Will Puma Survive?

[Bismark]

MM,

You certainly live in a dream worldd. If you think CAS and Cmd JHC have any credibility at all in MoD or No 10 then you are truly delusional. The behaviour of the top of the RAF has been atrocious over the past couple of years and those that need to have noted it well.

"Played a blinder"....far from it.

[glojo]

Year after year we see senior RAF officers playing an absolute blinder at selling their service to our politicians, all credit to them for carrying out those duties to the best of their ability. No complaints, no criticism, well done for making the best out of this awful situation we find ourselves in.

Does the Royal Navy still believe that by keeping quiet our service will somehow flourish? Am I being too rude when I say Wake Up and look at our once impressive Navy. We are now even having to beg (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9064697/Britain-had-to-plead-with-US-to-take-part-in-Iran-flotilla.html) to take the crumbs from the table of other nations.

Any modern Navy that wants to project power MUST have its own air cover and that can only be operated from ships.

Well done to the RAF :ok:

[MaroonMan4]

I am not the boss of JHC, was drinking lager, have absolutely no knowledge of F1 let alone F-35.

But hullloooooooo I am sure that you recognise we as a nation are so broke that the politicians will take anything that can reduce the Defence bill. With a CNS that appears is more worried about things that float, a CGS allegedly more concerned about Regiments and Battalions that march, of course when it comes to the air, CAS and his team will be all over any organisation-things that fly and the air environment is his core business.

Dry your eyes Princesses, times are a changing and you can't keep up. I do not say this detracting from anyone's professional nature or any particular colour of cloth, but some people have not quite understood how broke we are and what radical activity needs to be done.

Something has to give and it looks as though both CGS and CNS and the politicians are all favouring CAS and the RAF in the current environment. There is a clue in the title.

[Airborne Aircrew]

but some people have not quite understood how broke we are and what radical activity needs to be done.I'm with you in almost everything else you've said but I can't agree with this. In 2013 we will spend 58%, (yes, almost 2/3rds), of our GDP on Welfare, (15%), Health Care, (17%), Pensions, (19%), and interest, (7%)* because we've done so many things wrong in the past. We spend a mere 6% on defense... Hell, Goverment itself costs us 2%. We spend twice as much on the sick, lame and lazy, as we do in defence of the country and we spend more paying back debt than we do in defence.

The money is there but the self serving politicians don't get votes for doing the right thing, in fact it's quite the opposite, they maintain power by doing precisely the wrong thing and pandering to the wasters!!!


* Source (http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2013UKbt_11bc1n#ukgs302)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

In 2013 we will spend 58%, (yes, almost 2/3rds), of our GDP on Welfare, (15%), Health Care, (17%), Pensions, (19%),


...but the Govt has been trying recently to reduce spending in these areas, and has run into a modicum of opposition! Rightly or wrongly, more of the UK population care about welfare/NHS/pensions than about how many types of support helicopter the military has, and the Govt is elected by the whole electorate not just by the tiny proprtion left in the Forces!

Maybe we should change to the Athenian style of democracy where 5000 citizens are selected to make the decisions...there should be room for everyone in the Forces plus a few token civvies...

[Airborne Aircrew]

You left out the interest... ;) Get that payed off and you can double the defence budget... Stop borrowing money!!!!!!!!!!!! If you can't afford all the welfare then tough titties... Feed them and house them but don't buy them cars and flat screens!!!!

[kenparry]

58%, (yes, almost 2/3rds), of our GDP

I think you will find that it is 58% of government spending, not of GDP, as taxation is currently around 40% of GDP.

[PTT]

Maybe we should change to the Athenian style of democracy where 5000 citizens are selected to make the decisionsYes, a few more than the 650 we currently select to make the decisions is a great idea!

[randyrippley]

"Gripper 20 is a lying dishonest tw@t."
The way I read his (now deleted) post I thought he claimed to be a royal butler (or similar).
Same thing I suppose really....Probably kicked out for being a friend of Dorothy

[rotormonkey]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_popout&v=U5PtSJEfajw/YOUTUBE]

:ok:

[high spirits]

Tourist and I quite often disagree on this forum. He is an uncomprimising individual who genuinely believes he is right(whether he is ,or not)However, I find the rubbishing of his skills as an aviator quite unedifying. Clearly he doesn't require me to defend him, but come on! Banter is witty. Those comments were nothing of the sort.

MM4, Please explain why less SH is a good thing for the RAF. Me no understand. I have seen Puma 2 cockpit and perf figures. Not massively impressed. Gives the frame an extra decade or so. Whoopy-do. What then?

