New Helicopter announcement tomorrow

[Ex-Dragoon]

As CFL has pointed out this helo was bought to fulfill naval requirements and while it probably could do tactical missions its unlikely to be used for such.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

From http://www.sikorsky.com/details/0,3036,CLI1_DIV69_ETI1583,00.html

Based on proven BLACK HAWK® technology, the Sikorsky H-92 SUPERHAWK is built for the rigors of military missions. With its large cabin, survivable design and enhanced range, the SUPERHAWK does it all. It can perform austere to all-weather operations in arctic cold, ice, desert heat, at temperatures anywhere from -40 ºC to +55 ºC, day and night. The SUPERHAWK is ready to serve all branches of the military in a broad range of missions.

Well-equipped to take on the job, the SUPERHAWK gives you everything you've ever wanted in a military helicopter. Some of the features that make the SUPERHAWK the ideal choice for performance include: scramble start in less than two minutes; a 6-foot wide aft ramp for easy loading and unloading of cargo and troops; the ability to outlift the competition by 1500 lbs. at 300 nautical mile range.



The SUPERHAWK can be configured to match your missions. As a systems integrator, we deliver the right systems for the job, including extensive electronic warfare equipment, navigation system controls and displays, infrared suppression, refueling probe, weapons, Terrain Following/Terrain Avoidance (TF/TA) radar and Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR).

Mission flexibility and low operating costs were identified as primary design criteria - and the result is a high performance, versatile helicopter that is the safest and most economical in its class.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

That said considering it has roots in the Blackhawk it seems it could make a good work horse helicopter for the army (airforce).   Put the Griffon in a Recce role.   Now that we will have this for the navy it would make sense to outfit a couple wings for a cmbt role..see less parts and training for air crews and mechanics.   Who knows, maybe some in gov't has a clue and this is there intention if everything goes well.   (Yeah I know, who am I kidding).

Some features:
SUPERHAWK HELICOPTER CABIN
For tactical troop transport, the 17m ³ cabin can be fitted with folding crashworthy seats for 22 combat equipped marines. The cabin is sufficiently high for passengers to stand and is fitted with sliding cabin windows and weapon mounts.

The raised position of the tailboom and wide rear ramp and overhead door allow rear loading via the ramp.

For the search and rescue role, the cabin can be equipped with a 272kg-capacity hydraulically powered rescue hoist. The crew can use the rescue hoist cable viewing window and spotlight to assist in deployment. The helicopter can be fitted to evacuate 12 stretcher patients.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

With regards to Frank in Vancouver post it seems that either they had advance knowledge of the contract or they are really good with updating their site really quick.

"Sikorsky and Bombardier Aerospace have an industrial teaming agreement to offer the H-92 as a replacement for Canada's Maritime Helicopter. 28 helicopters are required and a selection is planned for the summer of 2004"

 

[Kirkhill]

Max. underslung load (max. Außenlast): 4535 kg in military version

Passengers (Passagiere): 19 in civil version or 22 combat-ready troops.

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRS-92.htm

LGI Mark II weight

Weight: 1.5 t

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/2_0_50_1.asp?uSubSection=50&uSection=2

C3 105mm Howitzer

Weight: 2,380 kg

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/2_0_52_1.asp?uSubSection=52&uSection=2

As an aside I found this.

with folding crashworthy seats for 22 combat equipped marines

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/superhawk/index.html

Yes but how many manly Canadians.. ;D

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Are you guys under the impression that the Cyclone can be configured from ASW on one flight to a troop transport on the next and then a medium lift helo on its next mission,  or am I reading too much into your posts?

 

[ringo_mountbatten]

from what i heard before was that the govt wanted the asw equipment to be roll on/roll off so that the new mhp could be used as a troop transport when the new jss comes in and to fully support boarding party operations.  as for lifting arty and such i don't think that it is even a consideration with the h92 or the eh101.  the us and brits both use the s53 and the chinook for their heavy lift needs for things such as arty for their amphib forces. 

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

The flexibility is there for the changing roles but I would imagine that if things go well, more would purchased when the support vessel is nearing completion.

 

[Recce41]

Inch
Your a lil off. The Ross had a semi locking bolt, just as the M16. The Enfield (which I own) has a flat face bolt. The FN was the same. It will fire even if the head spacing is off.
As for the LAV, is crap, The Marines have the Lav 25 (Coyote). The Army has purchased the LAV!!! based Styker. But when the Crew Commander has to get out to clear a misfire or reload the Coax MG. It sucks. They get stuck just going off the road. You cannot transport the crew/kit/ammo/add on armour,etc on one Herc. It will take three hercs to deploy anyone of the LAV Family( LAV MGS, LAV 111, LAV TOW). And as CFL has stated a joint team?
I still like the Big Old Chinock, for the Army though.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

The thing with the LAV is it isn't really designed for the same terrain as a M113.  If you use the equipment for its intended purpose (and I know we ask more for our equipment ie. cougar, LAV etc) then it will perform fine.  If the cannon is loaded correctly then the only stoppage you should get is when you run out of ammo.  It is a very technical wpn platform for sure.  (unless your talking about the Stryker, but wouldn't the coax be mounted internally). I'm of course not familiar with the stoppage procedure of the Stryker.  Perhaps you could elaborate.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I see the Minister has described it as the best helicopter at the best price for Canadians.

Let's all hold the government's feet to the fire on that "best price for Canadians" policy in all future acquisitions.

