http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti ... topstories
Ottawa set to announce Sea Kings' replacement
CTV.ca News Staff
The federal government is finally ready to announce its choice for a military helicopter to replace Canada's aging Sea Kings.
Canada's new defence minister, Bill Graham, will make the announcement Friday morning at the Shearwater air base, near Halifax.
There are two options for the replacements: the Sikorsky S-92, built by U.S.-based Sikorsky, and the Cormorant by EH Industries of England.
Aircraft industry sources tell CTV News the defence department will buy 28 Sikorskys at a price of about $4 billion. The new choppers will be used for defence, surveillance, search-and-rescue missions and disaster aid.
But in a report in Friday's Globe and Mail, an aircraft industry source said the commissioned choppers were "cheaper and less capable" and that the decision was made to avoid going with the company with which the Liberals broke an earlier contract in 1993.
At the time, then-prime minister Jean Chretien called the deal a "Cadillac" expenditure the country couldn't afford. The government paid $500 million in cancellation fees.
The source also said the new helicopters will not be compatible with new support ships that the military intended to purchase. The Sikorskys are also not designed to carry large numbers of troops or large amounts of heavy equipment, he said.
"We're right back to where we started," Scott Taylor, editor of Esprit de Corps Magazine told CTV News. "In the mean time we've put our soldiers at risk for an entire decade, our air force at risk for an entire decade ..... it's a sad day for the air force."
But Retired Col. Lee Myrhaugen, who flew helicopters for the air force, is pleased that a decision has been made.
"It's just going to be such a quantum leap. It's going to put us back where we were some 40 years ago with the Sea King when it was introduced on the cutting edge of technology," he says.
The Paul Martin government promised in December it intended to buy 28 maritime helicopters to replace the Sea King fleet, which has been plagued by several serious accidents and repeated mechanical failures in recent years.
The Sea Kings won't be decommissioned anytime soon. Once the new aircraft are purchased, it will still be at least another four years before the new choppers make their official debut. And even then, the Sea Kings will be phased out gradually.
Canada's Sea Kings were purchased in the 1960s, making most of them older than the crews who fly them. Every one hour of flight now requires about 30 hours of maintenance.
Ten people have died in four fatal Sea King crashes over the years and mishaps have resulted in 13 aircraft being withdrawn from the original 41-helicopter fleet.
Ottawa set to announce Sea Kings' replacement
Moderators: Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, I WAS Birddog
Glad to see we'll finally be getting some new equipment. There's probably still going to be a 2-3 year gap before they're delivered, so our boys and girls aren't done with the antiques yet.
I hope the government opts for the extended warranty, cuz we're going to need it.
I hope the government opts for the extended warranty, cuz we're going to need it.
It's better to break ground and head into the wind than to break wind and head into the ground.
I'm glad they picked the Sikorsky. While the Cormorant is nice, It's too big and the fact it has 3 ENGINES is crazy!!! We don't need that kind of heli.
One nice cost saver about the S-92 is that all the dynamic components have no life on them - which will be a huge money saver!
One nice cost saver about the S-92 is that all the dynamic components have no life on them - which will be a huge money saver!
Both the superhawk and the cormorant are a big step up from the sea things, and not just because they won't mysteriously fall out of the sky at random intervals.
The tactial guys have had the griffons for a while now, it's about time that the maritime side of things got an aircraft that will do the job without adding significant risk through being decades past it's "best before" date.
It's just too bad that political agendas dictated that all the money that could have been saved through having a common platform for both land-based SAR and maritime ops has been lost.
I guess we'll see if this carries through to restoring overall military funding levels to a level that will be able to sustain overseas operations without seeing the continual hemmoraging due to overwork of the corporate body of knowledge that defines a professional military, and makes is effective.
The tactial guys have had the griffons for a while now, it's about time that the maritime side of things got an aircraft that will do the job without adding significant risk through being decades past it's "best before" date.
It's just too bad that political agendas dictated that all the money that could have been saved through having a common platform for both land-based SAR and maritime ops has been lost.
I guess we'll see if this carries through to restoring overall military funding levels to a level that will be able to sustain overseas operations without seeing the continual hemmoraging due to overwork of the corporate body of knowledge that defines a professional military, and makes is effective.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
This is just another chapter in the huge c***up that begun when Chretien cancelled the EH-101. The search and rescue birds are a version of the 101. I know the S-92 is a capable bird and light years ahead of the Sea Pig in reliability and technology. The reality is, with the various missions like peace keeping the forces are often called upon to do, the Cormorant (EH-101) is somewhat more versatile than the S-92. It can carry more of a load, more troops or refugees if required. Plus the fact that they already operate some. They probably didn't want to risk a black eye buy buying the same aircraft that they lost half a billion on cancelling. But they already have one because they bought it for SAR. The original contract was for SAR and maritime aircraft.
