CH-148 Cyclone Progress

[Sub_Guy]

"Stealth"?

I never once thought of the NH-90 as stealthy..

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Really? ???    The fact that "brochure" is actually in the filename should make one pause and contemplate...

Lessons Learned #1 in aircraft manufacture: Don't put a planned in-service year anywhere in the aircraft's name, i.e. NH90 > NH90+17 = NH2007

The Long, Sad Tale of Germany's Botched Helicopter Buy

:2c:

G2G

I picked the pic only because it listed both the Army and MH models.  I've never looked into the Army version, but the little I know about the MH all seems good.

As I said, they're already flying. 

 

[Good2Golf]

I picked the pic only because it listed both the Army and MH models.  I've never looked into the Army version, but the little I know about the MH all seems good.

As I said, they're already flying. 

Yup...they went IOC only 22 years after project initiation...yay!  Using a similar timeline, Sikorsky could have until 2026 to get it right, so they could beat NH-90 by a healthy margin.

In the platinum category of fast procurement are Chretien's 2 x CL-604s, time from Contract Award to FOC...48 hours.  C-17 next, then everyone else.  Want more international examples?  EFA-2000...oops, there's that planned IOC year in name issue again, etc...

Regards
G2G

 

[Colin Parkinson]

To be fair, no one would have expected Sikorsky to struggle so much to produce a marine ASW helicopter, when they for all intents and purpose invented the role.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Yup...they went IOC only 22 years after project initiation...yay!  Using a similar timeline, Sikorsky could have until 2026 to get it right, so they could beat NH-90 by a healthy margin.

In the platinum category of fast procurement are Chretien's 2 x CL-604s, time from Contract Award to FOC...48 hours.  C-17 next, then everyone else.  Want more international examples?  EFA-2000...oops, there's that planned IOC year in name issue again, etc...

Regards
G2G

My info was about 6-7 years from idea to flying.  Something like that.  Source;  Janes.  I had to research the NFH for a NATO ex RECCE briefing when I was doing my upgrade a few years ago.  :dunno:

I didn't look much into the green machine version...just knew one or a few of the 4 countries involved went with both the Army and MH versions.

But...maybe this is a very myopic assessment, the countries involved were flying them for ASW 2 years ago on a NATO ex.  I did the same NATO ex again very, very recently, and the Sea King was still flying off our CPF that was there to play.

 

[Good2Golf]

...and there are not just "two" variants.  There are 18 unique high and low cabin NFH, TTH, TTT, TTT/SAR, TTT/ASW configurations...for 14 nations.  Some nations have three or more sub-variants.  Hardly "2 jacks for all trades."  Some nations were only getting their helos in the mid-20-teens for an aircraft that started design in 1985.  Hardly the paragon of pristine helicopter development and fielding.

Re: 148 - For folks to believe that the Government of the day didn't understand that making a new aircraft, albeit one that looked externally similar to its civilian sibling, would be far from simple, but was well worth the "anything but the EH-101 again!" could be seen to be quite naive.  Cynical or not, I have a hard time believing that the 148 wasn't the result of the LPC's "anything to save face after an election promise" course of action.  Chretien's "Read my lips, no new 'elicopters" was simply an earlier version of Trudeau's "No F-35s"  In fairness to the young Sun King, at least he smiled when he made his promise.

:2c:

G2G

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I didn't look into all the configs (in detail), just the NFH.  NFH prototype (produced in Italy) was flying NLT Dec 1999.  First Italian Navy NFH made initial flight from Vergiate on 15 December 2005.  Netherlands
became the first customer to receive NFH version on 21 April 2010, with France following suit on 5 May 2010.  Maiden operational deployment by NFH version accomplished by Netherlands, which embarked one NH90 on frigate HrMs De Ruyter on 20 January 2013;  France declared NFH variant (Step A MOC) operational on 8 December 2011.

Granted, initial studies ('83-'84) to Dec '99 is a long time.  But, in the doc I have (19 pages) it seems most of the initial time wasted was finalizing 'who was in, who was out' (Canada had withdrawn before '83 according to my info).

Prototype ('99) to first NFH ('10) to first MOC and FOC still seem to be respectable timelines, IMO but...I'm a button-monkey, not a procurement guy.  But they're 4 years of operational flying ahead of us.  What was the date given for FOC on Cyclone...2025?

Don't get me wrong here though...I'd of loved to have worked co-op on MANTA with a 148 instead of a 124.  And I certainly feel for the folks in the MH world *living it*.

