View Full Version : Janes report on AAC
floating_rock
1st Oct 2017, 18:56
UK army aviation hit by new round of cuts | Jane's 360 (http://www.janes.com/article/74484/uk-army-aviation-hit-by-new-round-of-cuts)
Janes are reporting on the Aviation section of Army 2020(R), with some purported large scale cuts.
Headlines of retirement of Gazelle brought forwards to 2018, 5AAC disbanding, and 669 \ 672 no longer taking up the Wildcat as planned. Manning is reported to reduce from 1700 to ~ 1300 of AAC, with REME losing ~200.
If true, disturbing times ahead for the corps. FW ISR -> RAF has been on the cards for a while, but with drawdown from Lynx, this will leave a fairly small cadre of Army Aviation.
pr00ne
1st Oct 2017, 19:51
floating rock,
Surely there is nothing new here and it's old news? The AAC FW has long been heading for the RAF, the Gazelle AH1 fleet was to be retired some time ago but was extended, now being retired closer to the original planned date, and the Wildcat Squadrons at 1 Regt Yeovilton are 652, 659 and 661, as there are only 34 Army Wildcat. Hasn't this always been the plan, that the AAC would only be a small Apache force and an even smaller Wildcat force?
proone - the Corps had planned to keep Gazelle going for some time since there is nothing else, at the moment, to replace the 5 Regt effort which is definitely needed.
The Wildcat is a lemon with no role other than to keep Westlands going at Yeovil.
Still waiting for the decision re Wattisham Apache.
Its a mess and there are plenty of quality people trying desperately to try and make sense of which direction they are trying to go with the future of the Corps.
NutLoose
1st Oct 2017, 22:19
Often thought it was a shame that they never restarted Gazelle production as really there is nothing similar in the class these days, I could see it being popular with small air arms and civilian users.
Martin the Martian
2nd Oct 2017, 11:17
What about the EC120 Colibri? it looks very much like a Gazelle Mk.2 if you squint.
And as regards the Wildcat, I believe General Dannatt refused to countenance any alternative during his time as CGS, hence why the AAC is stuck with it.
chevvron
2nd Oct 2017, 11:46
Often thought it was a shame that they never restarted Gazelle production as really there is nothing similar in the class these days, I could see it being popular with small air arms and civilian users.
Don't forget AAC Gazelles are different from civil and ex Navy/RAF ones having a simplified control system (no auto-stab) so they were easier to maintain in the field.
656 Sqdn at Farnborough didn't like them as they weren't as robust as the Scouts they operated alongside them, plus they required more maintenance than the Sioux they replaced eg frequent 'turbine washes' (whatever that is).
oldbeefer
2nd Oct 2017, 13:27
g frequent 'turbine washes' (whatever that is).
Compressor wash, and only takes a few minutes.
Chevron - the Stability Augmentation System (SAS) is a very simple rate damping system which adds very little complexity to the Gazelle.
chopper2004
2nd Oct 2017, 15:54
What about the EC120 Colibri? it looks very much like a Gazelle Mk.2 if you squint.
And as regards the Wildcat, I believe General Dannatt refused to countenance any alternative during his time as CGS, hence why the AAC is stuck with it.
There is not a mil version of the H120B , certainly no proposal I am aware of for the scout role. Only one Airbus Helicopters are marketing now is their H145M.
The Spanish Air Force uses it for training all helo RW crews from all the branches of their mil and forms their Patrulla Aspa display team. The PLAAF uses their variant to train their RW crews.
cheers
pr00ne
2nd Oct 2017, 16:13
chopper2004,
Has the Gazelle really been utilised in the scout role since proved disastrously unsuitable as such in 1982? I thought in this day and age that scouting is done by Apache and Wildcat and that Gazelle is merely a VSO runabout and a specialised Northern Ireland observation role?
Cows getting bigger
2nd Oct 2017, 16:40
chopper2004 - H135M?
proone - the Gazelle was an excellent scout helicopter for many years, especially in the North German Plain role where it scouted for fire positions for the TOW-equipped Lynx. It is reliable and robust but it needs spares and that has been the problem over recent years.
