In transition

While those problems are far from as damning as those that afflicted the notorious Seasprite, the Australian National Audit Office’s (ANAO) 2010-2011 Major Projects Report, released in December, gives some insight into government’s assessment of the risks and ongoing issues with the MRH and ARH aircraft types. To better appreciate those issues, Australian Aviation spoke with RADM Mark Campbell, the Defence Materiel Organisation’s Head of Helicopter Systems, to discuss the current state of Army rotary wing projects.

Still “a bunch of work to do” on MRH

The ANAO’s assessment of the state of the Air 9000 Phase 2/4/6 project to acquire 46 MRH 90 trooplift helicopters for Army and Navy does not make for pretty reading: “…The reliability and rate of effort of MRH 90 is well below the contracted requirement and has impacted the training of MRH 90 aircrew. Key contractual and capability milestones have been impacted by the reduced flying rate of effort.” In addition, it says, “Aircraft system immaturity has affected the certification schedule of the MRH 90. Several aircraft components, including the cabin floor panels and windscreens, do not meet the contracted capacity…”

The report again highlighted the MRH’s well known issues with system immaturity, technical problems, and contractor performance, with the program now running between two and three years late. Air 9000 Phases 2, 4 and 6 underwent gate reviews twice in 2011, with the second resulting in the MRH 90 being added to the government’s Projects of Concern (POC) list. At the time of the first review in April, Defence engaged with contractors Australian Aerospace, Eurocopter and NATO Helicopter Industries (NHI) to remediate the project, regardless of the review’s outcome.

“The first gate review found a few issues, obviously,” said RADM Mark Campbell. “There was no decision to make MRH a project of concern at that stage, because there was a lot of work going on, and there was a fair chance that we were going to remediate the program before the Project of Concern process even kicked in. It’s fair to say those discussions culminated in September-October last year when the second gate review occurred, the the remediation efforts by DMO and Australian Aerospace hadn’t quite completed,” he added. “And in the view of the Minister, there was still enough question in his mind that enough had been done, or enough was planned by the contractors, so the decision was made to make it a Project of Concern.”

RADM Campbell noted that there were no additional risks found by the gate review panel, which includes independent external experts, but a deeper level assessment of the existing risk identified by the project team. “It’s an important part of the gate review process that we have independent people, and they’re people who have long experience in projects and defence business,” he said. “In this circumstance what they helped most with was an assessment of risk, and an independent view of the sort of risk we were facing with a capability that is still developmental as far as we were concerned. And I suppose they helped to get an independent view of that, of how far through the development cycle we were.”

Each acquisition project now undergoes annual gate reviews, with the MRH 90’s next assessment due in mid 2012. The key difference with the project being listed on the POC list is the requirement for monthly reports to the Defence Minister, which measure progress against the milestones agreed in the remediation plan.

The remediation plan for MRH is in development and will be based on up to three deeds, each covering different aspects of the project.

“Highlights are that the consortium [Australian Aerospace, Eurocopter and NHI] will develop or have developed a series of capability fixes,” RADM Campbell explained. “Things like the floor, the oil cooler fan, the windscreen, the engine, will be fixed. There are some commercial issues which I am unable to discuss, however, most of these have been resolved. That’s all encapsulated in deed one. And in deed two, we’re going to address several other commercial issues, like IP, like access and a few other things. That will be the next discussion we have, which has already started.”

The ANAO report flags that the first 13 aircraft will require in-service retrofitting at the contractor’s expense. MRH 90 deliveries were suspended in late 2010 at the 13th airframe, but the new deed enabled Australian Aerospace to deliver the 14th MRH in late November, only a few days after the listing on POC, and the 15th just before Christmas.

The 14th MRH new Product Baseline Three (PBL3) level of software, which RADM Campbell said is “an improved level of software across the board, with improved reliability according to Eurocopter and Australian Aerospace. Australian Aerospace is very confident that the PBL 3 aircraft is a much improved aircraft with an improved software load and several other minor hardware improvements which will combine to improve overall reliability which Defence is looking forward to. Reliability and rate of effort are two of our biggest issues. The contractor keeps assuring us that this is going to be better, and this will be critical because with any new platform, increasing reliability is one of the most critical aspects of customer confidence.”

Lack of rate of effort continues to drag on the project, contributing to ongoing issues with training and certification, as well as hindering a full understanding of the MRH’s capabilities. And with the current rate of effort much lower than Army and Navy needs to complete all their training, accepting a definitive standard helicopter and the issuing of the MRH 90’s Australian Military Type Certificate remain key to increasing training rate of effort.

“We’re quite constrained as to what we can do right now. Our airworthiness instruments are quite restrictive until we have fully tested and assessed the capability. Therefore a higher flying rate should lead to less restrictions which will increase training rates.”

