WOMBAT seams to fit, Waste Of Brains Money And Talent. Seriously other than keeping Queenslanders employed I can't see why we bought them. Blackhawk/Seahawk seemed the better (and proven) option; had the extra lift really been that critical then buy extra Chooks or even stick to the original plan and just buy an additional dozen hellos only, maybe the Merlin, and standardize on the S-70 derivatives
It has had bad press but one thinks that most new types have problems when they first come into service. I see that one problem NATO Helicopters do have is now they cannot keep up with orders, with something like 400 on order. I also read the the Merlin missed out on the Canadian ASR deal because of continuing problems with the aircraft and it's been in service since the 1990s. The Merlin is also three enginned so higher running costs. The Blackhawks cannot lift the same as the NH90s, so buying more Blackhawks means increased purchase and operational costs. The NH90 is new technology whereas the UH60, AW101, S70 etc are 1980 - 1990s design and tech.
Are they really that bad ? I can understand that a new platform would have some issues ,have read that a number of country's have had problems with them ,but i was under the impression Eurocopter would fix any issues over time?
Have a question regarding these new choppers. Are these aircraft marinized for regular use on the LHDs? Same question for the ARH Tigers. Some heavy seas will be throwing lots of spray around the deck. I have poured through most of the posts on this thread and have not seen anything. Apologies if I did miss the relevant information. Thanks.
The biggest problem is that they are just not suitable as battlefield helicopters. They will be great transport helicopters when they finally get sorted, but they are not the sort of thing you will want to be flying into a hot LZ.
The rival Black Hawk offer would have seen UH-60Ms assembled in Queensland as well. By Hellitech which is just down the road from Eurocopter in Brisbane anyway.
It wasn’t the extra lift that won it for the NH 90 but the argument that it was the new technology and would cost less to operate. The same argument that won Tiger for the ARH project.
Once again that’s Army’s fault for choking on the specifications writing. Only seem to have got it right once in the past 15 years and that was LAND 907.
The sad thing is I have heard that the LCHs actually have a fair bit of life left in them and that they would actually still be quite useful supporting operations off CI at the moment. i.e. seaworthy, reliable and can carry stuff.
I find this whole 10 year gap a bit odd.
Tiger's are not specifically marinised; but HAP experience in the Med has shown that there are no issues found to date when operating off a deck.
Decommisioning is not the problem as long as they stay where they are and not be disposed of (2 are currently in the parking bays at DNB).
Give them to the army or the navy reserve. I am certain the LCM 8 crews would love the upgrade and it would provide a better career path for any who wanted to stay on the water, I.e I imagine the army would use a WO2 to command a LCH vs a CPL for a LCM.
Funny how the army seems to trust senior NCO's with that sort of command responsibility but the navy doesn't.
I still have reservations on their use in our environment, big difference between the Mediterranean and the conditions we will use them in. Time will tell
A while back two were in Navy Reserve hands (80's) but were subsequently bought back into PNF service as they were just too useful. Nothing has changed really. They were effectively laid up as reserve boats and reactiated with not too much difficulty (compared to other platforms) so hopefully nobody is rushing to dispose of them.