Wednesday, March 11, 2015

The Philippine Air Force Gets Dornier UH-1D Helicopters, and Technical Clarifications on the Project's Alleged Issues

The recent articles by the Manila Times reported by Joel M. Sy Egco circulating lately regarding the irregularities on the Department of National Defense's (DND) acquisition of refurbished UH-1 helicopters has caught MaxDefense's eye due to a lot of errors and total disregard of facts. As the topic was discussed in our Facebook page, MaxDefense noticed a lot of its readers have difficulty understanding the issue, or understanding the errors on the allegations made by the Manila Times.


The Dornier UH-1D Super Delta upgraded version while undergoing flight testing at Clark Air Base, Pampanga. The Fastfin system is visible from this angle.
Photo by Tim Q. Maceren, taken from his FB page.


One of the UH-1D delivered by Rice Aircraft Services undergoing testing at Clark Air Base.
Photo taken by Tim Q. Maceren, taken from his FB page.



So, it was decided that MaxDefense will answer some of the technical issues, as well as obvious issues in this blog entry. MaxDefense suggests that further research be made by its readers to fully understand the issue and avoid bias.

So, first of all, we discuss the product itself, the Bell Model 204 & 205, otherwise known as the UH-1 series in US military language.


Short History of The Bell UH-1 Iroquois Helicopter:
The Bell Model 204 Helicopter
The Bell Helicopter company produced the Model 204 helicopter, with the first prototype flown in the late 1950s. As the US military accepted the helicopter, it was initially called the HU-1A, officially named "Iroquois" after an American Indian tribe, but HU-1A was pronounced "Huey" which is its more famous name. When the US military changed its aircraft naming standard, the HU-1A became the UH-1A powered by the Lycoming T53-L-1A engine. Bell later on improved the helicopter by increasing the engine size and power using the Lycoming T53-L-5, and lengthening the fuselage to accommodate more passengers, which was later called the UH-1B. 


The Bell UH-1A Iroquois, which is the original name of the Huey. Take note of the short fuselage as compared to what Huey helicopters the Philippine Air Force uses.
Photo taken from Wikimedia.



The US military used the UH-1B for utility and armed missions, and this is where Bell addressed aerodynamic deficiency of armed UH-1B by replacing the engine again with the Lycoming T53-L-11, increasing the fuel capacity, and installing an improved rotor system. This was later on called the UH-1C, a gunship variant with rocket and gun pods installed. Further improvements of the UH-1C to increase power resulted to the UH-1M. The US Marine Corps have their own variant of the UH-1B/C called the UH-1E, with differences on the avionics used. Further developments of the UH-1C for the US Air Force resulted to the UH-1F, which used the General Electric T58-GE-3 engine, but only a few units were built. Many other minor variants were released.


The Bell Model 205 Helicopter
With the US military wanting to have a helicopter that can carry more troops, Bell proposed to stretch the UH-1B by 41 inches, enabling them to increase the seating capacity of the helicopter to 15 people. Modifications were also made on the doors and windows in accordance to the changes Bell made to the design. The rotors and tail boom were also lengthened, and the engine of the UH-1C was used. This ultimately became what was known as the Bell UH-1D. 


The UH-1H, like those used by the Philippine Air Force (above), are part of the Model 205 series.
Photo taken from Airliners.net, photo copyright @ Carlos A. Morillo Doria.


In 1966, Bell again made modifications on the UH-1D, by replacing the engine with the Lycoming T53-L-13 with 1,400shp, and shifting the pitot tube from the nose to the roof of the helicopter to avoid damage during landings. This was later known as the Bell UH-1H, the most famous of the entire Bell UH-1 series. A civilian version was also made, under the name Model 205A with minor differences including a different position of the tail rotor.


Foreign and Licensed-Built Bell 205 / UH-1:
Due to its popularity, several countries chose the Bell 205 series for their own military and civilian applications. Industrially capable countries like Italy, Germany, Japan, and Taiwan all manufactured their requirement for UH-1 helicopters.

Italy is among the most successful in manufacturing the Bell 205 locally, under a joint venture between Bell Helicopters and Italian aviation company Agusta as the Agusta Bell. They used the designation AB.205, which is similar to the UH-1H. Agusta Bell continued to produce several other variants of the Model 205, and went on to produce their version of the Model 212, 214 and 412 known as the AB.212, AB.214 and AB.412, respectively.

Germany was also able to acquire a license to build the Bell UH-1 helicopter by Dornier Flugzeugwerke. This would later be called the Dornier UH-1D, and in spite of having the "D" series label, is actually standard UH-1H. According to online sources, more than 350 units were built from 1967 to 1981,and majority have undergone Service Life Extension Program and upgraded avionics for night capability. 






Japan built its UH-1 series, with the license given to Fuji Heavy Industries. Originally they built the UH-1H series, but later on made in improved version called the UH-1J, with a more powerful 1,800shp Allison T53-L-703 turboshaft, night vision goggle cockpit compatibility, infrared countermeasures and vibration reduction system.


The Japanese-built UH-1J variant of the Huey. Based on its improvements, it may have similar features as the Philippine Air Force's UH-1H Huey II.
Photo taken from Wikimedia.

Later Improved Models Based on the Bell Model 205 Helicopter:
Bell later on came up with further improvement on the UH-1H specifically for the Canadian Armed Forces by making it a twin engine variant instead of the single engine used for the Model 204 and Model 205. It was designated as the Bell 212 series in the civilian sector, and was called the UH-1N Twin Huey in US military service. It used the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6T engines and was first introduced in 1970.

Bell also released an improved Model 212, called the Model 214, which uses the more powerful Lycoming LTC4B-8 engine while retaining the twin-blade rotor, and was called the Huey Plus. Another development was made by Bell by using a 4-bladed rotor, which later on became the Bell Model 412. Its current variant, the Bell 412EP, was chosen recently by the Philippine Air Force to become its latest Combat Utility Helicopter model and is expected to replace the UH-1 series in its inventory.


A CH-146 Griffon of the Canadian Armed Forces together with a UH-1H Huey of the Philippine Air Force. The Griffon is actually a militarized Bell 412EP helicopter customized according to the needs of the Canadians.

The latest iteration of the UH-1 was again made by Bell, this time by working again on the UH-1N design by lengthening its cabin, increasing the engine power and size using General Electric T700 engines used in the Sikorsky S-70/UH-60 Black Hawk, and having a 4-bladed rotor for improved lift and performance. This resulted to the UH-1Y Venom, currently the combat utility helicopter of the US Marine Corps. This variant is still in production until now.



The latest variant of the UH-1 series is the Bell UH-1Y Venom, which is currently used by the US Marine Corps.
Photo taken from Airliners.net, copyright @ Kevin Whitehead.




Background on the DND's UH-1 Helicopter Acquisition Project:

This project was regarding the acquisition of 21 refurbished UH-1 helicopters for the Philippine Air Force. 13 units will be standard models, while 8 will be upgraded models. All are expected to be used and refurbished by the winning bidder before delivery. 

The PAF decided to acquire more UH-1 helicopters as funding to acquire new helicopters are scarce, with the government only providing enough to acquire 8 new combat utility helicopters from 2013 until 2017. With only a budget of more than a billion pesos, the acquisition of more UH-1, being the PAF's premier combat utility helicopter model, was still found to be the best solution, as the platoform still have potential for effective use for another 10 to 15 years after proper maintenance and continued refurbishing and modernization. 

Aside from this, there is an urgent need to beef up the helicopter fleet as many of the PAF's UH-1H helicopters have not entered refurbishing works and modernization, ending up as non-flying assets after reaching a certain period. Although there are plans to refurbish current PAF helicopters, it might take long before this can fully take place. Acquiring readily available units is still considered the fastest way to acquire additional assets.


An illustration of the fastfin system as installed on a Canadian Armed Forces CH-146 Griffon (Bell 412)
Photo taken from Canadian American Strategic Review website.


