columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6835 posts, RR: 5 Posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19747 times:
So now it is official. Germany has send RFP to Agusta Westland, Boeing, Eurocopter and Sikorsky for a Navy helicopter as well as for a CSAR Helicopter for the Luftwaffe. Annoucements have been made at the ILA Air Show.
The most interesting option in my opinion comes with the Sikorsky CH 148 helicopter as it could be a common platform for both reuirements although it would be hard for Sikorsky to fulfill the Air Force performance requiremnts.
The article below says that for the CSAR order Eurocopter have been asked as well. This seems to be wrong. The NH 90 and EC 725 were considered too small earlier therefore it is more likely that FI meant Agusta Westland instead, which is offering the AW 101 to the Air Force (see second article).
This will be a very interesting decision as the German Minister of Defence is not very pleased with EADS due to the delays of the NH 90, Tiger and A400M. Therefore it is very likely that Sikorsky will get the Navy deal, as the CH 148 is also been favouvered by the Navy over the NH 90. Sikorsky announced that they are building up a team with German companies such as MTU and Rheinmetall and others.
Boeing is working together with EADS on the new HTH (http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/military/read.main/123485/) so the CH 47 does not seem so far fetched as it seemed earlier.
For more information see the two articles below:
Sikorsky is busy at the show assembling its team to bid for Germany's twin requirements for an air force combat search and rescue (CSAR) helicopter and a replacement for the navy's ageing Sea Kings.
Discussions with MTU Aero Engines are well advanced and a deal should be agreed during ILA, while an expected agreement with Rheinmetall is further off, said Sikorsky vice-president sales for Europe, the Middle East, Turkey and Africa, Joseph Gigantelli, at the show yesterday. Ruag and ZF Luftfahrttechnik have already signed up to the team.
Sikorsky aims to persuade Germany of the merits of choosing its S-92-based CH-148 Cyclone as a common platform for the separate air force and navy requirements, despite the fact that some of the former's performance requirements may not be met.
The air force and navy selections are due to be made during the fourth quarter of 2010, leading to contract award in 2011. Boeing and Eurocopter are also in the running for the air force order, while the navy RFP was sent only to Eurocopter and Sikorsky.
AgustaWestland proposes AW101 for Luftwaffe CSAR requirement :
AgustaWestland has pitched its AW101 platform as a means of meeting the German air force's combat search and rescue (CSAR) requirement.
The Luftwaffe requirement encompasses in-flight refuelling capability, enhanced self-protection and all-weather net-centric avionics, including satellite communications. It also seeks the ability to recover a seven-person team with the same number in the rescue-aircraft team.
ThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 19720 times:
Sikorsky is having problems meeting our performance requirements (seems the aircraft needs another engine upgrade and has missed weight targets, AGAIN for us). This is beyond the fact that they are already 3.5 years late...
CH-149: Rescue me!
The EH101 had been the Maritime Helicopter Program’s initial winner, and a civilian version currently serves in a search-and-rescue role as the CH-149 Cormorant. Canadian experiences with this type have been strained, however, due to reliability and readiness issues.
The H-92 is a larger derivative of the ubiquitous H-60 family that comprise most of the US Navy’s current fleet. it makes heavier use of rust-proof composite materials, and also sports uprated engines, a rear ramp, and other features that place it in a similar class to Europe’s NH90.
Initial CH-148 delivery was originally scheduled for November 2008, but that was moved to January 2009, then pushed back again to November 2010. In the wake of a very vague announcement about contract renegotiation and further program delays, observers began questioning whether the program’s initial dates were ever realistic, and whether even the revised dates can be depended upon. Their suspicions were justified when it was revealed that fully operational CH-148s with upgraded engines wouldn’t begin delivery until June 2012.
The CH-148 is based on Sikorsky’s H-92 Superhawk. As noted above, the helicopter uses aluminum and composite construction to reduce rust. Initial specifications called for GE’s 3,000 hp class CT7-8C, but weight growth will force another engine upgrade before the final design is ready. Standard self-sealing fuel tanks can carry up to 3,030 kg of fuel, and an in-flight refuelling probe allows in-air refueling.
Emergency flotation systems under the cockpit and in the tailboom are automatically deployed and are expected to work up to Sea State 5 conditions. If they fail, or aren’t practical, a 15-man life raft is installed in each sponson.
For the Navy SAR requirement Germany is looking at the NFH 90 and the CH 148, for the air force CSAR requirement Germany is looking at the S-92, the CH 47, the AW 101 and the NH 90 CSAR.
Eurocopter is still confident of winning due to commonality with the rest of the fleet even though the NH 90 only would provide an 80% solution but with far lower risk and cost.