So Defence is keenly anticipating any improvement in rate of effort from the PBL3 aircraft. An initial three PBL3 aircraft will be accepted – the two handed over in late 2011 and a third due to be delivered in late February – and their performance will be tracked against the less mature PBL1 and 2 aircraft.

Defence will then again pause aircraft acceptance, although RADM Campbell did not rule out further deliveries in 2012, as long as outstanding issues are resolved in the subsequent aircraft, particularly as additional airframes will help generate rate of effort increases.

But while deliveries are being paused, the training system won’t be. “The training system is not paused, it just is not happening as fast as we’d like it, or certainly as fast as we’ve got planned,” he said. “It’s fair to say Navy is not far off the level that it’d like to be, but for Army the gap is wider. IOC should be mid this year for Navy, and then, depending on progress with deed one and two, 2013 for Army. ”

Critically for the Army, the MRH’s inability to meet rate of effort milestones has delayed building a detailed understanding of the helicopter’s performance capabilities and limitations. “We’re very comfortable with the capability that NH90 brings to Navy,” RADM Campbell said. “We’re comfortable that the aircraft will fulfill all its roles very well. We’ve got a bunch more testing to do in the Army space. We don’t have as warm an understanding of the capability the MRH90 brings.”

While in December Defence advised AA that Australia had not formally requested cost and availability information from the United States on the UH-60M Mike as an MRH alternative, RADM Campbell noted Defence was conscious of other options should the MRH’s issues not be able to be successfully addressed.

“There has not been a formal request going to the US Government for Black Hawk, however, we have a good idea of the sort of costs that an alternate capability would require. So we’re aware of alternate options.”

Ironically, with the MH-60R Romeo selected as the new naval helicopter under Air 9000 Phase 8, it would be easier to justify a UH-60M acquisition, based on the desired rationalisation of helicopter types and the obvious commonality with the Romeos – compatibility with the MRH 90 was one of the key marketing points of Australian Aerospace’s unsuccessful NH90 NFH campaign in the Phase 8 competition.

RADM Campbell was careful to put in context any prospect of project cancellation. “I don’t want to project too far into the future,” he cautioned. “Every option is on the table. We need a troop carrying helicopter, for special forces, for Army, and a maritime support helicopter for Navy, and we need that fairly soon. The Sea Kings have been taken out of service and our current Black Hawk is getting harder and harder to support. Things like flight control computers, or even something simple like an intercom box, are getting harder and harder to support. They’re just not made anymore, so we need to do something. That’s not to say we have an urgent requirement, but I would say it’s pressing, and we need to be aware of all the possibilities for a troop lift helicopter.”

RADM Campbell said replacement of Australia’s current Black Hawk capability would reach a critical point “in the next 18-24 months”, but noted “I think we’ll have a solid understanding of MRH well before that, and be in a good position to either move forward or look at alternatives.”

Further issues with the supply chain would be addressed in deed two of the remediation plan, although there had been some progress with the ongoing maturity issues in the supply chain. “It’s still fragile, still very dependent on Europe…and getting the subcontracting right,” RADM Campbell said. “The biggest problem at present would probably be helmets, the HMSD (TopOwl helmet mounted sight and display),” which is common to the also delayed ARH Tiger helicopter as well. He added that the HMSD had – for now – been prioritised for Tiger, but that these issues alone were not causing the delays to rate of effort.

In addition, some of the other technical challenges are unique to Australia. “For instance, the Finns have never had a problem with a windscreen,” RADM Campbell explained. “They haven’t seen the problems we’ve had with oil cooler fans either, but they’ve had a bunch of other problems that we haven’t.”

All of these problems are canvassed in NH90 user group meetings, which pull together the 14 operator nations to discuss the machine’s capabilities in different operating environments. “We get together twice a year with all the NH90 operators. We all say ‘this is what is currently bothering us,’ and the differences are quite stunning, and I put it down to the different environments we operate in.”

Although the project has had hurdles, RADM Campbell was upbeat about the overall prospects for the MRH 90, and comfortable with the work required to remediate the aircraft. “You’ve only got to go flying in one of these beasts to know that this is a good, solid helicopter. I’m pretty upbeat about it, but we just have to keep stepping through issues. There’s a bunch of work to do.”

Tigers baring their claws

The Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) reached a significant milestone last December with Australian Aerospace delivering to the Army the final of 22 machines in Brisbane. Like the MRH, the Tiger program has had its ups-and-downs and it is still some way from achieving Final Operational Capability. But the Tiger looks to be on a firmer footing towards providing the ADF with a maturing, capable platform for rotary wing air support.

