Lets take a stroll down memory history lane. During the 1950's the US Navy became alarmed by the threat to its carriers posed by Soviet Subs. The solution for the close in fight and to work with anti-ship frigates was a light multi-purpose helicopter...the Kaman SH-2 Seasprite. The heavy helo was the Sikorsky SH-3 Sea King. Both helicopters served world wide and side by side for years. The latest example retired just a few years ago.
In the interim though, the SH-60 has gone on to become the primary helo of the US Navy. A mistake. With the turn toward littoral combat and the need to keep enemy subs at bay, a larger more sophisticated helicopter is needed with the range to be a real shield against enemy subs.The AW-101 is just such a helicopter. I am becoming more and more convinced that the MV-22 while unique and capable is too niche a vehicle to suitably fit the Marine Corps needs into the future. What is needed is a jack of all trades that is affordable, capable and able to not only back stop the UH-1Y but also the MV-22 and at times even the CH-53. The Marine Corps has had the luxury of having the CH-46 continue on in service for the past few years while the MV-22 came online. This "breathing space" is about to come to an end. If the Navy can be convinced to buy the AW-101 with the Marine Corps buying a squadron or four along with them then the buy should be an easy sell. Money projected to buy more MV-22's can be reprogrammed for this new purchase with the end result being more helos purchased and more robust Marine Amphibious Units being deployed (yeah I know its Marine Expeditionary Units but I'm campaigning for a name change...the term "Expeditionary" has been bastardized and is no longer relevant).
AW-101 Utility
Congress would throw a fit if the AW101 would be chosen (again), and rally a forced buy of S-92s.
ReplyDeleteNot a bad helo that btw, if we disregard its teething problems. But then again the AW101's record isn't so stellar either.
I'm still in favor of using the V-22 in the littoral patrol/security role, due to its dash speed and endurance. If fitted with at least two hardpoints and a good surface radar, it can patrol a larger area faster and respond faster, allowing its parent ship to stay over the horizon.
Alternatively, if ships are fitted with enough recoverable UAVs (such as Scaneagle or Integrator) the H-60 could be just the ticket as the responder while the UAVs would provide persistent (armed?) surveillance.
For smaller ships, a combo of UAS/MQ8 and SH60 derivative would be preferred; for larger ships, a combo of UAS, SH60, CH53K & V22.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/02/video-yes-or-no-to-the-mono.html
Sol you've surprised me. I'm a big fan of the AW101, but you were the last person i'd expect to be cheering along for a foreign (European) helo over an American one.
ReplyDeletei'm after the capability Grim/Marcase...
ReplyDeletethe Brits have done the heavy lifting with the development of the AW-101...i'm not as convinced that the S-92 works (at least as an anti-sub helo...)
besides, i'm tiring of these multi-national companies that wave the flag when it suits them then ships jobs to timbuktu whenever it suits them.
fuck'em all, buy what works....but let it be understood that if we're buying paper clips they better be built in the USA.
@ Sol
ReplyDeleteThe will of multi-national companies has been the driving force behind US politics since the end of the Cold War 2 decades ago; they are also the ones that bleed/outsource the country of her engineering and manufacturing talents.
It would be an irony to see paper clip made in USA and just about every high-end product under the Sun made efficiently and competitively abroad. It's happening. Arguably, the US already lacks adequate management, engineering & manufacturing talents to keep complex programs on track and on budget.
Between S-92, NH-101 and AW-101 medium sized, twin-engine, multi-role military helicopters, the market already prefers the later two.
USA: the next "Third World" - anemic, flamboyant & geopolitically isolated. Alea iacta est.
Horde,
ReplyDeletei disagree with your assessment...well at least the part about the die being cast.
my point is that we have a light wt helicopter performing a heavy wt mission...the NH-90 is closer in wt and class to the S-70...as far as the other helos on your list the S-92 and AW-101...i'm not sure. the S-92 is doing fine on the civilian market place, its just in the use of it for anti-sub work where i find it truly lacking.
but we definitely agree on the multi-national blood suckers doing a number on not only my country but basically on the western world.
oh but back to the 'die being cast'....thats why we're going to put adults back in the white house in 2012.
our national nightmare is almost over...the new day will be cloud filled but we'll recover from the incompetence of two straight administrations.
Sol I think you are right to say that USN?USMC need to relook at the 101 series helo. My take as a non-aviator, is that the a/c offers some distinct advantages to the Navy. While the Marines at least have a new bird in the Osprey to do the medium lifting, the USN is about the chop their H53 version and their Phrogs are already gone. It should be noted that some VETREP is being done by contracted Super Pumas. I am told that the Canadians have had a lot of problems bringing their 101s into service. The Brits just canx their S-92 purchase. How many other navies have bought that Sikorsky? So technically all should be in the running, BUT...
ReplyDeletePolically the hyopcrites on the Hill will scream if a foreing design is even considered ala KC-X. It really depends on the power of those with backyard air plants.
Not to mention the USN has its collective heads in the sand saying that an H60 variant can fufill all "their" missions - dahh?
Now to the politics
Geopolitics 2050
ReplyDeleteThe race is on. Watch out for the BRIC.
http://www.eurasiacenter.org/publications/geopolitical_visions_2050.htm
I just checked and the Canadians bought S-92s nee CH-148 Cyclone which are late getting into service. According to CASR,
ReplyDelete"The prototype didn't fly until Nov 2008 and after a $117M contract amendment, delivery is to run from Nov 2010 to 2013."
Compared to NH90 & AW101, S92/CH148 (derived from S70) is still nowhere near operational readiness.
ReplyDeleteNH90 & AW101 are purposely built military birds; S92/CH148 isn't. Americans consistently underestimate the challenges and risks involving civilian-turn-military conversion.
ReplyDeleteIt will cost a lot to add another aircraft type to the mix.
ReplyDeleteThere are definite limits to what the H-60 airframe can do, but it's hardly a light helo. It is typically classified as a "medium". SH-2, Lynx, AW109, Panther, and so on fall in the "light" category.
Semantics aside, numbers also matter. You can buy, carry and operate more H-60s than you can AW101s, and a lot more than having two types.
How about building an unmanned or optionally manned H-60 for ASW? You can use the extra space and weight for additional fuel.