Apparently, the units delivered by Rice Aircraft Services are German-made UH-1D helicopters by Dornier. According to MaxDefense sources, 8 are to be upgraded to "Super Delta" standard, which is said to be almost similar to the Huey II the PAF is currently using. It features a more powerful engine, a fastfin system, night vision goggle-compatible cockpit, and other features not present on the standard UH-1D or UH-1H. The remaining 13 will be standard "Delta" models.



A UH-1D undergoing testing at Clark Air Base. Note the fastfin installed at the tail end of the helicopter. This could be one of the UH-1D Super Delta, which is an upgraded version of the UH-1D.
Photo taken by Tim Q. Maceren, taken from his FB page.




Answering the Technical Allegations of the Report:
MaxDefense will be answering the news report released last March 8, 2015 by Manila Times in a part-by-part manner. You may refer to the link below to see the sources of the topic outlines:

"Choppers bought for P1.2B defective"
http://www.manilatimes.net/choppers-bought-for-p1-2b-defective/168066/



1. "Delivery of Old, Refurbished Units":
The project was meant to acquire used and refurbished UH-1 helicopters from the very beginning. The UH-1 series has long been out of production with Bell or any of its license-production holders like Agusta, Dornier, Fuji Heavy Industries and AEDC. So it is already expected that the helicopters would not be new due to unavailability of any new UH-1 helicopters.



2. "Contract Was for UH-1H Helicopters":
This is completely untrue. The project was actually called "Acquisition of UH-1 Helicopter Project", without specifying the exact variant. So the bidder could actually bid using other variants of the UH-1 series aside from the standard UH-1H being used by the PAF. 


The document above used by the DND to invite bidders for the project already shows that the project is for REFURBISHED UH-1 HELICOPTERS. There was no emphasis on the "Hotel" variant as well. So there is no violation on this part. There are many other documents on the bidding that is available to the public at the DND-BAC's website.
Document snipped from DND-BAC website.


But does that mean the PAF will accept any variant? No. The PAF already have extensive experience with the UH-1H, and would definitely prefer the UH-1H or any similar variant. This would make the maintenance, training, spare parts acquisition, and parts recycling possible. Which brings us to the next question.



3. "The Age of the UH-1D is older than the UH-1H...":
As discussed earlier, the German-made Dornier UH-1D were built between 1967 and 1981. The US-made Bell UH-1H were built starting 1966 until the late 1970s. In general, the German UH-1D and the US UH-1H are almost the same age. But this is also an inaccurate way to determine the age of an aircraft. 


Two Dornier UH-1D helicopters used by the German military.


The most important detail is, when was the specific aircraft manufactured? It is impossible to compare the age of aircraft without this detail, and by just using a 15-year range. With this system, we might be comparing a 1968 model UH-1H with a 1975 model UH-1D. Based on the range alone, it would only be possible to generalize the age of the Dornier UH-1D and the Bell UH-1H as on the same range, +/- a few years.

Technically, the Dornier UH-1D and the Bell UH-1H are one and the same. This can be verified in numerous online sources, as well as by helicopter databases like helis.com. Dornier obtained the license to build the Bell Model 205 initially based on Bell's UH-1D, but opted to use a more powerful and newer engine, the Lycoming T53-L-13. The same engine was being considered by Bell to install on their own UH-1D for improved lift performance during those times, and when they eventually used the same engine a year later, the new variant was then officially called the UH-1H. 

Thus, the UH-1D made by Dornier is essentially one and the same as the UH-1H made by Bell. Also, Dornier's UH-1D is far superior to Bell's UH-1D, in the same manner that the Bell UH-1H is superior to the Bell UH-1D. 



4. "UH-1D are not reliable and their parts are obsolete...":
Being new doesn't necessarily mean reliable. Although newer products tend to be generally more reliable than older products, using this in a general statement like that of the report can be considered as totally inaccurate and misleading statement.

Since the Dornier UH-1D is essentially one and the same as the Bell UH-1H, maintenance and parts for both helicopters are the same too. MaxDefense sources indicated, and several online sources also confirmed, that parts for the UH-1D and UH-1H are actually interchangeable. Although Dornier probably does not make new spare parts for these helicopters, Bell does, and Bell can provide parts and support for both helicopters, aside from the fact that both can use the same original and compatible aftermarket parts from other companies but are accepted by Bell itself, which means the supply chain is not affected by the difference in the helicopter's designations. This was confirmed by the DND's Fernando Manalo an interview a few days ago. If the UH-1H parts is acceptable to the PAF, then the same is true for the Dornier UH-1D's. There are also many companies with large stocks of spare parts for most Model 205/UH-1 helicopters, as aside from the Philippines, there are still a lot of countries using the UH-1 helicopter, including the US military, national guard, and police forces. Examples include Dakota Air Parts, Timken, AirTechnology Engines Inc., and many others. 

It would be worth noting that the Philippine Air Force actually uses both the Bell UH-1H and civilian Model 205A, as well as the newer Bell 412EP. It also had experience in operating the a very few Bell 212s in the past, all of which are different from one another. But this did not negatively affected the supply chain of the PAF as well. 

(Add to that the possibility that Japan might provide the PAF some of their Fuji Heavy Industries-built UH-1H and UH-1J, will that become another issue that the media will come up again in the future?)


The PAF's 505th Search and Rescue Squadron operates around 8 Bell 205A helicopters, similar to the photo shown above. These have minor differences with the UH-1H, but is said to be less similar to the UH-1H, as compared between the Dornier UH-1D to the Bell UH-1H.
The PAF previously operated the twin-engine Bell 212 / UH-1N Twin Huey, although they are now said to be stored and there are currently no plans to put them back in service.
Photo taken from Wikimedia.
Another Huey derivative being operated by the PAF is the Bell 412EP, currently used by the 250th Presidential Airlift Wing, although the PAF's 205th Helicopter Wing is expected to get a few within this and next year as Bell Helicopter Textron delivers the first batch before November 2015.
Photo taken from Wikimedia.


5. "If the DND awarded the contract to a supplier...and those helicopters should have been used during the Mamasapano incident..." 
This is a non-technical phrase that MaxDefense could not stand to leave unanswered. The PAF, with or without these new helicopters, currently has air assets that could have been used to assist the Philippine National Police Special Action Force (PNP-SAF) commandos during the operation in Mamasapano, Maguindanao on January 25, 2015. It was assumed by the reporter's so-called source that the PAF doesn't have any air assets available at all! 

It was clear that the military, more so the PAF, was not given any instruction from higher ops to use their air assets to assist the PNP-SAF in any way before and during the operation, be it for close air support, insertion, extraction, and rescue. So the 21 new helicopters would not be of any help to the PNP-SAF even if they were delivered before January 25. This statement by the report's source, now called "Joey" by a later article posted on March 11, 2015, actually reveals a lot on his real intention for bringing out this issue to the spotlight. Being wrong on technical matters can be acceptable if the source is a non-technical person. But bringing this out in poor reasoning just to give more reason to grill the project is uncalled for.



6. "Helicopters delivered....were not yet operational...":
This was confirmed by the DND recently, as reported by the Inquirer on March 9, 2015. Only 8 of a total 21 helicopters were accepted by the PAF, while the rest are still being assembled, checked, tested, and will undergo acceptance later on. The DND already confirmed that they have given Rice Aircraft Services and its partner Eagle Copter up to April 15 to complete the turnover for the balance units. So there is nothing wrong with this.


Some of the UH-1D helicopters are still awaiting completion of assembly, so it is obvious that they are not yet flying.
Photo taken by Tim Q. Maceren, taken from his FB page.



7. "President [Benigno] Aquino [3rd] was hoodwinked into believing that the aircraft delivered were UH-1H models..."
The President previously said in his previous public statements including previous State of the Nation Addresses that the helicopters coming are refurbished UH-1 helicopters, not specifically UH-1H helicopters. 