I do hope that EADS does not get the deal. They have the monopoly with the German government and its about time to break that. 80 % is not acceptable in my opinion the soldiers should get the best needed to do the job. The US Army bough a hundreds of EC 145s/UH 72s Lakotas so 20 helicopters from Sikorsky or Boeing instead of Eurocopters should not be that big of a threat for the German economy.
Sikorsky even suggested that the aircraft needed for Germany should be assembled here. I guess probably at RUAG, the owner of the former Dornier company.I would appreciate that, a second assembly line for aircraft in Germany apart from an EADS company. I am still mad that they led Dornier go down the drain.....
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
sasd209 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 633 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (2 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 18914 times:
Quoting columba (Reply 5): and while you at it put some CH 53K on the top.
This would be very nice indeed, esp since the USMC is paying for most of the development costs associated with the project. This somewhat lessens Germanys exposure in financial terms and may help provide them with what seems to be a first rate heavy-lift helo.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11738 posts, RR: 51 Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 18247 times:
It seems the CSAR helio requirements really has only two choices, a CH-47G version of the US Army's MH-47G (the CH-47G would carry a lot more fuel than the CH-47F) or a German version of the USMC CH-53K.
I am not really sure, as our army is operating the CH53 in different versions in high numbers and it seems too expensive and big for a lot of missions.
I would really appreciate the Chinook for our CSAR-role, but as i know our government, it will be a one type solution for the CSAR, Navy and probably the Army.
The Chinook doesn´t fit to our frigates for sure, so the only options left are the cyclone and the merlin.
Well, I believe the most likely winner will be the CH 148 Cyclone. I am reading every available article available for this topic.
For the SAR requirement only Sikorsky and Eurocopter were asked, the AW101 is considered too big for our ships and therefore is not being considered by the Navy.
Knowing our government I agree it will be a one type solution and that only leaves the Cyclone, although in the latest Flug Revue there is a hint that some people in the air force actually prefer the Chinook.
If the new Boeing/Eurocopter HTH - which is basically an enlarged Chinook - offers commonality the Chinook might have a chance.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
ThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 18024 times:
Comparing the size of the AW101 and the Cyclone, the Cyclone folded is 14.37m long, 4.72m wide, and 4.69m high, while the AW101 is 15.75m long, 5.60m wide, and 5.30m high. For reference, the NH90 is 13.5m long, 4.62m wide, and 4.1m high, and the Sea King is 14.38m long, 4.45m wide, and 4.88m tall.
For Germany, the hangars will need to be modified; probably by unifying the two smaller hangars onboard the Brandenburg and Sachen class frigates into a single hangar, and replacing the two hangar doors with a single one. It's a major structural mod for the hangars, and don't forget that the flight deck might need additional reinforcing.
That could possibly changed by more powerful engines, an updated rotor system and bigger fuels tanks...
The cabin itself is too small. The navy wants that the helicopter can do all missions without having to install or deinstall all the equipment. The NH 90 is too small for that a higher cabin would not help.
Also if NHI had to develop a new engine, new blades etc...it would take another 10 years. The German military has to learn that sometimes it is easier to buy of the shelf and not develop another product that would not be ready for another 10-20 years.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
NoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7802 posts, RR: 13 Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 16604 times:
Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 14): Comparing the size of the AW101 and the Cyclone, the Cyclone folded is 14.37m long, 4.72m wide, and 4.69m high, while the AW101 is 15.75m long, 5.60m wide, and 5.30m high. For reference, the NH90 is 13.5m long, 4.62m wide, and 4.1m high, and the Sea King is 14.38m long, 4.45m wide, and 4.88m tall.
EC 155: 12.73 l, 3.48 w, 4.35 t.
The Frenchies use them for their frigates as well.
I don't know why the German Navy don't consider them. Or they stay with the (Super-) Lynx, as a replacement isn't really a top priority.
As for CSAR, a capability gap the German Army and Air Force need to fill as quickly as possible, I thought the CH-47 would be best. And even Sikorsky say Luftwaffe have "raised the bar pretty high", which would indicate that Boing or Westland are in the lead. However, I was told that the side door of the Chinook is too narrow to (halfway effortlessly) winch stretchers. It is only 1.22 meters, because the bulges along the sides of the midsection are in the way.
The AW 101 on the other hand would be introduced quite late due to a long list of orders.
Quoting columba (Reply 11): Well, I believe the most likely winner will be the CH 148 Cyclone.
It would be a compromise. Not the best solution for CSAR (range with additional fuel tanks occupying some space in the cabin, small side-doors as well), and slightly too big and heavy for the frigates to accomodate two of them. Or the hangars would have to undergo some heavy modifications. The Cyclone would be a good replacement for the aging Sea Kings (SAR role), though.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3150 posts, RR: 4 Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 16454 times:
I think its funny people put anything as "less risk" than the CH47.
