Exactly what ive been saying. Anything to do with Ukraine stinks as the corruption there is absolutely staggering and the deals with western governments only ever seen to benefit the elite.
This is a complete disgrace! No wonder the ADF is in turmoil based upon the competency of the individuals representing them at this hearing. Great questioning.
You can't BS a former ADF test pilot, well done Senator Fawcett - Marles just give those damn Taipans to Ukraine, they want them. You are a stooge in accepting ADF advice to assign them to landfill
Have you thought of the fallout Australia would cop if we were stupid enough to give some of these helicopters to Ukraine, and only one was to fall out from the sky. If I had to take a punt, I would say the same ones yelling at professionals now about not giving Taipans to Ukraine would be yelling exactly the same if we did give some and one were to get scattered across a corn field . I can guarantee the media does not give any pats on the back for good intentions. I I don't agree with all the decisions made at Defence and am pretty unpopular with mostly, but this was 100% the right choice that they made.
@@MrMikeV00 Just to let you know that the Ukrainians do not come back on the gifting country if the equipment they receive is crap. They tried a mine roller and it was moving right along but the Russians had buried multiple anti-tank mines and when the roller hit the first mine it exploded in front of the tank and they continued but once the other mines were underneath the chassis of the tank they exploded and all we saw was a fireball. Russians are not particularly creative but they do have plenty of veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya both heavily mined. Afghanistan the most heavily mined in the world. Now that dubious distinction has been passed to Ukraine. There were no repercussions about the loss of the test driver that I was aware of the only thing I saw was a video from a distance of the tragedy.
@@MrMikeV00well if Ukraine want them they will already have an agreement with AirBus to service them outright, and if they can have a transport that can be used to carry injured troop to safety they should get that option.
If Ukraine wants them, send them! Freight costs would probably be less than what Australian taxpayers are paying the participants to ramble on during this enquiry.
If Papua asks for them! Ukraine has a different set of requirements that differ from ours or most others. Long term sustainability isn't one!@@JustIn-mu3nl
They're trying to BS the wrong guy....22yrs in the ADF, Experimental test pilot and Commanding Officer, RAAF Aircraft Research and Development Unit, Edinburgh, SA.
@R0d_1984 Oh please, cut the crap. The French subs we being designed on Australian custom specifications. The first new nuclear attack sub is being accepted into service as we speak. French is used to export subs. If Australia wanted to have nuclear attack subs, France could built it faster than the non nuclear one because it was already engaged into serial production. On the other hand, when was the last time USA and UK exported some submarine? The AUKUS deal will be even later and more expensive...
His line of questioning is BS, and he's using his credibility to mislead you. He's a politician above all else and a former senior officer. Who's more than capable of lying to get ahead in life. His point about NZs choppers is crap, and he knows it, comparing apples and oranges. And his talk about Swedes is shameful. Why all the half-truths? The Swedes cancelled their orders for parts after Airbus didn't deliver. The same issue we had. The point that the ADF officers didn't hammer home is how do you expect Ukraine to keep these things in the air when the rest of the world can't. We can't after more than a decade of effort and experience. They would just about become single-use items.
I have to correct myself, the first Suffren class attack submarine is already in active service. The second is performing a long deployment to test it before entering active service, the third one will be delivered for testing by the end of the year...
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
@@mikerogers582 Cents on the dollar after factoring in removal and such to the ADF . A huge boon to the manufacturer with 40 aircraft worth of certified parts to start their priority certified parts service for mh90 operators!
As an ex MRH90 pilot I can say it is a good aircraft that is safely operated by many other countries. The Ukrainians do not care if we think it has some issues or is expensive to operate. They are at war and will take whatever they can get. All aircraft have issues that are managed through the Airworthiness process.
Makes me wonder why the Ukrainians weren't keen to get their hands on the retiring F/A-18F airframes. They had standardised hardpoints for NATO munitions. Instead they had to convert their remaining Soviet aircraft for deploying supplied munitions.
@@geradkavanagh8240 Yeah that whole story reeks as much as the Taipans... my understanding was that they were interested... there's been a whole heap of disinformation about that too.
@@brianmurray1395 Russia only occupies 17% percent of Ukraine, and are hardly gaining ground while Ukraine lacks arms and Russiaa is on a war economy in its 18th month, with peak production. If we arm Ukraine they can keep up creating massive Russian losses and at some time soon the Russian "war chest" will run out. The west can easyli sustain Ukraine if it activates the defense industry now.
@@brianmurray1395Maybe we send you nothing. Get some decency. Ukraine is destroyed and people are murdered by a dictator. Maybe just sit in the cave. Maybe not help anyone who is in need of help? What kind of world is that!? Exactly how every dictator wants.
After the poor initial evaluation they should have been dropped! Australian Defence doesn't field enough equipment to be buying into early production of aircraft especially! If it isn't in major production for several buyers it shouldn't even be considered!
When you are talking about pulling critically wounded troops out of a battlefield, 40% availability with the MRHs is a million times better than 0% without them. Plus, that 40% would be based on peacetime operations where safety is paramount. Given the Ukrainians are fighting for their survival, they'd be able to fly with more broken items and accept the extra risk if it means saving wounded soldiers' lives.
Fly with broken items? You have any idea how stupid that sounds? Lets fly broken helicopters so we dont only lose the soldiers we are trying to save, we lose the highly skilled aircrew as well that take years to train. Do you people think past your emotions?
Perfect example of why ADF retention is failing, seriously who would walk into battle, with this lot in charge, greatest load of can't do double speak. Even 40% availability is better then 0% AME availability!!!!
@@dfor50and more to your point they will be in the environment and climate they were designed to operate in, one of the big issues the fleet had was our extreme climate and the rapid changes from things like near 40° heat and 0% humidity then flying to a place in the same day where it's raining for half the day and it's 90% humidity. That places a massive toll on the airframe.
Thats 40% with a budget that can sustain 45k plus flight hour cost. How long do you think Ukraine could operate a fleet of helicopters that cost that much when they have been relying on billions in aid from the US? Do you suppose we pay for it all? You do know why inflation is so high right now dont you?
Likely fishing for a 'Hero of Ukraine' medal to add to his collection. That lot all look like they won every battle since the Emu War amongst themselves. Tin badge collectors
Unbelievable At least Ted Serong from the Training Team, and normal Australian Army & airforce were in Saigon and Vung Tau, still exposed to bombings and Assassination, not in Pattya Beach or Cebu. Long distance command
They’re not unreliable. It’s a beat-up and cover-up. They’re replacing them with the same helicopters the Taipans replaced in the first instance (Blackhawks)… because they were unreliable.
The same idiots that are running this place, and supporting every other country except looking after our own backyard, both sides of the political spectrum are completely inept, they all need sacking and they wonder why the joint up rates are in the toilet, absolutely useless the lot of em, and look out if China or someone else was to attack Australia, we would be invaded within the week, and I know this because I come from an ADF family background, it's seriously pathetic, and should never have gotten this way, only idiots in Government let it, sack the lot of them.
John Howard I think, a.friend of mine is an engineer and works on helicopters , at the time he said these helicopters were heaps of junk . It was widely known in the industry that they were unreliable and expensive to operate.
Well done Senator! Speak to the guys on the ground and they will agree with you. Egos everywhere in that room! We should help Ukraine to save their lives in every way.
Excellent questions from the Senator. The Ukrainians have proven they can adapt and use incredibly effectively any western supplied arms. These helicopters should be provided now. Not only this but we should also be looking at producing 155mm ammunitions for when the situation undoubtedly gets worse. Also why can't we provide more Bushmasters which have proven to be excellent in combat?
