Lockorsky has had a standing offer to the federal government to replace the Cyclone with the MH-60R. No one is benefiting from the Cyclone. Lockorsky is losing hundreds of millions in the program, Navy has a platform that is troubled at best, RCAF has a hell of a time maintaining them.... just a lot of issues and Lockorsky would prefer we fall in line with everyone else.
If 427 is getting 60s it just makes sense to lean into that and build around it. UH60M for nTACs and MH60R to replace the Cyclone.
Sikorsky should be pushing hard for a Canadian final assembly line and/or a third line heavy maintenance facility here for all 60 variants. The commonality alone would be a game changer. Streamlined parts, shared training pipelines, aircrew and techs moving between fleets without starting from scratch every time.
Package it properly and it becomes a serious industrial offset tied to the F35 buy. That is a carrot Ottawa can actually grab onto. And at the end of the day it gives the RCAF the kind of capability they have been chasing for years instead of another one off fleet.
There is certainly an interesting argument to make assuming all goes Lockosrskys way. I have yet to hear about production here though. Although we'll see when nTACS comes around
“Is DND planning to increase investment, given its value as a recruiting pipeline?”
Value as a recruiting pipeline is far from the truth. Sure maybe it is in ur more rural areas but in our cities I highly doubt that, even tho yes we end up bringing cadets into the CAF it isn’t to the effect it would / should serve as a recruiting pipeline.
Again if we want to get more youth to serve in the CAF it’d be better to put more funding towards reserve co-op programs (which are now starting to bloom into amazing entry programs into the Reserve side of the CAF especially in our cities).
I should specify, co-op is already a entry plan into the CAF, what I mean by expand it is we should be focusing / targeting provinces / CBGs that have pitiful intake numbers compared to other parts of our country but also use additional funding to invest in infrastructure of training areas ie. modernizing and improving them. And having dedicated staff capacity to recruit and train them from high schools.
Steve Daly had some cool concepts and modest pragmatic proposals around kit. His blog, was unique in that he would talk about platforms such as the Buffalo NG from Viking for the FWSAR project and what a hypothetical aircraft could do performance wise. He even had suggestions for C Series, turning them into tankers, executive lift and maritime patrol. It was well before our current push to buy CanadaWould love it if you had some of the same “modest proposal articles. But I know it requires lots of Bandwidth.
I should also share love to Mr. Stephen Priestly who did most (all?) of the artwork as well for many of those concepts. Some of the coolest concepts I've seen came out of those. Shame that I believe he is now mostly retired from the space.
Beyond the initial tranche of 18 Black Hawks, it’s hard to see how additional Sikorsky variants fit within an industrial framework that increasingly prioritizes domestic final assembly and sovereign sustainment capability.
Canada now has an established in-country Cormorant production and modification line, and the RCAF has expressed interest in expanding that fleet. There is also the broader Merlin ecosystem to consider training, sustainment, supply chains, and the strategic advantage of building depth within an existing platform family.
While there is understandable enthusiasm in some quarters for UH-60Ms or MH-60Rs, procurement decisions cannot be evaluated on platform performance alone. Industrial participation, domestic capability, and long-term sustainment sovereignty are not side issues, they are central to Canada’s defence strategy.
Industrial participation and domestic capability are how we got stuck with the Griffon in the first place... If we chase an industrial win at the expense of capability, we haven’t solved anything, we’ve just repeated the same mistake and failed to give the warfighter what they actually need to win.
Ntacs is getting real interesting especially the medium lift.. Which route will we go? The battle tested, something CAF is kind of familiar with black hawk, or the new comer air bus H 175/175m which recently got certified. Leonardo also has the Aw 139 for lift and the new Aw 249 for attack, maybe they offer both as a package. It really is up to us to make the most of it.
In terms of the CH-146 Griffon replacement, Airbus just release their concept designs for the NATO NGRC (Next Generation Rotorcraft Capabilities) joint helicopter program which is based on the Racer demonstrator.
Lockorsky has had a standing offer to the federal government to replace the Cyclone with the MH-60R. No one is benefiting from the Cyclone. Lockorsky is losing hundreds of millions in the program, Navy has a platform that is troubled at best, RCAF has a hell of a time maintaining them.... just a lot of issues and Lockorsky would prefer we fall in line with everyone else.