[PTT]

I have seen Puma 2 cockpit and perf figures. Not massively impressed.Which bits are you unimpressed by? Because I've seen them too and I am massively impressed.

[Door Slider]

I have seen Puma 2 cockpit and perf figures. Not massively impressed. Gives the frame an extra decade or so. Whoopy-do. What then?

Are you sure it was not the current cockpit and perf figures!!! The new perf figures which are verified by ATEC make a huge difference.

Yes, it only gives us an extra 12 years, but we either get the P2 or nothing. 10-12 years should be enough time for the ecomony to improve and a longer term medium aircraft to be purchased. The NH90 may even have all its problems ironed out by then!

[high spirits]

Mainly the cockpit actually. Tell me what will make a jot of difference to the way it operates now as an analogue version...... Will it enable more pilot SA, I don't think so.

Better engines, I agree and long overdue. There are accident reports going back to the 80s that recommended the fitting of an anticipator system. I guess that is why I'm unimpressed. It could have been so much better years ago. Without the demise of some good aircrew. The turd polish only lasts a decade or so. What then? Chinook only?

[nice castle]

Maybe we'll buy some blackhawks from anyone who's getting rid of theirs in 10 years time, the correct decision, only made 50 years too late..:E

[Door Slider]

I fail to see financially what other options we have at the moment, there is little choice. If polishing a turd, whether you believe it should be puma or sea king keeps an additional fleet in the hope we get a good replacement in 10 years then so be it, or if you prefer we can scrap it and have fewer frames, less people and less capability, financially what else can we do?

[Tiger_mate]

The argument for Blackhawk was a valid one in the eighties. However the limited headroom due to compatability with transporting it by C130 is no longer valid when air forces including our own have C17. With any luck a better designed battlefield helicopter (with a tail wheel) will appear in the next decade. NH90 is a good looking helicopter, but what we really need is a grandson to the Wessex that can stop whilst airborne quickly and be ran onto roughish terrain. One that has two cabin doors and seats around the cabin to free up floor space in between the seats for kit. Such a helicopter is yet to see the light of day and it is not Blackhawk.

[PTT]

Mainly the cockpit actually. Tell me what will make a jot of difference to the way it operates now as an analogue version...... Will it enable more pilot SA, I don't think so.Actually it will, and it's not all about the glass. Greater integration of systems means the crew have less to do to manage the systems, increasing heads-out time, thereby improving both safety and SA. ATEC say that it makes a fairly large difference.
Better engines, I agree and long overdue. There are accident reports going back to the 80s that recommended the fitting of an anticipator system. I guess that is why I'm unimpressed. It could have been so much better years ago. Without the demise of some good aircrew. The turd polish only lasts a decade or so. What then? Chinook only?It's more than just the anticipators. The engine is far more powerful, improving fuel efficiency (and therefore range/endurance), improving hot/high performance enormously, and improving safety margins. And that's the tip of the iceberg.

[Door Slider]

TM......... I totally agree

[randyrippley]

The dies already cast for what happens in ten years
Puma will be replaced by AW149 - manned by the Army
Any remaining green Lynx and other light helicopters will be replaced by a stretched AW609. Eventually these will replace Wildcat as well - and some will be fitted for AEW work
Green Merlins will have been condemned by then and V-22 will be on order to replace them, and also the oldest Chinooks

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

Whether or not the cockpit is any good/makes a huge difference to the operational capability of the crew was not really a huge consideration. The new glass cockpit is there simply because it came with the engines as part of an extant EC mod programme that had already been fitted to other nations' Pumas. To redesign it or try to keep the old analogue cockpit would have cost more, much more. Remember this was a Life Extension Project, NOT an upgrade (the 'U' word was forbidden!), cost was everything.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Randy,

Top tip for you: never drink the bathwater. Even though you were clearly having a bath in vodka...

TOTD:ok:

[high spirits]

Randy,
Please don't tell me that after Merlin and wildcat that we are going to give yet more taxpayer wonga to the Somerset con artists.

[Fareastdriver]

redesign it or try to keep the old analogue cockpit

The Makilas have been flying around with analogue cockpits in the 332 for thirty years. I would have thought that introducing the glass cockpit at the same time was for flying and operational reasons with their obvious benefits.

Pity they kept the old undercarriage.

[Could be the last?]

For interest, considering the length of time that the Mikala engines have been in use, does the P2 LEP intend to use new engines, or will they be pre-owned/refurbished units?

