New MH Announcement

[GGboy]

According to Jane's, the Cormorant can carry up to 22 fully equipped soldiers in addition to the crew (which Jane's defines as two pilots). In MH mode it carries 4 torpedoes.
The Cyclone's listed capacity is 19 troops. No word on torpedoes, probably because the military version is still on the drawing board ...
Also, apparently the cost difference between the Cormorant and the Sikorsky bid was less than 2%. Mind you, with a $5-billion contract each percentage point comes to $50-million.

 

[Kirkhill]

Inch

Reference 40 pax on SeaKing.  Could they have been getting confused with the Westland Commando variant of the Sea King operated by the RN for the Royal Marines?  But even there I think the number is only about 21-28 with side seating.  Maybe somebody has jammed in 40 on overload with all standing or sitting directly on the floor? 

I am thinking that the EH101 only has seating for 24 but apparently the Brits have managed to lift more than 40 with all standing for short lifts.

Just a thought.

 

[Inch]

That's a possibility my man, all I know is that looking in the cabin of our Sea Kings, there is no way of fitting 40 pax. They could even be getting confused with the S-61, the stretched out transport version of the Sea King.  The oil rig guys use them quite extensively for transporting crews but I think they only hold 20 pax.

Cheers

 

[ringo_mountbatten]

the eh101 can hold 40 guys, but on the floor, 24 is more realistic as it is the number of crash seats available, not to mention passenger headsets.  i believe the h92 can carry 22 crash seats for transport.

 

[pjocsak]

Here's my thought's on the MHP announcement,

I think that the H92 is a fine choice to replace the Seathings, they'll adequately fill all of the roles currently required. However, the problem is that we've missed an opportunity to develope a new capability. The EH-101 could have done more than just the job of the Sea Kings. With the added internal space they could have carried a fair number of troops. While the EH-101 (or CH-149' or whatever the Maritime version would have been designated) would most likely not have been able to carry as many pax as the Cormorant or the RAF's Merlins due to the equipment required for it's ASW role, it could certainly carry more than the H92.  Now, in the here and now that really doesn't mean that much, but given the discussion surrounding the proposed Afloat Logistics Vessel, the ability to carry troops and equipment becomes very important. While many of the roles being envisioned for what ever ships replace the current AOR's are consistent with the ships we're using now, they're also talking about roles such as Comand and Control, more extensive flight deck and hangar space, and more space for troops and equipment. In truth, the project seems to be becoming a wish list that is fairly unreasonable. But, the foundation of the entire project is the need to develope at least an insipient maritme power projection capability. When this future possibility for the navy is considered, the EH-101 or a similar aircraft would be far more useful since it could do both the ASW and utility duties, as well as providing a medium lift helicopter capability to the same ships. The H92 can't do the later. So, if we intend at some point in the future to follow through with our current plans for multi-role ships capable of replacing the AOR's and acting as semi-LPH's, we're either going to have to buy a different helicopter or do without the capability. In the end, we'll probably have to do without the capability.

Like so many decisions regarding military purcahses, this seems to be another case of short sightedness. Or am I wrong?

p.

 

[Infanteer]

Although I was disappointed at first, from what Inch says the Sikorsky will do fine as an Naval Helicopter.  From the 70% commonality of parts, it appears that the next logical step would be to suck it up and purchase a good chunk of Blackhawk's to fulfill the roles you brought up, pjocsak.  Command and control birds, tactical lift, etc.  With the JSS, it looks as if the Army and the Navy are both going to be needing something like the Blackhawk (I know the Army desperately does...)

As well, I seen it brought up before, but isn't to our advantage to buy North American over European in terms of parts and aquistion and such.  Don't we have this problem with the HLVW and the slew of other European vehicles we have?  Despite the politics, there seems to be a good military rational (logistics) behind the decision.  I hope, if we ever look at Strategic Lift, that the Air Force can keep this in mind when comparing the C-17 to the magical Airbus A400.

