Status of the RAN Kaman SH-2G(A) helos?
- Thread starter Aardvark Fury
- Start date
I guess the RNZN could take some Penguins off the hands of the RAN, if the cost of integration isn't to high!Rocco_NZ said:I wouldn't be so sure. As this debacle has demonstrated, avionics choices make a lot of difference
Although I guess if the project does not go through money will be diverted to upgrade the Seahawks.
If the wikipedia verdict on the Super Sea Sprite is in any way valid then maybe the end of this project has some advantages. I quote:
"The SH-2F was infamous with Naval aircrew for its high accident rate and dismal 30+ maintenance-hour-per-flight-hour requirement, the highest of any aircraft in the Navy at the time this type was retired from active service. Many of the accidents and maintenance costs were attributed to the severe environment in which this aircraft was operated. This aircraft was "lovingly" referred to as the "Kaman Coffin" by enlisted Anti-Submarine Warfare System Operators."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SH-2_Sea_Sprite
I beleive the systems intergration was orginally in the hands of Litton but they were unable to make it work. As GF stated it is a software issue and who ever contracted to provided this should be liable for the stuff up.
"The SH-2F was infamous with Naval aircrew for its high accident rate and dismal 30+ maintenance-hour-per-flight-hour requirement, the highest of any aircraft in the Navy at the time this type was retired from active service. Many of the accidents and maintenance costs were attributed to the severe environment in which this aircraft was operated. This aircraft was "lovingly" referred to as the "Kaman Coffin" by enlisted Anti-Submarine Warfare System Operators."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SH-2_Sea_Sprite
I beleive the systems intergration was orginally in the hands of Litton but they were unable to make it work. As GF stated it is a software issue and who ever contracted to provided this should be liable for the stuff up.
abramsteve
New Member
What could the Seasprite possibly do that the Seahawk couldnt? I never understood that. Were they chosen only because of space concerns aboard the ANZACs, was it a cost based selection, or could they have genuinely been a more capable platform? IMO they were too small and not multi-purpose enough. If it wasnt for the cost and the embaressment I would not have a problem with them being disposed of. Maybe give them to the Kiwis to canniblise?
Long story short, the sprites were intended for another vessel the RAN was looking at getting which never eventuated!abramsteve said:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/06/16/1023864378971.html
"........We should never have bought them in the first place," said Aldo Borgu, an adviser to former defence ministers John Moore and Peter Reith and now a director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. The plan to build a unique helicopter was unrealistic and poorly executed, and was designed for a proposed Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) to be built jointly with Malaysia. The patrol vessel never got off the ground. "Once the OPV didn't go ahead, the rationale for buying a smaller helicopter disappeared," Mr Borgu said.
The patrol vessel project was a favourite of the Keating government, proposed by major ALP donor Transfield (now Tenix). The Defence Force hierarchy was always wary of a project it believed was driven by a desire for export dollars, and its fears increased after the Coalition's election in March, 1996.
Put simply, said one senior official, the boat was "neither fish nor fowl", too big for a conventional patrol boat, too small to combat a frigate. To expand its range and firepower it needed a helicopter, but the vessel was too small to carry the Seahawks already planned for the Anzac frigates.
Tenders were called for a small, state-of-the-art helicopter. The former chief of navy, Don Chalmers, confirmed that the Seasprites were acquired for the patrol vessels, OPV, although it was also planned to place some on the Anzacs. Despite this, Defence and the government failed to formally link the Seasprite and patrol vessel projects.
In Senate estimates hearings this month, Air Vice-Marshal Ray Conroy attempted to fudge over when the patrol vessel project was dropped. "That was effectively abandoned in February, 1998, when Malaysia selected a German tender over the one submitted by the Australian company," he said.
At that point, the argument for buying the Seasprite instead of more of the larger Seahawk collapsed, Air Vice-Marshal Conroy admitted. But he said the argument was hypothetical as the Seasprite contract was signed earlier, in June, 1997......"
rb
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
FYI, Aldo Borgu is now back in as Nelson's primary defence adviser.
