FAQFAQ    SuchenSuchen    MitgliederlisteMitgliederliste    BenutzergruppenBenutzergruppen 
       ProfilProfil    Einloggen, um private Nachrichten zu lesenEinloggen, um private Nachrichten zu lesen    LoginLogin 

Dieses Thema ist gesperrt, du kannst keine Beiträge editieren oder beantworten.
Seite 1 von 1      
Autor Nachricht

BeitragVerfasst am: Do Aug 01, 2013 14:55:22 
Titel: 50 Jahre Sea King Helikopter in Kanada
Antworten mit Zitat

Heuer ist es 50 jahre das Kanada die Sea King Helikopter in betrieb hat. (Ja, angekauft in 1963).
Eine flug stunde = 30 Wartungsstunden.
Ersatz dieser ist seit 1988 ein politischer spielball, wobei die Liberalen die groessten fehler machten.

Zuletzt bearbeitet von Frank am Fr Aug 02, 2013 15:22:57, insgesamt einmal bearbeitet
Nach oben
int. Luftfahrtjournalist
int. Luftfahrtjournalist

Anmeldungsdatum: 26.07.2004
Beiträge: 1553
Wohnort: Groß-Enzersdorf

BeitragVerfasst am: Do Aug 01, 2013 15:28:48 
Titel: Naja, das ist derzeit NICHTS besonderes...
Antworten mit Zitat

Die deutschen Sea Kings sind sicher nur wenig jünger, und halt bei Westland gefertigt worden, wir fliegen auch schon seit über 40 Jahren Saab 105, und wie lange war in Canada die CT-133 unterwegs?
Bei Euch sind Fluggeräte halt auch in einer Zeitschleife gefangen, aus der es kein Entkommen gibt... biggrin
Und bezüglich Helis verstehe ich das in Canada sowieso nicht:
Der EH101 ist ja land-based, oder?
Jetzt sollte seit Jahren Sikorsky S-92 kommen, oder?
Und die bekommen die Maschinen nicht hin, und verpassen eine Deadline nach der anderen und mussten schon VIELE Millionen Strafe zahlen.
Was ist denn das für ein Müll?
Wäre vielleicht doch der NH90 oder Seahawks besser gewesen statt dem Ölbohrplattformenversorgungsdings...
Wir sind Österreicher. Was bedeutet, daß grundsätzliche Kurskorrekturen und deutliche Prioritätensetzungen nicht unsere Sache sind. Man ist froh, einigermaßen über die Runden zu kommen und Probleme irgendwie auszusitzen. (Zitat v. Alfred Payrleitner)
Nach oben
Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden Website dieses Benutzers besuchen
ist immer hier
ist immer hier

Anmeldungsdatum: 17.08.2004
Beiträge: 687
Wohnort: Boston, USA

BeitragVerfasst am: Do Aug 01, 2013 18:03:32 
Titel: Re: 50 Jahre Sea King Helikopter in Kanada
Antworten mit Zitat

Frank hat folgendes geschrieben:
Heuer ist es 50 jahre das Kanada die Sea King Helikopter in betrieb hat. (Ja, angekauft in 1953).
Eine flug stunde = 30 Wartungsstunden.
Ersatz dieser ist seit 1988 ein politischer spielball, wobei die Liberalen die groessten fehler machten.

Frank ich glaube das sollte 1963 heissen da es erstens sonst 60 Jahre waeren und zweitens der Erstflug erst 1959 stattgefunden hat.
Nach oben
Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden

BeitragVerfasst am: Fr Aug 02, 2013 15:35:36 
Antworten mit Zitat

Ups, Tip-o. Bad me!

Der Sea King ersatz war/ist ein riesen skandal. mit $500 millionen an stornogebuehren (dank Chretien & Liberals),
Sikorsky ist mit dem S-92 10 jahre hinten (frag mich ob diese eine poennale zahlen warden), dieser ist jetzt fuer 2017 vorgesehen.

Der EH 101 ist nur fuer SAR zwecke, dessen # auch zu gering.
Nach oben

BeitragVerfasst am: Sa Sep 07, 2013 13:13:49 
Antworten mit Zitat

Der $3 milliarden Kontrakt fuer den SeaKing ersatz wurde jetzt offizell als fehler anerkannt.
CAF offiziere zur zeit in England die Merlin anzusehen um eine flugvertige uebergangsloesung zu finden.
Nach oben

BeitragVerfasst am: So März 09, 2014 01:33:09 
Titel: How the Canadian Navy got lost at sea
Antworten mit Zitat

As the plight of HMCS Protecteur shows, the future of the Canadian Navy looks dead in the water

The Canadian Navy

has been hoping its collection of banged-up ships, aging arguably beyond repair and sidelined by a year of unprecedented bad luck, can stay afloat until planned new vessels are seaworthy. But destroyers and supply ships from a bygone era are eating up repair budgets as austerity chokes the Defence Department. And a recent mishap has proved particularly embarrassing.

