# Various Problems with The Cormorants- Merged



## Kirkhill

Tail rotor cracks and spare parts cited as impacting aircraft availability.




> Canada Temporarily Redistributes SAR Helicopters to Cover for Decreased Availability of CH-149
> 
> 
> (Source: Canadian Department of National Defence; issued Sept. 29, 2005)
> 
> 
> WINNIPEG --- Two Search and Rescue (SAR) helicopters will be temporarily redistributed to eastern Canada due to the decreased availability of the CH-149 Cormorant helicopter. As a result, the Cormorants used in SAR operations at 8 Wing Trenton will be temporarily replaced by the CH-146 Griffon helicopter by mid-October. This is expected to remain in effect until at least the Spring 2006 timeframe.
> 
> This redistribution of aircraft will allow better management of the Cormorant fleet while availability challenges are being addressed. It will provide the remaining Cormorant squadrons with a sufficient number of available aircraft to better maintain air crews' skills and proficiency levels, while focusing the unique capabilities of the Cormorant on demanding coastal SAR missions.
> 
> The CH-146 Griffon will become the primary helicopter to conduct SAR in the Trenton area of responsibility. Three Griffon helicopters will provide SAR response in the area spanning from Quebec City to Thunder Bay and from Canada's North to the Great Lakes area. These Griffons, which frequently conduct SAR missions, will be reallocated from other locations. Griffon operations at their home units will not be adversely impacted.
> 
> The Commander 1 Canadian Air Division made this decision in order to provide the most effective and efficient use of available Cormorant helicopters across Canada. This was necessary because this fleet's availability has been affected by ongoing problems associated with cracks in its tail rotor assembly and a shortage of spares for various helicopter components, including main gearboxes and main rotor heads.
> 
> This lack of available aircraft had the potential to impact the essential training of Cormorant air crews.
> 
> "After assessing the situation, SAR helicopters will be redistributed temporarily to allow us more flexibility to conduct essential Cormorant training and to utilize the Cormorant for demanding coastal SAR missions," said Major-General Charles Bouchard, Commander 1 Canadian Air Division. "I am very confident that our well trained and professional crews will continue to provide a high level of SAR service across the country."
> 
> DND continues to work towards developing a solution with AgustaWestland, the original equipment manufacturer, to determine the cause of cracking in the tail rotor assembly; and IMP Group Ltd., the aircraft maintenance contractor, to address spare parts availability.
> 
> -ends-



http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.4308111.1089903978.QPadasOa9dUAAESlMZk&modele=jdc_34


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Lemon alert!!! I am hoping they will be able to rectify this problem much like I hope the Victoria's problems will be eventually fixed.


----------



## mz589

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Lemon alert!!! I am hoping they will be able to rectify this problem much like I hope the Victoria's problems will be eventually fixed.




Ever wonder what would have happened if we'd have bought the full complement of these dogs that was originally proposed? 

Maybe the bugs would have been worked out by now or maybe we'd be stuck in an endless cycle of unreliabliity.


----------



## Kirkhill

Anybody know if we bought the manufacturer's recommended support package?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

mz589 said:
			
		

> Ever wonder what would have happened if we'd have bought the full complement of these dogs that was originally proposed?
> 
> Maybe the bugs would have been worked out by now or maybe we'd be stuck in an endless cycle of unreliabliity.



If it was just the CF having reliability issues then I would be inclined to agree but it sounds like everyone who has bought/ordered them are having the same issues.


----------



## Wizard of OZ

Hmmm maybe the Griffion is not as bad as it seems at least it stays in the air.  I knock on wood as i say this.  And to think I just read somewhere that they were thinking of taking two or three of these birds to the stan to fly in the higher altitudes there. Or maybe this is all a big cover operation for that move.  I heard that they ordered a lot of tan paint in Trenton.


----------



## Inch

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> If it was just the CF having reliability issues then I would be inclined to agree but it sounds like everyone who has bought/ordered them are having the same issues.



