3 minutes ago, JAG said:

Although not party to all the technical details of maintaining aircraft, I am aware of the complexity of such matters (unlike some who compare it  to restoring vintage cars and 100 year old houses). I am fully aware (through first hand experience) of the difference between "serviceable" and "battleworthy" in the military.

 

My point remains, I wonder at the "quality" of the expensive spare parts and maintenance package which accompanied the purchase of these helicopters, given their reported serviceability.

 

The cynics amongst us may think that if you are going to divert funds in the procurement process it is easier to do so through maintenance provision than in actually buying the hardware (for both the manufacturer and the purchasers).

 

Of course these are all opinions, as is your position and that of everyone else posting on this thread. Unless the head sheds of both parties appear here and tell us exactly what they have been up to ( unlikely don't you think?) they will remain opinions. No reason for not expressing them though.

Opinions are fine, yes. However the newspapers do seem to have a knack of making opinions appear very much as facts.

That's my opinion. ????

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

Opinions are fine, yes. However the newspapers do seem to have a knack of making opinions appear very much as facts.

That's my opinion. ????

To be fair, the article didn’t make any opinion but just reported Srisuwan’s allegation and rightly so for the sake of transparency and accountability. 

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

To be fair, the article didn’t make any opinion but just reported Srisuwan’s allegation and rightly so for the sake of transparency and accountability. 

Just the facts Mam, only the facts.

Dragnet.

I worked in Army aviation for thirty five years on CH-47 helicopters when it comes to any helicopter there expensive everything about them. My guess would be they trained army personal to work on them and maintain I am sure there's been some learning craves made. When you get new helicopters there are special tools required to remove things like the rotor head, rotor blades trannies and such. Then you need all the special racks and stands to put your major parts so you can work on or store them.  There parts package was some thing like common hardware like screws, nuts, bolts, cotter pins, o rings stuff your suppose replace every time you remove one. A reason for over half the fleet being down could be there waiting on parts I have seen were certain serial# part will ground the Acft. sometimes it takes months to get. I have never been close to a Thai army helicopter only seen pictures but it looks like they maintain them well and that's what counts.                     

11 minutes ago, Hook said:

I worked in Army aviation for thirty five years on CH-47 helicopters when it comes to any helicopter there expensive everything about them. My guess would be they trained army personal to work on them and maintain I am sure there's been some learning craves made. When you get new helicopters there are special tools required to remove things like the rotor head, rotor blades trannies and such. Then you need all the special racks and stands to put your major parts so you can work on or store them.  There parts package was some thing like common hardware like screws, nuts, bolts, cotter pins, o rings stuff your suppose replace every time you remove one. A reason for over half the fleet being down could be there waiting on parts I have seen were certain serial# part will ground the Acft. sometimes it takes months to get. I have never been close to a Thai army helicopter only seen pictures but it looks like they maintain them well and that's what counts.                     

Friend of mine waited 3 or 4 months for a full set of valves and guides to be sourced and fitted for his little aerobat because one valve had a scratch on the stem. You wouldn't think about it or maybe even notice it on your Morris Minor engine. ????????????

Edited November 4, 20187 yr by overherebc