Page 24 - Australian Defence Magazine Feb 2020

24 AIRPOWER HELICOPTERS
FEBRUARY 2020 | WWW.AUSTRALIANDEFENCE.COM.AU
System (BMS TORCH 2) will also be added, as will a Manned- Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) capability. Future upgrades may offer systems under development for the European Tiger Mk.3, which will enter service with the French, Spanish and German militaries in the middle of the next decade.
All work, including software development, is intended to be carried out in Australia by Airbus Australia Pacific at its facility in Brisbane, which also assembled 18 of the 22 Tigers delivered from 2004.
“We estimate that we would achieve service release of the Enhanced Tiger at the Commonwealth’s (intended) Year of Decision for Land 4503 and we would start fleet moderni- sation approximately 18 months later. We anticipate reach-
ing IOC in advance of the Commonwealth’s requirement,” explained Airbus Australia Pacific’s key account manager, government helicopter campaigns, Laurie Alexander.
“Because we won’t have to wait for new aircraft to be built and delivered, we plan to have all aircraft modified (and H145Ms delivered) by the end of 2027, a low-risk achievement of FOC requirements 18 months in advance of the Commonwealth’s timeline.
“We really want to show it is a low risk achievement of their IOC and FOC timelines -it is credible, being based on the Tiger with targeted, selected upgrades (which can be) achieved with minimal interruption to the on-line fleet at the same time.” ■
TIGER AND PEGASUS AT AN END
KATHERINE ZIESING | CANBERRA
The Tiger helicopter has been subject of a development proposal under various guises (the old Capability Technology Demonstrator program through to Innovation Hub proposals) from One Atmosphere and their Pegasus solution since 2010. The technology essentially sees fitting of emergency flotation devices to the underside of the helicopter in case the aircraft has to ditch in water, allowing it to float to the surface for personnel to escape.
ADM estimates that the Commonwealth has contributed at least $5 million towards the program over this time along with further development funding from One Atmosphere, Tiger OEM Airbus and support from the Tasmanian Government.
The program has since been cancelled by Army as the solution is no longer a requirement. The matter was explored at the latest round of Senate Estimates at the end of 2019 with both the acting Head of Helicopter Systems Brigadier Jeremy King and Chief of Army Lieutenant General Rick Burr explaining the circumstances of their approach.
“When this was first identified, it was a new role for the Tiger helicopter,” BRIG King said. “As such, we sought a material solution to address the risk. This was a new role that we didn’t fully appreciate. For us, the value for money and the cost-benefit around a material solution was an extremely attractive and effective way of treating that risk around flying the helicopter over water. As we’ve now flown that helicopter over water over a number of years, we’ve started to develop other control measures that are non-material based.
“As we’ve progressed over time, that value-for-money adjustment has shifted. When the first assessment was made, it was a purely material based solution. We have moved to an assessment that is a combination of both material and other control measures, such as tactics, training and procedures that have allowed us to make a different value-for-money adjustment that was not purely material based.
CHAIR (Senator Eric Abetz): Did the cost-benefit analysis include the potential loss of personnel?
ABOVE: Pegasus test rig seen here in 2013 during a CTD
LTGEN Burr: Safety is always foremost in all of our minds. The procedures put in place to operate the Tiger over water have matured over time to the point now where, I think, it would be fair to say that the risk of flying this helicopter over water is the same as flying it over the land. That is an acceptable risk in relation to additional flotation systems to be considered at both capability and financial cost.”
Despite vigorous questioning from Senators around the time, money and schedule of program over so many years, Chief of the Defence Force General Angus Campbell was blunt in effectively shutting down the matter.
“What I heard from the testimony was that with the application of the floatation system, the weapons system cannot function as it’s designed as a weapons system. But an armed reconnaissance helicopter must function as an armed reconnaissance helicopter. It does not with this system attached to it. When I’m told by the head of army aviation that it blocks the ammunition feed to the major weapons system, it is no longer an armed reconnaissance helicopter. I think that we need to stand on that point and then calibrate the question of how we move forward.”
DEFENCE