Russia confirms purchase of Mistral

AI: Thanks for saying what I was thinking mate

Well I guess I am out of excuses for the EH-101 other than would the Russians buy British equipment?

Unlikely I’d have thought. And equally unlikely that the sale would be approved. There is another reason not to buy of course. The huge fncking price tag.

Well I guess I am out of excuses for the EH-101 other than would the Russians buy British equipment?

Wan- thanks buddy, I feel better now 😀

I did a bit of looking before commenting and I found no reference to the MI-38 being FBW at all.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=opera&hs=kQE&rls=en-GB&q=%22Mi-38%22+%22fly+by+wire%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

The Ansat is a small helo that would make a nice plane guard but not a real contender for mass airborne helo ops from an LPD- lets be serious here

I agree, but that was not my point anyway. All I was attempting to get across is that a NH-90 production license would really give Russia very little if anything which they don’t already have in terms of technology. Why do you insist that their naval helo must be FBW? IMHO it brings very little realworld benefit to the table but (in the NH-90’s case, at any rate) costs an incredible amount of money. The US Navy, with undoubtedly the finest and largest amphibious helo capability on the planet, seems to do fine without fly by wire machines.

An updated Ka-29 would provide NH-90 performance in a smaller airframe, generate more high value work (engineering rather than just manufacture) in Russia and likely come in cheaper. What’s not to like 🙂 Don’t get me wrong, the NH-90 is a fine piece of kit, the most capable of its kind when all is said and done – but it is so expensive that for Russia the numbers just don’t add up.

This is why I excluded it, I know it was being retired, though I thought that was at the end of this year, as for the Chinese Z-8’s, would China export them and if so, would Russia buy them- simple answer- NO!

Just used for height comparison, not suggesting it would actually be adopted by the russians. 🙂

Well ok they can fit in there, but ask a mechanic to change a rotor hub or gear box and don’t be surprised when they hit you in the head with a spanner!

The point is that Ka-29, while tallar than NH90, is more than 1 meter shorter (5.50m versus 6.66m) than Super Frelon. 😀

Speaking of which- you haven’t given me mine lately Wan 🙁 I feel left out!p.

Awe chucks, come here you big lug. :p

Yes you can make the EH-101 fold down, but you can’t make it reduce height- this is my point that everyone is skipping over!

Agree and I don’t skip over it, but the Ka-29 is already less tall so should fit.

Well ok they can fit in there, but ask a mechanic to change a rotor hub or gear box and don’t be surprised when they hit you in the head with a spanner!

Yes you can make the EH-101 fold down, but you can’t make it reduce height- this is my point that everyone is skipping over!

Mistral has a “high hat” area in its hangar that can fit one helicopter for maintenance, so the EH-101 to be maintained just fine. Here’s a pic of a Super Frelon under the high hat area, which is located under the island (hence the raised part at the back of the island). You can also see where the area begins in the other pictures. EH-101 has the same height and width as Super Frelon so no problem whatsoever.

The Super Frelon is actually being retired in less than a month. Since the NH-90 isn’t ready yet, the French Navy has bought 2 EC-225s in SAR configuration as stop gaps.

Pics of Super Frelon aboard Mistral and Tonnerre:

http://www.larsenal.com/GB/galeries/galerie_02.php?maquette=Super-Frelon_en_op%F9rations&poua=BPC_Mistral

http://bpctonnerre.free.fr/actualites2010transittoulonbrest4.htm

This is why I excluded it, I know it was being retired, though I thought that was at the end of this year, as for the Chinese Z-8’s, would China export them and if so, would Russia buy them- simple answer- NO!

Geee look at the tight sqeeze on that side elevator, no room for mistakes there!

Well, that settles the height issue then?

Well ok they can fit in there, but ask a mechanic to change a rotor hub or gear box and don’t be surprised when they hit you in the head with a spanner!