 

[Good2Golf]

I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs.  148 is late...sure, but ask NATO nations if they were happy that a helicopter targeted for delivery in the 1990 never became IOC until the late-2000, early-20-teens.  The lopsided critical eye is the same on seized-rotor aircraft - F-35 is late....sure, but so to were Rafale, EFA 2000/EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon, Gripen, Raptor, J-11, PAK-DA, etc..............

I know one thing, if I ever form an aerospace company to build aircraft, I'm sure as heck not putting the intended IOC year anywhere in the aircraft's name!

Regards
G2G

 

[Kirkhill]

I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs.  148 is late...sure, but ask NATO nations if they were happy that a helicopter targeted for delivery in the 1990 never became IOC until the late-2000, early-20-teens.  The lopsided critical eye is the same on seized-rotor aircraft - F-35 is late....sure, but so to were Rafale, EFA 2000/EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon, Gripen, Raptor, J-11, PAK-DA, etc..............

I know one thing, if I ever form an aerospace company to build aircraft, I'm sure as heck not putting the intended IOC year anywhere in the aircraft's name!

Regards
G2G

1970 was a very good year.

MBT 70 (1963 to Never - although it did eventually lead to Abrams and Leo 2)

FH70 (1963 to 1978 - almost on time, same decade at least)

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

There's 4 more in the pipe for delivery this year as well.

So that would make 15 deliveries by end of this year, of which likely 3 will remain in the test programs and 12 will be in hangars?  Wow.  That would make for an embarrassing photo for the Liberal Party.

 

[YZT580]

On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

 

[FSTO]

On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

Those were back in the days when Canada actually took its defence responsibilities seriously. Today? Not so much.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

On the other side of the fence sits the Argus.  If memory serves me it was less than one year from conception to first flight and IOC occurred within another year.  And for those interested, we actually did by an interim aircraft to bridge the gap between the Lanc and the Argus; namely the neptune

725 days?  Birth of a Giant.

Of note, she was born from the Bristol Britannia.  "On March 28, 1957, the first flight of the new aircraft took place, lasting seventy-five minutes. It had taken three years to reach this stage, and a long period of testing still lay ahead.  The first squadron to receive the Argus was 405, at RCAF Station Greenwood. Along with other aircrew and staff officers, the Squadron's crews had been consulted frequently at various stages of construction, and were delighted to welcome the first of the new aircraft on 1 May, 1958. The aircraft was officially handed over to Maritime Air Command on 17 May, which was proclaimed "Argus Day" at Greenwood."

http://cp107argus.com/ArgusHistory/CP107History.html

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I get that, EITS, honestly, I do.  But I am also wary when folks seem to bash on Canadian programs (that no doubt have their issues), while not taking as equally critical a view of other like programs. 

In retrospect, I likely focus on the fact the NFH is flying and I've watched it on IFF and EO circa 2015 in the Med and...well our new aircraft are grounded and...struggling.  Not exactly textbook unbiased thinking on my part...

 

[Kirkhill]

EITS:

I believe the disconnect you are having is that the NH-90 (ca 1983) is a closer contemporary to the EH101 (AW101, CH-149, Merlin ca 1977) than to the CH-148 which was contracted in 2004 with virtually a clean slate. 

We (Canada) had options.  We just wasted 20 years worth of effort.

 

[rathawk]

There is absolutely neither glee nor prophetic joy of any kind for me to be able to sit back now and say "I warned you this would happen by choosing a paper MHP solution".  In my view, it's a Trumpian "very sad" situation that we are now in but one that any intelligent person should not have expected back in 2004.  I'm certain that we'll learn to live with this Cyclone pig in a poke for a time; we've always managed to get by with faulty or half-assed gear in the past until we simply couldn't accept it any longer.  Good thing that the free world does not have to rely upon Canada for its military capabilities.

 

[Infanteer]

I just ride in helicopters.

Did we go Tesla-powered Cadillac when we should have been looking at a Ford Focus?

 

[Loachman]

This is what the Chretien Liberals wanted instead of the EH-101 "Cadillac".

 

[Kirkhill]

I just ride in helicopters.

Did we go Tesla-powered Cadillac when we should have been looking at a Ford Focus  F250?

Maybe?

 

[NavyShooter]

Nope, we got sold an aircraft that existed on paper....and that we're the only user/buyer in the world for....

Orphan fleet.  Developed specifically for us.