Here is the link to the President's previous SONA wherein he stated that UH-1 helicopters are being acquired. So far the text only says "UH-1", without the "H".



8. "The age of the UH-1D is older than the UH-1H....":
This was answered in Item # 3.



A Dornier UH-1D used by the German armed forces.
Photo taken from Airliners.net, copyright @ Jakub Nanowski/EPGD Spotters.



9. "...the manufacturer [Dornier] is no longer existing and no helicopter parts are being manufactured specifically for the UH-1D...."
Although Dornier has already folded years ago after a failed venture with American company Fairchild (yes, the manufacturer of the A-10 Thunderbolt), they were able to successfully turn-over the rights of Dornier products production, sales, and support to RUAG Aviation, a Swiss company with facilities in Germany and many other countries. They even continue building some Dornier aircraft products until now like the Do 288 New Generation. Their website also indicates that they provide Life Cycle Support Services to Dornier military aircraft like the UH-1D and Alpha Jet. 

As with the spare parts, this was answered in Item # 4.





The DND, through its undersecretary Mr. Fernando Manalo, confirmed a few days ago that at least 8 units were already accepted by the PAF. MaxDefense sources confirmed this information, and that PAF pilots were dilligently doing their job to see if the helicopters are indeed in tip-top shape before they signed the reports prior to release of acceptance papers. 

Also, Pinoy Aviators, a group page in Facebook with members from the civilian and military aviation community, confirmed that a batch of helicopters were formally accepted this morning (March 11, 2015). These are composed of 2 standard "Delta" and 4 "Super Delta" upgraded helicopters. Source apparently came from one of the PAF Huey pilots included in the testing phase. It is unclear though if this is in addition to earlier reported acceptance of Delta and Super Delta helicopters.


MaxDefense is unsure if there are indeed corruption issues involved in the acquisition of these German birds. But MaxDefense believes that all the technical issues raised by Manila Times recently unto the project might either be a product of intentional or unintentional misinformation, poor understanding of the product, lack of research, or just laziness. A short hop on Google can give the writer tons of information on the helicopters. Using these reasons to build-up a case against the project is uncalled for, and probably have other intentions that are directed to the people involved in the project and the President himself. We will not be touching those issues, and we will leave that to the DND, PAF, Rice Aircraft Services, and the government to answer.


To cap-off, here is a video posted in Youtube during the testing of the helicopters, uploaded by RecSpin.com:


During tests in the US prior to delivery to the Philippines:






During testing @ Clark Air Base, Pampanga:






===========
UPDATES:
===========
March 16, 2015:
The Manila Times has again posted a new article, part of their continued accusation against the UH-1 acquisition deal between the DND and Rice Aircraft Services-Eagle Copter venture. The link is provided HERE.

This time, the article indicated that there are officers from the Philippine Air Force that are covering-up the deal, and that the PAF only showed 2 helicopters to the media during the presentation to the press last week. News video from UNTV is available HERE.

This is a serious allegation made by the source, the so-called "Joey" in Manila Times report by Mr. Joel Sy Egco, as even if they were unnamed by the report, these officers have confirmed to the public via media reports that the helicopters are working perfectly. This includes those in the posted video news report above, Lt. Col. Enrico Canaya, Director, Public Information Office, PAF; and Maj. Aristedes Galang, Operations Officer, 210th Tactical Training Squadron, PAF. It may also include Capt. Bryan Dofie, Huey test pilot of the PAF, who shared information in Pinoy Aviators Facebook page that all UH-1D accepted by the PAF are working in perfect order. There are many unnamed officers who is affected by this allegation.

What MaxDefense is curious to know is, how come these PAF officers, who themselves will be using the said helicopters in their day to day work as pilots, will risk theirs and their friends and colleague's lives to accept the helicopters and confirm that they are working perfectly? MaxDefense does not personally know these officers, but who is more believable at this point in time, "Joey" & Manila Times, or the pilots & PAF? How about the enlisted men who are among those involved in the testing, does the allegation involve them as well?


Another point of discussion is the allegation that only 2 helicopters are flying because out of all those accepted, only 2 helicopters can fly. As previously said and even emphasized to MaxDefense's recent Facebook reply to Mr. Sy Egco, MaxDefense will definitely need to correct the errors in military technology information. And although this is not directly a MilTech issue, continuous monitoring of the issue can actually debunk may of the accusations.

During the Media Presentation, only 2 UH-1D helicopters were shown. The video below shows the 2 helicopters:




Both are actually standard model UH-1D, with body number 502 and 186. If these are the only ones flying, then how come there are photos and videos of UH-1D Super Deltas flying scattered around the internet and social media sites? See the photo below from Mr. Tim Maceren:


Photo copyright @ Tim Maceren.



This is one of the UH-1D Super Delta upgraded helicopters. Although the body number is not yet painted as of this photo, this is definitely not among those shown to the media. So that makes it 3 flying aircraft. Also, the Manila Times reported that there are actually 4 UH-1D in Villamor Air Base that day. So how did the 3rd and 4th helicopter reach Villamor Air Base in Pasay City from Clark Air Base in Pampanga?

The presence of a photo of a 3rd unit flying, plus the presence of 4 UH-1D in Villamor Air Base makes the report from Manila Times wrong. We have not yet even included many other aircraft that are already reported accepted and working/flying in very good condition by MaxDefense and other sources.

With time moving, it would be best if the PAF can show that the aircraft they accepted are flying, which according to MaxDefense sources, is happening soon. Meanwhile, with Mr. Sy Egco indicating that "Joey" is coming out soon, let's see what's in store from his allegations.




==========
UPDATES:
==========
April 1, 2015:

The Philippine Daily Inquirer posted on their website a video wherein Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin and AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Pio Catapang took a ride on one of the recently accepted Dornier UH-1D helicopters. This is the standard model, which can easily be identified by not having the Fastfin system. This was after the formal acceptance ceremonies of the Airbus Military-CASA C-295M tactical transport aircraft from Airbus this week.

The link is provided below:

LOOK: Gazmin, Catapang ride UH-1D chopper



==========
April 11, 2015:

MaxDefense noticed that the sources of accusations against the UH-1D acquisition is either using 2 different aliases, or are 2 different people.


  1. Manila Times' source, a.k.a. "Joey", was defined by their latest report as a "he", or a male. 
  2. Meanwhile, GMA News' source, only known as "Source", can be heard in an interview with a lady's voice. 
  3. ABS-CBN's source, a.k.a. "Alex", was interviewed with a distorted voice which will not allow listeners to determine his/her actual voice. But the report disclosed that the supplier is accusing "Alex" of extortion. 
  4. In a report by the Tribune, Rice Aircraft Services Inc. (RASI) named a certain Rhodora Alvarez, an employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) as the person extorting the company. 

So the question now: is BIR's Rhodora Alvarez = Alex = Joey?



MaxDefense is trying to make a database of the Dornier UH-1Ds that are part of the 21-helicopter deal with the DND and PAF. So far MaxDefense was able to do a partial list, but further data needs to be added. If there are people who can assist, please PM me in the MaxDefense @ Facebook page.

==========
April 13, 2015:

For those insisting that the Dornier UH-1D is older than the Bell UH-1H. Here is a sample of Manufacturer's Serial Number (MSN) plate from a Bell UH-1H and a Dornier UH-1D. It indicates the serial number of the aircraft as well as the accepted date (in month and year) for release from production.

Here is the Bell UH-1H:
Photo taken from Scramble.nl.

And here is from a Dornier UH-1D:


Photo taken from Scramble.nl.


If you look at the "Accepted" portion at the lower right portion of the plates of both aircraft, you can see that the Bell UH-1H sample was accepted on "11-68", or November 1968. The Dornier UH-1D sample has an accepted date of "8/70", or August 1970.

This only proves that the Dornier UH-1D is not an older model than the Bell UH-1H, but were actually from almost the same timeline. This specific Dornier UH-1D sample is even younger by 2 years than the Bell UH-1H sample!