Didn’t you know, we do a group hug regularly :);)

Speaking of which- you haven’t given me mine lately Wan 🙁 I feel left out!

Yak 141?
Length: 18.36 m (60 ft 2 1/4 in)
Wingspan: 10.105 m (33 ft 1 1/2 in)
Height: 5.00 m (16 ft 5 in)

Hmmmm Russia use their Mistral like the USN use their Amphibs with Harriers- I like it. Yeah Bring back the Freestyle!

The Kazan Ansat is in low rate production with a quadruplex digital FBW system and whenever it finally enters service the Mi-38 will be FBW as well. If only the Russian helo industry got their collective behinds in gear, I’m not sure Europe would have much to teach them beyond improvements regarding maintenance intervals.

Take also composites – the Ka-50/52 family do not contain as much by weight as many Western helos but they use this type of material in their central load-bearing structure, not just for skin panels and access hatches. That is unusual (though far from unheard of) even today and it certainly was back when the Ka-50 first appeared.

I did a bit of looking before commenting and I found no reference to the MI-38 being FBW at all. The Ansat is a small helo that would make a nice plane guard but not a real contender for mass airborne helo ops from an LPD- lets be serious here

The Super Frelon is still in service in France (though expected to be replaced by NH-90 by 2011-12) abd both produced and used in China (as Z-8). But that was not the point.

Super Frelon has a folding tail, which reduces it’s length, and it is as tall as EH101, which is significantly taller than NH-90. Wouldn’t it be logical for the French to take into consideration the EH-101 as a possible visitor (or even resident) of the Mistral, given it’s use by UK, Italy and Portugal. By comparison, the Dutch and Spanish have designed their LPDs (Rotterdam/Galicia, of the Enforcer-series, which resulted in the UK Bay class) with an eye to both NH-90 and EH101 even though e.g. Spain uses the Sea King (though plans for NH90 on the Juan Carlos), which is more similar to NH-90 (Length: 16.7 m, Height: 5.13 m) than to EH101, and the Dutch have NH-90. Lockheed Martin, team leader for the US101 VXX competitor, noted that the US101 has a folding tail, unlike the EH101. Which shows it is not that hard to make a change.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Mistral#Pont_d.E2.80.99envol

The flight deck at least can take EH101s and in one place even CH-53 (Length: 26.97 m, Height: 7.6 m). The 18.5×6.5m elevator can handle a 19-19.5m long helicoptor placed diagonally. Likewise, the 15x15m elevator should be able to handle a helicopter up to 21m long helicopter if placed diagonally.

Note that Mi-17 (max t/o weigh 13 metic tons) is entirely possible on both elevators, Mi-38 (max t/o weight 15.6 metric tons) on one.

Yes you can make the EH-101 fold down, but you can’t make it reduce height- this is my point that everyone is skipping over!

Thank you for the warm welcome 🙂

Didn’t you know, we do a group hug regularly :);)

The Super Frelon is actually being retired in less than a month. Since the NH-90 isn’t ready yet, the French Navy has bought 2 EC-225s in SAR configuration as stop gaps.

Pics of Super Frelon aboard Mistral and Tonnerre:

Well, that settles the height issue then?

Zil: Спасибо за ваши комментарии другу и добро пожаловать на борт

Thank you for the warm welcome 🙂

The Super Frelon is still in service in France (though expected to be replaced by NH-90 by 2011-12) abd both produced and used in China (as Z-8).

The Super Frelon is actually being retired in less than a month. Since the NH-90 isn’t ready yet, the French Navy has bought 2 EC-225s in SAR configuration as stop gaps.

