We have enough helicopters

[Low Ball]

Just caught the BBC news at home and now see it's on the BBC news on line.

A Lt Col in the AAC, presently in charge of helicopter operations in Helmand province claims he has enough helicopters.

Not sure he answered the question. There will always be enough helicopters for casevac - how many do you need one, two?

Surely the question was have any lives have been lost due to shortage of helicopters? That is to say has the limited number of helicopters available constrained planners and operational commanders to placing troops in the field by vehicle or foot when helicopter would have been preffered and have any been killed/wounded as a result?

Sounded like a political soundbite - didn't look the camera in the eye while replying either.

I didn't see the preceeding interview with a Brigadier who allegedly said the same. Maybe I'm being too harsh.

LB

[bingofuel]

I caught the tail end of a news report the other evening regarding a joint US/UK operation where the US provided 15 Chinooks to transport UK troops on one operation. The reporter made the comment that the US had provided more heavy helicopters for this one operation than the UK had in theatre.

Food for thought!!!

[airborne_artist]

So says Col Tootal in today's Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6165754/Ex-army-chief-extra-helicopters-are-too-old.html)

Discuss....:ok:

[The Helpful Stacker]

From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of helicopters operated by the British military aren't many of them similar to 'Trigger's Broom', in that although the airframe serial numbers may be old a good amount of the component parts are fairly new?

The Chinook may have been around in RAF service since the late 70's but the rotor heads, gear boxes and engines haven't, which correct me if I'm wrong, are the most critical parts of what (very) basically is an iso container strapped to a means of dragging it into the air. Thats not for one second playing down what is done with the Chinnies BTW.

Whilst the Sea King may be old technology and whilst it may not be the most suitable aircraft for operations in Afghanistan does that automatically mean its 'old and knackered' or is it just being used in a role it was really designed for?

Yes I'd like to see the British military equipped with newer SH but realistically thats not going to happen.

[Jabba_TG12]

I would bet a pound to a pinch of sh*te he was leaned on, heavily, to toe the official line.

"You know the reporter is going to ask you the question... if you value your career in ANY way, you are NOT going to drop us in it." :rolleyes:

Its all well and good asking JHC... Ask the guys actually out in the field who have come to depend on them.

Stuart Tootal is entitled to say whatever he likes, PVR'ing allows you to do that...

Reading Danger Close, I like the cut of his jib. I would take his word over that of Ainsworth any day of the week.

And anyway. We've had to deny 2 CH47's recently, so out of the original total of 10, we have 8 left. Therefore we obviously havent got enough, because if that was the case, we would have only have bought 8 in the first place and there wouldnt be any need for the 8 other 10 year old static display ones at Odiham to be reverted to HC2 and "rushed" out there by the end of the year, in addition to the Merlins, would there? :confused:

Not that most of the sheeple watching Al JaBeeba, apart from the likes of us with either an active or passing interest in the subject would recognise that though... And, after Dr Kelly, Auntie is never going to s**t on her own doorstep again, is she? :mad:

[PTC REMF]

It would be interesting to compare the monthly flying hours of the UK/US SH components in RC(S).

[jayteeto]

Years ago we took 2 Pumas to Columbia on disaster relief. There was a pan FULL of US Blackhawks. They did a good job, but we were flying 8 hours a day to their 2. (all figures approx) Size isn't everything. Just think what we could do with more though......
PS. Can't resist this one..... I didn't know Tigger had a broom. Did he sweep the forest with it????

[The Helpful Stacker]

Damn (slaps forehead), you know what I meant.

[Tigger_Too]

I didn't know Tigger had a broom. Did he sweep the forest with it????

Excuse me! I resemble that remark!

Years ago we took 2 Pumas to Columbia

Good Irish Pub on Dupont Circle!

[Two's in]

Whilst the Sea King may be old technology and whilst it may not be the most suitable aircraft for operations in Afghanistan does that automatically mean its 'old and knackered' or is it just being used in a role it was really designed for?


THS, you're basic assumption is correct about the critical components being replaced, the trouble with older designs compared to the newer equipment is there is little if any "reliability and maintainability" built in. Not only do components fail or wear out quicker, but they require disproportionate amounts of resources to replace them. That's assuming you can actually get the spares in the first place. Bottom line is they will certainly do the operational tasks effectively, but the logistics penalty in doing that brings the whole supply chain grinding to a halt.

[tucumseh]

Spot on, Two's In.

And that's one reason why the Tories approved an extra 50 (approx) Merlins (modifiable to Commando variant) in the early-80s, to augment the new (at the time) SK4 fleet. Then they cancelled them, leaving an acknowledged shortfall in troop lift. Perhaps they'll resurrect (or establish, seeing as it never existed) the capability if they get in next year.

Funny how Labour haven't sought to capitalise on this. But they don't like people with long memories.

The mod to convert from ASW to Commando was a bitch though. In the end, the powers decided to retain the radar (which I'm not sure is very easy to do in a HM Mk1), and endorsed a requirement to fit one to the SK4, so all (RN) SH would have that capability. This was only canned when the final Mk1 numbers were established, and it was known there wouldn't be sufficient to have a Commando Role fleet.

[Hilife]

THS

Whilst the Sea King may be old technology and whilst it may not be the most suitable aircraft for operations in Afghanistan does that automatically mean its 'old and knackered' or is it just being used in a role it was really designed for?

In addition to the relevant maintainability points noted by ‘Two’s in’, the answer to your question lies as much with its name as with the large amount of manpower and spares required to keep this ageing design in the sky.

An excellent machine as she is, the Sea King was born out of a requirement for an ASW rotary-wing platform (not high on the priority list in the Stan) operating at sea-level densities and temperatures. The installed engines do not have the ITT margin’s required to operate effectively at very high density altitudes, as a result the useful load is severely compromised with PAX numbers down to eyebrow raising numbers on very hot days.

Operating an ageing and unreliable fleet with high maintenance requirements and designed for operations in a temperate and marine European theatre has clearly left us struggling to support current OPS, so no we don’t have enough helicopters of current type (or crews for that matter), but we’ve known that for years now and still we dither on FASH/SABR/FRC/FMH/?

We did have an opportunity to rectify many of these issues in the summer, but I suspect the Treasury took a dislike to this idea and therefore put the kibosh on it.