Today, both the ARH and MRH fleets have an availability rate of about 70%. This is likely to be better than most - if not all - RAAF platforms and for the future Apache and Blackhawk fleets.Australia has had disproportionate problems keeping our 22 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters (ARH) and 47 Taipan Multi-Role Helicopters (MRH) flying. Other countries have nowhere near the same level of difficulty as has been experienced here. all this might be based on an incorrect premise - namely that the ARH and MRH fleets are chronically unreliable because of spare parts shortages, and they therefore must be retired in the national interest. This is not correct, with the major culprit being the Defence / CASG support process. For anyone who remains unconvinced: how else is it possible to explain the vast difference between the Australian and New Zealand experiences with the MRH?. by Kym Bergmann / Canberra -28/02/2023
Have you read the findings of the investigation to the MRH 90 that had an engine out autorotation landing. The one that had had landed in the water near a beach? Because you should. The issue that helicopter experienced was a design flaw. I don't think it ever be appropriate for a professional military who would not feel safe to have their own crews operate such an aircraft donate to let another nation operate such an aircraft. I can not agree that there is any comparison that is fair to be drawn between the blackhawk and the Taipan. The blackhawk is combat proven in all kinds of environments and, in opinion, is a workhorse. I would say the Taipan is a showpony as I always said it was from the beginning of the program. As someone who has studied defence technology for a long time I get extremely concerned with anything that has the term multirole thrown in right at the beginning of its design, not including the F35, which is the only exception. Its like the swiss army knife. Where does this multi-purpose can do it all knife be mosty? Unfortunately, in the kitchen draw.
@@MrMikeV00 so 1 helo out of 46 has a single incident in 10 years after 59,000 flight hours and its a design flaw? 🤔🤔 That's quite a random and seemingly rare flaw then would'nt you say? 🤷♂🤷♂
@regregan6852 I didn't write the report, so let's not take away from that. For me, that is the worst about this flaw, nothing ideal or safe about it. Look, I'm not getting on any helicopter that may eat its own engine components if the ambient air temp gets a bit high.
@regregan6852 FYI, it was a tolerance issue that saw certain engines' components expand behond limits. Most of the time problem was not even noticeable (Never went out of spec) but that should not takeaway that such a problem is most likely to occur when you least want it. On a hot day doing high tempo operations and when at low level. Which is exactly how/when the problem showed its head the previous two times. Basically, right in the flight envelope that military ops call for was the presence of this issue, and so it's not just a hazard or a danger. It was a complete lack of capability.
It really begs the question, does the ADF have some thing to hide or are embarrassed regarding the Helicopters. Haven't they done the right maintenance procedures or did shortcuts or even used generic parts. All this would come out/ be visible if those helicopters would ever be serviced by AIRBUS technicians and regulations.
It's not the maintenance, it's the airframes and computers, the entire system is F'd, always was, they looked great on paper and test, they started having problems after just a few years.
@@R0d_1984 so then, like the senator keeps asking, how do you explain the NZ experience with NH90? Outcomes are poles apart from neighbouring countries with the same model??🤔🤔
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
All equipment has issues, but it performs adequately on other Armed Forces. Ditto for the Tigers. This together of other issues in other military procurement projects, like naval, seem to follow a pattern that is hampering usability of these assets. One issue may be the overzeal in using domestic subunits which may be functionally equivalent, but not the same in specs. eg the problems with the Hunter destroyers and the excessive weight for the mast of the Australian CEFAR radar compared to the original BAE, or the american AN/SPY usually associated to the Aegis Combat System.
Another example of ADF deflecting and wasting question time. The timeline has been established. Ukraine should be given the first option on any ADF equipment being retired.
Minister McAllister should be quiet and allow the questions to be made. Well done Senator...opening up the discussion and the key issues so far ignored or covered over. We, the members of the public, put an extroardinary amount of faith in our appointed leaders of the Defence Force, government ministers and public servants to sort these issues. We often not privvy to to details/nuances of the issues. We do expect them to be properly thought through/discussed. Many thanks for your efforts.
And listening to this load of rubbish you can see why Australia is slowly sinking just give them to Ukraine instead of scrapping them a waste of taxpayers money
Absolute disgrace, every Australian needs to see this. In fact, it needs to be seen around the world. What a disgrace. Something definitely stinks here. Send the dam choppers already.
its worse to integrate an unreliable aircraft into a system rely on it. Than to not have it at all. Unless you want to accept an unnecessary duplication of effort. something you do not want in war time
@@simonleonard8154 I did listen to him. I think you’ve missed my point. That Ukraine would need to double its efforts for the same effect. The helicopter can’t reliably replace current arrangements for casevac so both would need to be used I. Order to achieve the same output. I have I also heard him misuse the NZ availability data. The nuance he glossed over and he missed was the restricted intended use that the NZ airforce has accepted. NZ has a revised usage for its helicopters. Which makes their availability rate look favourable. If you don’t expect your helicopter to do as much as other country’s being available for 70% of the time for a more limited role is not a fair comparison to compare to other countries usage rates like Australia’s . And every other NH90 user who has struggled to get more than 50% availability for the full mission set expected of NH90 by those countries. If you discard mission sets to achieve that availability rate then that should be understood by the senator given his experience and would answer many of his own questions, At which point I question the motives of the senator. As he’s being intentionally misleading in a field he should be familiar with. By analogy if your car can’t drive at night because its headlights don’t work. And then say your car is available 50% of the time as a result. You can not then compare that availability rate to a person claiming an availability rate of 100% with the same non working headlights as they don’t plan to drive at night.
@@ArsenicApplejuice I get where you're coming from now that makes some sense. I guess if Ukraine can next to nothing for casevac, day limited operations would massively exceed current availability right? I am sure there was a comment, I'll have to watch again myself, pertaining to Ukraine's intent to follow the NZ operating plan anyway but my memory is hazy as to whether I heard that here or elsewhere
@@simonleonard8154 I get cynical when politicians ( who should know better) start to misrepresent key facts in support of a narrative. He misused the NZ data And also misrepresented what happened with Sweden and its inability to secure parts. He suggested the reason for low availability rates was because Sweden didn’t order the necessary parts. In reality that cancellation for parts only came after years of Airbus failing to meet its contract obligations. And Sweden was forced to look elsewhere. A problem Australia also experienced while the Senator was in the ADF so he should definitely know. I see his behaviour in this clip as an individual acting as a politician to “score points” and not as an expert asking questions.
Australian defense force gave no consideration to the fact that there are other countries who are willing and capable of repairing the Taipan fleet for use on the Ukraine front line.
With Ukraine reporting high casualty list of wounded Soldiers, any support we can give in surplus airlift capability should be looked at. The Golden Hour for wounded Soldiers is critical to there survival. Given that the taipans are partly disassembled the Ukrainians would be happy to refurbish the Airframes with European MRH partners. 🤔👍
4:31 Lt Gen Stuart - the Ukrainians are aware of this, yet they requested the platform nonetheless. If they are willing to accept with those realities, that is entirely their prerogative and why would you deny them?
Because it will cost our taxpayers millions to get them sent there and put back together. Im pretty tired of people acting like government money isnt their money being spent on their behalf
As an Australian citizen I must form the opinion that the ADF have group think, and there is no logical reason why the retired helicopters should not have been gifted to Ukraine. Perhaps on inspection the manufacturer would have found issues with maintenance which explain their poor serviceability? Nothing about our current ADF senior representatives gives me assurance that we are in good hands, that we have capabilities which are being optimised.
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
The ADF don’t want the helicopters to go anywhere it a hole in the ground, otherwise it’d be shown that they just don’t know how to operate them. Bury the problem so it doesn’t embarrass them. I still remember the Sea Sprite joke….this is the same crap.
Defence has a chronic failure of not ordering the number of spares required to maintain any platform due to chronic underfunding by penny pinching accountants
Exactly right and way back at the start of MRH, the OEM suggested spares package to sustain the Australian fleet of MRH, was cut in half by Defence, this was the start of the spares issues.
This is how NZ was able to solve the issue and bought a 9th complete NH90 specifically to be used as spares as it actually worked out cheaper and so have then been able to keep on top of the "spares" issue by then taking said part off the spare frame immediately and then just ordering and replacing that Part on the spare so as not to impact the operational fleet. This excuse of no spares doesn't exactly fly (pun intended) here either as the ADF now had 6 spare frames in the even earlier retired RAN NH90s which could/Should have then kept the army Nh90s in a flyable state🤷♂️ The fact that the RAN justification for ditching the 6 naval examples was supposedly the difficulties the small fleet number presented whereas army reasoning for NZs ability to operate their 8 NH90s satisfactorily is exactly the same, a smaller fleet🤔 These guys need to work together on their excuses at least😂😂😂
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
Because they would have got them working and flying not only in general but in an actual combat zone which would have been not only embarrassing for the ADF but again (AGAIN) put the decision making process of all involved in terms of these $multi-billion project failures under public scrutiny. People should really be asking why these aircraft were dismantled so soon and the problem literally buried so quickly.🤔
6:03 and what if Ukraine was able to achieve higher availability and performance? I’d suggest you’d find that fairly difficult and uncomfortable to explain now, wouldn’t it?
you want me to believe a country that has never operated this airframe would achieve higher availability then the country that has the most flight hours when said country constantly demands billions in aid?