Pics of Super Frelon aboard Mistral and Tonnerre:

http://www.larsenal.com/GB/galeries/galerie_02.php?maquette=Super-Frelon_en_op%F9rations&poua=BPC_Mistral

http://bpctonnerre.free.fr/actualites2010transittoulonbrest4.htm

too bad the Yak-38 is now retired, i would like to see it fly off the Mistral :diablo:

Yak 141?
Length: 18.36 m (60 ft 2 1/4 in)
Wingspan: 10.105 m (33 ft 1 1/2 in)
Height: 5.00 m (16 ft 5 in)

too bad the Yak-38 is now retired, i would like to see it fly off the Mistral :diablo:

My point here is that the AW-139 doesn’t have Fly By Wire controls, the NH-90 does- this would help Russian industry expand into this area for their own local industry.

The Kazan Ansat is in low rate production with a quadruplex digital FBW system and whenever it finally enters service the Mi-38 will be FBW as well. If only the Russian helo industry got their collective behinds in gear, I’m not sure Europe would have much to teach them beyond improvements regarding maintenance intervals.

Take also composites – the Ka-50/52 family do not contain as much by weight as many Western helos but they use this type of material in their central load-bearing structure, not just for skin panels and access hatches. That is unusual (though far from unheard of) even today and it certainly was back when the Ka-50 first appeared.

Wan:I had honestly forgotten about the Mi-38 (or the NH ninetski :D), yes a naval version has been on then books for a while now- especially for deployment aboard the Kuznetsov, but money has been tight (not getting into it as requested by Zil and out of respect).

As for the others listed, The Super Frelon is actually a non contender as it’s no longer produced (actually i don’t know of anyone still using it- though I could be wrong on that). The EH-101 is out as I doubt the Russians would but it especially if they won’t buy American! The Tiger is out since the Russians are more interested in the Mi-28’s and Ka-52’s (for good reason). The Kasatka is out as it’s too small- it’s more of a plane guard type helo just like the French Dauphan it holds it’s origins to. The Ka-29 is out as mentioned by out friend above- too wide (mode would definately be needed! and as I mentioned the Mi-17 is just too long (I doubt they’d introduce a folding tail version since the Mi-38 is coming on line. The final aircraft mentioned- the NH-90, is what I was thinking they might buy some of- this would help Russian industry gain advances in both FBW and light weight polymer construction techs, I know France would love to sell more and adding the Russian navy to the list of customers for this fine product would be a score for EADS.

The Super Frelon is still in service in France (though expected to be replaced by NH-90 by 2011-12) abd both produced and used in China (as Z-8). But that was not the point.

Super Frelon has a folding tail, which reduces it’s length, and it is as tall as EH101, which is significantly taller than NH-90. Wouldn’t it be logical for the French to take into consideration the EH-101 as a possible visitor (or even resident) of the Mistral, given it’s use by UK, Italy and Portugal. By comparison, the Dutch and Spanish have designed their LPDs (Rotterdam/Galicia, of the Enforcer-series, which resulted in the UK Bay class) with an eye to both NH-90 and EH101 even though e.g. Spain uses the Sea King (though plans for NH90 on the Juan Carlos), which is more similar to NH-90 (Length: 16.7 m, Height: 5.13 m) than to EH101, and the Dutch have NH-90. Lockheed Martin, team leader for the US101 VXX competitor, noted that the US101 has a folding tail, unlike the EH101. Which shows it is not that hard to make a change.

Capacités aéronautiques

Pont d’envol

Comparés aux 1 450 m2 de surface de pont d’envol du TCD Foudre (3 spots sur plate-forme avant) ou aux 1 536 m2 du TCD Siroco (3 spots sur plate-forme avant et 1 sur plate-forme arrière), les 6 400 m2 des BPC s’étalent sur un pont continu comprenant 6 spots. Les hélicoptères alliés «moyens lourds» comme le «EH101 Merlin» (16 tonnes), peuvent se poser sur le pont d’envol. Les hélicoptères «super lourds» comme le «Super Stallion» américain (35 tonnes) disposent d’un spot dédié (spot n° 1).

