ADF to scrap NH90? Maybe opportunity to bolster RNZAF fleet?

[tfly]

If true this might be an opportunity for RNZAF? Useful to reduce usage on current fleet and more helicopters for reserve should that big quake arrive!

www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-09/us-to-sell-12-attack-helicopters-to-australia-aukus-/100526744

[joey05]

I think the issue there is the Aussie’s heavy modified their models to suit them, and ours were pretty much standard “off the shelf”, not sure how much commonality there is, but we done it with their A4Gs and Seasprites! Even as a parts source taking a few airframes would be worth it.

[pepe]

Given that Australian Army still operates @ 40 NH90 (and there are no plans to replace them), I would expect that the RAN ones will simply transfer between services.

[chis73]

The official press release from the US DSCA is here. It is not completely clear whether these MH-60R will be equipped with sonar (but I would presume not as the press release says "provision only", and refers to modifications to add extra cabin seating).

Still at AU $1.3b, it is a damned expensive way to replace 6 logistics helicopters (the MRH-90 in RAN service replaced their SH-3 Mk50 Sea Kings)

I would agree with previous posters that Aus Army will get first dibs on these MRH-90s (if the replacement actually happens - this is just a formal costing/permission request, not an order after all).

I'd be happy if RNZN resurrected some SH-60Fs or HH-60H from the AMARC boneyard for the same role (naval logistics/cargo transfer) at a fraction of the price.

[phil]

Well they are also ditching Tiger and getting Apache. European helos don't seem to be flavour of the month any more.

[Mustang51]

European anything..........

[phil]

Perhaps the French have suddenly lost the ability to support the MRH version of the 90.

[typerated]

Oct 10, 2021 16:41:12 GMT 12 Mustang51 said:

European anything..........

I think it's more Australian procurement that is world beatingly crap.

Plenty of superb European gear that bats US out of the park in capability, reliability and cost!

[Mustang51]

typerated..perhaps. Why do we buy anything whose principal users (in a firefight) are basically not in the same hemisphere. Troop helicopters with plastic floors to start with, attack helos that have no interoperability with our major ally and that stupid sub.....the last thing we bought that was totally fit for purpose, fit the slot perfectly and has operated superbly is the C.17. It all comes down to it not being a military capability but how many votes can I get for building something here which in itself is down to what the parent company is willing to offer. I'm not in love with America despite having many, many friends there. To my mind it is a huge land mass that is now turning into 50 fragmented political regions.....but its the best thing we have at the moment when, not if, things go 'south'.

[30sqnatc]

Overheard today by those who know - 'God I hope no-one has the great idea to try and purchase a couple to build up our fleet or to breakdown for spares'

[typerated]

If you are looking for your rose tinted US specs - they might be on the end of your nose!

They are past masters at oiling the political wheels to sell. Europe was full of unsuitable F-104s when I was a boy.

Interoperability sounds like it is important and useful but I’d suggest it is overplayed. The RAAF is not in the US supply system.

The important thing is training and procedures, comms kit etc so you can operate together. Not the same platforms. I was on lots of NATO exercises where there was a distinct advantage in having a range of platforms to do different jobs.

I’ll counter your perfect C-17 with the KC-30A - wishing you got KC-46 instead for the interoperability with your close allies?

[Mustang51]

Counter away....as I said, last thing we bought that fit the slot perfectly, fit for purpose and operating without probs was the C.17.....the development of the 'European' KC30 was a nightmare and delivered way later than expected. Crews were trained up, aircraft unavailable, crews back to Australia, retrained...saga went on. Nothing's perfect but apart from the Mirage, which went on to be retasked similar to the F104, most things from 'Europe' have been in retrospect, the wrong choice. KC30 ended up the better choice but its gestation was a problem. Probably find in future that the KC30 may go to more of our Pacific allies...

[mcmaster]

Speaking of the Mirage I'm reading our old birds in Pakistan will soldier on until 2030.

[typerated]

Yes I knew KC-30 wasn’t perfect at the start– but going well now!
1000% better than the comedy coming out of Seattle!
And remember the USAF essentially wanted the KC-30!!
Maybe you would have been happier with US built Airbus aeroplanes?

Again I point you back to your procurement process – rather than where the gear comes from.
I think you could have seen the dramas coming from before you signed! And I’d suggest what it shows is Australia is too small to lead on projects or buy too early in the project’s lifecycle.
Especially for low volume items. To me this is the key. We had the same drama in the UK – trying to keep local manufacturing and design teams going over buying off the shelf.
If you compare how NZ and Aus tackled the Seasprite – New or old airframes – buy off the shelf equipment or create a new package. I think it showswhy you get into trouble!

