Author Topic: CH-148 Cyclone Progress  (Read 528277 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline suffolkowner

  • Member
  • ****
  • 8,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 229
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #950 on: April 10, 2017, 16:58:35 »
There's 4 more in the pipe for delivery this year as well.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 18,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,077
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #951 on: April 10, 2017, 17:02:33 »
There's 4 more in the pipe for delivery this year as well.

None of them are in a configuration that we ordered and paid for.  Are they even usable to us in the capacity we bought them for?  I'm concerned that they won't do the job we need them to. 

Offline suffolkowner

  • Member
  • ****
  • 8,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 229
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #952 on: April 10, 2017, 17:52:38 »
Well block two delivery is supposed to begin in 2018. Block 1.1 delivery will continue as will Sea King removal. If the bugs aren't worked out by 2018 we're going to have a problem

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 18,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,077
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #953 on: April 10, 2017, 17:54:28 »
Well block two delivery is supposed to begin in 2018. Block 1.1 delivery will continue as will Sea King removal. If the bugs aren't worked out by 2018 we're going to have a problem

That's what I'm worried about.  We don't have a contingency at this point.  The Liberals should never have bought a paper helicopter.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 52,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,457
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #954 on: April 11, 2017, 11:43:46 »
Only eight years to go?  From Sept. 2016:

Quote
Cyclone helicopters to reach full operating capability in 2025: DND
Long, tortured story of getting replacement for Sea Kings a 'case study' in how not to do it
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cyclone-helicopter-operational-1.3746627

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #955 on: April 11, 2017, 11:59:40 »
And that is still a ridiculous (long) timeline.  The Cyclone project is a great study of how NOT to procure...well anything. 

If you want to read up some on a helicopter project that went well, read up on the NH90 NFH (NATO Frigate Helicopter) project that produced not only MH, but Army TacHel airframes as well.



"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline suffolkowner

  • Member
  • ****
  • 8,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 229
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #956 on: April 11, 2017, 13:02:09 »
And that is still a ridiculous (long) timeline.  The Cyclone project is a great study of how NOT to procure...well anything. 

If you want to read up some on a helicopter project that went well, read up on the NH90 NFH (NATO Frigate Helicopter) project that produced not only MH, but Army TacHel airframes as well.



You would prefer the NH90 over the AW101 or Cyclone?

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #957 on: April 11, 2017, 13:10:14 »
It's flying and has been for some time, and with more than 1 country in the army and Navy/maritime world.  I believe the timeline from concept to the first MH version being delivered was somewhere around 6 years.  So those 4 countries will have common parts, familiarity with the platform (it is NATO, so that's a good thing) and other benefits.  Meanwhile...we are still flying Sea Kings.

I'm no expect but...it likely would have been cheaper and we would have modern MH in the air, now.  Actually, a few years ago.  We don't have a single ASW-capable Cyclone AFAIK.  I can only image the ***-pain the MH aircrew have and will continue to go thru. 
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 85,045
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,658
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #958 on: April 11, 2017, 13:15:04 »
You would prefer the NH90 over the AW101 or Cyclone?

I thought the Cyclone was a myth ...

 :Tin-Foil-Hat:

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 161,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,639
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #959 on: April 12, 2017, 03:18:13 »
And that is still a ridiculous (long) timeline.  The Cyclone project is a great study of how NOT to procure...well anything. 

If you want to read up some on a helicopter project that went well, read up on the NH90 NFH (NATO Frigate Helicopter) project that produced not only MH, but Army TacHel airframes as well.

Really? ???    The fact that "brochure" is actually in the filename should make one pause and contemplate...

Lessons Learned #1 in aircraft manufacture: Don't put a planned in-service year anywhere in the aircraft's name, i.e. NH90 > NH90+17 = NH2007

The Long, Sad Tale of Germany's Botched Helicopter Buy

Quote
...The initial prototype took off on its debut flight in 1990 and, in 2007, the first examples were ready for combat....

:2c:

G2G

Offline Dolphin_Hunter

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 10,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,173
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #960 on: April 12, 2017, 05:52:36 »
"Stealth"?

I never once thought of the NH-90 as stealthy..


Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #961 on: April 12, 2017, 19:49:22 »
Really? ???    The fact that "brochure" is actually in the filename should make one pause and contemplate...