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

Caveat: been a while since I had anything to do with Puma 2, so things may have moved on!

The Makilas have been flying around with analogue cockpits in the 332 for thirty yearsYes, but not necessarily the RAF Puma cockpit (330E, effectively an RAF specific version of the 330B, which gives you some idea of its vintage!). To fit the Makilas and leave the same cockpit in would have required EC/MoD/QinetiQ etc to start from scratch with the design and certification process, as that work has, tmk, never been done. EC had already done the certification work (to JAR-29) on the Makila mod when they sold it to its previous customers, so QinetiQ need only to work on the delta between the Def Stans and JAR-29, rather than the whole shooting match (that was the case early on in the programme, if that's no longer the case I stand corrected), which saves money. If the Makilas could have been fitted to the Puma with the old cockpit still in, and it was cheaper doing it that way than doing it with the glass cockpit, that is what would have happened.

I would have thought that introducing the glass cockpit at the same time was for flying and operational reasons with their obvious benefits

It would be nice to think so, but no. It happily does bring those benefits, as well as the performance increase that the Makilas bring, and the extra fuel from having the 5th tank back in. But that was not the driver for this programme.

The whole thing has only been done in order to get anticipators on the Puma so it can stag on for another 10 years. Anticipators requires Makilas, the Makila mod brings the glass cockpit. The glass cockpit is only there because it comes with the Makilas.

The only reason it was done this way is because it is the cheapest way.

[Dundiggin']

IMHO the best replacement for the Puma/Wessex - type helicopter would have been/be the Westland Westminster. A twin jet Wessex with engines above the cockpit (NO CGB). It lifted the trailer plus a mounted Bloodhound missile together and that was back in the 50's. It was impressive but of course ****-canned by some short sighted tosser. It looked similar to the Blackhawk but had headroom enough to stand up inside. :{

[Airborne Aircrew]

http://members.multimania.co.uk/ctyoung57/Westminster/WW13.jpg (http://members.multimania.co.uk/ctyoung57/Westminster/WW13.jpg)

A bit dated though...

[Milo Minderbinder]

Dunduggin
It was cancelled so the money could be spent on the Rotodyne instead
Now that would have been the real solution - damn noisy though

Not sure how survivable that terylene skin on the Westminster would have been either - unless the production ones were going to be metal-skinned??

[Fareastdriver]

Just a query. Do Puma pilots get in the cockpit by means of the cockpit doors or are they still required to crawl in through the cabin?

[RedhillPhil]

Speaking of Pumas I was driving up the M40 yesterday at 11.00 ish and a Puma came over the carriageway lower than I've ever seen a helicoter in flight not at an airshow. It could not have been more than 60-70 feet high, possibly lower.

[xenolith]

And your point is?

[Door Slider]

Just as well they were authorised to fly at 50ft then! All perfectly above board and legal.

Yes Puma front end crews still get to the cockpit through the cabin and between the broom cupboards.

[RedhillPhil]

And your point is?

No point. I was just having a chat, friendly like. It's not every day that a bloody great helicopter flits across a motorway that low in front of you. That's all.

[Milo Minderbinder]

they usually fly alongside the motorway. Must be easier to read maps that way....

[Fareastdriver]

Yes Puma front end crews still get to the cockpit through the cabin and between the broom cupboards.

I thought that they had got over that. IIRC is was when a Puma was being guarded by a gunner at Woolwich who got bored and fiiddled with the pilot's door jettison lever. He put it back but the indicator wire went back to its original position. When the young Michael was flying it back the door jettisoned itself. That was in 1972. After that the doors were locked and we had to crawl in the back.
I cannot think of any other Puma/Super Puma/EC225 crews that do that worldwide.

[Airborne Aircrew]

The only dignified way to enter a Puma is through the starboard cargo door... :E

[Door Slider]

Or if you forgot the keys through the load hatch!!!

[Admin_Guru]

Why bother opening a door when you have a man (or maness) to do it for you. A door has been lost since the event mentioned when a 'visitor' fiddled and it was missed on pre-flight walk around. (NI IIRC) Besides which it is windy and wet far more often then nice weather and the cabin is usefull to doff ones kit (LCJ / helmet / armour / weapon ) whilst keeping warm and dry.

[Fareastdriver]

was missed on pre-flight walk around.

A suggestion, for what it is worth; nothing to do with getting in and out of the doors because if a door is inadvertantly jettisoned it doesn't matter if the door is locked or not.
In 1978 a Bristow 330J lost the pilots door through reasons unknown; probably somebody fiddling;or the pilots nav bag interfering with a jettison lever as the nav bag went with the door. To reduce the chances of it happening again the indicator wire was moved to the inside lever so it was part of the cockpit checks and a frangible plastic cover was placed over it. The wire was touchable around the cover and it was designed so that it fell away from the vertical if broken. There has not been a case of a door falling away since and the doors are frequently used by the pilots during offshore operations. On top of that offshore workers are notorious fiddlers.
At that time there was a fair amount of communication on the technical side between the RAF and Bristows, (it took a long time for Bristows to get their engine alignment tool back from Odiham) so this modification, approved by the CAA, would have been known to the RAF. Whether they followed it up I do not know so it may well have been done.
Just a thought, anyway.

[diginagain]

On top of that offshore workers are notorious fiddlers.
Really? Perhaps in your part of the World. Few of us venture that far forward as we prefer to stay in the cabin and get some zeds in en-route. "More kip, less trip."

[ShyTorque]

It could not have been more than 60-70 feet high, possibly lower.

What the hell was he doing up there, so high?

;)

[Lottery Winner]

.................. No!

[puma fixer]

Whats the latest on P2? Is it still happening? Do we have the first one in the UK yet? The cockpit pics look quite impressive!

[PTT]

It's happening.

[wg13_dummy]

Yep, £14 million per airframe for how many years return of service? Has someone in the RAF got compromising photos of MPs and thus blackmailing them in to squandering the budget on P2?

[nice castle]

One could easily say exactly the same about either Wildcat variant or Merlin 2, so steady there...

I heard £2m per airframe, not sure about the planned exit date of Pu2, but I heard Eurocopter are content the airframe is a simble box and really isn't subject to fatigue, so potentially, like most MOD aircraft, I expect it will have every last drop of life squeezed from it before they finally retire them.

[P-M-G]

Let it go, move on, Puma Mk2 lives and is moving forward. You must be FAA? Remind me how much for Wildcat HMA (around twice that). How much for the great (grey) elephant of the Merlin Mk2 to Mk4 CSP upgrade? Spreadsheet Phil, I imagine, knows a good deal when he sees one and he'd probably recognise Merlin CSP isn't one of them. Were he to acknowledge that, he may call a halt to the nonsensical Green Merlin Mk3 marinisation. Sense would prevail, transition to the RN canx and Merlin Mk3 would remain where it currently resides - with RAF SH providing Land Lift to the Army (apologies to CHF). Spreadsheet Phil (or his successor, or the next govt) actually might try (or be enforced) to balance the books. Following on from Harrier, they might cancel (or sell on completion) the carriers, canx Dave B/C and the boats and the landing craft. Just like MPA and the demise of Nimrod MRA4, we wouldn't be in the LitM game anymore....

[wg13_dummy]

The programme to extend the life of the Puma helicopter agreed by the previous Administration (Puma HC Mk2 project) remains within its approval level of £339 million and is progressing well. As with other battlefield support helicopters, we are also enhancing Puma's capabilities to match the threat environment. The Strategic Defence and Security Review has confirmed the ongoing need for Puma.

£339,000,000 ÷ 28 = £14,125,000. (reduced to 24)

Concur with cost/point of Wildcat

[Evalu8ter]

WG,
Be careful with your numbers; that quoted figure for P2 probably includes several years worth of support costs - it's unlikely to be just for design, parts and manufacture. P2 will be a superb airframe, and will outperform the Merlin in most areas and give the CH47 a run for its money in others.

I think history won't be kind to the acquisition and running costs v capability arguement for Wildcat, Me 2 and, particularly, Me 4....

OSD 2025? Highly unlikely IMHO (unless AW are going bust again)....

[MaroonMan4]

So why are we raising this issue?
Is it adding any value to Defence, the RAF or these threads?

Puma will add value to the Army, and of course it should have been saved from HMT's knife as the next conflict will require air mobility, just as the last conflicts have shown us what happens if we do not have enough helicopters.

As to Merlin going to the Fisheads, get over it and just because our Airships and Blimps have been backward in planning the outflow of our Merlin crews to other cockpits we cannot blame the Fisheads as they would ideally have had their FASH, SABR or whatever it was called many years ago. We got our Wessex replacement they got an extension of service to the Sea King.

There have been many recent studies on the cost of Merlin transition and if for one moment Army thought they could save a Regiment or two by keeping us in Merlin and stopping transition (or by making a Joint Force) they would have done it. Don't forget Army pay for us and also CHF.

