CH-146 Griffon

[PMars]

Speculation exists that the Griffon fleet will be reduced 20-25%.

Now, the AF site says 75 Griffs are in service; media reports generally say 85. The count should be 98 including stored machines (there were 100 purchased for the CF and two were lost.) So one argument is that the CF has already reduced the fleet by 25%.

However, if we take the 75 figure and subtract 20%, we end up with 60 machines.

Base support and SAR require 12 (four for Cold Lake [including one on det at Moose Jaw], three for Goose, three for 424 vice Cormorants and two for AETE) and that leaves 48.

Add nine to 439 for its new deployment role and there are 36 (three existing machines plus nine).

Reduce the two air res squadrons to five each and there are now 26. Assign ten to 403 for training and there are 16 left to divide between 408, 427 and 430.

That does not seem to leave enough machines unless each of the reg force squadrons get five each. That would leave one over for a spare. It would allow for a lot of folks to be detached for Chinook training in advance of the machines arriving, but that is at least three years out.

 

[geo]

part of the argument for the reduction goes with the addition of the CH47 fleet.
do we need as many griffons if we have chinooks

Once we get the CH47s, will we need gunships Cobras or A10ish kinda vehicle to ride shotgun?

Does that mean the griffons will be sold off or does it mean that the Griffs will be transfered to such organisations as the CCG, the RCMP, OPP/QPF.....?

 

[Sf2]

439 new deployment role?

What does that mean?

 

[armyvern]

Moderator warning:

Lanes...stay in your lanes.

The Army.ca Staff

 

[Welshy]

Your estimates seem a little extreme. Right now there are 67 aircraft under 1 wing doing tac hel. I really couldn't see them getting rid of any of those aircraft any time soon, because they are heavily used as it is. There will be a need for griffins as they perform as different role than the Chinooks, not to mention, it will be a quite a few years until the Chinooks squadrons will be fully operational

 

[Mortar guy]

WARNING - Following comments are not in my lane by G2G can correct me if I'm Ray Oliver

The Griffon fleet will stay steady at about 64 airframes in 1 Wing although there is talk of configuring the remaining a/c as I-BRUH or Interim Battlefield Reconnaissance and Utility Helicopter (IIRC). They are to get sensors and weapons to enable them to act as armed escorts to the CH-147s.

The reserve squadrons will be reduced/eliminated as well.

Sound right G2G?

MG

 

[Welshy]

I forgot to mention that 17 Chinooks will hardly be enough to replace or severely reduce the Griffin fleet

 

[Strike]

PMars,

Keep in mind that some of the aircraft that were "in storage" have been (are being?) sent to Portage for the wings course and I don't believe they are being considered in the reduction.

dan, why would we want aircraft that are no longer being used?  There is a reason they are getting rid of them -- they are OLD!  Take away the cool factor for a bit, which I suspect is the only reason you want to see them in Canadian airspace.  There is absolutely no reason why the Griffon could not be used as an escort, provided it was fitted with the right equipment and tactics put in place for such.

Edited to add:  BTW, if you want to discuss Canada purchasing attack helicopters, suggest you contribute to that thread, and not this one.  As for the spelling, consider every forum being written in the english language an english forum.

And to everyone else...it's spelled "Griffon."

 

[pipstah]

A little question for you guys (strike, G2G, Inch, Zoomie and whoever can answer ), I'm just wondering about the speed of the griffons fleet compared to the chinooks. Wouldn't it be too slow for the chinooks? I'm trying to compare those two aircrafts but I do lack the expertise of helicopters world I would like that if anyone can light my lantern it would be greatly appreciated

 

[Sf2]

Griffon top speed - 140 kts
Chinook - 170 kts (according to a quick google)

 

[dan_282]

arnt the chinooks gunna be second hand?

 

[KevinB]

arnt the chinooks gunna be second hand?

NO - the hooks are new off the assemly line

Secondly the CH146 Griffon buy was for 200 airframe -- what happened to the others -- or did the other 100 never happen?

 

[pipstah]

Thanks SF2.... have any idea about the manouevering speed of those two ?

 

[Sf2]

There's no manouevering speed per se.....especially with a helo - you can do whatever you want between 0 and 140 kts in a griffon!!

 

[pipstah]

DOH! I will have to go read somes documents about helicopter aviation because I know nothing on rotary wing  ;D as you can see   

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

Everything you ever wanted to know, but were afraid to ask:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/index.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/index.html

 

[armyvern]

arnt the chinooks gunna be second hand?

Dan,

Here's how it is at Army.ca...and many of the users here have given you nice hints and advice already. Listen to it.

Use your spellchecker, no MSN speak, use proper grammar/punctuation/capitals etc.

You would have received the "Must Read" notification upon joining the forum, I suggest that you go back and read it again.

Try this:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html
Consider this your freebie, you've had a few in this thread already.

The Army.ca Staff

 

[Globesmasher]

Do you think our forces have the option of buying state of the art?

Yes - we just purchased the C-17, brand new block 17 models fresh off the assembly line.
ACP-T will see the acquisition of the C-130 J.  They don't come much newer than that.
FWSAR will be modern.
The avionics in the Cormorant is pretty impressive.
The proposed Sea King replacement, S-92 is about to roll off the drawing board.

There's very modern equipment in the pipe coming down to us.

 

[Good2Golf]

WARNING - Following comments are not in my lane by G2G can correct me if I'm Ray Oliver

The Griffon fleet will stay steady at about 64 airframes in 1 Wing although there is talk of configuring the remaining a/c as I-BRUH or Interim Battlefield Reconnaissance and Utility Helicopter (IIRC). They are to get sensors and weapons to enable them to act as armed escorts to the CH-147s.

The reserve squadrons will be reduced/eliminated as well.

Sound right G2G?

MG

MG, you da joint-integrated-interoperational-combat operations understanding man!  I-BRUH leading to BRUH as MHLH comes on line with an MHLH/BRUH/SOA package of operators, yup....sounds about right.  8)  Don't know what's going to happen with the non-tactical folks, though....  ???

PMars, do you mind if I ask why you started your mission analysis with the CSS squadrons having priority?  To end your analysis with 16 Griffon left over for the combat operators seems a bit strange.  That's a COA that is not at the head of the pack for presentation to CAS or the CDS methinks.

G2G

 

[Good2Golf]

A little question for you guys (strike, G2G, Inch, Zoomie and whoever can answer ), I'm just wondering about the speed of the griffons fleet compared to the chinooks. Wouldn't it be too slow for the chinooks? I'm trying to compare those two aircrafts but I do lack the expertise of helicopters world I would like that if anyone can light my lantern it would be greatly appreciated

Pipstah, without getting into specifics, the limiting factor in aviation packages is almost always the shooter.  Hook is fast when it's not slinging.  Utility is middle of the pack (Griff, Hawk, Puma, etc...) and the guns usually have so much stuff hanging off them that everyone else slows down when element integrity is required.  Clean, you'll see 130-150 out of a 'hook and they'll pull G along with the best of them. The Griff isn't bad, as you know...element form speeds are not "significantly" less than Vne anyway.

G2G