Correct, my Det Commander is Royal Navy and he said the RN Merlins are having the same problems.

With the titanium tailrotor hub and main rotor head on the S-92, it's nice to know we shouldn't have the same types of problems when we get them.

We (Sea Kings) have been holding SAR standby off and on for the past year to cover for the lack of serviceable Cormorants. Pretty sad when the media's favourite whipping horse turns out to be the work horse of the coastal areas.


----------



## Cloud Cover

Inch said:
			
		

> Pretty sad when the media's favourite whipping horse turns out to be the work horse of the coastal areas.



And yet there is little mention of that fact to be found in the media.


----------



## Sf2

it was pretty crazy news to us in Petawawa.....

Usually we hear rumors of this first, but not this time.  Funny how alot of the Griffon guys kill to get a cormorant seat, only to be thown back in the mirabel monster...


----------



## childs56

buy new sea kings


----------



## Sf2

doesn't make sense


----------



## kj_gully

Wizard of OZ said:
			
		

> Hmmm maybe the Griffion is not as bad as it seems at least it stays in the air.   I knock on wood as i say this.   And to think I just read somewhere that they were thinking of taking two or three of these birds to the stan to fly in the higher altitudes there. Or maybe this is all a big cover operation for that move.   I heard that they ordered a lot of tan paint in Trenton.



LOL!!! Hah, I don't think the Army wants a chopper for two hours at a time ( time between rotor inspection) Pray for us!


----------



## daniel h.

Inch said:
			
		

> With the titanium tailrotor hub and main rotor head on the S-92, it's nice to know we shouldn't have the same types of problems when we get them.




Could you describe how these aspects of the S-92 is different than than Cormorant? In other words, what differs on the Cormorant that makes them break down, other than who built them? (Italian and British cars aren't known to be reliable either....I'll shut up now. ;D)


----------



## Inch

daniel h. said:
			
		

> Could you describe how these aspects of the S-92 is different than than Cormorant? In other words, what differs on the Cormorant that makes them break down, other than who built them? (Italian and British cars aren't known to be reliable either....I'll shut up now. ;D)



I'm not a Cormorant pilot, but my understanding of the tail rotor on the Cormorant from talking with friends that do fly them is that the Cormorant tail rotor hubs are composite material. Composites are known for their strength, in one direction, but they're also known for their ability to break without warning. Just watch an NHL game and you'll see how easily composites can break without warning.

The design of the Cormorant's tail rotor hubs is also a bit of a problem, there's weak spots in the design. It's kind of hard to describe, but basically, it's a piece of composite material with a square shape in the centre. It looks kind of like your computer monitor, the half hub would be the white case while the screen itself would be the hole, you see corner to corner it isn't very thick and this is where the cracks are occurring.

The S-92 avoided all this by using titanium vice composites for their tail and main rotor hubs, couple that with a different design and it's safe to say we won't see the same problems with the S-92/H-92/CH148 when we get them. They will probably have different problems since they are new after all, but I'm confident that they won't have tail rotor problems.


----------



## carpediem

There is a detailed article explaining the Cormorant tail rotor half hub problem in the Summer 2005 issue of flight comment.

See page 18 of:

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/dfs/pdf/Flight_Comment/2005/Summer2005_e.pdf


----------



## Strike

> We (Sea Kings) have been holding SAR standby off and on for the past year to cover for the lack of serviceable Cormorants. Pretty sad when the media's favourite whipping horse turns out to be the work horse of the coastal areas.



And THAT call usually comes at 1600 on a Friday just as you're about to crack open a beer at the mess.


----------



## Inch

Strike said:
			
		

> And THAT call usually comes at 1600 on a Friday just as you're about to crack open a beer at the mess.



Ain't that the truth. A few months ago I was out doing a compass swing, it was around 17:00 and the vast majority of the Wing was already into the beer and they called us on the radio to "ask" us if we would do SAR standby until noon the next day. Of course the answer was yes, we were stood down later that night so not much came of it.


