• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

Why 429 over 412?

And what new helicopter for the Polar icebreakers? Blackhawks or does Bell have something built here to offer?
 

The CCG requires up to four helicopters (polar helicopters) to support the polar icebreaker missions. Each polar icebreaker will be capable of supporting two helicopters onboard in the hangar. In order to ensure that the helicopter, aircrew, and the in-service support are ready for polar icebreaker operations, the CCG will require the polar helicopters to be delivered in 2028. The Polar Helicopters will operate from the CCG polar icebreakers year round in the Canadian Arctic, in both the Southern and Northern Domestic Airspace. They will also conduct operations at extended flight range and/or endurance from the polar icebreakers. The project is seeking industry availability and costing information on acquisition, sparing, sustainment, and training options.
 
Why 429 over 412?

And what new helicopter for the Polar icebreakers? Blackhawks or does Bell have something built here to offer?
412's are not normally assigned to a ship as the hangers are to small, that might change with the next generation of medium icebreaker/buoytenders. The 429 gives you a lot of capability still. I am not sure if the 412's have folding blade capability?
 
412's are not normally assigned to a ship as the hangers are to small, that might change with the next generation of medium icebreaker/buoytenders. The 429 gives you a lot of capability still. I am not sure if the 412's have folding blade capability?
its possible
like i said before Im not sure if the 412 meets the requirements of the Polar Icebreaker Helicopter???
 
412's are not normally assigned to a ship as the hangers are to small, that might change with the next generation of medium icebreaker/buoytenders. The 429 gives you a lot of capability still. I am not sure if the 412's have folding blade capability?
No one likes skids for Maritime Chopper work, not the Pilots, the passengers, or the ships crews.
 
Schefferville to Churchill and Muskrat Falls, Churchill Falls to Goose Bay, Goose Bay to Old Fort on Quebec Highway 138, just past Blanc Sablon on the Strait of Belle Isle.
Yup. 3200km from Quebec City to St. John's NL through some nasty winter conditions. 2300 vis the TCH with a ferry ride.

Shhh. Don't tell Quebec that we want to use Rte. 138 to link another province, or they will want the feds to pay for it. Rte. A85 connecting New Brunswick is still largely 2-lane because they say it benefits ROC more than Quebec.

Port Nelson route might be given preference over the Churchill route
Port Nelson was the originally intended terminus of the HBRR but was abandoned for several reasons, including heavy silting. They had already laid track ad built a bridge to an artificial island before giving up. When you have rivers that essentially 'drain the prairies' from the east side of the Rockies, they carry a lot of crap with them.


It is both a matter of pride and a bet on the future
Well, you see there's the problem right there.
 
There is one sitting in the museum…
60f7693ce5d36cd7a9b3b120_7c2cb359-359b-4740-86fd-cfce11b5e6b0.jpeg
 
The CCG been doing it for decades and the AOP's will be operating in the same areas in the north.
I think @KevinB was referring to grey maritime, not littoral lower sea state. I’ve done ad hoc land-on to CCG vessels in a skid helo (with a thick cargo netting pad) and I’d seriously prefer to just hover for an hour deplaning and emplaning…or have wheels, but the grey maritime folks probably have more valid feedback than, “that’s shite…I’m going back to my tent world!”
 
I wouldn’t put the CCG out as SME’s on Maritime Helo usage…
I think your seeing ship board helicopter use in tunnel vision. The CCG version is distinctively civilian based, they not launch in a sea unless there is a critical need to risk the machine and crew and would look to land elsewhere if required. The CCG uses helicopters quite a bit and we will sling tons of supplies as required, not to mention landing on places like this.

images
 
I think your seeing ship board helicopter use in tunnel vision. The CCG version is distinctively civilian based, they not launch in a sea unless there is a critical need to risk the machine and crew and would look to land elsewhere if required. The CCG uses helicopters quite a bit and we will sling tons of supplies as required, not to mention landing on places like this.

images
Exactly not a .Mil role.
 
I think your seeing ship board helicopter use in tunnel vision. The CCG version is distinctively civilian based, they not launch in a sea unless there is a critical need to risk the machine and crew and would look to land elsewhere if required. The CCG uses helicopters quite a bit and we will sling tons of supplies as required, not to mention landing on places like this.

images
Love the CCG’s new paint job! 😉
 
Exactly not a .Mil role.
The majority of flights in the arctic will be exactly the same as the CCG. For the other stuff there is the Cyclones, but we will be always short on those. So this is the 80% solution and will mean they will have helicopters onboard, making them far more useful than pining for the 100% solution that is not there.
 
I think @KevinB was referring to grey maritime, not littoral lower sea state. I’ve done ad hoc land-on to CCG vessels in a skid helo (with a thick cargo netting pad) and I’d seriously prefer to just hover for an hour deplaning and emplaning…or have wheels, but the grey maritime folks probably have more valid feedback than, “that’s shite…I’m going back to my tent world!”
Skids are for kids….

Plus, deck resonance is a thing….
 
Back
Top