This current Defence leadership group makes me extremely happy l'm no longer a member of the ADF, what a pathetic bunch! I'm interested to know just who it was who decided to knock back the Ukraine request which, despite all the problems associated with the MRH, STILL wanted them. Obviously aware of the 'risks' associated with the aircraft, Ukraine still wanted them. "Oh the platform's not really suitable for AME." Clearly they think it is and let's face it, a helicopter getting wounded off the battlefield to hospital is far better none. Could you imagine the Americans or the Brits saying to us, "We don't think nuclear submarines are suitable for the Australian Navy so we're not going to sell them, to you, we're of the belief they're not the platform you need."
Crap. MRH90 - Multi Role Helicopter 90. A helicopter can be switched form troop carrying to Casevac in a relatively short time. I have served in both the RAN and ARA as a maintainer on helicopters and we would regularly switch the roll of them. The senior ranks are beating to the drum of their ALP masters.
If the Ukrainians say they can use them and get even 40% availability out of them, that's 15 to 18 more helicopters than they have now, and being closer to the supply chain probably a lot more. And as someone has already said, what would the CDF know about combat. The closest he has ever been is an air-conditioned room in Abu Dhabi, while our troops were slogging it out in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Senetor Fawcett has the same questions been raised regarding the RAAF F18 hornets that are being decommissioned. Ukraine needs these also to protect its civillians from Russian drones and missiles
Because the Ukrainians stated the Hornets are Junk. 14 out of 42 could be made serviceable after 6 months of expensive overhaul and would have a life span of 2 years. Maintaining the aircraft would be logistically demanding, unlike the f-16's supplied by nearby Denmark and Holland.
@@deserteagle-nx1hl Someone called them junk?--So What? That is a flimsy excuse--only suitable if you don't want to give the aircraft in the first place!
Met an air force tech from Amberley air base in the 1980's. Front passenger floor of his car was littered with electronic components he had 'salvaged'. He was cutting them up and retrieving the gold from them.
These senior Army delegates are quoting incorrect figures. Australia had two units (MO's) that were run by Airbus, Holsworthy and Oakey, both were consistently running at above 70% availability/serviceabilty, for the last few years, the Army run MO (Townsville) was lucky to hit 30%, fact.
Good lord this adf guy can’t even answer a basic question there’s something rotten going on behind the scenes here. We need ppl to go and have a look. Have they stripped the planes of parts for souvenirs already is that the problem?
And there in lies the problem most people are not realising here, AUSTRALIAS programs, processes and problem solving, not the rest of the worlds. I actually have no doubt Ukraine would have got these flying effectively, with alittle kiwi help perhaps🤷♂️
Mate, don’t ever ask a woman to not over talk. You are a brave man. She’s all smoke and mirrors. It’s all bs. The choppers are used according to their design remit for purpose, without significant issue in many other countries. They should’ve/could’ve gone to the Ukraine. That’s also the goss amongst serving and retired military.
Hi David, I wrote to my local federal member asking for an urgent review and reversal on the decision to which he who remarked that it would be a bad look for Australia if the choppers were provided and had an accident. My response was that the Ukrainians had done the math…So whilst my query wasn’t perhaps fully appreciated, I sincerely thank you for your line of questioning which was highly intelligent and considered with the research you’d done and ability to cut to the chase with the military responses. Many thanks mate, please keep up the good work that you’re doing with trying to help Ukraine. Cheers, Graeme.
Defence hasn’t answered my questions regarding this. I am reporting for a Ukrainian newspaper in Australia. I think the Ambassador to Australia should have asked the right questions regarding acquisition of defence equipment. There are various processes and these should have been sought. It’s clear Labor wasn’t actively trying to source weapons for Ukraine. It takes political will and it seems their member base is still controlled by Russian intelligence and interests .
Even if the Taipan fleet can't be used as helicopters etc to help wounded, can the parts from these aircraft be used to support other aircraft because it appears the Aus govt doesn't want to give to Ukraine for them to use in it's defense in this war.
My dad was a defence engineering contractor for the ADF for years, they do not know a single thing about maintaining their equipment, if they did my family wouldn’t be so well off…
It actually does not matter if the choppers were useful as an aircraft platform, Ukraine's current situation suggest that regardless of state there would be useful equipment on those aircraft that the Ukrainians would most likely adopt to their vehicles. People might not believe it, but they can use any help they can get.....
Great questioning. Well done, sir! Interesting to see military leaders reply like politicians... If Ukraine says it's good enough for them, and you say it isn't, why not send it to Ukraine and replace it at home with better ones? Why holding on to something you don't want to use yourself?!
And sadly *no-one* in Europe knows anything about putting these aircraft (built by a consortium that includes Airbus Helicopters, formerly known as *Euro*copter) back together in working condition.
Taipans must have been working with Ukraine is strong support for everyone in Ukraine and Australia very special big 💓 stronger people and god bless you all Ukraine
yea but the bean counters also assign >$450/hr for a CPL techo to maintain the aircraft. Now add a a few troops to do the work and maybe and inspection from a SGT and suddenly work cost >$1500 per hour plus parts.
@@aussietroll7873Haha yea, if you think NZ is paying that much on their budget then you would be dreaming! Either they would be sitting in hangers and only flown on the weekends or there would have to be a cake sale to fund them😂
Whose nose is out of joint in terms of Australian military personnel if we were to fast track this helicopter debacle.? Ukraine is at war , why not just send them to Ukraine immediately?
Were not these helicopters used/available for evac in Australian fires and or floods, this has bungle written all over it and the Army does not come across with conviction on the point they are trying to make.
Can't believe all the stooges here calling for Australia to give Ukraine these choppers, As an Aussie I do not support this, give them nothing and mind our own business
The REAL question is, what did the ADF do so wrong while operating a helicopter that others have been flying successfully across the world for years?! There's no excuse for NOT giving them to the Ukrainians.
Senator Fawcett Thank you for the dogged and well prepared questioning! How can we justify burying the helicopters when wounded personnel can be evacuated with these helicopters. One day we may be in the same position, and will be told sorry we want to bury an asset as we have decided that it doesn't suit your needs...wow unbelievable !!!
As an Australian I'm so ashamed!! Send Ukraine the helicopters!! And the shipment of coal they requested 6 Months ago!! And anything else that we can!!
Senator with respect, there is one country that would be more suitable for MH90 Taipans and that is New Zealand. The reason is, the RNZAF has 8 Nh90s, the very same air frame as the MH90. NZ has been successful in operating them and maintaining them (as mentioned). If I may suggest, even 4 MH90s would ideal in building the Trans Tasman relationship. The will give the RNZAF 3 flights in which will complete the squadron that operates them. Furthermore, for the last 20 years the NZDF has suffered from neglect from successive governments that have 'kicked the can down the road' only being relevant for a photo op. The front line staff do their best with what they have got. By giving NZ parts and additional airframes would significantly help in maintaining any future ANZAC Joint Task Group. On a side note, please keep the pressure on NZ to maintain a defence force with relevance. Thanks for taking the time to read this...
Well, Senator! Have you spoken directly with the pilots? No. Because they will tell you that aircraft has had problems since day 1. Think about that one. And once more, who's going to train Ukraine on how to fly a defective aircraft anyway.
Absolutely 💯 true.I flew in them 13 times and twice we got grounded.The pilot im mates with was disgusted when we got rid if Blackhawk, and got out now looking at going back.
Well these same pilots are flying Mi-8 , so worst case is they will do very well in them. A very modern helicopter platform with problems that are solvable by any competent air crew.
Yes, who on Earth is going to train Ukraine to fly these European designed helicopters? It's not like there are any European countries successfully operating these aircraft with a better reliability than Australia.
This makes me feel ashamed to be Australian and a labour voter. They also need attack helicopters due to the fact that they are using rescue helicopters in place of attack helicopters. Just shut up and give them to UKRAINE. It sounds like ADF made no attempt to give them to Ukraine. Labour has lost my votes GLORY to UKRAINE
Thank you Senator. I am a Ukrainian who serves Australia as a police officer of one of the states. I am heavily involved in what’s happening in Ukraine and I am grateful for what Australia has done but shaking my head with disappointment that Ukraine could not be given the aircraft and let us Ukrainians worry about the safety aspect and operation without the application of ADF’s alleged issues with the aircraft.
