NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

Lumberton · Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:53 pm

What is the work around, if any? This doesn't sound too encouraging.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...-too-heavy-for-dutch-frigates.html

Quote:
The Netherlands decided in 1991 to participate in the NH-90 program, and ordered twenty [of the NFH-90 naval variant] which should have replaced the current Lynx ship-borne helicopters beginning in 2007.

However, because of the recurring weight issue, that date has been moved back several times. The latest date for their initial delivery has now been pushed back to 2011, de Vries said.

It is not possible to rule out further delays, nor to say what extra costs will arise from the delays, he added.

ptrjong · Fri Jun 12, 2009 4:03 pm

It is overweight and thus underperforming, or is it too heavy for the helicopter plaforms to support its weight?

par13del · Fri Jun 12, 2009 5:11 pm

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 1):
It is overweight and thus underperforming, or is it too heavy for the helicopter plaforms to support its weight?

1. Were the frigates designed before or after the purchase of the helicopters
2. Did the purchases of the helicopter know the specs of the ships as well as the frigate
3. Did the vendor agree to lower the weight to accomodate the frigate

Irrespective of the questions above, why would they still want the helicopter? To reduce the weight to allow operation on the ships may mean lower performance and capability, would be much easier to purchase another naval aircraft off the shelf within the design specs of their ships.

Lumberton · Fri Jun 12, 2009 6:35 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 2):
would be much easier to purchase another naval aircraft off the shelf within the design specs of their ships.

One would certainly think so, but this may be part of some agreement or offset deal. Are the frigates in service?

jwenting · Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:05 pm

Quoting Par13del (Reply 2):
Were the frigates designed before or after the purchase of the helicopters

Most frigates we have were designed around 30 years ago or are based on older ones designed that long ago.
So the specs of the decks were known at the time the chopper was ordered designed.

Of course when the chopper started design it was never thought the ships would last that long, they were slated for replacement around the time the chopper would enter service. Those new ships of course never appeared, victims of budget cuts.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 2):
why would they still want the helicopter

Because the Lynx is a 30 year old maintenance nightmare. They spend more time in the shop waiting for spare parts than they ever are ready to fly (let alone fly).

Quoting Par13del (Reply 2):
would be much easier to purchase another naval aircraft off the shelf within the design specs of their ships.

I don't think there is one. S-70/SH-60 is too American to be acceptable to our political leadership (let alone their overlords in Brussels), EH-101 is too large, Helix is too old and too Russian, anything else lacks the bluewater ASW function.

A342 · Fri Jun 12, 2009 9:10 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 4):
S-70/SH-60 is too American to be acceptable to our political leadership

Uh, what do you then call the F-35 your country is about to buy? (And don't tell me those few European, let alone Dutch parts in the JSF really make a difference).

Lumberton · Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:01 pm

Quoting A342 (Reply 5):
And don't tell me those few European, let alone Dutch parts in the JSF really make a difference).

Its debatable, but IMO, they have a considerable impact. Offsets are a fact of life in the defense business.

[Edited 2009-06-12 15:02:01]

[Edited 2009-06-12 15:03:03]

ptrjong · Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:28 pm

Dutch industry is involved in the NH-90, and there is thus a preference for this design, as would be the case in any country.
I can't answer the questions as to who is to blame for the current problem.
But before shooting down the NH-90 in general - it did take a long time to mature - please have a look at its order book.

Quote:
S-70/SH-60 is too American to be acceptable to our political leadership

That is utter nonsense. The Dutch armed forces always, blindly, ask for US equipment, and get it more often than not (F-104, F-5, F-16, F-35, AH-64, P-3 (some good buys there).

The Dutch Navy seems to make a a habit out of having problems with non-US aircraft, even when they seem to work well enough with other operators (Atlantic, Lynx).

