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

MacKay orders review of spare part fleet for SAR

FormerHorseGuard

Sr. Member
Reaction score
13
Points
180
see the story here
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/mackay-orders-rcaf-to-take-another-look-at-used-us-presidential-choppers-206198361.html


sorry for bad typing but only one hand in use, one arm in cast.
never knew we had these airframes.
how hard to get airframe worthiess paper work done?
 

Jammer

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Anything can be made to fly again. The question is how much will it cost.
 
D

Don2wing

Guest
The answer to your question on if these airframes are flyable is yes. According to the manufacturer in  an interview with Vertical mag        http://www.verticalmag.com/features/features_article/vh-71s-for-canadian-service-.html#.UYby3cprZ2E    AugustaWestland would be happy to bring the airframes up to stuff.


http://www.verticalmag.com/features/features_article/vh-71s-for-canadian-service-.html#.UYby3cprZ2E
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
663
Points
860
Of course Augusta would be happy - such work means money for them.  And the need to ensure commonality with the current fleet would mean lots of work, probably at cost plus.

 

Ciskman

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The Griffon is a sad excuse for a SAR chopper. It's good to see the issue getting some attention.
 

Jammer

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I wouldn't slag the Griffon. It may not be as sexy as the Cormorant, but it can go into tighter places. Anyone who has been rescued by the Griffon would beg to differ. Keep in mind...the US Military use the Blackhawk/Seahawk/Jayhawk series aircraft...not much bigger than the Griffon. They don't have anything bigger used for SAR...at all.
 

Ciskman

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Jammer said:
I wouldn't slag the Griffon. It may not be as sexy as the Cormorant, but it can go into tighter places. Anyone who has been rescued by the Griffon would beg to differ. Keep in mind...the US Military use the Blackhawk/Seahawk/Jayhawk series aircraft...not much bigger than the Griffon. They don't have anything bigger used for SAR...at all.

Unfortunately those who have been rescued would not know the difference, those who have spent the night waiting for the weather to clear up are the ones with the better opinion. Landing in tighter areas is not a factor with a hoist equipped helicopter. No de-icing, no weather radar and cabin space so limited that only one critically ill patient can fit, makes the Griffon a poor choice for Canadian SAR...IMO of course  ;)
 

PAdm

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
HappyWithYourHacky said:
The Griffon is a sad excuse for a SAR chopper. It's good to see the issue getting some attention.

Better a helicopter perhaps not ideal for SAR than one not yet delivered or merely being discussed...  :2c:
 

Ciskman

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PAdm said:
Better a helicopter perhaps not ideal for SAR than one not yet delivered or merely being discussed...  :2c:

Agreed. I'm just pleased to see the issue being looked into. Hopefully a viable solution will be found.
 

Jammer

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
3-4 Airframes back in the air is not unreasonable to hope for...Perhaps raise another Sqn?
 

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
42
Points
280
Jammer said:
3-4 Airframes back in the air is not unreasonable to hope for...Perhaps raise another Sqn?

I think that one of the objectives is to transition 424 Squadron off the Griffon and back to the Cormorant. As others have stated, the Griffon has limitations in the RWSAR role.
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
27
Points
430
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/45112027#/45112027/18

IMP says Cormorant fleet can be brought up to 21. Was that the plan, I thought these were spare parts.
 
Top