If you are still in doubt and have access to the helicopters or have friends/contacts with the Philippine Air Force, try to ask them a photo of the MSN plate located in the helicopter's cockpit. It is near thr pilot's foot area, on the left hand side of the central control panel and is visible from the outside.



==========
April 18, 2015:

Manila Times released a news report saying that the deal between Rice Aircraft Services - Eagle Copter joint venture and the Department of National Defense has been "axed", and only 7 aircraft were accepted by the Philippine Air Force. MaxDefense's sources also confirmed that there are indeed 7 helicopters already passed testing and accepted into service with the Philippine Air Force. It is unconfirmed though if the how many are Super Delta standards among the 7 accepted units.

Since the source of this news is questionable, MaxDefense is still verifying the report with other media organizations and from people involved in the deal.

The link on the news report can be accessed HERE.

If this is true, it would be a loss for the Philippine Air Force. Sources confirmed that aside from the 7 helicopters already with the PAF, another 6 helicopters already passed the acceptance test by the PAF several weeks ago, and are only awaiting for the PAF to accept them. While the balance 8 helicopters have already undergone internal testing by RASI and are only awaiting for the PAF to test them. With only 7 helicopters accepted, the PAF will not meet its required numbers, and according to MaxDefense sources, there are no immediate alternatives available that can catch the deal's downfall.


==========


97 comments:

  1. Holy crap!!!

    They make a contract without determined the specification of the UH-1!!!

    As much as Philippine can wish or prefer which type UH-1 that they want, there is no LEGAL BOND/OBLIGATION for the supplier to provide it with the type that the Philippine wish. Unless the wining supplier already mentioned the type at the proposal/tender document when they bid.

    In fact if the Philippine reject it, they can be considered to breach the contract. Maybe this is the reason the Philippine gov say there is no problem as they fear to breach the contract.

    Is there any info about the penalty if one of the side breach the contract.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct. But here's the catch. The DND can indicate in the technical specifications the requirements it needs for the UH-1 helicopter. If the performance values (ie. engine power, lift capacity, etc), accessories, and other parameters are all written according to UH-1H specifications, then even if the bidder wants to deliver a UH-1B or UH-1D, it can't pass the specs. But since the Dornier-made UH-1D is different from the Bell-made UH-1D, the ex-German birds passed the bidding even if the DND made the specs according to the UH-1H.

      Delete
    2. Well sir Max to be honest the spec is still confusing to me.

      I guess the only thing we need to do is ask if the government really put that kind of spec in the requirement list. Meaning ask for the legal document to be made public and the same to the supplier document.

      Delete
    3. Now this gets a bit confusing. A couple of years back, the DND posted an "Invitation to Bid" in its website which clearly specified that they were looking for the UH-1H variant. Were rules changed afterwards? The notice posted above seems to have changed.

      Check this link:

      http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=32849.45

      Delete
    4. That was for a previous bid for 10 UH-1Hs and it preceded the bid posted by the moderator.

      Delete
    5. Since it is already confirmed that the initial requirement released by the DND is for UH-1H, did anybody consider, including Manila Times and "Joey", on why the DND shifted from UH-1H to UH-1 in the first place? MaxDefense and many people who knows of the contract knows the reason as early as last year, but we let "Joey" answer that to see if he/she is telling the truth.

      Delete
    6. If the government will terminate this almost complete deal w/ the Rice Aircraft company. The government will take forever to acquire such helicopters at the price money they allocated.

      It was only price who offered to bid in the initial failed bidding while the others company did not even bothered to participate. If this deal is cancelled, it will be to the detriment of the Philippine troops in the ground should they ever need the necessary fire support, or should they need urgent evacuation of the critically wounded.

      The delay in the delivery of some of these helicopters were mostly beyond the control of the supplier, such as the congestion of the port of Manila, the just recently concluded strike in the US West Coast port workers' strike and the usual corrupt burearucracy of our Customs office. Some powerful and influential people make this false & baseless accusations because either they did not get their "cut" or for political mileage.

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. Mr. Egco must be either under the payroll of administration detractors or clearly incapable of the profession he has chosen. Mr. Egco you are probably better off writing for gossip columns since you're latest article contains more holes in it than the BRP Sierra Madre. Lol

      Delete
  3. sir max, i couldnt find the link anymore but i read somewhere that the "particle separators" for the 1D engines are different from the 1H and would post a problem for maintenance. this was supposedly made by an ex-PAF official....sorry again i couldnt find the link but it was in a recent news article, i'm not sure if it was the manila times

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rubbish. German Hueys operated in equally or more exterme environments than the PAF Hueys. Making that stupid comment is like making fun of the Germans. Aside from that, this item is a replaceable accessory that can be easily acquired, and is interchangeable with PAF UH-1H Hueys.

      Delete
    2. Earlier, a MaxDefense reader who is also a member of PDFF forum pointed out the the German Army Dornier UH-1Ds operated in Somalia in the 1990s as part of UNOSOM-II operations. And they performed well, considering the heat, dust and sand in the operating area.

      Delete
  4. i rediscovered the link to another of the recent articles i read, this one from the manila bulletin. but the detail i mentioned about the engine particle separator was not mentioned here. http://www.mb.com.ph/widow-makers-or-air-force-assets/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No doubt the Huey helicopters are old. But given that the PAF only receives a small amount of budget to acquire new assets, what can they do? Sit and cry? That's the reason why all possible avenues are being taken into consideration, including acquiring assets they can afford, continuous maintenance of their old assets, and making do with what they have. You have to praise our AFP people for that.

      Take note: the US military, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan - some of the most advanced economies and militaries in this part of the world, still uses Hueys. Japan with all its money still use them a lot. So why not the Philippines?

      Delete
  5. Sir Max, could please differentiate the "Delta" against "Super Delta
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UH-1D - D for Delta, is the standard model, in military/radio alphabet, D is known as Delta, while H is Hotel.

      Super Delta is an unofficial monicker given by PAF pilots to differentiate the upgraded model to the standard model. As MaxDefense was informed, it has similar characteristics as the Huey 2 being used by the PAF's 505th SAR Squadron. It has a more powerful engine, NVG compatible cockpit, vibration reducton system, and other additional features.

      Delete
  6. July 23, 2012 SONA of PBSA...
    Mainam na rin po siguro kung maglilinis-linis na ng mga hangar ang ating Sandatahang Lakas, dahil darating na ang mga kagamitang lalong magpapatikas sa ating tanggulan. Sa wakas, may katuwang na po ang kaisa-isa nating C-130 na 36 na taon nang rumoronda sa himpapawid. Dalawa pang C-130 ang magiging operational ulit sa taong ito. Bago matapos ang taong ito, inaasahan nating maide-deliver na ang binili nating 21 refurbished UH-1H Helicopter, 4 na combat utility helicopters, mga radyo’t iba pang communication equipment, rifles, mortars, mobile diagnostic laboratories, kasama na ang bullet station assembly para sa arsenal. [Applause] Pagdating naman po ng 2013, lalapag na ang 10 attack helicopters, 2 naval helicopters, 2 light lift aircraft, 1 frigate, at mga force protection equipment. [Applause]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Errors in script writing is very common as ther script writers themselves are non-military technology people. The media itself is the number one and most pravelent in making errors when writing about military of defense related reports.

      Look further at that SONA itself. Did Pnoy really intentionally defraud the people by saying that by 2013, 10 attack helicopters, and 2 light lift aircraft will arrive? Its already 2015 and none of the 8 (not 10) attack helicopters have been accepted by the PAF. None of the 2 light lift aircraft arrived until now, as well as that 4 combat utility helicopters which are only scheduled to arrive starting late this year.

      Relying on this too much to use to attack the project is really rubbish.

      Delete
    2. Btw, I am not an Aquino supporter. Nor am I a fan of Ninoy, Cory and People Power. I supported an underdog in 2010. I don't wish to see any post here of accusing me as an Aquino fan.

