Author Topic: Light utility heli's  (Read 1078 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pink Panther

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« on: February 27, 2004, 06:09:11 pm »
An article in this weeks flight international mentions the government will shortly be looking to put out to tender the purchase of six LUH for the aercorp.No type mentioned?

Offline Taj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2004, 06:46:01 pm »
Six?'<img'>?'<img'>
No way we can replace 14 helis with six.Something is not being retired methinks.

Offline MatRotor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2004, 09:20:12 pm »
Dauphins are definitely gone starting this summer.
So if you can do approx 2000 hrs with seven allouettes
Ergo with a newer type of heli with lower maintenance needs you can fly the same hours with less aircraft. It doesn't make sense but you have to remember a few facts
A. we have the lowest per capita spending on defence in europe if not the developed world
B. the brightest TD doesn't often get lumbered with defence
C. defence budget is managed by bean counters whose only aim to show how many beans saved not to provide "value for money" for want of a better word

Also consider guys the article in flight says we operate two squirrels for the gardai, there is one and an EC 135. small point but they might check their facts.
Never let the truth stand in the way of a good rumour

Offline alpha foxtrot 07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #3 on: February 27, 2004, 11:44:05 pm »
what the corps needs is 12 blackhawks, so mister smith if your reading this 'BUY 12 BLACKHAWKS'
you're not lost until you're lost at mach 3

Offline pilatus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2004, 05:10:37 pm »
mat rotor you might be slightly incorrect about maintainance of the heli's(or mayb im wrong?)but because the a111's are so basic in design its easier to maintain these than most of the modern heli's flying now?look at the dauphins they're not even half as old as the a111's but they are going because they are to complex a machine to maintain and overhaul.the a111's could fly another 20 years if the spares were still avaible for them.and taj there are 13 air corps light heli's not 14.also the corps no longer has to worry about sar so the number of heli's can be reduced now but stil 6 does sound very low.if 10 blackhawks were bought it would allow the corps to support oversea's deployments but not something like the ec-135 which is being considered. '[:sus:'
above and beyond

Offline Taj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #5 on: February 28, 2004, 06:30:01 pm »
Even if we do get 12 Blackhawks,I would be doubtful we would see an overseas deployment of them in the short to medium term.Due to the experience of the Rangers in East Timor and more recently in Liberia,the best that could be hoped in the short term really is to provide training in heli insertions and extractions,for section sized components.
Pilatus,as regards the number of helis,true 13 actually in service,fourteen including the crashed Gazelle and fifteen if Dauphin 248 is included.
If the overall Availability rate of the current fleet(of 13) is as low as,say 50% then 6 machines are available at all times.
If the 6 new machines have an Availability rate of say 75%
then 4 machines are available at all times.
That is still a reduction in machines available at any one time of 33%.
When training time is taken into account,how many machines will actually be available for actual operations.
One of the major limiting factors for the IAC, has always been the limited numbers of airframes available.
Think about this:
Since the current Minister took charge, changes to the fleet(accounting for the unfortunate crashes as well) will be-if we are reading the current plans correctly
Going/Gone:             Replaced by:
        6 x Fouga's               8 x PC-9
        7 x Marchetti            
        5 x Dauphins              
        8 x Alouettes
        2 x Gazelle                6 X LUH
        1 x SKA                    1 x Lear

Total: 29 Aircraft              15 Aircraft

Progress?'<img'>?'<img'>??





Offline MatRotor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #6 on: February 28, 2004, 09:56:05 pm »
its actually twelve helis(7xal3, 4xdauphin(one in storage), 1xgazelle). the squirrel and 135 belong to the cops. The reason older helis are more maintenance intensive is because the maintenance intervals are shorter, and there is more to do at each inspection compared to newer helis which have less to do at each inspection and longer intervals, usually 50 or 100 hrs .
Never let the truth stand in the way of a good rumour