The Navy’s West Coast supply ship, HMCS Protecteur, suffered a fire in its engine room on Feb. 27 that injured about 20 crew members and disabled the ship. The incident left Protecteur dead at sea, hundreds of kilometres from Hawaii. Help came in the form of USS Chosin, an American cruiser that attempted to tow the 45-year-old dean of the Canadian Navy to sanctuary at the Pearl Harbor naval base. But then, in choppy conditions, the tow line snapped. This week, the towing resumed at an estimated speed of nine kilometres an hour.
Back in August, when Protecteur and HMCS Algonquin collided during risky towing exercises, Algonquin took the brunt of the damage, most recently estimated at $3 million, and left the Navy without a destroyer in the Pacific. Protecteur was at sea again in a matter of days, but this recent fire shrouds her future in mystery.

Both Protecteur and HMCS Preserver, the East Coast supply ship, hit the seas over 40 years ago. The Navy had planned to retire the long-serving vessels over the next couple of years. But it may now take a pass on required repairs to Protecteur if it means just a few extra months of service.

If the fleet’s last year was defined by a rash of poor fortune, the near future may ultimately be remembered for a lack of ships at sea. David Perry, a senior defence analyst at the Conference of Defence Associations Institute (CDAI), says new joint support ships won’t be ready until at least 2019, which means several years of relying on allies for refuelling.

“We’re going to have no independent ability to project a naval task group, which is one of the core naval functions that, according to government policy, [the Navy] is supposed to be able to do on either coast,” says Perry. “That is simply going to be impossible.”

Perry says Canada’s fleet of frigates could start to feel the pinch, too. The dozen Halifax-class ships are coming to the end of a years-long billion-dollar retrofit program. While they sat in dry docks, the Navy’s operations and maintenance budgets shrank. Perry told a CDAI conference that total defence spending has, in real terms, declined to 2007 levels. And operations and maintenance has fallen 18 per cent below the $7.6 billion earmarked in 2009-10.

“If the budget levels don’t get adjusted, and the operations and maintenance imbalance doesn’t get fixed, [the Navy] is probably going to be pretty challenged to have the funding to operate all those ships,” says Perry. “That would significantly restrict their ability to respond to government direction, because frigates are the workhorses of the fleet.”

The fleet of a dozen smaller marine coastal defence vessels isn’t immune to cost-cutting, either. Two of the ships were taken out of service last fall, as the Navy funnelled most of its operational maintenance into its refurbished frigates and submarines. “They don’t have enough money to spread across the whole fleet,” says Perry. “That will restrict their ability to do coastal patrols and also, possibly, have a reduced ability to send the [coastal defence vessels] to do Caribbean operations.”

Meanwhile, mechanical malfunctions continue to haunt Canada’s seamen. Last month, engine failure sidelined HMCS Windsor, one of the Navy’s four ailing submarines, for at least seven months. Chalk it up as another unfortunate turn for an aging fleet that, in a matter of years, may find sailors onshore staring out at a lot of empty water.
Nach oben

BeitragVerfasst am: Mo März 17, 2014 00:54:16 
Titel: Aus fuer A-Stan
Antworten mit Zitat

Kanada's Afghanistan einsatz ist zu ende.
Flagge kam runter, am kommenden Dienstag werden die letzten soldaten wieder in Kanada sein.
162 tote, tausende verletzte.
$ 10 milliarden and bekannten kosten,
weitere $ 10 milliarden and noch zu zahlenden steuern.
-zig millionen in noch kommenden kosten fuer renten, geraete ersatz...
Der Taliban hat (zurecht) seinen sieg erklaert!
Nach oben

BeitragVerfasst am: Mo März 31, 2014 00:53:21 
Titel: Head scratcher
Antworten mit Zitat

New procurement approach forces DND to ditch 6 + years planning/research.

OTTAWA - National Defence was forced to throw over six years' worth of research and planning for its desperately-needed search and rescue plane out the window when the Harper government elected to take a different procurement approach.

A briefing prepared for the former associate defence minister, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, spells out in detail how the project, which has been grinding its way through the defence bureaucracy since 2004, was being further sidelined.

"It is important to note that the work completed on the project prior to 2011 is no longer valid and cannot be leveraged in the new procurement strategy," said the Dec. 3, 2012 document.

