Ongoing Sea King Replacement Debacle Thread

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by photon

Yeah the ones we bought then got out of. I still think if they go back and re-order them they should be able to get part of the cancellation fee back, since they're uncancelling!

I don't know if that's why they're making this agency, but it does feel like doubling down. It's probably only because I just watched like 4 episodes of House of Cards.

EDIT: I really don't care either, I just want to see cool helicopters and jets dammit!

Its not the companies fault that the government at the time did a mean spirit cancel even though it was shown that their product was the best product for the job. The company had to shut down the production of the line that was producing the airframe for a helicopter that was going to use a lot of made in Canada solutions.

I doubt that that a refund of any part of the cancellation fees are going to come into play. On top of that these helicopters are going to be more expensive now since this is a newer generation and there is inflation.

Canada could probably go after their current helicopter vender over the problems with those birds, but I don't know how much they can recover.

In a military that has to get by on small numbers and lower budget per soldier, sailor and pilot. It just makes sense that we're willing to buy as far ahead as possible in terms of technology to stay ahead of the obsolescence curve and rust out that came so close to our military pre-Harper government.

[Zulu29]

Government is apparently very close to scrapping the whole deal and either a) lowering the requirements of the new helicopter or b) going with a smaller helicopter with less capability.

It makes me wonder what the standards were in order to make them so hard to fulfil. If some standards are good enough for the Brits, Yanks and Aussies shouldn't they be good enough for us?

[I-Hate-Hulse]

CBC News has learned there are four other helicopters being considered, including the MH-60 Sea Hawk – a naval version of Sikorsky’s Blackhawk used by various branches of the U.S. Armed Forces – as well as AgustaWestland’s 159 and 101 and NH Industries' medium-sized NH-90

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sea-ki...ters-1.2055599

The AW159 is not in active service yet - deliveries not scheduled until 2015. Have we not learned anything yet? MH-60R would possibly be an easy deal if Sikorsky keeps us whole and doesn't exact cancellation penalties.

All pale compared to the AW101 (which makes sense for SAR commonality) but at this point, anything will be better than the Sea Kings.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

CBC News has learned there are four other helicopters being considered, including the MH-60 Sea Hawk – a naval version of Sikorsky’s Blackhawk used by various branches of the U.S. Armed Forces – as well as AgustaWestland’s 159 and 101 and NH Industries' medium-sized NH-90

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sea-ki...ters-1.2055599

The AW159 is not in active service yet - deliveries not scheduled until 2015. Have we not learned anything yet? MH-60R would possibly be an easy deal if Sikorsky keeps us whole and doesn't exact cancellation penalties.

All pale compared to the AW101 (which makes sense for SAR commonality) but at this point, anything will be better than the Sea Kings.

I like the AW-101 but from my understanding the equipment design that Canada has designed for ASW that's a bit unique would have to be modified for the AW-101.

I don't know enough about our Frigates, but the MH-60 is a pretty big helicopter would it work with the current hanger and landing system configuration?

[Barnes]

I assume they would fit.

CH-124 Sea King
Length: 54 ft 9 in (16.7 m)
Rotor diameter: 62 ft (19 m)
Height: 16 ft 10 in (5.13 m)

SH-60 Seahawk
Length: 64 ft 8 in (19.75 m)
Rotor diameter: 53 ft 8 in (16.35 m)
Height: 17 ft 2 in (5.2 m)

CH-148 Cyclone
Length: 68 ft 6 in [S-92 data] (20.9 m)
Rotor diameter: 58 ft 1 in [S-92 data] (17.7 m)
Height: 15 ft 5 in [S-92 data] (4.7 m)

Isn't it a bigger deal that for the Sea Hawk, the Tactical Coordinator works on the ship rather than in the chopper. All of our Frigates have one each, Destroyers have 2 each, and the supply ships have 3 each that I am guessing would require a refit to get systems not originally planned for in each ship.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Barnes

I assume they would fit.

CH-124 Sea King
Length: 54 ft 9 in (16.7 m)
Rotor diameter: 62 ft (19 m)
Height: 16 ft 10 in (5.13 m)

SH-60 Seahawk
Length: 64 ft 8 in (19.75 m)
Rotor diameter: 53 ft 8 in (16.35 m)
Height: 17 ft 2 in (5.2 m)

CH-148 Cyclone
Length: 68 ft 6 in [S-92 data] (20.9 m)
Rotor diameter: 58 ft 1 in [S-92 data] (17.7 m)
Height: 15 ft 5 in [S-92 data] (4.7 m)

Isn't it a bigger deal that for the Sea Hawk, the Tactical Coordinator works on the ship rather than in the chopper. All of our Frigates have one each, Destroyers have 2 each, and the supply ships have 3 each that I am guessing would require a refit to get systems not originally planned for in each ship.

I thought the SH-60 was the longer chopper. Wow.

I see your point with the tactical coordinator. Canada also has unique sub hunting systems that have to be built into the helicopter. Plus every pilot would have to go to school again to learn a whole new flight system. Also on a small deck frigate the two foot height difference might be a stowing concern.

[Madman]

Based on looks alone, (which is how I'm sure most defense contracts are awarded), the NH90 is easily the winner - wow.

[CaptainCrunch]

Reason number one on why they'd never let me do military procurement.

