Australian Blackhawks replacement

Errolwi

Monthly Donor
NZ also chose NH90 over Blackhawk, the later not meeting the requirements (cabin size and hot&high performance, I think).
We seem to have signed a decent deal, when airframe completion dates slipped, they were delivered via Antonov rather than ship to meet contracted delivery dates.
 

abc123

Banned
Riain said:
Politicians don't understand the nuances of helicopter size, doctrine and the like, they only see fleet numbers, cost and jobs. If the Blackhawk created Australian jobs for the right price without rocking the diplomatic boat then it would have won despite it not being ideal for doctrine etc. Politics is always king.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right.
;)

And you can't really blaime them...

While we allready talk about costs and jobs, what do you think about the death of Australian automobile industry? Worth of further saving or not?
 
Last edited:
La Rouge Beret

La Rouge Beret

abc123 said:
While we allready talk about costs and jobs, what do you think about the death of Australian automobile industry? Worth of further saving or not?
Click to expand...

The issue came down to the plants were unproductive, their labour costs were high and they were producing cars that Australians didn't want to drive.
 

Riain

Banned
Like a lot of government meddling in industry with preconceived results in mind it didn't work out the way senator button and co planned and the Australian car industry was the victim.
 

calmir

Riain said:
As for the help, the US didn't do a lot in Timor in 1999, but Thailand did. Australia policy is to not rely on the combat forces of other countries, so a fighter sqn, warship or Army unit from our Allies is a welcome addition to our strength but we're not staking our lives on it.
Click to expand...

The US wasn't originally doing anything in regards to Timor, but once a few words were directed their way they ended up backing us in. It's worth noting that they had an assault ship and escorts floating around. They were essential in terms of the logistics and transport, which we were having some issues with.
 

Errolwi

Monthly Donor
calmir said:
The US wasn't originally doing anything in regards to Timor, but once a few words were directed their way they ended up backing us in. It's worth noting that they had an assault ship and escorts floating around. They were essential in terms of the logistics and transport, which we were having some issues with.
Click to expand...

And of course, the RAN now has two large LHDs nearly in service, to address the demonstrated capability gap.
 
Dan

Dan

Does anyone know why the Merlin wasn't selected by the Australians?
It doesn't seem to have the problems of the selected version, is cheaper and carries more troops. And doesn't seem to get damaged by people walking in it either.
 

abc123

Banned
Dan said:
Does anyone know why the Merlin wasn't selected by the Australians?
It doesn't seem to have the problems of the selected version, is cheaper and carries more troops. And doesn't seem to get damaged by people walking in it either.
Click to expand...

Good question...

I presume that they desided to go with NH-90, because of stated intent to have capability of airlifting of infantry company ( 120 soldiers ) from Canberras at a time, and that's exactly 6 NH90...
 
Last edited:

Crowbar Six

Merlin is a BIG helicopter. The first time I saw one flying I thought it was a CH53 at first glance but only after taking another look realised it was a Merlin. It can carry 26 troops and five tons of payload.

They both do the same jobs but in different ways.
 

Riain

Banned
Was the merlin in the competition? As crowbar six says, it is a big helicopter, verging towards Chinook in capability, and has 3 rather than 2 engines so maybe was too much for the army.
 
La Rouge Beret

La Rouge Beret

Hmmm the only reason I could think of would be logistical support, but at the end of the day the NH - 90 is an orphan as well. One of the reasons the NH - 90 was selected for the RAN also related to the purchase of the MU - 90 lightweight torpedo that had a raft of teething problems. The service life of the Sea King had been reached and honestly we had fl$gged the Seahawks half to death as well. So in the interests of replacing two distinct roles with a single airframe we went with the NH - 90... imho the Merlin would have been a better fit due to its greater load carrying capability, endurance etc.
 

Riain

Banned
I found the ANAO report for the helicopter competition.

The eh101 had poor maneuverability, too big for amphibious ops, too much degradation of performance in hot conditions (we get the odd warmish day in Australia) and unsuitable for ant terrorism ops.

