Short term helo solutions - what's happening & what would we like to see happening?

[Jackonicko]

OK, so Future Rotorcraft Capability - Attack is being taken care of via Future Lynx and the existing Apache, and FLYNX (plus Merlin CSP) will also address Future Rotorcraft Capability - Find.

But that won't be for ages yet, so what about in the short term?

Is the UOR for an ISTAR Lynx replacement in Iraq/'Stan (Project Stockwell?) likely to be best addressed by a COMR procurement of A109, AW139, or EC135? Or is there no money in the pot, and will the Lynxes have to either soldier on or be replaced by an existing in-service asset - however unsuitable? (Broadsword Sea King, Merlin or P4 Puma, perhaps?)

And with all the money going on FLYNX and Merlin CSP what will (or what should) be done to provide Interim Medium Lift?

A Puma upgrade, together with an influx of second hand Pumas? The ex-Portugese Pumas are rumoured to be coming this way - in Portugal, at least?

Carson blades for the Commandos and Sea King 6CRs? And more Sea King 6CRs? (What is the frame mod that people used to say in the same breath as Carson - Frame 90? Frame 290? Frame 27?)

Or will it be another COMR solution - Super Puma/Cougar or AW139/149, perhaps?

[MaroonMan4]

Jack,

Haven't you realised yet - no one is listening! To you, to me, to the operators.

Nothing to see here - move along.

An NAO on the significant BH/SH lift shortfall, 2 SH heavy (understatement) operational Theatres and the most telling aspect of all an infantry CO and Brigade Commander doing the rounds saying that the thing they want most is more rotary lift.

What on earth are we doing with Carson blades and Mk6s - on todays battlefield should the UK really allow its troops (sailors (Royal Marines), soldiers and airman) to be operating such antiquated equipment?

If money is that tight - then re-role the Merlin ASWs (must be cheaper than paying off the Danes) - if that new RAF Merlin Sqn ever does get off the ground. Increase the capability in need (SH) and reduce (sorry keep on high readiness (mothball!) that which is not required at the moment (ASW).

But in answer to your question - at the speed of light, nothing is happening and just like body armour,Hercules fires and the Falklands - it takes history to repeat itself or a fatal accident before someone realises that maybe, just maybe that particular risk should not have been taken.

Good luck with your fishing Jack - I think that you will find that it has all stalled.

But don't worry, we have Typhoon - that will be of use.....or answer B!

[Mr-AEO]

What on earth are we doing with Carson blades and Mk6s - on todays battlefield should the UK really allow its troops (sailors (Royal Marines), soldiers and airman) to be operating such antiquated equipment?

Err - let me guess. Getting best value for money and an operational capability within a financially tight construct whilst offering this ability in the short term rather than the medium to long term. i.e getting something done before next summer. Which is what you seem to be cranking on about.

If money is that tight - then re-role the Merlin ASWs (must be cheaper than paying off the Danes) - if that new RAF Merlin Sqn ever does get off the ground. Increase the capability in need (SH) and reduce (sorry keep on high readiness (mothball!) that which is not required at the moment (ASW).
On the face of it you appear to have a reasonabel point, however I'm sure the DEC & Fleet would strongly disagree with you! You cannot just role aircraft in and out of the SH fleet that easily.

But in answer to your question - at the speed of light, nothing is happening - just because you are not aware of it, that doesn't mean it isn't happening:ugh:.

Overall MM4, you would appear to be a Sun reader.:p

[Jackonicko]

Does it need to be either/or?

With the shortfall in helicopter lift identified by the NAO, and with that shortfall having been exacerbated by unforseen demands in Iraq/Afghanistan, surely a multi-pronged attack on the problem is what is needed?

While the SK4/6 may be limited in hot and high conditions, it is better than nothing, and the Carson mod does sound as though it would make a real difference to performance. I just wish someone would put me out of my misery and remind me of the frame mod (and any other mods being proposed as part of the package) and I do wonder how many redundant SK5/6 are sitting around available for conversion to 6CR standards - and for subsequent Carsonisation.

I'd also have thought that DEC UW or whoever is responsible for ASW needs to be simply told that he is going to lose some of his assets - it's a Cold War capability and there are more pressing uses for these helicopters. Surely the ease of converting Royal Navy Merlins was demonstrated during Operation Iraqi Freedom, when four Merlin HM.Mk 1 aircraft were converted from their anti submarine configuration to a fleet protection utility helicopter configuration - achieving the role change at sea, in only 14 hours. The anti submarine warfare suite was completely removed, and stretchers for were installed for the medevac role, with troop seats, a weapons carrier and a light machine gun. It doesn't sound like rocket science, and even without a ramp, a de-ASWed Merlin would surely be a useful tool?

Aren't there surplus aircraft that aren't being CSPed, too? Though these lack the dedicated transport version's rear loading ramp, they could surely be converted to a Commando configuration, and as former ASW aircraft they are already navalised, with blade and tailboom folding. This would presumably make them particularly useful for 'amphibious lift', and wasn't that identified as a particular shortfall in the National Audit Office report on Battlefield Helicopters in April 2004?

Not doing so smacks of the sort of thinking that is delaying putting a Storm Shadow on the Nimrod MRA4 - the DEC who paid for them doesn't need this capability, so priority is being given to equipment for a role that is (or should be) a lower priority.

And weren't the Merlins always supposed to be 'role convertible' like the ASW Sea Kings were? Before the Mk 4 Commandos were clapped out, weighed down by DAS, etc. and over-stretched, they were always to be augmented by hastily stripped out ASW aircraft - and that happened in the Falklands (?) and Granby IIRC. Or did that plan go out of the window when the buy dropped to 44?

I'm all for getting things done before next summer, and would love to be reassured that something along those lines is happening, and I realise that just because this ill-informed hack is not aware of it, that doesn't mean it isn't happening.

But no-one seems to have much confidence that anything is happening, and after the brief flurry of "We'll give the troops what they need"s from grinning Tony, everything seems to have gone ominously quiet, and the things that we thought were happening short-term seem to have gone into reverse (Dansk Merlins, Chinook 3 fix-to-field).

Those I've spoken to in the SH world seem to feel a little let down and cheated since nothing has actually happened since Tony and Des told them they could have whatever they wanted.

If positive things are happening, it would be good for everyone to know that, I'd have thought.

[Mr-AEO]

Jacko,

You raise a good deal of issues in discussing the use of the Mk1 Merlin. I myself would like to know the detailed answers to the various questions that you raise.

I guess that we won't need more lift in Iraq because soon we'll be out of there. w.r.t the Afghanistan; the amphib lift would be a bit pointless so the naval mod's eg fold etc, won't matter ashore.

If we assume that there are excess Mk1. To re-role they would need clearing of their ADAS (SONAR), 903/903A (SONICS) and Sonobuoy Dispenser + any other excess seats/racking (as you say, a role fit, although the lad's and lasses at Culdrose may disagree!). Load lifting is limited - they don't have the same cargo hook or lift frame; no DAS;no armour seating; no SF or Air/Gnd comms; no Sat Comms; no NVG; no ramp; excess Mission System equipment. All in all a very significant mod package to convert the Mk1 to a really useful capability that can defend itself from manpads and the like. i'm not saying it can't be done but would expect it to be at least 6 months to a year design + 6 months Trials/Integration testing + 6 months to mod the aircraft (dependingon how many you need). Plus, is the Merlin cleared to operate over 43 degrees?

You refer to the Mk1 in Telic. To my knowledge they didn't have DAS, Air to Gnd comms, Sat Phone, medium load lift capability; this wouldn't be much use in Afghanistan right now.

Also, I expect an aircrew type person would offer comment on the ability to generate the crews; considering the potential mod time, it should be feasible.

Other options to lease or upgrade Puma a would, I hazard, be achievable quicker than the Mk1 option.

PS - i wouldn't bet on recovering Mk6 for Carson, more like spare Mk4, this will keep the mod pacakge for theatre entry bits and bobs to a minimum - but don't know for sure, just guessing.

Also, I think Stn 290 and 243 ring a bell, but you need a current jungly AEO to give you the definitive answer.

[Jackonicko]

Excellent, Smithers!

That's all good stuff that this dumba$$ hadn't really considered!

So what Puma options are being considered? Do you give any credence to the Portugese rumour, or do you think a COMR lease of Super Puma/Cougar is more likely.

Now all we need is a Hairy Arm Corps type to tell us about 'Stockwell' - will it be eight 109s or eight 135s, I wonder?

[Mr-AEO]

you probably have access to Janes defence weekly?

look at Page 9 of the edition 21 Jun 06 - article by Tom Ripley. although a bit out of date, it does show that the MOD is looking at more than 20 helo's and the basic construct remains the same.

now, wheres that money we need??...........

[Jeep]

Jacko,

Stockwell has a cunning plan. So cunning you could stick a foxes tail on it and call it professor of cunning.

All i can tell you is that a bloke called Santa is involved.

Stockwell briefed the press on everything about 2 weeks ago. 40 odd press hacks where there. Did you not get an invite?

Jeep

[Front Seater]

Jungly AEO,

Just before you think that you are qualified to spout off about the UK AH, just be very careful on what you are saying. I for one have no love for Wastelands, DTI or politicians - but have you spoken or seen the UK AH on Ops.

Anything strike you as a bit different than our US 'off the shelf' version - you know a few simple things that make it a far superior aircraft for the customer on the ground.

If you are still stumped - have a look at how much is on the rails of a UK Apache on Ops compared to a US one (that'll be down to UK engines). Whilst you are looking, have a look at some of the other bespoke UK stuff that the US now want (infact I think that they have now finished their mod).

I do believe that the whole Support Helicopter fleet could do with a little bit of re-investment but just be careful where you think you believe the money should come from.

For once (on the whole) UK industry got the UK AH about right (still teething and developing - but going in the right direction). I would put myself in the Front Seat of UK model rather than a US one anytime. One thing I do agree on though is the extortionate prices that Westlands charge - not just with AH. Whoever writes the contracts is surely being fed a very substantial lunch!

[Jackonicko]

Jeep,

Please check your PMs.

JN

[ShyTorque]

"A Puma upgrade, together with an influx of second hand Pumas? The ex-Portugese Pumas are rumoured to be coming this way - in Portugal, at least?"

Aha - another "end of life upgrade", eh?

If going for the Portugese Pumas, just make sure someone looks under BOTH engine cowlings before paying for them......... Oh, hush my mouth :oh:

[Jeep]

FS,

My you are touchy about AH moans. I am very glad we went for the RR engines as well as the 'mod' you hint at, whoever decided on that needs a medal. The cost of doing business with the 'middle man' at Westlands is proving to be very expensive. Check out the price of an AH helmet from our sole supplier compared to the cost to uncle sam and you have the tip of the iceberg. The cost in money and time of software changes? ... dont get me started.

At some point in the future I think you will be able to enter a UK grid into the AH from the cockpit KU. Just don't hold your breath.

Jeep

[motley2]

All,

Get a life and stop f:mad: g moaning!!!

[ShyTorque]

FS,

At some point in the future I think you will be able to enter a UK grid into the AH from the cockpit KU. Just don't hold your breath.
Jeep

Which is nice if you want to fight a battle in UK - but not much use in the rest of the world.

Unless you know about something that the politicians aren't telling us until after the next election......or the invasion. Just tell me it's not the French again ;)

[Jeep]

Motley,

Merry Christmas

[Archimedes]

Bit of a blast from the past, but rather than start a brand new thread...

It seems that the answer to JN's question may be 'more second hand Pumas'

Flight - UK nears a decision on interim helicopter deal (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/01/30/211773/uk-nears-a-decision-on-interim-helicopter-deal.html)

[Evalu8ter]

Gentlemen, all sound points and well made. The sad truth is that we're now (with the benefit of 100% hindsight) paying the full price for the politically expedient decision to buy the Merlin Mk3 back in '95. All the military advice said buy more CH47 -there was space on the line and the unit cost was far cheaper than the Merlin. But, made in the UK was too attractive politically. I did read the other day, though, that AW are negotiating with Boeing to get a CH47F licence to produce replacement Chinooks for the Italians, could we add a few on..?
As for the Merlin Mk1, as an SH platform it's a bit of a red herring. The TELIC re-role didn't involve any overland for obvious reasons, but did enable AW to say "combat proven in Iraq" at a crucial time in the VXX competition! As an SH platform, the lack of a ramp is a major hinderence - have you tried getting in the side door of a Merlin, let alone with a GPMG fitted there!
In the short term, there's not a lot out there. Chinooks are like gold dust (hence the UAE dragging Libyan "C" models out of the desert) as they are recognised as the assault/re-supply winner in the 'Stan. Do we really want more clapped out Pumas, or even more Merlin, that merely applies a political sticking plaster over the seeping wound of Helo lift in the hope that a bit of red meat will quieten the mob? Every mini-fleet we purchase, be they Portugese Pumas or Danish Merlins just store up more trouble for the future in modification and fleet management terms.
We're basically fighting 2 x Mediums and we've only got the SH lift for one.

I wonder how long it's going to be before we revisit the number of AH we bought?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Weren't the 814 Merlins employed in a maritime role (force protection and surface search) during Telic 1, with a number of stripped down Sea Kings performing utility roles for the task group?

[NURSE]

Or we go for the radical solution and cut the number of ops to a level we can actually support and afford! or is this to simple?

[Jackonicko]

The supposed fact that we paid £45 m for our AH-64s when everyone else pays £15 m is a hoary old chestnut that needs to be corrected.

The NAO say that the Apaches cost £3.068 billion (£45.79 m each) but while this doesn't include the training package, it does include some spares and support - and if the NAO's price figures for Typhoon are anything to go by, may also include IPT running costs, a proportion of QinetiQ charges, etc.

This is £71 million above the original approved cost, due to
a combination of higher than expected modification costs and the increased
costs of trials. The total acquisition cost of the project, including the training
package, is expected to be £4.117 billion.

So how much do others pay?

Back in 2000, Israel paid $63.625 m per aircraft for its NEW BUILD Apaches, and more recently, Singapore paid $77 m per aircraft EXCLUDING Longbow.

And those are more like real unit production costs, not loaded with through life spares and support, not inflated by the inclusion of IPT running costs and the like.

So while we may have paid more for our RTM322 engined Apaches, than Israel did for its D models, or even than Singapore paid, we haven't paid three times the usual price, and we've got a much better, much more useful aeroplane in the process.

And around 180 British companies have benefited from the WAH-64 programme, generating about 34,000 man years of work, equivalent to 3,000 jobs per year. And all of the money paid to UK suppliers results in tax revenue for the treasury, while a straightforward buy from Boeing would not have done so, and would have burned a huge slice of our foreign reserves.

What price do you put on all of that?

[Not_a_boffin]

One way of knocking down acquisition costs might be to follow the C17 approach. I'm told that during the original UK acquisition of the aircraft, the decision was made to follow US certification, training and support policies as the baseline (I don't know if this is still the case). Essentially that meant any deviation from these for specific UK requests had to be costed and a safety case impact assessment made. Funny old thing, it soon became clear that no-one wanted to pay for any of these, so the default (US) policy was almost invariably followed. Result, (relatively speaking) an on-time, on-cost programme that does exactly what it said on the tin.

Might be preferable to try that for FRC - certainly in terms of the shipborne a/c. CH53K would be another fleet, but once you drive for (ultimately) a Merlin HC3, CH47 and CH53 fleet, you're no worse off than HC4, HU5, CR6, Puma (UK and ExSAAF), Merlin and at least two models of CH47, surely? Got to be better than trying to make HC2 work embarked for long periods or marinising HC3.....

[Jackonicko]

"Got to be better than trying to marinise HC3....."

That doesn't follow at all.

There is already a marinised Merlin version in UK service.
There is already a marinised SF/transport Merlin version in Italian service.

A marinised Merlin to meet what used to be SABR/FASH has to be the best option - and certainly better than a warmed over 1960s H-53 derivative.