Mise en œuvre d’hélicoptères

Si la mise en œuvre simultanée d’hélicoptères passe seulement de 4 à 6, le nombre de ces derniers stockés, réparés et prêts à décoller, passe lui de 4 à 16 au sein d’un hangar de 1 800 m2 situé au pont inférieur. Une zone de maintenance aéronautique équipée d’un pont roulant, divers ateliers et magasins aéronautiques autorise l’entretien complet des hélicoptères embarqués. Les installations d’avitaillement en carburant aviation (kérosène TR5) permettent d’effectuer des pleins ou reprises sur 4 hélicoptères simultanément sur le pont d’envol grâce à un monte-munitions ou de mener cette opération à l’intérieur du hangar.

Ascenseurs
Les BPC sont dotés de 2 plates-formes élévatrices Mac Gregor de charge de 13 tonnes, la première de 225 m2 (15 x 15 m ), permettant la montée au niveau du pont d’envol d’hélicos voilures déployées (écourtant le délai de décollage), la seconde de 120 m2soit (18,5 x 6,5 m) à proximité d’une grue de charge de 17 tonnes. Selon le capitaine de vaisseau Gilles Humeau, commandant du Mistral, « la taille du pont d’envol permettait [en opérations, ndlr] de mettre en œuvre 30 aéronefs en utilisant les 6 spots ».

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Mistral#Pont_d.E2.80.99envol

The flight deck at least can take EH101s and in one place even CH-53 (Length: 26.97 m, Height: 7.6 m). The 18.5×6.5m elevator can handle a 19-19.5m long helicoptor placed diagonally. Likewise, the 15x15m elevator should be able to handle a helicopter up to 21m long helicopter if placed diagonally.

Note that Mi-17 (max t/o weigh 13 metic tons) is entirely possible on both elevators, Mi-38 (max t/o weight 15.6 metric tons) on one.

Provided that hangar height is compatible and the forward elevator can be enlarged, a modernised variant of the Ka-29 (based on the Ka-32-10 with a rear ramp that Kamov is studying) would be completely fine. Seriously, while the NH-90 airframe is very sophisticated, the Ka-32 family offers almost the same performance in a much more compact package – likely cheaper too. Other than tech-transfer (which Russia is getting anyway through civilian AW139 licensed assembly), what’s the point?

My point here is that the AW-139 doesn’t have Fly By Wire controls, the NH-90 does- this would help Russian industry expand into this area for their own local industry.

The EH101 is probably out
Russia probably won’t/won’t be allowed buy from US

But … EH101 is not US its Anglo-Italian

That doesn’t change the substance of your analysis or course.

Al

What I meant here mate was that if Russia can’t and won’t buy American, then they can’t and won’t buy English either! I know the EH-101’s design and origins- the Italians and the Russians have a history of co-operative design (MB-348/Yak-130)

Provided that hangar height is compatible and the forward elevator can be enlarged, a modernised variant of the Ka-29 (based on the Ka-32-10 with a rear ramp that Kamov is studying) would be completely fine. Seriously, while the NH-90 airframe is very sophisticated, the Ka-32 family offers almost the same performance in a much more compact package – likely cheaper too. Other than tech-transfer (which Russia is getting anyway through civilian AW139 licensed assembly), what’s the point?

The EH-101 is out as I doubt the Russians would but it especially if they won’t buy American!

The EH101 is probably out
Russia probably won’t/won’t be allowed buy from US

But … EH101 is not US its Anglo-Italian

That doesn’t change the substance of your analysis or course.

Al

This is what Mikhail Barabanov, Russian military expert, who visited the Mistral with Russian delegation said (pardon my English):

“о высоте ангар, по моему впечатлению, достаточен для размещения там Ка-27, Ка-29 и Ка-52. Но, помимо вопроса складывания винтов на Ка-52, серьезной проблемой тут встанет узкий бортовой подъемник. Если Ка-27 на него со сложенными винтами, видимо, и влезет, то Ка-29 и Ка-52 туда точно не войдут по ширине внешних подвесок. То есть их подача без серьезных переделок подъемника возможна будет только через кормовой «широкий» подъемник на торце кормового среза.”

