I'm posting to this thread because the other one has a borderline-cancerous title.
I think it's way overdue for the vendor to flog the Chinook.
Awhile back I was posting to a thread that was comparing the Romeo 'hawk to the Hip as potential acquisitions,
and I pointed out that it was apples to oranges: that a better matchup was Hip vs.
Chinook, and that even with
the payload-class advantage, Hip was a truly retarded choice compared to the 'hawk.
http://defenseph.net/drp/index.php?topic=4115.msg13448#msg13448Heavy-lift rotary wing is sorely needed in a country with our geography, whether we're talking about HADR or
frontier infrastructure... never mind .mil administrative/tactical movements of men and materiel.
PH is fortunate that Boeing needs to shore up its bottom line, which in turn relaxes the normal objections that
the US State Department (+ others) would have over transfers of .mil hardware to us --I'm sure everyone here
has had ample exposure to the sort of horses
hit that the DSCA regularly plasters on (
"...the proposed sale of
xxxxxxxxx and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region" ad absurdum) whenever the current
US administration DOESN'T want to transfer .mil goods/services to a supposed MNNA like us.
That said, it costs next to nothing for Boeing to use the press like this, to stoke Boeing shareholders.It would, however, cost a fortune for PH acquire Chinook.
Depending on scale of purchase: about US$40M each with sides & a soda, but CPFH is a reasonable US$6,900-ish
when loaned/extended (US 2018) as a billable to friendlies in need, and DCPFH is only about US$4,600 (RAF 2018)
--the latter is cost independent of cross-system expenses, such as will bloat the taxpayer-billable operating costs
of the aircraft for a HIGHLY cross-networked operator like the US Army.
CH-47 DCPFH can be cheaper than MH-60x, partly for lugging fewer systems, and the 'hawk (as I'd pointed out in
the prior thread) actually comes out cheaper, and more importantly, massively more reliable than Hip. Its potential
for cross-country electoral campaigning is undeniable, and might help push it through both Houses of Congress (if
OOP even wants to go through Congress --OOP annual discretionary is more than enough) far more easily than
the other bird Boeing is pimping in that article...
I really, really don't like Apache for the Philippines, though.
I think I might dislike it even more than Hip, and not for any lack of performance/capability.
JM2, YMMV, TANSTAAFL.
https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2018/2018_b_c.pdfhttps://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/osprey-vs-chinook-cost-vs-capabilities/for a quick dip into the nuances of arriving at CPFH:
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a423135.pdf
