AIR9000 what's the big problem

[cherry]

Does anyone have any idea on why there is such a big hold up with determining what the plan for the future of the all rotary aircraft within the ADF will be? It was slightly relieving to hear the announcement of the MRH-90 being selected as the new troop lift chopper to operate from our new amphib ships, but what is the big problem with those making the decision on the rationalisation of our chopper fleet? I understand that some believe that the Blackhawk is best suited to the anti-terrorism role so wouldn't the most logical step be to retain and upgrade a portion of these choppers and simply replace the remainder Blackhawks with the MRH-90? And the Seahawks, Seakings and Seasprite all need to be replaced with the ASW and trooplift versions of the MRH-90 as well. This would be true rationalisation of the fleet giving a common fleet with common maintenance and training.
Would this solution be feasible?
In addition to the 12 trooplift MRH-90 so far selected an additional 28 are purchased for the Army.
The 7 Seakings, 16 Seahawks and 11 Seasprites are replaced with 34 MRH-90 in a combination of trooplift and ASW.
The Chinooks should be upgraded to the latest version but marinised too to enable operations at sea, and then supplemented with an additional 4 new built Chinooks under AIR8000 to strengthen the squadron.
A single light utility chopper leased to train pilots from both Navy and Army.

This would give Army 40 trooplift choppers, 10 heavy lift choppers and 22 armed recon choppers. 12 Blackhawks could be retained and upgraded, 6 for east coast and 6 for west coast anti-terrorism.
Navy would have 34 MRH-90 (a mixture of ASW & trooplift) for a number of roles and supply lift. If more are required with new ships entering service then additional choppers can be purchased.
Industry are sick of waiting, and the public are sick of waiting and have every right to be worried about the poor management of this project so far. It has disaster written all over it!
Thoughts anyone?

 

[knightrider4]

I think the big problem is money. The economies stalling a little due to lack of skilled labor and the budget could be coming under a bit of scrutiny. As it stands at the moment AIR 9000 has done the exact opposite to what it was meant to achieve and that was decrese the aircraft types flown by the ADF.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The problems with the ADF come back to money a lot of the time, but it's not the only problem. Take AIR 9000 Phase 2 for example. It was a contract let out to acquire 12 additional troop lift helo's. On the face of it, a fairly simple project. Defence forces all around the world acquire new build helo's every single year. Troop lift helo's aren't THE most complicated piece of hardware going around, though of course, there are fairly high tech examples, and given the variety available shouldn't really prove that challenging to acquire.

Now, defence was looking at rationalising it's entire helo' fleet with this project. To replace the Blackhawk fleet and provide additional troop lift helo's, 40 MRH-90's or 48 UH-60M Blackhawks were to be acquired. For whatever reason defence chose MRH-90 helo's, but decided to proceed only with the acquisition of phase 2, the additional 12 helo's.

The problems this caused was the offer for the helo was based on what defence asked for, ie: the price of 40 helo's. Instead defence has gone and only chosen 12 and is now "re-evaluating" the requirements for the rest of it's helo fleet. This decision now means, the price and industry involvement has to be "re-negotiated" by defence. On top of this, defence has decided to "upgrade" the specifications and equipment fit of the helo's it will acquire, since deciding to acquire this helo. Unfortunately it smacks of amateurism that defence apparently can't decide what it wants to buy even when the money IS available...

Lord knows what will happen with the rest of AIR 9000, but I think you're right Cherry.

I think MRH-90 will replace the Blackhawk in Army (eventually) and will replace Seahawk and Sea King in the Navy. (The MRH-90 Sea King replacement will probably be sped up given the events of the last few days)... I'm betting the Sea Sprites will be kept for a long time, given that they are, for all intents and purposes, brand new helo's and have not even entered limited operational service as yet.

I also reckon some of the Blackhawks will be retained and transferred to the Special Operations Command and operated soley in support of the specwarries.

The Chinooks will be upgraded, though I'm not sure about additional examples being acquired. Britain is having great difficulty in acquiring new examples at present as the USAF/US Army are acquiring every example they can get.

The Iroquois will be retired as soon as the Phase 2 MRH's are in service and the Kiowa's will be gone as soon as the ARH's achieve full operational capability. It's ironic that AIR 87 (the Tiger ARH project) is proceeding far more smoothly than AIR 9000. The reason is that the money was made available, defence decided EXACTLY what it wanted and then simply went and bought it. End result: a project that is "on time and on budget" to quote the talking heads...