"Do we really want more clapped out Pumas, or even more Merlin, that merely applies a political sticking plaster over the seeping wound of Helo lift in the hope that a bit of red meat will quieten the mob? Every mini-fleet we purchase, be they Portugese Pumas or Danish Merlins just store up more trouble for the future in modification and fleet management terms."

"For my money (which has been exposed elsewhere and ignored) we should hitch our wagon the US model. Chinook Fs and UH60R for the Army and CH53Ks and UH60S for the Navy."

The idea that American is always best is simply wrong. In many ways, and for many jobs, the Merlin is a better option than noisy Chinooks, and a new Merlin variant would be no more difficult (in Mini Fleet terms) than yet another non HC2 version of Chinook. And in this day and age, we can do better than UH-60s, too, and we can do so without spending dollar reserves. We can even do so and create some UK jobs.....

"Chinooks are like gold dust as they are recognised as the assault/re-supply winner in the 'Stan."

So noisy that they're dicked from take off onwards, and so noisy that the Merlin is viewed as better for IRT tasks. And with adequate armour, they don't carry many more folk than a Merlin would. Don't get me wrong - I'm glad that we have a big fleet of Chinooks for the heavylift stuff that needs doing, but whether we need more....?

[Not_a_boffin]

Jacko

Agreed - all the various bits required for UK shipborne/amphibious ops do exist in Merlin variants - just not in the same variant and definitely not HC3! If we took the Italian Mk410 variant (ramp, and lots of gizzits) would JHC / DPA be able to resist dicking with it (Bowman, UK specific bits etc)? Hence the comment about the C17 approach, but Merlin might still be short of lift capacity / through life growth, given its gearbox issues.....which is where 53K might come in.

I doubt the USMC would go along with your description of the 53K as a 1960s rehash any more than the USA would describe current production CH47 as 1960s rehashes!

[ORAC]

The first CH-53K isn't scheduled to make its first flight till 2011. IOC is only scheduled for 2015.

With the USMC pulling just about every airframe they have out of the boneyard for refurbishment they are going through the remaining life at a rate of knots and, IIRC, from AW&ST yesterday, the pleading has started for their augmentation/replacement. So I think it probable that everything on the production line for the first 4 or 5 years will be spoken for. So, if you are willing to wait till around 2020.

This thread is, after all, titled Short Term Helo Solutions.....

[Not_a_boffin]

Point taken, department of wishful thinking closed / restructured!

[electric.sheep]

Jackonicko said:

And with adequate armour, they don't carry many more folk than a Merlin would

So how many could a Merlin carry with adequate armour? Its the fact they can barely carry itself that its considered an option for the IRT.

[JNo]

Do we really want more clapped out Pumas,

I think you'll find that in the latest MoD "fitness for service" statistics that the Puma has the highest serviceability rate of all the SH fleet at 75%. Everything else was round about 50% if my memory serves me right.

As for the solution to the helo strategy, my tea leaves say there's an anouncement in pipeline. :E Just depends how long they make the pipeline.

[Almost_done]

As for the solution to the helo strategy, my tea leaves say there's an anouncement in pipeline. Just depends how long they make the pipeline.

The pipe has spewed forth. Some will like it others will not, not for me to say.

[Evalu8ter]

JNo,
No offence intended against the current "plastic pig", which in recent times has proved to be a flexible asset (much to the chagrin of the Westland Show-pony & other communities). No, I was more concerned with old, tired ac from third parties being trumpeted by the MoD as some form of long term solution - though I hear that the Portugese ones were quite good...Now, if we could persuade the Dutch to flog us their Cougars (or swap them for the Mk3 Chinnies:eek:) that would be a good start.
For Puma read Wessex. It might well ferry the last Merlin crew back from the landfill site!

[NURSE]

interesting the Cougar merlin debate starts again we want cougars to replace the merlin blah blah. intrestingly I've not met soldiers yet who haven't a bad word to say about merlin and it would appear that merlin worked well in Balkans and in Iraq or is support helecopter still sulking cause they didn't get the toys they wanted to integrate into a european airforce? Why not in long term just get merlin. As to short term well it would appear a decision will have been made. And are we going to end up in the same situation over puma as we did over wessex and the canadians did over the CH46 and the Sea King were the aircraft were kept on for to long to save money and lives were lost because of it?

[ShyTorque]

The cynics have always been saying that the Puma HC1 will never last.

Since 1971, in fact. It's still on the original version, albeit with a few more bells and whistles for toys inside. She became a little more buxom up front in about 1980 and was given some nice plastic rotor blades too, around the same time. A big improvement on the old metal ones; anyone else here remember the 27 degrees nose up PFL recoveries and the 6700 kgs MAUW?

By comparison, the Spitfire ended active service after 19 years and there were over twenty marks to keep it competitive.

After nearly 36 years I think the old girls have earned their money. :)

[NURSE]

Puma is a good helecopter Just as wessex was and it was flogged to death. With the WG 30 then the WH60 listed in media as possible replacements but lack of money preventing replacement. If the rumours over the protugese pumas are correct then that in the long term could be bad news as the treasury may not then be sympathetic to requests for funding replacements as the budget has already been spent. BTW how many Pumas are we operating in Afghanistan? and are they capable of the hot/high enviroment? i seem to remember restrictions on them in Iraq

[airsound]

My understanding of Merlin ops in Iraq are that the aircraft is doing particularly well on four counts:

It has proved to be the most reliable helicopter in theatre, with 85% availability. Engines are lasting 3 or 4 times as long as other helos;

Its low noise signature;

Its three engines, giving it superior one engine inop performance;

And its active vibration damping, which on at least one occasion allowed an aircraft that had taken a ground fire hit on a blade to return safely in a state that would probably have caused another helicopter to cut short its sortie.

Anybody know different?

airsound

[R 21]

Airsoundpretty sure I have read a flight safety notice in crewroom about Merlin losing an engine in the desert and really struggling to hover on 2 engines.

[Almost_done]

Flogged to death the Puma certainly has been and it still has hours remaining, the Chinook is there as well for our forces considering the recent investment. The Merlin well as has been said is a political tool, no matter how well it is performing or how the stats are massaged.

What is missing is a long term commitment from our lords and masters committing to a joint, managed, assured and finally secure long term commitment to a future aircraft replacement to the Puma, not just the Puma 2.
It must be a secure look to the needs of a rapidly deployable armed force to police/secure any part of the world dependant on our current security policy at that time.

Following the latest polices from the Gov. (or even any future Gov for 10 yrs) it can be seen that, we will NOT be as big as the Americans, we will be following their general policies, to the dismay of many. (Due to the spending policies of the present Gov, on the past 3 terms of office) Even though they still refer any problems to tha last Tory Gov back in 1995.

We have to understand until the Treasury is willing to spend in our military we shall be following then a line of agreement with the Americans, unless we outstrip them in GDP for defence.

What I am trying to say is we do NOT have the spending in GDP or INVESTMENT in our armed forces compared to many European Countries, as has been described in another thread. But, we are the most involved in the world’s politics next to America. Until our Gov is willing to spend to meet their ambitions we the UK military shall always be known as the ‘Borrowers’. Not a term of endearment but a term of FACT

I dread to think what will happen once Broon gets his total hands on power, it won’t be pretty. I am now actively looking for work outside, after 22yrs in the mob, willing to lose pension status, to secure my future life.

Finally this ‘Gov’ are now looking at the last acts of the previous Conservative government to reintroduce what they pledged to destroy, such as water meters. So the wheel turns.

One final thought the Labour party were voted in 1996 on the ‘NHS has 24hrs to survive’, where is it now?

A long post I know, hopefully you appreciate what my views are and that you appreciate them and are not to condemn them, disagree please but not dismiss.


p.s. My wife is a physiotherapist I know where the NHS is in my part of the world.

[Compressorstall]

Does anybody actually know what's happening with regards the Danish Merlin proposal/additional SH?:ugh:

[NURSE]

Reading through the threads on support helecopters the opinion of many in the RAF would appear to want Cougar over merlin. And because they were forced to take Merlin they seek to denigrate it at every opportunity even talking about figures being massaged to cast doubts on the figures and throw further doubt over merlin. when there is accidents it always oh it inherent design flaws that caused the accident even when the cause if atributed to pilot error. At wadington last year i heard a very unenthusiastic commentry on merlin.
What of course the wingers wanted was foreign built helecopters like cougar and chinook with westlands then forced to close. the political descision was taken to preserve jobs in the UK and order merlin.
OK so what If westlands had closed and BAe to that matter as British couldn't possibly be any good what is the knock on. Well not my problem say the RAF bods I'm in a safe job well paid with a good pension........ HMmmm think again. Westlands closes how many people made unemployed? how much unemployment benefit and other benefits would the former employees get? Even if they were re-employed would they get similar salaries?
So how much money does the governemt have to pay out to support them? How much tax revenue would the treasury loose? How much money would have to be paid out in job creation schemes and retraining? where would this money come from..... well the defence budget is prime target to this government so how many squadrons and stations would close? how many of you would find yourselves dumped into the real world?
On the other hand a bit of support and good news about Merlin and it might be an export success, more sales westlands may have to expand more workers more taxes and more revenue to the treasury and well some of it may actually come the MOD's way.
Or is it more selfish than that cougar/super puma is flown by most of the big helecopter companies and well if you've been converted to cougar its less of your resettlement money to pay to fly for the airlines? Would you be more keen on Merlin if the Heleliner variant was being sold to the airlines?

RANT Over

[The Helpful Stacker]

The RAF (infact the whole Armed Force's) role is not to provide Westlands with a nice stream of orders over a suitable timescale to keep the shareholders happy, we are here to carry out the will of government through military force and we should be equipped to a standard that allows us to carry out that task in the most efficient and safest manner. If Westlands can't stay competitive with the rest of the helicopter producing market then the Armed Forces shouldn't have to dip into its limited budget to bail them out, that money should come from central government coffers.

I'm sure that many troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan would prefer to have helicopters that worked supporting them and to do that (among other things) requires logistical back-up, something the US manufacturers seem ever so slightly better at than Westlands.

[Jackonicko]

"We should be equipped to a standard that allows us to carry out that task in the most efficient and safest manner."

Indeed.

Which is why Merlin is a better option than more Chinooks or new Cougars.

Did you read Airsound's post? It tallies exactly with everything I have heard.

This supposedly 'political tool' is out-performing its rivals, is more available, and is more cost effective. (This supposed 'political tool' was certainly preferred over the Chinook by many in the USAF CSAR community - the HH-47 force having been a political choice imposed from above, according to Bob Dorr's column in Air Force Times, for example).

I am certain that most troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan would prefer to have helicopters that were not so noisy that the enemy heard them from miles away.

I am certain that they'd rather have helicopters that were more available, more of the time, and that were less likely to end up on the ground, in the wrong place.

I am certain that those flying the Apache, or enjoying its support, are grateful that they are WAH-64Ds, and not AH-64Ds, while I'd be surprised if you could find anyone who would prefer an S-55 over a Whirlwind, an S-58 over a Wessex, or even an SH-3 over a Westland Sea King.

Westland deserve some credit for their ability to improve and add value, arguably more now than ever before.

This tired anti-Westland prejudice may once have been more justified, but it's surley time for a more sensible approach, and to judge the freak according to it merits.

[Mr-AEO]

To add some more to the debate.

The argument that US companies such as Boeing offer much better support than WHL is undermined when you consider that Boeing exacts a huge (I mean +40%) profit in some instances for support whereas WHL are somewhere about the 10-20%. Further, we are small fry to Boeing and hardly wield the stick to beat them with, unlike WHL.

WHL are transforming to a customer focussed organisation and dragging themselves away from their past. IMHO I think it is unfair to swipe at them with 'Wastelands' etc comment when there are good people there, pulling out the stops and working damn hard to provide what we need, whilst making a profit for the shareholders - no mean feat.

With AW/WHL order book now looking vacant from the MOD after FLynx, they need to be, and are, looking at other revenue streams e.g effective capability support.

As for short term solutions - there seems to be a distinct lack of rumour update for the likes of Portuguese Puma, Danish/Portuguese Merlin. As for borrowing some old Wokka stock from the US - forget it, it won't happen.

[NURSE]

The RAF (infact the whole Armed Force's) role is not to provide Westlands with a nice stream of orders over a suitable timescale to keep the shareholders happy, we are here to carry out the will of government through military force and we should be equipped to a standard that allows us to carry out that task in the most efficient and safest manner. If Westlands can't stay competitive with the rest of the helicopter producing market then the Armed Forces shouldn't have to dip into its limited budget to bail them out, that money should come from central government coffers.
I'm sure that many troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan would prefer to have helicopters that worked supporting them and to do that (among other things) requires logistical back-up, something the US manufacturers seem ever so slightly better at than Westlands.

Actually stacker as unpalatable as it may seem the armed forces are there at times to provide support for British industry to support govt industrial and employment policy. All armed forces do the same the most blatant being the US and the French look how few foreign types are in service with both. Its not at times good procurement and we do end up with some awful kit but over the years thats how its been done. why did we get SA80, why was the SLR made semi auto and in imperial measures? Why was Tucano built in belfast. Remmber the Pumas the RAF have were westland built are they reliable are they solid pieces of Kit yes, the wessex was westland built was it reliable yes was it solid yes. I have see calls for the AH-6 to be procured for the AAC in some media but actually i would sugest Westlands dusts of the file marked scout and modernses it but builds them as solidly as the originals.
well if the rumours re Danish/Portusese Merlins and Portugese Pumas are untrue what about the rumours of the Sea Kings in store being converted to HC 6's?

[Kitbag]

'what about the rumours of the Sea Kings in store being converted to HC 6's?'

Thats definitely true

[WIWOWessex]

A Sea King has just completed a 2 min flight at Boscombe with the new Carson blades and (I think) new gearbox.

[Not_a_boffin]

There's certainly enough of them. Look under UK and then Gosport for the ones at Sultan (soon to be semi-superfluous you might think)....

http://www.demobbed.org.uk/

[electric.sheep]

The politically driven purchase of the Merlin Mk 3 has in fact reduced the overall number of SH available to the Army for a number of reasons:

- The unit cost of purchasing bespoke airframes instead of the economy of numbers.
- Duplicated supply and support chains.
- Duplicated aircrew and engineering training systems including simulators, all requiring dedicated instructors.

Which is money, men and effort that should have been put into the most effective SH we have. So how can it be claimed that the Merlin is cost-effective? Aircrew and engineers have to be retrained as they move between the types.

On what possible basis is it out performing its rivals?

If you want more availablity, more of the time, buy more of the same type and invest in improving it rather than dividing your resources on less capability.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Now now 'Electric Sheep', that sounds a little too reasoned for Pprune. I suggest you take it elsewhere.

;)

[BossEyed]

WIWOW, it was on 20 November, for more than 2 minutes, and there's been substantially more airborne time under a Carson disc in the UK since then. :ok:

No new gearbox.

[22/7 Master]

Mr AEO,

Glad to hear that WHL are seeking to move into effective operational support.

They have certainly mastered ineffective operational support.

[NURSE]

ATE: 30/01/07 SOURCE:Flight International


UK nears a decision on interim helicopter deal
By Craig Hoyle


The UK Ministry of Defence could be just weeks from determining how to best fill the critical shortfall in its battlefield helicopter capability, with life extension, lease, new-build and secondhand acquisition options still under consideration.
Flight International has meanwhile learned of a Eurocopter proposal to supply the UK with eight ex-Portuguese air force SA330 Puma transports. The offer emerged following Lisbon's rejection of a request to sell several of its new AgustaWestland EH101s to bolster the Royal Air Force's EH101 Merlin HC3 fleet.
An industry source close to the Eurocopter proposal says the secondhand aircraft would be "ideally suited for the hot-and-high demands of Afghanistan", and represent "an appealing package operationally".
Portugal's SA330s were delivered between 1969 and 1974, according to Flight's MiliCAS database, and have Turbomeca Makila engines more powerful than the Turmo systems used by the RAF's current Puma HC1s.
Eurocopter approached the MoD last October to offer the aircraft under a 10-year deal, to also include the provision of spares and a comprehensive logistics support package in conjunction with FR Aviation/Bristow Helicopters joint venture FB Heliservices.
This would be in addition to a five-year contract worth up to £100 million ($197 million) to support the UK's current Puma and Eurocopter Gazelle fleets
Eurocopter in mid-January submitted its final response for the latter requirement, with a contract award expected around June. MoD personnel are meanwhile understood to have flown to Portugal to inspect the secondhand Pumas, which an industry source says could be modified and delivered to the RAF within 12 months of contract signature.
The UK has previously acquired several secondhand Pumas from South Africa to boost its operational inventory of the type, which is currently in use in southern Iraq.
Other solutions being considered by the MoD include purchasing EH101 tactical transports from Denmark returning stored Westland Sea Kings to service and accelerating the acquisition of new medium-lift aircraft. Funding a "fix-to-field" package to bring the RAF's non-operational Boeing CH-47 Chinook HC3s into service, and a potential 10-year commercial lease deal are also options.
An MoD source confirms that a decision on a possible interim helicopter deal could be made within the coming weeks, but declines to provide further details.


so we aren't getting more HAS6 CR

[NURSE]

electric sheep you make the most logical argument for what the RAF should have been doing over the last few years. ORDERING MORE MERLINs and not this campaign to discredit a very versitile aircraft.

The other thing is hasn't the RAF operated more than 3 types of helecopter at once I do seam to remember Wessex used to be in service to.

[Evalu8ter]

I've nothing per se against the Merlin, and I applaud the efforts of many on this forum to back British industry. However, we cannot escape the fact that the critical shortfall theatre for us is Afghanistan. The Merlin simply does not have the disposable payload to provide the same service to the troops in that theatre in that level of kinetic threat as the CH47.
It is doing sterling work in Iraq, hats off to OC28 and his boys (& girls) who have worked hard to provide a valued capability to the commanders on the ground. BUT if the Merlin fleet was grounded (again) tomorrow then we could, at a push, back fill it with Puma / Sea King & Lynx. We simply couldn't replace the Chinooks in the 'Stan due to the DA / threat / nature of tasking involved. We would probably have to radically change the SoM of the troops if we tried to replace CH47 in theatre.
The greatest dis-service anyone can do to the Merlin is compare it to a Chinook. It isn't. It's a Merlin, and it has its own strengths and weaknesses.
The combination of the AH64 / CH47 works a treat in theatre, largely due to the efforts of the Westland staff in doing a good job on the Apaches. Agusta are looking at building F models for Italy, can't we have some as well?
Jacko, one point. Constantly bleating about how noisy a Chinook is compared to a Merlin is not a simple arguement. For covert, say pathfinder, insertions you have a point (unless they want to take a vehicle). Those who do this for a living will tell you that if you approach properly, at LL, where terrain permits, the noise (especially in battle) is irrelevant. Equally, flying over the isotropic beach which is South Iraq your noise will carry, whatever platform. A commander in a fight would rather have 40+ running out of a Chinook (which is a far more survivable platform) than 15-20 sliding down a Merlin ramp playing dodge the tail rotor!
On a serious note, buy a twin-turboprop (C27J / CASA 212 etc), fit it with armour and a good DAS, and offload some of the trivial "bus runs" that are always a feature when SH are in theatre for too long. Husband our scarce helo assets, employ them properly and replace them when they are worn out.
The root of the problem is that helicopters aren't sexy in purist Air Power terms. Ironic really that we've spent 20 years girding our loins for the TypHoon, whilst constantly delaying, or curtailing, RW projects then we get involved in a vicious shooting war where SH, AH & AT are the principle enablers. Might be a book in that...!

[NURSE]

So what happens if the chinook fleet is grounded? relying on a single type is not healthy and the chinook isn't always the answer what if you want to put a section of 8 on the ground? We need a mix of types in service and i would sugest merlin/chinook or merlin/ch53 is that mix and maybe the seaking and puma should be pensioned of.
Doesn't merlin have a fairly good integral DAS system already?
If the piece from flight is correct then it isn't more chinooks being procured its more pumas and if puma can carry a useful payload in Afghanistan why hasn't it been deployed there?
I do also seam to remember posters here decrying the deployment of Apache to support ops in Stan who a few months ago very pubically admitted they were wrong.
Lastly if the flight article is correct and we get 6 ex portugese pumas with different engines have we not generated another fleet with in a fleet with all the logistical/engineering problems that entails.
And can chinook be navalised at a sensible price? for the FAA isn't merlin a good comprimise as its already in Naval service there is a marine transport variant already in service with italy.

[NURSE]

Evaulu8tor your idea of a STOL fixed wing type actually has merit how many chinook hours are wasted in flying hub spoke type flights that an aircraft could do better but the payload is to small to be practical for a herc and how many herc sorties are there to lift loads just to big for chinook?
A STOL aircraft like C27J or CN295 might be a solution. How common is C130J and C27J in terms of equipment instrument layout proceedures etc?

[Compressorstall]

However...

Does anyone actually know what is happening with the fabled acquisition of new/second hand helicopters??:ugh:

[ProfessionalStudent]

I've heard there's a Puma HC2 on the way with upgraded enginges (Merkelas), upgraded avionics (two bean tins and some string would be an improvement;) ) and an extra fuel tank.

Now THAT is a short-term solution that will keep them going to 2022...

20 years too late, mind.

[ShyTorque]

How about Blackhawks to replace Puma? To appease the "buy British" brigade they could be license built by Westlands and re-engined with RTM 322. :cool:

Just like flared trousers, ideas like this come around every so often..... last time was in about 1979. It could possibly still work, IMHO.

[NURSE]

You are talking about introducing another helecopter with the training, spares and introduction to service timelines and disruption that would cause. Why not Bell 412 already in service new multi engine pilots already trained on it. AAC 212 crews could be converted to it.
I would sugest the reducton of transport types in service would be a better option. The idea of a puma upgrade is good however is it going to delay its replacement and lead us to another wessex or in the case of USN/USMC Ch46 position. It does fit this govts idea of doing defence on the cheap.Or are they planning on AW149 being delayed?
Where does the CH47 fleet go from here when are we going to need to look at major update. would we not be better returning th 6 HC3 to Beoing for rework to MH47G or at Least CH47F and gradually update the Chinook fleet to a digital aircraft?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

From MOD Contracts (http://www.contracts.mod.uk/cgi-bin/dc_public/dc_list_viewer.cgi?rm=show_list;start=0;;;start=0;order=desc ;sortd=auto_enter_date;recs=10):

9th Feb 2007 Puma HC Mk1 Life extension


The Authority advises it's intention to place a contract to extend the useful lives of it's existing fleet of Puma aircraft to enable them to continue.....

[kiwi grey]

"The Authority advises it's intention to place a contract to extend the useful lives of it's existing fleet of Puma aircraft to enable them to continue....."

This is appalling!

Two incorrect apostrophes in one sentence? :ugh:

[electric.sheep]

Nurse

So what happens if the chinook fleet is grounded?

This has been the vacuous arguement played out many times - how do the yanks/french/many other forces cope? What if the Merlin is grounded, what happens in Iraq? It would be no different in an all Chinook fleet, except both theatres would be affected.

what if you want to put a section of 8 on the ground? You probably haven't been to either op theatre, what do you think happens now? The Merlin is as big and is certainly more expensive overall, than the other types, so this question doesn't support your arguement for Chinook/Merlin mix. In fact Chinook/Puma or Chinook/Blackhawk is a more efficient mix.

[NURSE]

why am I not surprised. However with the state of the defence budget its better than nothing and hopefully they will be cleared hot and high but how long till its in service and will Gordon then refuse to fund devlopment of a repacement for Puma/Sea King

[Evalu8ter]

E-Sheep, yes, in terms of size, capability and cost Chinook/Puma or Chinook/Blackhawk is a more effiicient mix - but this has little bearing on defence procurement when a British (ish) company is involved. The compelling case at the moment is to upgrade the Puma - makes the support issues much easier - rather than introduce a new type, ie Blackhawk. A combination of re-engined Pumas and Carsonised SK4 will let us limp to the ISD of a new type in the 2015-2025 timescale (funding permitting).
Converting the Mk3 Chinook into MH-47E/G is not straightforward. We would run into all sorts of IPR/ITAR issues, not to mention having to attempt to certify the Rockwell cockpit which contains SOUP. Therefore, back to square one!!
The extant Mk2/2A fleet will require a further MLU in the next decade, where, I'm sure, a lot of the digitization issues will be addressed.
The 412 has much merit as a stop gap, esp as we train pilots on it already. However, having sampled it in a variety of military guises, it really is no long term solution. By the time you've armoured and DASed it up you're left with very little performance - Why do you think that the Canadians have not taken their CH-146s to Afghanistan?
The MoD and politicians owe us new helicopters; at the very least they should back up this "extension" of existing types with real money in the future and open competitions to give us what we need.
One very real problem we face is a reluctance on the part of industry to bid for Helicopter programmes in the UK, due to Westland's lobbying power. Understandably they don't wan't to waste millions of euros providing products/briefings/corperate entertainment if the UK Govt instinctively props AW up with contracts.

[NURSE]

Puma is a good helecopter though it does have some major problems when it comes to my side of the house when you put a stretcher on the floor you don't have a great deal of room to work round it and also getting a stretcher in is a pain in the Ar$e hence the reason they use chinook which though giving the room is very noisy and can make working on a casualty problematic. Friends who've used Merlin for casualty transfare have said its the best platform they've used yet.

[ShyTorque]

Nurse - the 412 is no bigger than the Puma and is a far less capable airframe. BTW, what happened to the Puma 6 stretcher fit?

I've flown all three types. The 412 is an ancient design and really quite limited in performance. The RAF Puma (God bless her) is a late 1960s design too, some of the RAF airframes in use are close on 35 years old! The helicopter equivalent of driving a 1970s car in a Formula 1 race?

I would have no hesitation in deciding which I'd rather fly in an operational theatre - Blackhawk please, every single time! After all, it's a 10,000 kg airframe with an impressive performance with the 701C engines. RTM322 (over 500 more shp) would turn it into an even more potent machine and give room for future development, especially now that engine has proved itself in service.

[NURSE]

The Puma 6 stretcher fit owwww have seen it once in northern ireland for training they set up half the aircraft we tried to put in 3 its bloody hard work and not the easiest enviroment to work in. Also if you set it up that way you loose the flexibility. you can set the chinkook up for a huge number of stretchers but again your looking at dedicated aeromed aircraft which UKPLC hasn't the resources to do so we tend to comprimise with stretcher on floor Puma tail boom is a great place to carry it.
I know the size limitations of the 412 and wouldn't see it as a puma replacement rather as a supplement to the current fleet.
I'm not a big fan of blackhawk and as a casualty the space on the medihawk they're crammed into makes it difficult to do anything if the patients condition deterioates. I was also told by a US medic Col you cant put a NATO standard stretcher on the floor of the Blackawk across the payload area. The Seaking is fairly good in IRT role but again getting casualties in and out is problematic. Chinook and Merlin have the advantage of the tail ramp so walking wounded can walk on and a stretcher can be carried on and not have to be put in like something out of a leaderless command task.

[microlight AV8R]

If the Chinook (HC.3?) problem is resolved I will assume that will make a big difference to heavy SH capacity. If they get some twin prop transports (c.27 or similar) for in-theatre support that should relieve the heavy SH and reduce the burden on the old hercs. So, then maybe we will have enough biguns to keep things moving. Just so long as Mr Bliar doesn't get tempted to join in any other adventures on tiop of existing debacles.

If the current Lynx is unsuitable for the hot & high stuff then it seems that there is a need for a basic wagon to plug the gap prior to F-Lynx coming along. Having read the comments about difficulties with access by side doors, I do wonder why we never had Wastelands build the S-61R under licence when the Commando helicopters were built. That ramp must shirley have made the aircraft more versatile. The biggest advantage of the tail ramp would appear to be that you can get in & out very quickly with awkward loads, particularly stretchers. So, that rules out the 412.
How about the NH90? Would that not be a good option betweem F-Lynx and Merlin/Chinook?

If the SeaKing improvements help take off the pressure until new kit is available that will be good. There will probably be a market for the improved SeaKing when we've finished with them.

The Puma seems to be approaching its sell-by date. Unless the Romanians can re-start production. i bet thiose Portuguese ones are knackered boneshakers. The NH90 seems a far better bet due to having a ramp.

Here's a thought to stir things up... Anyone remember the old Westland WG.30 ? It never attracted any orders and I seem to recall that it was underpowered. I wonder how that airframe combined with the same engines as Apache AH.1 might perform. Have Wastelands still got the jigs?

Of course this all comes down to money. Do we need JSF ?? Cancel that, operate one fast jet (Typhoon) and sort out AT & SH. Then we just need a government that recognises reality and doesn't expect our armed forces to operate beyond the capabilities of what the exchequer provides.

Whatever the outcome, you chaps at the sharp end have my utmost admiration. You deserve bettter. I'm glad nobody shoots at me when I'm trying to land in a respectable fashion.

[Evalu8ter]

Nurse,
Aware that this is morphing into a different topic, but I'm 100% in agreement about the Merlin being a superb CASEVAC copter. However, its size is an issue compared to the Puma.

Damn sight more comfortable than Chinook!

But, could it get to you at 15000ft in Afghanistan with the fuel / armour /role kit to do the job?

Nurse, you never flew with 1310 Flt out of Divulje Barracks did you?

[PlasticCabDriver]

MAV8R wrote:

i bet thiose Portuguese ones are knackered boneshakers

From speaking to one of the chaps who went out to see them, quite the opposite, they are of the same vintage as the UK ones, but with very low hours and have spent the last 30 years being flown in a very benign manner.

They come with Makila engines (the improvement in performance over the Turmos when H&H is impressive) and sponsons, and need some work (comms, DAS & IIRC NVG) but are a good bet for cheap additional capability.

QinetiQ could also use one to front load some of the certification work required for the Puma Mk2 if it ever comes.

[microlight AV8R]

Cab Driver

That's reassuring. So they'd make a good stop gap until a long term decision is made methinks. What you say appears to underline the fact that our armed forces are busier than most. war fighting and adequate training for the purpose takes its toll on aircraft.

Let's hope somebody in Whitehall is listening to the end users, then you might get adequate kit. Although I expect they will remain committed to having excess numbers of grey pointy things which are much more glamourous than humble SH and AT types. Oh to turn the clock back and have an AT fleet like we had pre-74.

[NURSE]

Only worked with Puma in Northern Ireland and Belize.
Jungly AEO that is a huge question is the RAF ready to have NCO Pilots? Or could Aditional SH be Green?


I would agree NH90 would be a useful addition to the fleet or maybe replacing the Lynx AH9's in the transport role for the army.

I think though the problem will be gordon as he see the military as the tory party in uniform.

I though something was said at farnborough about puma/seaking replacement?

[NURSE]

well the Dutch have ordered 6x CH47F for delivery in 2009/10 maybe we should follow suit and see about getting some of ours converted to CH47F standard

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q1/070215b_nr.html

[electric.sheep]

The last thing we need to do right now is start converting existing CH47 to the F standard - this will only reduce the availablity at the front line - we need to buy sufficent new ones first, as an increase to overall lift capability, then convert the existing fleet.

[RumourMonger]

So what are the details of the Puma H C Mk 1 Life Extension contract anybody know?

[RumourMonger]

If the Chinooks get grounded (or you have not got a SH) you do what the Royals did in Aghanistan you use Apaches

[NURSE]

considering there is 6 HC3 airframes sitting in store why not convert 6 at a time so the HC3's first then 6 more and work through the fleet that way.

[Evalu8ter]

Nurse,
Unfortunately the end user for the 8 Mk3s is different to any potential Mk2 upgrade. Therefore, they are on a different timeline. However, it would be common sense to de-risk the Mk2 MLU with the Mk3 Fix-to-Field as much as possible to minimise recurring costs.
Nice idea to replace CH47 with AH64 for Royal, but I don't think we have the required 60 odd AH at first line to conduct a company lift! Still, we could exhume the ACH-47 and have the SH escorting the AH....!
Electric sheep, IMHO you're bang on - we have no spare ac to "prime the pump" for a future MLU - we'd need a substantial reduction in Op tempo to achieve it without severely reducing ac available to the front line.

