• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Better roles for the CH-149

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,407
Points
940
The disaster began with PM Chretien when he cancelled the original project in 1993 for 28 Petrels/15 Chimos for $4.4 B and paying $500M(maybe just $197M) in cancellation fees. It actually began earlier when PM Campbell reduced the order from 35/15 for $5.8B.

It continued when the 15 scaled down CH-149 were purchased.

In 2004 the 28 CH-148 were purchased

So in my mind it's just one long never ending story, that is bound to get worse once we have to start paying for maintaining the Cyclone fleet as well
How about replacing the Cormorants with dedicated SAR versions of the Cyclones?
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
97
Points
280
How about replacing the Cormorants with dedicated SAR versions of the Cyclones?

Would they be S-92's or H-92's or actual Cyclones without the mission kit I wonder? It's my understanding that Sikorsky offerred something like that instead of upgrading the Comorants.

I think I would have preferrd that PM Harper cancelled the Sikorsky contract in 2013 and went back to the EH-101. Cancellation fees notwithstanding
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
2,040
Points
1,160
How about replacing the Cormorants with dedicated SAR versions of the Cyclones?
It would actually make more sense to buy more CH-147Fs as they were derived from the USAF CSAR-X HH-47 - includes unparalleled hot and high performance with rock-solid tandem-rotor stability, an advanced multi-spectral EO/IR sensor, far greater range and endurance than any other CAF helicopter, advanced operationally-proven multi-mode autopilot, just add a hoist and you have a super-Labrador on steroids that already has an established in-service support program that has options to scale up.

It would be the best “new helicopter” option for what the RCAF/CAF and Canadian government would need, but I do think that “new helicopter” is not a better option than sorting out the CH-149.

$0.02

G2G
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
97
Points
280
It would actually make more sense to buy more CH-147Fs as they were derived from the USAF CSAR-X HH-47 - includes unparalleled hot and high performance with rock-solid tandem-rotor stability, an advanced multi-spectral EO/IR sensor, far greater range and endurance than any other CAF helicopter, advanced operationally-proven multi-mode autopilot, just add a hoist and you have a super-Labrador on steroids that already has an established in-service support program that has options to scale up.

It would be the best “new helicopter” option for what the RCAF/CAF and Canadian government would need, but I do think that “new helicopter” is not a better option than sorting out the CH-149.

$0.02

G2G
What do you think the end result is here. Do we settle on the upgrade minus the new helicopters to get the project under budget and maybe look to acquire the new ones later or go back and seek more money?
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
2,040
Points
1,160
Personally, I think the compromise will be to keep current fleet size, and pare back the scope of the upgrade content of the remaining 14. This will also mean the CH-146 will likely stay at Trenton.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,845
Points
890
Or, hear me out, they'll scrub down requirements and simultaneously seek additional funding, and come up with a compromise to deliver an affordable upgrade and increased fleet size.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
483
Points
880
It would actually make more sense to buy more CH-147Fs as they were derived from the USAF CSAR-X HH-47 - includes unparalleled hot and high performance with rock-solid tandem-rotor stability, an advanced multi-spectral EO/IR sensor, far greater range and endurance than any other CAF helicopter, advanced operationally-proven multi-mode autopilot, just add a hoist and you have a super-Labrador on steroids that already has an established in-service support program that has options to scale up.

It would be the best “new helicopter” option for what the RCAF/CAF and Canadian government would need, but I do think that “new helicopter” is not a better option than sorting out the CH-149.

$0.02

G2G
I would not want to be wounded and hoisted aboard a Chinook! Quite the downdraft!!

Why not get the Blackhawk-series (Jayhawk to replace Cormorant/SAR Griffon, Seahawk for maritime helos, Pavehawk to replace SOF Griffons and Blackhawk to replace the Tac Hel Griffons)? Seems like we could have some economy of efforts with such a concept??
 

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
451
Points
980
I honestly think we spend an order of magnitude more on the risk abatement part (project management) than the actual risk.

If it was $800M in 1993 I wonder what the running total would be up to today

I'm not sure what "risk abatement" has to do with wasting $1.3B just to gain more votes.

