To add to the redesign comments... The "US 101" http://www.teamus101.com/index.cfmis the new presidential transport helicoptor. It will have a substantively more robust tail rotor design. We impatiently await the completed design of that component, as well as any new improvemnts that North American ingenuity can come up with. In the meantime, we wait, and hope.
Various Problems with The Cormorants- Merged
- Thread starter Kirkhill
- Start date
A
aesop081
Guest
daniel h. said:
another aviation expert :
A
aesop081
Guest
Infanteer said:
i remember that guy very well........ :
- Reaction score
- 22,811
- Points
- 1,360
Well, anything CAN be a sitting duck...helo, LAV, frigate, soldier...anything. Depends on how you employ whatever system you have at your disposal.
I have absolutely no problem coming back to the sandbox when we get our heavy lifter and operating it with all the appropriate weapon and protective systems on board and using TTPs that are appropriate to aviation and the specific aircraft type. I don't consider myself any more a sitting duck than the guys do driving a LAV down Green Route.
Anyone who is not smart about what they're doing, yes...they can become a sitting duck.
Mein 1 Afghani (= 2 ¢)
Cheers,
Duey
I have absolutely no problem coming back to the sandbox when we get our heavy lifter and operating it with all the appropriate weapon and protective systems on board and using TTPs that are appropriate to aviation and the specific aircraft type. I don't consider myself any more a sitting duck than the guys do driving a LAV down Green Route.
Anyone who is not smart about what they're doing, yes...they can become a sitting duck.
Mein 1 Afghani (= 2 ¢)
Cheers,
Duey
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
I have read various comments on the Cormant status on this site. Are there operational restrictions on the chopper, are they all grounded?
Apparently not from this: http://www.nanaimobulletin.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=23&id=810790&more=
Apparently not from this: http://www.nanaimobulletin.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=23&id=810790&more=
The Cormorant fleet is not grounded. there are ops restrictions in place, but they are being modified and removed as fixes come available, and currently Comox is having pretty good servicability. that being said, that is due in large part to the fact that Cormorants have been removed from Trenton (temporarily??), putting more birds in the other 3 helo sqns hangars ( Comox Greenwood Gander). Trenton is holding standby with hercs and Griffons.
Report: Chopper fix years away
Cracks in tail rotors on Cormorants
By MURRAY BREWSTER The Canadian Press
Article Link
OTTAWA — It will take years to fix a serious problem with Canada’s main search-and-rescue helicopter, say documents obtained by The Canadian Press.
Cracks in the hub assemblies of the CH-149 Cormorant’s tail rotors have led to flight restrictions on the 14 choppers, which often perform life-saving operations off the east and west coasts.
Defence Department documents, obtained under access to information laws, say a critical part is being re-engineered "under a high priority, but (is) still several years away" from a complete solution.
A Powerpoint presentation, dated October 2005, suggested the problem wouldn’t be solved for up to six years.
It is unclear how much the redesign will cost, if it will be covered by warranty, or whether taxpayers will foot the bill. Much of the information on cost overruns and maintenance is considered proprietary by the aircraft manufacturer and the company contracted to do maintenance, say defence experts.
The defect, combined with a shortage of spare parts and recently discovered corrosion problems, are a source of frustration for the new chief of air staff.
Lt.-Gen Angus Watt said the ongoing issues with the Cormorants have not affected search-and-rescue missions, but they continue to limit the number of aircraft available for ongoing training of crews.
More on link
Cracks in tail rotors on Cormorants
By MURRAY BREWSTER The Canadian Press
Article Link
OTTAWA — It will take years to fix a serious problem with Canada’s main search-and-rescue helicopter, say documents obtained by The Canadian Press.
Cracks in the hub assemblies of the CH-149 Cormorant’s tail rotors have led to flight restrictions on the 14 choppers, which often perform life-saving operations off the east and west coasts.
Defence Department documents, obtained under access to information laws, say a critical part is being re-engineered "under a high priority, but (is) still several years away" from a complete solution.
A Powerpoint presentation, dated October 2005, suggested the problem wouldn’t be solved for up to six years.
It is unclear how much the redesign will cost, if it will be covered by warranty, or whether taxpayers will foot the bill. Much of the information on cost overruns and maintenance is considered proprietary by the aircraft manufacturer and the company contracted to do maintenance, say defence experts.
The defect, combined with a shortage of spare parts and recently discovered corrosion problems, are a source of frustration for the new chief of air staff.
Lt.-Gen Angus Watt said the ongoing issues with the Cormorants have not affected search-and-rescue missions, but they continue to limit the number of aircraft available for ongoing training of crews.
More on link
They said that a few years ago. So now it is going to be another few years. I call total BS on it taking that long to fix. By about another few years time all the airframes will have been past warrenty time and thus they can charge a arm and a leg for the updated tail rotor.