Yes the S-92 is cheaper, but very capable. The real issue here is that purchases for military equipment are too political, with an eye to economic development instead of just being the best equipment for the need of the military. This local developmnet BS leads to stuff costing a lot more than required. There really has to be an overhaul of military procurement in Canada. It seems to me that the UK or Australia in recent years had a govt "white paper" on this issue and they drastically changed the way military procurement on contracts were assigned. Canada desperately needs to do the same thing.
The most important thing is, the RCAF people are finally going to get something half ways modern and safe to fly. About time, I have friends and relatives who do currently, or have flown on those Sea Pigs, and they risk their lives far too much on routine operations in those antiques. I know personally 2 guys who have been in accidents where the aircraft where written off, and one guy is scarred for life with his injuries. I hope the deliveries begin faster than 48 months!
Yes the S-92 is cheaper, but very capable. The real issue here is that purchases for military equipment are too political, with an eye to economic development instead of just being the best equipment for the need of the military. This local developmnet BS leads to stuff costing a lot more than required. There really has to be an overhaul of military procurement in Canada. It seems to me that the UK or Australia in recent years had a govt "white paper" on this issue and they drastically changed the way military procurement on contracts were assigned. Canada desperately needs to do the same thing.
The most important thing is, the RCAF people are finally going to get something half ways modern and safe to fly. About time, I have friends and relatives who do currently, or have flown on those Sea Pigs, and they risk their lives far too much on routine operations in those antiques. I know personally 2 guys who have been in accidents where the aircraft where written off, and one guy is scarred for life with his injuries. I hope the deliveries begin faster than 48 months!
I have my doubts that Canada will ever evolve from this position. Granted that the Canadian Forces, the global political climate, and Canada's position in the world have changed dramatically over the past 50 years and a great deal in the last 10, there's a long, long list of politically motivated defence purchases that were not the first or even second choice.The real issue here is that purchases for military equipment are too political, with an eye to economic development instead of just being the best equipment for the need of the military.
Many of the contracts aren't just about the purchase price, most of the time the company that is putting in the bid has to put back much of the purchase price of the equipment back into the Canadian economy, through subcontracting etc...
It's a pattern that repeats itself over and over...F-5's built in Canada instead of F-4's, Leopard tanks from Germany to repair trade relations after Trudeau pulled 1/2 of the CF out of Europe in the 70's, 100 Griffon's less capable than the Twin Hueys for a new helo plant in Montreal...
Canada wants to use it's military but it doesn't want to pay for it. They compound this with Defence Ministers who do not often have any background in defence, and even if they do, they're often shuffled into a new portfolio within 2 years...How is anything supposed to change? Our goverment has the the ultimate responsibility to equip and train the soldiers that carry the ultimate liability to protect Canadian interests. They deserve so much better, it's a shame.
Sadly, it will never change until the Liberals are out of power for a long period of time. So, it will never change.
The defence portfolio is used as a ministerial respite job. A small portfolio that requires the minister to do nothing except tour around the world attending meetings, shaking hands and making excuses for our limited contribution to global security.
The defence portfolio is used as a ministerial respite job. A small portfolio that requires the minister to do nothing except tour around the world attending meetings, shaking hands and making excuses for our limited contribution to global security.
I'm well aware that it'll probably never happen, but what twe need as Lew MacKenzie as the minister of National Defence. Hopefully that might de-politicize the acquisition process a wee bit, and might begin a shift from managers in the higher echelons back to leaders...an important distinction, and one of the reasons that I left the military.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
Nothing would be different with McKenzie as MND. The problem is political interference in the aquistion system. At the end of the day, politicians will choose whatever equipment is most likely to help them get re-elected. That coupled with little understanding about what they are buying and why, and you have the perfect recipe for the usual Canadian military buying boondoggle.
-
Avro Arrow 206
- Rank 0
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 8:27 pm
- Location: CYBR
- Contact:
Ahh say that when your over water, if your in the corm, and one dies, you dont have to worry, if your in a twin engine helo and one dies, your going down!boeingboy wrote:I'm glad they picked the Sikorsky. While the Cormorant is nice, It's too big and the fact it has 3 ENGINES is crazy!!! We don't need that kind of heli.
Any debate about the 101 vs the S92 is a red herring. The only reason the S92 was even considered was because Cretin personally ordered the requirements for the new chopper to be dumbed down. 10 years after Cretin cancelled the PC's order for the 101, the 101 was still the only helo that met all of DND's requirements. However, Cretin ordered that the 101 would not be bought under any circumstance. If no other helo met the requirements, then the requirements would have to be changed; and they were. I got that info first hand from the BGen heading up the selection process.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the S92 wasn't even a candidate during the original selection process - we looked at the seahawk, which is a distinctly different machine.