The Blackhawk bid was $380 million less than the mrh90 bid although both represented value for money. The government decided on the mrh90 for strategic and whole of government considerations.
 

abc123

Banned
Citing as reasons that despite being a MOTS aircraft in service with the United Kingdom, Portugal and
Canada, the EH101 had poor maneuverability; limitations in support of amphibious operations due to
its larger size; its payload and range advantage reduced markedly in hot and high operations (performing worse than the S-70M but still better than the MRH90); and was unsuitable for Counter Terrorism operations

http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/File.../Audit Report 52/AuditReport_2013-2014_52.pdf

What a bunch of nonsences, so it's good enough for the Royal Marines and score of other countries, but not good enough for vaunted Australian amphibious units?

Also, better than NH90, but than they choose NH90...

Australia must start to think like: if it's good enough for UK/USA, its good enough for us too- otherwise it will continue to pay too much for too little...
 
Last edited:

abc123

Banned
More juicy details:

7 By May 2011, DMO found the MRH90 spares to be significantly more
expensive than equivalent spares purchased for the Black Hawk helicopters
through US Government Foreign Military Sales (FMS). An extreme example is
an MRH90 plastic plug, which costs $2.18 through FMS, and cost $753.30 when
acquired from Australian Aerospace. Similar price mark‐ups occurred for the
ARH Tiger aircraft, for which a wheel locking pin cost €5783.63 when a similar
pin for Black Hawk aircraft cost A$9.67.

or

In April 2012, on average each of the 15 in service MRH90 aircraft was
costing approximately $51 200 per hour of flying, which Defence calculated to
be 5.5 times more expensive than an ADF Black Hawk aircraft. At the same
time, the cost of supporting the 15 MRH90 aircraft was more expensive than
supporting the ADF’s 34 Black Hawk aircraft.

http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/File.../Audit Report 52/AuditReport_2013-2014_52.pdf

Page 193
 

Riain

Banned
Just because something is good enough for the UK/US doesn't mean that it's good enough for Australia. If ANAO says that the EH101 is unsuitable for Australian amphibious operations for the reasons cited then so be it. There's no reason to buy the bigger, longer ranged and more expensive EH101 if this advantage dissipates in hot weather, the LHDs and Helicopters will be/are based in Brisbane and Townsville for gods sake!

As for the MRH90, it was selected for strategic and whole of government considerations. I know that FMS is cheap, but the price of that widget certainly doesn't include the cost of the public servants and military who do the ordering and run the logistics system and who re notoriously difficult to sack when a platform leaves service.
 
Last edited:

abc123

Banned
Riain said:
Just because something is good enough for the UK/US doesn't mean that it's good enough for Australia. If ANAO says that the EH101 is unsuitable for Australian amphibious operations for the reasons cited then so be it. There's no reason to buy the bigger, longer ranged and more expensive EH101 if this advantage dissipates in hot weather, the LHDs and Helicopters will be/are based in Brisbane and Townsville for gods sake!

.
Click to expand...

Well it's better than NH90, ANAO report says so...

And yes, it's larger and more expensive, but that means that they can carry more people and cargo, they have better range and are off-the-shelf solution. And if RN can use them on HMS Ocean, than Australia can definitly use them on larger Canberra class. UK/USA also pretty regularly operate in hot areas like Middle east...
 
Last edited:

Riain

Banned
IIUC the RAF didn't want the EH101, they wanted an all Chinook fleet. Interestingly enough they don't equate the EH101 to a smaller helicopter, but rather the heavy Chinook. Australia was in a similar boat, looking to replace the Sea King, Blackhawk and Seahawk with possibly a single airframe, not the heavy Chook.
 

calmir

Riain said:
Just because something is good enough for the UK/US doesn't mean that it's good enough for Australia. If ANAO says that the EH101 is unsuitable for Australian amphibious operations for the reasons cited then so be it. There's no reason to buy the bigger, longer ranged and more expensive EH101 if this advantage dissipates in hot weather, the LHDs and Helicopters will be/are based in Brisbane and Townsville for gods sake!
Click to expand...

To be fair, ADF procurement often seems to have the notion that it has to have the perfect (or what seems it) over the good enough. Which is understandable to a degree, except when costs start ballooning out, service entry is delayed and it's pigeon holed into having fewer units then are needed because of aforementioned costs. Even worse when the capability actually doesn't turn out great, or even enter service at all (Seasprites).

Note: Not saying we should have purchased EH101's, though I think we would have been better off with new Blackhawks combined with an additional Chook buy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top