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

CH-146 Griffon

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,733
Points
1,140
Um....yes?
Sf2, I think KevinB’s point was more about potential green-fleet use, vice the well-controlled use by a black fleet. Unless I misread his intent.

Yup, SOF will always have requirements for some items that aren't necessarily the best option outside that niche.
I was trying to be somewhat vague in the other posts about those roles.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,733
Points
1,140

One can dream.
One would wonder why the Aussies dumped them so late game, and opted for the 60 now - rather than suffering for a year or two and waiting for FVL to find winner - and then either getting cut rate hawks - or the more capable FVL winner.

As much as I like the Hawk - I wouldn't be cheering for Canada to dump the Griffon at this junction to buy 60's.
Better to see what comes out of the Bell/Sik FVL submissions IMHO

30, 20, even 10 years ago yeah it made sense to get 60's - now not so much.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,984
Points
1,360
Yup. 60s made sense right up until 29 April 1992 when Mulroney/Masse set the Griffon effort in motion.

Best now to see what FVL or NATO NGRC come up with.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,948
Points
1,260
One would wonder why the Aussies dumped them so late game, and opted for the 60 now - rather than suffering for a year or two and waiting for FVL to find winner - and then either getting cut rate hawks - or the more capable FVL winner.
Back to what they know?

The ARA and RAN flew them prior to the MRH-90s, and still do now. The Army flies S-70 Black Hawks while the RAN flies SH-60R Seahawks.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,733
Points
1,140
Back to what they know?

The ARA and RAN flew them prior to the MRH-90s, and still do now. The Army flies S-70 Black Hawks while the RAN flies SH-60R Seahawks.
That makes it even more odd -- I know the Aussie SOAR ran 60's - but never interacted with their regular army - so I didn't know the history.
One really wonders why one would dump the Hawk for the 90 in the first place.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,948
Points
1,260
That makes it even more odd -- I know the Aussie SOAR ran 60's - but never interacted with their regular army - so I didn't know the history.
One really wonders why one would dump the Hawk for the 90 in the first place.
From what I've read, the overarching idea was to replace them all with a common platform between the Army and Navy.

Guess how well that turned out.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,733
Points
1,140
From what I've read, the overarching idea was to replace them all with a common platform between the Army and Navy.

Guess how well that turned out.
About as well as the Griffon ;)

The S-70A is just the Export version of the 60, I'm surprised the Aussies didn't get the full US version - considering the S-70B was the export SeaHawk variant, and it looks like the Aussies had the actual Seahawks.
The mind boggling crap of export markets sigh.
 

h3tacco

Member
Reaction score
10
Points
230
About as well as the Griffon ;)

The S-70A is just the Export version of the 60, I'm surprised the Aussies didn't get the full US version - considering the S-70B was the export SeaHawk variant, and it looks like the Aussies had the actual Seahawks.
The mind boggling crap of export markets sigh.

Slight correction S-70 is the Sikorsky model number. This is internal to the company and all their products have some S- designation. H-60 (ie UH-60, MH-60, HH-60 etc) is the US DoD Designation. Sometimes foreign operators use the S- model number sometimes the US DoD model. Another couple examples the Sikorsky Sea King is S-61 is the US DoD H-3; the Sikorsky S-80 is the US DoD H-53E etc..

A US Army UH-60A/L/M etc is referred to internally at Sikorsky as a S-70 variant.
 
Last edited:

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,733
Points
1,140
Slight correction S-70 is the Sikorsky model number. This is internal to the company and all their products have some S- designation. H-60 (ie UH-60, MH-60, HH-60 etc) is the US DoD Designation. Sometimes foreign operators use the S- model number sometimes the US DoD model. Another couple examples the Sikorsky Sea King is S-61 is the US DoD H-3; the Sikorsky S-80 is the US DoD H-53E etc..

A US Army UH-60A/L/M etc is referred to internally at Sikorsky as a S-70 variant.
Agreed
I just found it odd that the Aussies referred to the Army Hawks as S-70A and their Navy Hawks as SH-60 SeaHawks - which led me to believe that they had been acquired differently.
The main difference being that "Commercial Export" versions can't have some integrated aspects (direct on bird weapon power etc.)
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,984
Points
1,360
How cold is it sitting in the door gunner position in a Griffon in March? :)
Depending on how many of the three integral layers of fire-retardant goretex flying clothing the DG is wearing, I'd go with "quite bearable." Notice that the air force allows people to wear gloves with all sorts of different headgear... ;)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,601
Points
1,160
Depending on how many of the three integral layers of fire-retardant goretex flying clothing the DG is wearing, I'd go with "quite bearable." Notice that the air force allows people to wear gloves with all sorts of different headgear... ;)

You fool! Look what you've done now ;)

angry homer simpson GIF
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,109
Points
1,010
How cold is it sitting in the door gunner position in a Griffon in March? :)
As others have already said: it depends.

I have hung out in the backdoor of a helicopter for large portions of my career. Wearing the winter flying pants and jacket (even the green legacy stuff), it was tolerable. The weak point for me was hands because preferred to wear standard flying gloves for dexterity.
 
Last edited:

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,200
Points
1,060
As others have already said: it depends.

I have hung out in the backdoor of a helicopter for large portions of my career. Wearing the winter flying pants and jacket (even the legacy stuff), it was green tolerable. The weak point for me was hands because preferred to wear standard flying gloves for dexterity.

I thought that is why God invented idiot strings?


1648134569856.png
 
Top