Lessons Learned #1 in aircraft manufacture: Don't put a planned in-service year anywhere in the aircraft's name, i.e. NH90 > NH90+17 = NH2007

The Long, Sad Tale of Germany's Botched Helicopter Buy

:2c:

G2G

I picked the pic only because it listed both the Army and MH models.  I've never looked into the Army version, but the little I know about the MH all seems good.

As I said, they're already flying.   :whistle:
« Last Edit: April 12, 2017, 19:52:18 by Eye In The Sky »
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 161,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,639
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #962 on: April 13, 2017, 15:09:24 »
I picked the pic only because it listed both the Army and MH models.  I've never looked into the Army version, but the little I know about the MH all seems good.

As I said, they're already flying.   :whistle:

Yup...they went IOC only 22 years after project initiation...yay!  Using a similar timeline, Sikorsky could have until 2026 to get it right, so they could beat NH-90 by a healthy margin.

In the platinum category of fast procurement are Chretien's 2 x CL-604s, time from Contract Award to FOC...48 hours.  C-17 next, then everyone else.  Want more international examples?  EFA-2000...oops, there's that planned IOC year in name issue again, etc...

Regards
G2G

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 98,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,654
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #963 on: April 13, 2017, 17:35:56 »
To be fair, no one would have expected Sikorsky to struggle so much to produce a marine ASW helicopter, when they for all intents and purpose invented the role.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #964 on: April 13, 2017, 20:42:48 »
Yup...they went IOC only 22 years after project initiation...yay!  Using a similar timeline, Sikorsky could have until 2026 to get it right, so they could beat NH-90 by a healthy margin.

In the platinum category of fast procurement are Chretien's 2 x CL-604s, time from Contract Award to FOC...48 hours.  C-17 next, then everyone else.  Want more international examples?  EFA-2000...oops, there's that planned IOC year in name issue again, etc...

Regards
G2G

My info was about 6-7 years from idea to flying.  Something like that.  Source;  Janes.  I had to research the NFH for a NATO ex RECCE briefing when I was doing my upgrade a few years ago.   :dunno:

I didn't look much into the green machine version...just knew one or a few of the 4 countries involved went with both the Army and MH versions.

But...maybe this is a very myopic assessment, the countries involved were flying them for ASW 2 years ago on a NATO ex.  I did the same NATO ex again very, very recently, and the Sea King was still flying off our CPF that was there to play.
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 161,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,639
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #965 on: April 14, 2017, 02:00:00 »
...and there are not just "two" variants.  There are 18 unique high and low cabin NFH, TTH, TTT, TTT/SAR, TTT/ASW configurations...for 14 nations.  Some nations have three or more sub-variants.  Hardly "2 jacks for all trades."  Some nations were only getting their helos in the mid-20-teens for an aircraft that started design in 1985.  Hardly the paragon of pristine helicopter development and fielding.

Re: 148 - For folks to believe that the Government of the day didn't understand that making a new aircraft, albeit one that looked externally similar to its civilian sibling, would be far from simple, but was well worth the "anything but the EH-101 again!" could be seen to be quite naive.  Cynical or not, I have a hard time believing that the 148 wasn't the result of the LPC's "anything to save face after an election promise" course of action.  Chretien's "Read my lips, no new 'elicopters" was simply an earlier version of Trudeau's "No F-35s"  In fairness to the young Sun King, at least he smiled when he made his promise.

:2c:

G2G

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #966 on: April 14, 2017, 18:20:32 »
I didn't look into all the configs (in detail), just the NFH.  NFH prototype (produced in Italy) was flying NLT Dec 1999.  First Italian Navy NFH made initial flight from Vergiate on 15 December 2005.  Netherlands
became the first customer to receive NFH version on 21 April 2010, with France following suit on 5 May 2010.  Maiden operational deployment by NFH version accomplished by Netherlands, which embarked one NH90 on frigate HrMs De Ruyter on 20 January 2013;  France declared NFH variant (Step A MOC) operational on 8 December 2011.

Granted, initial studies ('83-'84) to Dec '99 is a long time.  But, in the doc I have (19 pages) it seems most of the initial time wasted was finalizing 'who was in, who was out' (Canada had withdrawn before '83 according to my info).

