PDA

View Full Version : Chinooks to be upgraded to HC4


PPRuNeUser0211
25th Jul 2008, 09:52
Flight have the following:

UK Royal Air Force outlines plans for major Chinook upgrade (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/07/25/226047/uk-royal-air-force-outlines-plans-for-major-chinook-upgrade.html)


The UK Royal Air Force plans to upgrade its entire fleet of Boeing CH-47 transport helicopters to a standard configuration from late 2009, with the modernised type likely to be dubbed the HC4, says Chinook force commander Gp Capt Andy Turner.

Full details of the Chinook capability upgrade have yet to be finalised, along with funding approvals, but key elements will include a standardised glass cockpit with head-up displays and new navigation and night vision equipment, says Turner. A radio upgrade will provide connectivity with the British Army's Bowman battlefield communications system, and the aircraft will also receive a "refined" defensive aids system.

The work will be embodied with the service's current 40 Chinook HC2/2As (one pictured above), plus its eight extended-range HC3s; the first of which are entering a "reversion" programme to clear them for use after being kept in storage since 2001. "We will have a single, coherent fleet, with one aircraft standard and one pilot qualification," says Turner.

With 40% of the current fleet deployed on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the RAF's Chinook force is maintaining a commitment of 10 and one aircraft, respectively, the additional eight aircraft will provide vital extra capacity during the upgrade period, according to Turner.

A parallel effort to increase the number of hours flown by the current aircraft is also now paying off, with the fleet on track to meet its target of delivering 16,000 flight hours this year including 7,200h in Afghanistan and Iraq: up from 12,000h in 2006.

"We are now flying the 16,000h rate, and have been for the last four months," says Turner, who reveals that aircraft in Afghanistan are now logging a combined 550h a month, performing tasks including troop transport and equipment resupply. "Our role is hugely flexible," he says, while also describing the Chinook as "a war-winning capability". But responding to criticism that the UK should send more helicopters to the country, he adds: "The quantity at the moment is the maximum we can endure with."

The RAF also plans to within the next six months extend the periods between scheduled service intervals by 33% to further increase fleet availability, with this and the additional eight aircraft (three pictured below) to boost operations to 18,500h in 2010. "The net number of hours to the fleet won't change, but the pressure will be less," says Turner.

With the UK's Chinook force heavily committed in Afghanistan and Iraq, the RAF intends to address the risk of possible "skills-fade" in other areas. The service is now planning to conduct training in littoral and amphibious manoeuvres, and in jungle and arctic operations, says Turner.

The UK expects to operate its Chinooks until at least 2040, according to a through-life customer support deal signed with Boeing in 2006.

Preparations are meanwhile under way in the UK to support crew training activities for Canada's future fleet of CH-47Fs. One Canadian exchange pilot will join 18 Sqn at RAF Odiham, Hampshire in September, while a further two student pilots and two rear crew members will begin training at the base during the same month.


What.... can....possibly.... go....wrong....

HaveQuick2
25th Jul 2008, 10:08
"The RAF also plans to within the next six months extend the periods between scheduled service intervals by 33% to further increase fleet availability"


I don't like the sound of that.

Wader2
25th Jul 2008, 10:13
the additional eight aircraft will provide vital extra capacity during the upgrade period, according to Turner

RESOURCES not CAPACITY.

extra capacity if they were additional too . . .

extra resources on which to draw as the Mk 2/2a are withdrawn for modification.

NURSE
25th Jul 2008, 10:43
would it not be more worth while to order CH47F as additional airframes then trickle order more to replace the fleet over time?

Rakshasa
25th Jul 2008, 11:06
That might be in the offing, at least AW seem to think it is, they've secured a manufacturing licsense for the Wokka off Boeing, I believe.

