AB139 Pics

[Fouga]

'>

[The Blue Max]

Personally im really looking forward to the the deliveries of the AgustaBell AB139s so far they look like they will be a great contribution to Defence Forces in general and not just the IAC but will provide great services to the other key Parthner in the DF.

I would also think along similiar lines that it would be quite simple to upgrade the AB139s to improve the Add-On-Armour to increase the aircraft "Ballistics Tolerance" as there is high level protection add-on systems availible that are light and compact (i think IAI make them or similiar crowd) which will not adversely effect the Helicopters performance etc...

Are Law Enforcement models are cumtomised for the IAC but they have similiar charteristics to the Military Spec one and should only need a little need further a little further capital to upgrade them to this standard.  

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi all
I know some of the heads on the procurement board dealing with the 139s and they are very mindful of the Dauphin saga and are anxious not to overload this new aircraft, before it even gets into service...I see the Swedish have bought A109s, for both land and maritime roles.The A109 looks like it's loaded up to the gills with extra toys.I hope they don't end up with their own version of the Dauphins. I appreciate that it's hard to fit the aircraft out for the task and not allow it to gain weight and eat into the useful load,but, they absolutely have to avoid another Dauphin debacle.
I think every manufacturer touting a helicopter as a troop carrier should have a UH-1D placed before him and be told" this is what you have to replace..go to it".
regards
GttC

[Fouga]

Quote (GoneToTheCanner @ 20 Feb. 2006,23:41)

I think every manufacturer touting a helicopter as a troop carrier should have a UH-1D placed before him and be told" this is what you have to replace..go to it".

Does the UH60 Blackhawk not measure up then?

[sealion]

Quote (Fouga @ 21 Feb. 2006,14:59)

Quote (GoneToTheCanner @ 20 Feb. 2006,23:41) I think every manufacturer touting a helicopter as a troop carrier should have a UH-1D placed before him and be told" this is what you have to replace..go to it". Does the UH60 Blackhawk not measure up then?

If it did, would Bell be upgrading Hueys to UH1-Y standards for the USMC?

[Fouga]

Whats wrong with the Blackhawk then?

[sealion]

Over complicated.

on average 25 hours maintenance for every hours flight,
cramped crew cabin

For starters.

Hah! Hillarious!

There is no military version of the AB139. The version that they are advertising is based on the IAC and (Quatari police??) versions that have been ordered. All the mentions of armour are add ons that are not currently produced by AB but are produced to order by an American firm. The UH 139 mooted for the Yank military is essentially along the same lines as the IAC model, but AB never carried out any ballistic tolerence on its head or tail to my knowledge and to do so would mean a serious re-design. It's still not a military spec helicopter, but the yanks will be buying off the shelf for their next UH, which means that they are prepared to forgo the expense of developing a ballistic tolerent (read heavy and expensive) helicopter for one that is proven and will be affordable. Funny to read that the UH 1 is still essentially in the running with the EP 412. I wonder how an EP 412 compares with a UH1Y?

[Old Redeye]

In a quick aside before I get busted for straying...the USMC should have bought Blackhawks, they would be flying right now off the amphibs alongside new Navalized versions of Blackhawks that provide SAR.  The UH-1Y program is an expensive disastor that comes from the marines' insular culture.  They refused to buy something the Army uses and naively believed it would be cheaper to rebuild existing airframes - not only a false assumption, but technically problematic - all Y's will now be new build aircraft.  The Y's will be more expensive, less capable and harder to maintain than Blackhawks and will not be in service for years yet after a tortured, overcost development program.  The better question for you to ask is why no one else is rushing to buy Y's?  Because every other new aircraft in the same class, including the 139, is far superior and more economical.

[Viper]

Quick question for Frank: In your piece on the Air Corps in the European Airm Arms survey in AFM last year, you mentioned the AC were looking for 8 AB 139s; was this a typo, or are they eventually looking for 8 of these machines?

[Frank]

Hi Viper,

Nope, not a typo, the Air Corps have 4 heli's on order, with an option on 2 more and I was told that they hoped eventually to operate a total fleet of 8, but nothing more than 4 has so far been comfirmed.


Regards,

Frank.

[Viper]

Coolabula, thanks Frank.

[SousaTeuszii]

Interesting to note that CHC Holland is having a lot of trouble with their 139s. I believe exausts are imploding (Not in a huge way but more denting inwards) and have to be changed every 90 hrs while avionics racks are cracking. The aft CoG is also causing problems allowing only 200kgs to be put in the baggage area, this may not even be with full fuel.
Just new aircraft problems I guess!
ST

[sealion]

When were they delivered?

[clan]

It is possible I am mad, but I remember when the tender proposal came out. The Aircraft had to be proven Military Aircraft and built to Military spec the winning bidder also had to provide interim aircraft until the order was completed.

Was this the case?