The Apache does its own as you rightly say so the Wildcat is largely redundant in any role other than for the RN as a Frigate helo.
The aspiration for NI would probably be 135 or similar but where will the money come from?
No-one seems sure how prescient the Janes article is as there have been so many studies and other pieces of work looking at the future size of the AAC, none of which had the OSD for the Gazelle happening as early as 2018.
chopper2004
2nd Oct 2017, 16:58
chopper2004 - H135M?
Hi CGB
Yep I am aware of the H135M, however it appears there is more emphasis on the H145M especially from what I have seen especially last two Paris Air Shows .
The H135M or EC635 is in service with the Spanish Army, RJAF and Swiss Air Force albeit not in the armed scout role but combat support, training, and limited medevac / SAR. Albeitone can say we are the latest mil customer our Helionix equipped h135 Juno entering service with Ascent at Shawbury
I have seen the armed H135M back at Paris Airshow 2001 and 2003,
cheers
Evalu8ter
2nd Oct 2017, 17:17
847 NAS were using the Gaz/Lynx team as recce/fires until comparatively recently when replaced by Wildcat, which is, by far, the best maritime attack helicopter the AAC has ever operated......shame there's not many submarines and fast patrol craft involved with most land battles....The further reductions in AAC strength (reduced AH numbers, 657 being disbanded, transfer of FW MAS to the RAF, removal of aircraft from 667) on top of the scrapping of 5 Reg does shine a rather pessimistic light on the future of the Corps. Given the demands on the LAND budget from other helicopter projects, I can't see there being much if any money to fund 145M or anything equivalent. Is there even a requirement? I would imagine that any lingering NI tasking will be sucked up by either a contractor or, at best, a COMO provision.
Could the NI tasking be taken on by Watchkeeper?
Lynxman
2nd Oct 2017, 17:58
Gazelle OSD is still 2025 and the fleet size is being increased at the moment by regenerating a number of airframes from storage.
Cows getting bigger
2nd Oct 2017, 19:03
Could the NI tasking be taken on by Watchkeeper?
.................No
Corporal Clott
2nd Oct 2017, 19:59
Another sacred cow has also been slain in the Army; the Royal Signals’ White Helmets. Not aviation related but a sign of the times perhaps?
...And, as stated in a letter to the Times last week, it is probably time to have a good long hard look at the RAFAT and BBMF if Booties are to be cut. Defence has to be about output and not hanging onto history.
Agree with Cows above. No - most definitely not.
Politely_amused
2nd Oct 2017, 23:04
The Apache does its own as you rightly say so the Wildcat is largely redundant in any role other than for the RN as a Frigate helo.
Eh - so with Wildcat's exceptional mission systems and optics/laser/Seaspray radar (vs AH's poorer M-TADs/radar)... it's impotent as a recce/target cueing helo? But, oddly, it was fine on Gz with GOA? Seriously??
Two's in
3rd Oct 2017, 00:11
The trouble is, it's all a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The AAC fought tooth and nail to win (and keep AH) in the early nineties partly to divest themselves of the "ash and trash" reputation that grew up around BAOR and GW1. Never mind that the ash and trash roles provided critical recce, comms and liaison functions to ever eager BG Commanders. At the start of the millenia along comes Apache, and the beginning of a serious teeth arm role for the first time. Not only is Apache wildly successful, thanks to Afghanistan it brings major changes in Army doctrine that fully validates the AAC in a combat role. So now everybody either wants to fly or employ AH to stay on the glitzy end of the battlefield.
Meanwhile, back in the hangar, Aviation budgets are blown left right and centre trying to keep enough Apaches operational. Tough decisions have to be made, the AAC have eschewed the importance of those recce, comms and liaison roles, allowing UAV and JHC to consolidate in those areas (don't underestimate the lack of a meaningful troop lift capability in the AAC's demise) and suddenly, they have no political support. Gazelle was always going (no point doing recce for a fire platform that outperforms it on every level) and the 5 Regt role is politically unsustainable long term. The SF have always done their own thing, either with or without the AAC on board, so there's no capital to be gained there, and as for Wildcat, well the Navy just did the same trick to the AAC that the RAF did to them with Harrier.