The cost of Merlin transition has been proven to be not significant if the UK wants an amphibious capability and at the last SDSR the current Prime Minister stated he did want an amphibious capability which has been articulated in recent policy and doctrine documents. As discussed in earlier threads I wouldn't be surprised if there were numerous SDSR 'U turns', but I personally think a national amphibious capability is here to stay, therefore so is CHF and Merlin marinisation. If HMG do decide that a future amphibious capability is not required or is too expensive then with carriers not being operational for 10 years plus what will the RN do?

When will the bitter single Service focused people on this thread understand that the cost of ship optimising Merlin is minuscule compared to the overall mid life upgrade for obsolescence-whichever Service flys Merlin it will need investment from MOD and HMT. I would like to wager that those that espouse that the mighty Chinook can do all amphibious stuff haven't actually served on a busy deck or operation for any period of time (e.g. Al Faw), if they had then they might not be so confident in their assumptions. Same goes for Puma 2, if we are seriously planning on routinely operating Puma2 at sea, then I really hope that the LEP includes a marinisation element. One or 2 non marinised aircraft (say AH and CH47) can be worked around and absorbed into an embarked deployment by a majority of marinised aircraft, but if all embarked aircraft are not marinised then this presents a different dynamic, not just from an operating perspective, but I would also suggest overall risk/safety?

And that is just the equipment, what we forget is that if Merlin did not go to the Fisheads and CHF was absorbed into us or the Army, are we in light blue really going to accept a career profile (for all ranks) that includes many months at sea in order to run future ship's air ops, engineering teams, deck marshallers, fire fighters, etc etc? The RN grows those personnel (not just aircrew) through a career profile that takes time at sea as the norm. I don't think that many of us either joined up or would accept in the future regular 6 month deployments at sea. I know that the first time I found it interesting, but by the second time I and Mrs MM4 were less than impressed.

I do find it amazing (worrying) that as soon as we lose a capability/cockpit seats (through no fault or single Service agendas by the Fisheads-but due to HMG and VCDS decisions/direction) that we then start a campaign of negative PR and information saying the Merlin is too costly or not very capable.

There is no money for Blackhawks, or NH90 or more CH47 or any other new helicopter. I am pretty convinced that DE&S will only accept a core rotary programme of Apache, Chinook, Merlin, Wildcat and Puma. Any helicopter that maintains air mobility and lift for our troops must surely be a good thing, not single Service agendas to try and get the Fisheads out of Merlin by 'eating our own' and trying to scrap Merlin in total.

Comes across as very bitter and twisted.

I think I know why, and it could be because our hierarchy may not have been honest with us until recently and might have created the impression that the Merlin transition was not really going to happen. We all understand that alegedly our senior leadership has tried every trick in the book to not only keep Puma, but also prevent Merlin from going to the Fisheads.

This is the heart of the problem as if we had started honest and open planning for a Merlin transition as part of a wider JHC plan with other transitions then we would not be in the position that we are today where people have only just realised that they will be moving on and it will not be through a career path in the Merlin Force in the long term.

In summary Puma is cost effective and will be in much demand by troops for future conflicts, the cost of Merlin transition is neglible, and be careful if CHF does go as there are many non-flying aviation tied sea jobs just waiting for us if it does, but the bottom line is cutting helicopters of any type or Service is not going to assist future conflicts and the troops we serve.

Can we please stop this very damaging bickering. If we are too busy fighting and focussing on each other then not only will we be disjointed and dislocated for the next conflict, but we will probably miss the real threat which is the next SDSR.

[pr00ne]

When did anyone in CHF last spend six months at sea?

[MaroonMan4]

Proone,

I am not looking at today, yesterday or even the last 10 years-but some of us were around before Iraq and Afghan when we embarked with the Fisheads for long periods of time. With Bosnia being the focus in the late 90s our deployments were predominantly to the Med, but who knows where they will want to park their '65,000 tonnes of diplomacy' in the coming years.

Looking to a future beyond Afghan I reckon that politicians and senior officers alike are going to want to see their lovely big carriers do 'something' -and without any jets for quite a while that something will be amphibious which means you and me-which doesn't exactly fill me with much joy.

And as I have tried to highlight it is not just aircrew that make an amphibious capability, there are a whole load of aviation, engineering, fire fighting tied jobs that have certainly seen CHF personnel deployed for 6 months and quite frankly not the kind of jobs that I want to be doing and not what I joined up for.

It's not where we have been, it is where we are going that worries me!

[snafu]

MaroonMan4 - thanks for what I think is possibly the most sensible post I've seen on this thread for some considerable time!

A couple of observations...

- The last time OCEAN deployed, she left Guzz in Mar/Apr 2011 and returned in December. That was a little over 7 months and there were CHF aircraft and personnel on board for most of it.
- The AURIGA deployment in 2010 saw SK and Lynx embark on OCEAN, head to the East coast of the States and conduct a LitM exercise, before heading down south for a short trip to the South Atlantic and returning via West Africa.
- During the TAURUS trip in 2009, we had Lynx embarked for the whole trip, departing in Feb and returning in Aug, just under six months.

In all cases, there were personnel from CHF who did the whole of the trips on board. Admittedly, some of the crews and maintainers for the aircraft weren't on board throughout every deployment and there were roulements, but we had the capability available. The SKs were on board for some of the trips, but the roulement plots for Afghanistan would have been affected if we'd kept the Kings on board all the time, so we didn't. One SK Flight embarked three or four weeks after they got back from Afghanistan last year, spent nearly two months away in the Med and then came back to VL to work up before deploying to Afghanistan in the Autumn. Over the previous 24 months, they'd done three tours in Afghanistan (including Christmas) and had embarked for two deployments of two or three months in between each. I know we're all working hard, but keeping LitM going isn't as simple as a couple of DLs every few months!

Happy Easter to everyone, hope those in dusty places stay safe and hope that the CH boys in Yuma are all OK, if a little shaken up. :ok:

[163627]

When did anyone in CHF last spend six months at sea?

Please correct me if this no longer applies but I was under the impression that the CHF regularly provided long term detachments to the RFAs.

[snafu]

Support to the RFA aviation departments is provided by the Maritime Aviation Support Force (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/The-Fleet/Air-Stations/RNAS-Culdrose/MASF-Maritime-Aviation-Support-Force)based at Culdrose.

[glojo]

Hi Snafu,
I see the detail is in the wording and is the 'Support staff' a bunch of civilians that are posted to ships as and when required and what about the aircrew?

If the support staff are civilians then where is that line being drawn regarding the manning of front line warships?

The site lists these ships as having this type of support:

HMS Ocean, HMS Chatham, HMS Ark Royal

Are both Chatham and Ark Royal still in commission and why not civilianize the rest of the ship's company aboard that other warship, why be selective?

Apologies for thread drift but.......... ouch!!

[Tourist]

glojo

Where do you get the idea that MASF are civilians?

[glojo]

Hi Tourist,
Good point and hopefully it is my interpretation that has allowed me to jump to the wrong assumption :O:O:O

If they are service personnel it reads like they are based shore side and get 'parachuted' onto a ship as and when required?

I guess I am asking questions as opposed to making a statement and no doubt just like your very good self, you can see the problems of not having the so called 'support staff' as part of a ship's company.

I can think of any number of roles an Aircraft Handler might have to perform other than working on aircraft but if they are posted in as support to the embarked squadron, would they then refuse to be a part of a Boarding Party or help ashore to offer assistance toward a civil disaster or quell a civil uprising?? What about the more mundane work of Chief Toilet cleaner or head waiter in the dining rooms, would they also be exempt from these less attractive tasks? :O

Yet another apology for this drifting of the thread.. Perhaps the Puma might get embarked on Ocean ;)

[chopabeefer]

I cannot decide how it will affect the future of the Puma, but i hear (from a mate who is in the place to know) an announcement about the Merlin is imminent, and it is something of a surprise.

Ministers have rejected the logic of transferring it to the Navy. They have correctly reasoned that there exists a credible, trained and ready Merlin Force. Junglies (much respect) have ability, skill and corporate knowledge - that is beyond doubt. But so do the RAF, and embarked Ops and overwater techniques are taught by the RAF, and have been for years. It is FAR FAR cheaper to keep Merlin RAF. It saves a fortune, and NO capability will be lost. Ministers have worked it out.

Merlin to stay RAF. Announcement inmminent. Anyone willing to take my money?

[Tourist]

choppa

April fools day is long gone....

[Unchecked]

So with all of the above exercises being done via roulements by the CHF, why are 6-7 month deployments at sea even being talked about ? Its now proven that we can do LitM without the lengthy sea-time, Shirley ?

[chopabeefer]

Tourist,

Yep, that's what I thought to. I can assure you my source is genuine and adamant the transition won't happen. It ALL came down to £££, and the ministers reasoned it's cheaper to keep it where it is (how can it not be?).

If I am wrong, I'll be the first to say so. But I'm not. It's staying.

[Unchecked]

with nothing more than a dignified silence from the RAF (although some RN types would mistake that for sulking).

I would call it total professionalism - getting on with the job whilst under the near-guarantee of losing everything they have put their everything into in a couple of years time.

[chinook240]

Certainly goes a long way to explaining why there isn't a long queue of Dark Blue outside Benson!

[Milo Minderbinder]

So assuming this is correct, what replaces Sea King at CHF?

[MaroonMan4]

This is exactly the type of bickering that is not doing any of us any favours. Only a few weeks ago CAS was supposed to have gone to Benson to provide top level leadership in managing this change.

Either he failed to get his message across or it has been misconstrued by those eagerly hanging onto every word he and AMP's team said.

Either the posters to this thread are saying 'it is not over' are either worried and concerned personnel from the Merlin Force, or staff officers from Air Command/1 Group trying to cover up the perceived poor management of the SH Force, both at the Shawbury end (what a sad debacle) and now in refusing to take accountabilty and responsibilty to manage the Merlin outflow of our personnel.

As to politicians suddenly having a eureka moment, and/or the Army stopping transition due to cost, we must be very careful, we asked for the studies and cost benefit analysis and trust me, there is a General looking down the back of Army's sofa (which includes JHC) and they have NOTseen a significant increase in cost to Merlin transition (HMT and RP don't care what the colour of the uniform converted/re-roled to Merlin is-a student pilot over the next 4 years could be RAF, Army or RN-they cost the same. And unless the Merlin Force is never going to have any 'churn' then Merlin training will continue regardless. .HMT are truly colour blind. But, when the Army has looked at our Stations they have found other areas that they currently pay for, but think they can make savings.

Unless HMG (through PR12) no longer want an amphibious capability, Merlin transition is happening. If it doesn't then we and Army need to start to re-craft all our career profiles for more time and postings in non flying jobs to sea to provide the aviation personnel to a boat even if we do replace an amphibious capability with a pseudo floating DOB concept if/when we can't find Host Nation Support.

If The Merlin upgrade is not taken forward as part of PR12 then the whole aircraft falls over due to obsolescence in the near future anyway, so everyone loses, including Army (reduction in lift).

The politicians know this and they also know that the marinisation is but a fraction of the overall cost.

I am so sad for the people on the shop floor that read these threads being given false information, which results in false hope to our lads and lasses (at this very late stage with Merlin transition already underway) which sadly results in ill feeling and resentment.

Where is our leadership? If there is new information that has changed the situation from CAS' last visit to Benson then it sounds as though he needs to re-visit and tell them that Merlin transition is off as currently there is perceived ambiguity and misinformation by some that is doing nothing but damaging joint relations and de-stabilising families at the heart of this transition.

We will not need to worry about the new pension scheme as our hierarchy would have screwed this so well that the majority of the new blood under training has been made redundant and all the trained experienced personnel are so disillusioned with the leadership that they are looking to leave at the earliest opportunity that suits them and not the MOD/RAF.

[xenolith]

Looks like we have a straight fight 'know it all' and 'insider trader' going for the highest water mark on the wall!

MM4's rambles are convincing but Chopa's 'my mate said' is hard to argue with. I haven’t spent this much time on the edge of my seat since JR was shot! Perhaps that's it! We'll all wake up and everything since SDSR (or since 1997) has just been a bad dream!:eek:

[MaroonMan4]

Xen,

You are confusing me with someone that actually cares what the outcome is-chop wins easily.

After all my time in I am so saddened to see friends and their families being subjected to single Service willy waving and some of the worst leadership ever.

How long does it take to make a decision? Gordon Brown announced Rotary Wing Strategy in Dec 2009,with only 8 Chinooks dropped from this original vision.

There have been studies and more studies and even more studies (at our request because we dont seem to like the answer).

Mean while careers and futures are not properly attended to and far more importantly families are unsettled and feel let down.

That is where my ramblings stem from, as well as recognition that fundamentally JHC is a positive example of jointery that is being eroded by this ongoing challenge to Merlin transition.

But hey, I fly Chinooks, so my seat is secure, I have less than 10 years so pension is safe, and am getting to the stage where I will join everyone else and look after number one and get back into my licences.

Sorry Chopabeefer, of course you are right and good luck to the Merlin Force as it sure is going to need it!