As to the Seasprites, they were intended to provide the anti-aurface helo capability of RAN taskforces whilst Seahawk conducted it's main anti-submarine roles.
The Seasprite was envisaged also of providing OTH targetting capability for ANZAC's with it's telephonics radar for Harpoon II missiles, and also incorporated A2A modes to extend the practical range of ANZAC's ESSM capability (the missile has about 50k's range).
Seahawk's could be fairly easily upgraded to cover these roles too though, I'd imagine...
As to the Seasprites, they were intended to provide the anti-aurface helo capability of RAN taskforces whilst Seahawk conducted it's main anti-submarine roles.
The Seasprite was envisaged also of providing OTH targetting capability for ANZAC's with it's telephonics radar for Harpoon II missiles, and also incorporated A2A modes to extend the practical range of ANZAC's ESSM capability (the missile has about 50k's range).
Seahawk's could be fairly easily upgraded to cover these roles too though, I'd imagine...
From today's Australian Aviation Express
SEASPRITES FACE CANCELLATION? The RAN's troubled Kaman SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite program is facing possible cancellation after the 10 aircraft accepted to date were grounded two weeks ago by Defence Minister Dr Brendan Nelson over safety concerns.
Eleven refurbished Super Seasprites were ordered from prime contractor Kaman Aerospace in 1997 under Project Sea 1411 to equip the eight-strong Anzac frigate fleet. The project has since encountered ongoing delays surrounding the integration of the originally Litton-designed Integrated Tactical Avionics System and digital GPS / INS Automatic Flight Control, putting the Seasprite more than four years behind schedule from its planned 2001 in-service date.
The latest setback is believed to be the result of ongoing software problems with the flight control system, leading the Navy to ground the aircraft until a comprehensive report on the program can be presented, and its ultimate future decided.
"You could not have 100 per cent confidence in the software program that supports the pilot flying the helicopter to 100 per cent safety," Dr Nelson told The Australian on May 14. "It has required the chief of naval aviation to have it grounded."
A May 2 statement by Kaman detailing the company's first quarter 2006 financial results details the problem: "During the first quarter, the Royal Australian Navy encountered an anomalous flight condition on one of its training aircraft that it attributed to the ship's airspeed sensor. As a result, the Australian Navy's Operational Airworthiness Authority has suspended routine flying operations pending resolution and has indicated that the final acceptance of the aircraft will not occur until this issue is resolved."
A "senior defence source" told The Australian that the program requires a further funding injection of between $100 and $200 million on top of the almost $1 billion spent to date, and a further two years of development is required before the helicopter can be declared operational. This has led the minister to publicly consider whether to potentially throw good money after bad, or to cancel the whole project and try to recoup some of the money spent from the contractors.
"I have asked the Department of Defence to consider all options including, if appropriate, legal action against the contractors who have not fulfilled their obligations to Australia and to Australian taxpayers," Dr Nelson told a media conference on May 15. "We've been let down seriously by a number of contractors."
"At the moment the government has made no decision at all," he added. "I have simply asked defence to provide me with the three major options that we could consider: that is continuing with the program and at what cost, and when would we get the capability; secondly what modifications could be made to the program and at what cost, and what would we get; and thirdly what would be involved were the government to decide to get out of Super Seasprite altogether." The report is due to be put to the minister before the end of June, with the Seasprites unlikely to be flying again (apart from test and evaluation flights) before the end of the year.
Unfortunately, the legal route may not be open to the government, with the Defence Materiel Organisation's Air Vice Marshal Clive Rossiter telling a Senate committee earlier this year that the Super Seasprite contract did not have provision for liquidated damages.
"I would speculate that it was negotiated away in exchange for some other benefit at the time," AVM Rossiter told the hearing.