Offline S-61N

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2004, 01:09:45 pm »
hi guys i'm new to the board,from what i've heard the aercorps plan to buy second hand huey's
this would make alot of sense for several reasons...
1) they are well regarded as being a flexable workhorse chopper
2)have more cabin space than the dauphin
3)spares are not a problem 1000's of hueys are still airborn
4)it's a low maintainance machine by comparison
5) can carry underslung loads i.e munitions/artillery
6)as the usmc have sold their machines back to bell for re-fit(to be replaced by blackhawks) there are vast numbers available now,so they could be delivered very quickly
7)easily upgraded airframe i.e to a four blade rotor instead of two.a wide range of avionics on hand

the dauphin will time expire this summer.the airframes are fine but the avionics are outdated and thats the problem.even to convert the dauphin's to a daytime/overland troop carrier only role would still cost millions per chopper because it's a digital/analog hybrid.

it's ironic that the us offered us (practically) free huey's after vietnam but we declined because of our nutrality,that we could have had a fleet like this years ago.

btw i heard the number was ten? so maybe it's six with an option for another 4

Offline Taj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2004, 03:26:47 pm »
It would be an option if training of the Army was their intended role.What are the opinions on their suitability to overseas deployments in the modern environment?
Would have to question their suitability for night ops unless a UH-1N (twin huey/212) was on the cards.
With the upcoming Wings Ireland mag, Im on the press release mailing list for Bell.They experienced some problems with the upgrading process to UH-1Y standard.
The upgraded engines were producing more heat and this caused structural problems on the tail boom of the aircraft directly beneath the engines exhausts.Apparantly the intended solutuin is to use standard infra red exhaust deflectors as standard.
H-1 program officials paused flight testing February 5 because of
decreased structural strength in tail boom components caused by increased
engine exhaust temperatures and higher loads and torque imparted on the tail
boom by the upgraded T-700 engines.

        "Tail boom heating has had our interest since flight-testing began
in 2000, but the full impact has only recently become apparent," explained
Col. Doug Isleib, H-1 program manager here.  "We'd prefer that these sorts
of things didn't crop up, but we'd rather deal with them now than have them
be problems for Marines out in the fleet.  This is why we do developmental
flight test in the first place."

Offline Imshi-Yallah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2004, 06:21:53 pm »
If there was any chance of the aircorps getting H-1s someone in the aircorp would have heard of it, perhaps someone has relayed to you the fanciful debate had on this and other sites about what an affordable, sensible option 212s would have been as an AIII replacement.

Its funny how a story can gradually attain the status of truth if its passed between enough people.
Second hand H-1s are too knackered to meet european safety standards and refitting them to a level where they could be deployed overseas wouldn't compete on cost against a newer airframe purchase.
‘The hottest place in hell is for those who are neutral’
Dante Alighieri

Offline John K

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
    • MSN
Light utility heli's
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2004, 11:44:41 pm »
Yeah Imshi, and imagine the furore in the press when the story gets out that the Dauphin was phased out due to the avionics being out of date, only for it to be replaced by something that was operational 40 odd years ago!

Offline alpha foxtrot 07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2004, 01:20:30 am »
they should put thr garmin 1000 system in the dauphin.
you're not lost until you're lost at mach 3

Offline John K

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
    • MSN
Light utility heli's
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2004, 11:05:36 am »
D'you reckon that would be cost effective Alpha? Do you think they can backtrack on the statements that the machine is out of date? Is there really a need to replace the Dauphins?

Offline alpha foxtrot 07

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2004, 08:31:24 pm »
the us coast guard are still using them, so it can't be that out of date. if it can still do its job then keep it, plus its the only twin heli the corps own.
you're not lost until you're lost at mach 3

Offline Taj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Light utility heli's
« Reply #14 on: March 10, 2004, 09:23:55 pm »
There was a working group put together to examine upgrading the Dauphin and the best that they came up with was somewhere in the region of 2 million per machine.This was considered excessive.
Personally,extending the in service life of a helicopter for 10 years plus at a cost of 2 million per machine does not seem like much.If they were upgraded with a particular tasking in mind (instead of multi role) I think that they could be a really valuable asset.18 years from state of the art to obsolete?Aircraft are only obsolete when there is no upgrade potential.
There are a lot of electronic components in every modern capable heli.Is the Dept so naive to believe that any new heli purchased will not need a component upgrade 18 years down the road?
All analogue aircraft with the simplicity of the Allouette are a thing of the past.