To this point the ARH has endured a bumpy road. The helicopter’s acquisition under Air 87 was approved in early 1999 with the aim of replacing the outdated Bell Kiowas and Iroquois in their reconnaissance and fire support roles. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) was planned for June 2007 and Final Operational Capability (FOC) in June 2009. But instead, the project is three years late, having achieved IOC in April 2010 and with the revised FOC now set for December 2012.

ARH was placed on the Projects of Concern list after a number of contract disputes between Defence and Australian Aerospace. It was removed from the list in April 2008 with the signing of a Deed of Agreement establishing a revised contract price and delivery schedule, a revised through life support under a Performance Based Contract arrangement, and networks for work completed by third-party support subcontractors. While the ARH program remains imperfect, the path ahead seems clear, with key issues identified and mitigation strategies in place.

All in all, RADM Campbell said, there was very little concern from a reliability perspective. “We have some system reliability issues with it: there’s some technical pieces of equipment, like the helmet and roof mounted sight, which are very important to its primary role, and the reliability of those pieces needs to be better.”

In the main though, the main ongoing issues involve a fragile supply chain, particularly in ensuring a whole squadron of deployed or attached Tigers can be supported.

“If we get them away from Darwin, to Talisman Sabre or Hamel in Townsville, we have to think very carefully about supply chain and what spares we’ve got and what we haven’t, in order to make that happen. I shouldn’t need to be in that place, now. I would have thought that we’re beyond that, but it’s still a fragile supply chain,” RADM Campbell said.

The ANAO Major Projects Report agrees. In the ARH report, under the heading marked ‘Major Challenges”, it reads, “The most significant issue for the program continues to be the underperformance of maintenance and supply support networks. This is impacting the availability of serviceable spares (repairable items and breakdown spares) and support and test equipment at the required configuration to support the in-service fleet achieving required flying rates of effort and Australian Aerospace’s ability to deliver aircraft on time from its production/retrofit program.”

With final materiel release (FMR) due in July this year, the ongoing issues with spares availability could be potential options. While the ANAO report notes that delivery of some long lead time repairable items and support and test equipment is due after the FMR, RADM Campbell said that very little remained.

“A few more helmets and some necessary spares – that’s about it. We’re getting close to wrapping up Air 87 Phase Two, although we’ve already started work on Phase 3, which includes an upgrade to the aircraft, which the French and Germans are thinking about as well.”

Phase 3, the ARH upgrade, is currently in the definition stage, due to government around 2020, and although listed in the most recent update to the 2009 Defence Capability Plan, details are scant.

On the training rate of effort, RADM Campbell said it had improved, but was still not enough. “We’re still not training fast enough, still jumping into the simulator a bit too eagerly for my liking.”

The simulator, RADM Campbell said, rarely has the equipment problems of the actual machine, and is often used to fill out the training objectives of pilots. “I need to get the aircrew into the actual airplane than they are at present.”

The next capability milestone for the platform, Operational Capability Milestone 2 (OCM2), comprising a deployable squadron, was originally due in July 2012, but the ANAO report outlines further delays, again blaming serviceability and supply chain issues for a failure to meet the required rate of effort.

“The delays are due to ongoing technical serviceability issues with the TopOwl Helmet Mounted Sight and Display which has affected Army’s ability to develop a night aided flight capability. Additionally, Australian Aerospace’s immature maintenance and supply support networks is impacting the ability to achieve the required aircraft flying rate of effort.”

Ultimately, RADM Campbell said, operational evaluation for the deployable squadron in OCM2 is being conducted by the Army, and they were in control of the timeline. “The Army is in control of the timeline for Milestone 2. It wants to take the Tiger to Exercise Hamel in mid-2012, take it away, test it, see what it thinks. I’m quietly confident about the outcome of that,” he said.

Addressing the other point of the ANAO’s critique, RADM Campbell said Army had recently introduced the latest configuration of Thales’ Helmet Mounted Sight Display (HMSD) system. “Thales has been very helpful, and is very keen on helping us out. The French Army has just gone to it as well. We’ve completed a number of successful trials in the last few months, which is why I’m feeling quietly confident that the Army is going to be comfortable with what it has when it comes to Hamel next year.”

Following Exercise Hamel, RADM Campbell said, Defence would look to remove the current restriction on night operations. “The aircraft can fly at night, [but] it can’t flight at night, at least at present. So we will have a capability that can fly and fight at night once we get through this next capability milestone.”

“We’re going to package it all up in a year and we should have a fully fledged Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter by then.” Once these capability milestones have been met, the platform could potentially deploy on operations, particularly Afghanistan.