So it's Apache or nothing, it full on ops or full on training, its a small cadre of dedicated and talented individuals bringing a key capability to the battlefield. But it's certainly not a lot of things that made it such good fun.
Rotate too late
3rd Oct 2017, 07:00
There was always a running joke in the infantry that the reason the Paras or Marines were sent was because their names were easy to remember! Princess of Wales Royal Regiment anyone?
From a political perspective, all they will see in the main, is a two helicopter fleet. Wildcat to the navy, AH to the RAF minister?
The smaller the organisation, the bigger the target. And a wonder around the ivory tower that is Wallop would suggest that there isn’t much to stand in the way of that flight of fancy.
Eh - so with Wildcat's exceptional mission systems and optics/laser/Seaspray radar (vs AH's poorer M-TADs/radar)... it's impotent as a recce/target cueing helo? But, oddly, it was fine on Gz with GOA? Seriously?? the RN version is what you are describing, not the AAC version. There is no Seaspray radar and the the 'exceptional' mission system is seriously hampered by the lack of processing power (one was removed to save money and the other barely copes). It doesn't have the endurance of either the Lynx or the Gazelle and it can barely lift the skin off a rice pudding.
I'm not saying the Gaz was better - it was what it was in its day.
The shortcomings of the AH will be addressed in the E-model - we knew we were buying old technology from the US with the original AH but it has still shown its capabilities in anger.
and as for Wildcat, well the Navy just did the same trick to the AAC that the RAF did to them with Harrier.
actually the same trick the RN did to the RAF with Merlin - Navy need a new helo but not enough of them to justify production costs then the RAF get stiffed with the Merlin and the AAC get saddled with the Wildcat. The RAF have managed to dump Merlin back on to the RN as a Sea King replacement though - lets see what the AAC can do:ok:
Martin the Martian
3rd Oct 2017, 11:34
...And, as stated in a letter to the Times last week, it is probably time to have a good long hard look at the RAFAT and BBMF if Booties are to be cut. Defence has to be about output and not hanging onto history.
And no doubt the Royal Marines will be happy to get rid of the school of music alongside RAFAT and BBMF. Or do we still mount amphibious landings to the soundtrack of bugles? And don't forget all that horsey stuff the Army does in the capital; very relevant to 21st century warfare.
Back on topic...
Engines
3rd Oct 2017, 12:29
Martin,
Having a 'pop' at each others' services can be fun - but do be prepared for a rejoinder or two.
The RAFAT is, by my reckoning, one of the (if not the) largest military air display team in the world. The BBMF is also the largest government owned and operated 'heritage' collection in the world. I'm not sure that the RAF can really justify either or both. The USAF doesn't. The USN doesn't. Can't find another Air Force anywhere that keeps two such large teams going (but happy to be proved wrong). I love seeing them both, but honestly, if it's a choice between active Royal Marines and cuts to RAFAT and/or BBMF, then I'm afraid the RMs have to be the priority.
On the subject of musicians the RAF is, as I type, actively recruiting for its own musicians. Lots of slots available, according to the website. The blurb makes no mention of the types of secondary roles the RAF musician is required to carry out, but I'm sure they do some, just as the RM musicians do. Perhaps the RAF could cut back on its own musicians to keep the RAFAT and BBMF going?
The point here is that uninformed inter service mud slinging gets none of us anywhere. Let's be nice to each other, shall we?
Best regards as ever to the RAFAT, BBMF, Royal Marines and musicians (whatever cloth they wear).
Engines
Nigerian Expat Outlaw
3rd Oct 2017, 16:44
The trouble is, it's all a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The AAC fought tooth and nail to win (and keep AH) in the early nineties partly to divest themselves of the "ash and trash" reputation that grew up around BAOR and GW1. Never mind that the ash and trash roles provided critical recce, comms and liaison functions to ever eager BG Commanders. At the start of the millenia along comes Apache, and the beginning of a serious teeth arm role for the first time. Not only is Apache wildly successful, thanks to Afghanistan it brings major changes in Army doctrine that fully validates the AAC in a combat role. So now everybody either wants to fly or employ AH to stay on the glitzy end of the battlefield.