Its done, nothing left to prove on it.
If your not in a limited space like a frigate deck, its just alot more helicopter for your money. The extra size means far greater payloads are possible, along with very good range. Decades of inservice data and experience with the frame mean that it should have by far the lowest risk in future problems creeping up on an operator.
Of course trying to fit one on a frigate is... amusing. So its not going to be one stop shopping. That said the AW101 isn't either and I'm very much not sold on the idea of a 3 engine aircraft that has the same 1 engine out problems that all the traditional 2 engine helicopters have. More places to fail, with no gain in redundancy... Not a good plan. That said, it will be very interesting to see if they can keep it alive a couple of decades so they can upgrade it.... My feeling is that its just going to be a pile of junk till then.
ThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16445 times:
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 22): That said the AW101 isn't either and I'm very much not sold on the idea of a 3 engine aircraft that has the same 1 engine out problems that all the traditional 2 engine helicopters have.
Actually, it is SOP that on long range missions with our CH-149's to have one of the engines on idle or shut down to conserve fuel while flying. The shut down or idled engine can be quickly spooled up if there is a need for the extra power. The AW101 has enough engine power to fly on 2 of the 3 engines.
I think you should read the thread again.
No one said the Chinook would provide a greater risk than every other option. Unless perhaps you consider and old design "risky", but if anything was said against the Chinook than it was that the German MoD would most likely prefer a single-type solution and that the side-door was too small. No one said those restrictions would only apply to the Chinook.
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 22): If your not in a limited space like a frigate deck, its just alot more helicopter for your money.
That was never disputed.
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 22): The extra size means far greater payloads are possible,
That was never disputed as well. But you would need the additional space and payload for the proposed role. If a smaller heli can do the job, why opt for a bigger one, and what are you going to tell the Federal Court of Auditors?
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 22): I'm very much not sold on the idea of a 3 engine aircraft that has the same 1 engine out problems that all the traditional 2 engine helicopters have
As far as I know the AW101 does have a better engine-out reliability than 2-engine helis (everything else should come as surprise). That was one reason the White House considered purchasing one (or a couple) for VVIP transport.
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 22): That said, it will be very interesting to see if they can keep it alive a couple of decades so they can upgrade it.... My feeling is that its just going to be a pile of junk till then.
With the numbers of airframes already sold or on order it is extremely unlikely that the EH101/AW101 is going to be "a pile of junk" anytime soon.
I support the right to arm bears
25 328JET: I have the feeling we are getting Chinooks as an interim solution for CSAR. Boeing and eurocopter are working together on studies about a future large
26 KiwiRob: I wouldn't say that as todays Mercedes aren't anywhere near as well made as pre 1990's Mercedes, quality has taken a significant step back.
27 328JET: No, they are back on track again. Mercedes had some quality issues the last years, but all new models are better then ever.
28 columba: I agree with you on the Chinnok. On the MH 90 I disagree, I had the chance to talk to two Seaking pilots and they told me the Navy does not really wa
29 328JET: Are there any new rumours ? We have a new minister of defense (thanks god...!!!). So maybe at least the urgent CSAR decision will not be postponed tim
30 columba: No new rumors around, I am reading some German aviation forums on a regular basis but nothing new there either. Also nothing from the Sea King pilot
31 328JET: According the latest issue of teh Flug Revue magazine, germany has signed a contract with Eurocopter. Medevac kits which can be installed within 30min
32 L-188: Too bad the HH-60 wasn't requested/offered. The Seahawks/jay hawk platform I would argue would be the most reliBleof the lot
33 oldeuropean: You do! Agusta Westland is an Italian company!
34 columba: But this has nothing to do with Navy SAR or the Luftwaffe CSAR requirements. The Medevac kits are something else and will be used in Afganistan.
35 328JET: I agree that the navy helicopter is most likely a different story. But to assume, that our small forces will receive Medevac kits in 2012 AND also a
36 Flying-Tiger: Will probably not really fit on the heli deck of the F-122s as well as in the hangar. Have seen such a bird land on one of these couple of years ago
37 mffoda: The flight deck can handle Sea King helicopters that have a 19 meter rotor diameter. The The SH-60 has a rotor diameter under 16.5 meters. The SH-60
38 L-188: Still n the case I'd say a Blackhawks/Seahawks varient has a nearly thirty year operational history behind it. It works, it isnt experimental. And I w
39 328JET: According the latest issue of the "Flug Revue" the german navy will decide at years end. In the moment the Cyclone is the favourite.