Why were certain spares not ordered? Because they were not considered to be an often replaced item. Spares are purchased on advice and flying aircraft designed to operate in small areas often means we need parts not considered replacement parts when operated in smaller countries.
As A New Zealander its always good to hear Aussies speaking well of us. Is the army General deliberately making it complicated? Asking for a friend you understand.
As an American who saw this come up on my TH-cam feed and decided to watch it, I took an interest in it and my first reaction was very positive towards the idea that the Australian Defense Forces would give these Taipans to Ukraine for CasVac purposes. But after doing a bit of research on it it seems as though the Taipans have been plagued by design and maintenance and safety problems which would prove very difficult for the Ukrainians to overcome were they to try to use them for combat CasVac purposes. Apparently the military has known about these problems for quite some time and decided all the way back in 2022 to basically decommission them and purchase and use US made UH60m Blackhawk Helicopters instead. So it was already in the works to have the Taipans decommissioned over safety concerns because it was known that those helicopters weren't safe. It totally makes sense to me then why the generals answering Fawcett's questions would be very careful about how they made their statements in regards to the "suitability" of those aircraft for Ukrainian military needs. I dont think anybody would want to see faulty or potentially dangerous medvac helicopters sent to Ukraine just for them to fail while in use. Also, I don't think its altogether fair to blame the army generals for a slow response on the question since the same generals were brought before the government to answer for when a Taipan helicopter crashed 7 months ago. You would think Fawcett would have done a bit more homework on the reason why those helicopters had beem grounded in the first place insteas of insulting the generals in front of him for not giving him the answer he wanted to hear. As someone who works in lower level government, I completely understand the politics involved with procurement and its often a damn nightmare, especially in regards to tax dollars. There's so many seemingly stupid little procurement rules and policies, there's red tape around everything, ethics rules, procurement procedures. Its a damn nightmare. It takes a very long time for procurement and decommissioning procedures to take place because at the heart of the process is government trying to make sure that everything that is procured or decommissioned is being done in a financially responsible and justifiable way. The other nightmare is that budgetary concerns and limitations often force agencies to purchase sub-par equipment. Agencies are often tasked with alot of responsibilities but do not match with the level of funding to support the people in those roles with proper equipment. I guarantee that thats how it works with the military. It takes forever to get new equipment and when you get a piece of crap piece of equipment its almost impossible to get rid of. Something literally has to fall apart on it or it has to blow up first in order to get politicians to decide to put any money towards it. And I dont blame taxpayers for wanting politicians to be penny pinchers but God-damn sometimes you just gotta go out and buy the right shit the first damn time no matter what it costs. There's plenty of damn waste that takes place in government but in my time its equally true that there's an army of hard working government employees who make miracles happen with substandard equipment on a daily basis that more or less makes up for it. The real waste in government in my opinion 9 out of 10 times is bad procurement. Buying a bad piece of equipment that has systemic and chronic problems ends up costing way more money than lazy government workers. Yeah, there's some lazy pos out there but to be honest the equipment thats out there being used by government workers to perform their jobs is really old old crap that should have been thrown away a long time ago. Its good to see Aussie's having good debate along these lines tho. I believe in government accountability and I like to see and hear from both sides because it keeps everybody on the up and up. Much respect to both sides.
There is more to this than we are hearing. Something stinks.
Back room dealings. Follow the $$$$?
Exactly what ive been saying. Anything to do with Ukraine stinks as the corruption there is absolutely staggering and the deals with western governments only ever seen to benefit the elite.
I agree!!; The Australian government stinks of the smell from neo Nazi's....
Well, in Norway they got som nice trips to USA whit boos and hokers whit brown envelopes. And they are getting Sea Hawk. Who payed for the show?
@@Klemheist Sounds like you hit the nail with that one....
This is a complete disgrace!
No wonder the ADF is in turmoil based upon the competency of the individuals representing them at this hearing.
Great questioning.
I'm 99.999% sure that 40% availability (70% in N.Z.) is better than nothing in Ukraine ! What an absurd, stupid argument !!
It’s this kind of stuff that turned me off for even joining the adf
You can't BS a former ADF test pilot, well done Senator Fawcett - Marles just give those damn Taipans to Ukraine, they want them. You are a stooge in accepting ADF advice to assign them to landfill
Have you thought of the fallout Australia would cop if we were stupid enough to give some of these helicopters to Ukraine, and only one was to fall out from the sky.
If I had to take a punt, I would say the same ones yelling at professionals now about not giving Taipans to Ukraine would be yelling exactly the same if we did give some and one were to get scattered across a corn field . I can guarantee the media does not give any pats on the back for good intentions.
I
I don't agree with all the decisions made at Defence and am pretty unpopular with mostly, but this was 100% the right choice that they made.
@@MrMikeV00 Just to let you know that the Ukrainians do not come back on the gifting country if the equipment they receive is crap. They tried a mine roller and it was moving right along but the Russians had buried multiple anti-tank mines and when the roller hit the first mine it exploded in front of the tank and they continued but once the other mines were underneath the chassis of the tank they exploded and all we saw was a fireball. Russians are not particularly creative but they do have plenty of veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya both heavily mined. Afghanistan the most heavily mined in the world. Now that dubious distinction has been passed to Ukraine. There were no repercussions about the loss of the test driver that I was aware of the only thing I saw was a video from a distance of the tragedy.
@@MrMikeV00well if Ukraine want them they will already have an agreement with AirBus to service them outright, and if they can have a transport that can be used to carry injured troop to safety they should get that option.
If Ukraine wants them, send them!
Freight costs would probably be less than what Australian taxpayers are paying the participants to ramble on during this enquiry.
Wouldn't it be prudent to give them to a close neighbour who we ally with, Papua or such?
If Papua asks for them!
Ukraine has a different set of requirements that differ from ours or most others. Long term sustainability isn't one!@@JustIn-mu3nl
If Ukraine got them you need to give them the crews also.
😁
Its not that simple. It would cost millions to send them, millions I dont feel like paying for.
They're trying to BS the wrong guy....22yrs in the ADF, Experimental test pilot and Commanding Officer, RAAF Aircraft Research and Development Unit, Edinburgh, SA.
What part was BS then?
It was know at the time that the NH90 was just, wasn't a fully operational system, like the French subs; Somebody (several) got paid...
@R0d_1984 Oh please, cut the crap. The French subs we being designed on Australian custom specifications.
The first new nuclear attack sub is being accepted into service as we speak.
French is used to export subs.
If Australia wanted to have nuclear attack subs, France could built it faster than the non nuclear one because it was already engaged into serial production.
On the other hand, when was the last time USA and UK exported some submarine?
The AUKUS deal will be even later and more expensive...
His line of questioning is BS, and he's using his credibility to mislead you.
He's a politician above all else and a former senior officer. Who's more than capable of lying to get ahead in life.
His point about NZs choppers is crap, and he knows it, comparing apples and oranges. And his talk about Swedes is shameful. Why all the half-truths? The Swedes cancelled their orders for parts after Airbus didn't deliver. The same issue we had.
The point that the ADF officers didn't hammer home is how do you expect Ukraine to keep these things in the air when the rest of the world can't. We can't after more than a decade of effort and experience. They would just about become single-use items.
I have to correct myself, the first Suffren class attack submarine is already in active service.
The second is performing a long deployment to test it before entering active service, the third one will be delivered for testing by the end of the year...
What absolute rubbish from our defence department. Give the Ukrainians the choppers and let them deal with the issues.
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
I'm glad the taxpayer will get something back from this fiasco!
@@mikerogers582 Cents on the dollar after factoring in removal and such to the ADF . A huge boon to the manufacturer with 40 aircraft worth of certified parts to start their priority certified parts service for mh90 operators!
As an ex MRH90 pilot I can say it is a good aircraft that is safely operated by many other countries. The Ukrainians do not care if we think it has some issues or is expensive to operate. They are at war and will take whatever they can get. All aircraft have issues that are managed through the Airworthiness process.
