New tactical helicopter for Canada

[WPA]

The Bell 412 Griffon Helicopters should be replace by the same number of NH90 chopper built in Canada.

Instead of midlife upgrade of the Griffon should be given to other department to improve capabilities.
At the same time the Force get a true military helicopter that is can be used on to mover the army's equipment, and use on mission like the one they are on right now. A bonus is that the NH90 is perfect the new icebreaker / patrol ship.

What you think?

[mellow_pilot]

LOL

Do you go to SFU?

[sky's the limit]

The NH-90 is a VERY capable machine. Should be interesting.


stl

[WPA]

LOL

Do you go to SFU?

Are you one of those people think negative about everything.

Face it, the DND need a complete overhaul of all equipment. The only equipment that the liberals purchase them self that was not started by the PC party can be count on one hand.

1. LAV III project a piece of equipment
2. Griffon good for training and at home use for floods etc. They can not be full armoured and lift a section of ment and their equipment. The Helicopter can lift the 105 gun.
3. The used Upholder Sub. WOW there make an agreement with the British Gov. to trade use of training space in Canada for the Sub is a good deal. The liberal watch a few years and let the sub rush unused for years. That is the main reason the sub are in such bad shape.

4. the CF 18 & CP 140 upgrade projects is taking longer and an over all cost that when done the aircraft will have little service life left.

That not much for 15 years and a very very bad track record..

The people of Canada do not like to spend too much on defence.

There for people might be willing to spend more on equipment for the DND if we take some a good piece of equipment like the Griffon to other departments, then maybe the Airforce and Army would get the helicopter they need.

[WJflyer]

You do know how expensive the NH-90's are? And why are you introducing a third (soon to be 4th) type into the CF? It would make a whole lot more sense if you recommended the EH-101 or the Sikorsky H-92...

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

[WPA]

You do know how expensive the NH-90's are? And why are you introducing a third (soon to be 4th) type into the CF? It would make a whole lot more sense if you recommended the EH-101 or the Sikorsky H-92...

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

What i have been say is that we should give the Griffon to the department of Transportation, Fishers, RCMP and etc.

Plus the EH101 is not the great.

[sky's the limit]

You do know how expensive the NH-90's are? And why are you introducing a third (soon to be 4th) type into the CF? It would make a whole lot more sense if you recommended the EH-101 or the Sikorsky H-92...

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

NEVER BUY THE "A" MODEL OF ANYTHING.

This applies to helicopters in a big way, which we are finding out with the EH-101 right now. The S-92 is another, let's wait a few years. The NH-90 is the best selling of the three word wide, or at least was last year, and apparently it's quite a piece of equipment.

stl

[Mr. North]

The dreadfully poor use of grammar throughout this thread is terrifying!

[sky's the limit]

The dreadfully poor use of grammar throughout this thread is terrifying!

I seen that two.

stl

[ScudRunner]

OK don't we have Chinooks coming soon? That leave the SAR tech boys with the EH101 and the Navy is getting the Sykorsky Ceiling fan or whatever its called.

So what we need are gunships Im talking creapy crawl through the river beds pop up and zap the bad guys full on kick ass Missles and guns and stuff that makes Airshows all worth while.

Lets get this thread going and talk Fighter Jets to replace the CF-18


F-22
F-18D's
F-35
Eurofighter
Saab
PC-12
Beech C90
Oh wait wrong thread, forget the last two! I believe that SECFJ (Single Engine Combat Fighter Jets) are unsafe so lets get some Raptors while we are it!!!

[mcrit]

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

You mean parking Griffons or other types?

[WJflyer]

You do know how expensive the NH-90's are? And why are you introducing a third (soon to be 4th) type into the CF? It would make a whole lot more sense if you recommended the EH-101 or the Sikorsky H-92...

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

NEVER BUY THE "A" MODEL OF ANYTHING.

This applies to helicopters in a big way, which we are finding out with the EH-101 right now. The S-92 is another, let's wait a few years. The NH-90 is the best selling of the three word wide, or at least was last year, and apparently it's quite a piece of equipment.

stl

NH-90 is also suffering from problems as well... apparantly, NHI has issues with prompt delivery as the NHI are going to be 2 years late with delivery, and the Germans aren't too pleased with the situation.

We have a golden opportunity with Sikorsky right now. Right now, we are about to levy penalties and late fees because they are going to be late in delivery. Since companies don't like to pay penalties and late fees as it looks bad on the balance books, we might be able to snag a couple Cyclone's for free or at a significantly discounted price, as I bet Sikorsky will want to negotiate over the penalties.

Also, the Griffon is not getting a mid-life... we've been parking airframes recently to make room for the new types entering service.

You mean parking Griffons or other types?

We purchased 100 Griffons between 1995 and 1997; of those, we have on list, around 80 Griffons on active duty. I expect that we will retire more once the Chinooks enter service.