[serf]

Still some Gazelles flying, and they can carry one more than an Apache!

[NURSE]

hasn't the mh47g got many of the ch47f systems so wouldn't then a conversion from HC3 to mh47g to 'de-risk' an HC2- CH47f conversion?

[wokkameister]

Whatever the decision, we need some coherency across the fleet, ie: CH47/Blackhawk CH47/Merlin not CH47/Puma/Merlin/Jungly.

This would save money in infrastructure, eng processes etc.

My personal favoure option (utopia time) would be CH47/Blackhawk for SH, Seahawk for the jungly guys.

The Seahawk is pretty capable, and the eng similarities between Black/Seahawk would eradicate much of the doubling of Eng assets/sims.

[Jackonicko]

I'm inclined to agree, and since we already have CH-47 and Merlin those should be the platforms we should base future expansion around. What we need are more Merlins - same engine as the Apache, and there's a model with a ramp, two big doors and on which everything folds.

There may be tasks where a Merlin is overkill compared to an NH90 or Super Puma, but the advantages of a single-type SH fleet (plus the Chinooks) are surely compelling.

[wokkameister]

Jack - You know that, and I know that...but by the time MOD/Abbeywood have got their beaks in, it'll be 3x R22/15 x Bell412/18 Old superpumas/12 x Hips from Kazakhstan and a partidge in a pear tree.

[electric.sheep]

What we need are more Merlins

No, no, no! It was a mistake to buy them in the first place and it would be good money after bad to buy more. The CH-47 is the only helo with the lift capability in the theatre that is going to be our enduring op. If we have to spend money from our cash-strapped budget we have to buy the most capable and cost-effective vehicle we can - to do anything less would short change our troops.

[Jackonicko]

Availability and serviceability are key factors in cost effectiveness, and Merlin offers both. Especially in theatre.

And it's quiet and agile. Had a Merlin been available I wonder if we'd have seen Royals strap-hanging on the outside of Apaches?

A Chinook would have given far too much warning of its impending arrival.

We can't standardise on just one type - but two seems possible. Chinooks for underslung and heavy lift, Merlin for everything else - especially the amphib stuff that a Chinook can't do.

What's needed is a single type to replace Commando SK, and Puma, and Merlin seems to offer an excellent solution, providing commonality with the existing Merlin HC3 and HM1.

And it doesn't entail spending foreign reserves, we recoup more of the price to the exchequer and it provides high value work for UK industry.

If we really NEED something smaller as well, then grab a few AW149s.

[electric.sheep]

Availability and serviceability are key factors in cost effectiveness, and Merlin offers both

Can you provide a comparitive analysis to support this claim. Coupled to the support costs of maintaining a separate type in service.

Had a Merlin been available I wonder if we'd have seen Royals strap-hanging on the outside of Apaches

Like the CH-47, a Merlin would have been too large for the LS.

especially the amphib stuff that a Chinook can't do

Must have missed Coporate, Pulsator, Palliser, Veritas, Telic 1, where the CH-47 didn't do amphib, not to mention numerous exercises!

UK industry

AugustaWestland?

[Jackonicko]

1) There has been plenty of open source material on the comparative performance of Merlin and all other SH in Iraq from a serviceability and availability point of view. I also understand that there's also a restricted study, though as a mere taxpayer I would not, of course, know whether it supported my argument.....;)

2) I don't believe that is correct.

3) Whereas I missed the part where Boeing incorporated powered blade folding and all the other goodies that would allow a Chinook to do more than use a ship as a temporary operating site. I can walk up a gangplank and scribble in my notebook on the deck of a carrier, but that doesn't make me a Sea Harrier, nor even a qualified sailor.

Whereas the Merlin is a fully proven and fully navalised helicopter.

4) Agusta Westland still pays taxes to the UK exchequer. We will still pay for the aircraft in pounds sterling. And since all Merlins are now being built in the UK (both engine flavours, even the next Italian Navy aircraft) every penny paid to the workforce is taxed by HMG, and almost every penny spent has a direct impact on the local economy.

Better that than spending the money in France or the USA.

[electric.sheep]

1) That'll be a no then.



2) Brigadier Jerry Thomas, Commander of British Forces, Afghanistan, said:"This was an extremely hostile situation where our men were exposed to fire from 360 degrees. A range of options was considered by the commanders on the ground, including the use of an available Chinook transport helicopter, but it was the Apaches that were judged the best platform for performing the rescue. They are smaller and therefore less vulnerable to incoming fire, faster and carry a formidable array of weapons.3) A folding head is possible on the CH-47 just as it is possible for the Merlin HC Mk3, however, it is not currently fitted. Your flipant answer about walking up a gangplank doesn't support your argument; the Merlin Mk 3 does not even have a deck clearance - so, fully proven?. A commando Merlin, yes, give the Merlin Mk3 to 845/846 with a folding head to replace the SK4.

4) I agree that is today's situation.

[NURSE]

I seam to recal the Italians have a naval transport version of Merlin already in service so I would say a UK version would be farther ahead than a navalised Chinook. Also how much modification would be needed to deck lifts on Ocean, Invincible class and Argus and could Chinook be housed in Hangers of other RFA's without expensive modifications?
Just because the UK isn't flying a Maritime Merlin HC doesn't mean others aren't and please remember when pipe dreaming Chinook onto Naval vessels does it actually fit in hangers or is it exposed deck cargo?

[wokkameister]

On the 26th of March 2002, two CH47 left Ocean bobbing in the North Arabian Sea and made the 9 hour trip to Bagram, both carrying a crapload of stuff and fuel. Oh, and they crossed a 6000' mountain range on the way. They had been aboard ship as 'deckcargo' since the preceding November. Try that in a Merlin or SK.

Suggest you stick to handing out flu packs

[Compressorstall]

Whilst people lunge to attack Jackonicko, what he is really saying is that we need a more standardised fleet. Right now we have the Chinook, pretty much a mainstay of UK operations in Afghanistan, but they are in short supply. Merlin is holding its own in Iraq and showing a serious 2 fingers to its critics. Puma is short-legged and over 30, which is 210 in dog years and Sea King 4 isn't far behind. What we need now is a realisation that helicopters are an enduring part of any operation and that they need serious capital investment. That would mean more commonality, fleets stopping being almost role specific and our guys on the ground would get what they need. A Merlin can't do everything a Chinook can do, but then again a Chinook isn't suited to everything a Merlin is either, but together they complement each other.:ugh:

[Jackonicko]

wind up lamb,

1) No, that was a yes, not a no. All indicators, class. and unclass. are that Merlin is the most serviceable and available rotary platform we have.

2) The good Brigadier had Chinook or Apache to choose from. The Chinook was too big and way, way too noisy. He didn't have the luxury of having the choice of using a Merlin.

3) No it isn't. The folding Merlin is already in full service, no-one has a folding or navalised Chinook, it won't fit the lifts, and folding the back end is not possible.

4) As long as they build Merlins in Yeovil, they'll be a better proposition industrially and politically than a Chinook from Philly or a Cougar from France.

And I'm not suggesting that Chinook isn't useful, just that we don't need a one-type SH fleet of Chinooks, and that since we have 40 of the damned things, the priority is to buy more Merlins to replace the Pumas and Commandos.

[Front Seater]

As someone in theatre - I agree wholeheartedly with Jack, on everything he says.
A Merlin, Chinnie and AH mix, plus a credible ISTAR asset (BRH that has the right sights, sensors and self protection capability?) and then we can all stop moaning.
But it is needed, and not in a little sop to the media as here are are a few ex Danish models - it really does need to be an all inclusive over haul and investment in a long neglected fleet.
I say this as an AH driver on operations that heaven forbid if the unthinkable happens wants the security of knowledge that there is something capable of getting the right people to the right place in the most timely manner.
I look at all of the SH (across all fleets)- and I see crews, aircraft and engineers looking very tired. Bringing in the airframes is only half the battle, correctly crewing and supporting them is the next other wise given the tempo of Ops forecast for the next 8 years then there is the distinct possibility that maybe (just maybe) there will be shiney new airframes on dispersal but with no spares, aircrew or engineers to keep them flying.

[High_lander]

Yes it is possible to fit a folding rotor head to the Mk3 Merlins.

However, there needs to be a Mk1 gearbox fitted, which also include the tail fold actuator and the rotor head. Which is great when you have a folding tail. Why not buy the navalised Mk3 version like the Italians, who also have ASW and EAW Merlins.

And sitting in the office, You don't need to be a genius to guess whats coming when you see a small dot on the horizon and hear a "wokka wokka".

BERP IV should make the Merlins quieter. Coupled with the General Electic engines (as fitted to the V-71 [VXX]), it would increase MTOW, and speed.


Underslung loads on the Mk1s do happen, quite a few when they were deployed to Sierra Leone
1 (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/11D4D3AA-FA1E-44DF-AFA3-5EF44285C51B/0/loadedmerlin.jpg) 2 (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/E76603FF-934A-4A35-8C94-920714063684/0/merlinlandrov.jpg)

"There can only be one"

[TheWizard]

the Merlin Mk 3 does not even have a deck clearance

Watch this space!!;)

[Jackonicko]

Sorry, I should have made it more clear.

When I say "Buy more Merlins" I categorically do NOT mean more HC3s. I mean a Merlin like the Italian SF aircraft, with folding tailboom and rotors, ramp, and radar.

BERP IV and the new engine might be a good idea, though it further reduces commonality.

[Bismark]

Jacko's right on this one.
No-one has mentioned taking advantage of what comes out of the VX programme. This is likely to deliver a new gearbox, better airframe, new tail rotor etc. Combine all this with the Italian naval version, but with a full sliding door either side and you will have the perfect medium helo - highly reliable with good lift potential.

[High_lander]

Sorry- The BERP IV Blades are being test fitted to a Mk3 A/C.

It doesn't need the engine, although its an alternative

[electric.sheep]

As long as they build Merlins in Yeovil, they'll be a better proposition industrially and politically

I think that neatly concludes the discussion; nothing to do with military capability. We could argue the merits of stealth & smoothness against pure loadlifting, survivability and whether it fits in a lift on Ocean, but Jacko summed it up superbly.

[Jackonicko]

Affordability of course comes into the equation, and spending £ sterling rather than $ or even € is preferable.

It's not the only factor, nor is it the most important factor and nor have I suggested that it is, or should be.

But only a complete kn.ob would expect anyone to ignore cost/politics/industry when selecting any military equipment.

And in this case those factors are on the side of a faster, quieter, more agile more modern helicopter that is better suited to amphib lift (remember what the NAO report on battlefield helos said about that?), and that has proved to be more maintainable, more reliable and more available.

And not one from the contractor who delivered eight unuseable aircraft last time we bought anything from them..... :p (yeah, I know whose fault that was, but it's just too tempting not to mention it).

[Evalu8ter]

Some (more) thoughts on the Merlin in the amphib role:
Bad Points:
A cab that is already performance limited,
A cab where we traded the folding head/tail off to save money & weight,
A cab that takes up as much deck space as a CH47 and offers a third of the payload,
A cab that can't lift Viking,
A cab that can barely lift a 105 gun (certainly not over Doctrinal distances)
A cab with a SHOL (CH47 - What wind? Who cares?)
A cab with a slide, oops, sorry, ramp
How many cabs for a company assault? Op Houghton 5xCH47= 240+ booties (+ support weapons) onto the target in less than 2 minutes, and if you approach at 50ft/140kts at night the enemy don't have time to worry about the noise!
A cab that's too big & too expensive for many LS, a puma sized ac proved ideal for many roles.
You need CH47 in a TAG to lift Viking etc
Good Points:
Commonality with Pingers
Made in Britain (well, sort of)
It's a bit quieter than a Chinook
A small amount of growth left (BERP IV / Engines /Transmission), but much of this will be used up with folding gear
It will fold & fit in a Hangar deck
Whilst I firmly agree that the problems with striking Chinnies below is a problem for permenant sea-basing, the norm is to fly the cabs through Europe to meet "mother" south of Biscay to avoid the worst of the weather.
Ideal fleet:
CH47 (or CH53X) / Cougar (Blackhawk) / WAH-64 / A109 Power
Combat proven, reliable, known cabs.
Let's not re-make the same mistakes again....!

[NURSE]

so a Merlin with new transmission and engines with folding rotors and tail most of which is already available Is a comprimise it doesn't tick all the boxes but a good few of them.

Now according to army technology a split Viking can be carried by Merlin and how far can a puma or seaking carry a light gun?

Evalu8or quick question what happens if we have to deploy ocean and the Amphibious group further away than Europe eg to east or west africa or the far east and the TAG has to be carried and maintained for a long period at sea? Or into something like a south atlantic winter with chinook as deck cargo. Ok everyone will start thats not on the operational horizon but please remember the Falklands in 82 was on no ones operational horizon and who knows what events/natural disasters the armed forces will have to deal with in the lifetime of Chinook/Merlin.

[Evalu8ter]

Nurse,
I totally agree with your point. So why did the booties buy such heavy kit? A merlin can carry a split Viking, leaving about a 1000kg for fuel / crew/ armour / weapons - get the point? And a split Viking is hardly a "combat configured load"!! No, the only solution we'd have is either to store the CH47s without blades below deck, or fly them off an Atlantic Conveyor style STUFT.
Either way, far from ideal. But hey, CVF is designed with the chinook in mind, as LPH is one of her secondary roles, so come 2012 there's no problem........
The replacement for Ocean is being scoped at the moment - I imagine that CH47 compatibility is a KUR.
So buying more Merlin on the basis that it fits the current CVS/LPH is short sighted, unless you think they won't get replaced...
Sea King/Puma can still carry a light gun, as long as it's cold outside and you don't want to move it far!! Leave the lifting to the CH47 and the CASEVAC / patrol stuff to the PU/SK4.

[Not_a_boffin]

Don't bank on CVF in LPH role being available to support the Wokka (and certainly not in 2012! CH47 compatibility is a KUR for LPH(RC), but I'd be astonished to find that fitting the size of lift required would be compatible with an affordable ship. Although the spot requirement and EMF issues lead to a big ship, positioning lifts will incur some major cost impacts, particularly wrt deconflicting landing craft, vehicle access and the hangar.

There is no easy way out from where we are. Wokkas are not suitable for sustained embarkation on a ship. I know the Odiham force and the CVS / LPH air departments have managed to do it, but at what cost in terms of airframe deterioration and emb8ggerance? Merlin (Italian Utility) modded up with a sensible transmission at least offers UK workshare, some fleet coherence and a long-term ML future beyond SK, but won't do large lifts.

The issue always comes down to HL. One option gives a compatible rotor craft fleet, but compromises either capability or ship affordability, the other option (53K) would require a very small fleet unless the specialist capability of the Wokka force could be traded against it (which doesn't appear likely).

[NURSE]

Evalu8or the Chinook is not a one size fits all helo actually in my opinion the RAF bought the wrong helecopter in the Chinook and should have bought the CH53 but anyway we're now stuck with them.
Yes an atlantic conveyor solution is an option but look at what happened to her bad luck yes.
The chances of CVF comming to fruition in its full promised spec are zero if it comes about at all and Ocean replacement is a long way away probably after chinook and merlin have been retired so Chinook is still limited. And I would guess that either illistrious or Ark will soldier on for a good few years as the spare LPH.
Yes a merlin can lift half a viking so 2 merlins can lift 1 viking as split loads not ideal but a comprimise or you put the vikings ashore across the beach another comprimise the stuff staff officers of 3 commando brigade get payed lots of money to work out.
Given the UK history of specialised chinook variants I would say the team involved in Navalising the chinook will be extremely cautious and I would also say that given the current round of proposed cutting and financial controls the more cost effective proposal with proven technology and capability will go forward.
Yes a properly navalised chinook based aboard ships capable of supporting it would be the gold plated option but thats not going to happen. My reading is SK and Puma will soldier on till they fall apart hopefully someone will be generous and give some money to replace a proportion of the SK fleet with a naval assualt helecopter and we'll have to muddle through with chinooks as deck cargo just like we always have and on land an updated puma and the HC3 Merlin will ease the burden on Chinook.

