Design your navys air assets

http://www.corgi.co.uk/CorgiSite/Military_Air_Power/AA35904.htm

http://www.corgi.co.uk/CorgiSite/ModernEra/AA35903.htm

There ya go

Nice models……………. US Coast Guard HH-60J Jayhawks often fly over my home!:D

FLY NAVY:cool:

Turb: Thanks mate

http://www.corgi.co.uk/CorgiSite/Military_Air_Power/AA35904.htm

http://www.corgi.co.uk/CorgiSite/ModernEra/AA35903.htm

There ya go

Turb: mate I’d love to see a pic of the Corgi Diecast you have (both of them really).

Uni: you are right for the most part mate, there’d be only a few vessels that might be able to handle the baby tilt, and all of those in US service. Still as you said, future designs might be capable.

Trouble with both the Osprey and the baby Bell tilt-rotor is they have a significant footprint, one large enough to disqualify them from most current frigate-sized flight decks and hangars.

Later vessels, those on drawing boards now, might be able to accomodate them, but few operational frigates and destroyers could.

Unicorn

The argument over a single or two platform solution is one of those that is an eternal debate I guess:) The NH90 is clearly more capable than a Lynx, it is a superb machine. There is also a good argument for a high low mix too with the Lynx and EH101. Ultimately I’m guessing NH90 customers will be more than happy with their choice, as will the RN with their two platform decision:) Got to say though, the RAN S70’s are sharp looking machines, I got the Corgi 1/72 diecast and love it, it sits next to the equally sharp looking USCG HH60J:)

Tid, I know it is a bit radical mate but I have a funny feeling that this will be the future not to far away. We all know the advantages of these designs: Fast transit speeds like a plane, hover and listen like a helo, carry the same amount of ordenance as an A-4 (potentially)- Imagin a plane with eight tin fish ready to drop 😮 😀

Tilting at the treasury

Hi Ja-Thanks for the correct info re the choice of Seahawk in 1983, I was also not aware that the Army wanted the Panther.
Your choice of machines to do the combat & Medium Support & training & light support is definately thinking out of the box however I hope that there is plenty of $$$$$$$ in that box for our treasury to pay for this forward thinking.

Well if I had to go for American products, I’d go this way to get a jump on the field :dev2: :diablo: :dev2: 😉 :p 😀

Combat and Medium Support:

Training and Light Support:

It’s all about thinking outside the box 😉 Who siad they had to be helo’s in the traditional sence 😀

I would agree and can’t believe how some have such closed minds to the possibilities……………….:(

Well if I had to go for American products, I’d go this way to get a jump on the field :dev2: :diablo: :dev2: 😉 :p 😀

Combat and Medium Support:

Training and Light Support:

It’s all about thinking outside the box 😉 Who siad they had to be helo’s in the traditional sence 😀

Well there are some that share a commonality degree with engines (They might not be the same engine but they may share similar parts, most of the Eurocopter products have this commonality, as I would expect most Bell Products and Augusta would be able to share with both Eurocopter and Bell. Sikorski would have a common Combat/Support type in the Seahawk/Blackhawk range and you could use the S-76 Eagle as a training helo, thus giving you a close to 100% commonality across the board, but in my line of thinking the Eagle is a little too big for training.

I was thinking the same thing! So, what type would you select for your ideal helo fleet?

So, what training helocopter shares major components with a ASW/ASuW/Support Type????

Well there are some that share a commonality degree with engines (They might not be the same engine but they may share similar parts, most of the Eurocopter products have this commonality, as I would expect most Bell Products and Augusta would be able to share with both Eurocopter and Bell. Sikorski would have a common Combat/Support type in the Seahawk/Blackhawk range and you could use the S-76 Eagle as a training helo, thus giving you a close to 100% commonality across the board, but in my line of thinking the Eagle is a little too big for training.