 

[cherry]

Can anyone tell me if the Adelaide Class guided missile frigates always operate with 2 Seahawk helos on operations? If this is so, is it possible that the second helo be replaced by some sort of UAV replacement, thus freeing up another 4 Seahawks possibly for the new AWD. This may save some money and allow this money to be spent on other things.

 

[nz enthusiast]

The Adelaide Class guided missile frigates from what I know operate with one seahawk but have the capability to support two if needed.
Problem with your idea is, How much are the UCAV going to cost? Your suggesting an unmanned attack helicopter which are at the moment still in testing, mainly the US with its unmanned litle bird. There was an idea i had of createing a naval commanche helicopter.
You guys only really need to replace your seakings, they are the only ones that are actually old, the seahawks and seasprites are fine. Consider replaceing the seahawks around the time the Adelaide Class guided missile frigates come up for replacement, seasprites when the anzacs come up for replacement.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I'm pretty sure the Adelaide Class frigates can operate 2 helo's, but not 2 "large" or medium helo's. The Adelaide class frigates I've seen have had a Sea Hawk and Squirrel operating from them. I've not seen 2x Sea Hawks operated from them.

 

[AMTP10E]

I'm pretty sure the Adelaide Class frigates can operate 2 helo's, but not 2 "large" or medium helo's. The Adelaide class frigates I've seen have had a Sea Hawk and Squirrel operating from them. I've not seen 2x Sea Hawks operated from them.

The Adelaide class can and has operated 2 Seahawks at the same time. Granted, it is a little tight in the hanger, but they can do it.

The major limiting factor is the number of crews for the Seakings and the number of airframes available at the same time.

 

[cherry]

Problem with your idea is, How much are the UCAV going to cost? Your suggesting an unmanned attack helicopter which are at the moment still in testing, mainly the US with its unmanned litle bird.

I never said anything about an unmanned "combat" aerial vehicle. Why I am implying, is that the new air warfare destroyers may be equipped with a UAV capability to be used in conjunction with the chosen helo for the platform. If this eventuates, then logic would say (and I know the word "logic" is a dangerous one to use when dealing with Government departments), that our other surface platforms such as the Adelaide Class and ANZAC Class frigates should look at using the same structure. The benefits of doing this are things like making surplus Seahawks available to the rest of the fleet, it may reduce manning requirements on board our ships, the UAV can do such dangerous and mundane tasks as surveillance, find, track and designate targets, conduct battle damage assessments, and act as a communications relay if required. I know that VTOL UAV technology is rather immature at this stage, but by the time the AWD enters our waters this technology would have matured to the point where it would be a viable option for all our surface vessels. There are many types of VTOL UAVs out there at the moment, with the most renowned being the Firescout which, yes, is or can be armed with rockets. But, there are others such as the Schiebel Camcopter S-100 which is a lot smaller and cannot be armed.

 

[cherry]

I guess it it coming closer and closer to crunch time for AIR 9000. Rumours are constantly indicating that around 9th May (federal budget time) is the time where we will finally find out what the hell is happening with AIR 9000. Some rumours are stating that more Chinook helicopters will be purchased to supplement the existing 6 platforms that will eventually be upgraded to possibly the CH-47F model. Other rumours indicate that 12 blackhawks will be retained when the blackhawk fleet is sold off for new-build MRH-90s. These 12 blackhawks will most likely be upgraded to the MH-60M model for SOF to operate.

Can anyone please tell me if the CH-47F can be fitted with a retractable refuelling probe for this model? The reason I ask is that there are also rumours that another 6 C-130J aircraft will be purchased and quite possibly come in the KC-130J model. If this is correct, then 12 x MH-60M and 12 x CH-47F with refuelling probes supported by 6 x KC-130J would make quite a helo force with great range for ADF.

 

[Cootamundra]

Can anyone please tell me if the CH-47F can be fitted with a retractable refuelling probe for this model? The reason I ask is that there are also rumours that another 6 C-130J aircraft will be purchased and quite possibly come in the KC-130J model. If this is correct, then 12 x MH-60M and 12 x CH-47F with refuelling probes supported by 6 x KC-130J would make quite a helo force with great range for ADF.