 

[Kilted Mayhem]

I was just reading the CASR DND 101 web site idea of purchasing US Navy surplus SH-60 to immediately replace the Sea King's while we wait for the Cyclones to fully arrive. Basically, the idea is the savings from Sea King maintenance would pay for the surplus SH-60's.We could then decide to trade them in to Sikorsky to help pay for the Cyclones or keep them. I not to sure on the math but it is an idea worth looking at.
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-seahawk.htm

 

[Inch]

That's the first I've heard of that idea.  I like it, a lot. It would even get a foot in the door for the army types once we've got a little experience on the H-60s to get Blackhawks.

Cheers

 

[Kirkhill]

Also the Offshore Patrol Vessel is supposed to be Heli Capable.   What size Helo could you land on a 82 m - 1400 tonne vessel?

Cormorant?
Cyclone?
SH-60?
Griffin?
MBB-105?
Kaman SeaSprite?

 

[canuck101]

I think it will be the MBB-105 that the coast guard is using now.  they want the crews to be a mix of navy and coast guard that is what i think i read in a newspaper article.

cheers

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks Canuck.  Makes Sense.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Why would they get a different helicopter for the new OPVs when the Cyclone will do? Doesn't make sense to look at the SeaSprite, SH60 when they are not even in our inventory. From what I understand the MBB105 is being considered for replacement but someone else can confirm that.

 

[canuck101]

Ex-Dragoon you are right about the cyclone being a good helo for the new OPV.  It all depends on the size of the new OPV's.  Now all they have to do is build a OPV with the requirements for the cyclone. I will keep my fingers crossed. ;D

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Considering it won't have hangar facilities (supposedly) that  should not be too hard.

 

[canuck101]

They also i think need to have a bear trap so they will be able to land helo's in bad weather.

cheers.

 

[Kilted Mayhem]

Speaking of Bear traps, I heard from the news that the current bear traps will be to high for the Cyclone. It will be millions more to refit the bear traps on our current vessels. I looked for another source but was unsuccessful so put a grain of salt on what the media says.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Never heard anything like that but Inch would probably know more.

 

[Inch]

I haven't heard of any problems associated with the bear traps, doesn't mean there isn't a problem but I think the focus right now is the flight decks since the Cyclone is heavier than the Sea King and the weight is distributed a little differently with the tricycle gear vs the tail wheel on the Sea King.  Another major concern right now is the folding rotor head and tail pylon that haven't been designed for the Cyclone yet, though Sikorsky has done quite well with those sorts of things on the Sea Kings, Sea Dragons, Sea Hawks, etc, so I don't think anyone is too worried about that problem.

Plus my understanding of the contract is that it includes any mods required on the CPFs.

Cheers

 

[Kirkhill]

You are right Ex-Dragoon.  It wouldn't make sense.  That is why I asked the question. 

I wanted to know if the SH-92 would be able to land on an OPV and if perhaps that was a consideration in its selection versus the Cormorant which IIRC is bigger and heavier than the SH-92. 

The reason I included the SeaSprite in the list is that I believe that is the helo that the New Zealanders would likely operate from the OPVs as they have just upgraded their SH-2s.

Speaking of upgrading. 

I saw a letter in todays paper in praise of the Sikorsky S61s currently being operated by private enterprise firms on Search and Rescue duties in the UK.  The letter made the point that the S-61s are older than the SeaKings and maintained by a Canadian company.  The writer raised the possibility of ripping out the ASW gear and refurbishing the airframes.  Got me to thinking.

Those that know better....... Is there any merit to the writers notion?  Is there enough life in the SeaKing airframes/engines to make it worthwhile to refurbish them and distribute them within Canada as Medium Support Helicopters, even as a reserve fleet to be flown part-time and ready for Disaster Response?

Cheers.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

I was down in Halifgax for the Tall ships, and saw a couple of the Sea Things flying around.  They still LOOK good, I must admit.  Maybe Inch was in one of them.  It was a great spectacle (the tall ships), I would recommend that to anyone.  After three days in Halifax, I took a trip around Cape Breton.  Great holiday, now I'm back and ready to go!