[wokkameister]

Thanks for your opinion NURSE:

actually in my opinion the RAF bought the wrong helecopter in the Chinook and should have bought the CH53 but anyway we're now stuck with them.

I will file it in the big folder marked 'B#####ks I have heard quoted by people with no idea what they are talking about'

The US Forces have a huge supply of MH53, yet the aprons at Bagram and Kabul are full of Chinooks. They must be wrong, Nurse.

The CH47 has the triple hook facility, handy when you want to carry a Viking etc. The UK forces must be wrong, Nurse.

Blah, blah sea upgrades. The Chinook has had a sea upgrade for it's time as 'exposed deck cargo'. It's called regular servicing and a tin of varnish over anything suseptible to water ingress. Lot cheaper!

The exposed deck cargo you talk about has pulled a lot of people out of the clag. I get the impression that you would like to pick Helo's which are 'nice for medevac ops'. Go fly for Essex air ambulance, the Chinook has a huge spectrum of tasks to fulfil.

You are the weakest link, Goodbye.

[NURSE]

Given that most of the CH47's on the Ramp in afghanistan are US Army assets supporting Army operations I'm not surprised. the CH53 is used By USAF for SF type ops and the Marines as it heavy transport. Which begs the question If a Naval assualt version of Chinook was such a great Idea do you not think the USMC would already have it and wouldn't be devloping Osprey or updating its CH53's?
Now some of the features that make Merlin good for IRT/Medivac also make it a better platform for deploying troops from as the ability to communicate clearly easily makes command and control at all levels much much easier.
The triple hook capability is great for heavy and awkward loads like Viking but can be worked round or comprimises reached.
Yes there was an element of luck with the Deck cargo way of carrying helecopters. Given the damage the force of the sea can do to ships hulls what effect would a storm have on an exposed helecopter airframe if it even managed to remain shackeled to the deck. And I was always told relying on luck in military operations leads to disaster. Storage in a hangar would seam to be the better option.

[Jackonicko]

This doesn't need to be a Merlin vs Chinook b*tchfight.

Nor is there any need to 'work around' the Chinook's triple hook capability.

I'll type this slowly, so that some of the Wokkafans can understand.

We need Chinook and its capabilities. BUT we already have 40 of them (plus the HC3s) and what we don't need is an ALL-Chinook, all-heavy SH force.

We currently have a three-type medium lift SH force - Merlin, Sea King 4/6 and Puma, and could and should rationalise on ONE type.

Merlin is the most versatile and useful of the three types, is the most reliable and available, and has loads of life remaining. It does not need to be replaced imminently, whereas the poor olf Pumas and Sea Kings are nearing the end of their lives.

Of the available options, Merlin is the best choice on which to base a standardised medium lift helicopter force, superior to the Cougar and S-92, and smaller, lighter SHs (UH-60, etc) don't offer sufficient advantages to justify adding another type to the mix.

[electric.sheep]

And herein lies the argument against the Merlin, listing it as medium lift, alongside helos the size of SK and Puma, while in reality it is Chinook sized with 1/3 of the lift capability and significantly more expensive to purchase and operate.

All of the points raised by NURSE underpin the case to give Merlin to the junglies (sorry guys) and allow us to focus on a smaller, but equally capable type.

[NURSE]

Electric sheep yes i agree with what you are saying. But if Merlin replaced both seaking and puma the economies of scale would make it cost effective and the interoperability would also give certain economies. Not an ideal solution but a fairly good comprimise.
Given the Numbers game how many airframes and how many squadrons would give JHF the capability it needs? and what would the shortfall in crews be if they got all the airframes they needed?

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

And herein lies the argument against the Merlin, listing it as medium lift, alongside helos the size of SK and Puma,
Excuse me but I am new in such things, but I thought Merlin was designed to have the same foot print as a Sea King so that it could fit on the back of the frigates - hence why the thing is so tall! If this is true, then for the same foot print the Merlin is vastly more capable!

[Whirling Wizardry]

Electric.sheepy-weepy, don't know the last time you saw a Merlin next to a SK but they're almost identical in size.

Seaking

length 22.15 metres
main rotor diameter 18.9 metres
MAUM 9,750 kg

Merlin

length 22.8 metres
main rotor diameter 18.6 metres
MAUM 15,600 kg


It is wrong to compare the Merlin to the Chinook, it was never designed or intended to be a replacement/competitor for that role. I'd like to know just how "significantly more expensive to purchase and operate" a Merlin is over the Chinook. Your claims lack fact and I'd love to know where or what your sources are. UK SH ops in Iraq would have fallen apart without the Merlin over the past 2 years, and if it is as dire as you claim it is, we wouldn't have any Chinooks in Afghanistan as they'd be stuck in and around Basrah.

Now thats magic, you'll like it, but not a lot.

[TheWizard]

WW,
you have succumbed to the Dark Side. There can be no turning back from the grip of 'Prooning' now. Beware of large hooks!! :uhoh:

[Door Slider]

Do we need chinooks? Absolutely! Do we need a merlin sized aircraft? thats debatable. Yes it has done a sterling job in iraq, but it a very expensive cab to be a bus around MND SE. Do we need a puma sized aircraft, yes! The puma has been performing fantastically for years now. It looks certain like the upgrade is going to happen which is going to be a huge improvement in terms of lift and endurance

[Green Flash]

Slider

What does the Puma upgrade entail? (A link would be fine)

[TheWizard]

Do we need chinooks? Absolutely! Do we need a merlin sized aircraft? thats debatable. Yes it has done a sterling job in iraq, but it a very expensive cab to be a bus around MND SE. Do we need a puma sized aircraft, yes! The puma has been performing fantastically for years now. It looks certain like the upgrade is going to happen which is going to be a huge improvement in terms of lift and endurance
Ok lets debate.
Based on the fact that a Puma HASBEEN performing fantastically for years then is that enough to satsify the current requirements for more helicopters?:hmm: and even if and when it does get it's new engines do you really believe it will get a 'huge' improvement in terms of lift and improvement? I agree any is better than none but we are still not talking anywhere much above 1500 Kg at most for any useful distance.
As for the Merlin being an expensive cab to bus around MND SE, yes you could say that, but what is the alternative if it wasn't there? Is a Chinook any cheaper? Are there enough serviceable Sea Kings around? Well, not now they are off elsewhere. Don't even pretend a Puma could move the same amount of personnel around in the same time frame. Perhaps for the daily mail run but thats about it. Ask the GOC and his Commanders which aircraft they have asked for time and time again?
4000 or so troops for RiP in anything smaller than a Merlin/Chinook would take about three months not three weeks.
The bottom line is that there is a requirement for both MSH and LSH and we can bleat/moan/argue/debate/reason till the cows come home and it will not make a blind bit of difference. Unless of course any of the Ministry or CAS are contrubuting to this thread and are getting a feeler for what is required but then again they told the media we recieved a 9.2% payrise this year:ugh:
ps before anyone thinks this is another willy waving competition, I have many hours on Puma and Merlin so I can comment on both, unlike some!;)

[PTT]

Based on the fact that a Puma HASBEEN performing fantastically for years then is that enough to satsify the current requirements for more helicopters? and even if and when it does get it's new engines do you really believe it will get a 'huge' improvement in terms of lift and improvement? I agree any is better than none but we are still not talking anywhere much above 1500 Kg at most for any useful distance.
The "gold standard" could have more than doubled the lift capability of the Puma fleet - that's pretty 'huge' in terms of improvement. Even the likely "silver standard" will increase lift capacity by almost 20% assuming a 5T APS. Also, a "useful distance" in Iraq is not really that far. There are enough refuels available everywhere necessary and if loiter time is what's required then you are using the wrong cab on so many levels...
In terms of effectiveness the Puma upgrade works in terms of timescale and cost.

As for the Merlin being an expensive cab to bus around MND SE, yes you could say that, but what is the alternative if it wasn't there? Is a Chinook any cheaper?
Yes, because you would not need to replicate the support chain for a different type. No idea about per-hour costs though.

Ask the GOC and his Commanders which aircraft they have asked for time and time again?
4000 or so troops for RiP in anything smaller than a Merlin/Chinook would take about three months not three weeks.
So roulement out some Chinooks/Merlins for the RiP just as we did in NI. You're also making more of a pro-Chinook argument here as they can carry more pax. That, or Mi-26...

[TheWizard]

The "gold standard" could have more than doubled the lift capability of the Puma fleet
Perhaps, but there is one word that jumps out of that statement- could.
However, it does not increase the physical dimensions of the cabin by a 'huge' amount, so roughly the same amount of freight/pax can be carried a bit further.
Also, a "useful distance" in Iraq is not really that far. There are enough refuels available everywhere necessary and if loiter time is what's required then you are using the wrong cab on so many levels...

As for the useful distance, on the odd time that the Puma ventures South for specific things, it still can't make it in one hop (with full freight load) but the Merlin can make it faster and quicker up North without a stop (think CASEVAC/MEDIVAC). Who mentioned loiter time?
However, we are not talking just about Iraq are we, this is about the future of SH? Yes, because you would not need to replicate the support chain for a different type. No idea about per-hour costs though.

Not sure what you mean on that one?? There is already a support chain for all three types.
So roulement out some Chinooks/Merlins for the RiP just as we did in NI.
Already the case. However, where do these Chinooks AND crews come from? They are a bit busy elsewhere these days. And the RiP in NI was on a slightly differrent scale to that in Telic!
You're also making more of a pro-Chinook argument here as they can carry more
My point is that even with their sooper dooper upgrade the Puma does not have the capacity or range to do the job of LSH, whereas the Chinook and Merlin fulfill the role between them. Of course the Chinook can carry more, but as already said they are a bit busy at the moment. Face facts, the Government is not going to buy another fleet of new Chinnys when there is a fleet (Merlin I & 3) already available which ultimately (I agree not short term) is cheaper.
That, or Mi-26...
Ah yes, fantasy land, wonderful place to be these days!:)

[HEDP]

Would it be wrong to think in terms of:

RAF = Heavy = Chinook

FAA = Medium = Merlin (all roles)

Army = Light/Attack = LUH/AH

Single type hubbing and streamlining with a comprehensive golf bag for ops.

[serf]

That sounds far too sensible!

[Mmmmnice]

I'm late to this 'debate' - but here's a couple of points/observations:
1. Yes we need a mixed fleet in size/lift terms - but are forever rammed into a 'one size fits all' sitch by the usual financial constraints - hence the perpetual w*lly waving by all the different operators.
2. The 53 is only worth consideration in it's 3 engine guise (do they still make them with only 2 engines?) - and then it's a class above the Chinook (in size/lift/complexity terms). It's also something I would not personally like to load fully and then hoof into a hot LS in.
3. Viking is a single point lift, but a trifle porky for anything we currently have on the inventory - perfect for a 53E from a deck to somewhere close and 'cool'
4. I'm biased against tailrotors in terms of vulnerability/waste of power - but that's my personal problem, and I'm neither making the decisions nor holding the purse strings!

[Evalu8ter]

To quote a hackneyed phrase "we are where we are"
Yes, the decision to purchase Merlin in 1995 was flawed militarily, and has resulted in more money being spent on less "Chinook Equivalents" (which is what the purchase was framed in). More money as there was the need to establish and maintain a bespoke infra-structure to maintain a marginal fleet size of 22 aircraft. Remember, we were originally going to use a handful of Merlin to replace Walter on 72 (and spent a lot of money changing JHFNI to support it) and we weren't getting shot at as much in 1995!
So we have the Merlin, get over it! With the decision to go commercial with SAR the last best chance at palming it off has gone. It's here to stay. And, it is doing a damn good job in Iraq - hats off to 28!
However, does this mean that we need to repeat our mistakes? Merlin is a lot bigger than a Puma (esp in downwash terms) and is therefore ill-suited to a lot of the smaller, more "intimate" LS that are Lx/Pu optimised.
Keep 28 going as long as the fleet is sustainable, but purchase a smaller utility helicopter (such as EC-725) which can do pretty much all a Merlin can for a smaller footprint.
And get AW to build us some "F" model Chinooks!!

[electric.sheep]

Whirling Wizardry (notice no need to resort to naming insults),

Congratulations on your first post.

You will be familiar with the phrase read the f'#~$g question - well, I didn't say that the Merlin was bigger than the SK, I said
listing it as medium lift, alongside helos the size of SK and Puma, while in reality it is Chinook sized
in simpler terms, its as big as a Chinook, has 3 engines, but only competes in the medium lift class.

I'm well aware of its current work in Iraq, the lads on 28 are doing a great job, but only because the CH47 had to be withdrawn as it was the only helo capable of delivering lift in Afghanistan.

[PTT]

My point is that even with their sooper dooper upgrade the Puma does not have the capacity or range to do the job of LSH, whereas the Chinook and Merlin fulfill the role between them.
If this is your point I must disagree. Merlin/Chinook simply cannot fit into places the Puma can (see NI as an example as well as other places), certainly not without destroying the surrounding area or anything they are hovering over. The flexibility to do this is one of the important things you need from LSH - otherwise what's the point of a mixed fleet? If we accept that FLynx is too small for the job then Puma upgrade/Cougar fits the bill nicely.

[Whirling Wizardry]

electric.sheep

Many thanks for your congratulations on my first post, they are gratefully received. (note the lack of naming insults, wouldn't want to intentionally offend and hurt any feelings).

If you want to get pedantic, I believe that the Puma/Merlin/Chinook sim facility is called MSHATF, not the Puma/Merlin MSHATF and Chinook HSHATF. Basic physics tells us that the most effective way of acheiving helicopter lift is through the tandem rotor design, as all of the required power to drive any rotors goes downwards, there is no debating that it offers more lift capability over the Merlin/Puma/Seaking. However, there are some roles that the Merlin is more suitable to than the Chinook, any unbiased SH operator will admit this.

Fact of the matter is that the Merlin, along with the Apache, have both suffered a lot of unwarranted slander and gossip since their introduction into service from third parties that have absolutely no experience of operating them. e.g "the Merlin can't even fly on 2 engines", It can easily hover on two. I'm glad to say that both have given a huge 2 fingers up to all of them. You only have to look at some of the drivel that was being banded about before their deployments to Iraq and Helmand respectively, you will be hard pushed to find anyone coming out with the same comments now.

I'm not saying that Merlin is the be-all and end-all to the UKs future SH requirements but it is a damn fine helicopter that offers far more than the uneducated know.

[Tiger_mate]

Fact of the matter is that the Merlin, along with the Apache, have both suffered a lot of unwarranted slander and gossip since their introduction into service from third parties that have absolutely no experience of operating them.

So did the Puma, especially when the rear cowlings had a habit of falling off causing at least one fatal accident.

So did the Chinook in the early 80's. 'Boeing death ship' and 'Aluminium body bag' amongst others. Until a new helicopter has proved its worth,(safety) it will be subject to this form of criticism, it goes with the immortal mentality of aircrew.

It really is about time both Apache and Merlin were given a break on this one. If we got a new type be it small (a la Puma ish: NH90 please) or large CH53, it to would be subject to the cods being discussed.

[NURSE]

Agreed if we were to get a new type. But i think that is highly unlikley.
I would agree that the Merlin and Apache have earn't their spurs, the Army Air Corps has proved it can successfully field a technologically advanced attack helecopter and members of the Chinook community who worked with them have acknowledged this.
The next target for slagging will be the new lynx. So with the sugestion that Future Lynx be replaced with cougar we're back to cougar again why not NH90 or AW139? And if we did change from FLynx as the LUH the next argument would be of it has to be given RAF as the AAC couldn't possibly support it?
If the Flynx was to be abandoned in the LUH role then do we replace lynx in maritime role with Merlin?

[electric.sheep]

If you want to get pedantic the MSHATF was named when the project consisted of Chinook/Merlin sims only, the Puma was added later as a spend-to-save measure.

