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

CH-148 Cyclone Progress

Haletown said:
I have a memory of both parties agreeing to update the original spec to a new Fly By Wire design.  I seem to recall we got that upgrade as "a gimme" for accepting sched slippage.

When you factor in that the Cyclone is the H-92 which is based on the well known S-92, something went sideways.

The usual suspect in modern mil procurement is software. . .  might be a big player in this case as well . . .  esp the mission suite software.


I thought I had read that there was a significant engine upgrade issue....that the contract was signed based on a mission payload of 'X', and post-contract the payload was upped to 'X + 500lbs' or something....which required a new higher output engine (and mechanicals). 

Does that ring any bells with anyone?


Matthew.
 
Haletown said:
anyone know the background on this ?

How much of the delay is the helicopter and how much is the mission equipment?

How much of the delay is Sikorsky screwing the pooch and how much is DND spec changing, ECR/ECP dicking around?

Tough to say. There has been some gold plating going on, but its hard to tell who is at fault or if they had a serious effect on the program. However the problem with the program probably can be largely laid at its outset. To meet the GoC's requirements Sikorsky offered a modification of the S-92 Cougar helicopter. This was rated as a "low risk" design. What did it entail? The replacement of the engine, avionics, rotor and other segments, structural reinforcement of the airframe, the addition of weapon systems, and a bunch of other milspec things. So basically the entire aircraft was redesigned. Alot of the subsequent DND mandated changes has been in response to development problems or omissions.

In reality this was a full blown development program. Sikorsky should have never been sold as one, and DND should have never accepted its characterization as one. There were several legitimate competitors that could have done the job. the AW101 (Merlin HM) would have made the most sense in this case; its proven and could create a larger maintenence pool with the cormorants. This could have helped drive down costs for both aircraft.

If you want a parallel, look at the now cancelled Nimrod MRA4 programme in the UK; Originally sold as a low risk modification of a current aircraft, it ballooned into a multibillion dollar disaster.

 
This might eventually provide some answers.


Ottawa hires consultant to study if Sikorsky can deliver promised helicopters
By James Cudmore, CBC News Posted: Jun 25, 2013 8:25 PM ET
The decades-long project to replace Canada's 50-year-old Sea King helicopters has hit another snag, with the government now hiring an independent expert to study whether helicopter-maker Sikorsky is even capable of delivering a replacement as promised.

CBC News has learned that Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose has gone outside government and hired a consultant to study Sikorsky's work, and Canada's contract, to determine whether it's even possible for the U.S. helicopter giant to deliver the aircraft Canada ordered.

The details of the hire — or the review — are not publicly available and Ambrose's office has yet to provide more information, but Ambrose herself offered the news after questions from the CBC about Sikorsky and its contract.

"I have employed the services of an independent consultant and contractor to undertake a review of the ability of this company to deliver this to the government," Ambrose said.

The Defence Department's maritime helicopter project is the successor to the failed procurement of 50 EH-101 helicopters promised in 1992 by former prime minister Brian Mulroney. That program was cancelled in 1993 as part of an election promise made by Jean Chrétien.

For years, the program lay dormant as Canada's Sea King helicopters slowly gathered wear and tear.

In 2004, Sikorsky won a formal contract to provide 28 new CH-148 Cyclone helicopters to Canada.


www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...replacement-contract-sikorsky.html

 
HB_Pencil said:
Tough to say. There has been some gold plating going on, but its hard to tell who is at fault or if they had a serious effect on the program. However the problem with the program probably can be largely laid at its outset. To meet the GoC's requirements Sikorsky offered a modification of the S-92 Cougar helicopter. This was rated as a "low risk" design. What did it entail? The replacement of the engine, avionics, rotor and other segments, structural reinforcement of the airframe, the addition of weapon systems, and a bunch of other milspec things. So basically the entire aircraft was redesigned. Alot of the subsequent DND mandated changes has been in response to development problems or omissions.