Precisely
Our government is doing what the wef tells it to do
Makes me wonder why the Ukrainians weren't keen to get their hands on the retiring F/A-18F airframes. They had standardised hardpoints for NATO munitions. Instead they had to convert their remaining Soviet aircraft for deploying supplied munitions.
@@geradkavanagh8240 Yeah that whole story reeks as much as the Taipans... my understanding was that they were interested... there's been a whole heap of disinformation about that too.
Should we update or go back to blackhawks?
Why the hell is the Australian military defending this?
This is a complete joke.
Send the dam choppers.
Send them NOTHING. This is over!
@@brianmurray1395 Russia only occupies 17% percent of Ukraine, and are hardly gaining ground while Ukraine lacks arms and Russiaa is on a war economy in its 18th month, with peak production. If we arm Ukraine they can keep up creating massive Russian losses and at some time soon the Russian "war chest" will run out. The west can easyli sustain Ukraine if it activates the defense industry now.
@@brianmurray1395Putin may be finished, but this is not over
That’s what I wonder as well. It’s asking for a conspiracy questions.
@@brianmurray1395Maybe we send you nothing. Get some decency. Ukraine is destroyed and people are murdered by a dictator. Maybe just sit in the cave. Maybe not help anyone who is in need of help? What kind of world is that!? Exactly how every dictator wants.
Good on you Senator David Fawcett. The Taipan situation has been very poorly handled by ALP and the defence force.
Exactly, finally someone not only asking the pertinent questions but also providing some pretty blatant counter facts to ADF excuses.
The current chief of the defence force needs to be sacked. Look what hes done to a once and proud institute.
After the poor initial evaluation they should have been dropped! Australian Defence doesn't field enough equipment to be buying into early production of aircraft especially! If it isn't in major production for several buyers it shouldn't even be considered!
@@jackdbur so then by that logic drop the F-35? Scrap the hunter frigates?? And bury the hawkeis???
When you are talking about pulling critically wounded troops out of a battlefield, 40% availability with the MRHs is a million times better than 0% without them. Plus, that 40% would be based on peacetime operations where safety is paramount. Given the Ukrainians are fighting for their survival, they'd be able to fly with more broken items and accept the extra risk if it means saving wounded soldiers' lives.
We shouldn't be blowing each other up at all in this so called civilised world...but some are still MORE BARBARIC than others.
Fly with broken items? You have any idea how stupid that sounds? Lets fly broken helicopters so we dont only lose the soldiers we are trying to save, we lose the highly skilled aircrew as well that take years to train. Do you people think past your emotions?
Needs must. Not much delivered by Scott Morrison in 2022 either.
Exactly
Correct!!
Perfect example of why ADF retention is failing, seriously who would walk into battle, with this lot in charge, greatest load of can't do double speak.
Even 40% availability is better then 0% AME availability!!!!
Yes and the aircraft would be at home where they were built (EU) making maintenance issues less cumbersome.
@@dfor50and more to your point they will be in the environment and climate they were designed to operate in, one of the big issues the fleet had was our extreme climate and the rapid changes from things like near 40° heat and 0% humidity then flying to a place in the same day where it's raining for half the day and it's 90% humidity. That places a massive toll on the airframe.
Bravo and I second the comment. Bloody fools in charge of good dedicated men.
I'm 60 and as a reservist old soldier ,Im disgussed and angry
Thats 40% with a budget that can sustain 45k plus flight hour cost. How long do you think Ukraine could operate a fleet of helicopters that cost that much when they have been relying on billions in aid from the US? Do you suppose we pay for it all? You do know why inflation is so high right now dont you?
The EU is finally kicking into gear and providing billions, they are starting to realise this isn't ending with Ukraine@@lepermessiyah5823
Wherever and whenever Angus Campbell is directly involved in any ADF decision, you can guarantee it will be a stuff up.
The Army and the Government - are more interested in saving face than in saving the lives of Ukrainian soldiers.
Likely fishing for a 'Hero of Ukraine' medal to add to his collection. That lot all look like they won every battle since the Emu War amongst themselves. Tin badge collectors
120% correct.
@@Klemheist Hiding in protected bunkers with SAS PROTECTORS ........
Unbelievable
At least Ted Serong from the Training Team, and normal Australian Army & airforce were in Saigon and Vung Tau, still exposed to bombings and Assassination, not in Pattya Beach or Cebu.
Long distance command
Little wonder at the laughable state of the ADF with these clowns!
if these chopers are so unreliable - what idiot authorised the purchase of them in the first place ?
They’re not unreliable. It’s a beat-up and cover-up. They’re replacing them with the same helicopters the Taipans replaced in the first instance (Blackhawks)… because they were unreliable.
The same idiots that are running this place, and supporting every other country except looking after our own backyard, both sides of the political spectrum are completely inept, they all need sacking and they wonder why the joint up rates are in the toilet, absolutely useless the lot of em, and look out if China or someone else was to attack Australia, we would be invaded within the week, and I know this because I come from an ADF family background, it's seriously pathetic, and should never have gotten this way, only idiots in Government let it, sack the lot of them.
John Howard I think, a.friend of mine is an engineer and works on helicopters , at the time he said these helicopters were heaps of junk .
It was widely known in the industry that they were unreliable and expensive to operate.
2005. . . Drama from the start. . Doors to narrow!!
@bretloyd8097 yeah they couldn't mount a machine gun
Well done Senator! Speak to the guys on the ground and they will agree with you. Egos everywhere in that room! We should help Ukraine to save their lives in every way.
Excellent questions from the Senator. The Ukrainians have proven they can adapt and use incredibly effectively any western supplied arms. These helicopters should be provided now. Not only this but we should also be looking at producing 155mm ammunitions for when the situation undoubtedly gets worse. Also why can't we provide more Bushmasters which have proven to be excellent in combat?
nice, but i think we can do more@@Klemheist
Today, both the ARH and MRH fleets have an availability rate of about 70%. This is likely to be better than most - if not all - RAAF platforms and for the future Apache and Blackhawk fleets.Australia has had disproportionate problems keeping our 22 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters (ARH) and 47 Taipan Multi-Role Helicopters (MRH) flying. Other countries have nowhere near the same level of difficulty as has been experienced here. all this might be based on an incorrect premise - namely that the ARH and MRH fleets are chronically unreliable because of spare parts shortages, and they therefore must be retired in the national interest. This is not correct, with the major culprit being the Defence / CASG support process. For anyone who remains unconvinced: how else is it possible to explain the vast difference between the Australian and New Zealand experiences with the MRH?. by Kym Bergmann / Canberra -28/02/2023
Have you read the findings of the investigation to the MRH 90 that had an engine out autorotation landing. The one that had had landed in the water near a beach? Because you should. The issue that helicopter experienced was a design flaw. I don't think it ever be appropriate for a professional military who would not feel safe to have their own crews operate such an aircraft donate to let another nation operate such an aircraft.
I can not agree that there is any comparison that is fair to be drawn between the blackhawk and the Taipan. The blackhawk is combat proven in all kinds of environments and, in opinion, is a workhorse. I would say the Taipan is a showpony as I always said it was from the beginning of the program.
As someone who has studied defence technology for a long time I get extremely concerned with anything that has the term multirole thrown in right at the beginning of its design, not including the F35, which is the only exception.
Its like the swiss army knife. Where does this multi-purpose can do it all knife be mosty? Unfortunately, in the kitchen draw.
@@MrMikeV00 so 1 helo out of 46 has a single incident in 10 years after 59,000 flight hours and its a design flaw? 🤔🤔 That's quite a random and seemingly rare flaw then would'nt you say? 🤷♂🤷♂
@@MrMikeV00 sorry my bad, 17 years, but you get my drift...
@regregan6852 I didn't write the report, so let's not take away from that. For me, that is the worst about this flaw, nothing ideal or safe about it. Look, I'm not getting on any helicopter that may eat its own engine components if the ambient air temp gets a bit high.
@regregan6852 FYI, it was a tolerance issue that saw certain engines' components expand behond limits. Most of the time problem was not even noticeable (Never went out of spec) but that should not takeaway that such a problem is most likely to occur when you least want it. On a hot day doing high tempo operations and when at low level. Which is exactly how/when the problem showed its head the previous two times.
Basically, right in the flight envelope that military ops call for was the presence of this issue, and so it's not just a hazard or a danger. It was a complete lack of capability.
