BBC News: Troops face helicopter shortage

[rotorcraig]

Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4360089.stm)

Troops 'face helicopter shortage'

The armed forces face an "alarming" shortage of battlefield helicopters, a Commons committee has warned.

The Public Accounts Committee said the gap between the number of helicopters needed and those available to the MoD is between 20% and 38%.

The shortage was exacerbated by the MoD's £259m purchase of eight Chinook helicopters, which remain grounded.

The report also said shortfalls in other protection equipment could increase risks for service people.

The MPs branded the Chinook affair "one of the worst examples of equipment procurement that the committee has seen."

The committee also warned of shortfalls in helicopter protection equipment, nuclear, biological and chemical protection for aircrew, and communications capacity.

Risks 'increased'

It said these problems could increase risks faced by the Royal Air Force, Army and Royal Navy, including overstretching available equipment and pilots.

The committee said as yet the equipment shortfall had not impacted on the successful conduct of operations - but had "adversely impacted" training in the UK.

The MPs noted that the MoD intended to spend £3bn over the next 10 years to enhance and replace the capability provided by the helicopter fleet.

But it added: "The Department did not, however, expect to eliminate the shortfall in battlefield support helicopter lift in its entirety."

The committee said the shortfall problem had been exacerbated by the Chinook saga, which began in July 1995.

The Chinook helicopters were grounded because they could be a risk to fly in cloudy weather because the software which enabled them to do this could not be properly tested.

The report said "Only 45 of 100 'essential elements' set out in the department's requirement were actually specified in the contract.

"The department was unable to say who was responsible for the flawed procurement of the Chinook Mark 3. No-one seems accountable when things go wrong, " it stated.

As of April 2004, the MoD had an overall fleet of 357 battlefield helicopters to support land, amphibious and Special Forces' operations.

'Spare parts'

The committee made a series of recommendations including that the MoD should consider creating a single organisation which would deem whether a helicopter is airworthy and fit to enter service.

Currently that is a responsibility of the individual services.

Committee chairman Edward Leigh, Tory MP for Gainsborough, said of the report: "It is simply disgraceful that the MoD has spent a quarter of a billion pounds of taxpayers' money on the botched procurement of eight Chinook helicopters that cannot be flown because the MoD can't determine if they're safe.

"The MoD urgently needs to work out whether the helicopters can be made fit for operations and how much this would cost the public purse, or whether there is any other good use for the helicopters aside from breaking them up for spares."

The report welcomed the 1991 move which saw the battlefield helicopters of the Royal Navy, Army, and RAF brought under a single Joint Helicopter Command (JHC).RC

[Mr Toad]

Can somebody clarify what is actually wrong with these 8 aircraft? The Chinook is, after all, in useful service all over the world with many different countries. Boeing Vertol make a first-class heavy transporter; can it be that the MOD has hung such an unholy concoction of British-sourced equipment on it that no Briton can now make it work?

This aircraft is vital to battlefield mobility; was, is now and will be for the foreseeable future. I suspect the soldier on the ground may have a different priority to the Whitehall Warriors.

Come on, MOD; do your duty.

[headsethair]

Here's what the Public Accounts Committee said last October. (Sir Kevin hasn't resigned yet....and he probably won't because he was one of those involved in the David Kelly affair):

MoD head urged to quit on Chinook

The Ministry of Defence's most senior civil servant has been urged to resign by a senior MP over "blunders" in buying helicopters.

Sir Kevin Tebbit was lambasted by the Commons defence committee about why eight new helicopters worth £259m were grounded due to a procurement problems.

Labour backbencher Alan Williams asked him on Monday: "Don't you think you should consider your position?"

Sir Kevin said the way new kit was ordered had now been improved.

The Chinook helicopters were grounded because they could be a risk to fly in cloudy weather because the software which enabled them to do this could not be properly tested.

Chinooks are used for ferrying troops, artillery and supplies to and from the battlefield.


The committee also criticised the MoD over the lack of trained pilots which had grounded Apache helicopters and the equipment shortage which meant 24, not 33, Lynx helicopters were sent to Iraq.

Sir Kevin said the problems should not be compared as they were all very different.

He said nobody had known the next military operation would be in Iraq and he suggested people should be pleased the Apaches were now in Iraq.


There is nothing I can do to put it right overnight

At the committee questions session, Mr Williams branded the problems a "fiasco" and "downright absolute incompetence".

"You sound like British Rail saying it is the wrong kind of snow," he said. "The British Army is supposed to be able to operate anywhere in the world it is needed."