----------



## daniel h.

carpediem said:
			
		

> There is a detailed article explaining the Cormorant tail rotor half hub problem in the Summer 2005 issue of flight comment.
> 
> See page 18 of:
> 
> http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/dfs/pdf/Flight_Comment/2005/Summer2005_e.pdf




One more question if I may:

If the problem is literally one part or one section of the helicopter, couldn't the makers of the helicopter redesign this one section, and improve an otherwise great helicopter? Couldn't they even fabricate a new part and add them to helicopters currently in service and eliminate the problem? Isn't this kind of thing covered under a warranty in such an expensive purchase?


----------



## h3tacco

daniel h. said:
			
		

> One more question if I may:
> 
> If the problem is literally one part or one section of the helicopter, couldn't the makers of the helicopter redesign this one section, and improve an otherwise great helicopter? Couldn't they even fabricate a new part and add them to helicopters currently in service and eliminate the problem? Isn't this kind of thing covered under a warranty in such an expensive purchase?



I think that is exactly what Augusta-Westland is doing. From what I hear they already redesigned the rotor hub once  but that the new design ended up failing more often. Someone a lot smarter than me estimated that at a minimum it would  take another year to redesign, build, test and the new part. But I guess we will have to wait and see.


----------



## Inch

daniel h. said:
			
		

> One more question if I may:
> 
> If the problem is literally one part or one section of the helicopter, couldn't the makers of the helicopter redesign this one section, and improve an otherwise great helicopter? Couldn't they even fabricate a new part and add them to helicopters currently in service and eliminate the problem? Isn't this kind of thing covered under a warranty in such an expensive purchase?



They've already done a redesign and the cracks reappeared in a different spot, only this time with a lot less flight time on the part. It would be possible to redesign the entire tail rotor, but adding an entirely new tail rotor to the helicopter would require an entirely new set of data to be acquired. Things like icing trials, controllability and vibration analysis would all need to be done from scratch, that kind of info isn't just done in a matter of weeks, it could take years to gather that kind of info. If you add an entirely new part, it could just transfer the stress somewhere else as was evidenced with the tail rotor mod that's already been approved.

As far as classifying it as a great helicopter, IMO, a helicopter needs to be tried and tested under the harshest conditions and come away without so much as a scratch. The Blackhawk, for example, is a helo I would say is a great helo. It's been battle tested in 2 Iraq wars and a ton of other peacekeeping missions and it's been in service since the late 70's/early 80's. But I guess calling a Cormorant a great helicopter is a matter of personal choice, I know I don't call it a great helicopter, another term comes to mind, piece of.........


----------



## kj_gully

To add to the redesign comments... The "US 101" http://www.teamus101.com/index.cfmis  the new presidential transport helicoptor. It will have a substantively more robust tail rotor design. We impatiently await the completed design of that component, as well as any new improvemnts that North American ingenuity can come up with. In the meantime, we wait, and hope.


----------



## daniel h.

Inch said:
			
		

> They've already done a redesign and the cracks reappeared in a different spot, only this time with a lot less flight time on the part. It would be possible to redesign the entire tail rotor, but adding an entirely new tail rotor to the helicopter would require an entirely new set of data to be acquired. Things like icing trials, controllability and vibration analysis would all need to be done from scratch, that kind of info isn't just done in a matter of weeks, it could take years to gather that kind of info. If you add an entirely new part, it could just transfer the stress somewhere else as was evidenced with the tail rotor mod that's already been approved.
> 
> As far as classifying it as a great helicopter, IMO, a helicopter needs to be tried and tested under the harshest conditions and come away without so much as a scratch. The Blackhawk, for example, is a helo I would say is a great helo. It's been battle tested in 2 Iraq wars and a ton of other peacekeeping missions and it's been in service since the late 70's/early 80's. But I guess calling a Cormorant a great helicopter is a matter of personal choice, I know I don't call it a great helicopter, another term comes to mind, piece of.........