We need to do more to support Ukraine. We have helicopters we don't want. Ukraine wants them. Send them. It's that simple.
It really begs the question, does the ADF have some thing to hide or are embarrassed regarding the Helicopters. Haven't they done the right maintenance procedures or did shortcuts or even used generic parts. All this would come out/ be visible if those helicopters would ever be serviced by AIRBUS technicians and regulations.
It's not the maintenance, it's the airframes and computers, the entire system is F'd, always was, they looked great on paper and test, they started having problems after just a few years.
@@R0d_1984 so then, like the senator keeps asking, how do you explain the NZ experience with NH90? Outcomes are poles apart from neighbouring countries with the same model??🤔🤔
@@regregan6852Exactly…..same shameful Aussie incompetence as with the Sea Sprite joke. NZDF flies them today and ADF couldn’t get them off the ground.
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
All equipment has issues, but it performs adequately on other Armed Forces. Ditto for the Tigers. This together of other issues in other military procurement projects, like naval, seem to follow a pattern that is hampering usability of these assets. One issue may be the overzeal in using domestic subunits which may be functionally equivalent, but not the same in specs. eg the problems with the Hunter destroyers and the excessive weight for the mast of the Australian CEFAR radar compared to the original BAE, or the american AN/SPY usually associated to the Aegis Combat System.
Senator David Fawcett is a great guy and I support all his judgment. He is a fair play
Another example of ADF deflecting and wasting question time. The timeline has been established. Ukraine should be given the first option on any ADF equipment being retired.
How does anything get done if this is how they carry on. Sickening to watch.
40% operational availability. Simple question. Why didn’t we get rid of them 10 years ago?
Russian choppers would be a better investment 🙂
@@dvgsun We are an adversary nation and for that reason they wouldnt be sold to us
@@lepermessiyah5823 true , sadly
Because the enemies didn’t know that🙄
Sunk costs, 4.5 billion dollar mistake; The UH-60 was what many wanted, a far better system (far great parts availability etc), plus interoperability.
Is 40% better than 0%?
What an absolute disgrace, can't wait to vote these mugs out! Well done Senator.
9:15 This response makes no sense and is intentional obfuscation.
I'm 100% sure that 40% availability (70% in N.Z.) is better than nothing in Ukraine ! What an absurd joke of an argument !!
That’s was excruciating to watch! Thank you senator
Minister McAllister should be quiet and allow the questions to be made. Well done Senator...opening up the discussion and the key issues so far ignored or covered over. We, the members of the public, put an extroardinary amount of faith in our appointed leaders of the Defence Force, government ministers and public servants to sort these issues. We often not privvy to to details/nuances of the issues. We do expect them to be properly thought through/discussed. Many thanks for your efforts.
And listening to this load of rubbish you can see why Australia is slowly sinking just give them to Ukraine instead of scrapping them a waste of taxpayers money
Seems to me that when you need to evac someone by air, you need an aircraft. These guys are missing something here.
Absolute disgrace, every Australian needs to see this.
In fact, it needs to be seen around the world.
What a disgrace.
Something definitely stinks here.
Send the dam choppers already.
Well done Senator. This is a debacle and defence are dissembling and blocking and misleading.
They currently have NO casevac - so that's a 0% availability - 40% availability is MASSIVELY above their current capabilities.
its worse to integrate an unreliable aircraft into a system rely on it. Than to not have it at all. Unless you want to accept an unnecessary duplication of effort. something you do not want in war time
You really haven't listened to the Senator's statements regarding reliability and availability of this aircraft have you? @@ArsenicApplejuice
@@simonleonard8154 I did listen to him. I think you’ve missed my point. That Ukraine would need to double its efforts for the same effect. The helicopter can’t reliably replace current arrangements for casevac so both would need to be used I. Order to achieve the same output.
I have I also heard him misuse the NZ availability data. The nuance he glossed over and he missed was the restricted intended use that the NZ airforce has accepted.
NZ has a revised usage for its helicopters. Which makes their availability rate look favourable. If you don’t expect your helicopter to do as much as other country’s being available for 70% of the time for a more limited role is not a fair comparison to compare to other countries usage rates like Australia’s . And every other NH90 user who has struggled to get more than 50% availability for the full mission set expected of NH90 by those countries.
If you discard mission sets to achieve that availability rate then that should be understood by the senator given his experience and would answer many of his own questions, At which point I question the motives of the senator. As he’s being intentionally misleading in a field he should be familiar with.
By analogy if your car can’t drive at night because its headlights don’t work. And then say your car is available 50% of the time as a result. You can not then compare that availability rate to a person claiming an availability rate of 100% with the same non working headlights as they don’t plan to drive at night.
@@ArsenicApplejuice I get where you're coming from now that makes some sense.
I guess if Ukraine can next to nothing for casevac, day limited operations would massively exceed current availability right?
I am sure there was a comment, I'll have to watch again myself, pertaining to Ukraine's intent to follow the NZ operating plan anyway but my memory is hazy as to whether I heard that here or elsewhere
@@simonleonard8154 I get cynical when politicians ( who should know better) start to misrepresent key facts in support of a narrative.
He misused the NZ data
And also misrepresented what happened with Sweden and its inability to secure parts. He suggested the reason for low availability rates was because Sweden didn’t order the necessary parts. In reality that cancellation for parts only came after years of Airbus failing to meet its contract obligations. And Sweden was forced to look elsewhere. A problem Australia also experienced while the Senator was in the ADF so he should definitely know.
I see his behaviour in this clip as an individual acting as a politician to “score points” and not as an expert asking questions.
Australian defense force gave no consideration to the fact that there are other countries who are willing and capable of repairing the Taipan fleet for use on the Ukraine front line.
What countries offered to do that?
With Ukraine reporting high casualty list of wounded Soldiers, any support we can give in surplus airlift capability should be looked at. The Golden Hour for wounded Soldiers is critical to there survival. Given that the taipans are partly disassembled the Ukrainians would be happy to refurbish the Airframes with European MRH partners. 🤔👍
4:31 Lt Gen Stuart - the Ukrainians are aware of this, yet they requested the platform nonetheless. If they are willing to accept with those realities, that is entirely their prerogative and why would you deny them?
Because it will cost our taxpayers millions to get them sent there and put back together. Im pretty tired of people acting like government money isnt their money being spent on their behalf
The Ukrainians will cover the cost of transport. Keep up..!!@@lepermessiyah5823
@@lepermessiyah5823 Would have cost less the the VOICE referendum!
We could deny them because they are causing the slaughter of their population instead of negotiating and they are lying to us about what is going on!
The main issue is the airframes.
As an Australian citizen I must form the opinion that the ADF have group think, and there is no logical reason why the retired helicopters should not have been gifted to Ukraine. Perhaps on inspection the manufacturer would have found issues with maintenance which explain their poor serviceability? Nothing about our current ADF senior representatives gives me assurance that we are in good hands, that we have capabilities which are being optimised.
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
THX Senator..
Stuffing it to an ASKING Country in WAR TIME is disgraceful
SEND the AIRCRAFT!!!!!!!!!!!!Immediately
It's not war time, not for us
Have 2 recomend YOU' get some HELP, if it's not TO LATE already SUCKA👹💩 @@jamesrustles8670
They are not out problem. They dont contribute to our country
Since when Australia is in war? Or this is a wishful thinking for you?
@@justincase3426 Oh ya - CRIME’S. NO ethics or consciousness.
Please don’t travel in Europe We don’t want corrupted cowards. Bye Bye
Way to go, Senator Fawcett! Good on you for this!
Why are we deciding if they are appropriate for them if they have said they need them. Just send them!
Who cares?
Clearly you don’t. Why watch the story and waste your time on adding a non-value added comment if you don’t care?
The ADF don’t want the helicopters to go anywhere it a hole in the ground, otherwise it’d be shown that they just don’t know how to operate them. Bury the problem so it doesn’t embarrass them. I still remember the Sea Sprite joke….this is the same crap.
French Amry flew NH90 over Afghanistan and all over the worst condition in Africa without any crash.
Italy also flew NH90 in Afghanistan.
Still not one good reason why Australia wouldn't give them to ukraine, the Australian government and defence should be ashamed of themselves
Is it true the government put these aircraft up for sale last year? If they are unsafe why would the government try and sell them? The
Good on ya, Senator.