Meanwhile, back in the hangar, Aviation budgets are blown left right and centre trying to keep enough Apaches operational. Tough decisions have to be made, the AAC have eschewed the importance of those recce, comms and liaison roles, allowing UAV and JHC to consolidate in those areas (don't underestimate the lack of a meaningful troop lift capability in the AAC's demise) and suddenly, they have no political support. Gazelle was always going (no point doing recce for a fire platform that outperforms it on every level) and the 5 Regt role is politically unsustainable long term. The SF have always done their own thing, either with or without the AAC on board, so there's no capital to be gained there, and as for Wildcat, well the Navy just did the same trick to the AAC that the RAF did to them with Harrier.
So it's Apache or nothing, it full on ops or full on training, its a small cadre of dedicated and talented individuals bringing a key capability to the battlefield. But it's certainly not a lot of things that made it such good fun.
Spot on. Apache took the AAC from poor relation to Number 1 in the Hit Parade with a bullet. But everything has a price, particularly in this era of austerity.
NEO
'The RAFAT is, by my reckoning, one of the (if not the) largest military air display team in the world. The BBMF is also the largest government owned and operated 'heritage' collection in the world. I'm not sure that the RAF can really justify either or both. The USAF doesn't. The USN doesn't. Can't find another Air Force anywhere that keeps two such large teams going (but happy to be proved wrong). I love seeing them both, but honestly, if it's a choice between active Royal Marines and cuts to RAFAT and/or BBMF, then I'm afraid the RMs have to be the priority.'
Well done Engines for understanding what Defence is all about - something that many, many on here don't have a slightest grasp of.
No names but it is pretty clear.
'Spot on. Apache took the AAC from poor relation to Number 1 in the Hit Parade with a bullet. But everything has a price, particularly in this era of austerity'
...and the shiny toy syndrome meant that did not have their eye on the ISR ball that allowed the RA through the defence. They should have grabbed it with both talons.
Politely_amused
3rd Oct 2017, 20:31
the RN version is what you are describing, not the AAC version. There is no Seaspray radar and the 'exceptional' mission system is seriously hampered by the lack of processing power (one was removed to save money and the other barely copes). It doesn't have the endurance of either the Lynx or the Gazelle and it can barely lift the skin off a rice pudding.:
I don't know where you're getting this from but, knowing some guys on the platform well, it just isn't true. The radar is a role fit, whilst it has the same endurance as Lynx (2hrs), ~800kg of lift (with growth for another 200kg) with 3 crew and full fuel. And yes, whilst two TPs would have been beneficial for redundancy, one works perfectly well...
In an Army bereft of ISR you'd think a Recce Helicopter would be an easy sell. Yet, whilst everyone of varying services are (understandably) obsessed by UH-60, that is not where we are (yet).
In other news, the US Army is reportedly regretting cutting its recce heli... US Army Says It Badly Needs A Scout Helicopter After Junking The Ones It Had (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/9784/us-army-says-it-badly-needs-a-scout-helicopter-after-junking-the-ones-it-had)
melmothtw
3rd Oct 2017, 20:51
In an Army bereft of ISR you'd think a Recce Helicopter would be an easy sell.
The problem with the Wildcat in the army recce role is its configuration. While the above-the-nose sensor turret is ideal for scanning a maritime horizon, it's not so ideal for when you're hovering over a jungle and need to look down, say.
The radar is a role fit
Can you point to a single occasion when the AH1 Wildcat has had it fitted? Or where they'd get them from...
Can you point to a single occasion when the AH1 Wildcat has had it fitted absolutely Bing - it just doesn't. The Mk 7 Lynx had 2:30 endurance btw Politely.
An armed recce helo for overland use needs the sensors mounted above the rotor so that the aircraft doesn't have to be exposed when terrain masking - can the Wildcat do that??????? That ball thing is just in the wrong place.