[ch135146]

... The only equipment that the liberals purchase them self that was not started by the PC party can be count on one hand...

2. Griffon good for training and at home use for floods etc. They can not be full armoured and lift a section of ment and their equipment. The Helicopter can lift the 105 gun...

I hate to defend Chretien and the Liberals, but the CH-146 should not be on your list.

The Griffin purchase was rammed through in a single-source (no competition) purchase by Mulroney to buy votes in Quebec; the machine was to be built at the (then new) Bell Mirabel plant.

The Auditor General criticized this fact in 1998, and that it could not carry the required payload, and is way behind in state-of-the-art ballistic&crash protection, i.e. more easy to shoot down than a Blackhawk (which get shot down enough!)

I flew a tour on the Griffon's predecessor, the CH135/Twin Huey/B212.

Edited to add: the CF of the day did not ask for, or want, the Griffon. We wanted something a generation newer than the Huey design, first flown in 1956. And, we certainly didn't think that the CH146 could also replace the Kiowa and Chinook!

[mellow_pilot]

LOL

Do you go to SFU?

Are you one of those people think negative about everything.

Nope, I just know horse hockey when I read it. I don't know where you're coming up with these ideas, or where you expect the money to come from, but honestly, to really believe what you are writing? There is no intention to replace Tac Helo in the near future. Regardless of any short comings of the airframe, I can guarantee you that the Air Force is fully committed to making do with them.

If you knew anything about the helo and it's capabilities, you wouldn't even mention the gun-slinging. Air lifting the guns 12km is not a reasonable battlefield scenario in any current mission. We're buying Chinooks for better battlefield mobility (troop and equip transport), but the griffs are still going to be used for tac hel and they aren't going anywhere soon.

Mid-life? They only upgrade I'm aware of is the armament/sensor package that may be introduced on a limited # of airframes for 2010 security duties.

WJ is 100% right! You're talking, again, about introducing another airframe!! This is not congruent with Air Force planning. Giving them to other ministries is also not feasible. The RCMP don't need that many helos, or that type. TC really doesn't need them, and the DFO (dept of fisheries and oceans) really doesn't have the budget to support them.

If I seem negative it's cause you're coming onto the board and posting like you're knowledgeable, which may lead others to believe what you say. The fact is that it's obvious you don't know anything beyond what a cursory story in the Sun would say and that you're spreading garbage! The Canadian public doesn't need anymore incorrect info about military needs or how the Forces work. There is already enough garbage floating around out there. You're evaluation of the Subs is the perfect example. Did you even know about the necessary re-fits to make them compatible with CF weapons and technology? It isn't just the rust that's holding up the fleet. I have no idea what you were trying to say about the LAVs.

The people of Canada do not like to spend too much on defence.

There for people might be willing to spend more on equipment for the DND if we take some a good piece of equipment like the Griffon to other departments, then maybe the Airforce and Army would get the helicopter they need.

What? This is so far from making sense I really don't know what to say... how is it that people who don't want to spend money are going to want 2 full fleets of aircraft?

I realize that you're interested in the Forces and military aircraft, but your posts are so far out in left field that I can't help but wonder if you're not doing polling on the sly for some corporation. What's next, cancel the 130Js in favour of A400Ms, miraculously built in Quebec??

[LH]

Hey, I read some mention on this forum about the subs that Canada purchased from our cousins over in the 'old country. Well thank God for the disappearing Polar Ice Cap because they could only operate in 40% of Canada's maritime waters year 'round. Canada should consider purchased F-22's for example. What could Canada afford? Maybe 2-4 of them. I'll consider that suggestion as coming from another government idiot.........perhaps even the same one who had the idea to purchase the subs. Funny how people forget that it was not that long ago that the first Canadian troops could not be outfitted with proper cammoflage gear for Afghanistan because Canada didn't have any.

Also read mention on here about dumping some or all of the blame on Liberals for the situation and condition that the CAF had deteriorated down to over the past decades. BOTH the Liberals AND the Conservatives are equally responsible for the state that the CAF had been allowed to sink. Nothing but 100% garbage has been directed towards the CAF by Ottawa since the early 60's and every adult Canadian over those years allowed it to happen because they didn't care. So don't ever let any Conservative or Liberal feed you any bullshit to the opposite because Canadian, RCN, RCAF and Canadian Army histories all record the truth.

[WJflyer]

Hey, I read some mention on this forum about the subs that Canada purchased from our cousins over in the 'old country. Well thank God for the disappearing Polar Ice Cap because they could only operate in 40% of Canada's maritime waters year 'round. Canada should consider purchased F-22's for example. What could Canada afford? Maybe 2-4 of them. I'll consider that suggestion as coming from another government idiot.........perhaps even the same one who had the idea to purchase the subs. Funny how people forget that it was not that long ago that the first Canadian troops could not be outfitted with proper cammoflage gear for Afghanistan because Canada didn't have any.

