What's happening to the RAF Puma Force?

[kadamen]

The recent press reports of an RAF Puma accident in Iraq has become an all to familiar story these days. I think there have been about 5 accidents involving the RAF Puma's this year and I reckon about another 6 since 2000. Why are so many aircraft from a relatively small force crashing? As an aircraft type their accident statistics must be the worst in the RAF, if you start in 2000 and count up to the present day. Anybody got any ideas?

[minigundiplomat]

I believe that those in the know will have their own views, otherwise BOI's are underway.
There is no story here, try casting further down river.

[Cim Jartner]

Don't tell anyone - but the Puma is an inherently dangerous design - the lack of airbags plus the fact that the skin of the aircraft is made from non-defrangible material means that if there is an inappropriate arrival declaration of over 38g then the chances of occupant survival is limited. Also Puma pilots are no longer trained but born into the seats and everyone hopes for the best that they will be able to cope by the time they are needed for operations.

We also use dynamite for fuel rather than the more traditional Avtur and it is believed that this could be more volatile than standard aviation liquids.

I hope this answers your questions - by the way please don't tell the press about this, we are trying to keep it quiet and don't want it to leak out.

[Faithless]

Kadamen,
Don't tell any one I told you this :oh:......It's all down to Global Warming, The price of petrol and the fixed prices of Milk in Asda and Sainsburys...and don't even mention the price of car tax :=
Hope this helps :}

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Does this mean that those airframes currently cluttering up RNSD; bugger, sorry; DSDC Llangennech may now be fed through the recycling loop?

[Magnersdrinker]

As an ex Puma eng ,they have had a terrible year , amazed the press aint picked it up yet. Saying that they dont have hoodlims saying how unsafe and mentioning the amount of fuel leaks blah blah

sorry I just being cynical
:uhoh:

[Wigan Warrior]

Hurry-up, I'm getting bored waiting....
I heard the animal rights brigade had taken the government to task over the use of cats by the RAF in war zones. The government folded and that’s why firstly Jaguars and latterly Pumas are being retired.
When the Government asked senior Army officials about their use of Lynx, they were told it was purely to keep the troops smelling nice.

[Maple 01]

Ah yes, but who has the weakest Linx?

[jayteeto]

Cim Jartner, it is a bloody dangerous design you know, it even has throttles...... I'll get me coat :ouch:

[8-15fromOdium]

From the Sunday Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3022129.ece):


RAF RISKS: In southeast England RAF Chinook helicopters circle continuously over the most densely populated part of the UK, flying so low that they damage houses. The Chinooks are so vulnerable that a pigeon strike on the windscreen has forced them to land. Imagine what a stork or terrorist could do.

The government cares so little it even refuses to put crash emergency arrangements in place to mitigate the consequences of a helicopter crashing on one of the towns.
Brian Edmonds
Farnham, Surrey


Sometimes I wonder why we bother :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Mr Rotorvator]

I don't think we should worry about the Storks, it's those bl@@dy (bl@@dy) Red Kites that are the problem. I'm surprised more aircraft aren't dropping from the skies like... well Pumas.

[cornish-stormrider]

8-15, check out "Charles" from Bath's reply. I would post it but I am thick so I can't.

[Cim Jartner]

JT2 - I think you'll find the throttles are quite safe, its the 'throttle-seat' interface that has serious failings!!

[Chugalug2]

To Brian Edmonds,

How shameful your letter is. The men flying in those Chinooks are preparing to fly through the mountains of Afghanistan or over Iraq and you are worried about the one in a million chance that one might crash land near you! Or that your a greenhouse might lose a piece of glass.
We regularly get Chinooks flying overhead and I love to see them. It is always a real boost.
I have recently also heard of protests in Surrey about the treatment of troops at the Headley Court centre. What a selfish, small minded and cowardly minority there seems to be in Surrey!

Charles, Bath, UK

Hope that is what you wanted Cim Jartner.
Chug
PS Great sentiments Charles!

[jayteeto]

That is absolutely right. I often found the right hand seat to flying control interface unit was totally useless when I was flying. Something should be done about it........ Oh yes, they did do something....... I am Mr Jayteeto now. :ok:

[Tappers Dad]

kadamen
You may find an answer to your serious question here.
http://www.dasa.mod.uk/natstats/ukds/2005/c4/table44.html

Table 4.4 Aircraft lost or badly damaged in air accidents by aircraft role and type These are accidents that happened after the aircrew had taken responsibility for the aircraft. They include accidents during military operations, but exclude aircraft losses caused by ‘hostile action’.
Only aircraft types that flew in 2004 are shown, except where marked with a footnote.
These exclude accidents to aircraft on MOD Directorate of Flying charge.

These stats are quite scary.

[Ivan Rogov]

The Puma force and their pax seem to have had the worst luck recently and they have my sincere condolences.

Without going into why they occurred, would newer designs of helo such as Blackhawk, NH90 or Cougar have offered greater survivability? If so any idea how much better they could be based on real incidents?

I do not want to degrade another thread into a slagging match and will remove this post if it upsets anybody :ok:.

[harrogate]

Storks aren't native to the UK.

What a thoroughly pointless life that guy must have to have the time to write in to a newspaper about that.