Peter

[Edited 2009-06-12 15:29:37]

[Edited 2009-06-12 15:30:02]

ThePointblank · Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:18 am

Sounds like an issue with deck strengthening; for Canada, with the new CH-148 Cyclones, the ship that is supposed to be carrying them, the Halifax-class frigates as part of their mid-life refit, will have the helicopter deck strengthened, and the landing system moved to accommodate the new helicopter. This was of course expected from the beginning.

jwenting · Sat Jun 13, 2009 5:00 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 5):
what do you then call the F-35 your country is about to buy?

Under heavy opposition from a majority of parliament. The only reason it's not yet been cancelled is because the leading party would have a major bloody nose, they approved initial funding over opposition from the left because of the generated jobs.

It's been the same with pretty much every purchase of US equipment.
The F-16 was chosen over Mirage 2000 and Viggen because the rest of the countries in the program favoured it, and going it alone would be too expensive.

Similar stories can be told about pretty much every other US purchase where there was a European competitor, certainly within the last 25 years or so (when EU control really started to take off).

The Cougar (really a Super Puma with a glass cockpit) was chosen for purely political reasons. The armed forces wanted the UH-60, everyone outside politics wanted it in fact, but Cougar was chosen solely because the French president offered the then-PM (Lubbers) a nice cushy job at the UN for after his retirement from Dutch politics.

Similarly now with the F-16 replacement some of the politicos pushing hardest for the Gripen and Rafale (Eurofighter is too expensive) almost certainly have personal interest resting on the decision, bribes or promises of no-work high-pay jobs.

columba · Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:14 am

Interesting the German Navy is right now evaluating if they should order the MH 90 or look for another alternative. Does anybody know if the German frigates are similar to the Dutch ones and if there would be similar problems ?

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 4):
Because the Lynx is a 30 year old maintenance nightmare. They spend more time in the shop waiting for spare parts than they ever are ready to fly (let alone fly).

The German navy seems to be quite happy with the Lynx the pressing need would be a Seaking replacement our Lynxs are doing fine.

jwenting · Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:54 am

Dutch Lynxes have always had reliability problems, don't ask me why.
Same as the German F-104s which were always in trouble, while the Dutch 104s (ouf of the same assembly line) were among the most reliable in NATO.

Some of the German frigattes are the exact same type as some of the Dutch ones, but we do have others as well.
Could be the newer ships were for some obscure reason designed with smaller flightdecks and/or hangars (more cost cutting?).
Of course the Dutch ships have a Goalkeeper gun mount on the top of the hangar, which might mean there's less headroom if they had to lower the ceiling.

German SeaKings are also not ship-based, and thus the size restrictions of a shipboard heli hangar wouldn't be so much of a factor.

columba · Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:49 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 11):
German SeaKings are also not ship-based, and thus the size restrictions of a shipboard heli hangar wouldn't be so much of a factor.

There are shipbased with the "Frankfurt" and "Berlin". They have been on missons abroad (Somalia etc..)

ptrjong · Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:32 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 11):
Dutch Lynxes have always had reliability problems, don't ask me why.

This is true. The Dutch Navy also always had problems with the Atlantic (even crashing three out of nine I believe).

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 8):
Sounds like an issue with deck strengthening;

Doesn't sound too difficult, does it? I always thought size was an issue for frigate helicopters, but weight..

petertenthije · Sat Jun 13, 2009 2:18 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 4):
Most frigates we have were designed around 30 years ago or are based on older ones designed that long ago.
So the specs of the decks were known at the time the chopper was ordered designed.

That is bull shit and you know it. The Navy only has five or six frigates. One or two M-class frigates, the oldest still in use with the Netherlands Navy is the "Van Amstel" which entered service in 1993. The oldest entered service in 1991, so the max weight of the helicopter deck was well known. The M-class frigates are slated for replacement by four new corvettes the first one started construction only a few months ago.
The main component of the navy are four 7-Provincien class frigates. These are among, if not the, most advanced frigates worldwide. The first one entered service in 2002. The last one entered service in 2005.

