Falklands Lynx

[Trojan1981]

Does anyone on this forum know why no AAC Lynx AH-1 helicopters were deployed as part of the Falklands task group in 1982? I have tried to find an answer but to no avail. It just seems odd that no Lynx were deployed, but the less capable Gazelle and Scout were.

Cheers.

[Ali Barber]

Were they on the Atlantic Conveyor?

[Wizzard]

In 1982 all of the front line Lynx in service were stationed in Germany and therefore committed to NATO. IIRC no NATO units were released for operations in the Falklands

I was a Lynx pilot in 1982 and I don't think at the time I would have classed it as "more capable".

Later - much later - yes.

[Milo Minderbinder]

At the time it was said in the press that the Army Lynx had not been fitted with deicing gear. As someone else implied in another thread a few months ago, that doesn't quite seem to make sense. However I guess its possible that for whatever reason, the Lynx had not passed cold weather trials???

[St Johns Wort]

Didn't a Navy Lynx escort BN to San Carlos to provide radio cover?

[diginagain]

Army Lynx were deployed around 83-84, but the airframe was still under-developed, to coin a phrase, and didn't suit long-distance logistics support. I'm sure one of my learned colleagues may offer more precise numbers, but in the early days of AH1 we were looking at close to 100 man-hours of maint per flying-hour. In comparison to the 7, the AH1 was just bloody awful.

RIP Rog Jones and John Belt.

[Lower Hangar]

Yes - that is correct.

[Airborne Aircrew]

IIRC no NATO units were released for operations in the Falklands

I believe 63 Squadron RAF Regiment were "committed to NATO" and they went south.

[Trojan1981]

Thanks for the answers so far. An under-developed airframe, maintenance intensive and not necessarily more capable at that time; as well as being committed on the continent. That all seems to explain it. Does anyone know a source/link I can quote on this? (Rather than just proone!).

Wizzard, as a Lynx pilot at the time, were you aware of any operational Lynxes supporting RM Commandos, or were they not yet operating with the type?

Cheers.

[tucumseh]

At the time, the Lynx Ground Support Equipment (GSE) development and manufacturing tasks were only just getting under way. Lacking that equipment, having Lynx dispersed around the globe wasn't supportable. Which ties in with the above post about NATO assets.

But there was clearly a contingency plan to send them, because GSE production was ramped up. In those days, most GSE was designed and built in-house, at 3rd line workshops.

[Pheasant]

There were plenty of Navy Lynx down south in '82 and which were far more complex that their Army counterparts. Average flying hours in 6-8 weeks was 150 per airframe. MMH were pretty low as well. As far as GSE is concerned I would have thought that most of the RN kit would have been suitable for the Army version. I suspect one of the reasons was deck space for another helo type.

[ewe.lander]

I flew Lynx AH1's in Hildesheim in '84, we had to re-convert to Scout's for our Falklands tour, then back to Lynx on return to BAOR. Somebody somewhere will have a photo of 'Skid Row', all the broken Lynx Skids from previous tours in the Falklands (a skid graveyard at Murray heights.....:hmm:)

[gsa]

It wasn't very long after the tail booms had been changed on the ones at Detmold so would you take a cab to war that tried to shake itself to bits when you had a squaddie proof Scout with lots of manpower that knew how to use it and the big hammer to fix it.

[tucumseh]

Pheasant

You are right -re GSE, but the point I made was that the GSE was being built at a rate commensurate with the production rate of the aircraft themselves; which were bought in relatively small batches. The rate for everything was increased in 1982.

For example, the production output of avionics for RN Lynx was increased 5-fold in the examples I'm familiar with. By 1982 the majority of GSE had been designed (often by apprentices), but was being produced (again by apprentices) as and when their training permitted. In other words, it was a minimum cost exercise, which MoD excelled at (not a criticism!). Nowadays, we don't have such expertise in-house and prefer to pay 10 times as much for less flexibility.

[diginagain]

Ground-handling the grey Lynx is relatively easy, especially over short distances as are often found on HM tubs. As a former groundcrewman on Army Lynx, I cannot imagine that dragging a cab around the dispersals at Murray Heights would have been fun with the 'Westland Wheels'; I shudder to think what carnage would have resulted from using the ML Handler* in the prevailing weather conditions. In 85 the pans were barely big enough to push a Scout or Gazelle onto without fear of it disappearing into the surrounding bog.