[jayteeto]

You just can't compare one accident with another and say it would have been more survivable. No names, no types, but as a veteran of many many funerals, some seemingly minor incidents can result in tragic results. Post accident, falling debris causes fatality/weather conditions the same/fire etc etc. Crashworthy seats/tanks/airframes are great, but if it isn't your day then it just isn't your day. The aircraft has vices, but handled with respect it is no different to any other aeroplane or helicopter. Fast jets with full external fits, any helo at max AUW, Multis on tactical approaches. All are a handful to fly and the military do it in hostile conditions as well!! The Nimrod saga is different to this Puma one, it has shown people lacking integrity in the command chain. No-one is questioning this on Puma.

[Ivan Rogov]

Thanks Jayteeto, I suppose we all want the safest designs but as speed and/or alt increase maybe they don't improve survival as much as the manufacturers claim. :{

[harrogate]

I heard the Puma problem was to do with the RAF's exposure to the sub prime mortgage market in the US.

[jayteeto]

Don't misunderstand me, I will take any crashworthy bits you can bolt on, they are better and will make impact 'easier'. What I said was that you can't generally say that one accident would have been better, because other factors come into play. Modern design is bloody great!! My companys EC135 parked outside is outstanding.

[captainjohno]

There is always more than one reason for an aircraft to crash

[OverTq]

Jayteeto - you mean you've tried it for crashworthiness?

[jayteeto]

Not me, have a trawl on video sites for the German one that dips the fenestron in the river and flies away!! Ours has crashworthy seats front and rear, one button for full engine fire drill, reliable FADEC, virtually no visible hydraulic pipes (all cast into MRGB), no main rotor head (yes its true!! Even less than a lynx/squirrel head) and the creme de la creme... the First Limit Indicator. No more checking torque, N1 and T4, the computer works it out for you and you pull power until the main needle reaches 10. You WILL be within all limits. Jayteetoproof!!
However, despite all this luvverly technology, we still retain the ability to crash like the rest of you.

[South Bound]

Indeed, no matter how many 'what ifs' and unlimited hindsight we share, aircraft will always be involved in accidents. It is what we learn from them for the future that is important. I have no personal input on the Puma Force, but as with any accident, we must look hard at ourselves and see what we can learn.

As always, I remain in awe at what we ask our young (and looking younger every day through my eyes) aircrew to do with the equipment we provide to them. We owe it to them to be as thorough as possible with every investigation to reduce the chances of accidents reoccuring. In the case of Puma, I am not aware of any pattern and am inclined to let the powers that be identify the lessons and ensure they are learned the easy way.

[nigegilb]

Sub-prime is still getting worse, but SB seems to have nailed it here,
"As always, I remain in awe at what we ask our young (and looking younger every day through my eyes) aircrew to do with the equipment we provide to them." Esp when the training is described as sub-prime. Fairly obvious journo alert going on in this thread, ain't no point pretending someone is sniffing for a story here.

[PlasticCabDriver]

Nigegilb, clearly you can back this up:

Esp when the training is described as sub-prime.

[nigegilb]

Plastic cab, I am conscious that this thread is inspired by a journo, so I will not comment on more recent crashes.



"A helicopter pilot from RAF Benson who died in a crash in Iraq had "insufficient training", a coroner has said.

"Flt Lt Kristian Gover died while landing his Puma helicopter at Basra airport on July 19, 2004, an inquest at Oxford Coroners' court heard today.
Recording a narrative verdict into the death, Oxford assistant deputy coroner Andrew Walker said: ...""The training of the crew was insufficient to take account of the change in aircraft performance in the operating environment in which they were to fly."

Mr Walker indicated that he would be writing to the Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne, recommending that flight data recorders are installed in all military helicopters, and that a requirement is made for air traffic control to pass on wind speed to landing craft - and for it to be confirmed back to the control tower before clearance for landing was granted."

[pedroalpha]

This is silly.

I flew the Puma for more than 5 years in theatres that ranged from arctic Norway to Belize in CA. It is a beautiful, responsive and safe helicopter and should not be subject to any attempt to denigrate its abilities. My training was no more or less in 1973 than it would be today. Subsequently, I flew the 330J, AS332C, AS332l and AS332L1. It is a great design and all that is needed is to respect it and observe your training.

Animo et fide

Pedro

[Spot 4]

With the greatest of respect Pedro:
My training was no more or less in 1973 than it would be today
Is bull5h1t.

You probably did basic (Chipmunk/Bulldog) and advanced flying training (Jet Provost) before being streamed rotary. The loss of the Jet Provost in the flying training system was significant, and is still being felt.

You also had a cab limited to 6700kgs that had none of todays 'toys' bolted onto it. There is not oneof the original 2 batches of RAF Pumas that has not been Cat 4 at some stage, and nowadays they are Cat 5 far too often.

I knew Kris, and as a second tourist, he had made up for the lack of hours during training, but he had his sum total of hours in a very type specific, boring in fact down right monotonous role. He would have been above the average at NVG simply through experience, but variety of tasking in differing weather conditions in the many parts of the world: No, he was a novice at that.

