Thanks. I think I may be out of luck, will go for it anyway. Unfortunately, I have contacted recruiting via that site, their answer was fast but vague. Basically they said they couldn't say. "Only a Nursing or Medical Officer can assess if a medical condition will impact on entry into the ADF and will be assessed on a case by case basis." Fair enough. Thanks for the advice, sounds like the way to go.
t68
Well-Known Member
Australia, France eye collaboration on special forces NH90 helicopters
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...ce-eye-collaboration-on-special-force-421028/
Don't know how much stock to put on this article. But makes sence from a common airframes point of view, wonder if it's the French pushing it or there has been some ground work by the ADF?
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...ce-eye-collaboration-on-special-force-421028/
Don't know how much stock to put on this article. But makes sence from a common airframes point of view, wonder if it's the French pushing it or there has been some ground work by the ADF?
Sounds very much like the French are pushing this and while it makes sense in terms of fleet commonality so would the MH-60S (Sierra) with its relationship to the Romeo. Throw in FMS, full marinisation and how smoothly the Romeo buy went compared to the MRH90 the Sierra would have to at least be evaluated.
I doubt it... They are stuck with MRH-90. I can't see any new builds purchased, this will just lead to mods of existing airframes, in ADF service I suspect...
True, but if it is additional airframes then FMS Sierra or even MH-47 would have to be under consideration as they not only have commonality, they are proven in US service in SF support and CSAR as well as being available through FMS.
meatshield
Active Member
Saw this and thought the group might find it interesting
ADF orders UK-built bridging systems under Land 155 programme | IHS Jane's 360
ADF orders UK-built bridging systems under Land 155 programme | IHS Jane's 360
t68
Well-Known Member
I guess one factor is logistics and the number of airframe parts on hand at sea?
The MH60R has the GE same as the S but from memory the MRH & ARH has RR.
One way to get around the problem is if it cheaper to buy new build Apache then upgrading Tiger, a Seahawk deal for the at sea and SOCOMD would make it a bit easier logistical wise. That way Romeo, Seahawk Apache all have GE T700's keep a MRH 90 for land Army, don't know if that would work
And then you may have to add the Ch47's T55's
the road runner
Active Member
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I must say I wasn't overly surprised when I saw the article that France and Australia were looking at collaboration on their respective Special Forces helicopters.
Mid last year there was an article published on the Janes website about France looking to modify their NH-90's for special forces work (I put this same link up in the Army thread at that time):
Paris Air Show 2015: French special forces look to modify NH90 | IHS Jane's 360
I'm not suggesting for one minute that this is going to be a done deal, but it certainly gives the Government (and Army) time to look at the possibilities of what replaces the Black Hawks when they are eventually withdrawn from service (and from memory there was something announced before Christmas that the Army was going to keep some of the Black Hawks in service a few years longer specifically for the Special Forces).
I think it's a smart move to see what the French (with probable Australian input) come up with in regard to a special forces modified NH/MRH-90, if it works, then maybe we might see some more MRH-90's ordered with the appropriate Special Forces modifications.
If not, then maybe we will see an order for some MH-60M's instead.
Either way, probably won't see anything announced for a couple of years yet.
t68
Well-Known Member
That would make sence, but the way I read it they may want us to stump up some money towards it as well. But that might just be me could also mean they want our input and we buy the adapter kit.
If you wanted to put a trap door in the floor for which has not been designed from start what structural integrity problems will in incur and the time to test?
They would've have been good and are a well proven platform. They only real issue that I have with them is their undercart. Skids are fine on a normal surface but shipboard they create extra handling issues. Yes, the USMC use them shipboard but they operate with larger crews than the ADF would. That's why I feel a wheel undercart is better, just makes for easier, quicker and safer handling. In a way I think Bell have missed an opportunity in not offering a wheeled variant of the AH1.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Yes we probably will have to stump up some dollars if we want to have a reasonable input (and say in), how a modified NH/MRH-90 might turn out in it's Special Forces configuration, don't see a problem with that.
Sometimes a small investment could save many many 10's or 100's of millions of dollars more in the long run, if you don't have skin in the game, then you end up having very little say or input in to the final result.
One would hope that if we do get involved reasonably deeply in the development of a Special Forces version of the NH/MRH-90, that at some point in the development we can either say 'yes, keep going' or 'no, this isn't going to work' and move onto other options.
I still think its better to be on the inside of a development program than being on the outside and being fed BS that may or may not be true!!
t68
Well-Known Member
Yep that's true, in the greater scheme it's probably a worthwhile investment if it get to a standard acceptable to SOCOMD
What is the chance if we participate in MRH/NH-90 SOCOM upgrade that it will be late, cost more than we were told, be delivered with incomplete capability (and the offer to achieve the promosed standard "in time" if we keep paying and keep throwing money art it), will not be supported with reasonably priced and available on a timely basis spare parts, have a limited further development path, etc.
We will then realise it would have been cheaper, faster, and much more effective to have ordered a small number of MH-47G in the first place.
Have we learned nothing from ARH and MRH acquisition?
We will then realise it would have been cheaper, faster, and much more effective to have ordered a small number of MH-47G in the first place.
Have we learned nothing from ARH and MRH acquisition?
t68
Well-Known Member
Oh I think defence has a memory like an elephant, politicians on the other hand see a totally diffrent picture with there rose tinted glass
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I don't think there is any suggestion at this stage that we are even talking about a firm commitment to either order additional MRH-90's fitted for the Special Forces, or even an upgrade kit for the existing airframes.
