RNoAF NH90 troubles...

tiv

LE
Every helicopter designer should have a Bell Uh 1D diagram placed on his desk and told that his mission is to meet or exceed the performance of the above, on pain of being thrown from one.
One flew over Southend a couple of times in (looks at date of photo) 2013.

Huey.jpg
 

gafkiwi

War Hero
Every helicopter designer should have a Bell Uh 1D diagram placed on his desk and told that his mission is to meet or exceed the performance of the above, on pain of being thrown from one.
You can see that progression in the Black Hawk from the UH-1 series. Increase in capabilities etc without sacrificing sound design features. Large troop doors, separate crewman/gunner position, integrated rappelling and fast roping attachment devices.

The NH90 seems to be the opposite. The market/companies decided what was needed in a tactical lift helo, not the users and the roles. A lot of use of composite materials like carbon fiber to achieve weight savings that are not maintainer friendly especially in the field. Its sounds like that this is what is behind the re design they are looking for for the French and Aussies to produce Helos capable of supporting SF operations to the level "Old" Black Hawks are already capable of.
 
You can see that progression in the Black Hawk from the UH-1 series. Increase in capabilities etc without sacrificing sound design features. Large troop doors, separate crewman/gunner position, integrated rappelling and fast roping attachment devices.

The NH90 seems to be the opposite. The market/companies decided what was needed in a tactical lift helo, not the users and the roles. A lot of use of composite materials like carbon fiber to achieve weight savings that are not maintainer friendly especially in the field. Its sounds like that this is what is behind the re design they are looking for for the French and Aussies to produce Helos capable of supporting SF operations to the level "Old" Black Hawks are already capable of.


See that other great Airbus military turkey, the A400M
 
Interesting enough the Heeresflieger gonna keep the UH-1D for a few more years yet for the SAf role.

Neue Rüstungspanne: Bundeswehr muss bis 2020 mit Oldtimer-Hubschrauber fliegen - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Politik

If anyone remembers us to 2012 the whole Bundeswehr RW Fleet was like this

Luftwaffe
AS532UT for VIP
Bell UH-1D for SAR and utility
NH-90 entering service

Heeresflieger
UH-1D
Tiger UHT
Ch-53GA/S
H135M
NH90 entering service
BO105

Marine flieger
Sea King
Lynx

Come back end of the year and 2013 to this day A mass shake u cuts and re jigging meaning the Luftwaffe gained heavy lift with the transferring of the Heeresflieger CH-53 to them, in turn the whole UH-1D and Nh-90 TTH is now u de Heeresflieger control and colourss. Oh and with the UH-1D transfer means the army now does mil SAR.

So as of today

Luftwaffe
H145M SOF LUH
AS532UT
CH-53GA/S

Heeresflieger
NH-90 TTH
UH-1D
Tiger UHT
H135M


Marine flieger
Sea King
Lynx
NH-90 NFH Sea Lion ( 1st production a/c flew last year )

And I haven’t forgotten the ongoing replacement for the Ch-53 Fleet (produced by the then VFW aerospace decades back and upgraded by then Eurocopter near 2decades back and continually upgraded by Airbus) between the Lockheed Martin Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion and Boeing CH-47F. The CH-53K will be making its first international debut in ILA Berlin in April.

Cheers
 

Ack-Ack

Clanker
The Danes did, they purchased the SH-60R.
Exactly - the Danes pulled the plug on a the NH90-project that was orginally envisioned to be a "pan-Scandinavian aircraft", and did the only sensible thing choosing the Seahawk. The RDAF have ordered eight aircraft IRC. Only the Swedes and we were daft enough to still hang on to this disaster. A political farce from start to the (eventual) finish. The emphasis to choose no-matter-what an European rather than a US aircraft is political hogwash of the first order.
So, why do I believe the MH-60 R Seahawk was a better choice? The Romeo-version of the Seahawk has so far proved to be a success with the Royal Australian Navy.
(Yes, this is a " Lockheed Martin-Sikorsky commercial" but still has valid points nonetheless!)
 
So, why do I believe the MH-60 R Seahawk was a better choice? The Romeo-version of the Seahawk has so far proved to be a success with the Royal Australian Navy.
(Yes, this is a " Lockheed Martin-Sikorsky commercial" but still has valid points nonetheless!)
I bet that our Fleet Air Arm wished that they had ended up with the SH-60R...
 
...Only the Swedes and we were daft enough to still hang on to this disaster...
The Finnish Army also operates them but has suffered major reliability problems.

I bet that our Fleet Air Arm wished that they had ended up with the SH-60R...
Actually, I think the Wildcat’s a pretty decent naval small ship asset; it’s just far less suited to the AAC’s needs.

Regards,
MM
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I bet that our Fleet Air Arm wished that they had ended up with the SH-60R...
Possibly, but the Seahawk, carries less than half the Pax (less than a quarter if they are standing) and a 3/4 - 4/5s the load of Merlin
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Sadly recenty (befoe xmas ) there was a crash of RAFO NH-90 TTH

Qatar has signed up to buy NH-90 TTH as well as MH-60R and MH-60S

Depending on who you talk to from down under - the Tiger ARH problems were partly attributed to local assembly by Hawker. I did post up the other year that Bell was heavily marketing and promoting the AH-1Z to the AAAC as replacement for the Tiger. Bell signed an agreement with BAe Systems Australia for this,

Cheers
 
be wary of the AW 149...anything Agusta touches can turn to shit rapidly...our Fuerza here in Ireland has the 139 which is a warmed up millionaire's chariot and which routinely wears skiboots to stop it sinking in fields...
 
...One the subject of the A400, mentioned a few posts up, it actually got some good press the other week...
On a fairly non-demanding mission and they skirted around many of the issues. It handles well enough but there are som major concerns regarding the Tac and particularly SF roles, while the article was the first positive thing I’ve read or heard about the back end.

Fundamentally, we’d have still been better off with C-17/C-130J rather than C-17/A400M/C-130J or C-17/A400M (which is probably what we’ll have to make do with soon).

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
give us the ten-second outline as to why Airbus have made a balls of the back end of an aeroplane. they are not amateurs at this business and tend to mostly get it right.
 
give us the ten-second outline as to why Airbus have made a balls of the back end of an aeroplane. they are not amateurs at this business and tend to mostly get it right.
When have they done a military cargo type of this class previously? However, let’s start with the thermal curtain debacle.

Regards,
MM
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
give us the ten-second outline as to why Airbus have made a balls of the back end of an aeroplane. they are not amateurs at this business and tend to mostly get it right.
Its bloody cold
 

Latest Threads

Top