I note that the forced-confiscation-of-private-property-with-partial-financial-"compensation", or what this current corrupt and power-seeking-at-all-cost (to us, not them) Liberal government euphemistically and dishonestly calls a "buy-back", has been estimated by the PBO to cost $756M.

That amount of money - which ignores the huge budgetary bloat of the last Lieberal attack on legal gunowners and a similar inevitable one this time - would pay for a good chunk of the CH149 upgrade and fleet augmentation.

"If it only saves just one life it's worth it" was their constant chorus used to tout the Firearms Act.

What would be the most-life-saving use of that $756M?

Which will most likely be given the priority?

"The SAR community is asking for more than we can give..."
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
97
Points
280
Personally, I think the compromise will be to keep current fleet size, and pare back the scope of the upgrade content of the remaining 14. This will also mean the CH-146 will likely stay at Trenton.

I'm not sure what "risk abatement" has to do with wasting $1.3B just to gain more votes.

I note that the forced-confiscation-of-private-property-with-partial-financial-"compensation", or what this current corrupt and power-seeking-at-all-cost (to us, not them) Liberal government euphemistically and dishonestly calls a "buy-back", has been estimated by the PBO to cost $756M.

That amount of money - which ignores the huge budgetary bloat of the last Lieberal attack on legal gunowners and a similar inevitable one this time - would pay for a good chunk of the CH149 upgrade and fleet augmentation.

"If it only saves just one life it's worth it" was their constant chorus used to tout the Firearms Act.

What would be the most-life-saving use of that $756M?

Which will most likely be given the priority?

"The SAR community is asking for more than we can give..."
The risk abatement is the cost the government forces on itself to make sure these procurements go smoothly and correctly. Which would be fine except these projects haven't been going smoothly or correctly and instead drag on for 15, 20 years or more, imperiling the actual purpose for which they exist. It's not an insignificant thing at all if you start with $800M back in 1996 we have to be well over $2B if not $3B by now to purchase 42 helicopters over lets say 30 years. Then its questionable if the process even generates the right result, witness the Oshkosh decision versus the government on the MSVS-SMP. Or take the FWSAR process. In all these procurements I think its debatable whether theres anyone in the broader civil service that can even distinguish between the different contenders. Even after decisions have been made, I've never seen any of the metrics published that informed or determined that decision. Look at the upcoming F-18 replacement, we know that 60% is performance, 20% cost and 20% industrial benefits, but we don't know how those numbers are going to be arrived at, awarded, or judged. Are they going by simple rank system, are they weighted, ?

My point is simply that we are wasting Billions of dollars running a procurement system that doesn't work in any way, simply because someone is afraid giving the option of sole sourcing to the CAF because they might pick a C-27 instead of a C-295, eventhough they can't tell the difference between them or why one is better even after the fact. With the state of our equipment and procurement personel we should just be sole sourcing all of our major equipment purchases untill the procurement system has shown that it can manage effectively.

As an aside I don't think Chretien's or Trudeau's comments on the AW-101 or the F-35 made any difference on the election outcome it was just stupid politiking.

I also find it hard to believe that it is only going to cost $756 million for all the semi automatics out there
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
577
Points
1,060
I would not want to be wounded and hoisted aboard a Chinook! Quite the downdraft!!

Why not get the Blackhawk-series (Jayhawk to replace Cormorant/SAR Griffon, Seahawk for maritime helos, Pavehawk to replace SOF Griffons and Blackhawk to replace the Tac Hel Griffons)? Seems like we could have some economy of efforts with such a concept??
As much as the "breathing cargo" would love that, I'm willing to bet we're stuck with the Griffom for the next 20 years until we start looking at the winner of the US Army's future assault helicopter program.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,469
Points
1,040
As much as the "breathing cargo" would love that, I'm willing to bet we're stuck with the Griffom for the next 20 years until we start looking at the winner of the US Army's future assault helicopter program.
And then - like the Blackhawk - we'll buy something different.

🍻
 
Last edited:

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
226
Points
710
I would not want to be wounded and hoisted aboard a Chinook! Quite the downdraft!!