Already the Tiger has shown itself to be a capable platform on operations, with the French currently operating three Tigers, in a similar configuration to Australia’s ARHs, in Afghanistan. Australia watching the French experience closely, and has gained valuable insight into the helicopter’s capabilities and effectiveness.

“The Taliban don’t tend to attack a convoy that is supported by Tigers. They’re not happy with the accuracy of the 30mm cannon,” RADM Campbell said. But he also said the Tiger, as a Euro-centric datalink system, was not as Coalition-friendly as it could be. “Work towards that is going on under one of the Joint Projects. Eurocopter and Australian Aerospace are well aware of that.”

In early 2011, the French Army suffered its first operational accident involving a Tiger. At the time the French Ministry for Defence said the incident occurred in difficult terrain and adverse weather conditions, but did not attribute a cause. Although the French have yet to provide their report on the accident, RADM Campbell said, “We understand that it had a bit to do with night vision devices, but I’m hoping the report will confirm the cause.”

Beasts of burden

One platform that isn’t suffering maturity issues is the tried and tested Chinook

“It’s a mature system, and one that is well understood. The Australian Army Chinook operators in Afghanistan are regarded as the best around,” RADM Campbell. “We frequently lead the push.”

And with Australia’s CH-47D Chinook worked hard in Afghanistan and regularly called upon for civil assistance missions, the fleet has been bolstered by the arrival of two ex Us Army D models to join the five in service with Townsville-based 5 Aviation Regiment.

The two extra D models arrived in Townsville in February after being acquired under AIR 9000 Phase 5D, to replace the loss of A15-102 ‘Centurion’ in Afghanistan’s Zabul Province last year, and to supplement the heavily worked fleet.

“A small fleet is much harder to support than a bigger one. When you’ve got a third of the capability in Afghanistan for six months of the year, it doesn’t leave much for ‘raise, train and sustain’ back in Australia. One extra airframe makes it easier to build up a good stagger,” RADM Campbell said.

RADM Campbell said Defence made a case to government to replace the machine lost in Afghanistan on a one-one basis, but also presented the option for two.

The two ‘new’ helicopters arrived in Townsville on February 1, and are now undergoing deep maintenance and modification work to bringing them to the same configuration as the existing CH-47Ds.

“You’d struggle to tell the difference between what we’re getting and something straight off the Boeing line.”

Both had come out of the US Army’s “reset program”, and we’re already close to the ADF’s existing configuration, bar some unique modifications.

“We’re doing what is necessary to get these aircraft to look and feel like one of our current Ds for ‘raise, train, sustain’ purposes. We won’t use these two aircraft to go to Afghanistan in the near term,” he said.

“Then in the next stagger, we’ll build the remainder of the mods in so they’re exactly like one of our Ds.”

The Australian-specific modifications include ballistic protection, a blue force tracker, and the Dillon M134 machine guns.

It seemed curious to many that Defence was purchasing two machines helicopters rather than a single replacement to cover a gap of only 12 to 24 months, until the first of seven CH-47F ‘Foxtrot’ Chinooks on order arrive in late 2012 or early 2013 for service entry in 2014, RADM Campbell acknowledged there would be a capability overlap between the different configurations, but said that Defence undertook a cost benefit analysis as part of its proposalto government, which took into account pressing factors like Afghanistan and the Army’s struggles to meet pilot training needs.

“We want to get the Foxtrot capability in-country and bedded down before we worry too much about the Deltas,” RADM Campbell said.

“We’ll be doing some lead in training and other preparatory activities. There will be an operational overlap, which we’ll obviously be trying to minimise as much as possible. There will be significant work done next year.”

“Army requires enough airframes to keep its training going. We don’t have a simulator for [the CH-47], and most of the training takes place in the aircraft,” RADM Campbell said. “The return on investment was seen as an issue, but it was assessed that we would get around four years out of the D models, maybe five, and that was seen as enough.”

Defence is currently scoping the options to present to government for what will happen to the D model fleet after the introduction of the Foxtrot aircraft.

“The Chinook is a very useful helicopter, very cheap to operate, when all is said and done. From a DMO perspective, it’s harder and more expensive to support two different configurations. I’d prefer them all to be one configuration. To upgrade from Delta to Foxtrot is very expensive; you could probably buy more Foxtrots for what it would cost to upgrade our current Ds,” RADM Campbell said.

“We’ll look at the numbers as we develop the paper. Disposal will certainly be an option, particularly if you look at some of Mr Clare’s announcements from last year.”

Then Defence Materiel Minister Jason Claire announced in mid 2011 that Defence would, where possible, seek to recover some costs by on-selling older model platforms.

“Army is certainly looking at everything from disposals through to retaining them. Everything is on the table at present.”

For now though, the extra Chinooks will provide the existing fleet with some welcome respite.