some national debate[9] about the future of the EH101 programmed in Denmark and whether it made sense to acquire different helicopters since the EH101 had very low availability (roughly 30%) due to mechanical issues. AgustaWestland, in turn, blamed the Danes for ordering spare parts very late and not keeping enough staff to properly service the helicopters[10].

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.84375