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 7):
The Dutch Navy seems to make a a habit out of having problems with non-US aircraft, even when they seem to work well enough with other operators (Atlantic, Lynx).

Really, when was the last time the Navy operated a US aircraft? The Orion was retired a few years ago and the last US build helicopter goes back decades.

ThePointblank · Sat Jun 13, 2009 6:48 pm

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 13):

Doesn't sound too difficult, does it? I always thought size was an issue for frigate helicopters, but weight..

The ships will need go into a major refit that would take them out of service for a couple of months. Furthermore, they will need to check the dimensions of the hangar door to ensure that the new helicopters will fit.

Lumberton · Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:25 pm

Modifying the ships is not as easy as it sounds. Additional weight could affect the sea keeping characteristics of the vessels, particularly if its the main deck. This has an impact on the righting arm and affects the way the ship rolls--particularly in rough sea states.

ptrjong · Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:49 pm

Quoting Petertenthije (Reply 14):

Really, when was the last time the Navy operated a US aircraft?

OK, then read my post as follows: They often seem to have problems with aircraft that other operators are fine with.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 15):
they will need to check the dimensions of the hangar door to ensure that the new helicopters will fit.

That sounds like an brilliant idea Smile

ThePointblank · Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:13 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 16):
Modifying the ships is not as easy as it sounds. Additional weight could affect the sea keeping characteristics of the vessels, particularly if its the main deck. This has an impact on the righting arm and affects the way the ship rolls--particularly in rough sea states.

The De Zeven Provinciën class frigates are big ships; 6,000 tons full load. Considerably bigger than the US Perry class frigates, and technically, would be small destroyers. The old Karel Doorman class frigates are a little smaller, so for them, it may be more of a problem.

jwenting · Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:38 am

Quoting Petertenthije (Reply 14):
That is bull shit and you know it. The Navy only has five or six frigates.

we've degenerated that much? The M class entered service in the early-mid 1980s btw.
The S class (which I thought were still in service, at least some of them, and with Germany too) for which the Lynx was purchased are of 1970s vintage.

Guess I'm stuck with an old image of a fleet of some 20 frigates, like we used to have until a few years ago.

ptrjong · Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:20 pm

I found some useful facts in a Volkskrant newspaper article from May 30, in Dutch only:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/archief_gra...e_zwaar_voor_Nederlandse_fregatten

Abstract in English:

Both the weight and vibration problems have been worrying both the Dutch and other NH-90 partners for years. In addition to cracks in the tail, cracks have apparently now been found in the part [bulkhead?] between the cabin and tail. The manufcaturer recently attempted to fix the problem by adding weight, without much avail, and this has also made the NH-90 500 kg heavier [seems excessive, perhaps an all-in figure for all weight overruns?] It now weighs in slighty over 10 tonnes. The M class frigates [Karel Doorman class] have not been designed for helos of over 10 tonnes. Earlier, NHI tried to solve the vibrations by fitting a sizeable disc [flinke schijf] near the rotor. However, this made the NH-90 too tall for the hangar doors of the eight [Doorman class] frigates.

Zkpilot · Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:50 pm

The NH-90 is an excellent helo, however for naval use aboard a frigate it is a very large helo compared to most types typically operated. What do the Dutch intend to do with such a large helo?? The only reason why you would need a helo that big aboard a frigate is to be able to carry a large number of people onboard (ie rescue off an oilrig) or to tow something large through the water. Carrying the likes of torpedos, ASM etc does not require such a large helo.

ThePointblank · Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:55 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 21):
The NH-90 is an excellent helo, however for naval use aboard a frigate it is a very large helo compared to most types typically operated. What do the Dutch intend to do with such a large helo?? The only reason why you would need a helo that big aboard a frigate is to be able to carry a large number of people onboard (ie rescue off an oilrig) or to tow something large through the water. Carrying the likes of torpedos, ASM etc does not require such a large helo.

Not as big as some of the other competitors; the AW101 is a even bigger helicopter, and so is the Eurocopter EC225 and the Sikorsky S-92.

Bigger is at times better; bigger means more room for the crew inside to work in, bigger means more sensors, and of course, bigger means more range.

trex8 · Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:01 am

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 20):
has also made the NH-90 500 kg heavier [seems excessive, perhaps an all-in figure for all weight overruns?] It now weighs in slighty over 10 tonnes. The M class frigates [Karel Doorman class] have not been designed for helos of over 10 tonnes.

what idiot in the Koninklijke Marine chose a 10 tonne chopper to fly off decks designed only for 10 tonnes??

LifelinerOne · Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:17 am

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
The Cougar (really a Super Puma with a glass cockpit) was chosen for purely political reasons. The armed forces wanted the UH-60, everyone outside politics wanted it in fact, but Cougar was chosen solely because the French president offered the then-PM (Lubbers) a nice cushy job at the UN for after his retirement from Dutch politics.

There was also the little fact that the Cougars were waaaay cheaper to buy than the Black Hawks...

Cheers! wave

trex8 · Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:57 pm

Kaman have a nice bunch of smaller choppers which are hardly used which may be just what is needed here! Big grin

KennyK · Fri Jul 17, 2009 6:18 pm

What about the next generation SuperLynx that the UK Royal Navy are to get to replace their older Lynxes from 2015?

Arniepie · Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:14 pm

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
It's been the same with pretty much every purchase of US equipment.
The F-16 was chosen over Mirage
2000 and Viggen because the rest of the countries in the program favoured it, and going it alone would be too expensive.

That must be one of the most blatant twisting of facts if I ever seen one, the F-16 was chosen by then MoD Henk Vredeling in stead of the F-18 pushed by Northrop, from the Dutch side this was mainly done to give the order to a direct competitor (in those days anyway ) from Lockheed Martin and Northrop to burry the nasty old Lockheed-affair and the new Northrop-affair both involving HRH Prince Bernard.
The Northrop affair was properly tackled by the Den Uyl government to prevent a potentially major monarchial crisis.

BTW there where 4 partners in that deal, in Belgium the vote could have gone either way, in Danmark there was a clear preference for one of the 2 American designs and Norway (as always) was deathset for the US too, preferably the F-16.
In hindsight either the F-18 and F-16 where good choices and most consider the F-16 a real successtory, certainly after the MLU.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9):
Similarly now with the F-16 replacement some of the politicos pushing hardest for the Gripen and Rafale (Eurofighter is too expensive) almost certainly have personal interest resting on the decision, bribes or promises of no-work high-pay jobs.

That's interesting , never heard that accusation before (not that I deem it impossible though).
With all the problems surrounding the new JSF I would be more interested knowing why countries like NL, NO, DK, UK and IT seem so determined not to consider anything else but JSF, maybe the bribing comes more from the Lockheed side ( AGAIN ) I would guess (If you allow me also to just wildly speculate and accuse parties involved)

PS; that JSF program just ran into another hurdle, let's see where that leads to.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...kheed-alleges-software-lapses.html

Quoting fair quote from the article:
Davis' lawsuit recommends to the court that Lockheed should "immediately" stop developing software for the F-35 to "avoid further waste" of resources and the "serious risks" to F-35 pilots.

"The software contains substantial corruption," says the lawsuit, "which has multiplied significantly the risks that the software will not operate as intended."

The lawsuit also alleges that Davis informed Lockheed managers of the software problems and attempted to change their processes to meet the government's contractual standards.

.........

"Much of the hundreds of millions of dollars spent, thus far, have been wasted because of [Lockheed's] dishonest conduct which has created an unacceptably dangerous product,"

NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

RE: NH-90 Still Too Heavy For Dutch Frigates

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net