Fellow backbencher Gerry Steinberg said the mistakes had undermined the UK's ability to act in Iraq.

He said: "You balls up the Apaches, you also messed up the Chinooks, you also messed up the Lynx. Three acquisitions messed up.

"Every time you come to us you tell us it will not happen again but it does happen again."

Sir Kevin said he was sorry for the problems but added: "There is nothing I can do to put it right overnight."

[Head Turner]

The BBC report is almost an historical document in it's format. The military have always been short of equipment and that the equipment that they have has more often than not cost the tax payer dear because 'committees' do the purchasing and often takes so long to reach the troops that it is obsolete as it arrives in service.
Mr Toad could be on the right track though not correct on the fact of British bits not working.
Military aircraft are more than highly sophisticated due to the varied tasks in varied environments. So it's my guess that the committee is the fault behind this farce.

[Widger]

Mr Toad,

Have a look at this thread.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109805

[SASless]

Now just why is it I have trouble understanding the grounding of 8 chinooks over software problems? Just why is it they cannot get their fingers out and re-do the software or re-wire the hardware with units that are the same as current aircraft and get the birds into the air?

I am beginning to wonder if some bureaucrat has a financial interest in some warehouses that are being used to store some very expensive helicopters. How many Apaches are gathering dust as we speak?

Maybe some old fashioned yankee ingenuity is required here....and exercise some Problem Solving 101. Hire Old Storming Norman and invite him along to see into the mess and suggest some quick fixes starting with the management. He had a way with incompetent staffers that forgot who they were supposed to be supporting. He tied a can to their tail and kicked their butts out the door.

Sounds like the Brits could take a lesson from old Norm.:E

[Head Turner]

I'm sure we'd love to change the incompetant staffers AND our incompetant politicians, starting of course at the very top. He may be rated as the sexiest politician but how does that quantify for the top post. Get someone in up there who can sort things. Maggy might have had her faults but by gum she knew how to get things done. She didnt have to follow orders from Ronald Reagan like Tony has to.
As I said in my previous post the staffers are committe members and for sure a committe decision is crap, slow, and never quite correct but bloody expensive.
Behind every committee is a lousy political mess.

Send in the yanks and get it sorted!

[SASless]

Can someone answer a question in simple layman's terms....what is it about the US avionics systems on the Chinook that are so unfit that the eight Chinooks the Brits ordered had to have unique software/avionics? I have yet to understand how the problem arose to begin with....and for sure do not understand why it is easier to scrap the 8 aircraft rather than be able to "fix" the problem. Is there a simple explanation for this situation that we all can understand?

[paco]

There are 42 Apaches in cold storage in Shawbury because they have no crews.........

multiply that by 26 million or so..... A criminal waste of money

Phil

[JimL]

SASless,

Go to widgers thread - it explains it fully.

Jim

[Widger]

Paco

You are out of date old chum.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=167508;) ;) ;)

[Mr Toad]

I still don't get it.

As the Chinook rolls out of the shed at BV in whatever guise it may have been ordered, it will be reasonably able to perform it's intended roles UNLESS some bright B*****er not connected with operating it has interfered with the manufacturer's spec for reasons of his own.

Here's where the individual states' military Procurement process seems to screw up a perfectly good aircraft. For God's sake, everybody else's Chinooks are operational; look at the state of the Chinooks the US National Guard sent to Iraq. And yet they were flyable, and the US politicians recognised their errors and corrected their funding and training programs accordingly.

But in the UK we still have a culture of non-accountability stretching from senior RAF officers up through senior civil servants and reaching to Ministerial level; and it has blighted the operations of one of the world's most capable military aircraft and the careers of some of those who fly it.

This aircraft generates strong emotions among those who are or have been involved with it; myself included.

[wg13_dummy]

Paco,the original sensationalist story referring to 'Apaches mothballed' was to a certain degree misreported to suit the story. We got delivery of all our AH quite quickly. The aircrew and ground crew training of this system isnt just a case of a week long tick in the right box. Simply speaking, we got the assets, the ones that could be used straight away for training or by fully trained crews were placed on the trianing list. The other assests that were already paid for but at the time not ready for use were placed in storage (if you care to look into every other new system the the UK forces has equipped itself with, its the same thing. When Tornado came in, did every single machine that had been built go straight to front line?)

If you were in the loop of the programme it is actually quite easy to understand. Believe me, its not a csae of wasting tax payers money.