peaches said:
I agree, Cobra's would most likely be better. Would be easier to swallow politically as Bell Helos make Griffons, could also make Cobras for us.
"Another quality Bell product" is usually said dripping with sarcasm. Having somewhere around 5000 hours on Bell products, I have sort of of a love-hate thing going. Boeing made/makes stuff for us, too, which will include Chinook, so why would/should a Bell product be more attractive politically?
And everybody subcontracts anyway, so it probably doesn't make much difference from the Canadian industrial viewpoint.
Bristol Aerospace in Winnipeg overhauls USMC Cobra engines I believe.
That is unlikely to be a factor.
Cobra would also be easier to deploy, lighter, can easily fit in C130
Hah!! My guess is that you've never seen that done. Neither have I, but I have seen Twin Hueys put into Hercs in 1983. It wasn't "easy", requiring the removal of the main rotor and mast, with re-assembly and test-flying on the other side - requiring cranes and specialized tools plus a day or two to carry out. They barely fitted into the Hercs (scant inches of clearance inevery direction), and one out of three was damaged and required a couple of months to fix.
Between AH1Z and AH64, there's probably not a lot of difference. Being designed for shipborne ops, Cobra's blades fold relatively easily. What Apache's are like, I admittedly do not know. We can fold the blades on Griffon, but it's not something that one would want to do everyday.
sling it under a Chinook
Not if you want a reasonable chance of ever flying it again.
My whole point is that the Air Force needs to better support army ops. It is not the Air Force troops fault, we don't buy the equip, if we did it would not be as it is. I have no doubt the crews would love new combat equip. The Griffon is not a military helo, proof, non are in A-Stan evern doing medeveac, WHY??
What needs to happen is for Tac Hel to move back into the Army, from whence it came and where it rightfully, naturally, and logically belongs. And equipment procurement needs to be done logically and honestly, based upon military requirements and not political whim and arbitrary money caps - which is how we got Griffon. As for Griffon in Afghanistan, is there a need for more casevac hels there? Supporting any CF tac hel operation there is going to be a huge problem anyway, given the disruption that the TUAV operation is going to have throughout our little community. We are pulling pilots and techs and a few other support types off of helicopters for TUAV mission planning and maintenance. We do not have enough bodies to support both ops in theatre. True, Griffon is a civilian helicopter painted green, but the Twin Huey, which was the military version, is not being operated there either to the best of my knowledge. There are not many helicopters, military or civilian, that will work well at those temperatures and altitudes. There is a reason that Chinook is in such great demand. Black Hawk is the premier utility helicopter, but are they used for anything more than casevac in Afghanistan?
We originally purchased 100 Griffons to replace 68 Kiowas, 50 Hueys, & 8 Chinooks, 126 helos total.
We started out with 75 Kiowas, and all three fleets had sustained losses over the years.
Instead of 100 Griffons why not 20 Chinooks, 50 Blackhawks & 40 Cobra/Apache.
Aside from minor adjustments to your numbers for tactical, training, and attrition calculations - politics and money.
Go to an airshow with CF Cobras, Blackhawks & Chinooks, there will be young folks who want to join and fly/fix them. Awsome equip is strong a recruiting tool.
Now there's a solid basis for acquisition.
And it reminds me too much of a Ray Henault quote from the late eighties - but that's another rant.