In reality this was a full blown development program. Sikorsky should have never been sold as one, and DND should have never accepted its characterization as one. There were several legitimate competitors that could have done the job. the AW101 (Merlin HM) would have made the most sense in this case; its proven and could create a larger maintenence pool with the cormorants. This could have helped drive down costs for both aircraft.

If you want a parallel, look at the now cancelled Nimrod MRA4 programme in the UK; Originally sold as a low risk modification of a current aircraft, it ballooned into a multibillion dollar disaster.

Completely and utterly unacceptable to the Chretien Liberals who cancelled the EH101 (Merlin) and signed the Cyclone contract
 
Quite the sad procurement saga . . .

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/canadas-ch-148-cyclones-better-late-than-never-05223/


 
Colin P said:
this is the company that pretty much invented the maritime helicopter niche, screwing the pooch is unacceptable for them.  Igor is likely flopping around in his grave at this.

If you had told me when we first selected the Cyclone that Sikorsky couldn't deliver; I wouldn't of believed you. This is an embarrassment for the company that wrote the book on HELOs.
 
h3tacco said:
Recent Article in Vertical

http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/24552#.UeNgx421H25

Thanks. I have a feeling I know which Sr officer/pilot they were quoting. Like him, I too dearly love the old girl. She's a hard worker. The harder you push her the better she flies. It'll be a sad day for the RCAF and RCN when she lifts off a flight deck for the last time. I hope I'm there to retire with her.
 
UnwiseCritic said:
To me this just means the seakings were just 50 years ahead of their time, good buy. ;D

An awesome buy. Hopefully we get the same value with the new helo.
 
h3tacco said:
Recent Article in Vertical

http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/24552#.UeNgx421H25

This quote from that article makes a valid point that few have considered;

"When you see the two aircraft side by side, you can't even compare them; they're night and day. I love the Sea King dearly; it's carried me all over the world and brought me home. But if I was going to war tomorrow and had a choice, I'd pick the undelivered, uncertified aircraft, because it's so much more capable. We're talking about the technology jump from our current CF-18 to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter being huge? This is akin to jumping from the CF-104 Starfighter to the F-35. The 104 and the Sea King were both first delivered in 1963!"
 
it was reported in Defense News  10 hours ago:

Canada Refuses To Accept Sikorsky Helos

it was written by DP, so no link. I read the article and nothing definitive to back up the headline. Possible a rehash.
 
Rifleman62: Indeed largely of this June 25 CBC piece:

Sea King helicopter replacement hits a new snag
Ottawa hires consultant to study if Sikorsky can deliver promised helicopters

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/25/pol-sea-king-replacement-contract-sikorsky.html

Mark
Ottawa
 
I read the CBC  piece, among others, looking for confirmation of DP's article.  Posted just in case there was something rather than a rehash.

Hard to make a buck sometimes.
 
MarkOttawa said:
Rifleman62: Indeed largely of this June 25 CBC piece:

Sea King helicopter replacement hits a new snag
Ottawa hires consultant to study if Sikorsky can deliver promised helicopters

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/25/pol-sea-king-replacement-contract-sikorsky.html

Mark
Ottawa
Also in the first paragraph of the verticalmag.com article referenced earlier in the thread (highlights mine) ....
There are four Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclones at Canadian Forces Base Shearwater, N.S., the vanguard of an eventual fleet of 28 replacements for Canada's 50-year-old Sikorsky CH-124 Sea Kings. All of those Shearwater Cyclones remain the property of Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., as do five more in a secure facility in Plattsburgh, N.Y., at a former U.S. Air Force base located about 30 kilometres (20 miles) from the Canadian border. Two more are undergoing testing at Sikorsky's facilities in Florida and Connecticut, and the rest of the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) machines are in final assembly. But to date, not one of them has been accepted by Canada ....
 