But if the French are actively investigating what is needed to upgrade their NH-90's for a Special Forces role, then I don't see the problem in being part of that process.
Being on the inside, rather than the outside, of a development program gives you far more insight as to what is required to achieve the end result.
It still doesn't mean that there is an actual commitment to go down that path.
Again, I'm not suggesting that for one minute that this is the answer to the helicopter needs of the Special Forces, but it does allow us to see what is possible with the NH/MRH-90, or not!!
the road runner
Active Member
The costings that Eurocopter gave for the MRH-90 was a bit of a fib ,regarding Australia's future helicopter fleet.Defence wanted Blackhawks and the Howard Government chose MRH-90s
Government wanted to rationalise our helicopter fleets for both Army and Navy, fast forward to 2016 and navy has Romeos with 6 MRH 90s..
The Army wants to keep its Blackhawks for as long as it can,while also flying MRH-90s.
My opinion with hindsight.. i think the better decision would have been to choose what the Army wanted. More S-70 Blackhawks.
Im with Volk ....if we need a Special forces chopper go with the Sierra
Government wanted to rationalise our helicopter fleets for both Army and Navy, fast forward to 2016 and navy has Romeos with 6 MRH 90s..
The Army wants to keep its Blackhawks for as long as it can,while also flying MRH-90s.
My opinion with hindsight.. i think the better decision would have been to choose what the Army wanted. More S-70 Blackhawks.
Im with Volk ....if we need a Special forces chopper go with the Sierra
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I don't think anyone would disagree with what you have said.
The question is going to be, when the last of the Black Hawks are eventually retired, will the Government budget/plan for the purchase of helicopters specifically for the Special forces or will the Special Forces have make do with what's currently in service, eg, the MRH-90's?
As far as I'm aware, there are currently no more phases of AIR 9000.
When we eventually get to see the new DWP and DCP possibly there may be some clues as to what the plan will be when the last of Black Hawks are retired.
I think people are giving the MRH a bit of a rough time without looking at the advantages of the helo. Yes it has had a difficult gestation but not all of the problems that you are experiencing can be sheeted home to NHI. We do not appear to be having the same difficulties bringing our NH90s into service, that the ADF do. This may be because of a different approach on our part. You have problematic issues regarding spares with European helo manufacturing. Maybe that is because the pollies balked at purchasing a decent supply of spares. We bought an extra aircraft and use that when necessary for AOG (Aircraft On Ground) spares then replace that item through the normal supply chain. This reminds me in some ways of your Seasprite debacle. That wasn't really all the fault of Kaman, but more of the RAN being to ambitious in what it wanted, without any real research and prototyping before committing to the final order, on an airframe that was being replaced by the USN.
One of the reasons that the MRH would have been chosen is that it can lift more than the Blackhawk. This same argument was put forward in NZ during its assessment phase. It is also a brand new aircraft with new technology that will be around for quite a while. Already the US Army is undertaking a Blackhawk replacement study. The NH90 / MRH offers a lot of potential and I believe that it is a good platform now and will be a far better one in the future. The proposed French / Australian special forces modifications research will be one program that will improve the aircraft. Don't forget that there are other nations who use this helo so Australia will own some of the IP on the mods. Also there is the NH90 Users Group which consists of all the user nations plus NHI. This group passes quite a bit if knowledge gained about the helo amongst the users and it puts pressure on NHI to sort problems out.
Having said that wasn't I think that NHI need to look at the door gunner and troop embarkment issue sooner rather than latter. Maybe there is a quick fix by having the doors slide aft instead of for'ard and put place the gun just for'ard of the door with a hatch like the chooks. Regarding the spares problems, especially AOG related spares, in the short to medium term the ADF probably should build up a good spares supply until NHI get their logistical problems sorted out. I would suggest the same for the Tigers. This appears to be the best way of mitigating European military aviation spare parts issues. Returning to the Seasprite quickly, IMHO both the RAN and the RNZN would have been better off acquiring the Lynx. Would have worked out more cost effective in the long term.
Just my thoughts.
One of the reasons that the MRH would have been chosen is that it can lift more than the Blackhawk. This same argument was put forward in NZ during its assessment phase. It is also a brand new aircraft with new technology that will be around for quite a while. Already the US Army is undertaking a Blackhawk replacement study. The NH90 / MRH offers a lot of potential and I believe that it is a good platform now and will be a far better one in the future. The proposed French / Australian special forces modifications research will be one program that will improve the aircraft. Don't forget that there are other nations who use this helo so Australia will own some of the IP on the mods. Also there is the NH90 Users Group which consists of all the user nations plus NHI. This group passes quite a bit if knowledge gained about the helo amongst the users and it puts pressure on NHI to sort problems out.
Having said that wasn't I think that NHI need to look at the door gunner and troop embarkment issue sooner rather than latter. Maybe there is a quick fix by having the doors slide aft instead of for'ard and put place the gun just for'ard of the door with a hatch like the chooks. Regarding the spares problems, especially AOG related spares, in the short to medium term the ADF probably should build up a good spares supply until NHI get their logistical problems sorted out. I would suggest the same for the Tigers. This appears to be the best way of mitigating European military aviation spare parts issues. Returning to the Seasprite quickly, IMHO both the RAN and the RNZN would have been better off acquiring the Lynx. Would have worked out more cost effective in the long term.
Just my thoughts.
Last edited: