RAF announces Puma Replacement plan

[Cyclic Hotline]

They could have bought a fleet of 225's for cheap if they had moved fast enough!

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/uk-reveals-puma-replacement-planUK reveals Puma replacement planby Gareth Jennings



The United Kingdom is set to replace its Westland-Aerospatiale SA 330E Puma HC2 rotorcraft with a new aircraft type via its New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirement.
https://www.janes.com/images/default-source/news-images/fg_3903140-jdw-10741.jpg?sfvrsn=2e93669c_2While the Puma’s put of service date of 2025 has long been known, the UK had not revealed its plans for the type or the wider medium-lift helicopter capability after this date. Speaking at the Defence IQ virtual International Military Helicopter conference on 23 February, Colonel Paul Morris revealed the New Medium Helicopter requirement to replace it with a new type. (Crown Copyright)

Speaking at the Defence IQ virtual International Military Helicopter conference on 23 February, a senior military officer gave the first official indication that a replacement for the Puma is being sought.

The Royal Air Force (RAF) currently fields 23 Puma helicopters that were upgraded to the HC2 standard in the mid-2010s. With the airframes themselves dating back to the early 1970s, these helicopters are slated for retirement in 2025.

While no replacement for these helicopters has officially been touted before (options have previously included extending the type out of 2030 or losing the capability altogether), Colonel Paul Morris, Assistant Head Plans, Capability Air Manoeuvre, noted that the NMH requirement is being drawn up. The colonel did not disclose details but did say that the UK Rotary Wing Strategy is scoping potential options.

[ShyTorque]

Talk about long winded.

The RAF were in serious discussions about the contenders for a Puma replacement when I began my first tour flying them in 1979. So, 42 years later....

[[email protected]]

Must be about due a Wessex replacement then:)

[ShyTorque]

I think that was part of the same Air Staff Target. Unfortunately I can’t remember the AST number.

Very late edit: Having seen the last photo in the thread, the term “AST404” just came into my head…. I think that’s the correct one but it must have been forty years since. The memory is a strange thing.

[Self loading bear]

They could have bought a fleet of 225's for cheap if they had moved fast enough!
...... (https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/uk-reveals-puma-replacement-plan)

But a military refit/modification would probably have cost more than a new one!

Better leave it to the professional negotiators.
Let them ponder somewhat more over it.
Then they buy new H225M from Airbus and negotiate some futile counter orders or the promise that Airbus will not pull their wing fabrication from the UK.
(which they are not planning anyway)

If the UK would want like-for-like replacement, the H215M could be a better option.

[minigundiplomat]

Bell 525 or Blackhawk.

No more eurotrash.

[chopper2004]

They could have bought a fleet of 225's for cheap if they had moved fast enough!

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/uk-reveals-puma-replacement-planUK reveals Puma replacement planby Gareth Jennings



The United Kingdom is set to replace its Westland-Aerospatiale SA 330E Puma HC2 rotorcraft with a new aircraft type via its New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirement.
https://www.janes.com/images/default-source/news-images/fg_3903140-jdw-10741.jpg?sfvrsn=2e93669c_2While the Puma’s put of service date of 2025 has long been known, the UK had not revealed its plans for the type or the wider medium-lift helicopter capability after this date. Speaking at the Defence IQ virtual International Military Helicopter conference on 23 February, Colonel Paul Morris revealed the New Medium Helicopter requirement to replace it with a new type. (Crown Copyright)

Speaking at the Defence IQ virtual International Military Helicopter conference on 23 February, a senior military officer gave the first official indication that a replacement for the Puma is being sought.

The Royal Air Force (RAF) currently fields 23 Puma helicopters that were upgraded to the HC2 standard in the mid-2010s. With the airframes themselves dating back to the early 1970s, these helicopters are slated for retirement in 2025.

While no replacement for these helicopters has officially been touted before (options have previously included extending the type out of 2030 or losing the capability altogether), Colonel Paul Morris, Assistant Head Plans, Capability Air Manoeuvre, noted that the NMH requirement is being drawn up. The colonel did not disclose details but did say that the UK Rotary Wing Strategy is scoping potential options.

I watched him talk as attending the same conference this week, interesting points raised and it could conceivably FVL ..

cheers

[chopper2004]

Bell 525 or Blackhawk.

No more eurotrash.

4 years ago Bell touted a mil version of their 525 strangely enough ..

Blackhawk would have fitted AST whatever it was 3 and half decades ago but probably not for tomorrow’s battlefield. Then again ask any SHF aircre from that era and they be wishing we had UH-60 to replace the Wessex.


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/39d3736f_e961_44e1_94c1_a81b4a668726_1974245aee4c20d7b2d6f50 126d96d697ab602b7.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x540/ec468d8c_e534_453e_a919_5d14d954618d_f67c499417950e0395830b0 4483313202ccd658c.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x540/0f620c6f_0092_4b7d_8aac_9c254d683698_9955e82d16bea7b20ff5eb7 c7a88a6248cb7f758.jpeg

[Fareastdriver]

Times have changed. The Royal Air Force Puma replacement being announced by a Colonel.

[[email protected]]

The joys of JHC :)

[Two's in]

Colonel Paul Morris, Assistant Head Plans, Capability Air Manoeuvre, - These days it's all about capability owners, not platforms.

[Fareastdriver]

I built the coffee bar in 33 Sqn. at Odiham before it was reformed. I was in the front of XW 204 with Trevor Wood on its first flight from Odiham.

When I die I will go to Hell. My Squadron boss will be a lieutenant commander and the station commander will be a women.

[NutLoose]

Trevor Wood who reported a bird strike if I remember correctly, managed to hit it sitting on its nest, if the green stained damaged rotor tips were to go by.

[retreating blade]

I wonder if my old SD hat is still hanging on the Hart’s antlers in the 33 Sqn crew room? It was still there in 1981 although it often disappeared for a few weeks at a time on detachment. Must be green by now.
pedro

[NutLoose]

Two things strike me of those images posted by Chopper,
One it’s low and long which must put the tail awfully low in battlefield scenarios, especially from a pilots position.
Assuming you have a crewman to control the pongoes, having 4 doors must be a nightmare, especially as you are blocked from controlling the ingress and egress from the front compartment by seating. One assumes after dropping off the SLF means the crewman will have to egress it to secure the doors..

[NutLoose]

Finger trouble :)... now sorted...now sorted.. ;)

[jimf671]

You cannot get two full infantry sections in CEMO in a 330.

In a (Eurotrash?) H215M or H225M you can easily get two sections in CEMO plus a monster pile of ammunition. :ok: Bit of a hot n high issue with the H225M perhaps.

In a Bell 525 you can get an entire Divisional O Group, dressed in well-fitting smocks, complete with their laptops. :E

I guess this won't be spec'd by a Gunner though. :sad:

[9BIT]

The Belgians have got some hardly used NH-90s in storage. I reckon we could get a good price.

[Hot_LZ]

NH90 would be a disaster. The best thing the U.K. could do is select a proven reliable airframe to fit this purpose.

LZ

[tigerfish]

Sounds like the usual partizan comments coming through already, with various vested interests trashing the oppositions machines. It always happens. The RAF/MOD will make its own decisions

TF

[JulieAndrews]

no RAF helicopter has ever had a credible replacement date - such a waste of ink and hot air. Tail wheel and high TR is a must - have we not at least learnt that much!!!
Lost count of the number of dates we were given for Wessex/Puma replacement back in the day

[chopper2004]

The Belgians have got some hardly used NH-90s in storage. I reckon we could get a good price.

Not as yet the NH90 TTH still operational as can see by this CSAR /PRV exercise in the week


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1169x1314/ea5922ff_8bde_458a_91cf_47f23f270305_0bf92b59663c7a3a7abe52e f2048d59961533933.jpeg

[chopper2004]

First time I came across the AW149 was Farnborough Air Show 2014 (my pics below ) and as it happened on the Monday, the Italian MoD / Armaments Directorate had approved the AW149.


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1898x1555/77e3dbb6_dd79_4a38_a64c_808a3b208e6d_ef452a6927b7d46d2f373f0 bcb128104e7f73a8b.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1841x1289/e739e347_65b6_4a59_b248_db1ba54324f1_e179860b2cd1f97e23ef59b 33cf38da8ad1e38ff.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1953x1253/161984c8_f3bb_4e9b_bc05_e98ed051003e_993ea45a565104e6b340208 f1cae728b5179265a.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1780x2000/b120f67a_8701_420e_a5fe_bcdcc79eebad_14e5154d81d1579f24e9fb6 0a4bf9557fe669c8f.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1877x1309/d79e230b_d10d_4bee_a9ef_511cfa3836fa_0dcda9c449bb91920cc1c93 ef491a4f523a67fbb.jpeg



Two years alter Farnborough Airshow 2016, I attended the Leoanrdo brief on the AW149 (my photos). They had announced AUW increase for the a/c and as such also cleared it to integrate Russian gun/rocket system to attract say Eastern European countries. Anyhow they brought 2 x a/c with them.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/66614cc4_9423_4b74_b288_6d674f56c96a_035b273d961875c148fed0e 6850a0e968f5f0a44.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/65412130_d1af_44d9_83ba_b7fd7648b39f_8ae076679ce554aae6c71d4 bb90574aff967aae3.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/27d6bc0e_e330_436c_aca5_f8291c106864_f5e87753d1c8b2ef611a0a9 a481c7874f44494f4.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/50d661f9_03c5_4509_8154_3658693cfdbe_0ba7cf9407b87e7803ae80f c6b6f8a1a113db0cb.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/5deb81e6_1e5d_481b_914b_91c2151cac31_2ce9ecbc7c11eb62c53decf 0f03aeed0a9dc5a61.jpeg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/4b5eb51a_a303_4d77_b60c_8210cbf5dd99_2c4429db01aaf799e549c24 8d7996edd041a9ef8.jpeg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/414d5c45_263b_4f47_80a0_02714c6721e4_71d4fd8dcb3fcce88551c5d 8be4b28dcbf792cfb.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/e9caea9e_14be_4c1f_834c_e8d67760e166_7527447ce25052382c3cad0 619efb9d0b2ea7d01.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/0e16ee41_b047_4c6d_a47e_087ae3519500_86e816eaf8c478ec7a960f1 350a8c061213c7351.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1602x1068/6645d4d5_f47f_409a_a5b9_ddf3c743a493_6a54f187b5b2750d0230580 7fa93ea9caaaa8b12.jpeg

Say for example we pick it in 2025-2030 timeline so it be decade plus in existence. I believe the Egyptian military are a recent customer of the type (probably supplied via US Army like their SAR AW139).

Cheers

[Bravo73]

Tail wheel and high TR is a must - have we not at least learnt that much!!!


Shouldn’t they just buy Blackhawks? Or is that too obvious and/or political?

[Hot_LZ]

☝🏽 The obvious choice would be Blackhawk. Watch Leonardo dangle a carrot and say they’ll build any 149 order at Yeovil.

LZ

[ShyTorque]

Maybe Blackhawk powered by something like RTM322?

Oh hang on....I’ve just had a flashback.

[[email protected]]

Shy - better get Michael Heseltine on the phone:ok:

[huge72]

From a crewman's perspective, none of the types that have transverse seating are suitable for the crewman to move around the cabin. On the Blackhawk for instance from their seat they cannot reach the doors and have to rely on the troops to close it. RAF Crewman have always had room to move from Whirlwind to Wessex to Puma to Chinook and then Merlin. We have always been able to use the cabin with minimum of fuss from troops to freight to casevac, or mixture of all. Small low cabins are pointless no matter how many fancy digital screens at the pointy end for the pilots, if you cannot achieve the task for the Army, which is why we have them in the first place.

[chopper2004]

Shy - better get Michael Heseltine on the phone:ok:

And polish the mace while 😬🤠 you at it

[Mee3]

If they intend to keep the capability 225/725 is the only choice. If they downsize then surely 149 is the choice.

[chopper2004]

From a crewman's perspective, none of the types that have transverse seating are suitable for the crewman to move around the cabin. On the Blackhawk for instance from their seat they cannot reach the doors and have to rely on the troops to close it. RAF Crewman have always had room to move from Whirlwind to Wessex to Puma to Chinook and then Merlin. We have always been able to use the cabin with minimum of fuss from troops to freight to casevac, or mixture of all. Small low cabins are pointless no matter how many fancy digital screens at the pointy end for the pilots, if you cannot achieve the task for the Army, which is why we have them in the first place.

Some have said similar to you regarding rear crew training with the Airbus H145 Valley re DHFS/Ascent etc
cheers

[jimf671]

If they intend to keep the capability 225/725 is the only choice. If they downsize then surely 149 is the choice.

Something like that. Is there a hot n high H225/725 because an off the shelf H225 is optimised for those long crew change flights over the ocean and we'd be back where we were several decades ago?

[chopper2004]

With the musings on H225M/H215M any thoughts on Airbus offering H175M?? AFAIK only two government operators, albeit prapublic Royal Thai Police Aviation Division (VIP??) and Hong Kong Government Service - (Special Duties Unit and SAR/EMS support). I am not awaree of any mil developments planned...

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/airbus-pitches-h175-as-potential-puma-replacement-for-uk

Cabin space probably a tad more with headroom, then AW149 ....I suppose thats about it.

cheers

[Snarlie]

Good time to resurrect the Westland Westminster. A couple of PT6`s and job done.

[chopper2004]

Supposedly L-M Sikorsky may be offering UH-60M / S-70i

https://twitter.com/garethjennings3/status/1375468642947768322?s=21


Hmmm let’s throw Boeing into the mixed bag with Mh-139 according to their musings

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/boeing-to-consider-uk-new-medium-helicopter-and-other-international-mh-139-opportunities-later-in-2021

cheers

[industry insider]

UH-60M on an FMS basis would be a great MOTS purchase. FMS keeps the price very competitive. I have no idea if the RAF would go Euro after Brexit.

[ShyTorque]

Looking at the photos of the AW149, as posted above. Very nice.

However, having flown both analogue and more modern glass screen cockpits, I can’t help thinking how much could be put out of action in that cockpit by just one bullet, especially bearing in mind that a Data Aquisition Unit has to process all the information displayed.

As much as I like modern displays, I’ve suffered an inflight loss of a DAU, which resulted in the loss of ALL aircraft systems information, including engine temperatures, pressures, rpm, torque, electrics, hydraulics, rotor rpm, fuel contents, the lot.

Sometimes I’d prefer analogue, rather than having all the eggs in one basket.

[JohnDixson]

Crab and Shy: your posts brings back memories of flying the Rolls UH-60 with their RTM-322 installed and after the engine/airframe integration testing had been accomplished. Flew with Rolls test pilot Ken Robertson, and was impressed with both the performance of that engine, and the rigor with which they had tested same. Wouldn’t it be ironic to see something resurrect that idea this far down the road. BTW, there is some decent coverage of the Heseltine Affair in the Alan Bristow biography, but not the whole story, aircraft configuration-wise, as to why that ship wasn’t bought by the Saudi government. A missed opportunity for both companies.

[casper64]

[


Thats a pretty strange architecture if failure of one DAU causes all systems to fail.... what about redundancy??? In the aircraft I fly at least two, in some cases even three “DAU’s” would have to fail before I loose all information.... the screens auto-reconfigure if a screen fails... etc etc..

Looking at the photos of the AW149, as posted above. Very nice.

However, having flown both analogue and more modern glass screen cockpits, I can’t help thinking how much could be put out of action in that cockpit by just one bullet, especially bearing in mind that a Data Aquisition Unit has to process all the information displayed.

As much as I like modern displays, I’ve suffered an inflight loss of a DAU, which resulted in the loss of ALL aircraft systems information, including engine temperatures, pressures, rpm, torque, electrics, hydraulics, rotor rpm, fuel contents, the lot.

Sometimes I’d prefer analogue, rather than having all the eggs in one basket.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Looking at the photos of the AW149, as posted above. Very nice.

However, having flown both analogue and more modern glass screen cockpits, I can’t help thinking how much could be put out of action in that cockpit by just one bullet, especially bearing in mind that a Data Aquisition Unit has to process all the information displayed.

As much as I like modern displays, I’ve suffered an inflight loss of a DAU, which resulted in the loss of ALL aircraft systems information, including engine temperatures, pressures, rpm, torque, electrics, hydraulics, rotor rpm, fuel contents, the lot.

Sometimes I’d prefer analogue, rather than having all the eggs in one basket.
As someone said below, pretty rubbish architecture if there's a single point of failure across the entire cockpit . However, I'd be more disappointed about the loss of ballistic protection given by all those steam gauges in front of you - I've yet to see an MFD marketed as bullet proof!

[[email protected]]

As someone said below, pretty rubbish architecture if there's a single point of failure across the entire cockpit Taking the 139 as an example, the two MAUs sit pretty much next to each other under the bonnet so 1 round could quite easily do them both in - not much left in the cockpit without the MAUs.

[212man]

Something like that. Is there a hot n high H225/725 because an off the shelf H225 is optimised for those long crew change flights over the ocean and we'd be back where we were several decades ago?
I don't believe that is strictly correct - the EC725 (later H225M) is the primary design, for long range CSAR, and the EC225/H225 is the civilian derivative (as has always been the case with the Puma family). I don't know exactly how its hot and high performance ranks, but bear in mind that most of the current operators are in 'hot' countries (Brazil, Malaysia etc), the French have been operating it in Afghanistan, and where are the primary theatres the French military are historically involved in (which would be factored into the design brief)? Chad, Niger, Mali, CAR etc

[Fareastdriver]

225 temperature limits according to the EASA Type Certificate:

-30°C to ISA +40°C, limited to 50°C See RFMS SUPP 2 for lower temperature operation down to -45°C.

I never had a problem with the 332L in Karratha with temperatures up to 40 degrees.

[Cyclic Hotline]

And now the Bell offering. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/bell-touts-ideal-525-for-uk-new-medium-helicopter-requirement01 APRIL 2021
Bell touts ‘ideal' 525 for UK New Medium Helicopter requirementby Gareth Jennings



Bell has described its 525 Relentless has being “an ideal aircraft” for the UK New Medium Helicopter (NMH), telling Janes that it is in constant touch with UK acquisition authorities as the country defines its Puma replacement plans.
https://www.janes.com/images/default-source/news-images/fg_3932714-jdw-11374.jpg?sfvrsn=d88cb8aa_2The 525 Relentless would be ‘an ideal solution’ for the UK’s New Medium Helicopter requirement, Bell told Janes citing the aircraft’s ‘superior payload and range performance’. (Bell)

Speaking on 1 April a company representative said that Bell’s ‘super-medium’ 525 would be an ideal solution for the United Kingdom with its “superior payload and range performance”, while the company also has in its military portfolio the UH-1Y Venom and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor it has co-developed with Boeing.

”Our teams are in constant contact with the UK acquisition authority as the United Kingdom continues to define their New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirements. Bell remains committed to providing the right solution based on those requirements and we are certain our aircraft offer the most capable and versatile performance options,” the representative said, adding that the 525 is on track to be issued its certification by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later this year.

The 525 designation reportedly stands for 5 blades, 2 engines, 500 n miles. Developed as a commercial platform tailored for offshore oil and gas operations, as well as for corporate, VVIP transport, and parapublic roles, the 525 can carry 16 passengers and/or 1,814 kg of payload out to 500 n miles (926 km; 575 miles) at a cruise speed of 162 kt (300 km/h; 186 mph). Other performance specifications include a service ceiling of 20,000 ft, as well as a hover ceiling of 11,200 ft (in-ground effect)/ 8,600 ft (out of ground effect). Bell recently announced that the 525 had completed flight testing, and

[ShyTorque]

As someone said below, pretty rubbish architecture if there's a single point of failure across the entire cockpit . However, I'd be more disappointed about the loss of ballistic protection given by all those steam gauges in front of you - I've yet to see an MFD marketed as bullet proof!

The AW109 has a single DAU.

[chopper2004]

And now the Bell offering. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/bell-touts-ideal-525-for-uk-new-medium-helicopter-requirement01 APRIL 2021Bell touts ‘ideal' 525 for UK New Medium Helicopter requirementby Gareth Jennings



Bell has described its 525 Relentless has being “an ideal aircraft” for the UK New Medium Helicopter (NMH), telling Janes that it is in constant touch with UK acquisition authorities as the country defines its Puma replacement plans.
https://www.janes.com/images/default-source/news-images/fg_3932714-jdw-11374.jpg?sfvrsn=d88cb8aa_2The 525 Relentless would be ‘an ideal solution’ for the UK’s New Medium Helicopter requirement, Bell told Janes citing the aircraft’s ‘superior payload and range performance’. (Bell)

Speaking on 1 April a company representative said that Bell’s ‘super-medium’ 525 would be an ideal solution for the United Kingdom with its “superior payload and range performance”, while the company also has in its military portfolio the UH-1Y Venom and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor it has co-developed with Boeing.

”Our teams are in constant contact with the UK acquisition authority as the United Kingdom continues to define their New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirements. Bell remains committed to providing the right solution based on those requirements and we are certain our aircraft offer the most capable and versatile performance options,” the representative said, adding that the 525 is on track to be issued its certification by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later this year.

The 525 designation reportedly stands for 5 blades, 2 engines, 500 n miles. Developed as a commercial platform tailored for offshore oil and gas operations, as well as for corporate, VVIP transport, and parapublic roles, the 525 can carry 16 passengers and/or 1,814 kg of payload out to 500 n miles (926 km; 575 miles) at a cruise speed of 162 kt (300 km/h; 186 mph). Other performance specifications include a service ceiling of 20,000 ft, as well as a hover ceiling of 11,200 ft (in-ground effect)/ 8,600 ft (out of ground effect). Bell recently announced that the 525 had completed flight testing, and

lest it’s April 1st LOL Anyhow 4 years ago Bell unveiled mil Transport version


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/b833d09f_86e4_4586_95e3_223b5c6921c1_7737dbd8175ff15520a5bec 3d0b413b00939640d.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x540/e6a13f7f_7e07_4655_b8ed_954bef5894ba_e1833e59439b7cf209c89df 43fa83b0926c93407.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x540/94b83d77_9243_4c90_9509_5ce5387fee9e_d2287bdc28d3946acf9c202 9ca813c7694a34638.jpeg

[skadi]

lest it’s April 1st LOL Anyhow 4 years ago Bell unveiled mil Transport version

Bell also proposed the B525 as a replacement of H155/ AS332L1 for the German Federal Police ( Bundespolizei ). That was well before April 1st.

skadi

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

One point which hasn't been mentioned yet on this thread is that the NMH is meant to replace three other niche military fleets as well as the Puma. The other three types are all much smaller, so the 225 looks rather big as a solution. As one example, having 225s in Cyprus would bring to mind the old adage about sledgehammers and nuts. For this reason as well as others, I suspect a smaller type will be selected.

[JulieAndrews]

All the machines touted so far in the aviation press will come in very pricey for what will be a 'stop gap' machine - all be it a long gap if traditional new project intros are anything to go by......Not sure we'd get value for money opting for an unsuccessful Leonardo design or an over-egged AH one.......As for the 525, behave yourself

[PPRuNeUser0211]

All the machines touted so far in the aviation press will come in very pricey for what will be a 'stop gap' machine - all be it a long gap if traditional new project intros are anything to go by......Not sure we'd get value for money opting for an unsuccessful Leonardo design or an over-egged AH one.......As for the 525, behave yourself

I mean, let's face it, we're not going to see shiny tilt-rotors in RAF colours until what? 2045 at the earliest? At the recent RAeS lectures they were talking 2040 iirc for the NGRC, and openly admitted that to achieve that they needed to have already started work. So worst case (best case?) you'll see 20-25 years of life out of the fleet, and that's in the Puma replacement role, let alone any of the other more niche jobs.

[minigundiplomat]

In a (Eurotrash?) H215M or H225M you can easily get two sections in CEMO plus a monster pile of ammunition. https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif Bit of a hot n high issue with the H225M perhaps.

Only counts if you get there without the rotorhead falling off at 2000'

[nowherespecial]

Now now MGD, let's not start that discussion up again :)

[tigerfish]

So it seems that we are back to people who have vested interests in promoting their own products, rubbishing everyone else's again are we?

Just let the MOD make up their own minds on this one!

TF

[nowherespecial]

So it seems that we are back to people who have vested interests in promoting their own products, rubbishing everyone else's again are we?

Just let the MOD make up their own minds on this one!

TF
I think the issue here is the MOD is run by politicians and civil servants and their angle is not always the same as MOD procurement. Politicians like to keep jobs going in the UK, so whatever wins will likely have to be built (under license potentially) at Leonardo in Yeovil (or another facility if someone else wins). If Leonardo say the 149 will be built there, they are already 50% of the way to winning IMO. Anyone who cannot match that has a considerable hurdle to overcome commercially or technically. I was involved in an aviation tender recently for a government where the value to the local economy was given the same weighting as the price.
You might see something similar with UK SAR now that the UK is not bound by EU procurement rules with overall value to the UK judged rather than just price and technical.

[EESDL]

MOD seem to be coping without influence of lobbyist/politicians with Apache using US FMS and new order for Chinooks. We can use Leonlardo for SELEX and for painting O&G aircraft warry colours if required for decoys ;-)

[Cyclic Hotline]

Airbus Helicopters claims Chinese content on H175 can be replaced if offered to UK militaryhttps://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/airbus-helicopters-claims-chinese-content-on-h175-can-be-replaced-if-offered-to-uk-military/143437.articleBy Dominic Perry (https://www.flightglobal.com/dominic-perry/263.bio), Oxford23 April 2021

Airbus Helicopters insists it can overcome obstacles related to Chinese content on its H175 should the super-medium-twin be offered as a replacement for the UK Royal Air Force’s Puma fleet.

No military variant of the 7.8t H175 has so far been developed, in part due to restrictions related to substantial Chinese involvement on the civil programme, which is a joint development with Avicopter.

https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/5/7/6/78576_h175-sar-gfs-pair_74001.jpg

Source: Airbus Helicopters

No military version of the H175 has yet been developed

But Colin James, managing director of Airbus Helicopters UK, says the company would have no difficulty in providing a military version without the Chinese content.

While declining to reveal the precise details of the plans, James says: “We have a viable solution and we know how we would do it”.

“It is very feasible and there are scenarios for providing that aircraft without that problem,” he says.

He also notes that the current civil version of the H175 already has 10-15% of UK content.

In its recent Command Paper defence review document, London announced that it intends to withdraw the Puma from service in the mid-2020s, replacing it with a platform it calls the New Medium Helicopter (NMH).

Airbus Helicopters delivered a significant mid-life upgrade to the Puma fleet in the early part of last decade, adding new engines and avionics, which could have seen the platform operated into the 2030s.

While James says he is “disappointed” by the retirement decision, he understands the strategic rationale for the move as the UK eyes a next-generation capability in the 2040s.

https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/5/7/7/78577_pumaccrowncopyright_507243.jpg

Source: Crown Copyright

UK intends to retire its current Puma HC2s in the mid-2020s

No details of the requirements for the NMH have so far been revealed, although a team has been stood up within the Ministry of Defence to work on its plans.

Although the Puma is due to depart by mid-decade, James questions the realism of that, noting the time it takes to get a new aircraft into service.

He believes that once the procurement process begins and “sanity checks start being made”, 2027-2028 will emerge as a “more realistic timeframe” for the Puma’s departure, unless a capability gap can be tolerated.

While Airbus Helicopters UK is located at Oxford Airport, expansion of the site may not be required to house an assembly line for the NMH, as the wider Airbus group has a “lot of real estate in the UK”.

“Whatever solution we would employ would be to create sustainability and future business,” he says, including the production of helicopters for the export market. And while final assembly is one aspect of the process, bolstering the level of UK content on the H175 is also key, he stresses.

Should a larger platform be required, Airbus Helicopters has also touted the 11t H225 and NH Industries NH90 as possible solutions for the NMH requirement.

Any proposal of the NH90 is complicated by the make-up of the NHI consortium, which includes Leonardo Helicopters and Fokker as shareholders. “It would simply require Airbus and Leonardo to cooperate”, says James.

https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/5/7/8/78578_aw149egyptcfabriziocapenti_566760.jpg

Source: Fabrizio Capenti

Egypt is one of only two current customers for AW149

Leonardo Helicopters has long pitched the 8.6t AW149 as an ideal Puma replacement which it would build at its site in Yeovil, the UK. The type is currently produced at the airframer’s main final assembly line in Vergiate, Italy and has secured two customers since launch in 2006: Thailand and, more recently, Egypt.

Although in many quarters the NMH contest is seen as Leonardo Helicopters’ to lose, James insists that as “the incumbent” Airbus Helicopters does not feel it is the underdog.

“[Airbus] has a very, very good record of bringing export success to the UK,” he says. “Everything our competitors have to offer, Airbus also has to offer, and more.”

[JohnDixson]

Question re the mission: will this be an aircraft doing an admin mission or will it be expected to go in harm's way? If the latter, will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability and crash-worthiness, along with maintenance and aircraft availability targets?

[ShyTorque]

Well there certainly didn’t seem to be so for the Puma!

[chopper2004]

Question re the mission: will this be an aircraft doing an admin mission or will it be expected to go in harm's way? If the latter, will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability and crash-worthiness, along with maintenance and aircraft availability targets?

It will be in harms way as it be battlefield utility helicopter,

cheers

[Bayek Itsarumdu]

will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability?
It's many years since I spannered a Puma; mk1 of course, but one thing I remember is that, according to the aircraft maintenance manual, the self-sealing fuel tanks could cope with damage up to 7.5mm in diameter. It puzzled me that the specification was 0.12mm short of what seemed requisite.

[JohnDixson]

Hello Bayek. If I recall, the Army requirement for the UTTAS said that the entire vehicle had to be invulnerable to 7.65mm, while a lesser part of the vehicle to 12.7mm ( 51 cal ) and the blades and main shaft had to be able to take various angle hits from 23mm HEI and still fly home. The 23 mm requirement included live ammunition firing at real blade samples, which were then sent to the metal fatigue test stands and exercised at known flight loads to substantiate meeting the requirement. This series of tests was repeated, by the way, after the main blades were changed from a titanium spar based blade to a total composite structure blade. Pictures were impressive. I am sure our competitor Boeing went thru the same original design/test cycle for their fly-off prototypes.
You mentioned fuel tanks and in that area I just don’t recall the specifics re the ballistic survivability requirements for the tanks, but I do recall that there was a crash test requirement that in part, required the competitor to construct a test specimen that consisted of the fuel tank, its attached hardware and the fuselage structure immediately surrounding the tank, The test was to drop it from 65 feet and no leaks were allowed. We used a crane to do the test.

[EESDL]

Just so we are clear - from what I have seen so far - the build quality of the 175 has been very poor. Very poor.

[EESDL]

Hypothetically, if there are any Puma crews going through an Instructor course at a certain place in Alabama and have the weekend 'off'......they are very welcome to pop over to Guntersville where there could be an 'open' invite to get to grips with a possible contender, just saying. PM me for contact details

[JulieAndrews]

Anyone rough idea of annual hours being put on the Puma Mk2 since update - or at least 'best guess'? Interested to read the phrase 'Value for Money' in UK publications ;-)

[EESDL]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1575x1005/bh1_ecf4a44303b1e43dc19a6b0f0185a524094ef80b.png
Now there's a pretty picture..

[chopper2004]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1575x1005/bh1_ecf4a44303b1e43dc19a6b0f0185a524094ef80b.png
Now there's a pretty picture..[/QUOTE]

yep from my other neck of the woods Bundesheer …got to see them at Airpower 2019 my pics below




https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/ef399099_e48c_453d_9a62_7e8ec662bc66_24b7755344f8b426decd8b7 248f821df10fe8e9c.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/ff7dc76d_5bea_4eb9_b151_3c094651ff12_51d5d52aa93daed46b39077 70fd9be72b0c82fb1.jpeg

[chopper2004]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1575x1005/bh1_ecf4a44303b1e43dc19a6b0f0185a524094ef80b.png
Now there's a pretty picture..

Also laughingly the photo reminds me of the end scene from Arnie film Eraser with the US Marshall’s (good guys and not James Caan iffy corrupt Witsec lot) exiting an A109A


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/ad5a2667_d0fd_482b_9ff4_2e84a8cd5d5f_705ffa73b29876e73d01f4c 2c7495a0abe5e36e3.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/308e8b30_4a79_4eac_bd60_900cbb898df9_1cffec4a5cf20bb572eb0ed c3181a2c3ddad25cc.jpeg

Albeit in True Hollywood style …

cheers

[JulieAndrews]

as long as we stay away from the NH Naughty - 2 Cloggie examples now broken in Stornoway

[torqueshow]

Would any modern medium helicopter really meet the task? Modern types seem a little fragile in a lot of ways in comparison to some previous generation aircraft with software and sometimes hardware reliability being an issue with huge swathes of downtime.

AW149, H175, Bell 525, none with any real operational time under the belt with allied militaries and one that hasn’t even come to market yet.

NH90, not the most glowing of reports from current users

[NutLoose]

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/airbus-helicopters-showcases-westernised-h175-as-uk-puma-replacement-hots-up/144144.article

Airbus Helicopters has revealed the first airframe of an H175 super-medium-twin which has been built entirely using European-sourced components to replace those previously provided by Chinese suppliers.

The product of a five-year initiative, the absence of Chinese content will remove a significant obstacle to development of a military variant of the 7.8t platform.




https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x519/image_7dacb18a847ce1480bd53af7a1f9440675550566.jpeg

[Cyclic Hotline]

Any NATO procurement should be a ground-up program with full transparency and financially backed OEM performance guarantees on;

Configuration control with individual pricing for each capability or system
Design standards
Systems commonality
Configured helicopter price
Program price
Delivery schedule
In-service schedule
Operational hourly price
Flight Training
Maintenance Training
Support package pricing
Availability guarantees
Reliability guarantees
Helicopter operational performance guarantees
Unresolved AOG and non-availability penalties
Supportability and Obsolescence strategies

If this is to be a standardised NATO platform, there should be a single multi-nation NATO office to provide fleet management control and provide a sole point of contact with the selected OEM to manage every part of the fleet, including monitoring and controlling all of the above items. This doesn't stop the individual operating entity from engaging directly with the OEM, but does standardize configuration and option pricing and support so the ability to gouge or take advantage of individual customers with "special deals" which are rarely beneficial to the operator.

The failure of so many of these platforms is the completely failed procurement process utilized by individual governments filled with bureaucrats who have no idea what they are talking about, and get bamboozled by OEM salesmen who talk them into a never-ending list of idiotic concepts and requirements as they "shape" the procurement to meet their own product whether it meets the requirement or not. It doesn't matter if you are looking at the US Presidential VH-71, the NH90, CH-148 Cyclone or the MH-139A or any other programme - something is completely wrong with the process. It's time to take control of an essential airborne capability, that according to various published reports is so entirely dysfunctional that there are huge holes in strategic defence capabilities, leaving countries incapable of meeting their basic rotary wing requirements.

The OEM is quick to blame the operating entity, saying that they didn't procure adequate parts or services, which leaves them grounded because the parts aren't available because they didn't procure them, and the OEM doesn't stock them, and the lead time is 2 years (or whatever). This may well be correct, but the procurement should never have proceeded without full visibility to the primary acquisition cost, and full visibility to the sustainment costs and binding commitments from all parties to adequate sustainment planning and financing, and guarantees from the OEM to availability of parts and service, with controls on pricing. No aquisition should be permitted without an approved operating plan and fully funded budget. For anyone who doubts this might work, then take a look at the commercial world, where OEM provided PBH or equivalents have become the norm on modern platforms. If the helicopter fails to meet any of the required performance points, then start applying penalties. Really BIG penalties - that is the only way to get things done in this industry.

In the current market the Customer has complete control of the transaction and terms, lay them out and the OEM's will all still be there. There is nothing wrong with new platforms and technologies, but there needs to be an appropriate process to assign the risk (and expense) to the supplier who has committed to supplying it.

It's an embarrassment to the entire industry and as a taxpayer, it's a rip-off!

[SASless]

Cyclic.....does all that translate to the RAF is buying Black Hawks to replace the Puma?

[Nescafe]

Cyclic.....does all that translate to the RAF is buying Black Hawks to replace the Puma?

What? A battle proven capable airframe, fully suited to the task? Available off the production line?

Ask the end users in the military, they’ll say ‘yes please.’

Ask the politicians and the procurement people, they’ll be designing you a camel before you can say ‘factory in my electorate.’

[muermel]

What? A battle proven capable airframe, fully suited to the task? Available off the production line?

Ask the end users in the military, they’ll say ‘yes please.’

Ask the politicians and the procurement people, they’ll be designing you a camel before you can say ‘factory in my electorate.’


Translate that to most militaries in Europe, very frustrating to see them invent the wheel over and over again.

[dangermouse]

With all due respect Cyclics post is b*******s

This is not a NATO procurement it is a bespoke requirement for a sovereign nation. If we follow his logic the only equipment in use by NATO would be US designed and built (surprise, surprise) as the US industry size and American procurement quantities would trump any one else's view leaving operators beholden to one foreign source of kit. The reality is that other considerations have (and should) always been a part of how kit is bought. The effect on your own industrial base, resultant tax revenues, ability to modify as necessary and sovereign security issues are equally as important to the decision makers as the effectivity of the kit itself.
Regarding obtaining an in service proven product using that logic the UH60 would never have been created as the in service UH1 met those parameters. Sometimes an improvement is required even over what appears to be a suitable solution, in the case of the Puma, why replace a design from the 1960s with one from the 1970s, there are much newer technologies available with minimal development costs, amazingly designed in Europe, not the assumed centre of the world the other side of the pond.
Not all posted is rubbish, the users DO need to properly engage with OEMs and be very clear what specs are mandatory and what are negotiable, realistic timescales need to be agreed by everyone along with an agreed relevant basis of qualification (in itself a huge issue for this industry), finally the user/procure must recognise that OEMs are not charities, but will not deliberately screw him over (because it is not in the OEMs interest to do so) and most importantly no one is allowed to change any requirements once agreed because that is the cause if most programme delays.

[melmothtw]

Anyone rough idea of annual hours being put on the Puma Mk2 since update - or at least 'best guess'? Interested to read the phrase 'Value for Money' in UK publications ;-)

Janes, from Jan 2020:
RAF notes Puma milestone, with third of hours delivered on operationsDate Posted: 28-Jan-2020

Author: Gareth Jennings, London

Publication: Jane's Defence Weekly

The UK Royal Air Force (RAF) has flown 30,000 hours on its Westland-Aerospatiale SA 330E Puma HC2 medium-lift helicopters over the last five years, with 10,000 of these having been accrued on operations in Afghanistan.

Having received the first of 24 upgraded Pumas from Airbus Helicopters in 2015, the RAF announced on 28 January that it had achieved the almost unheard of feat of amassing a third of its hours on the type during real-world combat operations.

“A third of all flying done on operations is quite unprecedented. I don’t think, to my knowledge, there is another platform in our inventory that has completed a third of its total flying hours on operations,” Group Captain Adam Wardrope, Station Commander RAF Benson and Puma Force Commander, was quoted as saying.

The United Kingdom deployed three Puma HC2 helicopters (crewed by personnel from 33 Squadron and 230 Squadron from RAF Benson) to Afghanistan in March 2015, taking over from the Boeing Chinooks that had been flying in support of the Afghan National Army Officer Academy (ANAOA) and Afghan Security Ministries in Kabul since late 2014. One Puma HC2 helicopter crashed in October 2015 with the loss of five of the nine personnel on board but was replaced in-theatre.

“The Puma has been in Afghanistan for nearly five years and we have two aircraft out of three flying on a daily basis so 10,000 hours in five years is impressive,” Gp Capt Wardrope said. “The real statistic that shows the capability of the Puma for me, and what really drives home the serviceability and the spares and everything else that keeps the aircraft going, is that we’ve met over 95% of our flying task. We have never failed to deliver on operations in that entire five years. We’ve never been let down by the logistics or the engineering because we’ve always had a robust method in place to get any problem solved, which is a significant achievement on top of the 10,000 hours as well.”

As noted by Gp Capt Wardrope, the Puma ...

[NutLoose]

Regarding obtaining an in service proven product using that logic the UH60 would never have been created as the in service UH1 met those parameters. Sometimes an improvement is required even over what appears to be a suitable solution, in the case of the Puma, why replace a design from the 1960s with one from the 1970s, there are much newer technologies available with minimal development costs, amazingly designed in Europe, not the assumed centre of the world the other side of the pond

Well from what I’ve read here and elsewhere, it appears the ideal replacement for the current Puma is a new build version of the current Puma, it’s known it operates well, it’s reliable, years of operations have wrinkled out any problems and parts must be still in production for it to keep existing fleets operational, so surely an order for replacements in sufficient numbers would put it back in production.

Failing that the Blackhawk, a younger helicopter design that is again proven and has had all the gremlins ironed out of the design and more importantly they are still in production, so you have had the US do all the shakedown and development cost, also both carry 12 fully equipped troops. When was the last time an RAF Puma carried 16 pax?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Not all posted is rubbish, the users DO need to properly engage with OEMs and be very , finally the user/procure must recognise that OEMs are not charities, but will not deliberately screw him over (because it is not in the OEMs interest to do so) and most importantly no one is allowed to change any requirements once agreed because that is the cause if most programme delays.

​​​​​​The first and last parts of that paragraph are absolutely true. The middle bit had me rolling around on the floor laughing! I've seen plenty of OEMs deliberately throw the end user under the bus for the sake of an extra 1% on their (usually already considerable) profit margin.

The issue is normally not the engineering/design teams fwiw though!

[Blackhawk9]

When I was in Norway 20 years ago and RAF Puma crews came over for the sim all they wanted was Blackhawks and I don't think they have changed since then, but the UK Govt will buy something the boys don't want and is less capable.

[medod]

Any NATO procurement should be a ground-up program with full transparency and financially backed OEM performance guarantees

That's exactly what NH90 is. Yeah some breakdown but there are also 400+ in service with >250,000 hours between them now.

No doubt that, like Boxer, we'll go back to a programme we never should have left.

[dingo9]

That's exactly what NH90 is. Yeah some breakdown but there are also 400+ in service with >250,000 hours between them now.

No doubt that, like Boxer, we'll go back to a programme we never should have left.
.. do some basic maths here then. 250,000 hours spread over 400 ac = 625hrs per ac. Spread over say 10 years ( to be generous) 62 Hrs a year per ac. That’s incredible, where do I sign? ! 😂😂

[Blackhawk9]

.. do some basic maths here then. 250,000 hours spread over 400 ac = 625hrs per ac. Spread over say 10 years ( to be generous) 62 Hrs a year per ac. That’s incredible, where do I sign? ! 😂😂

And to top it off Australia has just grounded their MRH-90 fleet again because of maintenance and safety concerns.........

[EESDL]

Correct - this is not a NATO-led requirement but a 'stop-gap' measure until the expensive and futuristic-vertical-lifty stuff arrives - whenever that will be; lets be conservative and say 2035-2040.
UK demands value for money without sacrificing capability. UK demands a low-risk option that requires minimal development. UK is aiming for net-zero carbon emissions in procurement.
As a UK tax payer, it concerns me that some PPrRuNers, mostly residing in Somerset, think you need a new design rather than a combat-proven and purposefully-designed aircraft updated with future-proofed avionics/engines etc and that Yeovil should be the 'default' option. The Chinook is more than 10-years older than the Black Hawk but still proving invaluable and in a field of its own for many years to come. The US Armed Forces are still developing the Black Hawk and are committed to 2070 (eg, Jolly Green II). - proving that it matters not how old the original design is if it's 'right'.
Using LEDs to light a parts shed does not mean 'net-zero' ;-) The Somerset lot will say and do anything to try and sell their unpopular machine and work on the premise that if you shout it from the rooftops (or fly the Daily Mail down the Thames in a painted O&G machine) then it must be true. It was 'launched' in 2006 and has been sold to 2 Countries (both with shocking Human Rights records) in small numbers. We've heard the "we'll build it in UK if you buy us" chant before but Bristows had to send engineers to Italy to ensure they built them correctly for SAR role.
There is a non-OEM solution that would get the Army their Black Hawks at a fraction of a price of the competition (5:2 ratio if FlightGlobal's Egypt/AW149 article correct) and they'd be made in UK to help level-up the country and disperse MOD procurement. The aircraft already slings twice that of the 149/189, is quicker over distance and around the battlefield, relishes DVE and can survive an RPG round - not mentioning that you don't have to ask the troops to move each time you need to swing the weapon through the cabin !

[EESDL]

The AW189 offering, and indeed the other ‘new’ contenders do not offer any new technology that aids capability, performance or reliability. It could be argued that ‘Current’ advanced rotor technology was designed for the UTTAS competition in the 70s with airframes keeping abreast of battlefield comms/ew requirements through avionics upgrades.
It could also be argued that, if anything, the design of these ‘contenders’ is in fact a backward step in design - or will Leonardo and Airbus re-design their MRGB to have complete internal oil lines, shielded components etc?

[chopper2004]

Week ago I went up in said AW149 demonstrator from Yeovil, so here are my photos below.

cheers


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/0965d8e1_9302_40e8_8c23_dc91d20ef52f_c03e8179da8a71688160e43 e9d246acd984718d5.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/1e0e5825_1860_4783_aac1_f43928bff3b7_718a8357c578ce2e6d47704 b2a51c0d393476591.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/6c944ce9_e1f0_4e85_a556_a54e3db7caeb_03045fe519aef9f43fff9e1 bddde6e760e2af811.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/6b765036_bc34_4360_8c6c_d5850224d316_a9e20871ce81d0b2a9e7c98 f42c2db6333fbe70f.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/0f6a039d_0282_4dbc_a136_f2bb1d18972d_78f132bdf22d293f72b8473 cbce5a2917cabc690.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/339ad5f9_c0f7_425b_9cd7_1efe21787207_8eb1c5dc0016b2a48c3af1d c56ebd1c3e174f505.jpeg


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/0b358d9e_8dfd_44d0_8a1a_21da48992cce_5152569dea4dec54911bd88 b645e2a430202896d.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/33cd6ad0_57b0_49b7_99d8_84c1ef93bf8e_9b10047733bbc4efef8e8d6 3a8785a591e05df60.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/0dc72cd4_2580_46a8_ac9b_8da22a975f9a_19c5d9fb77202161b36b8bc d1f97bffb18cde098.jpeg

[Fareastdriver]

That tailplane should really dig up the dirt if you overcook the flare.

[sycamore]

It also looks like you can only `hot `refuel/`splash and dash` with the doors only open half-way,after climbing up on the sponsons....shades of the `Bevelgear`....even filler caps on both sides.....may be there are some old WW tail-bumpers left in the stores they could fit.....?UJ on stbd side shows `in distress....!

Wonder if its got plenty of `bathroom sealant` around the w/screen/,roofpanels to stop the rain from dripping in over the electronics panels ,a la WW,WX/S-K.....?

[rrekn]

That is the gravity refuel only, there is a pressure refuel coupling on RHS below it.

[[email protected]]

Wonder if it is the same as the pressure refuel setup on 139 which couldn't cope with standard mil-spec pressure so you end up gravity refuelling it.

[Northernstar]

How much will Yeovil charge for it given it's about $20m for bare bones oil and gas one like this demo version.

[casper64]

The H175m joins the “marketing fight”…. Cool video.

https://youtu.be/pt-FGBW3sT8

[chopper2004]

The H175m joins the “marketing fight”…. Cool video.

https://youtu.be/pt-FGBW3sT8

I am here at Excel so here my photos of Leonardo AW149 NMh and Airbus booth model …


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/5d7eba45_49e6_49b1_afd4_1a40db1f1cb7_b49102d9a4d4f46d12776fc f2efca2691265e351.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/84279c50_2ddf_43c5_bcbe_37459076bc00_d5e6289cc3fe10962f49041 b8ed3bf189f37c3ab.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/7de893cf_9a14_4505_b24c_15cbef850d01_0dc40ac6153df423659a973 e4d192cd62ebf840f.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/1c0055d7_c9c3_49c6_ad11_f81879358fa6_cb5f49f201c5196dd954fac 22d6f4a472d0c035b.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x960/3a5b1efa_a1d1_4d6d_a17e_4fca5b39e4a0_4d431760e640187267fcb48 fdaafd3b947f17c97.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/61c7f0c8_5231_4384_bee0_ed1d766d9e3a_0d605c1ca35d2ab441296ad 1369dce6cdd2e5261.jpeg

cheers

[detgnome]

Hadn't realised how much smaller the H175 is compared to the AW189.

[NutLoose]

Did you point out to the Leonardo’s people that if you are intending to try and flog your product to the U.K. it would be prudent to at least put the bloody flag of the country on the right way round.

I still agree the Blackhawk would be a better combat proven design that works.

[JulieAndrews]

Looks like that the 189 window gunner has to a contortionist!
all of the videos showing AW189 were of civilian O&G variant-
there is no such thing as ‘149 demonstrator’ ~ it is a painted 189 FAS machine which wasn’t allowed to do the Iran contract.
Yeovil now saying it will close if doesn’t get NMh, strange as a previous PR said it would create new jobs.
the blackmailing arrogance is astounding-
forget Hairbrush 175 - they can’t even get their performance figures correct never mind film a credible video shoot.
here’s hoping those guys looking to find a way to build a uK ‘Paveway’ find a way through the BS.

[[email protected]]

Hadn't realised how much smaller the H175 is compared to the AW189. I suspect that was lost on a few:):ok:

[MeddlMoe]

Isn't a flag on the starboard side supposed to be backwards?

[jimf671]

Isn't a flag on the starboard side supposed to be backwards?

Yes. Flagpole-foward on the side of a vehicle. :rolleyes:

[Bravo73]

The H175m joins the “marketing fight”….


Seen in the skies over Oxfordshire recently.

[EESDL]

Airbus /Flightglobal reporting 14 fully laden troops and 500nm range.
That would put it about 1000kg overweight - based on standard O&G APS weights and 100kg each soldier - without beefing-up everything and adding ballistic protection, couple of machine guns etc etc
What complete tosh!
OEMs at it again - peddling utter BS - worse than Arthur Daly.
‘Assembled in UK’………

[minigundiplomat]

Having threatened to pull out of the UK during the Brexit negotiations, I find Airbus’s push to trouser UK taxes a little on the nose, added to which they didn’t cover themselves in glory during the H225 incident in Norway. Leonardo have gone down their traditional route of give us the contract or Yeovil gets it.

A few years ago I did a comparison between the AW189 and the H175 for a major operator and to be honest, I’d vote Blackhawk.

[ericferret]

Having threatened to pull out of the UK during the Brexit negotiations, I find Airbus’s push to trouser UK taxes a little on the nose, added to which they didn’t cover themselves in glory during the H225 incident in Norway. Leonardo have gone down their traditional route of give us the contract or Yeovil gets it.

A few years ago I did a comparison between the AW189 and the H175 for a major operator and to be honest, I’d vote Blackhawk.

Me too, the other offerings are civil helicopters in green paint. Same as the 330 Puma so no change.
Surely we should be buying a military aircraft!!

[industry insider]

Watching that H175 video, I expect the incidence of airsickness among troops will be quite high.

[[email protected]]

Watching that H175 video, I expect the incidence of airsickness among troops will be quite high. And they'll get shot down a lot flying like that too.:ok:

Nothing like a vertical and predictable manoeuvre profile to make it easy to get a lead on the target even with small arms.

[Fareastdriver]

Me too, the other offerings are civil helicopters in green paint. Same as the 330 Puma so no change.

I beg your pardon. The 330 was a pure military development. It was only when it was a success the Sud went for the civil version. Even then they had to get the cooperation of the RAF and the French Army to release aircraft for main gearbox reliability trials in 1974. It was called the Components Advanced Ageing Programme to prove that the gearbox could be TBO'd to 1,500 hrs instead of the military 800hrs. 33Sqn's was XW 203 which was required to fly 100 hrs/month to meet the programme.

It crashed during the programme whilst trying to do a self innated barrel roll.

[Cyclic Hotline]

Evidence of history repeating itself?

I beg your pardon. The 330 was a pure military development. It was only when it was a success the Sud went for the civil version. Even then they had to get the cooperation of the RAF and the French Army to release aircraft for main gearbox reliability trials in 1974. It was called the Components Advanced Ageing Programme to prove that the gearbox could be TBO'd to 1,500 hrs instead of the military 800hrs. 33Sqn's was XW 203 which was required to fly 100 hrs/month to meet the programme.

It crashed during the programme whilst trying to do a self innated barrel roll.

From the EC175 thread and reference to an AAIB report on a contemporary EC175 MGB issue; https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/281966-ec-175-a-14.html#post11035130

The (EC 175) helicopter was undergoing scheduled maintenance to replace the main gear box (MGB), which had reached its overhaul life of 800 flying hours.

Did we just go back 50 years in time?

[BedakSrewet]

PELITA AIR SERVICE / INDONESIA was the first civil operator, commenced operations with c/n 1082 in 1971.followed by another 18 during the early 70's, which were ( in addition to offshore work ) used to to 'move' oil / gas drilling rigs in North Sumatra whereby the average daily utilization was 12 + hours..

[melmothtw]

We have movement....!!

https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/status/1459061773311651840

36 to 44 aircraft, for £1 billion over 5 years - 2023 to 2028.

[[email protected]]

It will inevitably be a compromise given the different roles that need to be covered, hopefully some recipients will be happy with what they get.

[sycamore]

Think that the aircraft chosen should be fully `marinised` in that it can be operated on ships,tail/blade folding,full internal corrosion protection,etc,etc.....

[ShyTorque]

I built the coffee bar in 33 Sqn. at Odiham before it was reformed. I was in the front of XW 204 with Trevor Wood on its first flight from Odiham.

When I die I will go to Hell. My Squadron boss will be a lieutenant commander and the station commander will be a women.

I can’t help hoping that FED ended up with none of those things happening to him. RIP Al Tait!

[EESDL]

You just hope marinating the aircraft is in the requirements ;-)

the encouraging news with recent publication is that it will be more difficult for Leonardo to wangle / blackmail a single-source contract; which has to be good news for tax payer - UK taxpayers that is, not French or Italian……
Ladies and Gentlemen - The AceHawk ML-70

[ShyTorque]

EESDLYou just hope marinating the aircraft is in the requirements ;-)

Mmm lovely, helicopter marinated in its own sauce! ;)

[tigerfish]

Far too many biased and company replies on this thread! The real answer must be in what the RAF` and the combined armed forces require!
Who gets the contract MUST be decided on that! Not political issues. For Christ Sake the question is about what aircraft is the best one for our armed services NOT what is the best Political answer!

TF

[industry insider]

I can’t help hoping that FED ended up with none of those things happening to him. RIP Al Tait!

If you are "downstairs" FED, I know you will be enjoying a drink and a smoke and amusing people with your experience. I thoroughly enjoyed every hour we spent flying together in the S-76 at ND, you were a consummate professional and a gentleman.

[[email protected]]

The real answer must be in what the RAF` and the combined armed forces require! That has never happened in the history of RAF procurement - why should they start now?

We would have been flying Blackhawks since the 80's if we had been given what we needed.

[EESDL]

EESDL

Mmm lovely, helicopter marinated in its own sauce! ;)
I’ve got this vision of the NMH floating in a pot of optional extras…..

[Mee3]

The (EC 175) helicopter was undergoing scheduled maintenance to replace the main gear box (MGB), which had reached its overhaul life of 800 flying hours.

Did we just go back 50 years in time?
Evidence of history repeating itself?

It started with 800, not TBO at 800.

[212man]

It started with 800, not TBO at 800.
Is it just me, but I don't understand what that means, or is it semantics? 800 hours was the time at which the MGB had to be removed for overhaul - how is that different to TBO? What does "started with" mean?

[Mee3]

Is it just me, but I don't understand what that means, or is it semantics? 800 hours was the time at which the MGB had to be removed for overhaul - how is that different to TBO? What does "started with" mean?
It was EIS with 800 but gaining more every year.

[BTC8183]

It was EIS with 800 but gaining more every year.Without casting doubt on your claim, what has the 800hr TBO 'gained' so far?



Each airframe 800hr inspection requires the MGB to be removed anyway,for the airframe structure inspection,with many MGB being returned to airbus for precautionary inspections, in certain areas, on a fast turn-around basis.



Certainly too, MG​​​​​B's are being regularly rejected well short of the 800hr TBO.

[chopper2004]

That has never happened in the history of RAF procurement - why should they start now?

We would have been flying Blackhawks since the 80's if we had been given what we needed.

You have a valid point as politics/Tarzan/Mace all contributed to what-should-have-happened-but-did-not.

One of my thermodynamics lecturers worked at RR before his PhD worked at Rolls-Royce Leavesden and did a few test flights with G-RRTM (only S-70 on CAA register)

Cheers

[Mee3]

Without casting doubt you are in the know, it has gained multiple of 800 so far. Although well short of the 5000 TBO designed for.

800h inspection does not require dynamic removal if it is not due.Precautionary is rather often due to obvious reasons and also because the hums are now real time monitored as long as GS plugs into internet.

It is true some older production still have shorter than expected life but cases has been reducing as they move on to component made by new supplier.

[BTC8183]

I have no doubt that airbus, consider themselves to be in a theoretical 'good place', regarding the 175. MGB TBO 'gaining by multiples' is just fantastic!



However, enter a offshore operators hangar and the 175 on a 800hr insp will almost certainly have its MGB out of the airframe. In fairness, it is very easy to remove.



To return to thread, Blackhawk gets my vote. Leonardo make a solid and robust MGB,it is just a shame about the flimsy airframe and (allegedly) poor support.

[trim it out]

Any option for skids on the NMH offerings? :)

[Mee3]

I have no doubt that airbus, consider themselves to be in a theoretical 'good place', regarding the 175. MGB TBO 'gaining by multiples' is just fantastic!



However, enter a offshore operators hangar and the 175 on a 800hr insp will almost certainly have its MGB out of the airframe. In fairness, it is very easy to remove.



To return to thread, Blackhawk gets my vote. Leonardo make a solid and robust MGB,it is just a shame about the flimsy airframe and (allegedly) poor support.
We are sitting in one of those hanger you described and fairly certain what I am talking about.

But this is a 189's contact to lose.

[Rigga]

Hmmmm….Leonardo or Airbus UK?

Well, let me see…

Leonardo UK (Yeovil?) can’t be any worse than the main factory in Italy for delivery erm…standards (yes, thats the word).

And AHUK seem to have aspirations for becoming second only to BAES for military maintenance and spares profits - probably basing a few very long term business plans on those two items alone...and then there are the Mods…(Whooppee!!)

[Hilife]

As has been pointed out in previous posts, both contender solutions are merely spinoffs of ‘Commercial Platforms’ and neither has any proven combat experience, let alone demonstrated that the multitude of bolt-on equipment options required in-role have yet to be designed, built, evaluated on-wing and certified to the satisfaction of the end-customer.

Add the multitude of customer SIRFC, comms, mission planning, datalink, hoist, fast-roping, rappelling, weapons mount, A2A refuelling and survivability options (electronic, structure, material safety, defence, etc.) Provisions, let alone Completions, I dread to think what the useful load and performance of either platform would be at final delivery.

A recipe for delay and cost overruns that is for sure and for what, to save a few hundred jobs that would be lost without this win?