*4x 12v/100amp truck batteries and fragile hydraulic pumps, guaranteed to quit without notice - who thought that one up?

[Two's in]

*4x 12v/100amp truck batteries and fragile hydraulic pumps, guaranteed to quit without notice - who thought that one up?

Not forgetting its ability to randomly open a front jaw and drop the airframe onto the lifting beam! Step forward ML Aviation, we have a winner.

[timex]

Possibly one of the reasons for no AH1 going to the Falklands was that the Sqns in Support of 3 Cdo Bde and 5 Inf Bde were still roled with Scout, certainly 3 BAS was equipped with Scout and didnt get Lynx until afterwards.

[diginagain]

Not forgetting its ability to randomly open a front jaw and drop the airframe onto the lifting beam! Step forward ML Aviation, we have a winner. At the Grand Opening of 669 Sqn's refurbished shed, the highlight of the ceremony was to be the entry of the hangar by a Lynx/ML Handler combo.

The ML quit with the cab halfway through the doors.

[Sloppy Link]

Not 100% certain but I think one of the factors was that although the aircraft was in service, TOW wasn't whereas Scout/SS-11 was. Further, 3 Cdo Bde were the deployed unit with their organic aviation support, 3 BAS equipped with Scout/SS-11. The Bde was reinforced with elements from 8 Field Force in the form of 2 Para, 3 Para, 9 Para Sqn RE with their organic aviation support of one flight of 656 Sqn AAC also equipped with Scout/SS-11. When 5 Field Force deployed, they bought no aviation support as, by means that are lost in military smog, 656 Sqn was by now complete ahead of the unit!

[Trojan1981]

Ok, thanks Sloppy Link.

Do you know when 3 BAS re-equipped with Lynx/TOW?

[MOSTAFA]

651 Sqn Air-gunners did their TOW conversions prior to deployment of the task force. I think the truth is nobody trusted Lynx albeit the Sqn had operated them since 79.

[helimarshaller]

Most of the 3 BAS RM & 656 Sqn AAC Det who deployed within days of the Argentine invasion were operated off the back of either LSL's or the MV Europic Ferry. It was tight enough with 2/3 Scouts or Gazelles on there flight deck. If Lynx had been deployed there is likely to have been room for 1 Lynx, 2 at a push on the LSL deck.
As someone who departed UK with the Task Force it was hard enough man-handling Scouts on the rolling decks. I would not have wanted to have been attempting to move a Lynx when the ML Handler failed and left a top heavy helicopter in a very awkward position and closing the deck.
If the Scout's had been replaced with a like number of Lynx I don't think the AAC would have had enough ML Handlers to cope the the scattered aircraft around the fleet.

3 BAS didnt equip to Lynx until they re-located to Yeovilton and TOW came a few years later if I remember right. They definitely had TOW when I joined the squadron in Oct 1985.
Steve

[timex]

Certainly agree with Steve about 85 as thats when I joined 3 BAS and they were there then, ISTR seeing a Lynx in Norway with the Sqn about 83/84.

[Trojan1981]

Thanks for the responses; I think thats about covered.

For you guys who flew the Lynx, how does it compare to other types? Particulary the Squirrel, Seahawk and Scout if you have flown them. I alsways wondered why the Australian Military never purchased the Lynx. Also, are Lynxes still using the TOW capabilty after the EIS of the Apache?

[Milo Minderbinder]

Better to wonder why no other armed forces purchased the Army Lynx

[timex]

TOW was finally taken out of service about 2004/5 IIRC, shame as it was/is still a decent system.

[diginagain]

ISTR our tubes were a bespoke build under license, in the hope that orders to other countries would help offset the costs of developing training rounds, ITOW and FITOW, and that funding was only available until ISD OF Apache. Lx7/FITOW, when it eventually made it into service, was a game-changing combination, unlike the AH1/TOW.

For Op Corporate, Lynx/TOW wouldn't really offer more capability than Scout/SS11, given the limited anti-armour opportunities, and the Sqns deployed were well acquainted with their primary customers; bringing-in Lynx-equipped units might have been an unwelcome disturbance.