The note was written by the department's now former deputy minister, Robert Fonberg and obtained by The Canadian Press under access to information legislation.

The program, first announced by Paul Martin's Liberals in 2004, is meant to replace two different fleets of aircraft — one of them almost 50-years-old — with a single modern formation of possibly 15 planes.

The original pricetag — laid out a decade ago — was $1.4 billion.

Despite pledges since 2008 to make the purchase the department's "top priority," defence and public works officials could not say last week when a tender will be issued.

The most recent Conservative budget moved over $3.1 billion of capital spending on the military off into future years and it's unclear whether the rescue plane is among those affected.

"We continue to work with DND and industry with a view to finalizing the (request for proposals)," Pierre-Alain Bujold, a spokesman for public works, which oversees the project as part of a secretariat that shepherds defence buying through the federal system.

The program was dogged by criticism, almost from the outset that the air force had wired its specifications to favour one particular aircraft — the C-27J Spartan, built by Italian aerospace giant Alenia. The complaints became so loud that former defence minister Peter MacKay asked the National Research Council to examine the requirements.

It agreed the military's specifications were too specific and needed to be broadened and it should also look at things where search-and-rescue squadrons are based.

A defence spokeswoman cited that as the reason the years of research and planning had to be discarded.

The "procurement strategy changed from a platform-based procurement to a capability-based procurement," said Melinda Miller, in an email.

As part of the new strategy aerospace companies will be required to "propose the type of aircraft, the number of aircraft and the number of bases required to meet the level of service."

The comment left some in the defence industry and the opposition Liberals scratching their heads.

The aircraft is still at the centre of the program, said one defence insider.

Joyce Murray, the Liberal defence critic, said the foot-dragging is meant to keep the purchase off the books in what she describes as a "cynical cost-cutting exercise" ahead of the 2015 election.

"We have been waiting nearly a decade for these desperately needed search and rescue assets," she said Sunday in an email. "This will result in more costs and more delays to an already long overdue process, and it will put at risk our ability to respond to emergencies and safeguard lives."

The briefing note warned Findlay, whose position of associate defence minister was abolished in last summer's cabinet shuffle, to expect further delays, even when the plane is finally under contract.

According to Fonberg's note, the defence industry told the government it would need up to three years to deliver the first plane because they would have to "engineer, test and produce" a mission system, which is essentially the software that operates the aircraft and the associated supply system.

Once again, defence industry sources are surprised by the assertion because at three-of-the-six competitors that could be the running already have established aircraft systems.

The bigger internal debate is whether the country needs four principal search-and-rescue bases and whether any of them would be closed as part of a revised strategy, the insiders said.

Follow @Murray_Brewster on Twitter
Nach oben

BeitragVerfasst am: Di Jun 10, 2014 23:11:36 
Titel: Federal officials expected de facto sole-source coast guard
Antworten mit Zitat

OTTAWA - Federal officials overseeing the plan to replace Canada's coast guard helicopters were aware almost from the outset that only one bidder might come forward.

Documents from May 2013 also show that just weeks after the bidding to supply 15 light helicopters got underway, officials looked for ways to justify a de facto "sole source" outcome to the request for proposals.

The documents, which include minutes from that meeting, were released as part of a legal action in Federal Court being brought by a rival aircraft-maker.

During the meeting, bureaucrats from Transport Canada, Public Works and the coast guard, discussed the need to justify why only one manufacturer would meet the contract's criteria.

The $172-million contract was awarded just a few weeks ago to the only bidder: Bell Helicopter Canada, based in Mirabel, Que.

Minutes from the meeting on May 23, 2013, show Transport Canada officials insisted that the requirements were "not written to suit one aircraft; the requirements were written to suit what (Canadian Coast Guard) is required to do."

But they also show the coast guard wanted "detailed justification," and that the reasons could include not wanting to upgrade existing infrastructure, such as landing pads.

No one from either Public Works or the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which oversees the coast guard, was immediately available for comment Tuesday.

By the spring of 2013, Airbus Helicopters Canada had been waging a behind-the-scenes war over the decision by transport safety officials to give Bell a weight exemption for its model 429 chopper, a decision that allowed the aircraft to qualify for the coast guard tender.

The company, which has a plant in Fort Erie, Ont., eventually filed suit against the federal government, claiming the decision to grant Bell a waiver gave the company an unfair advantage.

Both the Federal Aviation Administration in the U.S. and the European air safety authority objected to the Transport Canada exemption, suggesting in writing that there was no overriding safety concern and wondered if the rules were being changed to please Bell Helicopter, a subsidiary of U.S. conglomerate Textron.

