[Newsbot]

Title: Bittersweet 50th anniversary for Canada's Sea King helicopters
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2013-08-01 00:31:21
Canadian

[saturn_656]

Testiment to government incompetence.

"Flying Yesterday's Aircraft Tomorrow" is damn accurate.

[QBall]

This is one anniversary I was hoping we would never reach.

[Jabberwalker]

This is a testament to the personnel in our Navy who have not only have kept these flying dinosaurs going for decades longer than their design parameters, also kept a fleet-load of steam turbine powered DDEs and DDHs going decades after their sell-by dates, as well. We, the taxpayers of this country, should be deeply ashamed of ourselves.

[DrCaleb]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

We, the taxpayers of this country, should be deeply ashamed of ourselves.

Why? I am not ashamed, because if I made the buying decisions they'd have the best kit available to them.

It is a testament to the mechanics who keep those birds in the air. Last I heard they took 4 hours to maintian for every 1 hour in the air. That's a lot of wrenching.

[uwish]

I will never forget or forgive crooked face for this mess....

[Jabberwalker]

uwish uwish:

I will never forget or forgive crooked face for this mess....

Ditto ... cynical old bastward.

[Jabberwalker]

Why? I am not ashamed, because if I made the buying decisions they'd have the best kit available to them.

... because we elect this clown show ...

If defending our shores were a priority of our populace, these would be election issues.

It doesn't seem to matter much which party is in power, either. Unless there is some traction among the electorate for defence issues, they will never come up and the forces will be stuck with making bricks without straw ... over and over. It's the royal "we" who are to blame in this country.

[BartSimpson]

Meanwhile in the USA we're still flying B-52 bombers that are older than the fathers of many of their current pilots. And the B-52 may well end up being the first military aircraft to stay in service for 80 years when it is finally and completely retired.

[DVC185]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Last I heard they took 4 hours to maintian for every 1 hour in the air. That's a lot of wrenching.

Actually, if you wish to believe a CBC report from 2006, it's 30 maintenance hours to each flight hour.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnmilitary/seaking.html

Having been an aircraft maintainer, I would suspect the actual number is quite a bit higher for this particular airframe for a multiple of reasons of which age, scarcity of parts and need to train younger techs being prime factors.

When we got rid of our first batch of Chinooks, one of the reasons bandied about for ditching them was the 33 to 1 ratio and the beancounters thought that was too much. Of course, that was just hangar floor scuttlebutt.

[GreenTiger]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Meanwhile in the USA we're still flying B-52 bombers that are older than the fathers of many of their current pilots. And the B-52 may well end up being the first military aircraft to stay in service for 80 years when it is finally and completely retired.

They do a very good job though, They are a credit to Curtis LeMay.

[BartSimpson]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Meanwhile in the USA we're still flying B-52 bombers that are older than the fathers of many of their current pilots. And the B-52 may well end up being the first military aircraft to stay in service for 80 years when it is finally and completely retired.

They do a very good job though, They are a credit to Curtis LeMay.

Correction on what I said there: The B-52 has been officially extended into the 2040's - given that it first flew in 1952 that'll make it the first NINETY year old airframe in service.

True, they're workhorses, but it's bloody well time to replace them!!!

[Jabberwalker]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Meanwhile in the USA we're still flying B-52 bombers that are older than the fathers of many of their current pilots. And the B-52 may well end up being the first military aircraft to stay in service for 80 years when it is finally and completely retired.

I was thinking that very same thought, yesterday.

[Jabberwalker]

Here is some interesting Sea King footage for you. Remember, these guys are flying in your navy on your behalf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4MbCu_Y ... re=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggy1CGmE ... re=related

[bootlegga]

uwish uwish:

I will never forget or forgive crooked face for this mess....

In fairness, it was a campaign promise - and one of the few he kept.

I didn't like the decision either, but had Mulroney not screwed the pooch while he was in office, we would already have had them and there wouldn't have been a damned thing Chretien could do about it.

Further, if the DND had been willing to accept a smaller helicopter (like say the NH-90), we'd already have them and for far less too. I seriously question the need for such big helicopters AFTER the Cold War has ended and the threat of submarine attacks are so low.