My experience & opinion of Eurotorp seems to be justified with the experience of the Royal Australian Navy & the MU90. The Indian Navy should definitely go with the MK54.
Why? Because Aussies are too cheap to fund integration for airbourne platforms?
No, because the weapon has failed to perform to requirements and has proven to be expensive to field. The battery refurbishment costs alone were a big surprise. Why integrate a weapon that has failed to perform when the MK54 is already fully integrated on the 60R (and the 70B)? The RAN is already geared up to support the MK46 and the MK54 uses the same OTTO fuel system so a big savings in training & logistics. Also, Eurotorp requires integrators to use their equipment to integrate the MU90 into the mission system of the aircraft thus adding cost & weight to the aircraft. I believe the RAN made the logical choice given the circumstances.Why? Because Aussies are too cheap to fund integration for airbourne platforms?
They must be pretty high requirements, what little testing the ADF has done shows:
We have fired the thing over 200 times and have success rates well into the 90th percentile. Australia is mad it is over budget and doesn't want to spend the money to integrate it to airbourne platforms or buy more test samples. It isn't a lack of failing requirements except that of cash.
@Armand2REP - you must be closer to this than I am. My info comes from former contacts in the RAN who basically said the weapon cannot perform all the capabilities that Eurotorp claims. Being a digital torpedo, like the MK54, these new weapons offer a myriad of new features that the old analog torps do not. My info indicates some of these new features do no operate correctly. Even with the info you stated above, the cost of the weapon is more than the MK54, the maintenance costs appear to be higher and the integration costs (both non recurring and recurring) would amount to several million dollars per aircraft when amortized over the 16 60R aircraft. I base this estimate on my experience in integrating the Eurotorp A244 Mod3 torpedo into the S-70B for the Singapore Navy. EUROTORP is very expensive for both basic weapon cost and support and to integrate the weapon to a new aircraft. I can also state that the MK54 has been extensively tested by the USN and has been updated to address all known issues from those tests. I have a much higher confidence in the testing Raytheon & the USN have performed than the testing done by Eurotorp. Just my personal opinion based on my work with both companies. I cannot fault the RAN for deciding not to spend the funds to obtain a capability they already have with the MK54. Also, I would expect the P-3 Orion aircraft would be much easier to retrofit to carry the MK54 than the MU90 for the previous reasons I have already provided.
India would have to decide on acquiring the Osprey or any larger Helicopter at this stage. Just make the design in large enough to except aircraft that large if it decide to adopt them later on.
What i meant was that its too big for our ships and current carrier.Really!
You can't deny that that the Osprey offers a great deal of advantages. Which, give it the ability to lift large loads @ speed and distance. Yet, land like a helicopter. Such an aircraft has unless possibilities......
Interesting concept........Yet, wouldn't its small size make it extremely vulnerable to Anti Aircaft Damage???
, by that time Navy & others will ask Mk2 version which will take another 10 years
All EU weapons and platforms are hella expensive, they quite simply lack adequate orders or volumes of production to offer competitive pricing.
But is can replace our smaller heli's and but i always felt that smaller the target, its more agile and harder to hit.
Here , X2 is like motorcycle(Max takeoff weight 3600kg) in front of a truck(V22, max take-off weight 28000 kg), you can't compare the fuel efficiency between a bike and a truck as such, also for X2 all the claims have yet to be verified in real life condition, A Heli design can never be more efficient then an aircraft like design in cruising. Similarly an Aircraft can not match the hover(on small area) efficiency of a true Hali in the same category.
Don't confuse the S-70i with the S-70B, two very different A/C. S-70i is the international version of the Blackhawk. V-22 is a very different A/C as you noted. Not suited for an MRH role.