Prototype ('99) to first NFH ('10) to first MOC and FOC still seem to be respectable timelines, IMO but...I'm a button-monkey, not a procurement guy.  But they're 4 years of operational flying ahead of us.  What was the date given for FOC on Cyclone...2025?

Don't get me wrong here though...I'd of loved to have worked co-op on MANTA with a 148 instead of a 124.  And I certainly feel for the folks in the MH world *living it*.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 18:26:58 by Eye In The Sky »
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 161,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,639
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #967 on: April 15, 2017, 09:17:09 »
I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs.  148 is late...sure, but ask NATO nations if they were happy that a helicopter targeted for delivery in the 1990 never became IOC until the late-2000, early-20-teens.  The lopsided critical eye is the same on seized-rotor aircraft - F-35 is late....sure, but so to were Rafale, EFA 2000/EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon, Gripen, Raptor, J-11, PAK-DA, etc..............

I know one thing, if I ever form an aerospace company to build aircraft, I'm sure as heck not putting the intended IOC year anywhere in the aircraft's name! ;)

Regards
G2G
« Last Edit: April 15, 2017, 09:19:53 by Good2Golf »

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 182,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,682
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #968 on: April 15, 2017, 11:56:33 »
I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs.  148 is late...sure, but ask NATO nations if they were happy that a helicopter targeted for delivery in the 1990 never became IOC until the late-2000, early-20-teens.  The lopsided critical eye is the same on seized-rotor aircraft - F-35 is late....sure, but so to were Rafale, EFA 2000/EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon, Gripen, Raptor, J-11, PAK-DA, etc..............

I know one thing, if I ever form an aerospace company to build aircraft, I'm sure as heck not putting the intended IOC year anywhere in the aircraft's name! ;)

Regards
G2G

1970 was a very good year.

MBT 70 (1963 to Never - although it did eventually lead to Abrams and Leo 2)

FH70 (1963 to 1978 - almost on time, same decade at least)
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Cdn Blackshirt

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 10,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,319
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #969 on: April 15, 2017, 12:00:25 »
There's 4 more in the pipe for delivery this year as well.

So that would make 15 deliveries by end of this year, of which likely 3 will remain in the test programs and 12 will be in hangars?   Wow.  That would make for an embarrassing photo for the Liberal Party.
IMPORTANT - 'Blackshirt' is a reference to Nebraska Cornhuskers Football and not naziism.   National Champions '70, '71, '94, '95 and '97.    Go Huskers!!!!

Offline YZT580

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 475
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #970 on: April 15, 2017, 13:11:24 »
On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 24,520
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,255
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #971 on: April 15, 2017, 14:46:56 »
On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

Those were back in the days when Canada actually took its defence responsibilities seriously. Today? Not so much.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #972 on: April 15, 2017, 20:03:16 »
On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

725 days?  Birth of a Giant.

Of note, she was born from the Bristol Britannia.  "On March 28, 1957, the first flight of the new aircraft took place, lasting seventy-five minutes. It had taken three years to reach this stage, and a long period of testing still lay ahead.  The first squadron to receive the Argus was 405, at RCAF Station Greenwood. Along with other aircrew and staff officers, the Squadron's crews had been consulted frequently at various stages of construction, and were delighted to welcome the first of the new aircraft on 1 May, 1958. The aircraft was officially handed over to Maritime Air Command on 17 May, which was proclaimed "Argus Day" at Greenwood."

http://cp107argus.com/ArgusHistory/CP107History.html
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • I can count to potato!
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 174,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,300
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #973 on: April 15, 2017, 20:05:29 »
I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs. 

In retrospect, I likely focus on the fact the NFH is flying and I've watched it on IFF and EO circa 2015 in the Med and...well our new aircraft are grounded and...struggling.  Not exactly textbook unbiased thinking on my part...
"Stop telling everyone I'm an *******; I like to see the look on their face when they realize it for themselves..."

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 182,845
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,682
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: CH-148 Cyclone Progress
« Reply #974 on: April 15, 2017, 20:34:47 »
EITS:

I believe the disconnect you are having is that the NH-90 (ca 1983) is a closer contemporary to the EH101 (AW101, CH-149, Merlin ca 1977) than to the CH-148 which was contracted in 2004 with virtually a clean slate. 

We (Canada) had options.  We just wasted 20 years worth of effort.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"