Except for that whole "Black Hawk Down" thing. ;D


----------



## Sf2

> Except for that whole "Black Hawk Down" thing.


don't think there's any helo out there that will still fly after taking an RPG to the tail rotor


----------



## Inch

short final said:
			
		

> don't think there's any helo out there that will still fly after taking an RPG to the tail rotor



Amen to that!


----------



## aesop081

daniel h. said:
			
		

> Except for that whole "Black Hawk Down" thing. ;D



another aviation expert  :


----------



## Infanteer

I am a world expert on airplanes.... :rofl:


----------



## aesop081

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I am a world expert on airplanes.... :rofl:



i remember that guy very well........ :


----------



## Good2Golf

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I am a world expert _*whilst*_ on airplanes.... :rofl:



...and when not on airplanes, you are "oustanding in your own field" Infanteer!  ;D

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Infanteer

Duey said:
			
		

> ...and when not on airplanes, you are "oustanding in your own field" Infanteer!   ;D
> 
> Cheers,
> Duey



Thank you, I'm here all week.


----------



## daniel h.

aesop081 said:
			
		

> another aviation expert   :




No I'm not an expert....I just can't understand why so much technology is put on an aircraft which is always a sitting duck.


----------



## Good2Golf

Well, anything CAN be a sitting duck...helo, LAV, frigate, soldier...anything.  Depends on how you employ whatever system you have at your disposal.  

I have absolutely no problem coming back to the sandbox when we get our heavy lifter and operating it with all the appropriate weapon and protective systems on board and using TTPs that are appropriate to aviation and the specific aircraft type.  I don't consider myself any more a sitting duck than the guys do driving a LAV down Green Route.  

Anyone who is not smart about what they're doing, yes...they can become a sitting duck.

Mein 1 Afghani (= 2 ¢)

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## observor 69

I have read various comments on the Cormant status on this site.  Are there operational restrictions on the chopper, are they all grounded? 

Apparently not from this: http://www.nanaimobulletin.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=23&id=810790&more=


----------



## kj_gully

The Cormorant fleet is not grounded. there are ops restrictions in place, but they are being modified and removed as fixes come available, and currently Comox is having pretty good servicability. that being said, that is due in large part to the fact that Cormorants have been removed from Trenton (temporarily??), putting more birds in the other 3 helo sqns hangars ( Comox Greenwood Gander). Trenton is holding standby with hercs and Griffons.


----------



## eurowing

Media reps were to get a tour today to see the "rust"  : and hopefully they will give a proper perspective on corrosion as it applies to helicopters operating in a salt environment.  Suffice it to say I will fly on a Cormorant anytime.


----------



## GAP

Report: Chopper fix years away
Cracks in tail rotors on Cormorants
By MURRAY BREWSTER The Canadian Press
Article Link

OTTAWA — It will take years to fix a serious problem with Canada’s main search-and-rescue helicopter, say documents obtained by The Canadian Press.

Cracks in the hub assemblies of the CH-149 Cormorant’s tail rotors have led to flight restrictions on the 14 choppers, which often perform life-saving operations off the east and west coasts.

Defence Department documents, obtained under access to information laws, say a critical part is being re-engineered "under a high priority, but (is) still several years away" from a complete solution.

A Powerpoint presentation, dated October 2005, suggested the problem wouldn’t be solved for up to six years.

It is unclear how much the redesign will cost, if it will be covered by warranty, or whether taxpayers will foot the bill. Much of the information on cost overruns and maintenance is considered proprietary by the aircraft manufacturer and the company contracted to do maintenance, say defence experts.

The defect, combined with a shortage of spare parts and recently discovered corrosion problems, are a source of frustration for the new chief of air staff.