The guys and girls are rising to the challenge, but there are no old and bold with tales of daring do to pass on to the youngsters for they have all gone, and a dilution of experience at about 85% 1st tourist of greater. It simply was a differanttraining system and differant RAF in your day, and dont get me wrong, for I envy you, best job, best aircraft, best era, but now all gone. (I too did Puma single pilot)

The aircraft has done its bit and should be retired asap and replaced tout suite with one of the many suitable options on the open market. How many (first time round) J reg cars do you see still onthe roads, but that is what the guys are taking to war.

[nigegilb]

Plastic Cab, the recent Herc crash has been followed by significant changes to how the Herc fleet supports the SF community. These changes have been brought about specifically by a lack of experience as a result of a mass exodus of pilots and far fewer tactical training opportunities..

I personally BELIEVE that a lack of training and experience is now killing people on ops.

Harsher still, is criticism doing the rounds that not all helo pilots are getting the same level of training as they used to, specifically concerning SF Ops.
I cannot back up that specific criticism, but now is not the time to go quiet if there is a problem out there.

I don't measure going quiet as a lack of visibility on this forum either.

[SAR Bloke]

I personally BELIEVE that a lack of training and experience is now killing people on ops.

How did you come to that conculsion?

Harsher still, is criticism doing the rounds that not all helo pilots are getting the same level of training as they used to

In case you had forgotten we are conducting at least 2 major ops with huge rotary involvement. How do you suggest, in the current climate, inexperienced pilots get the time to train to the same levels as before?Unfortunately, you cannot delay a war for a couple of years to conduct more training? Maybe we could ask for a time-out?

In any case, I would argue that there is actually a great deal of experience in these types of ops at the moment. Not from training but from real operational experience.

How many of these experience issues would be improved by retiring the Puma?

[nigegilb]

"In case you had forgotten we are conducting at least 2 major ops with huge rotary involvement. How do you suggest, in the current climate, inexperienced pilots get the time to train to the same levels as before?Unfortunately, you cannot delay a war for a couple of years to conduct more training? Maybe we could ask for a time-out?"

SAR Bloke don't ask that question of me, ask it of the CoC. Suffice to say that this issue of training and experience is now being looked at with grave concern at the highest levels.

I have already stated that I am not going to comment on recent crashes as this thread is a fishing trip.

And no, live ops are not the right place to be blooded. There was a time when the kind of ops routinely taking place in Afg and Iraq were only done by SF. No longer. There remains a question mark, in my view on the ability of the RAF to deliver as a result of waves of cutbacks and issues of morale and outflow.

Edited to add, the Herc K fleet is about 40 years old.

[Spot 4]

How many of these experience issues would be improved by retiring the Puma?

At the present rate of attrition, it will not be too long before needs must. In the meantime, a new aeroplane with 21st century technology blessed with hot & high performance, that is more forgiving, is long overdue. For the old chestnut Ng below 75% and the poor engine performance that goes with it still has sharp teeth despite being recognised 3+ decades ago.

Had HUMS been installed from the outset, they would have been scrapped years ago. The titanium bar-b-que plate was the first bodge, and indicative of an overworked aeroplane. My memory is fading as to the timeframe of that one but it must be the middle eighties. Am I right in thinking that only VC10 & Nimrod are older nowadays? ....or do we still have some ancient C130s hanging on in there.

[SAR Bloke]

SAR Bloke don't ask that question of me, ask it of the CoC.

I don't need to as I don't see it as the huge problem you do. There should be plenty of people with sufficient experience on the Puma force to conduct these sorts of ops as safely as can be expected. You don't need years of experience to learn hot and high desert ops and there are a lot of guys/girls that have done more than their fair share of op deployments.

IMO a large portion of the morale issues are caused by constant putting down of ability/capability of the RAF by the media. You are questioning the ability of JHC crews to conduct ops (suggesting that only SF can do it). You say that you think the RAF can't deliver. How do you think some of your comments come across to those still serving? Not really inspiring to me.

Why can't we praise the guys and girls on ops rather than constantly attacking them? I understand that you are not having a go at the coal face directly but it is they who equally feel the pain of the media criticism as well as their masters, if not more.

[PTT]

a new aeroplane with 21st century technology blessed with hot & high performance, that is more forgiving, is long overdue.
Or how about these (http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1227819&WxsIERv=Zvy%20Zv-171&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=HGnve-RH&QtODMg=Cvrfgnal%20%28CML%20%2F%20YMCC%29&ERDLTkt=Fybinxvn&ktODMp=Whar%2016%2C%202007&BP=1&WNEb25u=Qnavry%20Eloxn&xsIERvdWdsY=BZ-NIB&MgTUQtODMgKE=&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=1884&NEb25uZWxs=2007-06-24%2021%3A24%3A14&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes&width=1150&height=788&sok=JURER%20%20%28nvepensg%20%3D%20%27Zvy%20Zv-171%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=6&prev_id=1251622&next_id=1166918)?

[PTT]

There should be plenty of people with sufficient experience on the Puma force to conduct these sorts of ops as safely as can be expected.
There should be but there aren't. And even if there were enough people to carry out the ops you'd need still more to enable a suitable and sustainable roulement, not to mention carrying out training of those up-and-coming Puma pilots who'll be taking over from those on ops when they get posted 3 years down the line. Or do you suggest a freeze on postings etc? 'Cos that'll do wonders for retention... :rolleyes:

You don't need years of experience to learn hot and high desert ops
True, but it damn well helps when it's more than just a dust landing you're doing.

there are a lot of guys/girls that have done more than their fair share of op deployments.
Exactly, and they're getting to the point where they are going to vote with their feet.