This picture gives me a full raging boner, we must buy 1000

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Isn't it a bigger deal that for the Sea Hawk, the Tactical Coordinator works on the ship rather than in the chopper. All of our Frigates have one each, Destroyers have 2 each, and the supply ships have 3 each that I am guessing would require a refit to get systems not originally planned for in each ship.

Yup you called it.

But the smaller choppers being considered – the AW159 or the new naval variant of the famed UH-60 Blackhawk, called the Seahawk – use remote communication to perform those functions.

On the Seahawk and AW159, the TACCO operates via remote link from a berth in the ship’s operations room. That's also where the sophisticated battle computers are located.

In the Canadian context, moving to the smaller chopper model would force the navy to renovate and rewire its ships to accommodate the TACCO and his or her battle equipment in its operations rooms.
This is no small feat as those systems would need to be integrated into the ship's existing warfare systems. Those modifications would need to be performed aboard every currently serving Canadian vessel, and would also likely require a reworking of planned designs for future ships, such as the military's joint supply ships and perhaps, the planned Arctic offshore patrol ships.

That could be a problem for the Arctic vessels, in particular, because they are based mostly on commercial designs and include only minimal accommodation for a military operations centre.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/smal...navy-1.2075359

How does the RN do ASW? If it's with the TACCO on the chopper, wouldn't it be a slam dunk just to go get the Merlin/AW101 with whaterver ASW suite they're using? I believe the NH90's ASW electronics suite is still in development?

An interesting comment that talk of a smaller chopper might just be politics.... until we end up with the smaller chopper/Iltis.

In fact, some manufacturers quietly maintain their smaller helicopters are really unsuitable for Canada's needs.

They suggest the whole process of looking at smaller helicopters feels like it's designed to prove they're simply not as suitable for the task as a larger helicopter might be.

Some industry sources say that could favour the now much-maligned Sikorsky Cyclone in any mini-competition resulting from the government's request for information, which would likely suit the military just fine.

[CaptainCrunch]

With the royal navy the Tacco is on the helicopter, so the AW101 makes really good sense, but Canada's tactical helicopter weapons systems are a made in Canada solution so even with the AW101 we would buy them without the standard sensor weapons suite and add out own.

With the manufacturers its up to them to sell us their helicopters and prove the small chopper benefits. I don't think it makes sense. The EH101 was the perfect bird until it was canceled by the Libs

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Awwww shinguardballs....we're stuck with them...

In a news release late on Friday, the federal government announced a deal with aircraft-manufacturer Sikorsky to start receiving 28 “fully capable” CH-148 Cyclone helicopters in four years. The helicopters are designed to replace the nearly 50-year-old Sea Kings on the Royal Canadian Navy’s frigates for military operations around the world.

Ottawa refused to state on Friday whether it will receive the entire fleet in 2018 or over a longer period.

Between 2015 and 2018, the Canadian Forces are planning to operate Cyclones with “sufficient” operational capability to start replacing the Sea Kings, but not the full capabilities that Ottawa is paying $5.7-billion to obtain.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...board/follows/

Translation - they will fly like a utility chopper but I wouldn't expect an ASW suite anytime soon. Hey, if it looks like we have choppers to the voters, they'll think we have choppers...

I look forward to thread bumping this till 2018 and beyond.... There is no way this wraps up in 4 years time.

[getbak]

You had know that was the likely outcome. Insane that it will be a full decade behind schedule, even in the best case scenario.

[ranchlandsselling]

Are these things any good ?

[Zulu29]

So basically between 2015 and 2018, we will be receiving a cyclone, retiring a sea king? I find it hard to believe that Sikorsky has 28 or whatever number of choppers just sitting idle in hangars waiting to replace all our sea kings in one fell swoop. If they got rid of every Sea King in 2015 we won't have choppers on the majority of our ships.

What a nightmare...the procurement process for the cyclone and the fact that our poor pilots are still flying those bloody sea kings.

[Madman]

Sea Kings to begin retirement in 2015.

Yesterday, the Government of Canada announced that it has completed all required amendments to both the acquisition and long-term in-service support contracts with Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation for the acquisition and maintenance of 28 CH-148 Cyclone helicopters for the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF). These contract amendments are further to the Principles of Agreement announced in January 2014.

The amended acquisition will ensure the delivery of helicopters with operational capability to begin retirement of the Sea Kings in 2015, and a program to enhance those capabilities culminating in a fully capable CH-148 maritime helicopter beginning in 2018.

http://rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/arti...-rcaf/hwltfwc7

[Tron_fdc]

The only ones who deserves any kind of praise through this whole debacle are the mechanics who kept those relics in the air.

Pretty sure Montgomery Scott is alive and well, hiding somewhere in our frigates.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

The only ones who deserves any kind of praise through this whole debacle are the mechanics who kept those relics in the air.

Pretty sure Montgomery Scott is alive and well, hiding somewhere in our frigates.

I'd add that the pilots and on flightcrew who probably kissed their families goodbye and prayed to whatever diety they prayed to before they got onto those old Seakings.

[Madman]

Formally accepted the first 6 CH-148 Cyclones.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/ottawa-...pers-1.2430312

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by Madman

Formally accepted the first 6 CH-148 Cyclones.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/ottawa-...pers-1.2430312

And the engines are underpowered ffs......how could DND or the govt allow that????

[GoinAllTheWay]

Probably because this process has gone on for so bloody long they probably just said "fine, give us something, we will work out the kinks later"

Why are we so bad at buying equipment?