Lt.-Gen Angus Watt said the ongoing issues with the Cormorants have not affected search-and-rescue missions, but they continue to limit the number of aircraft available for ongoing training of crews.
More on link


----------



## childs56

They said that a few years ago. So now it is going to be another few years. I call total BS on it taking that long to fix. By about another few years time all the airframes will have been past warrenty time and thus they can charge a arm and a leg for the updated tail rotor.  
I say cut the deal, the airframes have not lived up to the promise of airworthiness have a Canadian company perform a redesign and fix the things. 
 Good thing we didnt buy a larger fleet of the EH101, I mean CH-149.


----------



## geo

this subject came out in.... October 2005... like the story said.
If you do a search on the subject you will find that there is at least one other thread where the virtues of the Cormorant are discussed.  

Is the Cormorant a hunk of junk as CTD contends or is it the teething pains of fielding a new airfrmae?

I have as yet not heard bad things said about the Cormorant from it's maintainers & pilots - so CTD, if you feel so strongly about it's failings, please, tell us more... why is it that you consider to be a bad buy?

do you think the Cyclone will be any better?
do you think the Sea King was any better at time of purchase?


----------



## Inch

geo said:
			
		

> this subject came out in.... October 2005... like the story said.
> If you do a search on the subject you will find that there is at least one other thread where the virtues of the Cormorant are discussed.
> 
> Is the Cormorant a hunk of junk as CTD contends or is it the teething pains of fielding a new airfrmae?
> 
> I have as yet not heard bad things said about the Cormorant from it's maintainers & pilots - so CTD, if you feel so strongly about it's failings, please, tell us more... why is it that you consider to be a bad buy?
> 
> do you think the Cyclone will be any better?
> do you think the Sea King was any better at time of purchase?



A new airframe? We were going to buy these things over 10 years ago. They're not new, the British have had all kinds of problems with them from cracking windshields to tailrotor hubs. 

We won't have similar problems with the Cyclone because their hubs are one piece milled titanium, main rotor and tail rotor to my knowledge. Sure we'll have teething pains and we'll probably lose a few too since we're the military test bed for this aircraft, but that's something to be expected when you're the first military customer. 

As for the Merlins, they first entered service in the UK in 1999, you would think that the Brits would have worked most of the bugs out of the Merlins by the time we bought them for SAR 5 years later, but nope.


----------



## geo

Merlins / Cormorants - Think that when Canada backed out, the Brits ended up being 1st customers for the EH101s.  Now considering that they are now fielding a US101 to be built in the USA and are replacing the presidential helicopter with a 101, I have to conclude that, despite its faults, the Cormorant is not a bad bird.


----------



## childs56

I can list a couple of the known problems with the Cormorant, such as the tail rotor, cracking windshield, corrosion a few electricle glitches, parts supply problems and technicle support from the manufacturer. The remainder I am not at bay to speak about. 
This isnt a new platform as indicted. It has been around for more then a few years. 
We now have a platform that is ops restricted from out of the box. This will continue for many years to come. This platform although a cadillac of Helo's is also a lemon of such. 
The US has imposed rules on the delivery of their Presidential EH101's. They must be able to fly with no restrictions out of the box, they have to be reliable. 

Eurcopter got caught with their pants down on gambling that their updated EH101's were going to be problem free. Well we lost their gamble. 
How to fix it is the question. 

How I would do it is ask Canadian Aerospace to build a new tail rotor.  

As for the the Sikorsky were buying having teething problems. So far so good for the platform. With a long history of making RELIABLE MILITARY Helicopters I think Sikorsky can and will produce a better more reliable product.  

Just to let everyone know I have good friends who work for the same companys who build, fix and maintain the airframes internationlly we discuss here. They are the SME's on these subjects. The in and outs of what is and isnt working, the cost of such projects not only to Canada but to their own companys in money and reasearch. 

Just because you fly a machine or you fix it, doesnt mean you know more or less then some one else. All it means is you have information for the puzzle. 

Just because the people who fix or fly the machines are not complaining to you doesnt mean everything is peachy.