      Delete
  7. what about the allegations of non compliance? fuel cells are not crash worthy, no self sealing tanks and no nvg compatibility?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That can be answered by the PAF, or if there are independent groups that know how to verify them. MaxDefense cannot answer because I have not seen the helicopters up close. But so far, MaxDefense sources confirmed that the helicopters have NVG compatibility.

      Delete
  8. btw, first vid is 2013

    ReplyDelete
  9. i dont know why some people are against the acquisition of these old and defective choppers. we are getting them for a reason. as you can see, brand new aircrafts are very few in the PAF. hence, we cannot sacrifice those birds for pilot training. we need these old hueys to train our pilots. so that when they crash and kill the trainees, the loss will be very minimal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let us not jump into conclusions, saying that the helicopters are defective. The PAF pilots from the 205th THW, the end users themselves, are among those doing the tests and signing off the test results that agree on the acceptance. Lack of trust of the pilots who will be using the helicopters themselves is actually insulting to them.

      At the end of it all, it all boils down to one problem - money. Had the government allotted enough budget to acquire new helicopters, the PAF could be getting the best aircraft the market can offer.

      Delete
  10. I am confident of the Aquino administration and thankful for the effort he gave to our AFP for the modernization. To Sir Mar Roxas also for the recent news regarding the plan purchase of new equipment for our AFP. Hopefully more APC for our AFP and PNP.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Why is MaxDefense doing the "Technical Clarifications on the Project's Alleged Issues". THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE DOING THIS IN ALL POSSIBLE AVENUES AND NOT A THIRD PARTY ENTITY.

    MaxDefence should be a an alternate reference to non-military readers. Or at best a layman's reference of military activities and/or actions. This is a clear mistrust of the people to their government and the should be protectors of the Philippines.

    How sad....

    -freemindonline

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Freemindonline, the government can defend themselves on however manner they want. MaxDefense, in the mean time, is clarifying what is obviously wrong information being fed to the public. MaxDefense cannot just tolerate misinformation from being spread to the public, especially when obviously it is only being used to build up a case against the deal.

      Delete
    2. If there is an issue of corruption, Manila Times should point out issues that are related to the corruption case, not destroy the image of the Dornier UH-1D by making incorrect remarks by the so-called source named Joey. Go straight to the issue. If there is sufficient evidence that the DND is indeed involved in corruption, MaxDefense will be there to echo the issue against the DND.

      Delete
    3. Correct if Mr. Go and the Manila Times have their evidence on their allegation why not file your complain direct yeah! not to spread your malicious writing just to gain back attention from the avid readers... kakainis kayo!!!!

      Mc Padz

      Delete
  12. The reason why refurbished hueys were acquired is because this helos are the PAFs workhorses used as combat utility helicopters, for airlift during insertions and extractions and medevac and during relief operations in times of calamities..the government has to fill in the deficiency of such helo due to several years of neglect, our air force use to have a hundred of hueys but right now we have just over 20 in working condition..the fastest we can fill up that deficiency is to get refurbished units which could be bought for a fraction of a price of brand new units..the delivery of this helo should have been in 2013 before the elections but due to the lenghty bidding process and acquisition and to make sure everything is transparent and graft free this took more than a year before it was awarded..I hope media will be more responsible in reporting rather than sow intrigues and spread lies and disinformation just to attack the Dnd and the President..seems nowadays some media wouldnt care to do research before reporting and are more for sensationalism and envelopmental journalism

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Mr. Sy Egco really cares about our pilots, why not hit the government by questioning Malacanang why the budget for the AFP Modernization is only Php 90 billion (~US$ 2 billion) from 2013 to 2017, when obviously this is not enough to replace all ageing assets of the entire Philippine military? As compared to Malaysia, their Navy alone is requesting more than US$ 3 billion from the government under their 11th Malaysia Plan (11MP) from 2016 to 2020? Obviously the government is not putting emphasis in investing on defense, thus the reason why the PAF has no choice but to buy refurbished helicopters with their meager budget.

      Delete
    2. Php 90 billion budget for AFP Modernization from 2013 to 2017... Holy Sh&$)t the government Pantawid & Pamana program alone for 2015 is already Php 90 billion, last year was Php 40 billion... It only means one thing, Pnoy doesnt give that much value to AFP modernization morethan he does giving doleouts to DSWD Pantawid & Pamana program.What corrupt & lame President Pnoy is.

      Delete
    3. It actually started with Php 75 billion in 5 years. I'm not really sure how it ended up at Php 90 billion as of 2015. But that extra Php 15 billion is better than nothing.

      Delete
    4. I think the yearly budget for the BBL (Bangsamoro Basic LAw) if approved is greater than the AFP modernization budget. Renbios

      Delete
    5. Yes, the bbl budget for subsidy starts at 75 billion escalating upwards over 5 years.this is far greater than the modernization budget. Chances are these guys will squander the money or even buy more modern arms to fight our army one day. Did armm improve the economic situation in their Area? No it Didn't! What makes you think bbl Will? if they can source 75 billion for bbl they can find funds for the modernization if they really want to.Fight

      Delete
    6. Just as I have thought, there will always be a budget available. It is simply the president's prerogative to choose his priorities. BBL and DSWD CCT budget is more of a priority to Pnoy than AFP modernization. If Pnoy is replaced by a military junta or council, that is the only way AFP modernization will be given priority under there is a nationalistic & patriotic politician whose priority is our military modernization.

      Delete
  13. The issue here is not about the helicopter per se but about the COMMISSION . IT so happened that the DND Officials are loyally attach to the president, that when you hit these people you are hitting the whole system as well which is under the accountability of the president. This is the handiwork of DISGRUNTLED INDIVIDUAL who are not happy the way the procurement was being manage. It means that they can no longer do their previous nefarious activities to earn KICKBACKS. To get hold of the positions, you have to eliminate the obstructions to get back on business. You have to get rid of Manalo by creating destructive issues to kick him out of his position. This issue is well justified to defend Manalo and entire DND. I hope this issue will serve as warning to Manalo to be more cautious in doing his job above par and expeditiously so that his department will not be branded as DEPT OF NOTORIOUS DELAYS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the issue is commission and corruption, stick to that, go straight to the issue. No need to build up a case wherein you start by hitting on the product incorrectly by way of misinformation. Not only did the author lost his credibility to people who care for the AFP, he also lost his chance to gain support from them.

      Delete
    2. The solution to totally stop corruption in the DNF/AFP is to change the procurement process. Pnoy should establish a Military Procurement Council consisting of the President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Senate President & the Supreme Court Chief Justice. Let this Council handle the procurement process out of the hands of the DND/AFP. No need for bidding just go straight to govt-to-govt. negotiation to accelerate the procurement. What the DND/AFP only need to do is just give the list of weapons they need to the Council.

      Delete
  14. Mr. Sy Egco has no credibility..he doesnt care about our pilots or the afp modernization..all he cares about is hit the Government because thats what they want to spread lies and intrigues for their goal of tarnishing the corrupt free image of the President. Manila times by the way is owned by dante ang a supporter of GMA. They were also present during the launching and meeting of the national transformation council who wants to oust the President..this is not just an ordinary article by a reporter.its part of a destabilization plot by the ksp by hitting at the programs close to the presidents heart.

    ReplyDelete
  15. There are more new info coming in, all supporting the DND's case. Will be discussed in the blog entry's update section.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Best decision so far in Capability Upgrading.

    If they did this with the Navy, 3 Maestrale frigates would be patrolling the WPS now.

    If they did this with the Air Force, 5 Kfirs will be patrolling our skies now. Wake up DND AFP from your US induced slumber, the chinese are literally cementing their control in the WPS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with the Maestrale was they were offered at a very steep price. Less than half the cost of the current new frigate being acquired by the navy.

      To make a comparison on a smaller cost scale: the Maestrale deal is like if the you being offered an old 1995 Toyota Corolla for Php 700 thousand when a new 2015 model be bought for Php 1 million. Would you choose the old model if you can just shell out an additional amount to get a new one?