Interestingly, the Seasprite has been viewed as something an orphan type in the ADF's stated goal to rationalise its helicopter fleet from 10 different types across the Navy and Army services to just four or five (Chinook, MRH-90, Seahawk, Tiger ARH, and a new training/light utility type) over the next decade. So cancelling the Seasprite project would go some way towards achieving this goal while saving the extra costs of operating another type.
Meanwhile, the New Zealand government has moved quickly to back its own fleet of five Super Seasprite helicopters. The NZ Seasprites are off-the-shelf new build SH-2Gs, and have suffered no such integration issues.
SEASPRITES FACE CANCELLATION? The RAN's troubled Kaman SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite program is facing possible cancellation after the 10 aircraft accepted to date were grounded two weeks ago by Defence Minister Dr Brendan Nelson over safety concerns.
Eleven refurbished Super Seasprites were ordered from prime contractor Kaman Aerospace in 1997 under Project Sea 1411 to equip the eight-strong Anzac frigate fleet. The project has since encountered ongoing delays surrounding the integration of the originally Litton-designed Integrated Tactical Avionics System and digital GPS / INS Automatic Flight Control, putting the Seasprite more than four years behind schedule from its planned 2001 in-service date.
The latest setback is believed to be the result of ongoing software problems with the flight control system, leading the Navy to ground the aircraft until a comprehensive report on the program can be presented, and its ultimate future decided.
"You could not have 100 per cent confidence in the software program that supports the pilot flying the helicopter to 100 per cent safety," Dr Nelson told The Australian on May 14. "It has required the chief of naval aviation to have it grounded."
A May 2 statement by Kaman detailing the company's first quarter 2006 financial results details the problem: "During the first quarter, the Royal Australian Navy encountered an anomalous flight condition on one of its training aircraft that it attributed to the ship's airspeed sensor. As a result, the Australian Navy's Operational Airworthiness Authority has suspended routine flying operations pending resolution and has indicated that the final acceptance of the aircraft will not occur until this issue is resolved."
A "senior defence source" told The Australian that the program requires a further funding injection of between $100 and $200 million on top of the almost $1 billion spent to date, and a further two years of development is required before the helicopter can be declared operational. This has led the minister to publicly consider whether to potentially throw good money after bad, or to cancel the whole project and try to recoup some of the money spent from the contractors.
"I have asked the Department of Defence to consider all options including, if appropriate, legal action against the contractors who have not fulfilled their obligations to Australia and to Australian taxpayers," Dr Nelson told a media conference on May 15. "We've been let down seriously by a number of contractors."
"At the moment the government has made no decision at all," he added. "I have simply asked defence to provide me with the three major options that we could consider: that is continuing with the program and at what cost, and when would we get the capability; secondly what modifications could be made to the program and at what cost, and what would we get; and thirdly what would be involved were the government to decide to get out of Super Seasprite altogether." The report is due to be put to the minister before the end of June, with the Seasprites unlikely to be flying again (apart from test and evaluation flights) before the end of the year.
Unfortunately, the legal route may not be open to the government, with the Defence Materiel Organisation's Air Vice Marshal Clive Rossiter telling a Senate committee earlier this year that the Super Seasprite contract did not have provision for liquidated damages.
"I would speculate that it was negotiated away in exchange for some other benefit at the time," AVM Rossiter told the hearing.
Interestingly, the Seasprite has been viewed as something an orphan type in the ADF's stated goal to rationalise its helicopter fleet from 10 different types across the Navy and Army services to just four or five (Chinook, MRH-90, Seahawk, Tiger ARH, and a new training/light utility type) over the next decade. So cancelling the Seasprite project would go some way towards achieving this goal while saving the extra costs of operating another type.
Meanwhile, the New Zealand government has moved quickly to back its own fleet of five Super Seasprite helicopters. The NZ Seasprites are off-the-shelf new build SH-2Gs, and have suffered no such integration issues.
Kiwi Seasprites
New Zealand could use the extra airframes if Australia ready to make a deal. Our five will soon be expected to operate from two frigates, two OPVs and 1 MPV, a couple extra to allow for type training and maintainance would be great.