----------



## h3tacco

CTD said:
			
		

> Eurcopter got caught with their pants down on gambling that their updated EH101's were going to be problem free. Well we lost their gamble.
> How to fix it is the question.



Just a correction Eurocopter has nothing to do with the EH101. It is built by a consortium of two of its main rivals Augusta and Westland. Also, in regards to the CH148 not having any major problems when delivered, just remember no one really knows because the fly-by-wire variant has not flown.


----------



## aesop081

CTD said:
			
		

> Just to let everyone know I have good friends who work for the same companys who build, fix and maintain the airframes internationlly we discuss here. They are the SME's on these subjects.



 :rofl:

I hope you arent refering to IMP


----------



## geo

CTD
considering that you are transmitting info that you got from a friend or a friend of a friend, whatever you declare is 2nd hand information.

Some of the defects you listed (windshield cracks) have been reported in the Merlin.  I have not read about same happening in the Cormorant.

Also, the EH101 is built by westland and Augusta... two companies that have considerable experience in building helicopters.  Reliable military helicopters.  No grounds to diss them


----------



## childs56

It is AugustaWestland. 
There was cooperation between the two companys Euro and Augusta to build the EH101, although they are competitors on paper they are merged through ownership stocks. 
I cannot remember who bought into who. 36% shares

AugustaWestland is the principle builder of the EH101, 
I always get confused between them and Eurocopters because some of their projects are so closely merged. 
yes the Cormoronts had cracking windshields. They put a restriciton on them I think it was 2 years ago for this problem, It was quickly fixed in about 2 or three months. 

Or maybe I am totally full of it and have no clue as some on this site seem to think which is the way it goes on in here. If they didnt here it themselves or see it in writing they dismiss the whole thing as a rumour or a flame war. 
what ever, 

The helos we have are some of the nicer platforms around in the world. they are hightechm user friendly, and maintainer friendly. You usually see one or the other not both. 

Cheers


----------



## geo

CTD,
I don't think the tone of my post any way near a flame.  
Your earlier posts left an impression that you considered the Cormorant a hunk of junk - which it isn't... re para 4 of your last post 



> The helos we have are some of the nicer platforms around in the world. they are hightechm user friendly, and maintainer friendly. You usually see one or the other not both.


----------



## I_am_John_Galt

CTD said:
			
		

> There was cooperation between the two companys Euro and Augusta to build the EH101, although they are competitors on paper they are merged through ownership stocks.
> I cannot remember who bought into who. 36% shares



You sure about all that?


----------



## time expired

I am very confused by this EH 101,Merlin,Cormorant, discusion.
If this helicopter is the turkey that a lot of people on this thread
maintain, why does it seem to be selling so well,even the US
President will be flying around in one.Could it be that it is the
only obvious replacement for the S 61 Sea King?.
    Canada really missed out of being on the ground floor of 
development of this project,as when our brilliant Prime Minister
Mr Cretian cancelled our original order,we had been offered
substantial work sharing offsets in the production of this
helicopter.When one considers the number of Sea Kings getting
close to their sell by dates it seems to have been a particularly
stupid decision.
     Please feel free to jump in and correct me if my impression
is incorrect.
     Another point that just occurred to me, is the fact that the 
introduction of the CH 47 Chinook into Canadian service was 
not without problems.One was lost on the delivery flight,at
least we have not lost a Cormorant.
                                 Regards


----------



## geo

TE,
The fact that the UK ended up holding the bag & enduring the teething pains of a new design is not 100% a bad thing.
The mixed bag of Cormorants & Cyclones may work in our favor over time...

BTW - YES, we did lose a Cormorant.