SAR Bloke, you seem to think that people are placing the blame at the feet of the Puma force personnel. Not true - it is the higher command chain who must recognize that they are asking too much and they must be made aware that it is them who have ballsed it up.

I don't need to as I don't see it as the huge problem you do.
Look harder and think long term. This op tempo has already been happening since 2001; how much longer?

[Training Risky]

It is a beautiful, responsive and safe helicopter

With emphasis on 'responsive'... Now I never flew Puma, but I have heard that the lack of droop anticipators can cause massive Nr drop when a large power demand is made on the engines.

Any truth to this sweeping statement or am I talking hoop? I stand ready to be corrected if so.

[jayteeto]

Some truth but not absolutely correct. If you let the engines back off to below 75% Ng (N1), the response can be poor. However if you make a power demand above 75%, the response is similar to any other helicopter. In practice, this means the pilot becomes the anticipator from low power settings, just remembering to squeeze in a little bit of lever in advance of any large demands. It sounds more difficult than it actually is, Puma pilots quickly learn not to come in on approaches fast and high!! Knowing there is a potential gotcha reduces (but statistics show not eliminates) risk. In the 90s, pilots learned this on exercise and in NI/Norway/Germany/Belize/Balkans. Nowadays, there must be less time available to train and exercise, meaning they learn in Stan and Iraq. Judge for yourself the results. Are there more incidents??
I had a one hour grilling in the dock from previously mentioned coroner and found him to be a genuine caring individual with a great sense of integrity. He appeared to want to stop anticipator accidents happening again. He was realistic about cost implications and agreed that more training MIGHT have helped but also it might not.
The fact is that training is not the same as in my day, pilots get to squadrons with less flying experience. However, flying instruction is still good, there is just less of it!! There is only one answer to this problem........ More money for training!! So lets get real here, there isn't any cash in the public purse, so we have to accept things as they are. The alternative is to do like myself, and leave. I can tell you now that 'warning' the management on sites like this doesn't work. My generation warned 15 years ago that things were going bad, everyone would leave and things would implode. Guess what, lots left, lots didn't and we muddled on. Same complaints now, same outcome in the future. The military will continue on regardless. Individuals must remember to think of themselves as well as their country and do what they think is right for their own future.
Blair, Brown, Labour..... Shame on you!!

[nigegilb]

Jay t,
It has been stated here on pprune that the Puma revamp will include the installation of anticipators.

Is this true?

[jayteeto]

Who knows? I have been out 4 years now so am clueless to current thinking. I have 2500 hours on type so feel qualified to comment on anticipators. A revamp?? We were told for years the anticipators were coming, but they never did.

[It's only Me]

It was ever thus.

Did 2 tours in RAFG on 230 with a Sqn that was always wishing that it had the experience levels that it used to have.

Most of my 2500 hrs were single pilot

We had a Plt Off pilot.

In 1990 the Gulf NVG course was 90 mins airbourne; we had no incidents.

To cover NI and Belize, anyone that had even seen a picture of a Puma was brought back without incident.

The aircraft was a delight to fly, but old then. Then toddled off and flew the C130 - now they were old, and the Sqns had all of the same problems.

Now a civvie, flying aircraft that were new - once.

[PlasticCabDriver]

It is quite important, as this is a rumour net, the reason I asked is because I had been told the pumas from SA were having their anticipators TAKEN OUT, for reasons of fleet commonality. Please someone tell me I am wrong and I will delete this post.


The engines that were taken out of the SA Pumas (for reasons of fleet commonality, you are right, Nige) were Turmo 4C4, which do not have anticipators.

The Makila 1A1 engines due to be fitted as part of the Puma LEP do have anticipators, that is the primary reason why they are included.

[jayteeto]

Of interest, if you don't believe that journalists use this site for cheap stories, pop over to AS350nutter thread in rotorheads. The video has just appeared on Sky News.

[OCCWMF]

Doing stuff is dangerous. Doing dangerous stuff is more dangerous. Taking a rough guess at how to do dangerous stuff without the supervised training or false experienced gained from stories, true or with 'exaggeration factor' added is more dangerous still. Doing it at night, tired.....well you get the picture.

[Two's in]

recommending that flight data recorders are installed in all military helicopters,

This comment should be on the header and footer of all BOI reports by now - It's been appearing for at least 25 years.

[nigegilb]

Plastic Cab, thank you, my post is deleted.

I know little about the chopper world, but I thought you guys might like to know that there is an acceptance in the tactical multi-world that a high degree of risk is associated with many sorties.

I believe some of the more switched on chiefs of staff have accepted that in these circumstances, and with a level of experience much lower than in recent times things might be expected to go wrong from time to time.

This adult point of view, extends to the lack of a witch hunt afterwards.

Common sense, at last. However, I still believe the RAF is in a tailspin with regards to the exodus of personnel and the quite ridiculous pressure to reduce training budgets. This issue needs highlighting for a rear guard action to underline the importance of training.

