Joint Helicopter Command looks forward to 2045
Thread Starter
Joint Helicopter Command looks forward to 2045
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 53
Posts: 1,235
Received 52 Likes
on
21 Posts
Puma 2035 anyone?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Martin the Martian
Puma 2035 anyone?
JHC is conducting what it calls the Future Capability Study, to identify rotary-wing requirements into the 2040s and beyond. One element of this could be to push back the retirement date of the RAF's Airbus Helicopters Puma HC2 medium transports until 2030 to bring them into line with the out-of-service date for the Royal Navy's AgustaWestland Merlin HM2s and HC4/4As. Both types, plus the AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat, could then be replaced with a common medium platform in 2030-40.
I/C
One element of this could be to push back the retirement date of the RAF's Airbus Helicopters Puma HC2 medium transports until 2030 to bring them into line with the out-of-service date for the Royal Navy's AgustaWestland Merlin HM2s and HC4/4As.
Both types, plus the AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat, could then be replaced with a common medium platform in 2030-40, he says
Both types, plus the AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat, could then be replaced with a common medium platform in 2030-40, he says
the AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat,
Westland name to be dropped from parent company Finmeccanica | Western Daily Press
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Noticed this recently on the US FVL Programme. Is there any likelihood that the UK could go down this route ?
Image Credit : Defense News
US Army Driving Toward FVL Production in 2030
Image Credit : Defense News
US Army Driving Toward FVL Production in 2030
So, that"ll be more Chinooks then!
Didn't take long for DRWCS to be superseded did it?
Nothing really new; Puma would be very hard to replace in 2025 as the fact there's no MSH PT stood up indicates no funding line - therefore extending Puma OSD becomes the only game in town, at least for the next 5-10 years.
The interest in AAR suggests that the long range insertion requirement is coming back, and that there's no money until the 2030s for something like CV-22 or a version of the JMR output. Merlin can AAR, and the Chinook Mk3 AU could but most of the kit was stripped out during the reversion programme.
The commitment to Chinook is sensible given the investment made and the uncertainty around CH-53K. The key problem for the UK will be the "through life costs" issue. This would normally mean "align with the US Army"; in the case of Apache CSP the differences are a lot narrower than Chinook, where "green" US Army has always operated to very different TTPs. As long as the PT is honest as to what will be changed, and how it will effect TTPs/SOPs, then the bumps should be smoothed.
As for "capability lead" - well, that smacks of little cash as well. Lots of Dstl and Niteworks studies to suggest where to spend the money we haven't got.....
Nothing really new; Puma would be very hard to replace in 2025 as the fact there's no MSH PT stood up indicates no funding line - therefore extending Puma OSD becomes the only game in town, at least for the next 5-10 years.
The interest in AAR suggests that the long range insertion requirement is coming back, and that there's no money until the 2030s for something like CV-22 or a version of the JMR output. Merlin can AAR, and the Chinook Mk3 AU could but most of the kit was stripped out during the reversion programme.
The commitment to Chinook is sensible given the investment made and the uncertainty around CH-53K. The key problem for the UK will be the "through life costs" issue. This would normally mean "align with the US Army"; in the case of Apache CSP the differences are a lot narrower than Chinook, where "green" US Army has always operated to very different TTPs. As long as the PT is honest as to what will be changed, and how it will effect TTPs/SOPs, then the bumps should be smoothed.
As for "capability lead" - well, that smacks of little cash as well. Lots of Dstl and Niteworks studies to suggest where to spend the money we haven't got.....