Cherry I'm not sure if it is retractable but the Chook can be fitted with a refuelling probe. I too have heard those rumours however I actually read about them in this months Defence Today. In there they discuss a few options including Turbo Caribous but the option I liked was additional 12 x CH-47Fs, C-130J-30 fitted as tanker/transport and upgrading 6 of the C-130H models to MC-130H specifically for SOCOMD.

Guess none of us will know until next month!

 

[gf0012-aust]

Cherry I'm not sure if it is retractable but the Chook can be fitted with a refuelling probe. I too have heard those rumours however I actually read about them in this months Defence Today. In there they discuss a few options including Turbo Caribous but the option I liked was additional 12 x CH-47Fs, C-130J-30 fitted as tanker/transport and upgrading 6 of the C-130H models to MC-130H specifically for SOCOMD.

Guess none of us will know until next month!

Turbo Caribous? Thats been killed off 4 years ago - and it won't get up now. I'd bet my house on it.

The DCP is going to have a few goodies in it to keep people happy.

 

[cherry]

The DCP is going to have a few goodies in it to keep people happy.

Would you like to elaborate? Any idea on an approximate date for the DCP release. I have heard on or around 9th of May and also late June??????

 

[Supe]

GF has been teasing folks in Stratpage about the 'goodies'. He won't budge on specifics.

've haf vays and means off making you talk!'

 

[Cootamundra]

GF has been teasing folks in Stratpage about the 'goodies'. He won't budge on specifics.

've haf vays and means off making you talk!'

Yep all we need is the internet forum equiv of the rack so that we could torture gf till he talks. Hot coals under the rack anyone!?:

 

[Magoo]

Would you like to elaborate? Any idea on an approximate date for the DCP release. I have heard on or around 9th of May and also late June??????

Look for it to be released at the Defence+Industry conference in Canberra in July.

As for AIR9000, here is what you'll 'probably' see around the 2010 timeframe.

Kiowa - }
Squirrell - } replaced by common LUH type (UH-145 or similar), some possibly config'd for SF work.
Iroquois - }
Sea King - replaced by MRH-90
Seasprite - in service...maybe!
Seahawk - in service but replacement on order - MRH-90
Black Hawk - all but 12 replaced by MRH-90. 12 upgraded & retained by SOCOM.
MRH-90 - about 30 in service
Tiger ARH - in service, sorted and a world-beater
Chinook - Six CH-47Ds upgraded to CH-47F plus six additional CH-47F (all with AAR)

Not quite the rationalised target of four types, but pretty close.

Magoo

 

[alexsa]

The Adelaide class can and has operated 2 Seahawks at the same time. Granted, it is a little tight in the hanger, but they can do it.

The major limiting factor is the number of crews for the Seakings and the number of airframes available at the same time.

The Australian FFG7 has two seperate hangers each capable of holding one Seahawk helo. If the airframes and crew are available the ship could support 2 Seahawks.

 

[cherry]

With the likelihood of 6-7 MRH-90 to replace the Seakings and the original 28 MRH-90 to replace the Blackhawks, adding up to around 34 new build MRH-90, does anyone believe that there may be a lower number of MRH-90s purchased because there may also be a purchase of another 4-6 Chinooks and the retention of 12 SOF Blackhawks? I certainly hope not, but it may be a possibility.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I guess it depends how well Army is travelling with pilot, maintainers etc. It would be rather pointless for Army to have 40 MRH-90's, 10-12 Chooks, and 12 SOCOMD Blackhawks in-service, if they were grounded the majority of the time for want of pilots etc. Navy is also suffering badly with pilot numbers and is from al reports scratching to "find people to put to sea" on occasion.

Hence my statement a week or 2 back, "for once the ADF's biggest problem isn't funding"...

PersonallyI think the above scenario is the most likely. Special Forces REALLY want Blackhawks for some reason, and Government seems determined to consolidate our helo fleets on MRH-90 in the longer term (which is fine by me).

I think in the short term, SeaKing and Blackhawk and Iroquois will be replaced by MRH-90, leaving ADF with a helo fleet of MRH-90, Chinook, Tiger (which will replace Kiowa), Blackhawk, Seahawk, Seasprite and the new LUH helo for Army and Navy (if they can ever agree on what they want). Not exactly what they were trying to achieve under AIR-9000 but still better than the 10 separate types we operate now...