I'm sure it is a good naval helicopter but that's it (and that is what is was designed for)
Ricorigs
3rd Oct 2017, 23:31
Wildcat will come good eventually we just need a “ruddy good war” to fix it first because only then does money become available. AH didn’t arrive in the state it is now, Afghan helped.
As for the WC radar I’m no expert but I know a bit on EW. When I challenged a well informed individual about the chin radar rather than a mast he was adamant it no longer needs to be atop the mast as modern software can filter a lot of the ground clutter out. I’m no engineer, I don’t know but I do know AESA plus some processors can do wonders. It could be something unique on the battlefield in the land environment. A SAR that can cut around at high speed with relative LO characteristics. Surely worthwhile to a Div or Bde commander?
But we haven’t got it so ...meh. Make do with a camera, hardly as useful disappointingly.
But what grinds my gears is-
The saddest thing I find for the AAC is that it appears to lack a big direction or end state. The axe is swinging but other than AH there isn’t much to justify what we intend to do in 10-20 years. Just a bit more of the same if they’ll let us.
We are in for big changes there is the transition from D model AH to E, MFTS, end of Gz, FW to RAF, eventually 212 changing over and by the way Lynx and some of its missions are dead for the AAC but not defence. It saves money fine but what effects are we to deliver in the peer plus/peer enemy environment. The AAC is part of the deterrence and modern capability piece.
If this was all going on to enable an Avn force that can use, hunt and kill UAS, protect or kill HVTs in a Div or Bde fight then it would make sense. Unfortunately to my humble gaze we appear to be getting salami sliced with not much of a corner to claim as our own.
Rant complete, record target as DR1P.
andrewn
4th Oct 2017, 06:23
Ah well, on the bright side there's going to be thousands of new build homes coming to rural Suffolk or Hants in the near future :)
RicorigsWildcat will come good eventually we just need a “ruddy good war” to fix it it already had, in the guise of the Mk9A which could easily have had an EO capability added.
Otherwise, I think your feelings are reflected exactly in crewrooms across the Corps.
Briefly back to Politely (the Wildcat guru) - can you tell me what use a 2 hour endurance is at sea? It's not a great deal of use over land but for a helo designed to go out on station for an hour it rather limits its ability.
There is mention of aux fuel tanks extending the endurance to 4:30 - are they a standard fit for the RN ones? If so, there goes your 800kgs of lift capacity.
Autorev
4th Oct 2017, 07:22
In an Army bereft of ISR you'd think a Recce Helicopter would be an easy sell.
With the current 'challenges' that the Equipment Programme is under, nothing is an easy sell at the moment!
If the Army wish ISR, and persistent ISR at that, there are other, far more effective ways of delivering that than wildcat....
Front page of today’s Times....
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-army-air-corps-prince-harry-s-flying-force-to-be-cut-in-defence-revamp-pjrmx7pw9
The army’s air force is to shrink by almost a quarter in a cost-cutting measure that will change the shape of military aviation.
The Army Air Corps (AAC), which provides surveillance and combat support and once included Prince Harry in its ranks, is set to lose five squadrons and 400 posts. Senior sources questioned whether the reduction in staffing and aircraft would take the unit below “critical mass”, opening up the possibility of the AAC being split between the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm, 60 years after it was formed. “It’s goodbye, goodbye,” said a senior former officer, adding that the AAC traditionally felt that it had a raw deal: “The Army Air Corps has always felt on the hind tit and being kicked by the rest of the army.”
The plans, which have yet to be finalised, are part of a revamp of the army to cut costs and improve efficiency. They will also be influenced by the mini review of defence that will conclude in December. “It is a proposal that looks likely to be implemented,” a military source said.
Under the Army 2020 Refine plan, 400 jobs out of the 1,700 staff roles in the AAC will go. In addition about 200 of 2,000 attached support posts provided by the Royal Mechanical and Electrical Engineers, Royal Logistic Corps and Adjutant General’s Corps will be erased. A source said that affected personnel would be moved into other areas of the army so that the move would not result in redundancies.
