Steve TouchdownJust because I didn’t see F-911 doesn’t mean I haven’t seen it
What else really needs to be said? :rolleyes:
QED
Steve TouchdownTo illustrate Arthur’s point I’m pretty sure the only “all-American” contender for the US Army’s LUH is the Bell 210/Huey II (ie refurbished UH-1H/V airframes). I think the two Euro competitors are the AB139 and the EC635 but the whole programme is subject to ratification in a couple of months’ time.
Art’s mention of the S-76 also reminded me that, until the relationship concluded, their fuselages were being constructed at Aero Vodochody in the Cech Rep.
I guess it’s been widely reported by now in today’s media items, but worth reporting that the cost of the VH-69A programme in total will be $6.1 billion, with the full-spec choppers costing around $110 million apiece.
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownHow can changing the radios and IFF systems to be compatible with NATO systems be considered modernisation?
They mean “modernised” as compared to the Czech’s current Mi-24D/V Hinds and old Mi-8/17s.
Besides based on the figures given above if 19-billion-koruna = 631-million euros that means 1.2 billion koruna = just under 40 million euros. So for 26 helos they pay 142 million euros but to change the radios and IFF systems in 26 helos it will cost 40 million euros???? At about 5.4 million euros per helo that is 1.5 billion euros for each helo!!!! Damn!!!
The costs to convert the 26 choppers’ comms and IFF kit is roughly 40 million euros in total. IIRC the mods include TACAN, Trimble GPS, digital radios etc. so at 1.5 million euros a pop I don’t think that’s so extortionate.
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownMind you, the KLu has always been very pro-US in purchasing equipment….
Much the same as the younger Dutch spotters/aircraft nuts, eh Art? Can always spot the Dutch at European airshows by their calf-length shorts, huge Nikes/Reeboks, baseball caps and basketball “tube” socks! 😀 😀 😀 😀
And I won’t mention the incredible amount of hair gel/glue you guys go for either! :diablo:
Steve
Steve TouchdownSorry Steve,
I hadn’t heard the 80% part.I am also aware that these days rarely is anything 100% “US-manufactured”. Could you please point me to a link on the Apaches? Not the remaufactured ones but new fuselage being built outside the US.
Not to start a flame war but for my own reading. Thanks.
Sure thing, BL: the original story I saw included a photo and was longer than the item below. I’m pretty sure it was in the Korean Herald but they charge a sub to view older news items. Anyway, here’s a similar news snippet covering the first one coming off the line:
KAI begins Apache fuselage exports
Korea Aerospace Industries Co., the nation’s sole aircraft maker, exported the first of 50 Apache attack helicopter fuselages to U.S.-based Boeing Co. yesterday, company officials said.
Korea Aerospace Industries, commonly known as KAI, held a ceremony yesterday at its Sacheon plant in South Gyeongsang Province to celebrate its first shipment from the initial contract. The company expects to sell more than 160 fuselages to main contractor Boeing, according to KAI.
“It is first time that Boeing let a foreign maker produce the Apache fuselage outside the U.S. This clearly indicates their recognition of our company’s technology and ability,” a KAI official stated. But the official declined to disclose the total value of the contract, citing a confidentiality agreement with Boeing.
The order was won after the Korean government decided to purchase Boeing’s F-15 fighter jet to replace its aging military aircraft. In return, the U.S. aircraft maker gave $1 billion in contracts to state-run KAI.
The deals includes KAI refitting a part of its Sacheon plant to make wings and fuselages for the F-15 with assistance from Boeing’s technician team.
KAI was launched in 1999 after the aerospace affiliates of Samsung, Daewoo and Hyundai groups were merged. The company reported annual profit of 10.4 billion won ($9.11 million) on sales of 800.1 billion won in 2003.
KAI is currently unlisted but plans to trade its shares on the local bourse in 2005, officials said.
Steve TouchdownBecause you don’t keep an industry healthy just by assembling products designed elsewhere. The American helicopter industry isn’t exactly humming along, and we kind of need to keep it alive for strategic reasons.
Tell that to Sikorsky’s R&D, Dinger. To many commentators the FatHawk has always been a cost-saving compromise. I think I’m right in saying you can’t even stand up in the cabin if you’re taller than about 5′ 10″.
So are you asserting that the US economy and aerospace industry hasn’t benefitted in any way from the Texan II (PC-9), Goshawk (Hawk) and Harrier programmes?
I thought the majority of Americans were all for globalisation in this new century? It cuts both ways…..
Steve
Steve TouchdownLockheed is the “golden company” it can do no wrong in the current administration eyes. 🙂
US president in a foreign copter. I could understand it if the aircraft was superior …… with many US contractors already passing out layoff notices it just looks bad.
It’s 80% US-built: what’s the biggie? I don’t believe Sikorsky claimed their product was 100% US-manufactured, or did they?
Apache fuselages are now made in South Korea but I’m sure you consider that an all-American product.
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownThat should be a pretty tough blow for Sikorsky – FatHawk sales already weren’t all too impressive, now losing this competition against some furrin’ type o’helo seems a definate marketing dunk. Then again, giving statements like Published data shows that the S-92, the baseline version of the H-92, flies farther, flies faster and carries more than the EH-101. seems like pushing the credibility envelope a bit. If only because the EH-101 (interesting to note Sikorsky doesn’t like to use the US-101 euphemism) has a larger cargo bay, and three rather than two engines.