That said, I'd be the last one to argue with that statement about uncle Jean personally axing the 101. While I for one think that we should have the most capable bird possible, the superhawk is a huge step forward from what we're flying now - both in capability and a reduced tendency to kill people by falling out of the sky.
That said, I'd be the last one to argue with that statement about uncle Jean personally axing the 101. While I for one think that we should have the most capable bird possible, the superhawk is a huge step forward from what we're flying now - both in capability and a reduced tendency to kill people by falling out of the sky.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
I don't know if the S92 was looked at 10 years ago or not, however, it still didn't meet those ten year old specs when they were re-issued this time. The requirements hadn't changed much since the original tender, except for the invisible ink that said not being the 101 was a requirment.
That said, the 92 will be a big improvement over the Sea Thing.
That said, the 92 will be a big improvement over the Sea Thing.
From todays Globe and Mail:
Ottawa forced to buy Sikorsky, sources say
By DANIEL LEBLANC
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/sto ... /National/
Ottawa forced to buy Sikorsky, sources say
By DANIEL LEBLANC
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/sto ... /National/
Everybody says that the S-92 doesn't meet the requirements. From what I know the heli can do everything we need it to do. I still think it's the best heli for us.
That being said - Does anyone know where to find the actual requirements that were spelled out?
PS - if you lose one of two engines - it doesn't mean your going to crash. That would depend on many things!
That being said - Does anyone know where to find the actual requirements that were spelled out?
PS - if you lose one of two engines - it doesn't mean your going to crash. That would depend on many things!
I'm surprised that no one has brought up the issue that the Canandian government needs to suck up to the US Gov't. Sending a large chunk of $5 billion south, I'm sure will help persuade the Dept if Agriculture to re-think the Beef ban. Again I know nothing of helicopters and don't plan on learning anytime soon. I'm sure the S-92 is good choice.
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Why not start a media frienzy by trying to convince some uninformed media type that the S 92 is just a warmed over Sea King. They will never know they have been had. Should be good for a chuckle if someone with the gift of the gab can catch the ear of the right kind or reporter. Some dumb reporter who doesn't know the pointy end from the tail end.
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
I guess there is a bit of a family resemblance between the two. Given the usual inaccuracies that you see in reporting (saying that US attack helicopters "bombed" targets....) it shouldn't be that hard. It does look kinda like the Sea Stallion's little brother, and a stallion looks a lot like a sea thing.
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
The directive to exclude the 101 was made by Cretin long before the mad cow issue, soft wood lumber, or any other significant US/Canadian issue. Buying the S92 over the 101 has nothing to do with trade relations, economic diversification, best value, or any other above board reason. It was bought because the Liberals think it is best package that is not the 101.
Not only did Cretin decree the 101 would not be bought under any circumstance, he also issued orders over-riding the treasury board's purchasing regulations. Those regs require that all federal government purchases be made on the basis of "best value" rather than simply lowest price. For example, if they were buying a fleet of 4 passenger cars they would weight out purchase price, options, reliability, fuel economy, etc, etc. They would not go out and buy a bunch of crap Kia's or Yugos simply because they are cheapest.
In the case of the MHP, Cretin first ordered that the statement of operational requirements be down graded to allow more helos into the competition, and then he ordered that the cheapest helo meeting the SOR specs would be purchased. Otherwise, the 101 would still have come out the winner in a "best value" competition.
This whole affair has been a text book case study in Liberal corruption, dishonesty, and hatred of our military. And it's only going to get worse now that they have to suck up that band of left wing idealist fools, the NDP.
Not only did Cretin decree the 101 would not be bought under any circumstance, he also issued orders over-riding the treasury board's purchasing regulations. Those regs require that all federal government purchases be made on the basis of "best value" rather than simply lowest price. For example, if they were buying a fleet of 4 passenger cars they would weight out purchase price, options, reliability, fuel economy, etc, etc. They would not go out and buy a bunch of crap Kia's or Yugos simply because they are cheapest.
In the case of the MHP, Cretin first ordered that the statement of operational requirements be down graded to allow more helos into the competition, and then he ordered that the cheapest helo meeting the SOR specs would be purchased. Otherwise, the 101 would still have come out the winner in a "best value" competition.
This whole affair has been a text book case study in Liberal corruption, dishonesty, and hatred of our military. And it's only going to get worse now that they have to suck up that band of left wing idealist fools, the NDP.