The basic laws of physics are correct and there are some roles that the Merlin is more suitable for; the 3 engine design was intended to allow hover in the sonar dip, while shutting down one engine whould allow longer loiter time over the sea.

[PTT]

The next target for slagging will be the new lynx. So with the sugestion that Future Lynx be replaced with cougar we're back to cougar again why not NH90 or AW139?
They're two different aircraft with different capabilities. Cougar and the others are medium in terms of size and lift capability. FLynx is light in those terms in the same way that Chinook is heavy, i.e. the top end of what we have. As I understand it FLynx will be great at battlefield recce and anti-sub/ship warfare, but if you want to get just 8-16 troops (oddly useful numbers, those) into a small space then something Puma/Cougar-sized is the dog's knob. We already have a pool of Puma trained and experienced people, so choosing Cougar/Puma "Gold" reduces training costs and time to FOC over the other types.

As for Puma/Cougar vs Sea King, one word: speed. I fly Puma and have flown in formation with a Sea King in Iraq: having to slow down that much made me feel particularly vulnerable.

[NURSE]

PTT
Yes am aware of where FLynx falls but am worried some of its other roles like laison and reconisance will be forgoten by some posters in the debate its another of those comprimises were it will preform a multitude of tasks but not all of them well.
I can under stand the sea king being slow verses puma being faster sea King was of course designed as an ASW platform. Then was put into the transport role for commonality in the Fleet air arm. Have worked with Puma in Belize and Northern Ireland.
given the puma's listed speed as 147kts and merlins of 167kts (source RAF website) would that make you feel safer? even though its a bigger helecopter?

[PTT]

given the puma's listed speed as 147kts and merlins of 167kts (source RAF website) would that make you feel safer? even though its a bigger helecopter?
Without going into details which it would be imprudent to publish on open source, no.

Also, it's a matter of needing something the size of a Puma to do jobs that a Merlin simply cannot do due to being too big or having too much downwash. From a purely military SH point of view, a Puma/Chinook mix would work nicely (a la US Army CH-47/UH-60 basic mix, with other specialised aircraft in appropriate roles). From the UKPLC point of view we need the Merlin too. There is a job for it, but that job is one where the Chinook is unnecessary/needed elsewhere and the Puma is too small. Don't misunderstand, I think the Merlin is a great aircraft and it and the crews are doing the job in Iraq brilliantly; I merely do not see a need for a third, middle-sized SH where logistic and support chains need to be replicated when we can do the job with more Chinooks and Pumas (where the Chinook is too big/better used elsewhere/inappropriate) and only 2 support chains to feed. In fact, the reduction in support could fund an increase in front line capability - going out on a limb, you could then argue that the Merlin is in fact hindering UK SH capability! (not that I'd go so far as to say that)

[electric.sheep]

(not that I'd go so far as to say that)

Someone already did:

The politically driven purchase of the Merlin Mk 3 has in fact reduced the overall number of SH available to the Army for a number of reasons:

- The unit cost of purchasing bespoke airframes instead of the economy of numbers.
- Duplicated supply and support chains.
- Duplicated aircrew and engineering training systems including simulators, all requiring dedicated instructors.

[NURSE]

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/MoreBattlefieldHelicoptersForUkArmedForcesvideo.htm

so 6 more melins and a reannouncemect on chinook hc3

[kinelliQ]

we take carson to the US this month. Can't be long now.:D

[wokkameister]

With the ADF shedding their Blackhawks, stand by for a new squadron as Nu Labour buys up anything cheap to answer the headlines of lack of rotary.
Short term measure to cover the fact we have screwed up by getting the Merlin in the first place. Whatever the political implications for SW England, it is useful for Telic bus runs, but any aircraft could manage that. The Stan will test the aircraft to the limit and I fear it will be left very wanting.
Buying more may keep the Daily Mail of the MOD's back, but achieves very little.
Just my opinion mind you! And a reflection of the quality of the aircraft, and not the crews that fly them. (Still Freaks though)

WM

[Mr-AEO]

'Black Hawk' - Interesting though probably not affordable, and certainly not good for mixed fleet issues. But on it's capability alone, I remember reading a recent report that demontrated how much better it would be in the Stan than the forthcoming BRH.

[Jackonicko]

Because Chinook HC2A and Chinook HC3 were such an astonishingly sensible use of resources, Wokkameister?

:ugh:

[Mr-AEO]

Jacko - what's your inference? That Chinook 2b is a better use of resources than Chinook Mk3?

[lightningmate]

Mr-AEO,

Now why are you asking that question :)

lm

[Jackonicko]

Just trying to counter the ridiculous claim that "we have screwed up by getting the Merlin in the first place."

[Compressorstall]

Wokkameister - are you inferring that the Merlin is on its way to the 'Stan? If so, it would probably be a welcome relief for the Op TELIC crews who are tired of the so-called 'bus runs'. It may be that the Merlin was slightly foisted upon us, but it is has grown into an impressive aircraft. We simply have a more diverse fleet with Chinooks, Merlins and Pumas (not to mention the Commnado SK4s). The crews would probably welcome the chance to try it somewhere different, but it might require some mind broadening.
As for the ADF Blackhawks, they are tired and the Blackhawk doesn't perform startlingly well in theatre. Don't you think the ADF would have deployed them if they did?
It would be nice if anyone in procurement read these pages, but right now it is nice to know we have some additional SH capability coming rather than muddling on with what we have.

[WIWOWessex]

Wokkameister- Its exactly your kind of single minded "Chinook is the best aircraft in the world and anything else is c**p" thought processes that signify all thats bad about this forum.:ugh:

Wake up!!! No we didn't want the Merlin!! Yes we got it!!! And now after more than two years in Iraq it has proved itself to be a very able, versatile platform which, according to a shed load of squaddies, they much prefer over Chinook!!!

If it goes to 'stan it will no doubt prove to be just as effective (in its own way) as the mighty wokka.

Grow up and see the world as it really is!!:hmm:


Live long and prosper

[electric.sheep]

WIWOWessex,

No we didn't want the Merlin

So you agree with Wokkameister, can you remember why we didn't want it? Just because we have it now doesn't justify the decision taken over 10 years ago. WM agrees with you when he says it is useful for Telic bus runs, so your tirade towards him was uneccessary.

Grow up and see the world as it really is!!

I guess WM has seen the real world, have you?

Time to go back to snooze mode at SY, you'll be safer there.

[wokkameister]

Whoa there!

I Knew my post would inflame a bit of passion but.....


Compstall- Have operated in both theatres several times and take your point regards the crews mate. As for the blackhawks being tired....and the puma isn't? (not a dig at the puma guys, I have a lot of respect for what they do....before I make any more enemies)

WIWO- I won't take your remarks in the spirit in which they were intended, but I do respect you for fighting your corner.

None of us are CDS/CAS or the procurement minister, and so anything we offer up on here is opinion, nothing more. I stated what my opinion is, and if you don't agree, well fair enough. Called democracy apparently.

WM
Ps: Merlins still crap!

[Compressorstall]

WM good of you to reply. You do suffer from a little bit of Chinook bias - Merlin has some very valid roles eg when you want to get somewhere quietly and quickly. The Chinook is doing well at high altitude and if you want something big and heavy flying and then being told about how you carried 10 tonnes - over and over.
;)

[electric.sheep]

http://www.boeing.com/rotorcraft/military/ch47d/images/ch47art.gif

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/naval02.gif

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/naval01.gif



So, a comparison of the CH 47/EH101 in metric:

Overall length 30.1m/22.8M
Fuselage length 15.87m/19.53m
Fuselage width 4.87m/4.61m
Fuselage Ht 5.59m/6.62m
Wheel base 7.87m/7.00m
Rotor Diameter 19.4m/18.6m

EH101 Empty 10.5 T maum 14.5 T
CH 47 Empty 12.5 T MAUM 24.5 T


Mmmm, so which one is big and heavy????????? Only when its doing its job!

[Compressorstall]

You do realise that you put the outline of the Merlin HM1, not the SH variant don't you? SH doesn't have much need of the heavy radar or the sonar body...

[electric.sheep]

OMG, how stupid of me! There was me thinking I was illustrating the relative sizes and weights of the EH101 and the CH47, and the only observation made is of the line drawing I used.

A bit like service writing, don't read the content, just check the spaces after the dot. Any other relevant points?

[PlasticCabDriver]

You only left one space between "dot." and "Any".

Perhaps Compressorstall did read the content, and read it thoroughly, realised you had used the wrong picture for the comparison you were making, and just wanted to be sure that you had used the weight and dimensions figures for the correct Merlin variant, otherwise your argument would be bol1ocks?

Not saying it is actually bol1ocks, looks about right to me, but it can get a bit pedantic in here sometimes.

[Jackonicko]

How heavy would a Chinook be if you built it to modern standards of crashworthiness and H&S?

And the point isn't that Chinook doesn't offer some vital capabilities (triple hooks, etc.) it clearly does, and is clearly a useful (if vulnerable and noisy) asset. The point is just that Merlin's availability, speed and quietness make it every bit as useful - just in different ways, and for different things.

As to why people "Didn't want it" at the start, perhaps too many people had listened to narrow minded and indoctrinated Chinook operators? Perhaps people hadn't got a clue about what it could really do? Perhaps people judged it on the basis of the expensive and troubled (in their early days) grey ones?

But they want it now.

[wokkameister]

Jacko,

Why pose a question, and then get all pre-menstrual when you don't get the answer you want?

You ask the rotary guys what they need, and you will get as many answers as there are types. If you can't extrapolate an answer from the egotistical crap then youre not a great journo, really?

Accusing the Chinook fraternity of bias and closed minds is spot on. So ask yourselves, why are the whole fleet so 100% convinced that we have the answer to the MOD's problems.
Is it:

A. We are all insane and you are the only sane person?

B. We might actually have the ideal cab for pretty much every task barring the niche that the Puma guys are filling very effectively.

Any aircraft with seats could effectively fulfill the Merlins role in Iraq. I know because we did it for 2 years. I've heard some absolute tosh quoted on here about the tactical advantage of a 'quieter' aircraft. BO£$^X.

Unless it has whisper mode, the enemy are always going to here a helicopter operating. Its just as dependant on terrain and wind direction as type.

The banter aside, I have a healthy respect for 28 Sqn, but it doesn't mean their aircraft is any good. I am a little bit more au fait with the contemporary battlefield, and if a Merlin can't make an IRT shout 60 miles away at 10000 feet on a +55C day....You look the widow in the eye and tell her why jobs in the SW of England were more important.

I'm a touche tired of all the snivelling armchair napoleans on this particular thread talking ill informed crap. Only one thing matters in todays battlespace, and that is what the troop on the ground wants or needs at any given time. I'm afraid if you are not a rotary mate with recent desert experience in either theatre, you will never grasp this concept and may as well try another thread.

Apologies if this offends anyone on 28, its not intended to. If it offends anyone else....get over it.

WM

[Jackonicko]

The Chinook is the only other UK platform that can do what the Merlins have been doing in Iraq BUT they could not do it so quietly, they could not do it with the same availability, they could not do it without being comprehensively dicked from take off to landing, and they are more prone to nastiness in brown out.

And many users now swear by the Merlin.

Moreover, if you think that the Chinook isn't FAR LOUDER than Merlin, with a unique acoustic signature that is more directional, then you've been flying them much too long, or you've never heard the difference between the noise and 'thump' you experience on the ground when one flies over at a distance at which you wouldn't even hear a Merlin.

I may be a "snivelling armchair napoleon" and I certainly am not a "rotary mate with recent desert experience", but I don't need to be one to spot your exaggerated and arrogant boasting and ignorant dismissal of an aircraft that's proving to be as useful as your own.

[electric.sheep]

BUT they could not do it so quietly, they could not do it with the same availability, they could not do it without being comprehensively dicked from take off to landing, and they are more prone to nastiness in brown out.


Can't be bothered to answer each of these points, but I believe you are now the one using 'exaggerated and arrogant boasting' except it is without the benefit of relevant experience.

[Hilife]

Hansard - Defence
6 Nov 2006:

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of (a) the overall military helicopter fleet and (b) the helicopter fleet deployed in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan are considered (A) fit for service and (B) battle-worthy, broken down by helicopter type. [98556]

Mr. Ingram: The MOD does not use the terms fit for service and battle-worthy in describing helicopters. We use the term “fit for purpose”, which means those that are available, reliable, airworthy and capable of carrying out their planned missions on a given date.

6 Nov 2006 : Column 808W

Helicopter type Fit for purpose (Percentage)
A109 77
Apache 60
Chinook 61
Gazelle AH1 76
Lynx MK 3 and 8 57
Lynx MK 7 and 9 59
Merlin MK 1 48
Merlin MK 3 53
Puma 73
Sea King MK 3/3A 53
Sea King MK4/6C 51
Sea King MK 5 53
Sea King MK 7 56

The percentages shown in the table indicate the proportion of the helicopter fleet available to front-line commands, which are considered “fit for purpose”. These numbers will vary; the figures shown are the average for the period from 1 June to 30 September 2006.

All UK helicopters deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan are considered fit for purpose, but not all will be available for operational flying each day due to routine maintenance requirements. However, these factors are taken into consideration, and sufficient helicopters are provided to meet current operational requirements. We continue to review these operational requirements and adjust as necessary.

[tucumseh]

I accept there were probably some in the RAF who “didn’t want” their Merlin.

But in the early 80s, the RN was certainly looking forward to the dawn of a new decade (90s!) with their 103 ASW EH101s. At the 5/8 ratio (i.e. 5 Merlins could provide the capability of 8 SK HAS Mk5/6) their ASW capability would effectively be more than doubled. And orders for new ASW SKs were still being placed years later, so both were planned to be in service together for a long time.

And the Junglies’ dissent lasted a microsecond when they discovered all 103 would have a secondary Commando role, to supplement (not replace) SK4, which weren’t all delivered at the time. Another huge increase in capability, to meet the perceived threats of the day, and beyond. The only perceived difficulty was the SK4 had, and still has, a far better DAS, ILS, Comms etc.
The events of 1989 changed things entirely. I did not envy the decision makers at the time – the “procurement cycle” meant that most development, and many production, contracts for Merlin had been let, and completed, years before. The recent Nimrod AEW fiasco was eating up “air” funding. Concurrently, FRS2 and Lynx 8, and various RAF programmes, were well advanced. Even simple things, like the change in comms channel spacing, were hugely expensive. (We tend to forget these things aren’t dreamt up by MoD, but imposed upon them). Remember that, in a design sense, many Merlin avionic systems pre-date those of the SK6. I saw fully functional rigs in 1985. (Perhaps this is one of the problems undermining Merlin. Many avionic systems required a mid-life update before they were ever fitted to airframes, but didn’t get it. When the assembled aircraft arrived, many operators who had converted were immediately aware of some backward steps). It was definitely a case of, having committed so much money, we needed to adapt what we were getting, not start afresh. Yes, I believe politics were involved regarding Westland (and others) but I think most involved would blame the complexities of the international collaboration, rather than Westland. (I am an unashamed supporter of Westland. They have never let me down, or tried to stiff me; not once. Not many I can say that about).

Having gone through all that, it would take a very brave man to select other than Merlin for the RAF.

[Mr-AEO]

HiLife - What's the purpose of you post? Are you pointing out that Merlin has a lower % that Chinny? If you are, seeing as the figures are Nov 06, so take into account the period during which Merlin is still recovering from its Tail Rotor issues and now Tail cone corrosion issues. Given both of those, I beleive Merlins hours doubled last year as long lead time spares to solve the TR crisis come through in useable numbers. If that trend continues, and IMOS performs, then Merlins availability will reach the intended target in due course. This is not a slight on the Chinook at 60%, stats are stats, but being an older airframe, you cannot expect it to keep up with a newer aircraft (once that one has finished teething).

Ps - Hasn't it gone quiet about replacing the Light Utility capability, seems SK4 will continue being 'mis-used' with Broadsword for some time to come.