----------



## kj_gully

All right cannot resist any longer. Many of the problems we have with the shag (slang for a certain ugly seabird) are due to not getting enough of them in the first place. Even with all the issues, they are over 1000 hours each already, some over 2000. Other problems stem from not being privy to the "specs". I am not a maintainer so I do not know the terms, but basically AWIL decides and approves every aspect of our chopper. IMP cannot make mods without approval, nor come up with fixes on their own. Spare parts are extremely slow to arrive, choppers often sit awaiting parts for weeks for fixes that take hours. Our morning briefs almost always have the phrase "awaiting parts/approval/advice from AWIL" (Augusta westland). we still have several ops restrictions attached to our aircraft related to early problems, but many are not lifted because the supplier does not have time/interest in doing the work to get them lifted. I think the windshield speed limit (140? kts) is still in place, although the torque that caused the cracks has been solved for years. The tail rotor half hub issue that caused me so much distress a year or more ago, seems to be well past, yet in prudent risk management, ops restrictions remain, hopefully for not too much longer, mandating a rigid inspection schedule which greatly impacts training (requirements waived during ops). It is embarrassing to me that we have had to replace the cormorant fleet in Trenton with Griffons, an extremely limited SAR platform, in order to maintain our fleet elsewhere. Unfortunately, we can't just buy off the shelf eh101 because Canada has designed the Cormorant as a distinct airframe, with much in common with but enough differences to make our planes unique. Are Cormorants Lemons? They are yellow... I hate working under it, you cannot talk to anyone with the crappy radios, and there are espresso cup holders beside the spotters seats. We in the back got overlooked when the thing was designed, for sure, and we cannot mod it the way we would like due the the restrictive nature of airworthiness certification. The plane flies rock solid, though, it flies in weather that no one should go out in, and it can work at fairly high altitudes. I feel safe (finally) inside it. There is lots of redundancy, and our chauffeurs are generally happy, which makes me happy. They are SARTech lemons, and maintenance lemons, until we get the supply chain sorted out. Overall they are probably a C+. definitely a Canadian Military acceptable grade.

(edited for spell check)


----------



## childs56

I am sure about the AugustaWestland partnership. 
Excellant post kj_gully. 

The Cormoront is one of the nicest platforms in the world. it is operator friendly and also maintainer friendly. But it has many problems with it for what we bought and how many we were going to buy. 
I no where said it was a hunk of junk. 
It it not the perfect problem free helo that one thinks. 

Cheers


----------



## I_am_John_Galt

CTD said:
			
		

> I am sure about the AugustaWestland partnership.



Well, AugustaWestland is owned 100% by Finmeccanica and Eurocopter 100% by EADS: they have zero ownership interest in each other.  They only major thing they partner on (AFAIK) is the NH90 (along with Fokker): I don't claim to be an expert, but this is the first I've heard of Eurocopter being involved with the EH101 in any way (other than as a competitor) ... Augusta and Westland partnered on the EH101, then were merged to become AugustaWestland, then the GKN (Westland's parent) share was sold to Finmeccanica (Augusta's parent).  I think you are a little confused here.


----------



## childs56

Maybe I am confused, about the exact ownership and or the co-operation between the companys who made the Cormoront. Seems to me that Eurocopter owned a bit of Agusta Westland along with having some engineering aspect of the Cormoront.


----------



## Kirkhill

Courtesy of Paul Beaver: "Modern Military Helicopters" Patrick Stephens Limited 1987



> The EH 101 is a unique international co-operation venture between Italy (Augsta) and the United Kingdom (Westland) to provide a new generation helicopter for the Italian Navy (MMI) and the Royal Navy (RN).



Just had to dig it out from under the door it was propping up.


----------



## Zoomie

The British have recently acquired six (6) EH-101's from Denmark - they are standing up a new squadron of Merlin's.

Gully's note was spot-on and spoken from the direct coal face.  AWIL is really our biggest obstacle and we (CF & IMP) are working with this machine to the best possible way.  Shag pilots love the machine - the rest of us rub it in that their radios suck and going away on a long range trip involves getting off the Island - but that thing will fly in weather that makes the Buffalo come close to falling out of the sky.

90% of the high seas dramatic rescues that happen out West are done off that platform - Gully has been there and done that with them.


----------