      Delete
    2. Or if the Maestrale is compared tol a good-running (for 20 years more) and more powerful Italian-made 1995 Fiat car selling for 500K compared to a Korean-made 2017 1M Hyundai car, I think it is still worth buying it because the car is already built and available for utilization than waiting after 2 years. I would still buy all the good working and immediately available Kfir fighters, F-5 Tiger IIs and F-4 Phantoms than wait for the FA-50s bec. war will not wait for you. Anytime it can happen.

      Delete
    3. I will favor 3 reconditioned Maestrales patrolling the WPS NOW, over 2 brand new frigates God knows when. At the minimum, the opponent will need 50% more firepower and effort to neutralize the 3 Maestrales. That's how weak our naval strategists are or just blindly following the US C&C. As a result, the chinese have already built their islands. Anyway our naval strategists have their green cards and US visas ready for any emergency

      Delete
  17. Sir Max is it possible to upgrade all the existing UH-IH and Bell 205 fleet of PAF from a two blade system to a four blade system largely similar to what the USMC did with UH-IY Venom, not including all other upgrades beside the rotor system. How much would it possibly cost per unit?

    -Donner

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Donner, it would be better to just buy a new helicopter. All those upgrades would cost almost the same as buying a new one.

      Delete
    2. The AFP needs hundreds of helicopters for it's various operations throughout the Philippines. The government should have started a program of manufacturing Huey helicopters locally instead of buying 2nd hand and brand new copters. What is the problem ? No budget? No knowhow? No political will? No foresight! No proper planning? No good advice ? or simply bec.they know nothing at all..

      Delete
  18. http://pnp.gov.ph/portal/images/boimamasapano/boi_final.pdf

    Board of Inquiry report for the Masasapano incident. Just sharing the sh!t.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mar Roxas presidential plans is in jeopardy because of this Mamasapano mishandling which had tarnished the image of Pnoy. Binay now has something to sway people's attention from his corruption scandals.

      Delete
    2. Raffy Alan was interviewed today at cnn Philippines, that's solar on channel 9. He said there are Malaysia Citizens in the milf organization including iqbal. This should be investigated very well as it is only now that this has surfaced. Is Malaysia getting back at us or are they allowing themselves to be used by the US again to carve out some bases in mindanao? We are losing out on China and now this. What's going to be Left? And by the way the budget for the Bbl is 75 billion a year and will increase over 5 years. Thta's more than what can be allocated to the armed forces' modernization program. Kung gugustuhin nila Kay pala. so why should we dive that much to the Milf? They will buy arms to kill our soldiers and squander the money. What happened to the creation of the armm, Nothing! Poverty was not addressed process was limited and still more arms and violence. At the end of the day the BBL should be just a basic law without having to refer to the Milf? the Milf must be limited to a peace accord separate and distinct from the BBL. But they should not receive a single cent for subsidies, they should work hard for it. Please watch the interview of Raffy Alunan, a lot of interesting insights.

      Delete
  19. From HOngNam's post on PDFF:

    "** The senior Manila Times reporter - Joel Sy Egco, was directed to the article at Maxdefense pertaining to the technical clarifications on the project's alleged issues.

    Guess what his reply was on his FB page ?

    - "In the interest of fairplay and balance, I'm sharing this blog by maxdefense/max montero. It's highly technical... and I can smell something funny here."


    Was he smelling the crap that he was shovelling?"


    This is the link to egco's facebook page:

    https://www.facebook.com/JubairSyEgco

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hong Nam was right. He probably smelled himself as his report was already shattered for inconsistency, obvious misinformation, and impartiality. As the PDFF posters also said, how can he write something that he himself confirmed he doesn't understand well?

      For a media person, you can see Mr. Sy Egco's Facebook posts as someone who takes sides. How can you be partial to the fact if from the very beginning, you are already taking sides? If he wanted to continue what he's doing, he better get out of being a news writer and instead write in the opinions section. He can tell what's on his mind there anytime as it is his own opinion.

      Delete
    2. Sir Max,

      Yeah! better to he get out being news writer and instead write in tabloid one yong mga porno kasi malawak yong kanyang imagination kakainis!!!

      Delete
    3. Sir Max,

      Looks like Mr. Sy Egco has found his way onto your FB page, is trying to justify himself there.

      Delete
  20. Max, You are doing a good job! Keep it up..this is the kind of stuff people should be reading instead of libelous reports from the so called "mainstream media" in the Philippines. There ought to be a way to discipline these malicious people in the media industry.

    ReplyDelete
  21. http://globalnation.inquirer.net/119608/aircraft-firm-claims-extortion-try-by-dof-official/

    - Baka may kinalaman ito sa mga maling report ng Manila Times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These kind of corrupt government officials must be set-up for an NBI entrapment instead of just being reported or complained about so they won't have the chance of sabotaging foreign companies entering government biddings.

      Delete
    2. This company (Rise) should drop that bitch DOF name to the public so people know, anyway they already won the bidding diba? hanggat hindi nasasampolan yang mga sira ulong official na yan patuloy nilang gagawin yan sa mga susunod pang mga project specially for DND-AFP bilyon ang price ng mga project dyan!!!!
      Mc Padz

      Delete
  22. Somebody from DOF officials were implicated for harassment of the said deal with the DND and PAF with Rice for the said helicopter deals...hmmm something fishy smells here a disgruntled one from AFP or nakikisawsaw lang sa commission with the AFP?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Did the gov't already made a deal with the acquisition of CAS?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi Max, now that the pnp and the military is getting a lot of sympathy maybe its time that they push for a more aggressive law for the modernization of the armed forces and the pnp. Both institutions needs more helicopters, armored assets most specially the mine resistant ones and even more soldiers that need extensive training. By the way, what happened to the CAS project? After all the delays it turns out its a budget issue. What happens now to the other projects like the long range patrol Aircraft?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Now Sir Max like what i have written in my previous comment it is clear that tne motive for this character and project assasinations boiled down to main culprit..... MONEY COMMISSION KICKBACKS. Once again the DISGRUNTLED military personnel has to resort to EXTORTION to achieve his EVIL INTENTIONS.Unless these bad eggs from tbe govt were not remove the service and go unpunish , there will be more attempts that will follow.

    ReplyDelete
  26. You know from the way he posts and the way he reported this story that this character is a spin doctor...masyadong nagmamarunong eh halatang wala namang alam..mahilig gumawa ng istorya...first he saidthose helos are defective then nung nakuryente dinamay ang airforce at dnd...dapat dito kinukulong for libel..ilabas na niya yang "joey" na yan...o baka naman gawagawa lang niya ..baka si joey deleon lang or baka siya rin si "joel"..basta gusto lang manira kung ano ano sinasabi..i bet binay aran yang reporter ng manila times.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Sir Max any updates on the Frigate bidding?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Additional funding is being requested for the lot-2 subsystems of the frigates which includes sensors and weapons systems.

      Delete
    2. What do you mean by additional funding Sir Max? Previous announcement by the DND said that 2.5 billions of pesos out of the total amount of 18 billions for 2 frigates will go to the weapons and sensors. Renbios

      And here is the link:

      http://www.janes.com/article/41873/philippines-sets-aside-usd57-million-to-arm-new-frigates

      Delete
    3. Aside from the Php 2.5 billion allocated for weapons, the PN is requesting for additional funding to add to the Php 2.5 billion since they are planning to acquire systems that is beyond the current budget. They're trying their luck if the national government will approve their request.

      Delete
    4. So can you confirm Sir Max this might be the reason for the delay in bidding for the 2 frigates because additional funding was requested? Renbios

      Delete
    5. It is not the reason for the delays. Especially that it would be part of Lot 2.

      Delete
  28. Im new here so i have question:

    While some is a lie, some did have at least some ground.What if the reporter is right that some of the copter is not work?

    The counter argument was provide by the people that involve with the program. The one that will go to jail if this is true. So of course they say all it's or will work.

