Feds pick Sikorsky chopper (Canada)

OTTAWA -- Ottawa has chosen new Sikorsky helicopters to replace the military's aging fleet of Sea Kings. Defence Minister Bill Graham says the new choppers have been chosen because they meet the needs of the Canadian Forces.

The government affirmed in December it intended to buy 28 maritime helicopters, designed for defence, surveillance, search-and-rescue missions and disaster aid.

The choice was between two options: the Sikorsky S-92 built by U.S.-based Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., and the Cormorant by EH Industries of England.

The latter is essentially the same craft Canada contracted to buy in 1992 - before the newly elected Liberals cancelled the deal as a "Cadillac" expenditure the country could ill afford.

The winning bidder will replace the obsolescent Sea Kings, the first of which was delivered to Canada's air force in 1963 when Lester Pearson was prime minister.

The ancient helicopters - which are older than the crews who fly them - now require about 30 hours of maintenance for every hour of flying time and have been involved in a number of crashes. Seven crew members have died in various Sea King crashes between 1967 and 1994.

Prime Minister Paul Martin's predecessor, Jean Chretien, cancelled a $5.8-billion contract to buy 50 EH-101 military helicopters as his first act in office back in 1993.

The cancellation cost taxpayers $500 million in penalties and dogged Chretien politically for years.

Critics accused the Liberals of repeatedly doctoring the tender specifications, either to avoid making a decision or to ensure they wouldn't have to buy the same helicopter that Chretien had so dismissively attacked in Opposition.

In 1998, the Liberals awarded a $790-million contract for 15 search-and-rescue helicopters from EH Industries for its Cormorant, a downmarket version of the EH-101.

But the balance of the order for maritime patrol choppers went into a Byzantine tender process that at one point divided the air frame and avionics into separate bids.

The call for tender finally went out last December, just days after Chretien left office.

It will still take at least four years before the first of the new fleet will be flying over the perilous North Atlantic and seven years before the last of Sea Kings are decommissioned.

So the libs make another dumb-a** decision. They picked the cheaper option with two engines (instead of three), less carrying capacity, no prior military orders and the list goes on. Now our military will have to deal with the consequences. I'm frustrated not only due to this decision, but also the precedence it sets for future military acquisitions. Wake up Canada!

I'm not a Canadian, but the Sikorsky H-92 Superhawk is a pretty decent helicopter. At this point I think anything would be an improvement over the Sea King!

Both the H-92 and EH101 use variants of the GE T700 engine class - the H-92 has two CT7-8C engines running at 3100 shp for a total of 6100 shp at sea level, while the EH101 has three T6A1 engines at 2145 shp for a total of 6435 shp. The EH101 does have a slight advantage in max power. The H-92 has about a 20 knot advantage in max cruising speed.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that the H-92 is not by any means a lousy helicopter. It should do quite nicely for Canada, and at less cost than the EH101.

Thank you for your input. What bothers me the most is the politics of it all. Yes, anything is better than the Sea Kings and I'm happy we're finally doing something about it.

Back to the politics though ... the original requirement was for the chopper to lose one engine and still be able to perform. With only two engines, it is my understanding that the H-92 cannot meet this. It also carries less weight and is not compatable with the ships Canada was looking at acquiring. I hate the way the libs watered down the original requirements and simply went with the cheaper option.

Also, they did not want the EH-101s as they were the version that was originally cancelled. Politics over safety and performance, standard liberal protocol.

What happens if you lose a an engine in a heavily loaded H-92 over water? With one engine, you lose 50% of power. Is that enough?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.