[PTT]

Originally posted by Mr-AEO
stats are stats, but being an older airframe, you cannot expect it to keep up with a newer aircraft
Originally posted by Hilife
Helicopter type Fit for purpose (Percentage)
...
Chinook 61
...
Merlin MK 1 48
Merlin MK 3 53
Puma 73
The evidence seems to suggest precisely the opposite, Mr-AEO. :ok:

[Not_a_boffin]

Helicopter type Fit for purpose (Percentage)
A109 77
Apache 60
Chinook 61
Gazelle AH1 76
Lynx MK 3 and 8 57
Lynx MK 7 and 9 59
Merlin MK 1 48
Merlin MK 3 53
Puma 73
Sea King MK 3/3A 53
Sea King MK4/6C 51
Sea King MK 5 53
Sea King MK 7 56

The percentages shown in the table indicate the proportion of the helicopter fleet available to front-line commands, which are considered “fit for purpose”.

Doesn't the overall FFP rate (average v low sixties if you go by nos of airframes) just show how little investment in terms of support is being put into some of the hardest-worked bits of HMAF. Particularly when there are two full-scale combat ops on top of the normal burden. ISTR NATO readiness requirements were in the mid 70s not so many years ago - though this lot would probably go pedantry overdrive on the different definitions. When the overall force is in this state, isn't "my cabs better than your cab" missing the point somewhat?

[Hilife]

AEO

Having spent 9-years on Chinooks at Odiham back in the early years, yes I am more than a little biased. However, even though a mature platform when she entered into service with the RAF we had some dark days in the 1980’s, but she was a bloody good helicopter non the less.

Regarding my point. With the possible exception of the WAH64, the Merlin’s are surely our most modern helicopter, yet the Hansard response suggests that serviceability rates are the worst in the JHC fleet. Why is that and before lack of funding is quoted, surely this problem should role out across the rotary fleet?

I don’t doubt that things are improving and that in time the Merlin may well end up being a very good platform. However, if there is something else out there that would do the task more effectively and at less cost, then lets not buy from Finmeccanica just because it offers security for British jobs. There must be well over a 250,000 people in the UK aviation industry and AW represents only a mere fraction of our UK skills base.

Much as I am very patriotic, the cars on my drive are built in Scandinavia and Germany, the white goods in my kitchen are all German and my Hi-Fi originates from the Far East. Why, because for me they offer excellent quality, reliability at a competitive price.

For those that think we should buy AW because if secures British job, I would ask what car do you drive? We laid-off 30,000 miners because the numbers didn’t make sense, so let’s not stick with a home grown product IF it’s not what JHC wants.

I fear that AW is waiting for improvements from the VH-71A program to work there way back across the Pond and with this program slipping, should we be asking JHC to continue to wait for a greatly improved 101?

Just my opinion……

[Mr-AEO]

HiLife,

Firstly a caveat. I'm not current on Merlin so if anyone is, and my comments need updating, please feel free!

In short, the reasons for the low % for Merlin may well be down to the fact that they are still recovering from the well publicised Tail Rotor crisis which hit the fleet in 2005. Because of the long lead time of the items need to replace the faulty components, and the maintenance burden of a restrictive inspection regime, the availability of the Merlin was hit very hard indeed. The fact that they have gone from about 2000 hrs in 2005 to 7000 or so hours in 2006 is a massive improvement. Like I said, I expect this to get better and better under IMOS.

Chinook being supported by TLCS should also improve.

As for buying from AW or WHL. Who else in the UK has the licence/capability to provide us with a Military Medium Lift Helicopter? Who else has the infrasatructure and expertise to design major new modifications (such as HEAT) to that helicopters and maintain the safety clearance? I cannot think of anyone in the UK with that Helo expertise. If you really want to keep UK jobs, it's our only option - plus I live in Yeovil so need a retirement job;).

[PTT]

If you really want to keep UK jobs, it's our only option
Actually, what I really want is to provide sufficient and suitable helicopter lift for the people out on the ground in those places our government has deemed fit to send them (and us!).

I understand that keeping jobs is in itself a noble aim, but at the cost of lives?

[RODF3]

EH101 Empty 10.5 T maum 14.5 T
CH 47 Empty 12.5 T MAUM 24.5 T

not truely accurate figures. 24.5 T for USLs for the chinook otherwise 22.7T.
The merlin is cleared, when required, to 15.6T.
I know it's trivia but it all counts.

[Mr-AEO]

PTT - A good point. I'd agree that if we want something quick (like a new ML Helo) and someone like EC could offer it to us when we needed it, but AW couldn't, then to buy offshore is the way ahead. There may be an over-riding factor such as other Lines of Development though that make us choose the 'devil we know' rather than mix fleets just for the sake of a quick win. The DIS is not so blind as to make the answer always AW despite better offers from overseas. On balance though, if we take the Danish Merlin as an example, there were simply no alternatives in the timescale that made sense. We then contract with AW to modify the Danish merlin as required, as they are the DA, and then contract with them again to procure replacement aircraft on behalf of the Danes.

[PTT]

With all due respect - and perhaps an excess of cynicism - possibly the real reason we go with AW is that, to a politician, voters jobs are more important than the lives of voters who live in another constituency.
I agree that we need something fast to get more capability, and that the Danish Merlin is a fast and easy answer, but I am questioning the use of Merlin as SH at all. Like I said earlier in the thread, a 2 aircraft mix is certainly good enough for a force the size of the UK military.

[Jackonicko]

PTT,

Are you seriously suggesting that servicemen's lives are more endangered flying in the Merlin than in the Chinook or Puma?

Are you seriously suggesting that Puma's serviceability record in the Middle East makes it better suited to form part of a two-type JHC force than Merlin?

You're mad!

[PTT]

Are you seriously suggesting that servicemen's lives are more endangered flying in the Merlin than in the Chinook or Puma?
Not directly, no. I'm suggesting that a third type in what needs to be a two-type fleet endangers servicemen by duplicating logistics chains, thereby denying the front line of much needed assets as those chains cost money.
It can also be argued that either the Puma or the Chinook are safer under fire, but I will not go into such details here for obvious reasons.
Are you seriously suggesting that Puma's serviceability record in the Middle East makes it better suited to form part of a two-type JHC force than Merlin?
Again, no. I was merely refuting Mr-AEO's suggestion that newer aircraft are more serviceable - the evidence is clearly to the contrary.
I would, however, argue that the Puma (come Cougar/Super Puma) is a better compliment to a Chinook in a two-type JHC fleet, and I have made that argument a few pages back in the thread.
You're mad!
And you are a better debater than to resort to that.

[Jackonicko]

I'm not, you know. Especially not when I've been rendered incoherent by entirely admirable but over-stated enthusiasm for someone's own type.

Puma is dying on its ar.se. Short of going out and buying loads more (and upgrading them at massive cost) they are on their way out. Good aircraft (especially in more temperate climes) but yesterday's aeroplane, too small for many tasks, too noisy and increasingly costly to support. And before you start on EC725s or AS332s or whatever - that would be a new aircraft, requiring a new logistics chain, albeit with some useful commonality for training, etc. And it would provide no UK jobs, and no UK tax revenue, and it would cut the ground from under what has already been a sucessful export programme.

A logistics chain is already in place for Merlin (the grey ones, remember) and the aircraft has proved its capabilities and (where it counts, in theatre) its availability. The figures have been distorted by the MoD's incomprehensible attitude to spares (as being optional) and by the tail rotor and other fixes to inevitable teething troubles. But look at serviceability and availability in theatre.

Of course Merlin is a bit big to be ideal for some tasks, but it represents a more capable and more useful asset than would a Cougar or an NH90.

[ProfessionalStudent]

I don't really believe we needed more Merlins. What we really needed was more spares for the Merlins we already have. Without the correct spares package in place, the new Merlins will just join the rest in the shed being cannibalised to keep the few flying.

What is actually a pretty capable airframe has been blighted by 2 things. Firstly, and most significantly IMHO, is the inexcusable approach to spares procurement we see before us. Secondly is the interminable time it is taking to getting the MAR and full RTS from QinetiQ. If Westlands say it's good for X, surely it's good for X? In the litigation crazy world of today surely WH would be commiting commercial suicide to not produce the goods? Or am I being naive? And why couldn't QinetiQ have been more involved in the development in the first place, thus reducing the timeframes to MAR.

The upgrade of the Puma to HC2 standard will give it a new lease of life and provide a pretty capable bit of kit. We still need a frame of Puma size and the HC2 seems a pretty good compromise.

The Merlin has it's niche but isn't really as capable as the hype often suggests, and having seen it in action first hand on ops, it will struggle a reasonable amount if deployed in the Stan. It is, on the other hand, smooth, fast and quiet - considerably quieter than the Chinook (sorry wokkameister:oh:). So ideally suited for certain missions.

The Chinook is still our most capable type. Not the answer to all things, but to most. The fact that it's almost impossible to get onto the production line is testimony to that.

What we have is a fleet of oranges, apples and kiwifruit, and it's pointless comparing them. What we undeniably need, however, is a suitable support chain for what we already have.

[PTT]

The logistics chains for the two Merlin types are far from common, so while there is one in place for the grey Merlin, another is in place for the green one. Upgraded Puma/Cougar/Super Puma would simply replace the Puma supply chain after a period of overlap, and minimal training for 2 squadrons of crews would be required.

I agree that the figures for serviceability are distorted by the poor supply chain, but provision of spares is all a part of provision of an aircraft. No spares = no aircraft = poor serviceability rate. The utopia of a supply chain with surplus will never happen, so that must be taken into account when looking at serviceability rates. To the man on the ground, the "why" of there being no aircraft to support him is irrelevant, merely the fact that there is no aircraft matters, which is why I discount any argument about jobs, tax revenue and export programmes.

Of course Merlin is a bit big to be ideal for some tasks, but it represents a more capable and more useful asset than would a Cougar or an NH90.
An aircraft is only as useful as how well it carries out the role it is designed for. The F3, for example, is an utterly utterly useless ( :E ) fighter but a very useful interceptor. Similarly, the niche role the Puma has found itself (excelling?) in is not a role the Merlin could carry out at all well, and neither can the Chinook (nor the SK4 quite as well).
Yes, the Merlin is good at lifting stuff from a decent-size LS and moving it to a decent-size LS, but then so is the Chinook, and both are better than the Puma at that. Of the three, in terms of pure lift capability, I pick the Chinook. The conclusion is that a Chinook/Puma mix is the most efficient.

[Mr-AEO]

:bored:I don't uderstand why there is such a push for Puma:bored:

It is going out of service in wnat 2017/2018, whereas the Merlin Mk1 is going through a CSP at that stage and will see service until 203X A Mk3 CSP programme was always on the cards as well so thats an option still.

So far we have Chinny for HL, Merlin/Puma/SK for ML with the latter 2 going out in 2018. Depending on the outcome of the Future Medium Helicopter programme, I would reckon that Merlin is in a far stronger position in terms of coherency than Puma.

Or - Is it not acceptable to the RAF because the Fleet Air Arm fly it? ;)

[PTT]

Ok, in small words:

The Merlin is too big!

[VuctoredThrest]

... or too small, depending on your starting point.

[Evalu8ter]

"Puma is dying on its ar.se. Short of going out and buying loads more (and upgrading them at massive cost) they are on their way out"
Damn, who told the Journo the master plan...
For heaven's sake don't tell them we're going over the top at dawn....!
I think that a Puma 2 with the new engines/avionics/extra fuel will give a Merlin a bit of a fright when it comes to disposable payload.
I remember planning a sortie for a Merlin once, about a 4 hr beano around the UK. We were taking a Chinny with one bob tank, so no snags, plus 30ish troops (TOW 18 500Kg) - so, marginal safe single with a bit of breeze. The Merlin crew crowed that they could get round the route on internal fuel........but only if they carried themselves and no pax/kit - and they were most definately not safe single! The Chinny of course, could have carried a 6000Kg underslung as well if we'd wanted to....:} This is the fundemental difference between hype and capability. I don't give two hoots if a CH47 is noisier than a Merlin - in a Chinook (a FAR more survivable platform than Merlin, but we can't go into that here) I've only got to go once to put 40 troops on the ground, not twice.
The Merlin, a wizard PR machine for Westlands, a good "follow-on" aircraft in a low density altitude theatre and a gravy train for all concerned.

[Mr-AEO]

But, you forget the most important thing about Merlin is that it looks FAR sexier than a Puma, which looks like something my kid would draw if given a few crayons:}.

You comments re: survivability and not for here, ok - that's fine but some of this is public knowledge - like the curent DAS fit on both. To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?

[TheWizard]

You comments re: survivability and not for here, ok - that's fine but some of this is public knowledge - like the curent DAS fit on both. To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?

I know which one I feel safer on.....

[Compressorstall]

Doesn't everyone have some relevant points amidst the white noise that seems to be spouted here?
Chinook - noisy heavy lifter with some (very) opinionated crews. Good at high DA, quite fast and quite serviceable - also well funded by JHC.
Puma - old, tired, capable in role and operated with some humility by its crews.
Merlin Mk3 (not the RN one) - capable and nowhere near tasked to its full potential, quiet, fuel effcient and its crews would like to do more than 'bus runs'. Could do with some more money.
SK4 - tired and getting some attention.
As for the mixed fleets issues, why do we operate Lynx LUH as well?? We have a long history of proactive groundings, so perhaps a mixed fleet is a blessing given our small fleet sizes since there is an element of being able to soak up short-term pain...
This won't change anything and Wokkameister will tell you Chinook is best, but all types have their niche.

[PTT]

To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
In a word, no.

Merlin Mk3 (not the RN one).....Could do with some more money
We all could. It's just a matter of how much. As Evalu8ter said, Puma 2 with all the bells and (fairly cheap) whistles will have quite an impressive disposable payload, quite dramatically increasing the lift capability of the Puma fleet (which, I admit, is not that much to start with in Chinook terms!).

[TheWizard]

Quote:
To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?

In a word, no.


An opinion based on what? Do you actually know what the DAS fit is on both?(obviously not for publication on here) If you do then you need to have another look at the definition of capability. If not then your statement has no credibility and comes across as just another anti-Merlin rant:hmm:

[wokkameister]

Compstall.

Nice to see you adding your opinion and defending the Merlin. To be honest, I wouldnt have much respect for you if you didn't. However I do respect both you and your opinion as you talk from a viewpoint of experience.

Likewise I have offered my own viewpoint based on my own quite considerable experience of the Chinook. What greatly grips my proverbials, is that Jacko, having started this thread under the auspices of canvassing opinion, refuses to accept any point of view as valid unless it supports the Merlin as the be all and end all.

If the Merlin was the answer to modern civilisations problems.....why ask the bloody question?
I have added my opinion to the list, and it seems everyone is in no doubt what it is. I will not be adding to this thread, and I will bid you farewell.

Fly Safe, Report Facts.

WM

[The Helpful Stacker]

As a neutral (bluntie) I must say I'd take the experience of someone who actually operates SH types over that of an opinionated hack everytime. Janes Defence can only tell you so much about helicopters and no matter how well-respected a reporter may think they are they still won't get the whole truth from those really in the know.

My 2 pence worth is give us more Chinooks, just as long as they can be made quieter. Our little building towards the end of the Odious active doesn't have very good sound-proofing and sometimes it can be difficult to hear Terry Wogan in the morning.;)

[Jackonicko]

Would you indeed, you shiny a***ed blunt b@stard? (If you can resort to witless and low abuse about journos then I can be just as rude about your... 'profession', I guess?)

That's why you listen to Wokka while dismissing Compressorstall and Wizard?

Any impartial and air-minded observer (especially a current pilot) will listen to all aircrew from all of the types under discussion, and to the users, and will then form a balanced judgement, and not just listen to the loudest voices who happen to post on PPRuNe.

There's only one RAF Merlin squadron, and I'm not surprised that those not lucky enough to be posted at have a bit of a chip on their shoulders.....;) :E


Wokkameister,

While I appreciate the "no stick, no vote" argument, I'm as entitled to an opinion as anyone else, and I voice mine having flown in and flown all three of the primary types now being discussed, and having had enough exposure to aircrew from all three to have heard the boasts, the real arguments and a good deal of the stuff that I would never, ever print.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Actually 'Jackonicko' (once again) you've completely missed the point so I will use smaller words just so you understand.