“About hangar’s height, my impression is that it’s sufficient for placing there Ka-27, Ka-29 and Ka-52. But, in addition to the question of folding the rotor on Ka-52, another serious problem that will arise is the narrow shipboard elevator. If Ka-27, it seems, could get in with folded rotor, Ka-29 and Ka-52, on the other hand, won’t get in for sure because of the width of the side mounts. In other words, without introducing modifications to the elevator, their delivery [to the flight deck] is possible only by the “wide” stern elevator.”

http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/2/co/1922035.htm

So I guess some changes will be introduced into the Russian version of Mistral.

May be it’s important to the French, so they will give up on something else – I don’t know. My impression is that Russians locked on the Mistral, and the (supposed) interest in similar ships is for other reasons (maybe for the negotiations’ sake or for making this all deal to look more transparent and commercial than it is).

I don’t agree, but lets not get into this any more.

Zil: Спасибо за ваши комментарии другу и добро пожаловать на борт

Mi-17
Length: 18.42 m (60 ft 5 in)
Rotor diameter: 21.352 m (69 ft 10 in)
Height: 4.76 m (15 ft 7 in)

Mi-38
Length: 19.70 m (64 ft 8 in)
Rotor diameter: 21.10 m (69 ft 3 in)
Height: 5.13 m (16 ft 10 in)

Ka-29
Length: 11.30 m (37 ft 1 in)
Rotor diameter: 15.80 m (51 ft 10 in)
Height: 5.50 m (18 ft 1 in)

Ka-60
Length: 15.60 m (51 ft 2 in)
Rotor diameter: 13.50 m (44 ft 3 in)
Height: 4.20 m (13 ft 9 in)

(Tiger HAP)
Length: 14.08 m fuselage (46 ft 2 in)
Rotor diameter: 13.00 m (42 ft 8 in)
Height: 3.83 m (12 ft 7 in)

NH-90
Length: 16.13 m (52 ft 11 in)
Rotor diameter: 16.30 m (53 ft 6 in)
Height: 5.23 m (17 ft 2 in)

EH101
Length: 22.81 m (74 ft 10 in)
Rotor diameter: 18.59 m (61 ft 0 in)
Height: 6.65 m (21 ft 10 in)

Super Frelon
Length: 23.03 m (75 ft 6⅝ in)
Rotor diameter: 18.90 m (62 ft 0 in)
Height: 6.66 m (21 ft 10¼ in)

I’ld say Mi-38 with folding tail ….

Wan:I had honestly forgotten about the Mi-38 (or the NH ninetski :D), yes a naval version has been on then books for a while now- especially for deployment aboard the Kuznetsov, but money has been tight (not getting into it as requested by Zil and out of respect).

As for the others listed, The Super Frelon is actually a non contender as it’s no longer produced (actually i don’t know of anyone still using it- though I could be wrong on that). The EH-101 is out as I doubt the Russians would but it especially if they won’t buy American! The Tiger is out since the Russians are more interested in the Mi-28’s and Ka-52’s (for good reason). The Kasatka is out as it’s too small- it’s more of a plane guard type helo just like the French Dauphan it holds it’s origins to. The Ka-29 is out as mentioned by out friend above- too wide (mode would definately be needed! and as I mentioned the Mi-17 is just too long (I doubt they’d introduce a folding tail version since the Mi-38 is coming on line. The final aircraft mentioned- the NH-90, is what I was thinking they might buy some of- this would help Russian industry gain advances in both FBW and light weight polymer construction techs, I know France would love to sell more and adding the Russian navy to the list of customers for this fine product would be a score for EADS.

ZIL:

(…)

Well, maybe you right. I should check myself on this matter.