I say cut the deal, the airframes have not lived up to the promise of airworthiness have a Canadian company perform a redesign and fix the things.
Good thing we didnt buy a larger fleet of the EH101, I mean CH-149.
I say cut the deal, the airframes have not lived up to the promise of airworthiness have a Canadian company perform a redesign and fix the things.
Good thing we didnt buy a larger fleet of the EH101, I mean CH-149.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
this subject came out in.... October 2005... like the story said.
If you do a search on the subject you will find that there is at least one other thread where the virtues of the Cormorant are discussed.
Is the Cormorant a hunk of junk as CTD contends or is it the teething pains of fielding a new airfrmae?
I have as yet not heard bad things said about the Cormorant from it's maintainers & pilots - so CTD, if you feel so strongly about it's failings, please, tell us more... why is it that you consider to be a bad buy?
do you think the Cyclone will be any better?
do you think the Sea King was any better at time of purchase?
If you do a search on the subject you will find that there is at least one other thread where the virtues of the Cormorant are discussed.
Is the Cormorant a hunk of junk as CTD contends or is it the teething pains of fielding a new airfrmae?
I have as yet not heard bad things said about the Cormorant from it's maintainers & pilots - so CTD, if you feel so strongly about it's failings, please, tell us more... why is it that you consider to be a bad buy?
do you think the Cyclone will be any better?
do you think the Sea King was any better at time of purchase?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
geo said:
A new airframe? We were going to buy these things over 10 years ago. They're not new, the British have had all kinds of problems with them from cracking windshields to tailrotor hubs.
We won't have similar problems with the Cyclone because their hubs are one piece milled titanium, main rotor and tail rotor to my knowledge. Sure we'll have teething pains and we'll probably lose a few too since we're the military test bed for this aircraft, but that's something to be expected when you're the first military customer.
As for the Merlins, they first entered service in the UK in 1999, you would think that the Brits would have worked most of the bugs out of the Merlins by the time we bought them for SAR 5 years later, but nope.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Merlins / Cormorants - Think that when Canada backed out, the Brits ended up being 1st customers for the EH101s. Now considering that they are now fielding a US101 to be built in the USA and are replacing the presidential helicopter with a 101, I have to conclude that, despite its faults, the Cormorant is not a bad bird.
I can list a couple of the known problems with the Cormorant, such as the tail rotor, cracking windshield, corrosion a few electricle glitches, parts supply problems and technicle support from the manufacturer. The remainder I am not at bay to speak about.
This isnt a new platform as indicted. It has been around for more then a few years.
We now have a platform that is ops restricted from out of the box. This will continue for many years to come. This platform although a cadillac of Helo's is also a lemon of such.
The US has imposed rules on the delivery of their Presidential EH101's. They must be able to fly with no restrictions out of the box, they have to be reliable.
Eurcopter got caught with their pants down on gambling that their updated EH101's were going to be problem free. Well we lost their gamble.
How to fix it is the question.
How I would do it is ask Canadian Aerospace to build a new tail rotor.
As for the the Sikorsky were buying having teething problems. So far so good for the platform. With a long history of making RELIABLE MILITARY Helicopters I think Sikorsky can and will produce a better more reliable product.
Just to let everyone know I have good friends who work for the same companys who build, fix and maintain the airframes internationlly we discuss here. They are the SME's on these subjects. The in and outs of what is and isnt working, the cost of such projects not only to Canada but to their own companys in money and reasearch.
Just because you fly a machine or you fix it, doesnt mean you know more or less then some one else. All it means is you have information for the puzzle.
Just because the people who fix or fly the machines are not complaining to you doesnt mean everything is peachy.
This isnt a new platform as indicted. It has been around for more then a few years.
We now have a platform that is ops restricted from out of the box. This will continue for many years to come. This platform although a cadillac of Helo's is also a lemon of such.
The US has imposed rules on the delivery of their Presidential EH101's. They must be able to fly with no restrictions out of the box, they have to be reliable.
Eurcopter got caught with their pants down on gambling that their updated EH101's were going to be problem free. Well we lost their gamble.
How to fix it is the question.
How I would do it is ask Canadian Aerospace to build a new tail rotor.
As for the the Sikorsky were buying having teething problems. So far so good for the platform. With a long history of making RELIABLE MILITARY Helicopters I think Sikorsky can and will produce a better more reliable product.
Just to let everyone know I have good friends who work for the same companys who build, fix and maintain the airframes internationlly we discuss here. They are the SME's on these subjects. The in and outs of what is and isnt working, the cost of such projects not only to Canada but to their own companys in money and reasearch.
Just because you fly a machine or you fix it, doesnt mean you know more or less then some one else. All it means is you have information for the puzzle.
Just because the people who fix or fly the machines are not complaining to you doesnt mean everything is peachy.
