CH-148 Cyclone Progress

[Nvlgzr]

You forgot about the fatal CH-113 crash, which forced them to replace the remaining CH-113s with the same helicopters they canceled years earlier.

Yeah I was referring to both SAR (CH113) and ASW (SeaKings) roles. The EH101 was originally ordered by Mulroney’s government for replacing both roles . Jean Chretian cancelled the contract (35 airframes) that covered both roles. The government had to pay a huge cancellation fee as a result. And then as you said, there was a crash. The government had to back pedal and ordered just enough for SAR. The navy (Okay Airforce) was short changed and eventually stuck with the Sea Kings for many more years. After all, they just got new ASW ships, what more could they need?

 

[KevinB]

There was a competition. The “Cadillacs “ won. (Why are some Canadian military contracts called Cadillac?) Chrétien didn’t like the results and canceled the contract, paid a penalty, then ordered just enough for SAR mission leaving the navy in a terrible position. Now we’re back where we started. Just like the subs. The Vic’s were supposed to be a temporary measure.

I’m talking about a brand new - as in FY26 or so program.

The CH-148 wasn’t supposed to be an interim, unfortunately Canada ended up with an orphan (hint Canada isn’t big enough to support an orphan fleet, and as such should never be a first adopter).
The hope was that many other nations would leap at the CH-148 as it is the ‘big brother’ of the Blackhawk platform, and for nations that wanted a SeaKing replacement to be bigger the than the SeaHawk/OceanHawks it offered a American option in terms of size. Especially when the part of the original EH-101provider was in questionable financial condition (which the Westland Augusta merger solved).

As soon as Canada was left with an orphan, Sikorsky saw the writing on the wall and realized that the CH-148 was going to be a financial burden, and the structure of the contract seems to have allowed them to minimize further financial risk and place it all on the CAF.

To me the 148 is a case of throwing good money after bad. The quicker it can be divested the better.

 

[Nvlgzr]

I’m talking about a brand new - as in FY26 or so program.

The CH-148 wasn’t supposed to be an interim, unfortunately Canada ended up with an orphan (hint Canada isn’t big enough to support an orphan fleet, and as such should never be a first adopter).
The hope was that many other nations would leap at the CH-148 as it is the ‘big brother’ of the Blackhawk platform, and for nations that wanted a SeaKing replacement to be bigger the than the SeaHawk/OceanHawks it offered a American option in terms of size. Especially when the part of the original EH-101provider was in questionable financial condition (which the Westland Augusta merger solved).

As soon as Canada was left with an orphan, Sikorsky saw the writing on the wall and realized that the CH-148 was going to be a financial burden, and the structure of the contract seems to have allowed them to minimize further financial risk and place it all on the CAF.

To me the 148 is a case of throwing good money after bad. The quicker it can be divested the better.

Agree with you on the CH148. But I think we’re going to end up nursing it along for many years until we loose another aircraft and crew. The politicians don’t understand the saying, “throwing good money after bad”. My questions regarding the SeaHawk are: 1) Given Trump’s present poor treatment of Canada, do we want to buy more ITAR equipment as you are aware there has been a lot of negative talk about the F35. contract. 2) The Seahawk lost to the EH101 in the original competition. Would we see similar results in a new competition?

 

[KevinB]

Agree with you on the CH148. But I think we’re going to end up nursing it along for many years until we loose another aircraft and crew. The politicians don’t understand the saying, “throwing good money after bad”. My questions regarding the SeaHawk are: 1) Given Trump’s present poor treatment of Canada, do we want to buy more ITAR equipment as you are aware there has been a lot of negative talk about the F35. contract. 2) The Seahawk lost to the EH101 in the original competition. Would we see similar results in a new competition?

I think you are going to see a lot of turn around with POTUS. The Republican Party is starting to get some traction against some of his poorer policies and personnel picks. He seems to have a much better relationship with your new PM than the previous one, which I think made a lot of issues far bigger than they should have been. Like to or not your tied to us, so I don’t see ITAR issues to be a real problem.

All that said, I’m not a MH guy, so I don’t know if technology changes have made the 60 more compatible with the CAF’s MH needs.

 

[SupersonicMax]

It's funny. This platform gets a lot of hate on this forum, but the aircrew I've spoken with seem to like it. It's not perfect, but most of the complaints are around systems. Mechanically they seem to be quite robust. Are there any Cyclone aircrew on here that can comment?

In an environment in which sensors and systems win battles, the Cyclone may be mechanically sound (but from my limited experience with the Cyclone fleet, I don’t believe this is true), but without effective sensors and systems to process data into information, and share that information, it is almost useless.