 

[scraw]

This was in the paper yesterday or the day before:

Nelson chopper bungle feared
By Jason Koutsoukis, Canberra
April 23, 2006

ARMY insiders fear the Federal Government is about to commit another procurement bungle by opting to spend millions in taxpayers' money on a troubled European troop-lift helicopter.

On Wednesday, federal cabinet's National Security Committee is set to consider the purchase of up to 34 new troop-lift helicopters. Army insiders say Defence Minister Brendan Nelson is leaning towards the European-made MRH-90, which cost $100 million each.

The Army is arguing for the US-made Sikorsky Black Hawk, which costs about $60 million.

Australia's helicopter fleet is regarded by many within the Defence Department as a mess, leaving Australia dangerously exposed. The ADF's two latest purchases — a dozen MRH-90 helicopters for $1.2 billion and 22 Tiger attack helicopters for $1.3 billion — are both beset by massive cost blow-outs and delays in delivery.

The Navy's Sea King helicopter fleet has also come under fire for being too old and unsafe after a crash on the Indonesian island of Nias killed nine Navy personnel last year.

Then there is what the department has already admitted was its "$1.1 billion mistake": the purchase of a fleet of 40-year-old Super Seasprite helicopters that were refitted with new technology. The Super Seasprites still cannot be flown in poor light or undertake testing combat exercises more than two years after they were delivered late and over budget.

With cabinet to consider the purchase of troop-lift helicopters this week, Dr Nelson is coming under pressure to back the purchase of Black Hawks, which are already in production and could be delivered in a short time.

Dr Nelson has already expressed a preference for more MRH-90 helicopters.

With 12 already on order, he said last month that this made sense because of "economies of scale" and that while some colleagues might not agree with the proposal, "this is the highest priority now".

Dr Nelson is on record saying he wants the Sea King fleet to be replaced within five years. Another selling point for more MRH-90s is that they are being assembled in Queensland, which has created hundreds of jobs.

Federal Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane, in whose electorate of Groom most of the work is being done, told The Sunday Age he supported the original decision to buy 12 MRH-90s. He said this was a new phase of the program and he would be looking closely at the various plans.

"For me it will be which option offers the greatest opportunity for Australian industry to be involved in any maintenance and upgrade programs," Mr Macfarlane said.

One proposal being pushed by Sikorsky is for Australia to replace the Sea Kings with the 12 new MRH-90s and use 34 Black Hawks to beef up the Army's troop-lift capabilities.

A spokesman for Dr Nelson said the minister was unable to comment on National Security Committee meetings.

I'd be interested to know who had a word in his ear and why...

Also, my impression was the Tiger had gone relatively smoothly and MRH-90 was heading in the same direction?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Yep, that I saw that article. Another load of shite. $100m a piece for MRH-90? WTF???

There is NO problem with the Tigers. They are in fact being delivered, very slightly ahead of schedule. The Hellfire missile integration, took slightly longer than expected, but it's sorted now, and made no difference to the overall project. The biggest problem with the Tigers, is the lack of pilots. But that has nothing to do with the acquisition of the platform.

Nothing is wrong with our MRH-90 program, except the time being taken to make the decision to acquire sufficient examples to replace our SeaKing, Blackhawk and Iroquois fleets. There are some problems with the Eurocopter production line, but to the best of my knowledge, they haven't effected the Australian project...

Apparently Army Aviation, actually prefers Blackhawk, but since when has the Corps preferrence ever mattered? RAAC wanted Leo II's, RRAA wants AS-90. Doesn't mean ANY of them have any likelyhood of actually getting these platforms. Army Aviation, hasn't even flown MRH-90, AFAIK, so I find it a bit difficult to understand why they prefer Blackhawk so much.

No doubt plenty in Army wanted Apache over Tiger too, hence the "bad" news about the alleged Tiger problems. Unfortunately vested interests exist everywhere.

I've actually seen an NH-90 (painted up in MRH-90 colors) and a Blackhawk parked almost alonside each other at Avalon last year (I posted pics of each into the gallery). The MRH-90 is substantially bigger than the Blackhawk and WILL offer a significant improvement in lift capability. I think Army simply needs to get a few MRH-90's into service and fly them for a while and they'll change their minds...