NutLoose
25th Jul 2008, 11:41
Of course like a good Wine or Cheese, they will need to be stored for a while to reach maturity after remanufacture, I tell you what, Boscombe Down may be the ideal place to mature them...... Or am I just being cynical? ;)

Perhaps they are all being brought up to the Special NoOperations Mk 3 standards...:ugh:

MReyn24050
25th Jul 2008, 11:45
Full details of the Chinook capability upgrade have yet to be finalised, along with funding approvals, but key elements will include a standardised glass cockpit with head-up displays and new navigation and night vision equipment, says Turner. A radio upgrade will provide connectivity with the British Army's Bowman battlefield communications system, and the aircraft will also receive a "refined" defensive aids system.

The work will be embodied with the service's current 40 Chinook HC2/2As (one pictured above), plus its eight extended-range HC3s; the first of which are entering a "reversion" programme to clear them for use after being kept in storage since 2001. "We will have a single, coherent fleet, with one aircraft standard and one pilot qualification," says Turner.


Rather than reverting the HC3s to HC2 standard wouldn't it make sense to convert these aircraft to the proposed HC4 standard first?

Wader2
25th Jul 2008, 11:51
they will need to be stored for a while to reach maturity after remanufacture, I tell you what, Boscombe Down may be the ideal place to mature them...... Or am I just being cynical? ;)

Unrealistic may be but cynical, no. We used to do just that. When first brought in to service the number of V-bombers was set to maintain a given number on the front line with those on CWP and Majors being replaced from Command spares.

Do we think the full 3 tranche Typhoon buy would ever all be in-service at the same time?

It would be good if we did indeed have enough airframes to maintain front line numbers with major service airframes being replaced from the attrition pool.

Wader2
25th Jul 2008, 11:59
Rather than reverting the HC3s to HC2 standard wouldn't it make sense to convert these aircraft to the proosed HC4 standard first?

That crossed my mind too but perhaps there are other factors. The conversion time for Mk 2 to Mk 4 might be X months but for a Mk 3 to Mk 2a might be X/2 and then another X to modify it to Mk 4.

Now the Mk 2 might be out by the hours before the Mk 3 could be converted to Mk 4 standard so convert the Mk 3 to Mk2a and convert timex Mk 2s first. Then convert the Mk 3/2a which have filling the Mk 2 gap to Mk 4s.

Inefficient, yes, but necessary perhaps. Just a thought.

Evalu8ter
25th Jul 2008, 12:44
Nurse, To purchase and "trickle feed" CH-47Fs has much to commend it. For a start, we could align with the US Army's "virtual fleet" and we would have zero-timed airframes to play with. However, there are some distinct problems. Firstly, money. It is obvious that defence is broke for the next few years so there is little money to conduct a large capital purchase of F models. Secondly, we are too far back down the queue to get Fs much before 2012-2014 (due to the US Army, Canada, Australia & the Dutch getting in before us - let alone the potential CSAR-X...). Thirdly, distinct lack of UK/EU offset, much of the "Mk4" capability will be EU sourced. Fourth, although AW and Boeing are apparently discussing a Licence, it appears by no means a done deal. However, 50-60 AW CH47Fs with UK mission systems would do very nicely! Finally, there are a host of certification issues over CAAS and other systems on the F model; do we really want to buy another potentially uncertifiable aircraft...?

The Mk3R-Mk2a-Mk4 debate is a painful one. If you want to save money you would perhaps choose to mod them directly to Mk4 standard. However, if you want them in service substantially quicker and pulling their weight on Ops (or releasing Mk2/2a ac to do so) then you must "revert" them. If we could have bought / leased extra Chinook capacity quicker we would have done.

The RW and AT fleets have always suffered through a lack of combat attrition airframes. As Wader surmisies, the FJ force will never operate more than 50% of the Typhoon airframes at any one time, allowing upgrades and sustainment concurrently in depth. FJs are bought with a proposed accident and combat attrition element over the expected life-time of the ac, so that you still have enough ac on the the retirement date. We simply do not do the same for AT/RW. Ironically, our combat losses / operational accidents for the past 5 years have nearly all been AT/RW (and particularly felt by the C-130 and Puma fleets).