    And no one will suspect anything as long the copter never to be use.

    Because think about it, in the previous topic comment someone already mention that Philippine have A LOT of APC. Yet so few was deploy in battle that Sir Max think the Phillipine need MRAP. Theres even a comment that say PMC only have 30-40 APC. Where is the rest?

    In fact why do Phillipine now buy 114 units of M113A2 armored personnel carriers from the US? They already have a lot but not deploy it.

    Maybe the helicopter case is the same. As long no one fly it, no one will know.

    So maybe at least the reporter is right on one thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Army assigns its armored vehicles in different location. Compared to infantry, armored vehicles are difficult to transfer from one island to another. Each formation has allocations of armored vehicles. With only 300+ armored vehicles, the number is considered rationally small compared to other comparable sized armies. Why is MaxDefense advocating acquisition of MRAPs? Because these are also armored vehicles, and the Army needs more armored vehicles in its arsenal - tanks, APC, IFV, and MRAP. Since MRAP can be cheaper than APC, while providing better protection from IED and mines, then MaxDefense pushes for MRAP in the more immediate requirement. Even if the Army receive 114 + 28 M113A2 within this year, that would still be not enough. As early as the early 1970s, even then Defense Sec. Juan Ponce Enrile acknowledged the need for 1500 armored vehicles in then smaller Philippine Army's arsenal.

      As for the helicopters, the moment the source and Manila Times brought out the issue, almost 85% of the arguments they presented can easily be debunked just by simple research. This already destroyed the credibility of the source. So how will anyone believe someone whose credibility has become questionable? Add to that numerous information from different sources (from private & unofficial government) MaxDefense got even before Manila Times came up with the article?

      The PAF is readying a larger presentation of the Dornier UH-1D probably by next month as the process of activating, testing, and accepting the rest of the helicopters is still ongoing.

      Delete
    2. Sir Max i still think they should use the already available APC rather than wait the next purchase that probably will take a long time. Not deploying already ready APC when soldier keep dying is a sin.

      And while the Manila Times have credibility issue and 85% of their statement is false. The 15% is still credible, worse it's the most important one. What if they indeed not working.

      If old we can upgrade it.
      If no spare part, we can reverse engineering.
      But if it was a junk then we see our money gone.

      Who know maybe for all the lie statement Manila times spread they accidentally stumble the truth? Maybe this can be like F-35 where media say the plane is crap, but those who involve say its good.

      I guess the PAF really need to show all the helicopter fly in formation to counter this. Now i expecting "Apocalypse Now" scene. Do u know when they will do the presentation?

      Delete
    3. Mind if i butt in? hehe. Just to support sir Max argument.

      Were going to consider several factors here. With an army of 85,000 +/- personnel, think of the APC/IFV issue as like these:

      infantry + regular transport = mobility and flexibility (mobile/mechanized infantry)
      infantry + armored transport = mobility and ++ for flexibility (in the form of protection against enemy fire)
      infantry + armed armored transport = mobility and +++ for flexibility (in the form of transportation, protection and fire support to suppress enemy fire)

      On the question of quantity of APC/IFVs: The more mobile/mechanized infantry you have the more it gives you flexibility in the battlefield in the form of transport, protection against small arms (assault rifles, grenades and .50 cal HMG) and support to provide covering fire to your troops. Accordingly, the person asked if it is possible to concentrate armored assets to a single location to defeat an enemy. In theory, yes. But due to the lack of APCs and IFVs in our army, they are spread out according to priority and in paper so they can be given some form of flexibility. Aside from the issue of transporting the armored assets, by concentrating and stripping your forces of armored assets without proper planning you are leaving gaps for the enemy to exploit or render your mobile troops inflexible for any given task that they have. Inflexible. why? They are still mobile but they now lack the necessary protection and support that they needed.

      So if were going to do a simple math to make a conservative estimate of troops with armored transport:

      Simba APC: 133 (150 in all but I deducted the ones converted as 17 ambulances)
      Commando APC: 137 (155 in all but I deducted the ones given to the PMC)
      Chamite APC: 20
      M113: 120 (all variants and not including the ones coming)
      AIFV: 45 ( deducted the armored recovery variant)
      ACV-300: 6 (deducted the armored recovery variant)

      The solution is simple, add and multiply by 11 (infantry carried by M113 which is roughly a squad of infantry) to get results.

      133+137+20+120+45+6 = 461 units of APC/IFV x 11 infantry = 5071 +/- infantry units in riding APC/IFVs! Again, if were going to deduct that to the number of Army troops of 85,000. You still have +/- 79,929 regular troops riding on an assorted variety of unarmored Humvees, 6x6 trucks, KM 50's and etc that are very vulnerable to enemy fire.

      *Note this is a conservative estimate, it is not perfect.

      On the issue about MRAPs: Surely, APC/IFVs have their weaknesses by means of providing basic armor protection against most small arms (assault rifles, grenades and .50 cal HMG) fire but they are vulnerable to RPGs and landmine. By introducing the MRAP, you add another form of flexibility to your armored asset by providing mine protection to your troops which are not provided by the current transport assets of our infantry.

      So that's what, four pluses to the flexibility of the army in the form of MRAPs and more APC/IFVs?

      Lastly, IMHO Sir Max might be explaining to us that in modern armies there is a trend or theory that the more equipment that you give to your military force the more flexible they become to their functions.

      *Note: Please don't judge me for my statements because I admit that I'm no expert. Suggestions, comments are corrections are utmost welcome. :)

      -Mark

      Delete
    4. This is interesting so i like to join.

      Dear Mark:

      Sorry, but what is the priority on another area that are more important than using it in conflict area? Are U have another conflict? Because spreading it is not really helpful for overall defense.

      And about the gap that u mentioned, that the enemy can exploit if Philippine concentrated their armored asset. How could u have a gap? U are an island nation. Do rebel have ever launch an attack beyond their island?

      Sorry for question so much.

      -Ian from Indonesia

      Delete
    5. Armored vehicles are assigned to specific army units, and wherever the unit is, they bring in their armored assets as well. In case of the Philippines, not all armored units are in Mindanao, they maintain presence in Luzon, and several independent small units in the Visayas.

      The Philippines faces different rebel groups. These are the communist New People's Army, the More Islamic Liberation Front, splinter groups of the Moro National Liberation Front, the terrorist groups Abu Sayyaf, Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters, and several small others. Majority are in Mindanao, but Luzon and Visayas are not spared especially by the NPA which uses IED and landmines in their attacks.

      You must also consider that threats from outside is also part of the threats that you need to consider, which may include invasion from the sea or air. Also, many of that armored vehicles, like ships and aircraft, need time for maintenance and servicing and may not be available at immediate notice. The Indonesian Army also has the same routine, they spread several army units in the entire archipelago, although armored units are positioned on areas with higher threat. For example, the Leopard 2 that your army bought was position in Java island. Why there, when the threat is higher in Kalimantan, in Timor, or in Papua. You can verify this with any Indonesian Army officials.

      Delete
    6. Thanks for replying Sir Max.

      I like to answer about my nation military.

      Leopard 2 was station at Java because as my knowledge that is where our tank school located. Also at this point we only just receive 26 tank, all will arrive at the end of 2016. Maybe then they will be spread all over the region.

      I also like to note that only Papua that is still have insurgency. Timor is already another nation (sadly and full regret). Aceh already peace by autonomy. And Kalimantan (Malaysian border) while there is border dispute, it's unlikely there will turn into war. Because Malaysia understand that war with us will not easy, the same that we also know it's not easy for our side also. So diplomatic is the best way.

      Papua however is different story. We deploy many soldier in there with support of police and militia. Depending who u ask, u can get answer like "the most militarize region" to hyperbole answer like "there is more military than the civilian". But its safe to say that there is a lot soldiers in there. Plus many equipment, vehicle, ship and plane was deploy there. Considering the size of the region, this strategy success to suppress the insurgency but still not end it, so from time to time they resurface, but now at low intensity. I guess we still must done more.

