Black Beard– no FW Bitch fest intended. However, if you’ve been in the business a while you will know that the 2nd most expensive single item is the wrong aircraft – not only did you buy it but you now have to spend even more on it in an attempt to make it the right aircraft. One P68 may cost £900K but NPAS bought four, then had to spend more on converting them to the police role, then insisting on them being capable of flight into known icing which added more cost, then getting them all certified again which added more cost. Add to that the undercarriage/high wing configuration that limited the choice of camera to the “Sub-optimal” camera system which was subsequently fitted. Nobody is ”Anti Fixed wing” but, like the helicopter, they have their strengths and weaknesses. The purchase of a fixed wing solution that played to its strengths – endurance, ability to operate at greater heights with a larger and more capable camera – as the military does and GMP used to do - would have made sense. Buying them to replace the proven rotary fleet in the hope of saving money was a poor decision. UK Policing has long been in the business of spending millions to save a few pounds and has little concept that spending can also be investing if it brings results.
NPAS trialed fixed wings prior to purchase (Based at an RAF Helicopter Unit in the Thames Valley area) and, having seen the trial reports, I wouldn’t have bought a bucket that performed that badly never mind an aircraft. It doesn’t matter how “Cheap” it is to buy or operate, if it can’t do what you purchased it for then it is not “Best Value”. If you put so much role equipment in it that it cannot maintain level flight on one engine then it was a poor decision. If you buy an aircraft than runs on a fuel type not readily available in the wee small hours then it was a poor decision. If you buy an aircraft that takes 10 minutes to start up from cold and then has to taxy to a runway to take off then it is not an ideal “reactive” platform. The pre-purchase trial showed that for a task less than 17 miles from the base, the rotary platform would always get to the task quicker than the chosen fixed wing operating from the same location. Speed of arrival means that the “Search Area” is smaller as the scrote/misper has less time to move from place last seen. If you buy an aircraft before you decide where you are going to base it, hangar it or how you will crew it then it was a poor decision. If, during the purchase process, you keep changing your mind about which propellors you want to fit then it was a poor decision. If you have to keep looking for ways to shave weight from your role equipment in order for the aircraft to meet its performance requirements for certification then it was a poor decision. If you buy an aircraft for the purpose of observation and surveillance at lower altitudes and then choose one with small windows and only one crew member looking out of them whilst the other has twice the workload they used to have then it was a poor decision.
Yes, you can have 3 crew on board for line checks and even for ops – but you won’t be airborne for 9 hours or anything close to it. I remember well when Westlands were selling the Lynx to the Army as a multi role aircraft that could carry 8 TOW Missiles plus reloads, 8 fully armed troops and have fuel for 2 ½ hours. Sounded great and all three statements were true – but not all at the same time – 8 troops meant around 35 mins fuel. 8 TOW missiles meant no troops and not much more fuel. The same salesman was around this time and all those who pointed out the shortcomings were demonised and silenced by the Senior Officers in charge.
For an idea of what could have been – with all the required kit, bells, whistles, legroom and headroom - Google “DA62 MPP”.
Anti-fixed wing? – emphatically No.
Anti poor decision making based on assumptions and little or no experience of the task required – I’m in the same camp as Tigerfish on that one.