So, what training helocopter shares major components with a ASW/ASuW/Support Type????:rolleyes:

Tid: mate there is no truth in that at all, in fact the Navy wanted the Seahawk and the Army wanted the Panther (for which they got the Blackhawk- sadly). See the main problem with the Puma is it’s height, had we bought those machines, we would have had to spend heaps of money on the FFG’s to raise the height of the hanger to incorporate enough room to change the rotors of the helo’s in the hanger, as it was we had the decks lengthened to make minimum clearence for the Seahawks, as these decks were only designed for the SH-2 in the LAMPS role!

As for your choice in military assets, interesting if not stubborn :p The Sikorski’s only have one thing in their favour- spares resources, the capabilities of the machine are not what most expected of them. They are however robust enought to survive a number of hits it areas but too many vital areas are easy to hit 🙁

Turb: Mate the EH-101 is a very nice and capable machine, but in a lot of cases, it is just simply too big! This is the main reason why it lost the AIR 9000 contract with us (though I do like the idea of dropping three companys in behind the lines over the two companies the MRH-90 offers, but size was a major factor here, we didn’t want to fiddle too much around with hangers and decks just to incorperate a bigger helo. As for your combo- two thumbs up mate, i love the Lynx in both its versions

EH101, it may be bigger than the NH90 but the RN can accomodate it on many of it’s vessels and it is a very capable machine. Combine it with the Lynx for a lighter heli and I think the RN have a pretty good mix, as good as any alternatives anyway.

Probably too late

Seeing as the ADF is eventually going all NH 90 [46 ordered or virtually ordered ? so far] it is a bit hard to go against it but seeing as no NH 90 have been delivered I might use my makebelieve executive powers to cancel them. The Army always wanted more Blackhawks so I will let them have what they want. The RAN will get the Sikorsky MH-60S & the MH-60R to fulfil all main roles & keep some commonality with the Army.Training & Light General Purpose will be done by the A109, a bit of a luxury probably but I think it would prove very useful overall.
Now a question for any Knowledgible RAN person -In 1983 the Seahawk was chosen over the Lynx, Dauphin, & Super Puma. I have read [Somewhere] that the RAN really wanted the Super Puma,is there any truth in this or not.

Scoot, my old friend, you just got bonus points, you are the only one so far to have thought about the commonality between COmbat, Suppot and Training in terms of parts, well done lad!

Still, I’d be interested in hearing your sollution and any other from other American people as this would be a kind of test :diablo:

Interesting Question! Clearly, several Support/ASW/ASuW share similar platforms. Yet, which of any have a high content of part with a training type?:confused:

ASUW: Merlin-ER with extra fuel tanks for a 1000km combat radius. LPI sea search radar. direct video and radar feed from 3rd party UAVs . 4 x novator klub :diablo:

Guess it seems to be the concensus that the NH-90 in any and all versions is “The Way Forward” as GWB like to put things these days. I too would take it for the Support and Combat element of the Naval helo force, but I’d choose the A-109LUH as my training helo, simply because it has a small offencive role capability as well as some capacity as a support helo, thus I’d refelcet my tarining sylabus along the lines of the following:

Promotion from basic flight school to Helo Training School (A-109’s), the prospective pilots would then spend two years there:

6 months learning about helo ops at sea (theory)

6 months learning to fly helos culminating with six weeks at sea training.

6 months flying in a support role and finally

6 months learning ASW/ASuW tactics

Graduation from the training school would see the pilot then branch out to either “Support School” (A55 and Trash hauling) or Combat School (Jocks with rocks) where they learn more advanced tactics in their chosen fields. With this sort of schooling, you are ensuring that should the unthinkable happen and a helo does go down from the combat section, then a Support section crew is able to cover the job (albeit not as well- but some coverage is better than none at all right?).

Support school would also cover adventurous missions such as SAR, CSAR and Black Ops missions, so it’s not all bad for that section.

But when it comes to talking about the NH-90’s, I would take the MRH-90 (Aussie/ New Zealand) version. These machines are fully marinised and capable of deploying with everything the NH-90TTH and NH-90NFH have to offer. We have basically done the same thing with these machines as we did with the Seahawks (reference to the RAWS), turned them into Hybrid machines that cover both jobs.