[South Bound]

Nige

interesting that the briefings keep referring to PVR rates being the norm, yet there is a blatant refusal to discuss the trend in experienced personnel leaving at earlier option points than in the past. Not sure if anyone has figures (that they are prepared to share), but would be hugely interesting to know...tailspin indeed...

Interesting by-product of this of course is that there is an awful lot of very young sqn ldrs out there. The 'Company' would say that this shows how good our people are, there is another view that says we are promoting people with less experience than we would like (still quality people, no suggestion otherwise).

[Pontius Navigator]

Just to comment on the stats pointer that TD gave. Without doubt these are accurate but raw numbers belie the imcreased, or reduced, probability of numbers.

It is normal to quote accident statistics as a percentage of flying hours or sorties which therefore allows for fleet size.

Using an hours rate, for instance, would show a long range aircraft at an advantage compared with a short range aircraft with a higher sortie rate.

[nigegilb]

SB, my personal view, is that their job is to manage the decline of the RAF in the best possible way. I don't envy their job, a Sqn Ldr flight commander tour used to be a bit boring, not any more. A training risk turns into a deadly risk on a rooky tour in a theatre of war. I have huge respect for people willing to do the work on the front line. The lack of training airframes back home in the UK is a travesty in these conditions.

They might be young, but they absolutely have to stand up to the career pressures further up the CoC.

The future is grim. When people who should know better are asking for cuts in essential training budgets you just know that the Lords and Masters have yet to win the argument for more funding from the PM.

I am ashamed of what the MoD stands for nowadays, but I intend to do my bit to raise the profile of UKAF.

[Admin_Guru]

This adult point of view, extends to the lack of a witch hunt afterwards.


Not Squadron Commanders being asigned command of a squadron with a caveat to rebuild the supervisory chain then. Even I know that you do not have to rebuild something unless it is broken. Perhaps not a witch hunt applicable to specific individuals but definately a 'review' of the 'system' in place. This is indicative of a covert recognition of one mans issues, hereafter knowns as a problem by the masses.

[nigegilb]

AG, I understand your point - entirely and I also agree with it.

[Fareastdriver]

recommending that flight data recorders are installed in all military helicopters,

This comment should be on the header and footer of all BOI reports by now - It's been appearing for at least 25 years.

Try 45 years.

[H Peacock]

The fact is that training is not the same as in my day, pilots get to squadrons with less flying experience. However, flying instruction is still good, there is just less of it!! There is only one answer to this problem........ More money for training!!

Jayteeto, depends how you define more training? I learnt more about the Puma from handling it during Op flying rather than the OCU (No, you weren't a QHI then!) Just like the Wessex guys before us, the routine of operating at or even above MAUM in a tactical environment enabled even the 'average' shag to become quite adept at handling the Puma safely, despite its known handling problems.

Lots of tricks were developed, including the use of a tad of right yaw during a quickstop to hold up the N1. Had to be careful due to the yaw/roll divergence, but it did help. Also, not sure that anticipators are the be-all and end-all. Any gas turbine at idle is going to take a finite time to respond to increased full flow, be it from a rapidly raised collective or a slighly later reaction to a decaying NR.

In 1990 the Gulf NVG course was 90 mins airbourne; we had no incidents.

No, but we came bloody close! I can still remember some of our dreadful CRM having paired up 'single pilot' Puma guys and given them NVG and the new 252 to play with. I recall one incident when 2 very experienced Puma pilots and an AMF crewman landed back at Ras Al Gar having decended to within feet of the ground whilst all 3 were heads-in sorting the 252.

[OverTq]

'Any gas turbine at idle is going to take a finite time to respond to increased full flow, be it from a rapidly raised collective or a slighly later reaction to a decaying NR.'

One of the checks done on Squirrels and 412s is to recover from auto (needles just joined) to max cruise power in 3 secs. Neither of these types droop at all when this is done. Try that on a Puma and you'll trip the alternators, lose the AP etc etc. Turmo IIIc 4s were, I have been told, designed for running electricity generators at constant speed rather than for helicopter use.

[The Claw]

What role did Wastelands play in this? It would appear that the last loss was an ex- South African Puma which was way behind schedule and frought with problems. How do the handling characteristic's compare between these reworked Puma's and the older Puma's?

[teeteringhead]

'Any gas turbine at idle is going to take a finite time to respond to increased full flow, be it from a rapidly raised collective or a slighly later reaction to a decaying NR.' Gems and Gnomes are pretty good too OverTq!

IIRC when Sikorski saw the RR-engined Blackhawk, they didn't believe the lack of droop with rapid collective application ......

For the Puma engine(s), isn't it the extra inertia from the centrifugal first stage(s) that slows the response??

[PlasticCabDriver]

How do the handling characteristic's compare between these reworked Puma's and the older Puma's?

One of the main reasons it has taken so long to get them into service was MoD insistence that they were all turned into HC Mk1s, so the handling is identical, because they are the same ac.

[ericferret]

Looking at my Super Puma course notes Eurocopter claim that the anticipator anticipates the governors response and in effect pumps in extra fuel the moment the collective goes up.
The end result should be a higher Nr than that prior to the input.

The cost of adding an anticpator system would be expensive as a new FCU would be required. I don't know if one was ever designed for the Turmo.

It would be better to fit the Makila as apart from the added power most of the anticipator system is built into the engine.

The only airframe parts required are a short linkage to a twin potentiometer and wiring.

[Fareastdriver]

Over Tq. Try the Paris Lyon high speed trains, they used Turmo engines.
EF is right. There is no way you can fit a proper anticipator to the 3C4 because it is a mechanical/hydro system. The shaft from the power turbine to the fuel control unit is the governer, it tells the fuel control unit how fast the rotor is turning and that's it. You could, feasably, put a mechanical linkage from the collective to the governer but I doubt if you would ever come up with a correct collective input/engine acceleration balance. Other manfacturers have done it but their designs are different from the Turmo.
The Makila has three fhonn rings just aft of the power turbine that tells the engine control unit what to electonically. Once you have a handful of wriggly amps you can piss about with them and make the engine do anything you want. Anticipators, overspeed protection, the list goes on.
It's not foolproof. On the 332 the Makila has two idle stops, ground and flight idle, about 2.5k rpm apart, so in flight their engines would never back off below about 25k. Full chat goes up to 34k so 25k is about 73%. What it does mean that when you enter autoration, you have to apply collective to control the Rrpm. Quite a lot if you are heavy, not too difficult too lose it, pass 310 Rrpm and have a rotor overspeed.
The Puma IIRC only has one idle. A second idle would solve the antipator problem to a certain extent but it would introduce the risk of rotor overspeed.
Personally I would rather think ahead for five seconds or so, the alternative could very noisy. Again I am not now flying them so I cannot, and would not, give any advice.

[Tiger_mate]

The fitting of Makila engines to the Puma has been thrown around for decades. Thinking beyond that, was there ever a case for Rolls Royce to provide engines for the beastie in the late sixties when the type was procured? Any of the old and bold residents here know?

Like it or loathe it, the 3C4 seems to be the nemesis of the RR Gnome.

[ericferret]

Turbomeca's web site provides the answer I believe.
The Turmo was developed jointly by Turbomeca and Rolls Royce!!!!!!!!!

The Turbomeca Arriel has a mechanical anticipator system which works fairly well in the Dauphin (it also has overspeed protection). Not sure what the N3/EC155 have, given they have electronic fuel control systems.

If a new FCU had to be built from scratch for the Turmo with an anticipator I suspect the cost would be way out of proportion to the production run, but thats never stopped the MOD before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Realistically they should either crank up Merlin production or buy something off the shelf.
Putting in Makila's might not be a daft a solution as it sounds. The engines would have a decent resale value (in theory!!!!) and it would be a quick fix.

The lead times on the off the shelf types seems to very long.

[PTT]

crank up Merlin production
Why? Merlin can't replace Puma for reasons gone into numerous times on this site.

[Tiger_mate]

Romania has Puma's in Aviation Museums, and almost every country in Europe is using NH90:
http://www.vtol.org/news/NH90grec.jpg
Including Greece, as in this case. You would think for an expeditionary force that common spares & cross training would be important. But then I know what 'Ample Gain' means so I must be a Cold War relic.

[The Helpful Stacker]

It is rather telling of the contempt this and previous goverments have for the armed forces of this country that "an air force that strives to be person for person the best in the world" and "agile, adaptable and capable" is still using such out-dated helicopters when other 'lesser' nations have long since invested in more modren fleets.

Although they are operated by some of the most professional folk I have ever met (as are all the SH fleet and the wider RAF fleets) they are well past their sell-by date and whatever upgrades can be thrown at them are purely putting off for a short while a decision that should have been made years ago.

[0497]

US DoD order for 537 new Sikorsky 'Hawks - $7.4bn; $13.8m (£6.8m) each

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/12/14/220293/sikorsky-lands-massive-us-order-for-black-hawks-seahawks.html

[ShyTorque]

I first flew the Puma in the late 1970s; there was a test pilot's report from Boscombe Down Handling Squadron doing the rounds before then which criticised the lack of anticipators on the engines. It advised that this was a priority which should be addressed BEFORE the aircraft entered squadron service..... 1971? - more than thirty six years ago.

There are two types of Puma HC1 pilots. Those who have already severely scared themselves by getting caught out by the lack of engine response, and those who will do so in the future.

The best HC1 I ever operated was one in Northern Ireland where the engineers couldn't get the engines to match at idle. I think the maximum "mismatch limit" at low power was 10% N1. This one had a red line Form 700 entry because it had at least a 14-15% mismatch and was much nicer to fly due to the high engine being much more responsive to collective inputs. I didn't want it fixed :p

There was also much talk about the Turmo engines being replaced with Makilas even way back then.

These aircraft have done the UK Forces proud and owe the country nothing. It's time we bought our pilots something more modern and safe. It's the equivalent of asking someone to go to war in a Ford Cortina Mark 3 (or even worse, a Citroen GS Pallas)!

[ambidextrous]

As a recent civvy convert to the 330J Puma (Helog Sudan 2005) perhaps some of the more erudite members of this forum could enlighten me as to why we did not support the NH90, which would appear to be the answer to the RAF's current SH requirements?
Also, as an interim measure why were the surplus Puma's available from the Bundesgrenshutz in 2005 not purchased by MOD? Please don't say it was cost, I believe they were being sold on the open market for something like 1.0 to 1.2 million euro at the time & very low airframe hours too! :confused:

[PlasticCabDriver]

Because the money available to rotary has been so whittled away by the demands of Typhoon, Nimrod MRA4 etc, that it has never had enough to be able to afford NH-90.

As to the Bundesgrenshutz Pumas, even if they appeared on the MoD's radar, it would have been the cost.

€1.2m they may have been, but when all the extra cost of creating extra supply chains, QinetiQ clearances, changing the engines back to 3C4s, refitting the avionics so there weren't 2 seperate cockpit types etc etc etc was factored in, they wouldn't be so cheap.

Shytorque:

There are two types of Puma HC1 pilots. Those who have already severely scared themselves by getting caught out by the lack of engine response, and those who will do so in the future.


So very true!

[NURSE]

i though the AW149 was being developed to be the puma replacement and the puma fleet was being upgraded to give it life till this aircraft comes along.
NH90's or more merlins would be a good solution though

[ericferret]

The Bundesgrenshutz replaced some of theie 330's with ex North Sea 332's.

Why is it that everything is too difficult for the MOD?

We keep hearing about problems with mixed fleets, yet civilian operators do not seem to have a problem e.g CHC's S76A and AW 139's operating from the same base. S76C, 365N and 365N2 operating from the same base.

In the past the airforce operated successfully mixed fleets of aircraft.

Nobody says this is ideal but there are times that you have to do what works and not necessarily what is best.

[ambidextrous]

Well put ericferret.
In the early 80's I was operating with BCAL out of Sumburgh with a fleet of five S61N sourced from worldwide. I recall three different nav/comm fits & differing instrument layouts, there were no incidents/accidents attributed to lack of standardisation as far as I can recall.
Are we talking here of the MOD being unable to operate variants of the same type or that the crews are unable to get their heads round more than one variant at a time or both?
Plactic Cab Driver - why should the engines have to be changed?
with fraternal greetings,
ambi:confused:

[PlasticCabDriver]

If the Makilas were left in, we would end up paying QinetiQ vast sums of money to do the flight testing to certify them. The J4 chain would bleat about 'fleets within fleets' and all the additional logs & engineering work they would have to do. Are the Bundesgrenschutz Pumas NVG compatible? Do they possess a DAS that meet UK spec? Does the comms fit meet op needs? Are the instruments and warning systems in German? All that would cost money to fix. And we have none.

We could have bought them, but given the amount of money it would have cost to make them useable, was it worth it?

[Mr-AEO]

If the Makilas were left in, we would end up paying QinetiQ vast sums of money to do the flight testing to certify them I wish we had done that in 2005, because the Makila is going into the Puma Mk2 and the safety case work still needs doing.

Looking at the other FLynx thread. Some would accuse you of 'tinkering' with the airframes. But I totally agree with you, they were not useable to us at the COTS cost of E1.2E

[ambidextrous]

Plastic cab driver,
Thank you for your response & my apologies for labouring any particular point!
The initial two pumas operated by Helog were not fitted with Makilas' but Turmos, which are standard for the RAF fleet are they not? I can't vouch for the remainder. They were also fitted with sponson fuel tanks.
Yes, the Bundesgrenshutz machines are NVG compatible, we had the kit fitted in Sudan.
Yes, the instruments and warning systems are in English, they had to be because the majority of the pilots on the Sudan op. were former French Army!
It seems to me that the MOD missed a trick by not purchasing these machines.
with fraternal greetings,
ambi:ok:

[Fareastdriver]

A Puma is a Puma is a Puma, irrespective of where it comes from. My fleet has fast ones, 250 indicated cruise. Very steady ones, takes ages for the two needle altimeter to move. Some have enormous hydraulic pressures but as long as the needles point in the same direction as the others it doesn't matter. Flight instruments? Sometimes the Zero is at the top, sometimes at the bottom. Some radios and navaids have knobs, others have flip-flops. We havn't got confused and crashed any yet. No reason why we should.

[Tigs2]

Fareastdriver

My fleet has fast ones, 250 indicated cruise

250 what???

[airborne_artist]

250 km/h, which is about 135 kts

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

"A Puma is a Puma is a Puma"

So so glad we never flew together................:ugh:

[Pumaoldboy]

I have read with interest people's views on the Puma over the years - I have a Puma background and I have flown the Puma with Mikila engines, the SA Oryx, the Super Puma Mk 1 & 2 and the EC225. The Puma HC Mk1 has by far the worst engine response of this family of helicopters and any other helicopter I have flown that wasn't built in the 1950s. Accelerating the engines above 75% Ng before making a large power demand doesn't solve the problem - the acceleration characterisitcs above 75% Ng are still very poor when compared to other aircraft and when you use this aircraft at high DA and AUW. The accident statistics for the Puma over the years (particularly recently) reflect this, and I would suspect that the aircraft would not be cleared for use if it was presented for testing today.

A manufacturer will only spend suffcient money to rectify problems to an acceptable standard - not a good standard. However, over the years Eurocopter and Turbomeca have steadily improved the handling (use of AFCSs and a few aerodynamic fixes) ) and engine performance of the Puma family - consequently, today the issues the RAF associates with the Puma are not significant in Eurocopter's latest offerings. This is a long winded way of saying new aircraft always have significant problems and those of you out there who think the brand new NH90 is the answer to everyones prayers are not being realistic. I am sure over the years any problems the NH90 has will be ironed out and in ten years it will be a top notch helicopter - but not yet.

