• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CH-148 Cyclone Progress

Is it a helicopter problem or a mission systems problem? Pretty sad when we havent even got all delivered yet
 
Is it a helicopter problem or a mission systems problem? Pretty sad when we havent even got all delivered yet
It’s an orphan. So @Navy_Pete ’s comment is accurate. LocMart/Sik has already from my understanding has contractually maxed its damages, so they aren’t penalized any further on delays and other issues.

When you buy a bespoke Helicopter, you end up assuming all the risk. Canada wanted more than the SeaHawk could offer, and so made a bad play that the larger cousin commercial aircraft could be militarized to the needs easily. Shame also belong to Sikorsky, they had expected many follow on orders from other NATO Militaries, and when they didn’t materialize, they sort of lost interest.

I’ll note that the CAF could have gotten almost 3 SeaHawks for the price of 1 Cyclone , and now, it appears with all the cost on the Cyclone, they could have almost got 10 for 1…
 
Yup, liquidated damages were maxed out a long time ago. LM RMS/SIK gets paid cost plus, thereon, so it’s a question of how long the company wants to keep accepting Canada’s doubloons to wind its way towards FOC…
 
I’m not qualified (obviously) to comment on what capabilities the R would offer versus the Cyclone. My observations are solely made from the fact that the SeHawk is used by many other NATO navies, and the OS issues of the Cyclone fleet - as well as the recent news that Ottawa may be looking to replace the Cyclone at this point.

The Cyclone is larger with more range. So more stores and more theoretically capability in mission systems, I also understand that one can’t simply fit 2-3 SeaHawks in a CPF (or CSC), but I’m pretty sure that one could fit 1 SeaHawk and one UAS system, and it appears the CSC could be altered to fit 2 SeaHawks and 1 UAS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In order to progress a project I’m working on at the Shearwater Aviation Museum on telling the Canadian Sea King story, I’ve been digging deep into the technical, operational and crewing issues surrounding the Sea King moving from a carrier aircraft to a small deck one. This includes adding a navigator and a computer for them to keep the picture.

In my opinion, the Romeo would require those issues to be revisited.

Like SeaKingTacco, I won’t comment on that article, other than to say the Cyclone issues require more analysis then either that article or is on this forum can accomplish.
 
In order to progress a project I’m working on at the Shearwater Aviation Museum on telling the Canadian Sea King story, I’ve been digging deep into the technical, operational and crewing issues surrounding the Sea King moving from a carrier aircraft to a small deck one. This includes adding a navigator and a computer for them to keep the picture.

In my opinion, the Romeo would require those issues to be revisited.

Like SeaKingTacco, I won’t comment on that article, other than to say the Cyclone issues require more analysis then either that article or is on this forum can accomplish.
I said that I would not comment further on this topic. I lied, because I feel I can go here.

The topic of aircrew “unionism“ is, to me, a non-starter. You don’t (should not) buy aircraft because it fits how you have “always” crewed a previous aircraft. You buy it because it makes operational and financial sense.
 
I said that I would not comment further on this topic. I lied, because I feel I can go here.

The topic of aircrew “unionism“ is, to me, a non-starter. You don’t (should not) buy aircraft because it fits how you have “always” crewed a previous aircraft. You buy it because it makes operational and financial sense.
Not disagreeing… the point isn’t that the Romeo doesn’t fit, it’s that a new CONOPs would be required.

I had the same discussion on LinkedIn with an Aurora LCol, because he asked both Bombardier and Boeing would fit the Aurora CONOPs. The P-8 doesn’t, but my fear is that they will try to fly it like an Aurora.
 
Not disagreeing… the point isn’t that the Romeo doesn’t fit, it’s that a new CONOPs would be required.

I had the same discussion on LinkedIn with an Aurora LCol, because he asked both Bombardier and Boeing would fit the Aurora CONOPs. The P-8 doesn’t, but my fear is that they will try to fly it like an Aurora.
That is always the danger- that you fly the new aircraft like the old one, because that is all you know.

(ask me how I know…)
 
From what I understand the requirement for Canadian maritime helicopters is to be able to operate independently of its ship. That is collect data,analyze the data,and then act on it. Whereas the US Navy maritime helicopters collect data,transmit it back to ship to be analyzed. This is why R model Seahawk wasn't considered as a suitable replacement for Seaking.
 
That is always the danger- that you fly the new aircraft like the old one, because that is all you know.

(ask me how I know…)

From what I understand the requirement for Canadian maritime helicopters is to be able to operate independently of its ship. That is collect data,analyze the data,and then act on it. Whereas the US Navy maritime helicopters collect data,transmit it back to ship to be analyzed. This is why R model Seahawk wasn't considered as a suitable replacement for Seaking.
armrdsoul77 is largely correct, but that is an oversimplification. It used to be that way, when they had Hawklink on the Bravo. Hawklink has been replaced on the Romeo with both TCDL (Tactical Common Data Link) which can do everything Hawklink could and more, and Link-16. Hawklink and TCDL make them a better "extension of the ship" than the Cyclone (of note the Sea King had TCDL but did not use it that way, and TCDL is "on the list" for Cyclone but may never materialize). Link-16 allows them to be part of the force as a whole, and also makes them a very good hunter killer team with the Sierra (the Romeo hunts, and the Sierra kills). The Romeo also has a much better capability to exploit it's sensors autonomously (it's not considered a dedicated ISR aircraft, nor is the Cyclone, so the requirement is to exploit the sensor airborne, not analyze it). What is missing is a dedicated tactician.

When Canada was looking at the Sea Sprite and eventually bought the Sea King, it was primarily for the carrier. There was two schools of thought:
  • the USN tied the aircraft to the carrier
  • the RN had an observer as a tactician and allowed independent ops

Initially with the Sea King Canada went with the USN concept. The aircraft had two aircrewman and no tactician. On board the carrier HMCS Bonaventure in the Radar Control and Air Direction Room there was on "helo row" that kept the helos in the screen (thanks NavyShooter for filling in some of the details, including helping me understand the RCAD was not part of the Ops Room).

When we were getting rid of Bonnie we had to decide whether to put that on our larger ships (ie the 280s), all ships (which may have been a challenge for the steamers), or in the aircraft. It was realized the Air Force had surplus navs and there were surplus ASN-501 tactical computers in the system, so we switched to the RN model with a dedicated tactician. We didn't really get there until we added the radar in the late '70s.

So, if we went with the Romeo we would need to either:
  • adopt the USN CONOPs, and probably get rid of the nav;
  • keep the majority of our CONOPs, and try to force the rear end mission display to be the navs, even the it is largely meant as SA for an aircrewman (not new for us, the ASN-501 and follow on ASN-123 systems were both from the US and meant to be operated by the pilot, but we made do); or
  • put in a different mission system, which would be a very risky option at this point, if we are trying to keep the Wing from imploding.

By the way, I was involved on the side when the Romeo was brought up in or around 2013, including whether the Sea King mission system (Augmented Surface Plot - ASP) could be used.

So, doable yes, but I'm not sure 12 Wing is in a position to execute.

By the way, I'll talk about Sea King history to the cows come home if you want, but the reality at the Wing is a different kettle of fish.
 
Back
Top