Both sides seem more open to talking publicly lately....

http://skiesmag.com/news/articles/19521-cyclone-crew-training-to-begin-next-month.html
 
I'm not sure what to make of this, but it is reproduced, without further comment, under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/sea-kings-could-be-retired-sooner-under-proposal-from-us-aircraft-maker/article13472242/#dashboard/follows/
globe_logo.jpg

Sea Kings could be retired sooner under proposal from U.S. aircraft-maker

MURRAY BREWSTER
OTTAWA — The Canadian Press

Published Sunday, Jul. 28 2013

The Harper government has been asked to accept the air force’s long-delayed CH-148 Cyclone maritime helicopters as they are currently configured and gradually phase them into service using regular software upgrades intended to make the aircraft fully operational.

The proposal is being floated publicly by Sikorsky aircraft in the wake of a federal cabinet shuffle that has left both National Defence and Public Works with seasoned but not yet fully acclimatized ministers.

At the same time, the aircraft-maker and Defence have agreed to a separate plan that would allow flight testing to begin on four helicopters that have been delivered to the military air base in Shearwater, N.S. Twenty-eight of the aircraft have been ordered.

The evaluation, to begin in early August, inches the politically painful program ahead for the Conservative government, which has grown more impatient and vocal in its frustration over the replacement of decades-old Sea Kings.

The helicopters were first ordered in 2004 by Paul Martin’s Liberal government at a cost of nearly $3.2 billion — a figure which has now ballooned to $5.7 billion — and were supposed to be in service by 2008.

The failure to deliver new aircraft — detailed a few years ago in a scathing auditor general’s report — was underscored over the last few weeks with the grounding of the entire CH-124 Sea King fleet. One of the nearly 50-year-old helicopters was involved in a spectacular accident that saw the blades on one aircraft chipped away when the chopper unexpectedly careened forward.

Flight testing on the new Cyclones will begin even though the Defence Department has yet to formally accept the four aircraft that have been delivered.

Sikorsky spokesman Paul Jackson says the company is still in negotiations with the federal government on that aspect.

At the centre of the dispute is software to run the aircraft for the variety of missions it is expected to undertake.

Sikorsky has agreed to provide the basic program and upgrades every few months until the aircraft is fully “mission ready,” but the government — sticking to the letter of the contract — has refused to accept the aircraft until all the proper software has been installed.

“These aircraft, which are already there, can be performing service to the government in getting the Sea King fleet retired and out of service all the quicker,” Jackson said.

He said Sikorsky can foresee the Cyclone picking up some search-and-rescue duties in the meantime while it’s brought on stream, and the idea of gradual upgrades is something widely accepted in the U.S. defence industry.

The proposal puts the Harper government in a difficult position because the notion of introducing the aircraft through scheduled block software upgrades was the centrepiece of its F-35 stealth fighter plan — a program which is now on hold.

It also raises a host of potential legal problems because agreeing to Sikorsky’s plan could be a tacit acknowledgment that the Cyclones have been “under development,” which was not how the original contract and bidding process was structured.

Defence was asked to comment but did not respond.

Just before the cabinet shuffle, former Public Works minister Rona Ambrose reportedly ordered an outside evaluation of whether Sikorsky could deliver what it had promised.

United Technologies Corp., the parent company of Sikorsky Aircraft, struck a very optimistic tone with market analysts last week, saying the program is “gaining momentum” and even suggested that five more helicopters — already assembled and warehoused in New York State — could be flown to Nova Scotia to add to the training pool.

Greg Hayes, UTC’s chief financial officer, said two additional helicopters are being flight tested, and there is “a solid plan” to deliver eight more aircraft “going into the year,” for a total of 19 machines.

The nine remaining Cyclones are still on the assembly line, he said.

Hayes told analysts that “some issues” remain to be resolved with the Canadian government.

Aside from the issue of accepting the aircraft, the federal government and the manufacturer still faces the question of fines to be levied over delivery deadlines Sikorsky has missed.

To date, the aircraft-maker owes just under $86 million in penalties.

A senior defence official, speaking on background to The Canadian Press last year, said the government planned to collect the money by deducting the fines from in-service support payments once the helicopters are in fully operational.

Whether Sikorsky agrees with the plan is unclear.
 
Back
Top