If 427 is getting 60s it just makes sense to lean into that and build around it. UH60M for nTACs and MH60R to replace the Cyclone.
Sikorsky should be pushing hard for a Canadian final assembly line and/or a third line heavy maintenance facility here for all 60 variants. The commonality alone would be a game changer. Streamlined parts, shared training pipelines, aircrew and techs moving between fleets without starting from scratch every time.
Package it properly and it becomes a serious industrial offset tied to the F35 buy. That is a carrot Ottawa can actually grab onto. And at the end of the day it gives the RCAF the kind of capability they have been chasing for years instead of another one off fleet.
There is certainly an interesting argument to make assuming all goes Lockosrskys way. I have yet to hear about production here though. Although we'll see when nTACS comes around
Sikorsky is likely to be heavily pressured to keep final assembly at home.
I missed something, what's the offer on the table ref. the Cyclones?
“Is DND planning to increase investment, given its value as a recruiting pipeline?”
Value as a recruiting pipeline is far from the truth. Sure maybe it is in ur more rural areas but in our cities I highly doubt that, even tho yes we end up bringing cadets into the CAF it isn’t to the effect it would / should serve as a recruiting pipeline.
Again if we want to get more youth to serve in the CAF it’d be better to put more funding towards reserve co-op programs (which are now starting to bloom into amazing entry programs into the Reserve side of the CAF especially in our cities).
Co-ops are another great tool to use in these cases.
I should specify, co-op is already a entry plan into the CAF, what I mean by expand it is we should be focusing / targeting provinces / CBGs that have pitiful intake numbers compared to other parts of our country but also use additional funding to invest in infrastructure of training areas ie. modernizing and improving them. And having dedicated staff capacity to recruit and train them from high schools.
Steve Daly had some cool concepts and modest pragmatic proposals around kit. His blog, was unique in that he would talk about platforms such as the Buffalo NG from Viking for the FWSAR project and what a hypothetical aircraft could do performance wise. He even had suggestions for C Series, turning them into tankers, executive lift and maritime patrol. It was well before our current push to buy CanadaWould love it if you had some of the same “modest proposal articles. But I know it requires lots of Bandwidth.
I should also share love to Mr. Stephen Priestly who did most (all?) of the artwork as well for many of those concepts. Some of the coolest concepts I've seen came out of those. Shame that I believe he is now mostly retired from the space.
Beyond the initial tranche of 18 Black Hawks, it’s hard to see how additional Sikorsky variants fit within an industrial framework that increasingly prioritizes domestic final assembly and sovereign sustainment capability.
Canada now has an established in-country Cormorant production and modification line, and the RCAF has expressed interest in expanding that fleet. There is also the broader Merlin ecosystem to consider training, sustainment, supply chains, and the strategic advantage of building depth within an existing platform family.
While there is understandable enthusiasm in some quarters for UH-60Ms or MH-60Rs, procurement decisions cannot be evaluated on platform performance alone. Industrial participation, domestic capability, and long-term sustainment sovereignty are not side issues, they are central to Canada’s defence strategy.
Industrial participation and domestic capability are how we got stuck with the Griffon in the first place... If we chase an industrial win at the expense of capability, we haven’t solved anything, we’ve just repeated the same mistake and failed to give the warfighter what they actually need to win.
an anti submarine hunting helicopter that actually works should be a priority leaving
Merlin and SeaHawk. Getting out of the Cyclone at the cost of the 60 is what it is
Ntacs is getting real interesting especially the medium lift.. Which route will we go? The battle tested, something CAF is kind of familiar with black hawk, or the new comer air bus H 175/175m which recently got certified. Leonardo also has the Aw 139 for lift and the new Aw 249 for attack, maybe they offer both as a package. It really is up to us to make the most of it.
In terms of the CH-146 Griffon replacement, Airbus just release their concept designs for the NATO NGRC (Next Generation Rotorcraft Capabilities) joint helicopter program which is based on the Racer demonstrator.
https://verticalmag.com/news/airbus-reveals-two-ngrc-concepts-for-nato/
N for Next not New
as before
Cyclone, SOF, Chinook escort = "interim" Hawks= 35+18+24=77+
Griffons = base utility
+3 Cormorants?
MV75 replace Hawks and Hawks replace Griffons or low end utility becomes AIrbus product 145?
MV75 replace Cormorants as well