      Hope u Philippine can win against your rebels.

      Sorry for my bad English.

      -Ian from Indonesia

      Delete
    7. Hi Ian. Unlike the Philippines, Indonesia has land borders with neighboring countries. Timor Leste, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia all have physical land borders. Of the 3, Malaysia is your bigger threat, especially they have armored formation in Borneo Island. Although Papua has rebel activities, it is in anyway not as organized and as well equipped as the rebel groups in the Philippines. Java island is generally safe, unlike Luzon island where there are places where communist NPA still operate. They were even able to come as close as a few kilometers from Metro Manila (in Antipolo City, Rizal province).

      So far Mindanao hosts almost all Marine battalions, a Mechanized Infantry brigade, several Infantry divisions, and many of our elite forces, together with a few battalions of police Special Action Force and regional SAF. The concentration of troops is higher in Mindanao than in any part of the Philippines. But armored units can't concentrate in Mindanao alone.

      Delete
    8. Sir max dont forget Indonesia has more than 20 units of C-130's and 5 LPD with dozens of LST, they capable to conduct massive amphibious assault or quick reaction force with paratroopers, A single LST alone can carry a dozens of armored vehicles and tanks, not including their Marines is the biggest in SEA.

      Now they composing a new Mechanized battalyon in Kalimantan/Borneo island, and a new Regional command in Papua. So they can destroy any foreign intruders in any island in no time.

      Delete
    9. Again thanks for replying.

      Still i think your nation still need to increase their soldier and equipment numbers in the conflict area. We Indonesian do that and pretty much can suppress the rebels. And only lost Timor because politic and made peace in Aceh thanks the tsunami (which i can't really complain as they are now peaceful).

      Papua is not an intense conflict because we have strong military present. Strong and numerous military that can hunt the rebel, seal the region from outsider that try to help the rebel and deterrent so the neighbor (PNG) side with us. Plus numerous mean they can be everywhere.

      We worry not about Malaysia tank, years of neglected border area mean there is no road for their (and us too sadly) armor to use to invade. Seriously the road is so bad even troops patrol the border by walk and occasionally small jeep.

      Again thanks for replying and can i ask if Cebu safe for tourism? Plan to visit there someday.

      -Ian from Indonesia

      Delete
  29. Kudos to MaxDefense and more power.

    ReplyDelete
  30. very informative blog, thanks sir max sana tuloy tuloy mo blogging about philippine defense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you. I suggest you read previous blog entries discussing other defense issues, as well as backreading the MaxDefense @ Facebook wall posts.

      Delete
  31. Something to think about.

    http://www.philnews.com/2012/26a.htm

    A scenario why the Philippine military is now in it's current state.

    -freemindonline

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is true that previous administrations failed to place defense and the issue on Kalayaan Islands a priority. It's not only the Philippine military, but the entire government policy as well. The current administration may have done something better than those previous, but it is definitely still not enough. Example of failures is the current stance of the government of not sending ships to go show the flag and equalize the presence of Chinese ships in Scarborough shoal and Kalayaan Islands. The government has also avoided further improvement of its facilities in the Kalayaan, which includes the runway at Pag-Asa island and better housing and utility systems on all islands.

      The government must start by pushing more of its rights in the WPS rather than just putting its bet on a single solution which is the arbitration case.

      Delete
  32. 2 out of 5 fuel tanks of the UH-1D helicopters are not self sealing according to this video and in fact confirm by the Air Force spokesperson...so i guess there are some truth to the allegations. Here is the link:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEPxJVDP9aQ

    Sir Max why these helicopters have bubble windows?? My understanding is that these bubble windows can only be used if the door is fully closed but at the same time will block the location of gunner. I think they gonna use these helicopters more on ferrying VIPs and less on its intended role. Renbios




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Renbios, since the fuel cells can only be checked by authorized personnel, MaxDefense cannot answer regarding the installed fuel cells on the accepted UH-1D. But standard UH-1D & UH-1H have the same fuel cells, interchangeable, and were designed by Bell to be self sealing as part of its design and approved by the US Department of Defense in the 1960s.

      The bubble windows are specified by the Germans when they built the UH-1D. As I said in the past, the German Dornier UH-1D is different from the American made Bell UH-1D because of several German-specified items which include using the same engine as the Bell UH-1H, bubble windows, among others. The bubble windows won't block the gunner since the window is attached on the door, and door must be open when the door gunner is using the gun. This is actually an added feature because the passenger can have a higher peripheral vision as the bubble creates a space that where the passenger's head can view beyond the door itself.

      Delete
    2. sir Max is it true that only 7 UH-1D is delivered to the Philippine Air force instead of 21? it was stated in wikipedia that the contract was terminated. if it's true what is the cause of the contract being terminated? is it about the defects on the choppers? thanks and more power sir Max.

      Delete
  33. Meaning this bubble windows are not practical or un necessary because we have door gunners all the time. When they were in german service they dont have door gunners.Renbios

    ReplyDelete
  34. Bubble windows is an updated plus for the AFP, why complain when u get newer version ?

    ReplyDelete
  35. If you really want to have updated plus for the AFP i rather adopt this bubble canopy idea to all our VIP helicopters and aircraft used for patrol mission because it will make more sense. But on a Huey with door gunners? You don’t need a bubble windows on a Huey gunship because most of the time they are flying with the door fully opened and when its fully opened passengers can see a lot outside than bubble windows. Besides if you want to fully closed the door and use the bubble canopy for observation outside then what will the gunners do? Confine to their seats? Renbios

    ReplyDelete
  36. It only shows there are irregularities in the contract. Sept 2014 was the last date of delivery but DND didn't take action. Lets just credit the media who made noises in this deal.

    http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2015/03/26/1437603/dnd-may-scrap-huey-contract

    The last admin was better in terms of procurement of Huey helicopters because they were acquired thru FMS (govt to govt) transaction. That program was called POTUS helicopters. I think 20 were delivered during the last years of the Arroyo Admin. They were delivered by ship in a complete units with rotors attached opposite what was done by RICE. Even the logo of the air force name were painted here and not at the RICE facility as shown on the video.Renbios

    ReplyDelete
  37. Renbios... whether the bubble window is there or not with the gunner, it's immaterial. the door is open when gunner is present. the bubble window is a plus because you can have better observation angle than when it is a regular window. why complain when it is an added bonus? okay... you want it on a vip heli? so, order a vip heli with a bubble window. it just there, as a bonus. whether it is vip or combat utility, its still useful. same price same heli same utility. why complain... just like complaining that you bought a car with a freebie rain visor.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Max, thank you for educating me of the facts, history and technical specifications of the UH-1D. It is true that the media misled the public when it comes to the history and specifications of the UH-1D which gave this helicopter a bad image to the public and i thank you for correcting that issue. But Max, we must also be happy that someone came out to expose this because who knows maybe the DND is truly stealing money from us. Lahat ng sangkot kung mapatunayang nagkasala ay dapat managot sa batas kahit sino pa sila lalong-lalo na si Joey, Manila Times and DND.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Let us all campaign against Chiz Escudero, Franklin Drilon and many other politicians who don't support the AFP Modernization Program. Let us not forget Bongbong Marcos who blames the government for escalating the tensions in the West Philippine Sea by seeking the help of the US. Bongbong Marcos still wants to maintain a friendly relationship with China despite China's aggressive behavior by building islands inside our territory. These politicians are very unpatriotic.

    ReplyDelete
  40. My eagerness to know the truth that's why I bumped into this site/blog, in fact I read all the articles related on this issue well as scrolling down to comment section. However, my mind bugs me on the AFP modernization program out nowhere? I mean the procurement of UH-1D helicopter is obviously under the so called "maintenance of approving" the AFP modernization program"?I don't know if it's true or not but then I hope anyone can hear me and say something regarding on this matter. #enlightenme

    ReplyDelete