Defence has a chronic failure of not ordering the number of spares required to maintain any platform due to chronic underfunding by penny pinching accountants
Exactly right and way back at the start of MRH, the OEM suggested spares package to sustain the Australian fleet of MRH, was cut in half by Defence, this was the start of the spares issues.
This is how NZ was able to solve the issue and bought a 9th complete NH90 specifically to be used as spares as it actually worked out cheaper and so have then been able to keep on top of the "spares" issue by then taking said part off the spare frame immediately and then just ordering and replacing that Part on the spare so as not to impact the operational fleet.
This excuse of no spares doesn't exactly fly (pun intended) here either as the ADF now had 6 spare frames in the even earlier retired RAN NH90s which could/Should have then kept the army Nh90s in a flyable state🤷♂️ The fact that the RAN justification for ditching the 6 naval examples was supposedly the difficulties the small fleet number presented whereas army reasoning for NZs ability to operate their 8 NH90s satisfactorily is exactly the same, a smaller fleet🤔 These guys need to work together on their excuses at least😂😂😂
A deal had been done with the manufacturer to sell them back all the serviceable parts out of the airframes worth hundreds of millions so that the manufacturer can operate a ready spares service to the rest of the world fleet!😮😊
it's called "short-termism" it comes from hiring the same administrators who may have successfully managed supermarkets to run the Defence Ministry.
Because they would have got them working and flying not only in general but in an actual combat zone which would have been not only embarrassing for the ADF but again (AGAIN) put the decision making process of all involved in terms of these $multi-billion project failures under public scrutiny.
People should really be asking why these aircraft were dismantled so soon and the problem literally buried so quickly.🤔
Let Ukraine determine if the Taipans are suitable.... If they are begging for money and materials right now I am sure they'd be happy for anything...
Brilliant Sanator! Thank you
6:03 and what if Ukraine was able to achieve higher availability and performance? I’d suggest you’d find that fairly difficult and uncomfortable to explain now, wouldn’t it?
you want me to believe a country that has never operated this airframe would achieve higher availability then the country that has the most flight hours when said country constantly demands billions in aid?
@@lepermessiyah5823 Yes as they would have the local support, and don't need to waste time on things like gender training
@@lepermessiyah5823
Probably yes--at least that is better probability than the obvious lies of these liars.
@@WangAiHua sure m8
@@lepermessiyah5823
Glad you agree!
This current Defence leadership group makes me extremely happy l'm no longer a member of the ADF, what a pathetic bunch! I'm interested to know just who it was who decided to knock back the Ukraine request which, despite all the problems associated with the MRH, STILL wanted them. Obviously aware of the 'risks' associated with the aircraft, Ukraine still wanted them. "Oh the platform's not really suitable for AME." Clearly they think it is and let's face it, a helicopter getting wounded off the battlefield to hospital is far better none. Could you imagine the Americans or the Brits saying to us, "We don't think nuclear submarines are suitable for the Australian Navy so we're not going to sell them, to you, we're of the belief they're not the platform you need."
Crap. MRH90 - Multi Role Helicopter 90. A helicopter can be switched form troop carrying to Casevac in a relatively short time. I have served in both the RAN and ARA as a maintainer on helicopters and we would regularly switch the roll of them. The senior ranks are beating to the drum of their ALP masters.
I'd like to have played around with that, I only saw a few pictures of the stretcher fit.
You need dedicated crew and aircraft; Can use a MR for emergencies, reduced efficiency.
I don't understand the reduced efficiency part of your comment. I spent 10 years maintaining MRH/MSH90.@@R0d_1984
Thank you Senator Fawcett for exposing these clowns in Defence. 😡
If the Ukrainians say they can use them and get even 40% availability out of them, that's 15 to 18 more helicopters than they have now, and being closer to the supply chain probably a lot more. And as someone has already said, what would the CDF know about combat. The closest he has ever been is an air-conditioned room in Abu Dhabi, while our troops were slogging it out in Iraq and Afghanistan.
With respect whilst the AUSTRALIAN ARMY Generals talk Ukrainian soldiers are dying, we should be ashamed .
Nah I feel good actually. Doesnt bother me at all
The world becomes a better place day by day by that fact.
The ukrainians should just say sorry to the Russian Brothers
@@peterjenner5431what planet are you on?
Sorry for WHAT exactly?
Senetor Fawcett has the same questions been raised regarding the RAAF F18 hornets that are being decommissioned. Ukraine needs these also to protect its civillians from Russian drones and missiles
Because the Ukrainians stated the Hornets are Junk. 14 out of 42 could be made serviceable after 6 months of expensive overhaul and would have a life span of 2 years. Maintaining the aircraft would be logistically demanding, unlike the f-16's supplied by nearby Denmark and Holland.
@@deserteagle-nx1hl
Someone called them junk?--So What? That is a flimsy excuse--only suitable if you don't want to give the aircraft in the first place!
ever since the ADF took Tech's away from ordering Aircraft spares section, there has always been an issue, this is since the 1980's
Met an air force tech from Amberley air base in the 1980's. Front passenger floor of his car was littered with electronic components he had 'salvaged'. He was cutting them up and retrieving the gold from them.
What a great acquisition, heads should roll.
These senior Army delegates are quoting incorrect figures. Australia had two units (MO's) that were run by Airbus, Holsworthy and Oakey, both were consistently running at above 70% availability/serviceabilty, for the last few years, the Army run MO (Townsville) was lucky to hit 30%, fact.
How much did it cost to keep that serviceability? would Ukraine be able to cover that cost considering the billions they beg out of other countries?
@@lepermessiyah5823 Yes as they would have the local support, and don't need to waste time on things like gender training
Good lord this adf guy can’t even answer a basic question there’s something rotten going on behind the scenes here. We need ppl to go and have a look. Have they stripped the planes of parts for souvenirs already is that the problem?
Depending on how they plan the maintenance mate and I'm sure over there, it wouldn't be as regulated as here in Australia, not even close.
And there in lies the problem most people are not realising here, AUSTRALIAS programs, processes and problem solving, not the rest of the worlds. I actually have no doubt Ukraine would have got these flying effectively, with alittle kiwi help perhaps🤷♂️
Mate, don’t ever ask a woman to not over talk. You are a brave man.
She’s all smoke and mirrors.
It’s all bs. The choppers are used according to their design remit for purpose, without significant issue in many other countries. They should’ve/could’ve gone to the Ukraine. That’s also the goss amongst serving and retired military.
Hi David, I wrote to my local federal member asking for an urgent review and reversal on the decision to which he who remarked that it would be a bad look for Australia if the choppers were provided and had an accident. My response was that the Ukrainians had done the math…So whilst my query wasn’t perhaps fully appreciated, I sincerely thank you for your line of questioning which was highly intelligent and considered with the research you’d done and ability to cut to the chase with the military responses. Many thanks mate, please keep up the good work that you’re doing with trying to help Ukraine. Cheers, Graeme.
What a dick your local member is
Defence hasn’t answered my questions regarding this. I am reporting for a Ukrainian newspaper in Australia. I think the Ambassador to Australia should have asked the right questions regarding acquisition of defence equipment. There are various processes and these should have been sought. It’s clear Labor wasn’t actively trying to source weapons for Ukraine. It takes political will and it seems their member base is still controlled by Russian intelligence and interests .
Even if the Taipan fleet can't be used as helicopters etc to help wounded, can the parts from these aircraft be used to support other aircraft because it appears the Aus govt doesn't want to give to Ukraine for them to use in it's defense in this war.
Can even be used as decoys if nothing else!
My dad was a defence engineering contractor for the ADF for years, they do not know a single thing about maintaining their equipment, if they did my family wouldn’t be so well off…
It actually does not matter if the choppers were useful as an aircraft platform, Ukraine's current situation suggest that regardless of state there would be useful equipment on those aircraft that the Ukrainians would most likely adopt to their vehicles. People might not believe it, but they can use any help they can get.....
Great questioning. Well done, sir! Interesting to see military leaders reply like politicians... If Ukraine says it's good enough for them, and you say it isn't, why not send it to Ukraine and replace it at home with better ones? Why holding on to something you don't want to use yourself?!
They have been stripped too far and there is nobody left to put them back together. They were all made redundant.
Well… hand it all over to the Ukrainians and let them deal with it eh? They’ll make it work like everything else they were told was impossible.