New Zealand has had some supply chain issues, Kaman seems less than keen to provide for rapid supply of spare parts to small operator.
New Zealand could use the extra airframes if Australia ready to make a deal. Our five will soon be expected to operate from two frigates, two OPVs and 1 MPV, a couple extra to allow for type training and maintainance would be great.
New Zealand has had some supply chain issues, Kaman seems less than keen to provide for rapid supply of spare parts to small operator.
Brilliant news as far as I am concerned. The sooner we rid ouselves of these good for nothing pieces of junk, the better. Nelson is doing a great job so far, good to see somebody with some balls for a change. This is just the start of what should have been done many years ago. We will eventually see a true rationalisation of helos leaving us with MRH-90, TIGER, CHINOOK and SOF BLACKHAWK. Firstly, Seakings and Seasprites will be replaced with new build MRH-90, then as the Seahawk finally ends its life, they will also be replaced with MRH-90. This added with SOF Blackhawks, the best trooplift helo being the MRH-90, Tiger attack helos, and an expanded Chinook fleet, we will finally have a great helo fleet. Perhaps the new boat burning slabs up north can be tested with 11 Seasprites.
My understanding is the UK is facing similar software related problems with its Chinook HC3s. Also the Seasprite saga raises the question at what point does a small nation like Australia buy off the shelf equipment that may not entirely match its needs versus taking the risk on Australia-specific modifications I'm of the view that its best to acquire standard equipment that dosn't require too much in the way of ADF specific mods.
abramsteve
New Member
I have to disagree with you on that mate. As far as I know Australian modifications to its military hardware have turned our 'off the shelf' equiptment into some of the best in the world. I read on this site somwhere that our Hornets are rated as the best export versions in the world, due to Australian upgrades (correct me if Im wrong). I think that this stuff up is due to political bugger ups more than anything, and that there is still a great deal to be gained from Australian inovationsoviet said:
Ditto. It's an embarrassing mess. Any intention to keep tinkering with it in the hopes things will get better smells of delusion. I'm sure I've seen an article tacked on comparing the Seasprites to the Collins. I don't think the two programmes are in the same class, strategically therefore the Govt can walk away from this one. Eat the loss - and put in place procedures that tax dollar loss like this never happens again. Kinnairds? Beazely weighed in on the Seasprites going on about 'the govt has to get in close with contractor and babysit them...' and blaming the current Govt. Pardon the paraphrase, I can't find the original source article.cherry said:
I wonder if RNZN would be interested in a couple extra Seasprites...
contedicavour
New Member
If anybody is interested, we're more than happy to supply you with EH-101 or NH-90 helos. The Seasprites are in the same class as the NH-90 but are some 30 years older in terms of concept ... it won't be the umpteenth update from Sikorsky that will make up for the gap.Supe said:
cheers
Wouldn't think so, not compatable and not working.Supe said:
Not because of Australian upgrades (although the bulk of the work is being done here). Our upgrade program is essentially the same as those of the US and Canada (with a few minor differences - ASRAAM, Litening AT, ALR-2002B, SAAB BOL CMDS etc), but because Canada and the US have dithered over their own upgrade programs, we've forged ahead becoming lead customer for many of them.abramsteve said:
Just as a recap, the prototyping work for HUG 2.1 was done in Australia, and the production run is now complete. The prototyping for HUG 2.2 was done at Cecil Field and China Lake in the US by Boeing, and the first Australian 2.2 upgrade is due to be naded over next Tuesday. The HUG 3.1 work was all done here, and the prototype HUG 3.2 jet was sent to Mirabel in Canada on April 16 to be stripped down and assessed. Production on 3.2 will likely be conducted in Australia, but the final numbers (I estimate 55) and actual contractors (Boeing Aust, L-3 & BAESA = Hornet Industry Coalition) are yet to be finalised.