Transport Canada and the coast guard both deny the fix was in for the model 429. Bell has stated publicly that it is received no leg up in the competition and is working with U.S. and European regulators as well as the industry to modernize the regulations related to the issue.

The plan to upgrade the coast guard's nearly 30-year-old fleet has been broken into two contracts — light and medium-lift choppers.

Awarding of the medium contract is still pending, but once again Bell is the only contender in the tender process that closed at the end of May.

The minutes also showed that officials recognized in May 2013 that in the tender for the medium-lift chopper, "there maybe difficulty in obtaining more than one bid" for the program.

The awarding of the light helicopter contract has the potential to create some political pain for the Conservatives.

The Airbus factory, which has been in operation for roughly 30 years, is located in Defence Minister Rob Nicholson's riding.

Recently, Fort Erie Mayor Douglas Martin and Gary Burroughs, chairman of the municipality of Niagara, penned a letter of protest to two federal ministers.

They told Fisheries Minister Gail Shea and Infrastructure Minister Denis Lebel they were disappointed with the decision, which essentially shut out a company they described having had success all over the world.

"The potential exists for unintended consequences to result for companies like Airbus who, despite their reputation, record of achievement and global reach, may find themselves restricted from access to both government programs and contracts," said the letter dated May 14, 2014, which was copied to Nicholson.

Follow Murray Brewster on Twitter: @Murray_Brewster
Nach oben
ist immer hier
ist immer hier

Anmeldungsdatum: 07.08.2004
Beiträge: 8981

BeitragVerfasst am: Mi Jun 11, 2014 06:50:59 
Titel: naja…….
Antworten mit Zitat

was den Coast Guard Auftrag betrifft..

wird mir niemand nachsagen können, ich wär kein Liberaler was den Welthandel betrifft..

NUR, Canada hat eine hervorragende Aerospace Industrie…und auch wenn Bell Canada ein Teil von Bell und Textron ist, die Hubschrauber die Bell Canada entwickelt und herstellt kann man als genuine kanadische Produkte bezeichnen..

Wenn Bell Canada jetzt kein passendes Modell hätte, OK wär's was Anderes…aber der 429 ist hervorragend, und sicher für die Aufgabe sehr gut geeignet..

Im Sinne der Werbung für die kanadische Aerospace Wirtschaft, wär es nicht kommunizierbar, wenn ausgerechnet bei so einem Auftrag der heimische Hersteller nicht zum Zug kommen würde…

Ist ja makroökonomisch eine Werbung für die Industrie…

also ich versteh's…ehrt die Kanadier wenn sie das auf dem politischen Level diskutieren…

nur, als Staat Kanada, hätt ich auch nicht anders entschieden...
Nach oben
Benutzer-Profile anzeigen Private Nachricht senden

BeitragVerfasst am: Mo Jun 23, 2014 16:07:42 
Titel: Sea King replacements
Antworten mit Zitat

Sea King replacements: $5.7B Cyclone maritime helicopters lack key safety requirement

The Conservative government has agreed to accept new helicopters to replace Canada's 50-year-old fleet of Sea Kings even though they don't meet a key requirement recommended for marine helicopters by Canada's air safety investigator, CBC News has learned.

The government announced Wednesday it had finally signed a renegotiated contract with helicopter-maker Sikorsky for 28 new CH-148 Cyclone helicopters at a cost of $5.7 billion.

Now, CBC News has learned the details of what the government has agreed to forego in order to conclude a long-awaited new deal with Sikorsky, and it includes a formerly mandatory safety measure: a 30-minute run-dry standard for its main gear box.

The importance of the ability to fly for 30 minutes after a loss of lubrication in the main gear box was reinforced by an investigation into a deadly 2009 crash of a Sikorsky-built helicopter.

The gearbox is a kind of linkage between the helicopters engines and its rotor system. It's packed with lubricating oil that cools the gears and keeps power flowing to the rotors. If a helicopter loses oil in its main gearbox, the system will get too hot and either seize up or otherwise fail. That would lead to a loss of power in the rotor, forcing a helicopter from the sky.

A helicopter that meets the run-dry standard can continue flying for 30 minutes even if there's no oil in the main gear box — a critical feature for helicopters flying hundreds of kilometres out to sea.

"I am shocked, this is a very dangerous thing," said Jack Harris, the NDP's defence critic.

"This is a major safety requirement ... necessary for the safety of the aircraft operating in the maritime environment.

"This is a significant safety issue."

Sikorsky has struggled for years against the allegation its main gearbox could not meet that 30-minute standard.

It was a mandatory requirement in the 2004 competition held to determine which helicopter would best serve Canada's interests.

Sikorsky won that competition, besting the AW 101, a helicopter that meets the 30-minute standard and flies search and rescue for the Canadian military today.

Critics suggest if Sikorsky could not meet that requirement, it ought not to have won the competition to replace Canada's Sea Kings in the first place.

"There are other helicopters that can meet that standard," Jack Harris said. "These guys signed a contract with this as a requirement. They said they could do it."

In an e-mail, Defence Department spokeswoman Ashley Lemire said the main gearbox on Canada's new Cyclones is designed to ensure the total loss of oil lubrication is "very remote."

"The Cyclone gear box lubrication system has many safety features, including a bypass valve than can be used to isolate the gearbox case from the oil cooler in the unlikely event of an external leak, to prevent further loss of transmission oil," Lemire said.

Since Canada first signed with Sikorsky in 2004, the American company has been over budget and years behind schedule.

Last year, the government even took the unprecedented step of announcing it might drop Sikorsky and began looking at other choppers. But a consultant's report suggested the government recognize Sikorsky was essentially developing a military helicopter for Canada and accept it might have to let some promised items slip.

The government accepted that advice and the announcement last week was the conclusion of a process that saw the government reveal its bottom line on its requirements and Sikorsky lay out realistic capabilities and timelines.

In the end, the Cyclone helicopters Canada will get will feature several trade-offs when compared to the helicopter the government ordered a decade ago.

The 30-minute run-dry capability is just one of seven concessions the government has made.

The others include:

The ability to secure the helicopter's ramp in various positions during flight.

Crew comfort systems during extreme temperature operations.

Unobstructed hand and foot holds for technicians to conduct maintenance.

The ability to self start in very cold weather.

Cockpit ergonomics factors.

A system to automatically deploy personnel life rafts in emergency situations.

Lemire said the air force accepted those concessions because "there is no impact to overall operational capabilities and will not risk crew safety."

But it's hard to see how that's the case.

Sikorsky refers to Canada's Cyclone helicopters as H-92s. The H is used to identify the helicopter as a military aircraft. The H-92s are militarized and upgraded versions of Sikorsky's civilian S-92s.

When that lineage is understood, the lack of run-dry becomes more of a concern.

In 2009, a Sikorsky-built Cougar Helicopter S-92 on the way from St. John's, N.L., to an offshore oil platform crashed into the sea when two titanium studs securing the main gearbox failed, causing a total loss of lubrication. All but one of the eighteen people aboard died.

The Canadian Transportation Safety Board investigation made several recommendations but it also highlighted the problem with the helicopter's failure to meet that 30-minute run-dry certification.

"We recommend that all Category A helicopters, including the S-92, should be able to fly for at least 30 minutes following a massive loss of main gearbox oil," TSB chair Wendy Tadros told reporters in 2011.

Military helicopters are subject to different operating standards than civilian choppers, but in this case the government says Canada's upgraded and militarized versions of the S-92 will meet civilian airworthiness regulations.

That American standard, called FAR Part 29, allows for Sikorsky's design to fly, as it provides for an alternative arrangement to a run-dry requirement that allegedly makes the total loss of lubrication "extremely remote."

It's that standard defence spokeswoman Ashley Lemire says Canada is now relying on.

"Through extensive testing, proper operating procedures will be established to satisfy the required airworthiness regulations, including the civil run-dry requirement, to ensure the safety of the crew and aircraft," Lemire said.

Following Tadros' investigation of the Cougar crash, the TSB chair said that extremely remote standard was not good enough.

"The 30-minute requirement is negated by the 'extremely remote' provision. Therefore, (the provision) needs to go. It's as simple as that."

The TSB urged U.S. regulators to amend the standard, pointing out other helicopter-makers were designing aircraft that could meet the 30-minute standard.

Qualification under that FAA regulation is what both the government of Canada and Sikorsky are relying on in order to get their deal done.

"Sikorsky and the Canadian government have agreed on all technical requirements for the CH-148 Cyclone helicopter," says Sikorsky spokesman Paul Jackson. "The gearbox meets all FAR Part 29 requirements by the FAA, including those related to loss of primary lubrication."
Nach oben
Beiträge der letzten Zeit anzeigen:    Seite 1 von 1      
Dieses Thema ist gesperrt, du kannst keine Beiträge editieren oder beantworten.
Gehe zu:  
Du kannst keine Beiträge in dieses Forum schreiben.
Du kannst auf Beiträge in diesem Forum nicht antworten.
Du kannst deine Beiträge in diesem Forum nicht bearbeiten.
Du kannst deine Beiträge in diesem Forum nicht löschen.
Du kannst an Umfragen in diesem Forum nicht mitmachen.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group