[Tiger_mate]

A reasoned and well presented input into the debate, but:

A brand new NH90 will have longevity
Will have some form of accurate fatique monitoring
Will have future upgrade potential
Can be designed from the drawing board to include the very best self defence/warning equipment, rather then bodged.

Whereas the fact remains that the entire Puma fleet has been worked very hard over decades and already undergone at least 2 'mid-life upgrades', and has vices that are well documented, that the operator is expected to live with under battlefield conditions. Operational fuel levels/endurance is poor, and it is carrying a lot of heavy self defence equipment that was unknown in its original concept.

The Australians taking delivery of the NH90 now will not be operational until 2012, but at least there is action being taken to provide the required kit. In 2012 the RAF will still be completing 'mid-life' updates of the Puma, assuming of course thatthere are any left to upgrade.

In summary> Less focus on Typhoon > More expenditure on equipment for the guys and girls at the coal face right now. More Merlin/Chinook is a good start but there will always be a need for a smaller capable SH platform.

The NH90 helicopter programme is the largest ever launched in Europe, with firm orders now reaching 507 units for 19 Armed Forces of 14 Nations: France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Greece, Oman, Australia, New-Zealand, Spain and Belgium.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Fareastdriver : We havn't got confused and crashed any yet. No reason why we should.

I bet your colleagues are looking forward to flying the next sortie with you.

[Daysleeper]

If the Makilas were left in, we would end up paying QinetiQ vast sums of money to do the flight testing to certify them.

Why? These engines are in use by a variety of friendly countries and have been for some time. Its not as if they are some sort of brand new experimental kit. Why spend money doing work that has already been done by others.

[Fareastdriver]

Seldomfitforpurpose "A Puma is a Puma is a Puma"
So so glad we never flew together................

Vie sans frontieres Fareastdriver :
Quote:
We havn't got confused and crashed any yet. No reason why we should.
I bet your colleagues are looking forward to flying the next sortie with you.
They do actually. After 12,000 hrs or so on various marks and nationalities of Pumas they value my experience and are prepared to pay for it.
I'm on US$15,000 a month nett. What are you two on?

Changing back to the thread. Giving my opinion as an ex-service UK taxpayer, operating old aircraft was thrown out of the civilian operators windows years ago. Those who are of an advanced age will remember flogging off to Spain in beaten up old Connies or DC 6s. Those days have gone. All charter and cheapo airlines operators in the UK use the latest and most up to date kit, because it costs less. They don't retire them off to freighting anymore, Boeing produce brand new 747 400 freighters. I know because Jade have three of them down the road.

New aeroplanes cost less because they are more reliable, so have less down time. Any spares required arrive on tap because they are being produced for new aircraft. You can't get spares in a hurry for old equipment. Sikorsky subcontacted spares for S61s out years ago. If you want a bit, it has to be made, very much the same with a Puma.

I had a great time with the Puma. Pre-polivalent there was never any aerodynamic surprises with it. I remember Roy Moxam telling me when I found out that I was going on to them that it was like flying a fighter, and he was right. That was thirty seven years ago but time marches on.

Anybody in the aviation business will tell you that dragging out an old 737 200and trying to upgrade it with engines or what you like and hoping to make it as cost effective as a say 737 600 is completely and totally wasting his time.

[ShyTorque]

From my own experience, flying mixed fleets is not a problem.

I flew two different models of Sikorsky helicopter for some time, both single and two pilot ops depending on the job required on the day (Blackhawk S-70 and S-76). We often used to jump across from one to the other, the most difficult thing to overcome was remembering that we had to wear the correct helmet as the intercom plugs were different.

Same later in a different job, flew two different marks of the same aircraft (S-76 B and C++), with totally different engines.

Can't be that difficult as I'm ex-Pumas too. :p

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

"I'm on US$15,000 a month nett. What are you two on?"

Pay me that with another naught on the end and I still would not climb into an aircraft with you.................before your time I know but CRM was introduced because of the dinosaurs and thankfully is now working.........:ok:

[minigundiplomat]

Ive no real input except to say I hope the Puma fleet sorts out any problems it has.

The guys are doing a great job in the Near East.

[Vie sans frontieres]

Fareastdriver (again) :
I'm on US$15,000 a month nett. What are you two on?


...and I bet your colleagues are looking forward to spending time in your company this Christmas as well. You must go down a treat at dinner parties.

[NURSE]

The SH community has always tried to give a sterling service and has usually been let down by lack of investment over many years. Look at 72Sqn flying wessex in Northern Ireland right up till 1990's and now the Puma and sea king force will probably be around as long.
But then the government was never really committed to winning Northern Ireland and 2 of the services have other priorities to spend money on. What is needed for SH is some modern kit and some long term thinking/planning. A rehashed Puma will fill a gap but for how long?
Investment needs to be in New equipment I have seen the Blurb about AW149 as the Puma replacement and NH90 is just entering service with our allies so the chances of getting any of thease in the near future is 0.
So that leaves us in the short term with a capbility gap but medium term there needs to be some cohesive planning and thought put into the long term future of SH