I’m also not entirely sure upon what basis those statements are made, Art. The customer list for the FatHawk is certainly none too impressive thus far with only the Canadian ‘Cyclones’ representing anything like a coup.
Bearing these “faster, farther, more” claims in mind, has anyone got hard and fast factoids about the current specs for the two choppers as put forward for the VXX comp?
The next nice contract to win is the USAF’s PRV (HH-60G replacement) for 132 examples. The S-92 is up against the EH-101 for this one again and EADS/Grumman have also entered the NH-90.
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownIt was an HMH-361 CH-53E that crashed. I have never once seen any evidence that any of the US forces have tried to pass off what they classify as a “combat loss” for an accident.
Please don’t believe some of the BS posts you see on the web, including here on this forum. If you check the thread on ” a/c shot down by SAM missiles” (something like that anyway) it has pictures of an Army AH-64D supposedly shot down by an SA-6. The real circumstances were that it crashed on a FARRP due to the brownout conditions Lawdart described.
This is the official status report of the CH-53E that came down in the early hours of Wednesday morning:
Mishap Date: 01/26/2005 Severity: A FM Time: 01:20 Evt Ser: 68591
Acft: CH053E Count: Y Destroyed: Y Major Command: MARFORPAC
Custodian: HMH-361 Fatalities: 31 Location: IRAQ
Summary: SECTION FLT ENTERED INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND CRASHED.
Env: Aviation Operational
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownIt was an HMH-361 CH-53E that crashed. I have never once seen any evidence that any of the US forces have tried to pass off what they classify as a “combat loss” for an accident.
Please don’t believe some of the BS posts you see on the web, including here on this forum. If you check the thread on ” a/c shot down by SAM missiles” (something like that anyway) it has pictures of an Army AH-64D supposedly shot down by an SA-6. The real circumstances were that it crashed on a FARRP due to the brownout conditions Lawdart described.
This is the official status report of the CH-53E that came down in the early hours of Wednesday morning:
Mishap Date: 01/26/2005 Severity: A FM Time: 01:20 Evt Ser: 68591
Acft: CH053E Count: Y Destroyed: Y Major Command: MARFORPAC
Custodian: HMH-361 Fatalities: 31 Location: IRAQ
Summary: SECTION FLT ENTERED INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND CRASHED.
Env: Aviation Operational
Best regards
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve Touchdown“Chinese Whispers” in Action!?
Bizarre. Truly bizarre.
Maybe Piotr or Andrei can confirm this but, having seen the transcript of the original press conference a fortnight ago, I don’t believe the Tu-160 was even mentioned!
I think the article is based on four or five recent news relases that have been interwoven into a single thread.
Give it another six weeks and China “will be ordering” 30 Blackjacks :diablo:
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve Touchdownwell, it looks like a new PAF is slowly beggining to take shape based around FC-1s and F-16A/Bs as the mainstay and F-16C/Ds as the high end…..
Looking to acquire….
Hardly “news”, is it?
Does anyone happen to know why the DCG meeting was postponed? I had thought it was due to take place in Islamabad last month?
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownWell, that argument would be valid 6 years ago.Pakistan today is free from any US sanctions, It is a Major Non Nato ally.The recent US arms package included 8 P3C orions,6 C-130’s, 2000 TOW missiles,Phalanx Naval Guns,a few Javelin Missiles for testing, Plus another order for 80 Cobra attack helicopter gunships,Hellfire missiles and HawkEye awacs (which incidently were offered to it in 1986 instead of the E-3s).In additon the US is building 5 new frontline bases in Pakistan. So in light of the current american weapons sale and future ones, if the GRIPEN uses a few US made components…shouldnt really make a difference in authorizing the sale.The only other argument i can think of is that since its an offensive weapon and might be used in a conflict, the Swedes are a little hesitant because of their own export laws. Perhaps someone should remind them that being a Neutral country is all fine and dandy…….but the Cold War was over in 1989 and the USSR doesnt exist anymore .
It’s off-topic for this particular thread so I’ll keep this brief, EB: too many people are confusing wish/dream lists with concrete “orders”. Check out anderstryggve’s post, it’s far closer to what actually happened regarding Gripen.
Still no Congressional notification made regarding “new” F-16s, or even MLU for the existing A models come to that. Anybody citing this week’s brief piece in Flight should re-read it carefully without getting carried away.
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownErrr I thought Hungary was only leasing the Gripens, so then this wouldn’t really be a Hungarian Gripen, would it?
FMV yesterday:
The first Gripen aircraft will arrive in Hungary in March 2006 and all aircraft will be delivered during 2006 and 2007. The lease is for a ten (10) year period between 2006 and 2016, following which the aircraft become the property of the Hungarian government.
Following your logic then I guess the CT-155 Hawk and CT-156 Harvard aircraft based at Moose Jaw aren’t counted as belonging to the Canadian Forces?
Steve ~ Touchdown-News
Steve TouchdownA CH-53E, from what I understand. An Echo, as the Jarheads know it….
Apparently so. Two H-53 accidents in the past 24 hours, actually: a USN MH-53E ditched and sank in the Atlantic (offshore of Virginia Beach) yesterday whilst flying off the Ike. Thankfully, all eight crew got out in good shape.
Cheers
Steve Rush ~ Touchdown-News
Sign In