Magoo
Point taken, however he hasn't been the only one to say that once the OPC/OPV(?) was cancelled, the sprite acquisition should have been cannedAussie Digger said:
From my reading, I'm inclined to wonder whether a lot of these capabilities were included/expanded after the decision to keep the sprites despite the OPV demise.Aussie Digger said:
Here's an interesting read from 2003. Explains some of the problems. If it's to be believed then it seems the problem is trying to get a two man helicopter to do the job of a three man helicopter.
http://www.defensedaily.com/cgi/rw/show_mag.cgi?pub=rw&mon=0503&file=0503sh2G.htm
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
Kaman Practises CYA
Kaman Issues Statement Regarding Its Australian SH-2G (A) Helicopter Program
(Source: Kaman Corp.; issued May 16, 2006)
BLOOMFIELD, Connecticut --- Kaman Corp. today issued a statement regarding its Australian SH-2G(A) helicopter program.
Over the past several years, the company has reported extensively on its SH-2G(A) helicopter program for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN), a USD 611 million fixed-price contract for 11 aircraft featuring a new technology-advancing Integrated Tactical Avionics System (ITAS). While the basic aircraft have been completed for several years and nine have been provisionally accepted by the Commonwealth, they have lacked the full ITAS system. The company has reported on the substantial charges it has taken to provide the funding to complete the program, and has reported its progress toward the ITAS completion in its quarterly releases and public filings.
Kaman has been working closely with the RAN and believes the program is close to completion. In May 2006, the company finished the last of approximately 400 pre-qualification software tests of the ITAS software, and is in preparation for the final qualification testing to be witnessed by the Commonwealth. This process is expected to be followed by acceptance of the fully capable helicopters.
In its press release of May 2, 2006, the company reported that the Royal Australian Navy had encountered an anomalous flight condition on one of its training aircraft that was attributed to the aircraft’s airspeed sensor. This anomaly, involving a small component from a supplier, is not impacting the development process for the ITAS. The company also reported that the Australian Navy’s Operations Airworthiness Authority had suspended flying operations pending resolution and that final acceptance of the aircraft would not occur until the issue had been resolved. The company believes that it has determined the cause of the anomaly and has a plan for resolution of the issue.
Paul Kuhn, Chairman, President and CEO said, “Early this week, articles appeared in the Australian media that are critical of the program. At least one article questioned the safety of the aircraft. In fact, there is a significant history of safe operations for this aircraft type with the U.S. Navy and currently with several other naval services including the Royal New Zealand Navy.
“We are confident that the same will be the case for the Australian aircraft, and believe that working through the remaining technical issues is the most timely and cost-effective route to fulfilling the RAN’s mission requirements. We look forward to the introduction of the fully-capable SH-2G(A) helicopters into service with the Royal Australian Navy.”
Well if we listen to Kaman the Helo's will be up soon, hmm doubt, it is a real shame, at Amberly I was chatting to a SH2G pilot he was genuinely keen to get it up and go and was stoked about the capability it was bringing, sure it was an airshow but the projected capability would of made a fantastic Helo force. I don't think they will just scrap them though it would a massive waste, and Im sure Kaman would pull out all stops to get it right now that its hit the fan.
Kaman Issues Statement Regarding Its Australian SH-2G (A) Helicopter Program
(Source: Kaman Corp.; issued May 16, 2006)
BLOOMFIELD, Connecticut --- Kaman Corp. today issued a statement regarding its Australian SH-2G(A) helicopter program.
Over the past several years, the company has reported extensively on its SH-2G(A) helicopter program for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN), a USD 611 million fixed-price contract for 11 aircraft featuring a new technology-advancing Integrated Tactical Avionics System (ITAS). While the basic aircraft have been completed for several years and nine have been provisionally accepted by the Commonwealth, they have lacked the full ITAS system. The company has reported on the substantial charges it has taken to provide the funding to complete the program, and has reported its progress toward the ITAS completion in its quarterly releases and public filings.