Planned structural alterations mean that any plans to rebuild two additional squadrons to fly the Wildcat attack helicopter will be scrapped. Instead only 661 and 659 squadrons will continue to operate the aircraft, which is also flown by the Royal Navy. A third squadron will be a training and conversion unit. Plans to purchase additional Wildcat helicopters to equip 657 squadron, which supports Britain’s special forces, have also been ditched. The Times reported last month that the unit would lose its Lynx Mk9A helicopters next year, but at the time a Ministry of Defence source insisted that the aircraft would be replaced. This is no longer the case.
In other changes, an entire fleet of 34 Gazelle observation helicopters, operated by 655 squadron from Northern Ireland, has had its out-of-service date brought forward to next year, Tim Ripley, who wrote about the AAC shake up in Jane’s Defence Weekly, said. A contingent of fixed-wing Islander and Defender aircraft also operated by 651 squadron, will be handed over to the RAF. These moves will result in an entire regiment, 5 Regiment Army Air Corps, which comprises 651 and 655 squadrons, being disbanded, Jane’s reported.......
An army spokesman said: “The examination of aviation structures as part of the army structural change work to implement SDSR15 is ongoing. Final decisions on structures, locations and personnel numbers are not expected until the end of the year.”
jonnyloove
4th Oct 2017, 14:02
I have been reading this with great interest. What is going to happen with the NCO pilot Cadre is it going to go the same way as the Royal Marines and Commissioned only Pilots and NCO crewman.?
Cazalet33
4th Oct 2017, 15:08
Teeny Weeny Airlines is gonna get a teeny weeny bit teenier.
That's all.
alfred_the_great
4th Oct 2017, 15:41
Ricorigs it already had, in the guise of the Mk9A which could easily have had an EO capability added.
Otherwise, I think your feelings are reflected exactly in crewrooms across the Corps.
Briefly back to Politely (the Wildcat guru) - can you tell me what use a 2 hour endurance is at sea? It's not a great deal of use over land but for a helo designed to go out on station for an hour it rather limits its ability.
There is mention of aux fuel tanks extending the endurance to 4:30 - are they a standard fit for the RN ones? If so, there goes your 800kgs of lift capacity.
Your presumption is that Wildcat will be used like a Lx3 is probably incorrect. In the main, it works better like smaller ASAC.
So that 2 hour endurance will be really useful then...............
Ricorigs
4th Oct 2017, 18:12
So that 2 hour endurance will be really useful then...............
9A endurance was around the 2hr mark in the UK depending on what you did. The next hot and dusty place the WC may prove to have better endurance like the 9A did which it became more akin to the Lynx 7.
But I don’t know the technical detail, i’m not a WC guy. It looks like a Lynx disc with Lynx 9A engines attached, pulling more mass about, in a current mission that is mainly in the hover. Greater power required therefore more fuel burned is a reasonable expectation.
Defence has bigger problems than the costly AAC right now.
Rotate too late
4th Oct 2017, 19:41
Those far enough up the chain to have a vote probably remember the convenient flying club that was teeny weeny air. AH dragged the Air Corps into the 21st century, doctrinally and maybe literally. But maybe those high enough up the chain haven’t seen this close enough to realise the change, therefore, I fear for the future, It is only an article but maybe reflects the reality of the pressure MOD are under.
They are certainly Lynx rotor heads - courtesy of the 'donor' program that was required to build the Wildlynxcat and I believe they are the same engines as the 9A.
You can get away with limited endurance overland (the Puma managed for years with even less) but over water when your only option is to return to mother..........
alfred_the_great
5th Oct 2017, 12:49
They are certainly Lynx rotor heads - courtesy of the 'donor' program that was required to build the Wildlynxcat and I believe they are the same engines as the 9A.
You can get away with limited endurance overland (the Puma managed for years with even less) but over water when your only option is to return to mother..........
You return to mum, RRRF (and wee if needed) and re-launch.
Meanwhile, presuming you are the lone Lynx, sorry Wildcat, on the Frigate, who is out doing your job?
The RN website talks about the aircraft going out, presumably BVR, and being on station for 1 hour - that would mean less than 30 mins out and back to allow for MLA and therefore (allowing minimum time for refuel and pee) that there will be periods in excess of 1 hour where there is no helo patrolling - ie a one to one basis.