Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
Sign in to follow this  
fly_tornado

Australia abandoning its Tiger Attack helos

Recommended Posts

Australia bought its Tiger ARH attack helicopters only eight years ago, and now it wants to scrap all 22 of them. Even more embarrassing, the Tiger has still not yet achieved “final operational capability” — meaning the helicopter never fully became ready for combat.

 

http://warisboring.com/articles/australia-to-ditch-its-tiger-gunships-which-have-never-seen-combat/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like your experiences with the SH2...

 

When you fellas gave up and sold off the SH2's for a song, Kiwi Air bought them up for pennies on the dollar and the RNZAF has them up to scratch, working fine and in the fleet.

 

What's wrong with your Maintenance and Assembly crews? Can't they manage Tab-A into Slot-B and use M8 Nylock?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The supplier could not bring them up to spec and the contract was cancelled on mutual terms - I am not sure if the Oz government took a bath but clearly in early 2007 they were uninspired with the capability of the supplier to deliver something that the Navy could reliably use. It appears that all the planes were returned to the vendor.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The supplier could not bring them up to spec and the contract was cancelled on mutual terms - I am not sure if the Oz government took a bath but clearly in early 2007 they were uninspired with the capability of the supplier to deliver something that the Navy could reliably use. It appears that all the planes were returned to the vendor.

 

The Kaman Seasprites?

 

Returned to Kaman by the RAN, bought by the RNZAF on behalf of the RNZN in 2013, expensive faulty Australian custom modifications junked and reliable standard systems installed instead, currently flying without problems.

 

They got binned with only 1200 hours or so on the airframes after full strip and refurbish to 0 hours, the 5 RNZAF birds they are replacing (4 after a certain incident in bad weather at sea, I don't think that one ever came out of maintenance, might have become the parts bird and the parts bird shifted into the fleet....

 

) have a LOT of hours on them now.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1304/S00386/seasprite-helicopter-project-approved.htm

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia has a very good reputation in working like this when it comes to acquisitions.

 

"So, defence wants to buy a dog for 50 bucks. DMO says no, not when we can buy a cat for 30. DMO goes ahead and purchases a cat. After years of field trials, it is decided that the cat cannot perform the function of a dog. Defence says look, we can still get a dog for 50 bucks, it's all good. DMO says no, we've already got the cat, and we can retrofit it out to perform the function of a dog for only 45 bucks! Thats still cheaper than the dog! DMO kit the cat out, and with a lot of screaming and shouting, the cat almost passes the tests. DMO decide to lower the standard of the test because it is unfair on the cat, who is feeling belittled because it is expected to pass the dog test. DMO hire a cat specialist for 30 bucks to design a testing process for the cat. Once the testing process is tailored to suit the cat, it passes with flying colours! DMO supply defence with the upgraded cat. Once in use, defence discovers that the cat is not functional as a dog, and demands a dog. DMO have no money left to purchase a dog after project cat blew out the budget, and defence has no choice but to put up with the cat."

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the SH2 saga, Aussie navy wants a helo that can fly hands off in auto-hover with a crew of 2 and buys low hour second-hand copies of an old design made to fly hands on under pilots control with a crew of 3 and attempts to shoehorn in a non-supported autopilot off their own bat and find they can't do it meaning the airframes sit round for years doing nothing.

 

Turn around, sell them to the RNZAF navy support Sqn for pennies on the dollar who proceed to rip out the botch job and fit the tried and true old system for 3 men as used in their new-built trouble free and now very high hour airframes to the low hour ex Aussie (and previous others) airframes and start racking up the hours in operational use.

 

Meanwhile the RAN goes and buys a bigger more sophisticated design that has the desired capabilities built in from the factory.

 

Imagine how much could have been saved if they had done that in the beginning?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like the SH2 saga, Aussie navy wants a helo that can fly hands off in auto-hover with a crew of 2 and buys low hour second-hand copies of an old design made to fly hands on under pilots control with a crew of 3 and attempts to shoehorn in a non-supported autopilot off their own bat and find they can't do it meaning the airframes sit round for years doing nothing.Turn around, sell them to the RNZAF navy support Sqn for pennies on the dollar who proceed to rip out the botch job and fit the tried and true old system for 3 men as used in their new-built trouble free and now very high hour airframes to the low hour ex Aussie (and previous others) airframes and start racking up the hours in operational use.

 

Meanwhile the RAN goes and buys a bigger more sophisticated design that has the desired capabilities built in from the factory.

 

Imagine how much could have been saved if they had done that in the beginning?

Quite clearly Kaman could not do what they had contracted to do. The perils of contracting!! It would appear that NZ does not have a 2 person auto-hover capability or in fact any auto-hover capability. If that is what NZ wants, that is their call. Just don't ask or expect Kaman to deliver bleeding edge technology.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SH2 WAS bleeding edge when it was new, but it's an old fly-by-cable system dating back before computerised flight controls were evisioned. Remember the SH-2 first flew in 1959 and the SH2G of the late 80s is really only a better set of engines and a glass cockpit on the old strengthened airframe.

 

The U/H/M/S-60 family is 20 years newer and has somewhere around 4000 made of the various different versions, compared to the approx 200 SH-2 helos made. Plenty of off the shelf upgrades to bolt into the SH-60's for the RAN tht have been funded and debugged by many previous users.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The SH2 WAS bleeding edge when it was new, but it's an old fly-by-cable system dating back before computerised flight controls were evisioned. Remember the SH-2 first flew in 1959 and the SH2G of the late 80s is really only a better set of engines and a glass cockpit on the old strengthened airframe.The U/H/M/S-60 family is 20 years newer and has somewhere around 4000 made of the various different versions, compared to the approx 200 SH-2 helos made. Plenty of off the shelf upgrades to bolt into the SH-60's for the RAN tht have been funded and debugged by many previous users.

Defence does not build. it buys. The contractor was doing the work not defence.

 

If you rip the guts out of a biscuit box you can stuff a whole new, improved system inside. The fact that the contractor was unable to achieve that says more about the lack of competency of the contractor than than of defence.

 

I think it is fair to say that NZ got a good deal but don't expect to get a more fully autonomous system from that contractor.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later for your post to be seen If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...