Why not get the Blackhawk-series (Jayhawk to replace Cormorant/SAR Griffon, Seahawk for maritime helos, Pavehawk to replace SOF Griffons and Blackhawk to replace the Tac Hel Griffons)? Seems like we could have some economy of efforts with such a concept??
That's a great idea...all those used Blackhawk variants will be available at a bargoon price when the US starts replacing them all with the new Future Vertical Lift helicopters.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
2,040
Points
1,160
I would not want to be wounded and hoisted aboard a Chinook! Quite the downdraft!!

An often bandied about misinformation.

Volume ≠ velocity.

A Chinook’s down wash was measured and fell within the USAF specs for SAR ops.

3D22C372-9952-48F8-A883-F649C1777A23.jpg

A RAF friend having flown both EH-101 and HC.2/3/6 Chinnies described the aircraft as sitting atop either a tornado (EH-101) or a Typhoon (Chinook), one more intense in a smaller area, the other disrupting a larger area but with less intensity. Interestingly, the RAF put the EH-101 only in Iraq, close to sea level, while the Chinook is quite at home in the mountains in challenging airflow. There are few (if any?) 113-qualified SAR pilots left, but those I spoke with at the time lamented losing the tandem rotor capability in the mountains. Anyway, if RW SAR folks wouldn’t want to fly a 147F, that’s their prerogative.

Why not get the Blackhawk-series (Jayhawk to replace Cormorant/SAR Griffon, Seahawk for maritime helos, Pavehawk to replace SOF Griffons and Blackhawk to replace the Tac Hel Griffons)? Seems like we could have some economy of efforts with such a concept??
That ship sailed on April 29, 1992…the day that Marcel Masse announced the Griffon acquisition. We’ll see V-280s to replace the Griffon in the 2030s before we ever see H60 type helos replacing the 146.

$0.02

Regards
G2G
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
584
Points
890
An often bandied about misinformation.

Volume ≠ velocity.

A Chinook’s down wash was measured and fell within the USAF specs for SAR ops.

View attachment 65721

A RAF friend having flown both EH-101 and HC.2/3/6 Chinnies described the aircraft as sitting atop either a tornado (EH-101) or a Typhoon (Chinook), one more intense in a smaller area, the other disrupting a larger area but with less intensity. Interestingly, the RAF put the EH-101 only in Iraq, close to sea level, while the Chinook is quite at home in the mountains in challenging airflow. There are few (if any?) 113-qualified SAR pilots left, but those I spoke with at the time lamented losing the tandem rotor capability in the mountains. Anyway, if RW SAR folks wouldn’t want to fly a 147F, that’s their prerogative.


That ship sailed on April 29, 1992…the day that Marcel Masse announced the Griffon acquisition. We’ll see V-280s to replace the Griffon in the 2030s before we ever see H60 type helos replacing the 146.

$0.02

Regards
G2G
Not meaning this in a cheeky way, but also they (Blackhawk family) aren’t manufactured by Bell. For economic and political reasons, Bell will have a solid lead on any of those competitions.

Mind you, I could be wrong. Neither the Cormorant or Cyclone was manufactured locally - so who knows.

Either way, we won’t see any of the Blackhawk series in Canadian service. Even if it does make sense in some ways.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
1,104
Points
940
Why not get the Blackhawk-series (Jayhawk to replace Cormorant/SAR Griffon, Seahawk for maritime helos, Pavehawk to replace SOF Griffons and Blackhawk to replace the Tac Hel Griffons)? Seems like we could have some economy of efforts with such a concept??
Can't speak to the others, but the SH-60 series runs a different crew composition than the Sea King/Cyclone. 3 (Pilot and ACSO in the front seats, AESOP in the middle) vs our 4.

We can change the crew composition to match, but from what I've heard is that the SH-60s push a significant portion of the processing tasks that a SK/Cyclone would perform to the ship.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,407
Points
940
I suspect they be happy to restart the line, how much commonality with the S-92 or VH-92? The S92 is in SAR service elsewhere.
 
Top