Better to wonder why no other armed forces purchased the Army Lynx To coin a phrase in common usage at the time of it's introduction; The finest small-ship, anti-submarine helicopter ever fielded by the British Army.

For you guys who flew the Lynx, how does it compare to other types? Particulary the Squirrel, Seahawk and Scout if you have flown them.You couldn't get two camp-beds side-by-side in the back of a Scout.

[Milo Minderbinder]

"For Op Corporate, Lynx/TOW wouldn't really offer more capability than Scout/SS11"

Don't forget that also the Wessex 5 was wired for AS-11 and AS-12
Didn't one fire a missile from the hover up the main street in Stanley in an attempt to take out the Argentine HQ building?


Having said that, from memory I'm sure there were one or two Army Lynx at Yeovilton at the time - maybe early conversion training or trials?

[diginagain]

Having said that, from memory I'm sure there were one or two Army Lynx at Yeovilton at the time - maybe early conversion training or trials?Might have been doing some training with 3CBAS.

Popping back to TOW for a moment; the bloke who got the job of TOW Marketing Manager for BAe had previously been employed as a Scout pilot until a few controlled airspace infringements in the Heathrow area lead to the relinquishment of his Commission.

[Trojan1981]

"Quote:
The finest small-ship, anti-submarine helicopter ever fielded by the British Army."
:)


"Quote:
For you guys who flew the Lynx, how does it compare to other types? Particulary the Squirrel, Seahawk and Scout if you have flown them.
You couldn't get two camp-beds side-by-side in the back of a Scout."

Yeah, what I mean is how do the aircraft fly in comparison to each other? Advantages and vices, that sort of thing. For example I have heard the Scout has frightening auto characteristics; is this the case and, if so, did the Lynx inherit these?

[Mmmmnice]

I'm sure if it was anyway possible the Lynx would have been used - it was comical, and depressing, to see a Wasp puffing and panting to lift ONE can of kero from the ramp at Asi. It originally loaded 6 but they were taken off one by one as it became clear it wasn't going to get airborne. Interestingly there was no attempt at a running takeoff, but I guess the small deck mindset would discount that option.

[diginagain]

For example I have heard the Scout has frightening auto characteristics; is this the case and, if so, did the Lynx inherit these? Difficult to inherit if they are unrelated, other than by manufacturer. The Scout started out as a Saunders-Roe design. The Lynx in auto was very sensitive in Nr, in my experience. Never got to auto the Scout, but some who mishandled the cabin heat control did, as it was adjacent to, and operated in the same sense as the fuel cock.

[Tourist]

"but I guess the small deck mindset would discount that option"

..or possibly you could think about it for a minute and the reason might become clear.

[ralphmalph]

Can't think of a problem with a running take off.....as long as you had wheels, or could get light enough to drag the skids a little.

Just depends what you need to do at the other end!?:eek:

If it is a runway, mega....if not!

[diginagain]

..........as long as you had wheels,............that point in your intended direction of travel. Which didn't on the Wasp.

[jonwilly]

"in the early days of AH1 we were looking at close to 100 man-hours of maint per flying-hour."

As a mech of those days I would say that 100 man hours / flying Hr is far too high about 22 being a figure then quoted.
The original Lynx was a joke maintenance wise and the manning on the REME side was far too low. Manning figures had been established on IFTU results, which bore no relation to Real World Field use.
The lack of REME experience was frightening.
I had worked on Lynx for 3 years before I was sent on a Type Course and the majority of SNCO's never did a type course.

john:ugh:
I too remember John and Rodger.

[SilsoeSid]

You couldn't get two camp-beds side-by-side in the back of a Scout.

Maybe not, but with the bulbous doors, the 4 man bench seat as the 'upper level' and a camp bed at 'floor level', you had a nice little two-level effect. All that was missing was a nice little path running down the middle.

@4:10
Knights Who Say Ni

Oh, and don't forget the 2 casevac pods that could be fitted to the skids, fairly comfortable and probably one of the most 'different' first flights with a Sqn!

[diginagain]

All well and good, Sid, but for the thought of lying perpendicular to the only means of finding relief after an evening on the Herfy.

[SilsoeSid]

..and here's me thinking that the little window in the lid was for those that enjoyed to watch that sort of thing!!! A kind of field version of the German glass topped coffee table :yuk: