Will Puma Survive?

[llamaman]

Lots of rumours out there, anyone in the know?

[Blue Bottle]

The government's got no money and its not currently deployed on Operations, what would your guess be ?

[Courtney Mil]

Indeed. If we think the cuts have finished yet, we're dreaming. It might be more a case of when than if. But you could probably say that for all sorts of things at the moment.

However, to answer your question, no, I'm not in the know.

Courtney

[llamaman]

I see the blinkered thinking of HMG is rubbing off on those in 'town' as well. Nice to see we're structuring ourselves with a well-balanced force for the future, or b)?
The country isn't totally broke, plenty out there are. Brainwashing the population to believe it is is a very convenient way to get people to roll over and accept any decision made by our glorious leaders.
I feel deep sympathy for the many aircrew and support staff who will be without a job in the very near future in an ever more competetive job market.
Obviously it's still only a rumour though.:oh:

[Melchett01]

Well if Puma gets axed and Merlin goes to the Navy, the RAF will have a totally unbalanced capability which won't be FCOC compliant. Given that the doctrine wallahs are predicting a future of complex interventions in littoral / urban environments, that is going to need at least some relatively small, flexible RW assets if the RAF wants to operate SH in that context.

As we found all too often in the early days of HERRICK, trying to get CH-47 into small compounds doesn't always work, and you either end up a) trashing the cab b) trashing the compound or c) doing an insert to an offset HLS and having to fight your way in and out - which is just about fine in a relatively open area, but do you really want to do that in an urban environment?

Unfortunately, much of this seems to have been overlooked and hasn't been helped by the Chinook mafia dominating the RAF's RW decision making and planning processes. So now, given that we are skint and that Puma isn't on ops, regardless of the capability requirement for a reasonably small and flexible platform capable of operating in all environments, anything we might say will just be seen as a fighting a rear-guard action by the Army and RN who will quite happily see Puma go.

[Courtney Mil]

I think it's always been a bit like that, Llama. Perhaps (partly) because the guys in town see the severity of the cuts "close-up" and have to act on them. I agree with you about aircrew and support staff who will be without a job in the very near future.

I think it's also going to be very difficult for those still serving who find themselves deployed more and more frequently and trying to do more with less. Ops aren't over yet and there will always be more to come. Trick is, the politicians need to decide what they want to do in the world and then equip and man (sorry, person) the armed forces accordingly. They cannot keep cutting and expecting to keep being big actors on the world stage.

Courtney

[dc1968]

regardless of the capability requirement for a reasonably small and flexible platform capable of operating in all environments


Sorry, but it still won't work on a ship!

Don't get me wrong but I have the ultimate respect for gold old 'Percy' but I'm afraid the glory days of AMF heroically galavanting across land-locked Europe to only worry about keeping the 'Reds' in check are long gone.

[Courtney Mil]

I've been put onto a ship by one. Seemed to work OK then!

P.S. Before you say anything, yes I know!

[Melchett01]

dc1968,

I really don't have any personal loyalty to the Puma - I do not, never have and never will fly it, so my comments were not driven out of any sense of loyalty to the platform. I was merely arguing that whilst the CH-47 is a good ac, having nothing but CH-47 will leave the RAF's rotary fleet unbalanced, potentially putting the RAF at a disadvantage if the future operating environment does indeed develop in the way Defence seems to think it will.

Plus, if you can't get a Puma on a ship, you're going to have even more problems with a Merlin!

[PTT]

if you can't get a Puma on a ship, you're going to have even more problems with a Merlin!It's not a matter of size for the ship. Your comments regarding size with respect to in-theatre requirements are spot on though :ok:

[Biggus]

llamaman,

As to how broke the government is, try looking at this...

UK National Debt | Economics Blog (http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/)


We may not be as "broke" as some other countries, but we are still broke, and still borrowing £140Bn odd each year to make ends meet (despite the "massive cuts" Labour keep referring to), so continually increasing the size of the overall national debt. Indeed, when the coalition talked about getting rid of the deficit by 2015 (which they probably won't now be able to do), as opposed to Labour which planned to half it, they were talking about the ANNUAL deficit, not the overall one.

If we don't put our own house in order, and end up going cap in hand to the IMF, then any cuts undertaken nationally will be as nothing to any imposed on us externally - external ones will be far more draconian.

As a country we are living beyond our means, and it cannot continue indefinitely.

Cuts in government spending are necessary, where they are made, welfare, defence, education, NHS, etc are decided by the people that our supposed democratic system placed in power.

[tramps]

Your words are music to the ears of the Chinese. The Chinese government, in 1998, asked their military leaders as to how they could best defeat the West. Their Generals said that the West should first be defeated economically; our glorious leaders have, of course, fallen headlong into that trap.
In my view they now have the money, the military hardware, the manpower and the will to, well......do what they like:eek:

Anyway, back to the thread: Maybe the Puma is being mothballed because 1. it is French, and 2. it is made of plastic. :E

Incoming, Tin hat on, straps tightened;)

[Nicholas Howard]

having nothing but CH-47 will leave the RAF's rotary fleet unbalanced,

the RAF will have a totally unbalanced capability which won't be FCOC compliant. Given that the doctrine wallahs are predicting a future of complex interventions in littoral / urban environments, that is going to need at least some relatively small, flexible RW assets if the RAF wants to operate SH in that context

But why does the RAF need a balanced capability? Surely as long as JHC or Defence has a balanced capability then that ought to suffice?

Nick

[llamaman]

Biggus,

Thanks for the lecture in Thatcherite economics. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a balanced Armed Forces (across the board) that is properly equipped to adequately defend UK interests and support a realistic foreign policy. You can't save huge sums of cash that quickly if you have a Bullish administration who consider themselves a world player and pander to the beck and call of our American friends.

I'm not arguing that Puma is necessarily the best solution but the Chinook is not the answer to everything. Unless you're a Chinook driver.

[Could be the last?]

So if the Puma doesn't survive PR12, and the Merlin goes to the RN, why not give the CH47 to the Army? No requirement for JHC as the main users have their own assets and can utilise them as they see fit.

Save a fortune....... Simples!

[Melchett01]

But why does the RAF need a balanced capability? Surely as long as JHC or Defence has a balanced capability then that ought to suffice?


Nick - because JHC is effectively an administrative arrangement designed to reduce the costs by minimising duplication and procedures. However, the single services still retain Full Command of their assets and personnel. So whilst JHC may operate the ac, they are still the RAF's.

[Nicholas Howard]

Mel

, the single services still retain Full Command of their assets and personnel. So whilst JHC may operate the ac, they are still the RAF's.

Understood, but that doesn't quite answer why the RAF needs a balanced (whatever that means) SH force.

Nick

[Wrathmonk]

tramps

In my view they now have the money

Thread drift, I know, and perhaps irrelevant to the 'here and now', but I think China may have their own problems just around the corner - clicky (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/8957289/Chinas-epic-hangover-begins.html).

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

But why does the RAF need a balanced capability? Surely as long as JHC or Defence has a balanced capability then that ought to suffice?


But will JHC have a balanced capability if there is nothing in size between Wildcat and Merlin?

Just came across this...doesn't make happy reading for Puma folks... Ministry of Defence | About Defence | People | Speeches | Minister for International Security Strategy Speeches | 2011/10/19 - Heli-Power Conference & Exhibition (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/People/Speeches/MinISD/20111019HelipowerConferenceAndExhibition.htm)

[Melchett01]

Understood, but that doesn't quite answer why the RAF needs a balanced (whatever that means) SH force.

Because like it or not, the RAF is still the primary operator of SH in Defence. The CHF have a very good, albeit relatively small SH capability to support 3 Cdo, but by and large, SH is still an RAF function. Just as AH and LUH is still an Army function.

And by balanced I mean that to guarantee operational flexibility, you might want something other than a 100ft x 60ft ac weighing in at smidge over 10 tons. There are times when size really does matter - regardless of what CinC Home Command tells you - and there are times when small really is better. But if all you have is a CH-47, you could well be operationally limited which you wouldn't necessarily be with a balanced force of large and small SH.

[llamaman]

TorqueOfTheDevil

Good spot.

Quote from Minister for International Security Strategy:

'And the SDSR clearly laid out plans for a helicopter fleet based on four core platforms from 2025 -Apache, Merlin, Wildcat, and Chinook'.

Did it, really? Lets hope there's never any requirement for a platform that can carry a useful number of troops a decent range into tighter LS's (urban, jungle etc).

[Misformonkey]

Fixed wing will become a RAF activity and rotary in it's entirety will be RN & AAC. The RAF comprehensively out foxed the RN in the initial force reduction, i do not think that will happen again and the RN & AAC will take no prisoners in my opinion as it's survival of the fittest.

[Archimedes]

For what it's worth, Sec of State referred to the Puma upgrade in his evidence to the Select Committee last Wednesday:

Q84 Bob Russell: I am not sure whether you have read Jane’s Defence Weekly for November-I must admit I have not-but I have an extract: "MoD chiefs are to receive the Defence Rotary-Wing Strategy document later in November, which contains further plans for cuts in spending on the helicopter capabilities of the Royal Navy, British Army and Royal Air Force." We are now in the first week of December, so are you able to enlighten the Committee on what that strategy document says? Or has it not yet arrived with you?

Mr Hammond: It has not yet arrived on my desk. What I can tell you is that I was able to see at Colchester on Monday the upgraded version of the Lynx, which will, of course, in due course be replaced by the Wildcat when that is delivered into service. As you know, we have committed to the delivery of 14 additional Chinooks, which will take our fleet to 60 aircraft. We are already under way with the upgrading of the Puma fleet, and the first upgraded aircraft have been delivered. So there are a number of steps in place to maintain the helicopter fleet at the level required for current operations and to support the contingency element.

...

Q87 Bob Russell: Will there be a shortfall against Future Force 2020?
Mr Hammond: I do not believe so. My understanding is that the programmes that we have in place, including the Lynx replacement, the Puma upgrade and the new Chinooks, will deliver us the requirements to deliver the-
Q88 Bob Russell: We may need to focus on that when you come before us in a future session. Finally, Secretary of State, are you in a position, either today or subsequently, to outline the plans and timetable for bringing rotary wing capability into balance?
Mr Hammond: I am not sure what you mean by bringing it into balance.
Q89 Bob Russell: Well, you are telling the Committee, as I understand it, that there are sufficient helicopters in theatre and ordered. You are absolutely convinced that when we get to Future Force 2020, everything will be okay.
Mr Hammond: My understanding is that the Joint Helicopter Command believes that we have the existing equipment, the planned upgrades and the newly ordered equipment that will deliver the capability that we need for Future Force 2020. If, when I check that, Chairman, I find that I need to correct it, I will write to you.(from the uncorrected evidence).

It reads to me as though any decision not to continue hasn't reached SofS yet and that he might be a tad surprised to discover the upgrade isn't going ahead.

By the by, Howarth's observations were about 2025 - Flight and various other open sources have Puma 2 going out of service in 2024/25, so the fact that he failed to mention it isn't necessarily indicative of cancellation (and aren't there suggestions that Puma 2 has some influential supporters amongst those in charge of chaps resident in the Credenhill and Poole areas?) - Puma's meant to be replaced by a future medium helicopter capability, which translates as 'we'll all be retired, out of office or doddering about in the Lords by the time that comes to fruition, so someone else can worry about the specifics and how to bodge the project when we get closer to the date if there's any cash'.

[Courtney Mil]

"Puma's meant to be replaced by a future medium helicopter capability", which we can't afford, so maybe running it on a while is another option after all.

[RumPunch]

Is it just me or is the RAF and the Navy taking the full brunt of money cost saving cuts. It appears nobody else seems to be getting hit as hard as us with relation to public sector workers. I know its easier to take from us as we cannot go on strike but there is only so much pruning you can to to a tree stump. Last October we dealt a bitter blow, but after time we dealt with it but its been blow after blow to the forces and its no bloody wonder people are leaving in droves now. Todays decision on the Olympics is another slap in the face as I know not one person supports the most ridiculous money saving decision ever dressed up as " the troops would be privelaged to take part in such an event" what utter lies to the public. I for sure am not going to be living in a tent for 2 weeks in London, having to pay for my own accomodation and food only to claim it back when the RAF and JPA can be arsed to give it back. Im not going to be subject to abuse and slander from the general public.Id rather spend 4 months in Kandahar than let the government get another get out of free jail card. :mad:

[RumPunch]

As for Puma , I hope not but rumour has been about for ages its only a matter of time but maybe just maybe the olympics has given her some more time. Who knows :ugh:

[snafu]

Melchett

Because like it or not, the RAF is still the primary operator of SH in Defence. The CHF have a very good, albeit relatively small SH capability to support 3 Cdo, but by and large, SH is still an RAF function. Just as AH and LUH is still an Army function.

I'm sorry, but if CHF and the RAF SH community are both part of JHC, why should it matter who is operating the Merlins? I don't think you've answered Nicholas Howard's question beyond stating that the RAF need to operate both types to remain 'balanced', but the operator is irrelevant as long as the types remain in service with JHC, which is the organisation that needs to remain 'balanced'.

This is, of course, a separate argument to whether or not Merlin fulfils the 'medium' SH requirement currently occupied by SK4 and Puma. From a size perspective, Merlin isn't that different from SK, because the Merlin was designed to operate from the same spots at sea, so the footprint is very similar. Merlin length (rotors running) 22.8m, rotor diameter 18.6m, SK length (rr) 22.15m, rotor diameter 18.9m.

The downwash is a different issue!

[Melchett01]

Snafu,

I didn't say the CHF operating Merlin was an issue. What I did say was that in RW terms, the RAF is in danger of becoming operationally ineffective if all it had was CH-47 and nothing smaller to offer the flexibility required to operate in an complex urban scenario.

All I can think is that Nicholas, and possibly yourself, are alluding to RW capability being a Defence capability rather than a single service capability. Well on paper, maybe it is, but that argument would only work if we were a single Defence Force rather than the single services that we are. To take your argument to its fullest extent would be akin to saying that the Infantry belong to Defence not the Army. In practice, JHC is far from being Joint and has single service rivalries running right the way through it (apart from at the operator level, when the guys just crack on) which means that the RAF still very much fight their own corner within JHC as do the Army and the RN / RM and assets are still viewed very much as being RAF or Army or RN/RM. Be under no illusion, the loss of Puma would have broader political implications for the RAF outside of pure capability. The day the RAF were unable to provide the required SH support because we lack a balanced capability is the day the Army then make a bid to take over RW in total, arguing that the RAF cannot provide the effect required.

So if Puma does end up getting the axe, at a stroke, not only have we reduced our overall RW flexibility & capability in the manner already described (Wildcat will never be an effective Puma replacement), but the RAF could also end up facing more base reductions and the loss of more personnel associated with those defunct capabiltiies as the bean counters start to question the need for retaining Benson, the SHF construct and associated appointments and broader RAF manning liabilities. And in the current febrile atmosphere of SDSR and PRs, any chance for any of the services to get one over their sister services is being taken with both hands.

Plus, I just happen to believe that the SH role is still an RAF role. That is my opinion, many would question it, but in terms of operational experience over the years, numbers of aircraft and crews and associated personnel and infrastructure, the RAF has and continues to provide the lion's share of the capability. And as I don't see any other SH sqns outside of the RAF and the CHF's much smaller capability, in that respect, I don't see how I am wrong in describing SH as a primarily RAF capability.

[alfred_the_great]

To paraphrase Melchett....

It's because the RAF is important and we want the shiny things. :)

[Nicholas Howard]

Alfred

Thank you, much clearer now!

Nick

[snafu]

Melchett

To take your argument to its fullest extent would be akin to saying that the Infantry belong to Defence not the Army.

Errrr....last time I checked, we're all part of Defence, irrespective of which colour uniform we wear. I think the RM and RAF Regt might have something to say about their role as infanteers as well!

Inter-service rivalries about who owns what are one of the root causes of the bad behaviour between senior elements of each Service, because they've lost sight of the fact that we're all supposed to be working towards the single aim of providing the military contribution to Defence. The colour of your cloth should be irrelevant in comparison to whether or not you can provide the capability asked of you in the land, air or maritime evironments. I agree that the seams between those environments are the most complex areas for the high-priced help to decide who is going to get the funding to do what, but in our cash-strapped circumstances there's not much scope for unneccessary duplication.

I also disagree with you that JHC isn't joint, it looks pretty joint to me! There are always going to be single service tensions, but show me a 'joint' organisation where there aren't! The tensions are more evident back at home, where people are polarised by separate basing, but on ops it's about as joint as any organisation I've ever seen and is routinely producing the goods for the customers day in, day out. Without realising it, most of JHC are probably among the most 'joint' of all of the Armed Forces, because working alongside each of the other two Services is second nature. I would argue that the only groups that are more joint are within certain specialist organisations, where the colour of your original uniform is almost irrelevant to your role and position within whichever of those organisations you're working.

Getting back to the original thread, Puma's upgrade might still be on the cards at the moment, but I'm not sure I'd hold my breath about any project requiring a financial commitment right now, because there's still a bit of a hole in the finances that has to be closed somehow. I think you're probably relatively safe if your project or equipment is part of the future structure of the Forces beyond 2025, but if you're not.....!

[oldbeefer]

It's done better than expected.....

I remember the Wessex pilots saying that they thought it would last no more than 5 yrs. That was in 1970!

[jayteeto]

Yawn...... The Puma can operate from ships, the French have done it for years. We chose not to do it, but that could change if they were prepared to do the trials. Not sure where they have stashed the blade folding kits though. Probably in Lord Lucans new house. Never a funnier sight than a 33 Sqn Crewman Leader winching down to HMS Intrepid with his monkey harness still attached. I nearly fell off the side!

[Melchett01]

Snafu,

I do agree that many have lost sight of the bigger picture and single service rivalries do us no favours - especially when the Treasury is the real enemy. But having now done 2 tours in JHC in 5years, I have a pretty good take on just how joint JHC really is. That aside, agreed - lets get back to the original thread rather than going down the semantics rabbit hole of single or joint service.

I still think we need something Puma-sized to offer maximum operational flexibility in the future operating environment.

[Not_a_boffin]

If we still need a small(ish) cab (which we probably do), given that the Pumas were primarily early 70's build and a large chunk of the HC4 fleet are mid to late 80s build (albeit with high-time frames), why was Puma put forward for a SLEP instead of the HC4? That would have left the RAF with a straight choice between Merlin / Puma.

Not that I think CHF don't need a new cab (they do), I'm just somewhat surprised that the potential consequences weren't seen beforehand.

[Roger the cabin boy]

Apparently been agreed that we are getting 60 x Ghost Hawks to be operated by the RAF instead of Puma 2. That'll be nice.

[minigundiplomat]

The only thing the Puma operators can do that Chinook operators can't is handbagging.







:E

[Seymour Belvoir]

....and find the correct target first time!

[llamaman]

MGD

For a LONG time all the dross graduating out of Shawbury were posted to the Wokka. It's a shame that some of them were promoted a long way and ended up running (and now selling-out) the SH force.

[jamesdevice]

Puma can go down a carrier lift - if fitted with folding rotors
AND it can be marinised properly, though I'm sure the RAF ones will never be

[Engines]

Jamesd,

If my (fading) memory serves me correctly, the Puma has some serious issues with high CG and deck motion, as well as a startling lack of tie down points and any serious structure to fit them.

The phrase 'properly marinised' can be interpreted in a number of ways - but for my money I'd want a tough, medium sized helicopter, with decent corrosion protection, avionics suited for maritime ops, and power folding blades. Low CG, plenty of tie down points, and good all weather capability.

Puma (in its current form) doesn't fit my bill - but I'm happy to be proved wrong. SK4 does a very decent job, but it's old and going.

Best Regards

Engines

[jamesdevice]

I wouldn't disagree with you - but the question was what whether the Chinook could do everything the Puma could.. Or not...... I was just pointing out it couldn't
I agree - rebuilding the SK fleet would have been better than Puma, but politics were at play.. No way Westland were going to be given a contract after the issues with Merlin and Apache (which weren't caused by them..) and of course the Romanians could undercut anything with their cheap labour. Truth is, for a proper rebuild the Pumas should have gone to South Africa, but thats another story

[Fareastdriver]

the Puma has some serious issues with high CG and deck motion

The Puma has always had that problem. It was addressed with the single wheel main undercarriage in 1978. That can take an incredible amount of punishment and is stressed to 8 m/s ground impact without further investigation. The 'Puma Mk2' will be the only surviving version of the Puma in service with anybody with the six-wheel undercarriage. What will and has resulted by not fitting the later system is a complete waste of time and money.

[minigundiplomat]

llamaman,

and the Puma Force has built an enviable reputation for being soooo well run of recent years?

Suggest you check the construction of your roof before lobbing rocks.

[Just This Once...]

The 'Puma Mk2' will be the only surviving version of the Puma in service with anybody with the six-wheel undercarriage.

Loads of six-wheel Pumas out there, in both military and civilian use. Do they all get axed when Puma 2 comes into service?

Not convinced new wheels lowers the C of G either, but I await enlightenment from those in the know; including from those who like to land on soft ground.

[xenolith]

Quite right, there has been a plethora of ex Chinook bods running the Pumas over the last few years:ugh:

[minigundiplomat]

Yep, they were moved across the M4 to provide some leadership and oversight when it was discovered the Puma Force was lacking quite a bit of both.

[SASless]

The real question is not "will the Puma survive" but rather "should the Puma survive".

I would suggest Blackhawks would be a far better airframe for the mission than the Puma....less the one fact that the Puma is in the inventory and the purchase of the Blackhawk would cost money the UK Military just does not have.

After all...the Puma was "new" in the 1980's.

But then...with Blackhawks/Sea Hawks....the Lynx and Puma would both be indangered species. Perhaps Westland could do the same deal as they did with the Apache. Throw in some Kiowa's and you lot could be flying an all US Designed fleet less the Merlin.

[jamesdevice]

Is Westland's licence to build the Black hawk still valid?
Remember they built one in 1987 but got no orders

[Could be the last?]

Mini.......

I think you will find there were several ex-CH47 'leaders' in-situ, or putting further strain on the Puma Force by proxy, around the time you are referring too. But if you feel you know better, then feel free to come across and explain!

[xenolith]

Your timing is way out pal in fact as I heard it a recently departed senior officer at JHC suggested that the answer to all the Puma's 'problems' would be to post in a load of Chinook Flt Cdrs, untill it was pointed out just how many of their ilk were in charge at the time. Is changing history part of the Chinny CR work up? Hoist with ones own petard I think Mini.:ouch:
That said, I have known some seriously top blokes on the Chinook fleet over the years, they arn't all bad, even you have some good points;). How's the job hunting going?

[ShyTorque]

After all...the Puma was "new" in the 1980's.

It was even newer in the early 1970s when the RAF first brought the Puma HC1 into service.

An Air Staff Target was put forward in the early 1980s for finding a Puma/Wessex/Lynx replacement. Many of us flying the Puma could see that the Blackhawk would have been ideal for the RAF's role back then. A re-engined (Makila) HC1 was also one of the contenders. As usual there was no money and all went quiet.

I would hope that MOD will not throw away the money being spent on the ongoing Puma upgrade to HC2 specification (especially as it's taken another 30 years to get there), but stranger things have happened.

[Fareastdriver]

Do they all get axed when Puma 2 comes into service

Yes; civilian ones do. I cannot think of any major operator still using them. Even the 332Ls are being farmed out to second level owners.

I have landed both in soggy ground in both the UK and overseas and the single wheel has a far better footprint than the old twin bogie. Because the undercarriage leg cants back if the wheel gets tangled up with rock and bricks it is allowed to roll over them. I have been witness, ie in the cockpit, to some horrific arrivals that would have Cat 4d a 330 even if it had stayed upright. They can roll over; but most have been as a result of a strong crosswind either being towed or offshore refueling.

However it's done now and it will not involve me.

After all...the Puma was "new" in the 1980's.

So was the Blackhawk. It started with the US Army in 1979.

[llamaman]

Those with an intelligent enough viewpoint (stand-fast MGD) know that the Puma force was pushed to beyond breaking point by senior commanders, not those running the force at the time. Some of those senior commanders were ex-Chinook, some were not.

There are usually around the same percentage of strokers on every squadron, believe it or not even those equipped with Chinook. Anyone who disagrees would most likely be one of them.

[CrabInCab]

MGD

Yep, they were moved across the M4 to provide some leadership and oversight when it was discovered the Puma Force was lacking quite a bit of both.

I assume that's why Odiham had to import ex Puma and SAR mates to be Ch Flt Cdrs then too!!

:E

[heights good]

For those that are adamant the Puma is to get scrapped, do you actually know what is involved in the upgrade and the capability that will be gained?

I suspect you don't know the details and whilst it is a rumour network, for your own credibility it might be worth finding out. It could save embarrassment in the not too distant future as the LEP is giving a 'brand new' aircraft back to the RAF that is nothing like its Mk1 cousin :E

This is not a rant or 'having a go' at anyone, just hoping that there is no needless Puma bashing that is based on 'fact' :ok:

HG

[Misformonkey]

This programme will extend the operational life of the Puma helicopter fleet and is to significantly enhance its capability – particularly in demanding hot and high conditions. It will improve the safety and performance by providing new engines, a digital flight control system, increased platform survivability and enhanced navigation and communications.

Read more: Upgraded RAF Puma Mk 2 Makes First Flight | Air Force News at DefenseTalk (http://www.defencetalk.com/upgraded-raf-puma-mk-2-makes-first-flight-35243/#ixzz1guyzbav6)

A complete new aircraft i doubt, same fatigue life on the airframe but maybe a life extension. I agree it will be an enhanced aircraft over it's predecessor but as in the lynx 9 it will not be new. The RAF guy's are getting anxious as the possible loss of the Puma 2 on top of the Merlin is a massive hit in the SH role it has had a large foot print in for so long. Not RAF bashing but the writing is on the wall as far as i see it. All fixed wing to RAF and rotary to be AAC & Navy.

[BS Alert]

FW to RAF and RW to AAC & FAA - so FAA give up all future FW capabilities - I don't think so, no deal.

[PTT]

I do love it when the uninformed start arguing about their own speculations, increasing their own belief in their own flawed information. :ok:

[St Johns Wort]

Know something then do you?;)

[Misformonkey]

Evolution of forces aviation. Since day one it has evolved and I do not see it changing here. FAA FW will face an almighty challenge to stay viable for the incoming carriers. The RAF will have a single although large SH force. At some stage all the forces will need to reduce the infighting to look at realistic options for the future footprint of all aviation. The SDSR is all to raw and leaves a bad taste, the political statement was about re-shaping when in reality it was straight forward butchering of us. At some stage all concerned will have to agree on the way forward. Wrong I could well be but I don' t think I'll be wide from the mark.

[minigundiplomat]

llamaman/xenolith,

some equally valid points. However, my point was that it is not quite as simple as blaming all the Puma's woes on ex-chinook mates.

Neither are ex-chinook mates the answer to everything - god knows we've bred some howlers that have reached ranks far higher than their abilities or personalities should have allowed.

But in summary, the ex-chinook mates may well be part of the problem - but they are contributing to a bigger problem than just them. Llamaman's comments may not be incorrect, but they seem to suggest everything was fine and dandy until these people arrived - it wasn't.

xenolith - very well, it's nice being ahead of the drag curve for once!

[tramps]

Puma: French and made of plastic; 2 reasons, maybe, why the MOD are having a rethink?:E

[SASless]

So was the Blackhawk. It started with the US Army in 1979.

Compare the current Blackhawk to the A model version....and it is a very much different aircraft. Compare the current Puma to the original Puma...how different are they?

It is not an apples to apples comparison you offer!

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Compare the current Blackhawk to the A model version....and it is a very much different aircraft. Compare the current Puma to the original Puma...how different are they?

It is not an apples to apples comparison you offer!

Have you seen our track record with buying replacement kit, go take a peek in the Wildcat thread and look at the under funded under equipped ending to that project. We are that bad I suspect you could sell us some A models and still make a tidy profit on the deal :(

[SASless]

SFP....for sure the RAF cannot figure out how to buy a Chinook! I think you folk may have picked up some bad habits from us....thinking Commanche, Lakota....and a few other ripe picks.

[Could be the last?]

Without any bad news to hide it behind........as usually befits such a press release, has a decision been made? Or have they decided to wait until 2012, and let everyone sweat over the festive period?

[althenick]

Not RAF bashing but the writing is on the wall as far as i see it. All fixed wing to RAF and rotary to be AAC & Navy

... Assuming the RAF survive as a single service :sad:

[Tiger_mate]

Speculation: 17 Jan 12: Pre-briefed Redundancy Pt II Announcement Day.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the next round of redundancies will effect (insert number) men and woman from the Armed Forces (expand with single service breakdown of numbers); but we are trying our best; look we have even cancelled (insert project as required) to try and reduce the human misery we distribute. We are good....

Followed by some diversionary tactic about Schools, NHS, Clean beaches because nobody can afford holidays etc etc

To be followed the next day with 'Sun' headlines about the next Falklands War kicking off 30 years to the day etc etc.

Though in reality; Olympic Fever will kick off early in the New Year, if not January and will provide a good smoke screen for smoke and mirror tactics. Govt are almost certainly banking on the Olympics providing a 'Feel good factor' to the UK public and if is combined with good weather they may get it. I will find it funny if the spiralling costs of the Olympics leads to some seriously bad press and widespread discontent.

[Melchett01]

Not RAF bashing but the writing is on the wall as far as i see it. All fixed wing to RAF and rotary to be AAC & Navy [quote]

[quote]... Assuming the RAF survive as a single service

I wouldn't be so sure about all rotary going to the AAC & Navy for one reason - costs. I can't really speak with any authority on the RN side, but JHC is funded by the Army and it takes up over 40% of the Army's funding line - RW is horrendously expensive for the numbers you actually get. Now whilst the Army are the main users of aviation assets, they already grumble about the costs they have to foot to keep JHC going at the expense of historic infantry regiments, armour and artillery. I'm sure they would love to have full command of all Defence battlefield aviation, but when you take into account the extra associated costs on top of what they already pay, they simply can't afford it without getting rid of other capabilties, and I can't see the Army as a whole being happy about sacrificing more capabilities to fund what is a relatively small part of their ORBAT.

I assume the RN are in a similar situation - mortgaged up to the hilt already with the costs of carriers, SSBNs and Type 26s - to take anymore costs on by subsuming an increased share of RW would be an extra burden I don't think they would be willing or able to take on.

In short, when it comes to RW, I think the Army and the RN are both a bit like wives with expensive tastes but limited means - they would love to get their hands on shiny RW capabilties and, but I simply don't think they can afford it without further unpalatable cuts being made.

[Bismark]

Melchett,

I am not sure I follow you. In the unlikely event the transfer of capability were to take place surely the funding lines (equipment and manpower) ie it should be a cost neutral transfer.

[althenick]

I wouldn't be so sure about all rotary going to the AAC & Navy for one reason - costs. I can't really speak with any authority on the RN side, but JHC is funded by the Army and it takes up over 40% of the Army's funding line - RW is horrendously expensive for the numbers you actually get. Now whilst the Army are the main users of aviation assets, they already grumble about the costs they have to foot to keep JHC going at the expense of historic infantry regiments, armour and artillery. I'm sure they would love to have full command of all Defence battlefield aviation, but when you take into account the extra associated costs on top of what they already pay, they simply can't afford it without getting rid of other capabilties, and I can't see the Army as a whole being happy about sacrificing more capabilities to fund what is a relatively small part of their ORBAT.

I assume the RN are in a similar situation - mortgaged up to the hilt already with the costs of carriers, SSBNs and Type 26s - to take anymore costs on by subsuming an increased share of RW would be an extra burden I don't think they would be willing or able to take on.

In short, when it comes to RW, I think the Army and the RN are both a bit like wives with expensive tastes but limited means - they would love to get their hands on shiny RW capabilties and, but I simply don't think they can afford it without further unpalatable cuts being made.

Melchett01
You obviously have a good idea of the workings of JHC and as an interested observer (onlooker that is) I have a fair Idea of how the FAA operates as I have on occasion had to work with them and also had a father in it for 22 years (so my mother tells me ;-) ) Based on that (ok its flimsy I know) and whilst also applying some simple arithmetic I must question why the FAA/AAC would cost more to run JHC.
My take on it it this
1/ You'd get rid of a thrid of the Admin
2/ The 2 air services operate more helicopters than the RAF. In future - If the end is in sight for Puma - will only operate 1 R/W type. Couple that with the fact that WSO(P) trade is going to be practically non-existent in the Light-blue then is there any point in the RAF being in the R/W game at all?

Or am I missing something?

[Melchett01]

Bismark, Althenick,

In broad terms, I doubt that the costs for the day to day running of the fleets i.e. the aircraft, training, fuel costs etc would change drastically, and in that sense it should be cost neutral.

However, if the RAF were to cut all RW capabilities across to the other services, there would no requirement for the RAF to maintain funding for Benson and Odiham and their personnel - remember that although JHC is in the Army chain, single service Full Command issues and responsibilities remain in place. Plus you would have to find funding for any other capabilties associated with aviation e.g ATC at JHC units, TSW, fire and crash provision, support / R&D currently provided from within the Air domain e.g. AWC type support, recruitment of and training for long term personnel sustainability (air and ground crews) plus dealing with the fallout from those that refuse to change service and walk etc etc. All of these are crucial elements for ops that have to continue to be provided to allow the ac to continue to operate and many of them are not provided outside of Air.

Actually rebadging the cabs and calling it JHC Benson, Odiham etc is one thing and you probably wouldn't notice much change in the short term (maybe a bit more grumbling from the crewmen and the neighbours when they realise they are now living next door to an Army unit :E). But longer term, trying to sustain such a capability when you take all the other aspects that are provided by elements outside of the Army / RN into consideration, that is where the costs will come into play and bite the Army and RN. Cutting RW across to the end users is one of those ideas that is deceptively simple on the surface but would have significant structural issues for each of the services and as such comes with the caveat of be careful what you wish for stamped all over it in big red letters.

That said, and before the black Omega turns up outside the house to ruin Boxing Day, this is all just Melchett's opinion based on previous experience in JHC - I honestly have no idea what is going to happen to Puma, or any other longer term JHC structural issues. I may have some prior JHC experience, but I'm still a peasant way down the information food chain.

[Not_a_boffin]

Thoughts from Arrse...not entirely complimentary.

Save the puma!!! (http://www.arrse.co.uk/strategic-defence-spending-review-2010/174362-save-puma.html)

[diginagain]

........not entirely complimentary.
Are you referring to the topic, or to opinions on the originator of that particular thread?

[Father Jack Hackett]

Can somebody, please, just make an announcement about the future of of the Puma Force. Too many good people are hanging onto the promise of a future here.

And as for those who are using this issue to push single-service agendas, get a fecking life. The only service which has the potential to move SH forward is the RAF - fact. Having done a (very enjoyable) tour with the AAC I know they would be overwhelmed and massively undermanned (can you really see the requisite blue-suiters swapping for brown suits - really?).

The AAC do very good work in theatre, and long may that continue. Why mess with that. The CHF, hopefully, will develop a a very useful future capability with the Merlin. Who benefits from a bonfire of JHC - no one..

I would hope that the unrelenting diminishment of UK Defence capability would bottom out soon. Let us not "self-hack" by doing each other over - don't comply with the efforts of those who wish to divide and conquer.

[alfred_the_great]

I'm not sure how much extra cost would be involved on the RN side of life. AFAIK the RAF provide no capability (in the RW side) that the RN doesn't already via CHF, Merlin Force and Lynx Force. I would suggest that Culdrose and Yeovilton could fit in another squadron or two.

[wg13_dummy]

Can somebody, please, just make an announcement about the future of of the Puma Force. Too many good people are hanging onto the promise of a future here.

You mean members of the RAF?

And as for those who are using this issue to push single-service agendas, get a fecking life.

Like you did in your opening statement?.....

The only service which has the potential to move SH forward is the RAF - fact.

Why? The RAF are the only service who have been resourced to operate SH. CHF do a stirling job with with a fraction of the resources. Explain what you mean when you say the RAF is the only service to move SH forward?


Having done a (very enjoyable) tour with the AAC I know they would be overwhelmed and massively undermanned (can you really see the requisite blue-suiters swapping for brown suits - really?).

The AAC do very good work in theatre,

Which is where it counts I guess.

Blue-suiters reluctant to swap for brown suits? The unrelenting diminished UK Defence capability may require that and thus putting any single service selfishness to one side..... You may find that most AAC and FAA wouldn't give a stuff what coloured suit they wear so long as capability isn't compromised. Can't see the same ideology from the RAF.

[Fareastdriver]

FAA wouldn't give a stuff what coloured suit they wear so long as capability isn't compromised

Dream Along!!!!!!!!!!!!

[wg13_dummy]

Fair one but I think they'd cry less than CrabAir

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I think they'd cry less than CrabAir


Very true - but why is that? Either it's because the Crabs are just a bunch of wet lettuces who couldn't possibly cope in a proper military service like the RN or Army, or it's because there would be a genuine reduction in quality of life for people changing cap badge to operate ex-RAF aircraft.

Banter aside, it's pretty obvious which is the case. Whether or not you agree with Crab sentiments on the concept of transferring aircraft fleets, you can't argue with the fact that a great many Crabs would leave in preference to transferring to the AAC.

[Melchett01]

You may find that most AAC and FAA wouldn't give a stuff what coloured suit they wear so long as capability isn't compromised. Can't see the same ideology from the RAF

You have got to be kidding. Have you had a look on ARRSE lately? We do banter on here, but wherever you look on ARRSE you find nothing but absolute contempt and vitriol oozing out of a large proportion of posts - and that's just directed at other Army personnel who happen to be in a different cap badges. There is absolutely no hope that you would integrate a large proportion of AAC personnel into the RAF, just as you would have a hard time getting the RAF to go to the AAC. And if the stories are correct, just as some in the Harrier Force grumbled about spending so much time on the boats whilst the RN grumbled about being stuck in deepest darkest Bomber Country.

Like it or not, all 3 services are very different in their approach and general outlook on life and as such all attract very different people. You will find some happy to do the job regardless of the colour of uniform; you will find many that will put up with a change of service for a tour or 2, but unless there is a significant change in an individual's circumstances or outlook on career and life, it's a reasonably small number that swap colours for good voluntarily.

[BS Alert]

Truth is, it's nothing to do with the individual, more the color of the uniform.

[Dunhovrin]

I might have missed it but wasn't the old RAF SH concept: Chinny to carry the load, Puma to carry the chocks? Blah blah Belize blah blah KKMC blah blah AMF blah blah.

When one talks about over-promoted Wokka mates do we mean Italian Stallions?

[MG]

Dunhovrin,
Thank you for cheering me up in making me realise that I'm not alone!

[Tiger_mate]

Torque of the Devil said;
Crabs are just a bunch of wet lettuces who couldn't possibly cope in a proper military service like the RN or Army, or it's because there would be a genuine reduction in quality of life

I am RAF working in a supposedly Joint workplace; read Army (RLC not AAC). It is not just a (significant) reduction in Quality of Life, it is a Culture Shock that is difficult to comprehend. There is no trust, respect or integrity between CoC and the workforce, and intelect comes way down the list that is headed by physical prowess and autocratic discipline.

couldn't possibly cope in a proper military service

Change that to 'couldn't possibly cope working in an environment that does not allow professional military individuals to logically evaluate; make decisions, and act on those decisions whilst working autonomously' and your right, we cant cope. A Flt Lt that I work with was recently required to have an email sent from an external unit that he was detached (for only a few hours) back to his own CoC confirming that he was actually there! How bizarre is that?

As it happens; the RAF and AAC or CHF aircrew get on together a lot better than many would admit when the Mission Focus is the same. But infighting between Army cap-badges (or indeed Services) is destructive, especially at this time. I have worked in 'Joint' on four tours now and the ones that did work were those that enabled single service identity and traditions to be retained. (even if that does mean sliding the port and sitting for 'The Queen')

[Stitchbitch]

ALERT - Thread drift

Unlike a good portion of those who've posted on this thread I've actually worked and lived with the AAC & REME both in barracks and OOA. They are for the most part hugely professional, physically fitter and gripe less than your average airman. As for Army banter, like most people in Aviation the REME Airtechs and AAC think they look better, are better payed and have better banter than the rest of the Army (personally I think the Paras walk away with the banter prize)..
True, some bits of Army life can seem a bit harsh, they are a bit old school (i.e. you're in a military service not on holiday) and the accomodation leaves a lot to be desired, but I thoroughly enjoyed my two tours with them... :)

[glojo]

some in the Harrier Force grumbled about spending so much time on the boats whilst the RN grumbled about being stuck in deepest darkest Bomber Country. Boats you say!!!!! Boats and wafuus... Boats go underwater or have a pair of rollocks :O;)

I suppose playing with the rollocks might be one way of passing time whilst on deployment

Boats indeedeee doodle... blooming boats he says.... BOATS... I've never heard the like

[Courtney Mil]

Brings to mind a question, Glojo. A number of fine Naval personnel have tried to explain the difference to me. Two I remember are:

A ship has more than one deck above the waterline. (I think it was one.)

When a boat turns to port, it heels to port. When a ship turns to port, it heels to starboard. (Probably because of all the decks above the waterline.)

Would they be right?

[Biggus]

How to upset the RN:

When being shown round a skimmer say what a nice "boat" it is.

When being shown around a tube say what a nice "ship" it is.

Like shooting fish in a barrel...... :ok::ok:

[glojo]

Hi Courtney,
To be honest I have never given it that much thought ;)

If it's painted grey, it's a ship and if it's black and travels underwater it's a boat :):) but your explanation sounds far more accurate but I guess I am just a fish in a barrel :ok::ok::ok::ok:

Boat indeed... boat the man says

Thinking as I am typing that definition is very good, even a modern nuclear powered submarine could lean to port when turning in that direction BUT..... is a submarine a tube with a number of 'bits' added?? If it is indeedy a tube then it is still a boat and definitely NOT a ship! :sad: (morphine talks sensibility walks)

[Courtney Mil]

If it's doing its job, none. ;)

[Mountain Wings]

This is all very interesting but what has it got to do with the title of the post? Does anyone have anything relevant to "will the puma survive?"
I'm on Pumas and would like to know whether or not my job is secure as things with P2 have gone very quiet.

MW

[high spirits]

Maybe they are waiting for a really big news disaster story to bury it under....

[PTT]

things with P2 have gone very quiet.Waiting for a go/no go.

How are you on Pumas at Valley??

[MaroonMan4]

Mountain Wings (and Father Hackett),

Why do you think for one moment that HMG should tell you (either way)until they are good and ready-how many large companies in decline have not let their workforce know of the terminal nature until the very last moment?

If you think that we are any different from any other employee then sadly I feel as though you may be deluding yourself.

I do not know the answer, but I do know that much change is in the air (much apparently as a result of papers authored by our airships - the ongoing RW study allegedly came about after our lords and masters asked for it, so we can hardly turn our nose up when we don't like the findings), but others include Defence Transformation and the impending 2nd Tranche of redundancies.

Also we, as with the whole of the nation, should remember that we are broke, and if we cannot afford all of our helicopters then logic would suggeust that Puma is the one to go.....isn't it?

Are we really suggesting that we remove Wildcat or Apache or Merlin from the inventory to save Puma (which is due to go in 2025 anyway). Or do we just continue to salami slice from all fleets - something which historically we have all been against on these threads.

If there is any doubt that if Defence/Politicians find during this RW study that the best value for money is transferring [B]all[B] Battlefield Helicopters to the Army, then (as per the Australians and the US 101st) it will happen. Our 260 holdees that will not see a cockpit for 3 years will soon jump at the chance, and sadly people like me with only a few years to pension and a (second) wife and family to feed/clothe will pick up the slack at the other end of the spectrum. Again, we are deluding ourselves if we think that there will be a mass exodus.

I know, it sucks-but we are unbelievably broke and ethos, effect and capability have been overtaken with a new language of cost, value for money and efficiency.

:{

[PTT]

if we cannot afford all of our helicopters then logic would suggest that Puma is the one to go.....isn't it? No. Maybe your preconceptions would, but logic has nothing to do with it in this case.

[MaroonMan4]

PTT,

I know that I normally get accused of championing the twin tq monster too much, but seriously where do my preconceptions and logic differ from yours?

Am I missing something?

[SASless]

Boats (less Subs) can be hoisted aboard Ships....but then that would mean most of the RN if it wuz a USN CVN we used as a Ship.;)

[PTT]

PTT,

I know that I normally get accused of championing the twin tq monster too much, but seriously where do my preconceptions and logic differ from yours?

Am I missing something?Before I can answer that I need to know by what logic you have come to your conclusions.

[Tiger_mate]

Is the Lynx / Wildcat family really so secure??

We must have enough of an Apache force to render Anti Tank Lynx redundant and carrying 7 pax (LBH) is nothing to right home about. The Puma as a mid sized but capable (12 pax) beast suitable for urban ops has a role to play and is very likely to be secure until at least 2014 which was its traditional exit date. Personally I would have liked to see BritMil engage in NH90 or Super Puma but will aways be in cuckoo land. Is Wildcat bought and paid for? ....or are they just keeping below the radar fully aware that they too are 'at risk'. P2 whilst not in any way a golden answer may just be cost effective to see endex at 2025; or another Governments problem!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

The Puma as a mid sized but capable (12 pax) beast suitable for urban ops has a role to play and is very likely to be secure until at least 2014 which was its traditional exit date


TM,

Like most of us, I don't want to see any more fleets go the way of Harrier and Nimrod, but I worry that you're being a tad optimistic. Of course the Puma has a role to play - but it's not currently playing it, which means it could be disposed of without any impact to ongoing ops. The Govt is desperate to save money (having had to walk away from several previous ways of generating income/savings - selling forests, closing Coastguard centres etc) and the economic outlook has just got worse...If we look back to the indecent haste with which the Jaguar was disposed of (the Out Of Service date was brought forward by nearly 6 months at a very late stage, which surprised everyone, not least the Jag Mates who had already organized a big event to coincide with the planned retirement date), I think there is a real danger that the Puma may be removed very quickly to maximise the financial savings from getting rid, rather than leaving it in place until the previously agreed exit date. I just can't see us (ie JHC not RAF) hanging onto 4 SH types (if one can count Lynx/Wildcat - I'm not including Apache in this) in the current climate. Like it or not, the Wildcat is safe because of who makes it:ugh:...

Now here's a crazy thought for you...if the Puma 2 is as good as everyone says (and I'm not in a position to know otherwise), its best hope for survival is for the green Merlin to be removed entirely (ie not given to the CHF). That way, we (JHC) have Chinook/'new' Puma/new Wildcat, and we'd be able to flog the Merlins to someone somewhere. Great shame for the Navy, of course.

Just before you dismiss me as a lunatic, think on this: the people who will make the decision are the same people who reckoned we could do without an MPA ever and without an aircraft carrier for 10 years or more. All they care about is money...so if it comes down to choosing between 27 (?) green Merlins, crew of 4, with no chance of selling mixed bag of Puma HC1s/half-built & untested Puma HC2s, or a smaller fleet of 3-crew Pumas with the chance of some income from selling relatively new green Merlin, the latter may not be quite as secure as everyone assumes...and the whole CHF/Lit Manoeuvre argument doesn't hold much water (pun intended) against a Govt hell-bent on savings at all costs (see Nimrod, carrier point above). After all, Chinook, Wildcat and even Apache can all go to sea...

Now, having finished reading my ramblings, you can dismiss me as the lunatic I am!:ok:

TOTD

[Tiger_mate]

Sadly I am punch drunk with shock, bizarre decision making, and one wonders where the lunatics really are.

All they care about is money..

I have no argument with that statement at all. :\

I have had eyes on a letter from the last Defence Minister in which the 3 page ramble can be condensed to:

I will break apart the UK military until 2015 at which point I will rebuilt it with a target date of 2020 for UK Defence Plc. ....with hints that MPA will be part of the 2020 solution.

I heard a rumour of Pumas collectively becoming a reserve sqn which may then place it in somebody elses budget and therefore a possible stay of execution. Balanced by more contempory rumours that nobody has a clue what is happening; which is probably the truth of the matter. A factor maybe that the Olympics are to be followed by the UK holding another big games: European Championships? in a year or two which will need in-place security measures.

AL1. 2017 World Athletics Championships to be hosted by London.

[PTT]

Now here's a crazy thought for you...if the Puma 2 is as good as everyone says (and I'm not in a position to know otherwise), its best hope for survival is for the green Merlin to be removed entirely (ie not given to the CHF). That way, we (JHC) have Chinook/'new' Puma/new Wildcat, and we'd be able to flog the Merlins to someone somewhere. Great shame for the Navy, of course.What role does green Merlin have that Chinook can't do?

[Rulebreaker]

If this is being looked at purely from a finance point of view then apparently the only way to save money is to remove an entire platform (harrier, tornado argument).

We have around 60 chinook, merlin, apache and wildcat and 24 puma. Can 2 wildcat deliver the same number of pax into a urban environment as a single puma possibly? Can puma do the wildcat job on ships no. Chinook does heavy lift and merlin stays as its the only asw a/c we have left and both are currently in afghan.

IF we have to lose one for financial reasons next year then puma looks vulnerable unfortunately any subtle capability argument doesn't seem to matter all that much to those in whitehall.

[PTT]

Can 2 wildcat deliver the same number of pax into a urban environment as a single puma possibly?By that argument we may as well use squirrels and drop them off in pairs :rolleyes:

Clearly the aim is to get as many boots on the ground as possible at the start, and I think that when dropping into a hostile urban environment into a landing site which is too restrictive to fit a Chinook into that most commanders would prefer to get 16 troops on the ground than 8(?) then another 8. And then there's the hot/high performance, where Puma 2 outstrips just about anything apart from Chinook (yes, including the woefully underpowered Merlin).

Can puma do the wildcat job on ships no.What job? What ships? ;)

[diginagain]

Anti Tank Lynx went out several years ago, when the UK stock of TOW and its variants was lifex. Since then, AH7 has been used in the utility and obs roles.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

What role does green Merlin have that Chinook can't do?


It's keeps Yeovil's finest spares supplier in business;). But this would still be the case if we flogged them to another country...


merlin stays as its the only asw a/c we have left and both are currently in afghan


Most people (including the RN and probably even the Govt) treat the grey and green Merlins as different beasts entirely, so the fact that the grey Merlin is safe (surely?!) may not mean that much for the Mk 3/3As.

[Rulebreaker]

PTT

Puma 2 looks like it could have some nice capabilities but if the only way to make real savings is to remove a platform entirely as this government has already stated and done and is its aim with helicopters then which of the five helicopters do you remove?

Bearing in mind merlin and Apache use similar engines and the wildcat buy has been increased slightly and we'll be out of afghan by the time of any likely puma 2 deployment to me purely from a finance position puma 2 looks vulnerable.

I guess what im driving at is this could the capability of puma 2 be replaced with a merlin/wildcat combination? could puma 2 replace either wildcat or merlin in all there roles in a similar combination?

Torqueofthedevil what the betting the RN position would change on merlin if they're all in the RN and used by the Marines.

[PTT]

could the capability of puma 2 be replaced with a merlin/wildcat combination? could puma 2 replace either wildcat or merlin in all there roles in a similar combination?No to both questions. Green Merlin, though, could be replaced entirely by Chinook/Puma.

[CrabInCab]

Bearing in mind the less interventionist approach that HMG seems to be heading for with FF2020 or what ever it is called is AH really safe? It would appear that nothing is safe from the treasury at the moment after all.

:confused:

[Tiger16]

Must confess that, even after a decade on Pumas, that I had some reservations about upgrading a 40-year-old airframe. However, the feedback from QHIs/QHCIs who've recently completed Puma 2 groundschool has been overwhelmingly positive; its performance - particularly hot and high - is a quantum leap ahead of the HC.1, whilst the cockpit makes old technophobes like me just a tad nervous!

So, whether Puma 2 survives or not, massive credit is definitely due to the Puma 2 Fielding Team, who've clearly performed miracles within very tight financial and technical constraints. Cheers, ladies and gents... Oh, and - please - no more of this ridiculous talk of Wildcat being a suitable partial replacement. In terms of interior space and usable payload - forget it!

[Finnpog]

The point was made earlier.
From the Treasury POV- Not on Ops therefore not needed in the OrBat.

Not saying I agree. Maybe it is too easy to oversimplify the civil service / politico mindset.

[MaroonMan4]

Aaah, I see now....

But although I agree the sound of getting rid of the Merlin (and CHF) in favour of Puma would go some way to stopping the Pongos from taking all RW (and might even lead to a strong argument for all helicopters back to the 'Air Domain') I think we will have to be careful as we have only just finished arguing that we should retain Merlin and not let the Fisheads have it.

Presentationally it doesn't look very good to one moment say we want Merlin, then when we find that we have lost it, suddenly present an argument to say that it wasn't cost effective anyway, and actually Puma all along was the cheapest option to Defence.

But if our airships can sell it, then brilliant and although I have no idea what a Puma can do, then if it can do more than the Wildcat and Merlin, let's keep the Puma (AH will just have to work a bit harder on the recce tasks that Wildcat was to do in the future, while Puma more than makes up for the Lift requirement). If cheaper to run and operate then we will win hands down. Not being on Ops to being on Ops - especially after 2015, is not a big resource bill I would imagine.

The only negative bit of this (through hard experience in suffering on the O boat-i.e. I have scared myself on a few occasions) is the Chinook, Apache and any other non core maritime aircraft do not just pitch up, do stuff and go home. I will subscribe to a lot of things, but if you really want Chinook (and Puma) to embark to do amphib ops then train me and my crews properly, with the correct teams embarked to do the planning and integrate with grey funnel lines.

The only thing that is trumping the bean counters at the moment is the safety/MAA line and I for one (as authoriser and aircraft captain) do not want to volunteer for time at sea full stop, but if I am forced to go to sea at short notice untrained and with low currency is far worse. As I have said before, a few day/night deck landings does not make me or my crew competent in amphibious operations.

But if I understand the posts above correctly and I am led to believe that we within the light blue are seriously presenting a case that we believe that we can deliver a cheaper RW programme with Puma and Chinook (probably resulting in efficiencies downstream that could result in absorbing AH in due course) then that is music to my ears, as at the moment we are currently staring the barrel of being forced to amalgamate with the Army and all that it entails.

Like many others on this thread, if I have to become a brown job I will, but I really would rather not!!

So a future JHC of Puma, Chinook and AH (3 core types for DE&S) =
No CHF, no Army Wildcat = secure future for us :)

Capability retained, cost reduced - win win.

[Gnd]

Wildcat 1st course 8 weeks and counting (cash in AW bank) - only 3 RAF through RW training this year (see you in Nov!!!), when do you want your new uniform????

Oh and the new MinDP bringing in Civies so the RAF can't wine and stamp there feet in the battles to come!!!:E

[high spirits]

They may 'wine and stamp there feet'......

But at least they paid attention during basic spelling at school.





Thick tosser.

[Tiger16]

Indeed...
Furthermore, I can recall numerous ex-AAC pilots with whom I've flown on RAF SH over the years; very few (if any) pilots seem to transfer the other way. These individuals, to a man, made informed decisions - so please form your own conclusions about which service it is preferable to serve in!

[diginagain]

Thick tosser.
If that's the best you can come up with I surmise you weren't educated by the State. :)

[high spirits]

I had to speak the language of the gutter to get my point across to an individual who is still stuck in the dark ages.....


He deserved no less of a strong rebuke, and no more of an effort on my part.

[alfred_the_great]

Well, come March (or so), it will be CAS' decision if Puma survives. We'll then see how much importance your 'Mates' put on SH.....

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Wildcat 1st course 8 weeks and counting (cash in AW bank)


That counts for nothing! See Nimrod MRA4...

As it happens, I think both versions of Wildcat are safe, but not because we may or may not have started to train people on it.


massive credit is definitely due to the Puma 2 Fielding Team


Let's just hope all their hard work isn't in vain...:hmm:

[Door Slider]

massive credit is definitely due to the Puma 2 Fielding Team


And RWOETU who have been instrumental in programme since the start, supporting the P2G PT, ATEC and Eurocopter with front line advice, SME input and many many man hours of hard work, especially CG.

[Evalu8ter]

Door Slider,
Agreed - CG has been an utter mainstay of Puma 2; it's great that his efforts have been recognised.

[Gnd]

high (just about to fall) spirit (ghost, dead cause), If the best your small mind can do is protect your lost cause using petty distraction, I feel sorry for you. You are truly small minded, petty, pathetic and on a lost cause. You will fail and be on your deserved dung heap of self-importance soon - I shall be there to laugh and spit at you! Happy Brown suit - if you are good enough, not me, I.m thick!!:D:D:D:yuk:

[heights good]

And lets not forget, pick up the high (ish) ranking crew and media when the mighty Wokka runs out of fuel :E

HG

[diginagain]

I had to speak the language of the gutter to get my point across to an individual who is still stuck in the dark ages.....


He deserved no less of a strong rebuke, and no more of an effort on my part.
Fairy nuff. Nice to see that everything is returning to normal after the season of goodwill to all men, women, those of an indeterminate or self-determined gender, inclusive to each level of social and edumacational status.

[high spirits]

Bitter about those aptitude test results again? Bless.

[high spirits]

Digin,
I was referring to a slightly earlier, more moronic post, from Gnd. I should have been more specific in my goading.

HS

[high spirits]

I wonder what the media will make of it if Puma 2 does get the boot. And with Merlin going to the RN too. Especially after the headlines of a few years ago about lack of lift. Mind you, it will probably all get lost in the splash of the Euro getting flushed down the pan and other disasters.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I wonder what the media will make of it


Not a lot - because the Government will point out that Puma isn't currently in Afghan, so its loss won't be felt by those deployed, and they will also point out that the RAF has a number of Chinooks on order. Seeing as we (the supposed experts!) can't agree on the ideal number and size of SH platforms, I don't imagine that the cash-strapped public will spend too much time arguing with the "but there will be stacks of Chinooks so it'll be fine" logic.

[Tiger_mate]

The pro-armed forces media are astute enough to know that whilst Puma may not be in Afghan; it is doing/available for; other jobs. Jobs that will need replacing by Chinook should Puma go. ie the concetina effect still equates to a loss of helicopters when said lack of rotary has already attracted bad press.

If tensions on the east coast of Africa warm up, the Puma could be home and dry (literally). I doubt Puma will disappear this side of UK SH coming out of Afghan and it has been suggested in the press that this could be after 2015.

That MoD money is in the AW pigy bank is no security for Wildcat/Lynx at all. The precident on that has already been set on several projects, and the decision makers always look forwards not back. ie Cancellation will save X future expenditure rather then we have already spent and therefore we are committed. Cx P2, Cx Wildcat and string out P1s lifetime would be the penny pinching solution.

[A and C]

It was my understanding thar Puma 2 will be deployed in Afghan as soon as it comes on line, to a mere mortal like me I would think that a mix of Puma 2 and chinook would give a commander a much more flexible range of options when dealing with any situation rather than having to send the large chinook or small Linx.

The problem is I am talking logic and the government is talking money ( or lack of it)

[Not_a_boffin]

Especially after the headlines of a few years ago about lack of lift.

But let's be honest - the whole "lack of lift" issue was actually a combination of lack of deployable (in AFG) cabs, coupled with residual demands in Iraq and limitations in the flying hours/cabs JHC were allowed (by HMT) to employ. Not to mention that the MERT (understandably) prefer to work out of a big cab, which takes out at least one ready wokka.

The real problem has been that neither the Puma, nor the SK were initially deployable in AFG and the SK wasn't until the Carson fit. Given that the JHC forward fleet (Puma, Wokka, SK4 and Merlin HC 3/3A) in 2008 according to DASA

UKDS 2010 - Chapter 4 - Formations, Vessels, Aircraft and Vehicles of the Armed Forces (http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/UKDS/UKDS2010/c4/table410.php)

was 96 aircraft, to have over half the fleet (HC1 and SK4) non-deployable was always going to cause issues, given maintenance, training, currency demands.

Once Herrick is done, the specific demands of AFG will be replaced by the need for a broader capability, which with the additional 22 chinooks (8 Mk3s plus the 14 new cabs) is going to be a challenge. Like it or not, fully embarked ops are going to be required - and not just on the O-boat / Lusty or QEC, RFAs are frequently used as host platforms for SH, so the solution will have to be fully seagoing and fit the needs of 3 Cdo Bde.

That ain't Puma and it isn't a pure wokka force either. Merlin 3/3A is less than perfect starting point, but short of a new buy of something suitable (the amphib Merlin or CH53K) both of which highly unlikely, it's the best way forward of a bad bunch. As MM righly points out, if you're going aboard, you need to be scaled, trained and willling to do it for long periods.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

The pro-armed forces media are astute enough to know that whilst Puma may not be in Afghan; it is doing/available for; other jobs. Jobs that will need replacing by Chinook should Puma go. ie the concetina effect still equates to a loss of helicopters when said lack of rotary has already attracted bad press.


You are absolutely right - but when that bad press happened, times were much better than they are now, so the average British person had fewer pressing concerns. The Govt might well just decide to take a brief flurry of bad publicity knowing that very quickly people's attention will turn back to jobs/the economy/Olympics/Diamond Jubilee (or, more likely, Britain's Got Talent/X Factor!).


It was my understanding thar Puma 2 will be deployed in Afghan as soon as it comes on line


...but how soon can Puma 2 deploy, and how does that compare with the Govt's stated date from Afghanistan? The Puma 2's first flight was only six months ago, and whether or not the current exit date turns out to be nonsense won't matter, because the decision about Puma 2 will be made long before the exit date officially changes.

[Evalu8ter]

My impression was that the original FRWS (remember that?) had the Puma 2 going to Afghan to replace the Merlin 3 to permit (albeit limited) marinisation before being passed to CHF. That, of course, was predicated on 22+2 new Chinooks and 30ish Puma 2. Since then the AOR in Afghan has shrunken considerably (as has the near-cash available to fund anything) and the Govt probably think they can chop Pu2 as the Merlin could go straight to CHF without marinisation if it stags on in Afg until 2015, Pu 1 will still be in the UK for any Olympic contingency role and can be quietly rolled into the long grass after the jockstrapping is all finished. Net result? Operating costs of Pu2/Pu1 saved, CHF survive (and AW will, eventually, get the job of marinising it), the Govt (much in the style of it's predecessor) will pronounce the new Chinooks (yet again) and slant them as a Puma replacement and 4 Sqns of SH aircrew will be left fighting for seats on 1 new Chinook Sqn......

What could upset this applecart? CAS digging his heels in over Merlin transfer (probably a low risk given his desire to preserve Typhoon/F35 and the RAF's post-Libya push to retain Sentinel), the AOR in Afghan expanding again or a tech problem grounding Chinook for a prolonged period (it's happened before...). Or, HMG deciding that a 100% 24/7 LitM capability is a "nice to have" rather than an 70-80% solution at a weeks notice provided by Crabair....

[Archimedes]

In the applecart upsetting calculation, don't forget that Eurocopter UK is based in rather close proximity to the constituency of the Rt Hon David William Donald Cameron MP PC.

PM's interefere over defence projects in neighbouring constituencies? Never happ... hang on....

Granted, it's in the next door constituency, but it is a Tory marginal with a majority of 176 and fairly important if DC is going to aspire to getting a parliamentary majority at the next election.

[Gnd]

Wildcat won't make 2015 so Puma2 has even less of a chance- so no AFG

[Tiger16]

One of the particular selling points of Puma 2 is actually its rapid deployability. Quicker and easier to strip down than its larger brethren; 2 fit inside a C-17 (just); relatively simple rebuild at the far end (I've watched half-a-dozen engineers do it in a few hours with nothing but a landie and a jingly crane!).

In other words - should Puma 2 survive, HMG will then be able to deploy a meaningful SH capability worldwide within days. Sure, if the situation demands a medium-scale commitment, then more and larger SH will be required in addition. But for smaller deployments or when the need for speed is paramount - Puma 2 should be the way forward...

[Mountain Wings]

:confused:

RAF’s Puma helicopters face axe amid defence cutbacks | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/4052234/RAFs-Puma-helicopters-face-axe-amid-defence-cutbacks.html)

Not looking good.

MW

[high spirits]

I wonder if the press are aware that we will lose net 2 entire helicopter fleets by 2015 with the demise of Sea King Mk 4if this cut goes ahead. How many helicopters? Circa 60 plus at a guess.

Pretty shabby thing to do in light of headlines about a lack of troop carrying helicopters only 2 years ago......

[chopabeefer]

So, Puma axed, and Merlin to CHF? Hmm - the redundancy fields announcement on the 17th might have room for a LOT of aircrew...:(

[PTT]

:confused:

RAF’s Puma helicopters face axe amid defence cutbacks | The Sun |News|Campaigns|Our Boys (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/4052234/RAFs-Puma-helicopters-face-axe-amid-defence-cutbacks.html)

Not looking good.

MWBlatant puff-piece by the Sun. Or do you actually take predictive reporting from newspapers (if we can call this rag that) as some form of evidence of what the government are actually going to do?

[chopabeefer]

I hope you're right. The alternative is too bad to contemplate... Puma scrapped and Merlin to CHF. Then SAR goes civvy in 2016 (a done'ish deal), leaving an RAF Rotary force of Wokkas. (yes, ok, 84 Sqn and 32 as well - that's what...6 cabs?). How long before the Army say 'Oh you have 1 type, whose purpose is to support the Army - you know what...we'll have that, thanks a lot!':ugh:

[Not_a_boffin]

I wonder if the press are aware that we will lose net 2 entire helicopter fleets by 2015 with the demise of Sea King Mk 4if this cut goes ahead. How many helicopters? Circa 60 plus at a guess.

Pretty shabby thing to do in light of headlines about a lack of troop carrying helicopters only 2 years ago......

So put upgrade money into the HC4s which are already more capable than Puma (if equally aged), but are sufficiently smaller than Chinook & Merlin to meet the claimed differential for Puma. Benson keeps its Merlins, bin the Puma. Or is that the wrong answer as CHF survives?

And as posted earlier, it wasn't so much lack of actual cabs, more deployable in theatre and funded cabs that was the issue.

[PTT]

HC4s which are already more capable than PumaBut not more capable than Puma 2, which is what you actually need to compare with.

[Could be the last?]

I wonder if the decision on the Puma's future will be released before, after or on the same day as Tranche2 is announced???? Or is HMG still waiting for some 'proper' bad news to bury it all under????

[Not_a_boffin]

But not more capable than Puma 2, which is what you actually need to compare with.

The Carson upgrade to HC4+ adds quite a bit to the top end of performance. Compare that with HC2 and I doubt there's much difference except possibly in speed.

[rotormonkey]

Having never flown it, I can't say for sure how a Carson blade HC4 would perform directly against Puma 1 or 2. My educated guess, not as good as Puma 2, but better than Puma 1.

However, the HC4 still has only 1 door through which to get on/off - bit of a design flaw for a support helicopter. From what i've seen of it, it's also painfully slow in the cruise/climb.

In summary, Puma Mk2 gives you better range and performance, hot & high,... than a Merlin.

Fact.

[NURSE]

Or maybe Merlin stays with RAF and the HC4 fleet gets some refurbishment considering the difficulties in converting Merlin HC3 (due to the RAF specifications) to maritime capable and the sudden increase in available Sea King spares. The HC4 fleet is younger than most of the Puma fleet. Would be logical but then when have the MoD ever used Logic?

[Door Slider]

This bit is true,

The Sun understands that military top brass, under massive financial pressure,

This bit is untrue

but the word is that actual work has ground to a halt

Puma, which is seen as a low priority as it's not due to serve in Afghanistan. either is the Wildcat?

military top brass, under massive financial pressure, volunteered Pumas for the chop to free cash for other projects and so was the Wildcat a couple of years ago.

I'm not Wildcat bashing, I would love to see all the RW types survive. I'm just pointing out that things change and even with their 'inside expert man' I will only believe it when its offiicially announced.

A bit of a non story to be honest, until it is official of course!

[CrabInCab]

Nursey,

(due to the RAF specifications)

I can assure you matey, if the Merlin had been designed to RAF specifications it would have come with 2 rotor heads and been able to lift 24.5T!

:ok:

[NURSE]

And maybe if the RAF had learnt a lesson in 82 no helicoper would have been procured unless it had a folding rotor heads and tail booms!

[ralphmalph]

Nurse. Folding heads and tail booms are a red herring...we cannot afford to fight those kind of wars!

As far as Puma goes...if it is under threat, the fact that there have been multiple accidents in the latter half of 2000 might not help its case!

Why keep a fleet which has had so many accidents?.....contentious or not, its a fair question from a Tax payer.

[nice castle]

Arguably, it's also a good reason to upgrade the aircraft, in order to help prevent said accidents?

[NURSE]

We now cannot afford to fight those sorts of wars. But everything for options for change to SDSR has put the UK armed forces onto a footing were all our rotary wing fleet should be capable of operating from ships. And I would sugest that's going to be the picture for a long time to come.

And totally agree about Puma accident rate and lack of refurbishment when money was available. The South Africans have been operating upgraded pumas for years so why was it left till now to upgrade ours? Might have prevented the accidents and deaths!

[NURSE]

CrabInCab

I seam to remember in the run up to merlin procurment that the main alternitive being sugested to Merlin wasn't Chinook at all but Cougar. It was only when Merlin was the chosen that the Chinook started being mentioned. But you may get your wish for an all chinook fleet. Just a pity that there will be some loss in flexibility. Would be interesting if 1563 was still working in Belize to see the ammount of work needed to make the HLS's capable of taking chinook.

[chopabeefer]

NURSE

Not quite. In the run-off to see what the new frame was, the winner was Blackhawk. When the RAF was told it could not have it (even looked at Wastelands building under licence), then the RAF was told that Merlin was in fact the winner. At this point, Chinook was mooted. Effectively, and quite understandably, the RAF was prepared to do a lot of horse trading to not get stuck with the Merlin.

[TBM-Legend]

saw a couple of US civil registered Pumas operating of a USNS Robert E Peary combat support ship in the Gulf the other night on the box. It was used for Vertrep.

[wokkamate]

my money (and I will put my pension on this) is on Puma staying and Merlin going to RN......but you aint seen me right? :suspect:

[Fareastdriver]

saw a couple of US civil registered Pumas operating of a USNS Robert E Peary

That's where the Bristow UK/Aus machines were retired to.

[NURSE]

Or are they the ex German Border Guard SA330J's?

So when is the Merlin allegedelly going to CHF?

if its soon why was the Seaking HC4 rebuilt?

[PTT]

if its soon why was the Seaking HC4 rebuilt?Because our defence policy is in an incoherent state of constant crisis management.

[Tallsar]

I know it's now ancient history, but there's a great deal of error in people's view of our SH procurement history since 1978.... Blackhawk never won any assessment despite it's popularity, and in the competition that ended in the Merlin 3 buy of 1995 it was directly against the CH47 and nothing else. A part buy of 22 Merlins was politically directed. They were not fitted with folding tails and heads as in the early nineties they were being procured for overland ops primarily, and the extra weight of the folding mods precluded the ac being able to lift the maximum trrops stated as essential in the spec.... But then what do I know.:}

[Courtney Mil]

But then what do I know.

From what you say, probably quite a lot. This thread is alien territory for me, but I am interested to learn more. I recognize a LOT of common themes here between the helo and FJ worlds. No matter which card you choose, we end up buying the hardware that "THEY" want us to pick. Why do we do COEIAs, studies, assessments, etc? I think I might know the answer. :ok:

Courtney

[nice castle]

15 mk2 chinooks, plus 10 free to enable Boeing to close the production line, plus spares thru life for free. That was Boeing's offer.

Our reply, "No thank you very much, Mr Boeing, we have the Merlin coming!"

The cost of all 25 chinnies?

Equivalent to 3 merlins.:{

Still, at least it kept some Brits employed.:rolleyes:

Sorry, thread drift, back to the Pu2...

[NURSE]

I seam to remember from dim and distant past that Sikorsky/westland put in an unsolicited proposal to replace wessex HC2's with WS60 Blackhawk westland produced 1 or 2.

[COCL2]

Westland built one Blackhawk from a kit after Sikorsky took a stake in the company. The plan was to assemble aircraft at Yeovil for sale to the Arabs and so avoid the then boycott problems which stopped them buying direct. No business ever developed - possibly because the politocos were still more interested in developing a "European" solution to the Westland problem, despite Sikorsky baling the company out and keeping it alive (with Agusta's help). I don't remember a serious supply bid ever being for them to supply Westland Blackhawks to the UK

[Bengo]

Part of any Defence procurement decision is the Industrial Impact. This is (or was) put together by the DTI or whatever it's called today and comes in at Ministerial level, at a relatively late stage. Politicians tend to listen to these more than the military because these directly involve jobs, votes and political heat.

It is always very hard to make a military case for an MOTS item if a UK company is saying 'We can make that for the same price' (or a bit more if loads of jobs are claimed to be at stake). Good Project Management, sensible procurement strategies and everything else that leads to a successful buy are, at this point, poor politics.

In the case of CH47 vs EHI 01 it came down to jobs in Yeovil and down the Yeovil supply chain so the RAF was told there had to be a mixed buy.

[NURSE]

There was talk a while ago about a replacement for the Puma and Sea King based on a New AW product I think it was the AW149 has this project disappeared?

There is also talk in the Daily Telegraph of further troop reductions could this be the reason why? there may no be the need for the puma to support a smaller army?

[Gnd]

Regardless of all the bluff and bluster on here the RW review is still alive and well. There’s no ‘coming into service’ RW platforms that are safe and it must be logical to look at what we need; bang and bodies moved (alive and from place to place)! So the question is: which platforms can do this with the fewest bases, fewest bodies (regardless of beret) and most of importantly FOR WHO?
Not a difficult question and once the brass stop their pi***ng matches in the clubs, the purse strings will give what is required to whom it is required flown by those that can. Simples!!!


So Puma, Wildcat and 149 (but that was such a long shot I am not sure it should be in this list) are all doomed unless the strategic needs of UK change – regardless of how un-palatable some on here think losing their parochial little world is – or – how self-important they think they are.
Do the sums with the cash available and the Boeing deal would have been so sensible.
PS: I’m not looking for a job in Yeovil at the moment!!!!!:(

[Melchett01]

So Puma, Wildcat and 149 (but that was such a long shot I am not sure it should be in this list) are all doomed unless the strategic needs of UK change

I have a sneaking suspicion Wildcat will be safe - it's primary role isn't carrying pax or bang - have you seen how little room there is down the back? As such I would suggest that battlefield taxi comes well down the list of its roles, well behind ISTAR / C2. And given that every man and his dog seems to now have some variation of ISTAR or Information in their job titles, I would have thought that Wildcat should fit into that niche along with the escort role.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Melchett,

Agree - and if Wildcat is axed along with Puma, then the only RW fleets which the UK will field (apart from a couple of niche outfits such as 25 Flt and 84 Sqn) will be Apache, Merlin and Chinook...surely this won't happen?

[Just This Once...]

Melchette, I'm not questioning your analysis or the fact that Wildcat would be pretty poor as a battlefield taxi but is a fleet of light C2 / ISTAR helicopters what the green army needs given the cuts elsewhere?

Apache's sensors are very effective and its defensive aids, mixed weapons load and protective armour make it well suited to escort roles (nice if it was quicker though) as well as its originally envisaged role. Watchkeeper is also adding to the Army's organic ISTAR capability and the oft heard word from the infantry types around me is that we are now drowning in information but with dwindling ability to move boots around to exploit it.

With 100+ escort capable Army helicopters kicking around compared to what may be left of SH when CHF Merlins are embarked elsewhere, the Army could be doing an awful lot of walking with a constant chatter from their colleagues above telling them about the latest opportunity they have just missed.

Given the unpalatable structure and numbers we will be left with I am no longer convinced that Wildcat's predicted niche still exists. Clearly I would rather fund and fix the wider issues than bin Wildcat if we can extract the correct level of resource from the Treasury.

[NURSE]

given the numbers involved if the Army order for wildcat was abandoned is the Naval version viable?

Remember wildcat is for 2 services with 2 very different needs.

As to the future maybe the NH90 TTH should be looked at as the long term replacement for puma and the armed forces should be allowed to "Save" for this longer term plan! (Just like you and I would to buy a new car)

When is the Air sea rescue service being civilianised?
Could Puma HC1 stay in service till this date? and is there enough life left in the HAR3 fleet to allow them to serve as a stop gap transport helecopter for the RAF? some work would be needed and there is some Jobs for British workers.

There is a complete lack of long term thinking in the Amred forces and this is a direct result of political short termism spreading to the civil service

[wokkamate]

the Puma is not going to get axed people........:cool:

[FireAxe]

Of course it will................










But maybe not yet, who knows but all get axed eventually. Even the Wokka(cue sharp intake of breath) nothing lives forever!

[NURSE]

all good things come to an end eh fireaxe?

This why we should be currently planning, first phase should look at going to CH-47F fleet unfortunatley this planning should have started about 5 years ago.

Puma end of life should also be currently being planned for with replacement being identified now.


But would also say plan B to current plans should be being considered

[FireAxe]

At the end of the day it is people that count, keeping fingers crossed for all who may be involved on Tuesday. May be an opportunity for some hoping all get what they want. For my 2p, hope 1 Merlin sqn stays SH, with other going CHF also colocating at Benson. Means infrastructure can remain at Benson, so save money. Handover can be gradual and gives CHF time to work up, again saving money. We retain a sqn and gain an opportunity to share and benefit from combined expertise. Could work well with retaining Puma and Wokka with their reduced buy. And a varied capability and career path could be retained. I know it probably costs more due to multiple platforms but as has been seen the differing capability works well in Herrick for the varied tasks including the upgraded Lynx. For once JHC complementing each other as a team.
Long live SH!!!!

[MaroonMan4]

Rumour looks like Puma will stay for the short term.

I too would like a Joint Force Merlin, as when Puma does go eventually (and it will - even in 2025) then we are only left with a fleet of wokkas which will result in any hardly cockpits in comparison to what we used to have.

But, and this is where I am a realist and I find it difficult that others do not see it, but we are so broke as a nation with in excess of 6 years before we even begin to start to talking NH-90s, AW-149s and any other non-core fleet originally identified by the first version of the RWS back in 2009.

So we get new buy CH-47, the Army gets new buy Wildcat and the RN gets our second hand Merlins....

Please please please can we stop the cancer of negative bitching that has taken back Jointery many many years. Crew rooms from all 3 Services are full of anger, hate, selfishness and a raft of other negative emotions and feelings.

I know that our senior leadership has not been been entirely blameless in cultivating this culture of protecting our cockpits at all costs, but we cannot go on like this and as I have said it is now evidient around the table and ops.

It is messy, and there is much change ahead forced upon us by a combination of politicians and greedy bankers, not all good and yes sadly some (maybe me) will find that we are without employment in the coming years or at best forced into a non-flying job as there are no longer enough cockpits.

But we are eating ourselves up from the inside, and now is not the time (at all levels) to be stomping around with any single Service agendas trying to save your slice of the pie.

There is a plan, we can draw it out for as long we want and then continue to fight when we do not like the answer or the direction, but the more we do this the more we destroy the years of Jointery, good will and most importantly of all the mutual trust that has been built up through many operations and different theatres.

Enough is enough, now lets just get on with it.

[Could be the last?]

The JFM concept will be intersting when you consider the rearcrew implications for several reasons:

1. Currently, CHF only operate with one cmn, so will need a reasonable uplift in manning.

2. Rank/Pay/Trg differences between WSOp and RM(Cmn) for the same job.

This is not insurmountable, but will be interesting to see what becomes the accepted..........

[NURSE]

Maroon man I would agree however the history with Joint force harrier needs to be taken into account.

[PTT]

The JFM concept will be intersting when you consider the rearcrew implications for several reasons:

1. Currently, CHF only operate with one cmn, so will need a reasonable uplift in manning.

2. Rank/Pay/Trg differences between WSOp and RM(Cmn) for the same job.

This is not insurmountable, but will be interesting to see what becomes the accepted..........There is also a standardisation issue. What does "descending" mean again? :eek:

As you say though, not insurmountable, but certainly another opportunity for willy-waving.

[OafOrfUxAche]

As to the future maybe the NH90 TTH should be looked at as the long term replacement for puma and the armed forces should be allowed to "Save" for this longer term plan! (Just like you and I would to buy a new car)

When is the Air sea rescue service being civilianised?
Could Puma HC1 stay in service till this date? and is there enough life left in the HAR3 fleet to allow them to serve as a stop gap transport helecopter for the RAF? some work would be needed and there is some Jobs for British workers.


What a load of sh1te! Or is this the draft script for Peter Kay's new tour?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Unless I missed it but with there being no mention of RAF pilots or WSOp Crewman in today's redundancy fields I wonder if this might lead to some good news on the Puma and Merlin front, fingers crossed for all involved :ok:

[high spirits]

There won't be aircrew redundancies in the light blue rotary due to the need to service AFG and Kenya. 2015 SDSR will be brutal if not enough exit at option points though.

I don't think it has any bearing on the survival of Puma and the decision that has been taken to send Merlin to the RN.

[nice castle]

NH90? Do be brief. Let's not go there. Why do you think Sweden ordered 15 Blackhawks?

Sar cabs as transport. Ooooo-kayyy...Are we done with the crazy talk?:\

[Mountain Wings]

Anyone hear anything today? Apparently there was an announcement.

[MG]

Puma 2 safe. We think it's 2 sqns and probably 24 ac.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Puma 2 safe. We think it's 2 sqns and probably 24 ac.

OUTSTANDING NEWS :D:D:D:D:D

[MG]

Numbers to be confirmed but the news is most definitely good.

[Marly Lite]

MG is correct, large sigh of relief. :)

[Melchett01]

Now the arguments just need to be gone through over numbers of crews and how many hours they are funded for.

If we're not careful, you can just see the Daily Mail headlines about MOD buying aircraft they can't afford to fly.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Unless I missed it but with there being no mention of RAF pilots or WSOp Crewman in today's redundancy fields I wonder if this might lead to some good news on the Puma and Merlin front, fingers crossed for all involved :ok:

Puma decision is superb news now lets hope the Merlin decision turns out to just as good :ok:

["Running in"]

Good news about Puma indeed, if it's as capable as briefed the lads on the ground will benefit. I'm interested in Seldom's ideal outcome for Merlin though? Maybe you can elaborate?

[St Johns Wort]

The most capable ‘mid range’ helicopter in the HM forces inventory, Mk1 and Mk2, crewed by 1st rate aviators......... Was there ever any doubt?:ugh:

Running.
Re seldom and the Merlin comment. Perhaps the point is that ALL flying assets should be on one slop chit, owned by the RAF.

[althenick]

ALL flying assets should be on one slop chit, owned by the RAF.

On the Slop chit yes good idea - but budgeted and flown by them - no!

[alfred_the_great]

Perhaps the point is that ALL flying assets should be on one slop chit, owned by the RAF.

Coming to sea with me for 9 or 10 months then?

[St Johns Wort]

Alfred
Coming to sea with me for 9 or 10 months then?
Cheeky:p, I'd need to see a photo before I commit

Your predilections aside; I’ve not seen any convincing argument that a single service helicopter force, within a dedicated flying service, couldn’t take on any of the individual service roles as they stand.

[alfred_the_great]

All I've seen is an Airforce with a personnel restriction that stops them operating with the RN. I couldn't care less the colour of the uniform in the cab, but you'll a) do what I tell you and b) you'll remain deck-current and then deploy with me.

[St Johns Wort]

So if the restrictions are modified/removed........ we are on the same song/shanty sheet!

but you'll a) do what I tell you. Those predilections again big boy!

[alfred_the_great]

I know, but you'll never be good enough for me I'm afraid. I like people who rough it, no 5* hotels for me :ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Ah the old dig in/check in conundrum, or not as is the case nowadays :p

[Airborne Aircrew]

St. Johns:

Yep... I recall the only way to give an order is to use is to/are to. Anything else is a prediction that may or may not result in the desired action. Maybe they are slacker in the dark blue...:E

[Marly Lite]

Alfred,

I really do not think you have a handle on reality. The SH force has a long tradition of living in the field when the Navy are at CockersP 12 miles offshore.

[Dundiggin']

Well. well Alfie....looks as though you're sailing on yer own then - suits me.... shove yer boat.........;)

[charliegolf]

AA

Maybe they are slacker in the dark blue...

On the plus side, it would likely add to the convenience at Golden Rivet time.

CG

[Tourist]

Marly.

HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHA

Living in the field is not just sleeping in the back of a chinook/puma

[MG]

Tourist, choice between sleeping in the Boeing Hilton or in a ditch, I know which I'll choose, I've done both. And they were both on operations, where people were killed, before you try to pick holes in the argument.

[MaroonMan4]

Really good news for the Puma guys - is it the whole Puma LEP, or just the airframes already in the system?

But, something is certainly stirring up the road, not only have I had a whole load of the Merlin lot asking informally about how our transition plan is going, they then get a bit arsey when I say that we are tight on hours and spaces for our own guys, let alone absorbing them.

Some of the Merlin community still adamantly believe that Merlin will remain with us and are determined to ensure that whatever it takes they will delay and prevent RN footholds, others just do not want anything to do with the time away at sea and therefore are happy to go for Joint Force Merlin approach, conceding one of our squadrons to the RN, and just recently there is a small but determined bunch that are planning their exit strategy to CH47 as although they have not been told, they think there is now recognition that Merlin is going to the RN and that they had better do something about it before the music stops and they do not have a cockpit to sit in!

Personally, I am with the delay/wait and see community, hopefully by about 2015 Defence will turn around to the RN, give them a pat on the head and say 'well done for trying', give them one Merlin squadron that is always at sea, ultimately under a light blue command structure (so kind of a Joint Force Merlin, but commanded by us).

But as we were all saying yesterday, nothing formal seen (the word 'intent' is such a lovely word, meaning everything, and nothing, at the same time :)

As Seldom said, it was looking pretty bleak for us, but fortunately our ex boss and his team in town have done us proud and saved the (Puma) day - lets hope they can do some magic in swinging the Merlin open debate back our way too.

:ok:

[Misformonkey]

"Personally, I am with the delay/wait and see community, hopefully by about 2015 Defence will turn around to the RN, give them a pat on the head and say 'well done for trying', give them one Merlin squadron that is always at sea, ultimately under a light blue command structure (so kind of a Joint Force Merlin, but commanded by us)"

The addition of the green Merlin Sqdn's to the RN will happen, the depth facility is already RN run, the Merlin facilities down Culdrose are more than enough to support the entire fleet. The only question is whether they end up down Culdrose or Yeovilton. If i was a betting man i would say a good part of the decision to keep Puma was to appease the light blue boys when the Merlin does come to us.

[Tourist]

Maroon

I think you need to realise that without the Merlin coming to the RN, the FAA is unsupportably small.

ie, end of. close up shop. Not just junglies, but the lot of us. Below a certain number, it makes no sense to try to maintain the whole pyramid.

This may not seem like a bad thing to you, but the consequences of that are so enormous that I am sure it will go dark blue in its entirety, whatever your higher ups may say/wish quietly. The Puma thing is your sop. enjoy it.

I am willing to lay a bet that if I am wrong I never post again.

Ready to match my bet?

[Unchecked]

And I think you are kidding yourself if you think that any decisions made by the current Govt are there to appease anyone during this time of financial constraint. Did anyone feel appeased by the deletion of Ark Royal, Harrier or Nimrod ?

[Misformonkey]

The loss of another platform would have had a major impact on morale in the lighter blue area and i do think that would have been taken into account. I also doubt they could afford to buy themselves out of another project like they would have had to with Harrier. I agree with Tourist in that once the critical mass goes so does the entire capability.

[MG]

Merlin Mk3 is going to the RN, no doubt. The Puma decision makes that loss acceptable to the RAF. The critical mass argument worked both ways so if the RAF had lost both Merlin and Puma, then it (SH Force) would also become unviable. This way both services are content, so yes, there are still political decisions made in these lean times.

When Comd JHC asked the RAF's Merlin guys if they wanted to go to sea, not one of them put their hands up. That sealed it in his eyes; give the fleet to those who are prepared to sail and don't try to defend any other decision. Ironically, a fair few of those with their hands down will end up on Chinooks and will undoubtedly see what grey funnel cruising is all about.

[high spirits]

I have heard a rumour that only a quarter of the mk3 Merlin fleet will be optimised to go to sea. Note my use of the word optimised, not marinised. I think it will go dark blue , as Tourist said to save the FAA, not for any other reason. What a waste of already trained light blue crews and engineers who will be kicked out as soon as they return from Ops.

[MG]

High Spirits, I largely agree with you, particularly on the optimisation, but the transition isn't going to be so swift that there can't be an orderly transition and find the majority of crews alternate employment. If that wasn't going to be possible, we'd have seen more aircrew in the redundancy tranche.

[high spirits]

MG,
No aircrew in the present tranche because the light blue mk3 fleet is committed to ops and there are very few trained RN as yet. Post 2015 SDSR the cull will be significant if not enough aircrew leave between now and then.

[Hueymeister]

No Merlin for the Junglies = no more FAA as we know it, more a Naval Air Wing......

[Unchecked]

When Comd JHC asked the RAF's Merlin guys if they wanted to go to sea, not one of them put their hands up.

I don't remember ever being asked.

[high spirits]

Unchecked,
That's because Comd JHC never asked. Its good JHC myth that the present light blue force were ever consulted as to whether they would like to go to sea. They would never have been asked such a question as the ac does not presently have a clearance to operate from a ship.

[Unchecked]

Correct - and it will be a costly process to give it one, I suspect.

[MG]

There will certainly be a cost involved, which is why there will be an optimisation first, before the full monty. The Mk3s will all need an MLU soon, so that's an opportunity for the RN getting a good amount of the work done.

They would never have been asked such a question as the ac does not presently have a clearance to operate from a ship.
why does not having a clearance stop someone from asking a question? It will have, so the question is relevant.

[high spirits]

MG
It is a relevant question. But. The bit that you posted earlier about Cdr JHC asking the light blue Merlin Force whether they wanted to go to sea (and no one raising their hand), is I'm afraid, utter tosh. Urban myth. It never happened. Some one, somewhere has made it up.

The present Mk 3 force are like everyone else in the military. Can do. They go where they are told. Given the choice between going to sea and returning to the great desert f&&k all(again) they would probably choose the former. The choice between going to sea and keeping their jobs is a no brainer.

However, if they are only going to ship optimise a quarter of the fleet because the mid life programme to upgrade the cockpit is so hideously expensive (and this is before you pay for any ship optimisation), why not just buy new cabs for the junglies?

[glojo]

It is a relevant question. But. The bit that you posted earlier about Cdr JHC asking the light blue Merlin Force whether they wanted to go to sea (and no one raising their hand), is I'm afraid, utter tosh. Urban myth. It never happened. Some one, somewhere has made it up.As an outsider looking in, I must confess that statement did raise an eyebrow or two. The questions I was asking myself was all about being in a military service, discipline, orders etc.

'Would you like to go to work today?'

'Do you fancy flying to Afghanistan?'

'Do you fancy spending six months aboard HMS Ocean?'

I was always under the impression that we are a disciplined, military service, we are given orders and if lawful then the first words that come out of our mouth will be, "Yes sir\ma'am" :) (trying to get used to she-males giving lawful orders)

Reading some of the posts on this thread tempts me to throw a thought into the pot..

With all this internal competitiveness\rivalry\bickering, do we ever envisage a situation where the Ministry of Defence screams enough is enough and disbands the Navy, Army and Air Force and we start afresh with the Defence Force of Great Britain? I shudder at the very thought but if we cannot get our acts together then will this be a horrible option?

[high spirits]

The bickering you refer to does not take place on the shop floor. SH be it jungly or RAF is always can do.

The mid life update for Merlin mk3 is going to waste a lot of money. It will be spent on, amongst other things, a new cockpit to harmonise the fleet. Utterly unnecessary. It has the best cockpit of all SH assets at the moment and will still be the best after Puma 2 and Chinook mk4/5 because it is FMS based and not just a digital representation of what was analogue.

What it really needs are better engines, a meatier tail rotor and a new gearbox. The present mid life update is already very expensive and does not include the money needed to enable it to operate at sea for a limited time.

[glojo]

The bickering you refer to does not take place on the shop floor. SH be it jungly or RAF is always can do. :ok:Highly trained, highly motivated, extremely professional sums up ALL crews of all aircraft from ALL services but the bickering is there for all to see and I am definitely NOT going to point finger, thumb or foot in any direction regarding who is responsible for this issue.

Respect to one and ALL :ok:

[MaroonMan4]

Well let's get a few things straight here.....

Of course we are in the military and if HM Queen says go to sea for 6 months of the year then so be it, but lets be clear about 3 things. One is make sure that me and my colleagues are properly trained, if you really want a contingency force of wokkas or Merlins, then you will have to resource the training properly. Secondly, in the 6 months I am back in UK if you think that I then going to play a part in the Army exercise schedule with many weekends away or even day running to Salisbury Plain, you will soon lose me.

As to losing our jobs-remember, it is highly unlikely that any RAF aircrew have or will lose their jobs. If the Air Manners really did think that they couldn't manage the outflow of aircrew by natural wastage and creative posts (like the new international RAF kipper fleet), then I am sure that they would have made at least one of us redundant over one of the last 2 redundancies announcements.

Finally, I did not sign up for life at sea-of course I will do it, and have already done it on numerous occasions, but given the choice I would much rather the Fisheads to do it. And this is where we have to be honest in that the majority of the future cost to Merlin is not the marinisation upgrades, but just in keeping the Merlin force flying-whichever Service operates the fleet.

Now as to everyone getting fed up with the inter service rivalry, for christs sake, about bloody time that something gets done as I think we will all agree this is negative, corrosive and reducing operational capability as the mutual trust has all but vanished.

I quite like the idea of a Defence Helicopter Command, one SDH and ODH for all rotary. If CGS has the experience and qualifications to be the one proper Rotary Wing SDH then great, but personally I think CAS should be, especially as it looks as though future CAS' will be from a rotary background. Certainly the MAA see that qualifications and experience as key to duty holder roles.

[Evalu8ter]

"What it really needs are better engines, a meatier tail rotor and a new gearbox"

Simples, just make the tail rotor bigger and rotate it through 90 degrees....a two-type SH force HAS to be the target; Merlin exists purely to answer the question "how do we keep AW in business" not "what the best force mix for future SH capability".

I'd agree that the Merlin Mk3 cockpit is better integrated in some ways. However, it's not fully integrated. FMS driven cockpits are fine to the user but an utter pain for PTs/CAPs trying to upgrade quickly - it becomes very expensive and difficult to do so due to the "electronic spaghetti" linking it all together. The new Chinook/Puma cockpits are federated systems for good reason. Major sub-systems are effectively "firewalled" so that rapid upgrades to Comms/DAS/NavAids can be done without extensive and expensive regression testing and can therefore deliver capability quicker (in theory...)

I think the fundemental question is not being asked; this needs to be "how can we best deliver LitM from a LPH/LPD" not "how can we keep CHF in existence as it is today". The answer, IMHO, is "seeded" FAA crews into CH47, AH, Wildcat (Green) and Puma 2 units - perhaps as constituted flights, such that a TAG of suitably qualified (and motivated) aviators with a broad spectrum of platforms and capabilities can deploy in the appropriate force mix.

It'll never happen; this all boils down to SO1 and above Command positions, not capability.

[high spirits]

Eval,
I hear what you are saying, but....

Why bother with a new cockpit when it already has a perfectly good one for its SH role. Would the money not be better spent buying new than just ship optimising a slack handful of the fleet so that it can look good on a 'procedure alpha'. Because without better engines, tail rotor and gearbox that is all it will ever be good at.

As for time at sea, I agree with you and didn't sign up for it either. However, suggesting that the mk3 force somehow stood in front of the 2 star and said that they wouldn't go to sea is utter tosh.

[alfred_the_great]

The answer, IMHO, is "seeded" FAA crews into CH47, AH, Wildcat (Green) and Puma 2 units - perhaps as constituted flights, such that a TAG of suitably qualified (and motivated) aviators with a broad spectrum of platforms and capabilities can deploy in the appropriate force mix.

I think AOC 3Gp/FOMA and the JFH may've put paid to that idea from the Dark Blue side.

[Evalu8ter]

HS,
I agree - however, the arguement for changing the Mk3 cockpit is more to do with driving commonality with the Mk2 to save money through-life, and to address any obsolescence issues it may have. The real error was not latching on to the work AW did on the VH-71 (and perhaps buying the airframes?) and using it as a basis for Merlin CSP. It doesn't alter the fact that it is an expensive oddity in the UK SH/BH force and one that is tolerated purely on political rather than capability terms. I think it's an interesting question to ask CHF mates what they'd rather fly - Merlin as a CHF NAS or Chinook/Puma/AH as a constituted flight; the answers I've got back are split both ways - usually dependant on Career aspirations.

[glojo]

I am getting concerned that some folks might be of the opinion that I am suggesting the RAF accept that they might be ordered to set sail and disappear over the horizon for an extended period... Far from it and I totally agree with those that state they did not join up to go to sea. I have NO issues whatsoever with that sentiment.

Hopefully EVERYONE will understand I am just putting forward points that I consider worthy of debate.

[high spirits]

Without better engines, tail rotor and gearbox....and with only a few Merlin mk3 able to operate at sea, the RAF wokka force will have to go to sea anyway, come the day of the races. Just as they did for Sierra Leone and Iraq.

[MaroonMan4]

So let me just get this right, and please correct me if I am wrong, but based upon the posts so far it looks like:

From a capability perspective CHF should be disbanded amongst all JHC aircraft types.
Merlin should not 'waste' money on cockpit upgrades, but in upgrading engines, gear box, drive trains and tail rotors etc.

Does that mean then:

Do we really need amphibious forces should be the question, before we ask how we marinise and crew the aircraft. The whole environment is very risky anyway, why don't we just use land SH and AH to bounce off a deck when and if required (why do we have to waste 6 months of the year bobbing around at sea, why not tip up, use the deck for the op and then come home, with grey funnel lines picking us up at the nearest willing port?).

Another option could be to give CHF the CH47 that have the ship clearances (if they think they are getting our new buy, they have another thing coming!!).

Acknowledging that the mighty wokka is not the solution for everything that Defence wants but is a JHC fleet mix of Puma and CH47 the solution for medium/heavy lift, especially now that Puma has been made safe.

But, being fair if CHF is absorbed across the whole of JHC, does that mean that we in the light blue and also the green jobs forsake our uniform (either a true defence helciopter force, under a Defence Helicopter Command) or do we accept that we all come under either the RAF or AAC?

Should a Defence Helciopter Command fall under JFC, permanently tied to RAF for the duty holder persepctive (especially if we are to lose our ISTAR assets to JFC)?

As to the wager from Tourist, when one of our serious air ships (CAS, CINC or AMP) goes to Benson and publicly tells the lads and lasses there that Merlin is transferring to the RN in entirety, I will both eat my hat, and never post again. Until that point then I believe that we will happily use the ambiguity not to commit to too much - CDS, VCDS will all change soon, possibly a Secretary of State for Defence again, maybe a Prime Minister, with another SDSR just around the corner.

Lots of lovely ambiguity, half efforts, intents and platitudes ;)

[Si Clik]

I find this 'debate' odd, because it is no debate at all. Just a selection of of RAF SH mates actually driving the very inter-service rivalry they claim does not exist.

Note please how few of us dark blue types have entered the 'debate' or even tried to take the opportunity to point out the foibles of the various proposals laid bare here.

The policy remains thus for FF2020 and has not changed since SDSR:

Puma2 continues
CH4/5/6 continues
Mer3 goes to CHF
Additional CH buy continues
SAR goes civvy

The only reason P2 was up for debate was some interesting cost deltas against the originally quoted and budgeted price.

It would be nice if the RAF actually followed policy rather than ranged against it.

:cool:

[Finnpog]

Until that point then I believe that we will happily use the ambiguity not to commit to too much - CDS, VCDS will all change soon, possibly a Secretary of State for Defence again, maybe a Prime Minister, with another SDSR just around the corner.

So, more cavilling rather than mutiny? Oh well, what the Hell!:ugh:

[minigundiplomat]

the RAF wokka force will have to go to sea anyway, come the day of the races. Just as they did for Sierra Leone and Iraq.


And Afghanistan*, and the Falklands I believe.


* I seem to remember the welcome in Bagram, Kabul and the Panjshir valley started with a volley of rocks but was still warmer than that on the O Boat (Standfast Illustrious who were fantastic but had to head home after 7 months).
If the Dark Blue are serious about operating CH off of decks, perhaps they need to seek advice from the 2nd Sea Lord about hospitality, as he could have taught those on the O Boat a great deal. It's a 2 way street.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

when one of our serious air ships (CAS, CINC or AMP) goes to Benson and publicly tells the lads and lasses there that Merlin is transferring to the RN in entirety, I will both eat my hat, and never post again


Is that because you believe that the Merlin is staying with the RAF, or because you think it is going to the CHF but that none of the brass will actually bother to go to Benson to give 28 & 78 the bad news? I only ask because there is a bet riding on the outcome...:suspect:

[minigundiplomat]

The latter is my bet.

[Climebear]

when one of our serious air ships (CAS, CINC or AMP) goes to Benson and publicly tells the lads and lasses there that Merlin is transferring to the RN in entirety, I will both eat my hat, and never post again


Several announcements in Parliament not being enough then!

Latest from Hansard (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201212/ldhansrd/text/120123w0001.htm) on 23 Jan 12:

Questions
Asked by Lord West of Spithead

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Astor of Hever on 18 July 2011 (WA 226), 11 August 2011 (WA 456), and 10 January (WA 2), when is the next conversion course after March 2012; and how many Royal Navy aircrew will be on that course.[HL14677]

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Astor of Hever on 18 July 2011 (WA 226), 11 August 2011 (WA 456), and 10 January (WA 2), what is the planned date for completing conversion training; and when will the Merlin Mk3 become fully part of the Commando helicopter force.[HL14678]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Astor of Hever): In accordance with the Joint Helicopter Command (JHC) Lift Transition Plan, the current intention is that the second Merlin Mk 3 conversion course will commence in September 2012. Similar to the initial course, there will be 12 Royal Navy personnel on this course, comprising three aircrews. The majority of conversion training is forecast to be completed in late 2016.

Under current planning, Merlin Mk 3 will transfer to the Commando Helicopter Force (CHF) when the Commanding Officer CHF assumes the responsibility as Support Helicopter Merlin Delivery Duty Holder, anticipated to be in financial year 2014-15.

[Unchecked]

Plans are wonderful, but no plan ever survives first contact with the Merlin. People that have operated or relied upon it will know what I'm saying.

[MaroonMan4]

Any news on future Puma numbers?

[chinook240]

I'd have thought somewhere between XW200 and XW237!:ok:

[phantomstreaker]

Air Force news said approx 28 cabs

[chopabeefer]

It certainly appears the future of the Puma may have been secured, at the expense of the Merlin (in RAF service). I wonder if this has been the master plan all along...by that I mean that that the Air Staff were probably certain that the Merlin was going to the dark blue, given that it had already been announced in the House. They resisted and denied it was a 'done deal', even though, to most other observers, it appeared to be 'done'.

I suspect that this was simply being used as a bargaining chip to keep the Puma, as in 'We can't afford to lose the Merlin - we need a medium support platform (knowing full well it was going to the RN) - if you take it away from us, then we MUST retain the Puma(II) or our helo-lift capability (the subject of much press) will be compromised...'. The RAF heirachy, in my opinion, knew the Merlin was going, and actually wanted to retain both it, and Puma II, but knew this was financially unviable, so they played a game with the merlin, in order to ensure they at least got the Puma.

I know loads of merlin pilots, and they all say 'let the navy have the thing, they have no idea how completely crap they are for junglie ops - good riddance.'

Please do not misunderstand - they mourn the loss of the role, and the Sqn's, and the ethos, capability and drive that have made 28 and 78 such superb Sqn's, but the Cab is the epitome of the 'polished turd', and they all know it.

Navy - you are superb operators and deserve the very best replacement for the venerable 'Queen'. I can assure you that the Merlin is not it. Your professionalism and ethos will ensure you make of it what you can, but it will be you who are papering the cracks and making do, rather than the aircraft allowing you to fulfill your full operational potential.

A mate who is a current merlin QHI (with 2000hrs+ on it) recently told a group of us that is was ' on most levels, a step backwards from the Wessex, two steps forward in terms of speed, and nine backwards in reliability'.

Enjoy the thing navy, and do what you can - but don't expect Seaking levels of usefulness - you won't get them.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Deleted because of innacurate information :ok:

[MaroonMan4]

Brilliant

Banter to Tourist (albeit a tad harsh) rather than slagging!

Undoubtedly at cost to the nerves of the Puma and Merlin personnel and families, CAS and his team have played a blinder. Taking an aircraft that was by all accounts just about to get get binned before Christmas, and then playing a 'game' of Russian roulette to delay the final handing over the RN Merlin long enough (and we still have a few more years in Afghan up our sleeve to add to the delay in transfer if required). This will ensure that Puma cockpits are saved, and then look to remove through a PR activity (the inferior, sub optimal and pretty crap) Merlin to allow the Puma and Chinook to deliver all of the lift for all environments.

Now that is some very gutsy staff work and senior leadership indeed - well done those involved. With the Chinook new buys and Puma II cockpits safe we should be able to look after ourselves and manage the transition out of Merlin (which looks as though it is now the one for the scrap heap). We get the new shiney bits of kit, with more capability and less hours on the airframe and the RN (if they survive) get the white elephant that we always knew Merlin was, but kept us cockpit seats after Wessex.

All we have to do is play along for a few more years and then (if Merlin is still with us) at the next review bye bye CHF. Well, not quite as it is rumoured that our boss at JHC has promised that he will look after the RN crews and they will be absorbed into the wider JHC community to ensure that the maritime experience can be passed on to us. We certainly do not want to push out our HQs for a 6 month O Boat experience when CHF can do it for us!

It is beginning to make a lot of sense just to put all rotary wing back under one organisation and CGS and CNS do not really have the right qualifications or experience to be proper SDHs, so the logic suggests that it is CAS and the air specialists.

[high spirits]

MM4,
I can't believe that you are portraying the binning of SH cockpits and jobs as a victory. You are Comd JHC and I claim £5.

Or you had to much lambrini last night...

[alfred_the_great]

And MM4 has just provided enough ammunition to everyone involved in the F-35 fight to dismiss any talk of 'jointery' from the RAF. Well done.

[Hyds Out]

It makes sense to put control of 'all' rotary under the control of CAS.
He won't have anything else to control for much longer, unless the RAF buy up the buccaneers and lightnings from Sun City, South Africa, or try and buy another airliner to trail some hoses out for air to air refuelling that then doesnt work.