Kaman has been working closely with the RAN and believes the program is close to completion. In May 2006, the company finished the last of approximately 400 pre-qualification software tests of the ITAS software, and is in preparation for the final qualification testing to be witnessed by the Commonwealth. This process is expected to be followed by acceptance of the fully capable helicopters.
In its press release of May 2, 2006, the company reported that the Royal Australian Navy had encountered an anomalous flight condition on one of its training aircraft that was attributed to the aircraft’s airspeed sensor. This anomaly, involving a small component from a supplier, is not impacting the development process for the ITAS. The company also reported that the Australian Navy’s Operations Airworthiness Authority had suspended flying operations pending resolution and that final acceptance of the aircraft would not occur until the issue had been resolved. The company believes that it has determined the cause of the anomaly and has a plan for resolution of the issue.
Paul Kuhn, Chairman, President and CEO said, “Early this week, articles appeared in the Australian media that are critical of the program. At least one article questioned the safety of the aircraft. In fact, there is a significant history of safe operations for this aircraft type with the U.S. Navy and currently with several other naval services including the Royal New Zealand Navy.
“We are confident that the same will be the case for the Australian aircraft, and believe that working through the remaining technical issues is the most timely and cost-effective route to fulfilling the RAN’s mission requirements. We look forward to the introduction of the fully-capable SH-2G(A) helicopters into service with the Royal Australian Navy.”
Well if we listen to Kaman the Helo's will be up soon, hmm doubt, it is a real shame, at Amberly I was chatting to a SH2G pilot he was genuinely keen to get it up and go and was stoked about the capability it was bringing, sure it was an airshow but the projected capability would of made a fantastic Helo force. I don't think they will just scrap them though it would a massive waste, and Im sure Kaman would pull out all stops to get it right now that its hit the fan.
Brutus Caesar
New Member
I am confused...if these helicopters ever get off the ground fully upgraded and working as they are supposed to, will they be capable helicopters? Will these be like the Collins of the helicopter world or will they just be average?
It is a pity that the aussies are having such trouble with their seasprites..but if you fill something full of glass, that something is bound to get broken: ..probably why the SH-2G(nz) hasnt had the same woes..the RNZAF was smart and stuck largely to analog flight systems,rather than all digital
The Aussie airframes would probably be reasonably compatible with ours as a source of airframe spares..hell the RNZAF used SH-2F's as conversion trainers then sourced them as spares when the SH-G's came along, afterall surely the aussie ones have engine as well as airframe commonality with ours?
It'd give the RNZAF a couple more years before they need to knock on kamans door for spares...I just suppose that Tenix is counting their blessings this whole fraccas had nothing to do with them (for once ).
: ..probably why the SH-2G(nz) hasnt had the same woes..the RNZAF was smart and stuck largely to analog flight systems,rather than all digitalThe Aussie airframes would probably be reasonably compatible with ours as a source of airframe spares..hell the RNZAF used SH-2F's as conversion trainers then sourced them as spares when the SH-G's came along, afterall surely the aussie ones have engine as well as airframe commonality with ours?
It'd give the RNZAF a couple more years before they need to knock on kamans door for spares...I just suppose that Tenix is counting their blessings this whole fraccas had nothing to do with them (for once
).The SH-2G has a greater power to weight ratio than the Seahawk,I've seen the RNZAF SH-2G display team on a No. of occasions + it is no slug in the air. Its also capable of being loaded with a variety of pylon stores, but these are dependant on the requirements of the user-The RNZAF worked jointly with kaman to enable the Seasprites in service to carry mavericks that we bought new(why didnt they use the stock left over from the A-4K's? can someone shed some light..?!?).Brutus Caesar said:
I cant vouch for the RAN birds, I do belive they were meant to have a more comprehensive sensor package than the kiwi ones.
The RNZAF SH-2G's dont utilise any kind of sonar(kinda like the wasps) instead they rely on the ANZAC(nz) class to provide sonar plots + detect conacts with their Sephiron B sonar system which is barely adequate for that kind of work.