I will listen to any aircrew with experience on SH with regards to all SH over a reporter everytime. No matter how 'in the loop' you think you are most of what you constantly witter on about still appears to be just PR bumpf, guarded comments by individuals or recycled material from internet forums (in my ever-so-humble bluntie opinion of course).

During my years on TSW I worked with all manner of helicopter crews from all the branches of the Armed Forces and I've yet to meet one who isn't bloody good at what he or she does. Even when operating old, out-dated a/c (such as the Wessex crews of 72) they push their machines to the limit of what they can do and in doing so gain knowledge that you will never see on some glossy handed out to you at Farnbrough. These are the people I listen to and I respect their views.

Of course crews and support staff have pride in their aircraft fleets, often to the point that they will deride all other types but that doesn't mean that when the meat hits the metal they don't appreciate the support of other a/c types. We in the Armed Forces are consummate professionals and what many in the civil world fail to understand is the difference between bravado and honest beliefs.

I have the pleasure to work at Odious and even though morale is pretty much nil stock at the mo many of us will still take digs at the role of RAF Benson and their fleets because they are the other RAF unit within JHC. Not because 'we' honestly believe what is being said but because, like the Army has inter-regimental rivalry we in the RAF have inter-station and inter-aircraft type rivalries.

The service people who use this forum have (I believe) the experience to know what being said is barbed and what is just bravado whereas I believe you are wanting of this ability. Perhaps if BAe produced a pamphlet with the basic outlines of what bravado is you'd understand but then again a BAe version would be completely different to the RAF version and 12 years late.

[wokkameister]

Jacko.

You are rude and not very bright sir. I suggest you apologise to the Helpful Stacker forthwith. I cannot describe how low you sit in my eyes. If you cannot deal with humour, maybe you should be off chasing Royals through Paris tunnels.
If we ever meet, best you be a fast runner as your notebook and camera will swiftly be inserted and hammered home up to the fourth lacing of my boot.

Warm regards from Odiham

WM

[Jackonicko]

Has Odiham really become a banter free zone, WM?

It always used to be the sort of place where a robust response to abuse was expected.

If that blunt twit didn't want to be teased, then perhaps he should have avoided the 'opinionated hack' stuff, though it's heartening to see you leap to his defence.

And if you're really so dim that you class any journo as being the same as Tabloid scum or paparazzi, then you deserve my sympathy. (And perhaps a little help in removing that ramrod from your back passage).

I'm not the only person here (only the least qualified) telling you that your anti-Merlin prejudice is tired, silly and ill-informed

[The Helpful Stacker]

I have no problem with being called a bluntie by someone who has operational service in the military but from a hack who has pretensions of his own importance and influence....

:rolleyes:

[wokkameister]

Defending members of the team that is Odiham from ill informed abuse by an opinionated hack is not just my duty, it is a pleasure.

Odiham is a little low on morale, being exceptionally busy. Perhaps this is a reflection of the success of the Chinook.

Helpful- suggest we leave this second rate stringer to his own devices and go back to chatting to the grown ups. After all, he probably has tommorrows horoscopes to write anyway.

WM

[Jackonicko]

WM

Immediate banter lessons obviously required for you WM. Is that really the best you can do? Odiham's mess must be a barrel of fun nowadays, no wonder morale's not what it should be.

What have we had so far? Empty posturing and threats to kick my ar.se (what's next, are you going to get your Dad on me? Perhaps you could tell teacher?). And I shouldn't forget your pathetic stereotypes about the kind of journos who have nothing to do with what I do.


THS

No pretensions, no importance. All I do is try to assess, analyse and reflect what people tell me. They're the people who know, I don't pretend to be anything more than the conduit. Respect to you as a serving member of HM Forces, of course, (I know that my own VR service doesn't compare) but there'd be more respect from me if you'd actually flown as P1 in one of Her Majesty's aeroplanes.


Remember chaps, it's not just the inky fingered journo scum who is saying that while Chinook has its undoubted capabilities and usefulness, so too does the Merlin. It's other frontline aircrew who fly the Merlin, and the users, too.

[wokkameister]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Irrelevance buzzer test carried out satis.

[Tourist]

OOhhh, nice banter wokka

[PTT]

TheWizard
An opinion based on what? Do you actually know what the DAS fit is on both?(obviously not for publication on here) If you do then you need to have another look at the definition of capability. If not then your statement has no credibility and comes across as just another anti-Merlin rant
Yes, I do know what both fits are, and I am well aware of their relative merits and weaknesses. I'd happily chat to you about the definition of "capability" over a beer: as you correctly say, this is not the place. I personally am happier with one fit than with another.

Jacko - this is not an us vs them thing, it's a matter of fitting capability to requirement (effects-based procurement?), and the requirement does not include a third type to carry out what can be very (and I do mean very) simplistically be broken down into two tasks: move lots of stuff into big places and move lots of (although usually less) stuff into small places.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Jacko,

"but there'd be more respect from me if you'd actually flown as P1 in one of Her Majesty's aeroplanes."

The implication of that rather insulting throwaway is that only pilots have credibility and are therefore believable whilst crewman are simply to be ignored cos they know **** all :ugh:

Some have questioned your "actual" service knowledge and it's my impression from that rather insulting inference that your finger is quite a long way from any informed military pulse, but in your line of work why does that not come as a surprise :rolleyes:

[Jackonicko]

Seldomffp,

Wrong inference, I'm afraid.

The inference was that I had done. A modest achievement, and not to be compared with anyone who wears any form of flying brevet (whether crewman, WSO, Signaller or whatever), but one which I'm proud of...... (I have the arrogance, you see, just not the ability....)


PTT

Except that that really is too simplistic, isn't it? There are plenty of tasks that a Merlin does rather better than either a Puma or a Chinook (and vice versa, to a degree). As Iraq has shown pretty conclusively. If it were up to me, I'd want a mix of sizes of SH (Chinook/Merlin/NH90 perhaps, or even AW149), but if constrained to just the two types, then Chinook/Merlin makes more sense to me than the other options - not least (but not only) because that's what we already have.

The idea that we should throw Merlin away and buy Cougars is risible, and (in many people's view) would result in a force mix that was less available and less capable.


WM,

At last! (I don't believe I've agreed with Tourist).

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

"The inference was that I had done."

Go on I'll bite, in what and as what?

[NURSE]

Looking from outside IMHO we have to many types of support helecopter in service and as many people here have banged on about duplication of support and logistics. Is it not a little bit expensive and time consuming to have 4 Helecopters doing Broadly similar jobs with seperate training and spares holdings etc?

Puma is useful at the lighter end and chinook for the heavy stuff that leaves Merlin and sea king in the middle. Now refurbishing seaking will just keep the system as complicated as it is. now Fleet and 3 Cdo Bde still need Support helecopter as do the army and the RAF would a logical position not be to replace Seaking with Merlins which are already in service with royal navy and a maritime transport variant is available with the RAF running a fleet of land optimised aircraft. I know people will jump up and bang on about maritimising the Chinook but am reliably informed that is a non-starter both technically and financially.
Eventually Puma will have to be replaced and NH90 may be an option. UKPLC do need a mix of airframes and there isn't a 1 size fits all type at present. What does appear to be missing is some longer term thinking instead of the sticking plaster approach we appear to be taking at present.

[Door Slider]

"What does appear to be missing is some longer term thinking instead of the sticking plaster approach we appear to be taking at present."


NURSE, not really true. There are lots of people 'thinking' about long term procurement and availability. However, you can think as much as you like but if Gordon Brown is not willing to put some cash in the coffers not much is going to change.
I do agree that across the entire military fleet we do have too many types. The Puma is not dying on its arse quite yet and is still doing a very valuable job, the Sea King is in a similar position but without these two fleets Merlin and Chinook could not do what they are doing plus the extra work-load. 'Sticking Plasters' in the short to medium term is the only option unfortunately. The Merlin is a capable a/c and is doing a good job, the crews want to broaden there the Merlins portfolio so its not just MNDSE but we are not going to get rid of it now. I agree with previous post though that a chinook and Puma sized a/c offers a good degree of mission coverage but that does not mean we should just wipe the other fleets off that map.

[PTT]

Jacko
In an ideal world a mix if sizes would be great, but the fact is that the UK military is too small to be able to pay for such extravagance.

Your justification for the Chinook/Merlin mix is lacking somewhat - we do also already have Puma, and more of those than we have Merlin. An upgrade to Puma 2 will/would increase capability considerably, making it highly viable as the second platform and it would still hold what I see as the trump card in this situation - it's a lot smaller than the Merlin.
Size really does matter, you see, in particular for urban operations. You state that I oversimplified the case, but the truth is that we really are just the drivers of (complicated) trucks. The job of the truck is to get load X from point A to point B safely and efficiently and in a timely manner. In order to carry that out the truck must be fast, serviceable (!), safe and, crucially, able to park at points A and B. Where the Chinook cannot acheive the parking, the Puma slots in nicely - the Merlin is not really much of an improvement in terms of parking space. If the load is too big for the Puma then you use more than one.

[Wessex Boy]

If we are buying Pumas from the Portugese, why don't we buy Wessex from Uruguay? (they still operate the HC2):}
We know they can operate in fairly tough conditions, and we certainly have a lot of experienced crew around!

coat obtained and heading for the taxi:\

[Jackonicko]

How long can the existing Puma airframes last, though?

Which would it make more sense to retire - ageing Pumas or near-new Merlins (the latter sharing considerable commonality with Navy Merlins, some engine commonality with the AH, etc.)?

Facing the decision of which do you buy more of, Pumas or Merlins - the right answer must be Merlin - though it should be a Merlin like the Italian Mk 413, navalised with folding tailboom and rotors. Then the Sea King 4 could perhaps be taken out of service and its logistics chain removed.

And if there really is a need for a smaller platform, then augment the Chinooks and Merlins with AW139 or NH90.

I'm not anti-Puma by any means - I have stick time in the Puma, and I spent some very, very happy times with 33 and 1563 Flight and have a real soft spot for the old girl, and for the blokes who operate it. I'm aware of some of the extraordinary missions and roles that have been flown by the Puma in Iraq, and of the kit used, and I am profoundly sad (but accepting of the fact) that the likes of me can't write about them - the Puma boys deserve great credit for what they've achieved. I'm surprised that you haven't laboured the advantage of the big doors on BOTH sides.

The Wessex was a great aircraft, too, but that does not mean that it should still be in use, nor that we should be buying a new production Super Wessex were it still in production.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

"but there'd be more respect from me if you'd actually flown as P1 in one of Her Majesty's aeroplanes."

and

"I'm not anti-Puma by any means - I have stick time in the Puma,"

Jacko,

Can you just humour me and expand on your credentials for me?

[JNo]

How long can the existing Puma airframes last, though?

The airframes simply aren't the issue, there's nothing wrong with them. The issue (and Puma 2 being the solution) is that spares are getting increasingly more difficult (and expensive) to obtain. By replacing parts on the aircraft with more modern ones (not changing the airframe) it'll provide both a life extension to the Puma and a capability increase.

cing the decision of which do you buy more of, Pumas or Merlins - the right answer must be Merlin

In the increasingly budget constrained world which we operate in this is probabaly the wrong choice. Currently the operating costs of the Merlin are 3-4 times that of a Puma. Post upgrade I would assume this factor will only increase.

And if there really is a need for a smaller platform, then augment the Chinooks and Merlins with AW139 or NH90
Three points here:
(1) No money
(2) No money
(3) No money
Oh and yes they're really is a need - it's not for discussion here

able to park at points A and B
Spot on. The Puma provides EXACTLY what the "customer" requires.

In an ideal world we'd all have brand spanking new aircraft. There'd be more servicable Chinooks than we'd know what to do with. The Merlin would have seperate hanger dedicated to storing spares for when they're needed. And the Puma would have been upgraded in the 70's . That my friends is fantasy land.

[pinho_fap]

Sorry to jump in on the discussion, but I have flown Pumas and I am now flying the Merlin. Not in the RAF, but in the PAF - Portuguese Air Force.
I operated Pumas for 4 years in 711 Squadron in the Azores islands, and 2 weeks before we completed the phase out, we actually received a group of engineers and pilots from the RAF (both pilots were Squadron Commanders I think), to survery our a/c, and we were glad to see that everyone from the RAF liked the look and feel of our Pumas. Portugal ordered the first production aircraft from Sud-Aviation in the late 60's, but we upgraded them during their operational life, and we didn't use them as much as you do. I believe normal total time for our airframes were around the 6000/7000 hrs (in 38 years of service). In the early 90's we upgraded the engines to the Makila 1A1, and we gained a lot of available power (the MGB was not upgraded, so MTOW remained 7400Kg). Your pilots told us that in Iraq or Afghanistan that extra-power would be most welcome. I have to say that I never saw NR droop while flying our Puma, not even taking off at high AUW or landing at 7000 ft, which we did sometimes.
Then we bought the Merlin, and it is a great aircraft. That is, when it is outside the hangar, because as soon as it enters the hangar, they don't want to get out. There are no spares, period. And this is hurting a lot, we are having a lot of problems qualifying new pilots because there are no available hours. A lot of this problem is our fault, but the Canadians have the same issues with spares.
The Merlin brought an improved capability to us, doubling our SAR coverage from 200 NM to almost 400 NM, but curiously, we don't have a single heliport certified for 15600 Kg in mainland Portugal, which means that we stopped doing EMS service for the civilians, which we sometimes did in the Puma. It is a very good a/c, but the lack of spares and cost of flight hours has us now wandering why we didn't buy the Cougar...

I don't have knowledge about the specific situation of the British Armed Forces to give an opinion about what you should buy, but just thought you'd like to know what our experience has been.

Best wishes

Pinho

[Evalu8ter]

Pinho,
Thanks for some enlightening comments which appear, succinctly, to precis the previous arguements ie:
1. The Merlin is a great pilot's ac, when it works.
2. AW Customer support can be awful.
3. It's too bl***y big to be a Puma/Wessex replacement.
4. It's too bl***y expensive to fly given its' pretty pathetic disposable load.
Ergo, back to basics: Dream world = CH47 capability & Puma size ac both marinised with good H&H performance.
Real World= Pork barrel politics, Service infighting & not enough cabs for AFG.
I know many an individual who was kicking around MoD in the mid 1990s. To a man they say that the Merlin was NOT the choice of the RAF or the Customer. The case for extra CH47s was repeatedly vetoed by the then Govt for purely political reasons. In no way does this take away from 28 the respect they've earned in SE Iraq, well done. But, the most important contribution has been to free up CH47s for AFG. If we'd bought the 35-odd CH47s that were on the table in 1995 we'd have plenty to go round..

[electric.sheep]

And so another thread fades into the distance with the contributors firmly entrenched in their two traditional camps:

"Don't buy the best, buy British" and "Buy the Best"

Never the twain shall meet.

[NURSE]

ES unfortunatley that is the way of the world there are people who just don't want to believe their own countries can produce good kit or complete rubbish depending on your stance.
There are some Good European bits of Kit out there some British some European and Some American. But as I stated earlier sometimes procurement descisions are made to promote other aspects of government policy. I have to say at least we are fairly flexible and we don't have a binding must be invented here or at least built here.

As a Serviceman I want the best
As a Tax payer I want Value for money
As a British citizen I want to see the work carried out in the UK

But as a realist I want a compromise of the above.

The sticking plaster approach is probably best at present for puma as money is tight and there isn't an obvious replacement airframe in a reasonable timescale for operational need.

Will the rest of the South African airframes be converted to C2 standard?

Jackonicko I agree with you re the Merlin Mk413 for the HC4 replacement
Wokameister I agree we need a bigger Chinook Fleet (but we should be looking at the new variants) with realistic spares holdings
And I think the Puma HC2 programme is a good idea till there is a suitable replacement available but lets not repeat the wessex saga keeping them going for to long.
And in the middle a bigger Merlin fleet with realistic spares holdings all in all the main thing I've picked from this thread is Support Hele needs better resourcing for whatever airframes that are in service.