 

[Inch]

Sikorsky and Bombardier Aerospace have an industrial teaming agreement to offer the H-92 as a replacement for Canada's Maritime Helicopter. 28 helicopters are required and a selection is planned for the summer of 2004.

By the way, does someone know if this helo will be able to lift the arty??   I read somewhere that the Griffon was not able to..   I don't know about the Sea-King..   What will it be able to transport?   LAV, arty, MBT?????

This is the press release from Sikorsky

http://www.sikorsky.com/details/0,3036,CLI1_DIV69_ETI1844,00.html

They make no mention of Bombardier, that info could be from the late 90s when we were still trying to get new helos and had the avionics and mission kit as a separate contract from the airframe.

The Cyclone will have a crew of 4, 2 pilots, 1 TACCO, and 1 AESOp.  As for slinging arty, there's not a whole lot of arty in the North Atlantic so I don't think it'll ever be a concern of ours. Everyone seems to be concerned with the multi mission capabilities, how come no one asks these questions about the Cormorant? It's sole role is SAR, ours is fleet defense and ASW with a few utility roles for the Navy.  We don't work with crunchies, we don't even come into contact with crunchies.  We don't learn Tac flying since it's not our primary role, and I doubt I'll ever see a piece of arty in my MH days.

Now as for Hercs not being able to transport LAVs + ammo/crew/kit, etc, they can't transport MBTs or M109s, they're tac airlift, not strategic. On the question of slinging MBTs, there isn't a helo in the world that can sling an MBT, there's barely aircraft that can haul them (yes there are a few before someone jumps on that one).

Another point on the Cyclone, it is my impression from the guys at work that it will not have a ramp. I can't say for sure but the talk leads me to believe that it won't have a ramp. Sub hunting is not a major concern these days (it's still our primary role though), but the helo does extend the range of the ships eyes and ears, it allows the ship to identify possible hostiles without putting the ship and crew in danger.  Helos are a lot cheaper than frigates. So until we can get beyond line of sight with radar, a helo will continue to be part of the fleet defense package.

One final point for this post, having the same airframe for different roles isn't necessarily a good thing.  If one has a problem, now your entire helo fleet is grounded, at least with different airframes your world won't stop just cause a SAR bird had a problem. I've seen it with the Harvard in Moose Jaw, some American Texan II has a problem and the entire T-6 fleet is grounded, ours included.

Cheers

 

[ringo_mountbatten]

i think the concern for multi-mission comes form the jss announcement and the need for a helo to operate from them.  the role of the helo on board the jss seems very similar to how the seakings were used in somalia in a purely ship to shore support role.  if the jss does come through then i think the role of the maritime helo pilot will have to change to adjust with the needs of the mission.  i don't know about the ramp, but i would guess as the asw version of the merlin does not have one the same thinking will eliminate the need for one on the h92.

 

[Inch]

I agree, as the mission dictates the role of the helo and crew will change, I'm not against that, I'm simply pointing out that in the 40+ years that the Sea King has been in service, it's really only come up a handful of times. The main concern I have about multi mission capabilities lies in the old adage, "jack of all trades and master of none". There's only so many things you can be the best at without sacrificing quality. I for one like the idea of having a door gunner, reminds me of back in '78 when I was in Nam.  :warstory:

28 Cyclones won't be enough to outfit 3 JSS's as well as the Frigates, Destroyers, and the domestic training and proficiency flying. We'll definitely need more and if we're going to get into the amphibious warfare game, another dozen or so helos with ramps would probably be a good acquisition

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

LOL hey now Inch even the Sea Kings have door gunners

 

[ringo_mountbatten]

28 would not be enough, but leave it to a liberal govt to give it a good try. 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

There is nothing that says they could not order more down the road.

 

[JBP]

Forgive me, this is slightly off topic...

From some posts in this thread about the LAV's... It seems after we phase out our only MBT the Leopard, we won't realistically have an actual TANK to go into combat with? I ain't the most informed on these fine war machines, but uh... If you took 10 LAV's against 10 Leopards, wouldn't the LAV's look like scrap-yard material shortly thereafter? Or are we going with the thought that we won't need giant moving guns like tanks because we'll just be in a supporting/defence roll for most of our operations with allies? I know historically over the last while we don't take offensive ground operations anyway. Not in a big way! Operation Anaconda in Afganistan aside.

Is it really a good idea to not have an actual MBT of any kind in the future?!?!!

*Scared for us Canuckians*
:crybaby:

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Do a search on MBT's and you should find a wide variety of opinions on the matter. 

Inch
From this link (you are right it wasn't Sikorsky) they were either really lucky or knew ahead of time ie Summer of 2004, unless it was common knowledge that the government was going to announce a contract in 2004.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/superhawk/index.html

 

[Inch]

I think the summer 2004 announcement was common knowledge for the last couple months or so. That article had a sentence using Mar 04 in the past tense so it was probably written recently but that doesn't mean their info was up to date.  Given that the media has said stuff like Shearwater Naval Air Station, a Squad of pilots and crew (even if they were talking about a Squadron, there was actually 2 squadrons there plus all the admin wienies, sorry to any admin wienies), and calling the H92 the Sikorsky Cyclone, I wouldn't put it past them to assume that the partner in Mirabel was Bombardier. 

Yeah, Sea Kings have door gunners , we're hella cool that's why.

Cheers