And sadly *no-one* in Europe knows anything about putting these aircraft (built by a consortium that includes Airbus Helicopters, formerly known as *Euro*copter) back together in working condition.
The helicopter could be used as a dummy on an airfield for Russia to waste a missile stike
As an ex soldier, Angus Campbell is a disgrace and needs to be removed along with entitlements.
just give them the helicopters and stop being Knobs
Taipans must have been working with Ukraine is strong support for everyone in Ukraine and Australia very special big 💓 stronger people and god bless you all Ukraine
I've heard many generals speak, and that one lies.
As any casualty will testify, specific configuration does not matter one bit.
What about the Abrams and the F18 aircraft ?
why didn’t we think of donating the MRH90 from the moment the decision was made. This is what any thoughtful friend would have done.
59 thousand hrs flown at $46 thousand a hr to run ?????
So they claim. Seems not everybody else has the same issues however. Curious huh?
yea but the bean counters also assign >$450/hr for a CPL techo to maintain the aircraft. Now add a a few troops to do the work and maybe and inspection from a SGT and suddenly work cost >$1500 per hour plus parts.
What if I told you that number is well below the real one?
@@aussietroll7873Haha yea, if you think NZ is paying that much on their budget then you would be dreaming! Either they would be sitting in hangers and only flown on the weekends or there would have to be a cake sale to fund them😂
Shows incompetence at the top of the defence force, is marles telling them what to say
Well done Senator!
Whose nose is out of joint in terms of Australian military personnel if we were to fast track this helicopter debacle.?
Ukraine is at war , why not just send them to Ukraine immediately?
Were not these helicopters used/available for evac in Australian fires and or floods, this has bungle written all over it and the Army does not come across with conviction on the point they are trying to make.
Can't believe all the stooges here calling for Australia to give Ukraine these choppers, As an Aussie I do not support this, give them nothing and mind our own business
Dear David Fawcett , I thank you for putting this on TH-cam for public consumption.
The REAL question is, what did the ADF do so wrong while operating a helicopter that others have been flying successfully across the world for years?!
There's no excuse for NOT giving them to the Ukrainians.
Senator Fawcett Thank you for the dogged and well prepared questioning! How can we justify burying the helicopters when wounded personnel can be evacuated with these helicopters. One day we may be in the same position, and will be told sorry we want to bury an asset as we have decided that it doesn't suit your needs...wow unbelievable !!!
As an Australian I'm so ashamed!! Send Ukraine the helicopters!! And the shipment of coal they requested 6 Months ago!!
And anything else that we can!!
Senator David Fawcet would make a great Australian prime minister .
Senator with respect, there is one country that would be more suitable for MH90 Taipans and that is New Zealand.
The reason is, the RNZAF has 8 Nh90s, the very same air frame as the MH90. NZ has been successful in operating them and maintaining them (as mentioned). If I may suggest, even 4 MH90s would ideal in building the Trans Tasman relationship. The will give the RNZAF 3 flights in which will complete the squadron that operates them.
Furthermore, for the last 20 years the NZDF has suffered from neglect from successive governments that have 'kicked the can down the road' only being relevant for a photo op. The front line staff do their best with what they have got. By giving NZ parts and additional airframes would significantly help in maintaining any future ANZAC Joint Task Group.
On a side note, please keep the pressure on NZ to maintain a defence force with relevance.
Thanks for taking the time to read this...
Well, Senator!
Have you spoken directly with the pilots? No.
Because they will tell you that aircraft has had problems since day 1.
Think about that one.
And once more, who's going to train Ukraine on how to fly a defective aircraft anyway.
Absolutely 💯 true.I flew in them 13 times and twice we got grounded.The pilot im mates with was disgusted when we got rid if Blackhawk, and got out now looking at going back.
Well these same pilots are flying Mi-8 , so worst case is they will do very well in them. A very modern helicopter platform with problems that are solvable by any competent air crew.
Yes, who on Earth is going to train Ukraine to fly these European designed helicopters? It's not like there are any European countries successfully operating these aircraft with a better reliability than Australia.
Just send em... whats wrong with you guys ...seriously
Senator Fawcette, Well researched, on point logical questioning, a pity all our politicians aren't up to the above Australian Senator standards 😉
This makes me feel ashamed to be Australian and a labour voter. They also need attack helicopters due to the fact that they are using rescue helicopters in place of attack helicopters. Just shut up and give them to UKRAINE. It sounds like ADF made no attempt to give them to Ukraine. Labour has lost my votes GLORY to UKRAINE
Thank you Senator. I am a Ukrainian who serves Australia as a police officer of one of the states. I am heavily involved in what’s happening in Ukraine and I am grateful for what Australia has done but shaking my head with disappointment that Ukraine could not be given the aircraft and let us Ukrainians worry about the safety aspect and operation without the application of ADF’s alleged issues with the aircraft.
Why were certain spares not ordered? Because they were not considered to be an often replaced item.
Spares are purchased on advice and flying aircraft designed to operate in small areas often means we need parts not considered replacement parts when operated in smaller countries.
As A New Zealander its always good to hear Aussies speaking well of us. Is the army General deliberately making it complicated? Asking for a friend you understand.
As an American who saw this come up on my TH-cam feed and decided to watch it, I took an interest in it and my first reaction was very positive towards the idea that the Australian Defense Forces would give these Taipans to Ukraine for CasVac purposes. But after doing a bit of research on it it seems as though the Taipans have been plagued by design and maintenance and safety problems which would prove very difficult for the Ukrainians to overcome were they to try to use them for combat CasVac purposes. Apparently the military has known about these problems for quite some time and decided all the way back in 2022 to basically decommission them and purchase and use US made UH60m Blackhawk Helicopters instead.
So it was already in the works to have the Taipans decommissioned over safety concerns because it was known that those helicopters weren't safe.
It totally makes sense to me then why the generals answering Fawcett's questions would be very careful about how they made their statements in regards to the "suitability" of those aircraft for Ukrainian military needs. I dont think anybody would want to see faulty or potentially dangerous medvac helicopters sent to Ukraine just for them to fail while in use.
Also, I don't think its altogether fair to blame the army generals for a slow response on the question since the same generals were brought before the government to answer for when a Taipan helicopter crashed 7 months ago. You would think Fawcett would have done a bit more homework on the reason why those helicopters had beem grounded in the first place insteas of insulting the generals in front of him for not giving him the answer he wanted to hear.
As someone who works in lower level government, I completely understand the politics involved with procurement and its often a damn nightmare, especially in regards to tax dollars.
There's so many seemingly stupid little procurement rules and policies, there's red tape around everything, ethics rules, procurement procedures. Its a damn nightmare. It takes a very long time for procurement and decommissioning procedures to take place because at the heart of the process is government trying to make sure that everything that is procured or decommissioned is being done in a financially responsible and justifiable way.
The other nightmare is that budgetary concerns and limitations often force agencies to purchase sub-par equipment. Agencies are often tasked with alot of responsibilities but do not match with the level of funding to support the people in those roles with proper equipment.
I guarantee that thats how it works with the military. It takes forever to get new equipment and when you get a piece of crap piece of equipment its almost impossible to get rid of. Something literally has to fall apart on it or it has to blow up first in order to get politicians to decide to put any money towards it.
And I dont blame taxpayers for wanting politicians to be penny pinchers but God-damn sometimes you just gotta go out and buy the right shit the first damn time no matter what it costs.
There's plenty of damn waste that takes place in government but in my time its equally true that there's an army of hard working government employees who make miracles happen with substandard equipment on a daily basis that more or less makes up for it.
The real waste in government in my opinion 9 out of 10 times is bad procurement. Buying a bad piece of equipment that has systemic and chronic problems ends up costing way more money than lazy government workers. Yeah, there's some lazy pos out there but to be honest the equipment thats out there being used by government workers to perform their jobs is really old old crap that should have been thrown away a long time ago.
Its good to see Aussie's having good debate along these lines tho. I believe in government accountability and I like to see and hear from both sides because it keeps everybody on the up and up. Much respect to both sides.
14:10 Ah! Moriarty! I feel an evasive non-committal political-waffle answer coming on…
God help us, ADF top brass 💩💩💩
They prefer giving our money to money launderers.
We have given so much to Ukraine ,our hospital could use that money
What for?
They're asking to give aircraft over right now, not money.
Send the Taipans to a European NATO country for a refurb