[Admin_Guru]

You nearly had me there; it all sounded pretty good until you spoilt it all by saying:

recognition that fundamentally JHC is a positive example of jointery that is being eroded by this ongoing challenge to Merlin transition.


At which point I question what planet you are living on. One is led to understand that the single service opinion of JHC is low enough to justify staffing its disbandment and the return of the RAF SH to Air Command. This thread does much to support that theory as a 'need' asap.

So are we about to find out why no SH front or rear crew appeared in the second and final round of the RAF redundancy process despite expectation by many if not all to the contrary.

[MG]

MaroonMan4 - Completely agree. Until we are told otherwise, in an official manner, then the transition is happening. As far as I'm aware, the first of the RN arrives in 2 weeks time. Grasping on to some very thin straws is pointless, utterly counterproductive and damaging.

BTW, we must know each other!

[MaroonMan4]

Admin,

When we're you last in Afghan and round the table at BSN?

Let's go back to the Gutersloh days-did we ever work as closely with the AAC as we do now? We're we more integrated and joined up?

Although I have an ingrained hatred of living and flying from the morale vacuum of Ocean, I do recognise professionalism of CHF and the integration of both us and now Apache.

Although I would love all single Service politics to be removed by Air Command doing what it says in the name and commanding everything in the air, I am a realist that UK Defence and the UK economy is in a very different place than those nirvana days of the 80s.

But we weren't really fighting then, we didn't need the AAC to practice and operate with us to get rounds danger close to us finals to a PB etc. We didn't need the RN to integrate us onto their boats. From the customers perspective in the big scheme (i.e. no one was killed because of it)it didn't really matter if we dropped troops the wrong side of the boarder in NI (just embarrassment).

Now it does matter. JHC has brought integration and whether we like it or not it has focused us on the customer, which was lacking prior to JHC IMHO.

However, if Chopabeefer info is right then there is hope that we can take all the good elements of JHC and place all air capabilities under Air Command.

I thought that this was more of an SDSR 15 potential plan rather than PR12 option.

Like everyone else I await the outcome of PR12.

[Admin_Guru]

All fair comment. although my opinion is that at BSN it is more down to professional aircrew (& GC) focused on a common objective to fully support the guys on the ground whilst staying alive themselves then a cohesion imposed/enforced by a HQ in Andover. In N.I. pre-Afg when the AAC, CHF & RAF were required to work together, they did. All other times it was a banter rich zone but that did not mean that mutual respect was absent. Many a time a blue guardian angel watched over the real workers after dark. JHC was a good idea but it is also based upon unrealistic idealism; and a cynic would say a back door attempt to get SH into a brown uniform without a mass exodus. In that aspect it is an ongoing failure and SDSR has been more divisive then any other event in recent military history. Jointery only works when individual identity is retained and respected and this is a big failing in JHC units.
Not that this has anything to do with the survival of Puma.

[Tiger_mate]

How many Puma II are online now?

Not banter-bait, asking because I do not know.

[Alexander.Yakovlev]

Admin,

Surely AAC, CHF/RN and RAF SH assets working together to stay alive and get the job done for the guys on the ground is the essence of the aim of JHC?!!!

[chopabeefer]

upsdaisy

Imaginary friend? Denigrating somebody you don't know. You are a bully, clearly. The very lowest excuse for a human. Your insult is obviously the desperate rambling of a lost soul without purpose. If you were not a bully, I would pity you.
As for your thread idea - do i- I'm in. It's staying where it is.

[Unchecked]

You'll get the keys when you pass the OCF.

Good luck with that.

[Evalu8ter]

Would that literally be "chopping for job security"?? :E

[Spanish Waltzer]

Out of interest do the UK mil puma 1 or 2 have the same gearbox that has now led to the grounding of much of the civvy super puma fleet?

[Fareastdriver]

Depends on the hours. As far as I know the fleet leader among the RAF Pumas is about 12,500 hrs. I think the gearbox is lifed at 3,200 hrs which would mean that the last gearbox change was ten years ago which was way before this dodgy shaft came into existance.

IIRC the oil pump is mounted on the back of the gearbox with the hydraulics and alternators so it does not have the same oil pump system as the 332 and 225.

[Could be the last?]

So when do both Sqns stop flying Puma1?

[Fareastdriver]

31st December 2012.

[Ian Corrigible]

Out of interest do the UK mil puma 1 or 2 have the same gearbox that has now led to the grounding of much of the civvy super puma fleet?
No, different box (/shaft). Same for the KAI Surion.

I/C