Author Topic: Chinook procurement problem (Read 288 times)

Chairboy · « **on:** April 07, 2004, 03:43:30 PM »

Hi guys,

I read this slightly inflamed article that heavily editorializes against a Chinook contract, and I'd like to get some more info on the truth behind the article:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/07/1081326790295.html

Does anyone know what the problems are? Is this a technology gap issue (eg, the Chinooks just don't have a modern enough system and there is a new capabillity requirement) or is there an actual defect (eg, the Chinooks SHOULD be able to navigate ILS, but can't because of a problem)?

It's hard to distill the basics of the issue from this news story which has the slightest taste of bias.

Thanks!

ra · « **Reply #1 on:** April 07, 2004, 03:48:39 PM »

It sounds like they ordered the helicopters without the necessary navaids. How such a major oversight can happen is beyond me.

ra

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #2 on:** April 07, 2004, 03:50:20 PM »

Remember back in the day you were lucky if you had a single light in your cockpit?

They made due...

Furball · « **Reply #3 on:** April 07, 2004, 04:10:02 PM »

doesn't suprise me.

British military has fantastic training, fantastic personnel but equipment is very much lacking - bad decisions from the top levels.

Guess thats what happens when you try to cut the corners with funding.

At least they are building 2 new aircraft carriers, look what happened in the falklands after the last of the big aircraft carriers were retired - you think any ship would have been sunk if the RN still had F4 Phantom's as task group cover?

Drifter1234 · « **Reply #4 on:** April 07, 2004, 06:26:01 PM »

Chinook is the only helicopter that can have a mid-air with itself.

Pei · « **Reply #5 on:** April 07, 2004, 07:24:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
doesn't suprise me.

British military has fantastic training, fantastic personnel but equipment is very much lacking - bad decisions from the top levels.

Guess thats what happens when you try to cut the corners with funding.

At least they are building 2 new aircraft carriers, look what happened in the falklands after the last of the big aircraft carriers were retired - you think any ship would have been sunk if the RN still had F4 Phantom's as task group cover?

Similar story with the new Apaches: they are going to stay in storage years because the MoD didn't bother to setup a training program for the aircrew.

With regards to the carriers: the contractor said that they can't build them for the price given only a few weeks after accepting the contract: apparently they will have top be smaller and less powerful than requested to come in budget. Should have given the contract directly to the French.

Swoop · « **Reply #6 on:** April 08, 2004, 05:18:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pei
Should have given the contract directly to the French.

Wash your mouth out with soap right now!

Replicant · « **Reply #7 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:28:02 AM »

The problem with the carriers comes down to money and the decision to buy the VSTOL variant of the JSF.

Originally they had planned to build two super carriers that could take conventional aircraft and use a catapult system. This meant that even if they used the VSTOL JSF they could still accept other fixed wing conventional aircraft. However, because of costs cuts the two super carriers have been reduced in size. Apparently they're supposed to be 'modular' which means that they can make it bigger if necessary but I doubt that would happen since it would incur greater cost. I still believe that they should have chosen the carrier version of the JSF rather than the VSTOL version.

The builders of the carriers are actually a consortium that includes the French company Thales, but it does include other British companies too.

gatso · « **Reply #8 on:** April 08, 2004, 09:20:04 AM »

We may still get CTOL JSF and the carriers have gone back up to 60,000 tonnes was the last I heard. Neither decision has been set in stone just yet.

VSTOL JSF is under threat because theres doubts whether the US Marines will be getting the aircraft, VSTOL variant, at all. If that happens the UK is going to have to pick up the entire development budget for the VSTOL JSF. We'd buy CTOL before we did that.

Also interesting are the rumours that the two carriers will be quite different to each other. One getting a ramp and single island structure and the other getting a flat deck and double island. Why they want to do this is not entirely clear to me.

I'd rather be flying CTOL than VSTOL and that view seems to be shared by most of the other pilots I talk too. It just lets us have so many more options.

Gatso