It’s also its a tricky balance against getting gear that is obsolete or low in performance.

The F/A-18F/G I’d suggest falls into that side. Proven product – easy buy off the shelf. But how long is it going to be relevant?
Fine for CAS but not going to wrestle air superiority from anyone.

[mcmaster]

Typerated. As a Aussie taxpayer I hear you and given your concern in our procurement maybe you are also. However, I don’t think anyone is holding out our defence acquisition as a model for anyone. I expect we are not the best (who is Swiss, Singapore?) nor the worst at it. You seem to be flagging NZ as the model.

On the Supers, I suspect we really don’t know how the Supers would go in a shat fight but they were bought as a F-111- F35 gap filler and seems we will be hanging on to them. I suspect they are now a workhorse fighter and in terms of air/air where the F35 might be pricey to operate e.g. air policing it’s ideal for them.

I hear that Canada is shoehorning Super Hornet AESA radars into some of their Classic Hornets and maybe that will include some of our old birds. I digress but raise Canada as an example for context on acquisitions. Like Australia a middle power who struggles to get it right and I think (hope) we are above the curve compared to them. Subs come to mind here too.

But it’s all about history and context. The bear in the woods is now in our woods and I see parallels with Canada’s role in NATO in the Cold War with Aus now moving towards that place – but not operating nuclear weapons on behalf of the US as the RCAF did and lets hope doesn’t get to that. Mind you this is all moving very quickly…

[richard1098]

Oct 10, 2021 9:06:43 GMT 12 pepe said:

Given that Australian Army still operates @ 40 NH90 (and there are no plans to replace them), I would expect that the RAN ones will simply transfer between services.

With Army now deploying their own MRH-90s from the LHDs regularly, there's no longer any real need for the RAN to operate it's own troop lift helos. Transferring their small fleet to army will consolidate training and support to a single service, and fill part of the gap following the retirement of the last Blackhawks. In the current environment, more ASW capable helos makes a lot more sense.

The ADF has moved on from the early 200O's so it seems like a pretty sensible reallocation of assets.

[McFly]

Ozzy Navy may have to order an extra Seahawk.... Here and Here (14 Oct 2021)

"Three aircrew have been rescued to safety following an emergency landing of a MH-60R Seahawk helicopter.

A Royal Australian Navy MH-60R Seahawk helicopter has been ditched in the Philippine Sea after three of its aircrew were forced to make an emergency landing overnight in response to an undisclosed flight incident.

The helicopter was operating from Hobart Class destroyer HMAS Brisbane as part of a Regional Presence Deployment with Anzac Class frigate HMAS Warramunga. The crew were rescued by sea boats deployed by HMAS Brisbane approximately 20 minutes after the incident, and have received first aid for minor injuries.

As a result of the incident, Defence has temporarily suspended flying operations of the MH-60R Seahawk fleet while it conducts an investigation into the cause of the incident. HMAS Brisbane and HMAS Warramunga are searching the area for any debris to support the investigation.

“With the aircrew safe, investigating the circumstances that led to the helicopter ditching is the priority at the moment,” Commander of the Australian Fleet, Rear Admiral Mark Hammond said.

Defence is also reviewing the impact of the incident on the Regional Presence Deployment.

Rear Admiral Hammond lauded the efforts of the emergency response team. “The successful rescue is credit to the devotion to duty and skill of the officers and sailors of HMAS Brisbane,” he said. “Their immediate actions ensured the survival of the aircrew, validating the significant training undertaken in the event an emergency of this nature occurs.”

The grounding of the MH-60R Seahawk fleet comes just days after the US State Department greenlit the Commonwealth government’s request to purchase an additional 12 Seahawks from Lockheed Martin subsidiary Sikorsky for approximately US$985 million ($1.3 billion).

The deal, which will take the total size of the fleet to 36, was reportedly a response to technical issues associated with the Airbus-built MH-90 Taipan helicopters, deployed by both Navy and Army.

In June, Defence suspended flying operations of its 47 Taipan aircraft as a “safety precaution” after an issue relating to the “application of the helicopter’s maintenance policy” in the aircraft’s IT support system was identified. This was the latest in a series of technical incidents associated with the Taipan’s operation in recent years."[/i]

[Mustang51]

So wonder about the Loyal Wingman.......

[Dave Homewood]

Oh heck!

[mcmaster]

Phew glad all crew safe. Even the training for a helo ditching looks freaky enough let alone the real deal.