Also read mention on here about dumping some or all of the blame on Liberals for the situation and condition that the CAF had deteriorated down to over the past decades. BOTH the Liberals AND the Conservatives are equally responsible for the state that the CAF had been allowed to sink. Nothing but 100% garbage has been directed towards the CAF by Ottawa since the early 60's and every adult Canadian over those years allowed it to happen because they didn't care. So don't ever let any Conservative or Liberal feed you any bullshit to the opposite because Canadian, RCN, RCAF and Canadian Army histories all record the truth.

I would point out that the current Conservative government pretty much has a clean sheet in this despite the name 'Conservative'. Their roots are from the old Reform-Alliance party, which never has been in power, so we can wait and see what they do before we hang them out to dry like the Liberals and the PC.

[mellow_pilot]

The desert cam thing really burns me. The terrain over there is so varied. The ANA wear a very dark uniform even in comparison to our forest cam. I know this because I have coffee with them every morning. Watch some of the videos on the net, there are plenty of times when they're fighting in vegetation.

Also, our mission is high profile, ie. we want to be seen. We go on presence patrols to be seen, in loud tanks and armored vehicles. Quit it with the cam thing.

[LH]

Yes the present Conservative government is doing more than the governments before them........so far. We still do not have the resources to defend our OWN soil and until THAT'S accomplished, we have no business going worldwide to help other defend theirs. I grew up around the RCN and witnessed that force decline from openly the BEST ASW fleet in the free world to wondering if their ships would make it across the Atlantic Ocean during the first Gulf War without breaking down. Would the Americans, French or Brits send their Forces worldwide to defend others border if they were unable to defend their own at home? Anyone who believe they would is definitely smoking an inferior brand of 'weed' or needs a lobotomy soon.

I also witnessed the CAF being sent to Afghanistan at the beginning and being sent without the correct cammo gear required because the government stated Canada didn't have any, but were ordering quickly. You want to know where all the correct cammo gear was that they needed? Prhaps not even made yet or sitting in some factory awaiting order? Over 300 complete sets of the proper gear had been sold off by the CAF and was sitting at "Army & Navy Surplus, Colony and Portage Ave., Winnipeg, Manitoba. Some idot with DND authorized this sell-off because it was determine that they'd been sitting idle since the Gulf War and taking-up space. My supposition or exaggeration here perhaps ? Not 1 gram because it was openly admitted afterwards in by the government and the CAF. So what had happened here then? A complete NEW, UNUSED unit of exactly what the CAF needed badly was available for sale to me and others in Winnipeg at the same time for $300 and Canadain troopers were going without while patrolling in a combat zone. So they went with cammo gear designed for wear and use in Europe.......boots included. IDIOTS!!


So our present government has to do one hell of a lot more for the CAF than what they've done so far in order to impress this disgusted Canadian............AND I AIN'T EX-CAF EITHER. You don't correct 50+ years of total neglect in one or two sittings of Parliament.

[mellow_pilot]

I also witnessed the CAF being sent to Afghanistan at the beginning and being sent without the correct cammo gear required because the government stated Canada didn't have any, but were ordering quickly. You want to know where all the correct cammo gear was that they needed? Prhaps not even made yet or sitting in some factory awaiting order? Over 300 complete sets of the proper gear had been sold off by the CAF and was sitting at "Army & Navy Surplus, Colony and Portage Ave., Winnipeg, Manitoba. Some idot with DND authorized this sell-off because it was determine that they'd been sitting idle since the Gulf War and taking-up space. My supposition or exaggeration here perhaps ? Not 1 gram because it was openly admitted afterwards in by the government and the CAF. So what had happened here then? A complete NEW, UNUSED unit of exactly what the CAF needed badly was available for sale to me and others in Winnipeg at the same time for $300 and Canadain troopers were going without while patrolling in a combat zone. So they went with cammo gear designed for wear and use in Europe.......boots included. IDIOTS!!

READ ABOVE.

[SAR_YQQ]

Over 300 complete sets of the proper gear had been sold off by the CAF and was sitting at "Army & Navy Surplus, Colony and Portage Ave., Winnipeg, Manitoba. Some idot with DND authorized this sell-off because it was determine that they'd been sitting idle since the Gulf War and taking-up space. My supposition or exaggeration here perhaps ?

As much as I believe your heart is in the right place - your facts are a bit off the mark.

1) The extraneous combat clothing that was being sold off was declared surplus years before and was not the current style combat clothing the the CF uses.

2) 300 sets wouldn't have made much of a difference for the close to 1,000 soldiers that were sent overseas. Each would be issued 3 sets (minimum).

3) The CADPAT (TW) clothing was perfectly fine over "there" - for the very reasons that a previous poster has already mentioned.