Neither solution offers any real benefit to the UK taxpayer, as irrespective of what is ‘Promised’ for future export sales, if either helicopter were any good for the requirement, they would already have sold well to credible militaries in previous competitions, but alas not the case for either platform.

More importantly, neither is ‘fit-for-the-purpose’ in protecting those inside when things go horribly wrong.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[rrekn]

Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.

[casper64]

Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.

FVL is a Joke…. I mean, these platforms are so complex that their survivability must be questioned just like their agility. Simply not comparable to a Blackhawk or puma….

[EESDL]

Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.

I appreciate that AW/Leonardo are familiar with having money thrown at them but are you seriously suggesting that the 189/149/WG30 should only last 10-years?
Is that your definition of Value 4 Money for UK- tax payer?
It will take more than 10-years for the WG30 to reach the frontline - it is simply a ‘cash cow’ for overseas shareholders - any re-config to cost a fortune in time and money.
All because Italy has given it a ‘mil approval’ does not mean it is a military aircraft.

[[email protected]]

Since we need a replacement and we need it now - Leonardo 149/189 would seem the obvious choice as it is already in production.

No, it's not a Blackhawk but we'll never get those and the choice is limited - mostly due to politics.

[trim it out]

Something OTS would solve the 212/412 easily, just needs a winch. N3 replacement would just need a few add ons too. It's all the gubbins to make it a battlefield helicopter that is the difficult bit. Probably end up with a Mk2/3/4/5/6 etc when more and more things get added to the spec, finally followed by more powerful engines to carry all the extras.

[EESDL]

Got talking to some guys at GDH, Warsaw. They have worked out how to bring G5000H ‘Black Hawks’ over from Alabama. Latest engines, gearboxes etc and still half the price of 149/175 whilst outperforming competition - and all on FMS so minimal running costs. Teesside FreePort and the mayor all behind it.
‘Levelling up’ in truest form and helps to strengthen defence network by spreading it out.
Greenest of options as re-lifing existing airframes - just as new as the ‘new’ wildcat. To be produced in the Hydrogen Hub that is the North East - sounds to good to be true. They can even deliver earlier than required.
We might just get the beast after all !!

[Rigga]

Got talking to some guys at GDH, Warsaw. They have worked out how to bring G5000H ‘Black Hawks’ over from Alabama. Latest engines, gearboxes etc and still half the price of 149/175 whilst outperforming competition - and all on FMS so minimal running costs. Teesside FreePort and the mayor all behind it.
‘Levelling up’ in truest form and helps to strengthen defence network by spreading it out.
Greenest of options as re-lifing existing airframes - just as new as the ‘new’ wildcat. To be produced in the Hydrogen Hub that is the North East - sounds to good to be true. They can even deliver earlier than required.
We might just get the beast after all !!

No chance!
Not enough fingers in pies....

[Evalu8ter]

EESDL. I’ve been to Guntersville and flown the Ace Hawk. Great aircraft, and superbly updated by Darryl and the team. But. It’s not an FMS aircraft as the US DoD don’t use it. Any UK buy would be DCS to Ace or a possible UK agent - ergo it would be without some of the cost benefits of FMS but, equally, also not tied to several of the constraints. As JD notes, of all the proposed NMH candidate platforms, only the -60 was designed with strict survivability requirements stipulated - including separation of systems (including the pilots…..), duplex/triplex redundancy in key areas, ballistic tolerance and ruggedness to accept high RoD landings. However, unless the Social Value content of a UK -60 is high, Politics dictates that Yeovil wins….again….

[tigerfish]

I understand that the PUMA remains the current most efficient and reliable resource in the UK helicopter inventory. So why not extend its out of service relief until a decent replacement can be identified? CMon'y guys ditch the Politics give the armed services the bang bung for the politics

TF

[Evalu8ter]

TF, this was the first question I asked. After all, the upgrade to Puma 2 included modern engines and cockpit. I think the date is key here. By 2025 there’s precious little work at Yeovil forecast; Wildcat/Merlin support will endure, but Apache will end - transferred to E model and Boeing. My guess is that Puma has to go to justify chucking £1Bn at the factory. Personally, I agree with a sentiment I heard last week - scrap NMH and use the money to buy more Wildcat and Chinook, keeping Yeovil and the military happy, and COMO the ‘odds and sods’. The urban argument, whilst valid, is not as is often made out. If you have to keep NMH, lease 15-20 for 15 years and see how FVL goes and if NGRC amounts to anything tangible.

[EESDL]

Evalu8tor
you might be surprised what you can get on FMS these days ;-)

[[email protected]]

Evalu8ter - why on earth would you want to buy more Wildcat? More Chinook I get but the Wildcat? How many troops does it lift again??

[Northernstar]

Lynx Mk10?

No thanks!!

[tigerfish]

Evalu8ter, Did you know that the Wildcat is almost universally called the "Mildcat" by the RAF who regard it with a certain amount of derision. I suspect there would be strong opposition if that was suggested as a Puma replacement!

TF

[trim it out]

Of course it's not a Puma replacement. When has the Puma ever been referred to as a Recce platform?

[Evalu8ter]

TF, wrong end of the stick chap. The extra Wildcats are to keep Yeovil afloat and provide more FIND/light utility capability. The additional Chinooks backfill the Pumas (queue wails about urban ops and false inefficiencies of flying half empty Chinooks …..)

[212man]

Anyone heard a rumour the Pumas could be going earlier than 2025?

[helisniper]

Bearing in mind that the Wildcat production line depended on quite a few components recovered from the former Mk 9 fleet, is it even possible to build any more?!

Notwithstanding whether they could be made, and in what timescales, it's suitability for the Cyprus/Brunei (and the 'other one') roles is non-existent.

[EESDL]

I note that Leonardo are proudly marketing the fact that they continue to sell their wares to countries of horrendous Human Rights performance.

[minigundiplomat]

I note that Leonardo are proudly marketing the fact that they continue to sell their wares to countries of horrendous Human Rights performance.

Airbus are even worse - they inherited the French habit of feral sales to anyone with blood tinged euros

[[email protected]]

Let's not pretend that any country selling arms to any other country really gives a sh*t about what they are used for and who they are used on.

[minigundiplomat]

I don’t disagree Crab. My point was, if you’re going to apply a standard, apply it to all.

[tigerfish]

All of this buy X to save jobs at—- is a false logic. The primary role of the armed services is to protect the U.K. from those that will do it harm. Specific manufacturers viability must come second to that.
so IF for example the latest Blackhawk is adjudged the best that is the one we should buy!
Saving the Leonardo factory at Yeovil must come way down the list. The Mildcat is next to useless.
if necessary build the most suitable aircraft under license at Yeovil. It needs to be able to deliver at least as many fully equipped troops as the Puma.

TF

[PPRuNeUser0211]

All of this buy X to save jobs at—- is a false logic. The primary role of the armed services is to protect the U.K. from those that will do it harm. Specific manufacturers viability must come second to that.
so IF for example the latest Blackhawk is adjudged the best that is the one we should buy!
Saving the Leonardo factory at Yeovil must come way down the list. The Mildcat is next to useless.
if necessary build the most suitable aircraft under license at Yeovil. It needs to be able to deliver at least as many fully equipped troops as the Puma.

TF
TF, it's lovely that you think that, but large equipment orders in just about any country I can think of are all about the politics. If you have a domestic capability, then its internal. If you don't, it's international. Whether that's NMH, job shares for F-35, turkey buying SAMs, UAE buying a shiny jet fleet or whatever. A massive chunk of it is political, with the min viable product for the mil capabilities required essentially being the threshold beyond which the politicians don't care about capabilities of the kit (if they even cared before).

[chopper2004]

I note that Leonardo are proudly marketing the fact that they continue to sell their wares to countries of horrendous Human Rights performance.

You on about the sad (violent) demise of an Italian student who is up with the Pharoahs?? Leonardo are quite Schtum about the 149 seen in the same markings and camouflage on flight tests from Cascina Costa, when asked about who it’s been exported to.

Russian Helicopters JSC are no-comment at Dubai Air Show recently when I asked about the KA52K export to the same country. I explained there’s plenty of photos and the odd article showing the Alligator on the Nile. They said that’s fine but until they officially issue a press release then as far as the world is concerned it is what it is.

cheerd

[minigundiplomat]

Seen as Australia is dumping their entire MRH90 fleet and replacing with Blackhawk, does it not make sense for the UK to do the same under AUKUS?

Leonardo is no more British than LIDL; yes they employ people in the UK, but that’s no reason to hamstring the military with another helicopter that’s no use on the battlefield.

[NIREP reader]

Bearing in mind that the Wildcat production line depended on quite a few components recovered from the former Mk 9 fleet, is it even possible to build any more?!

Notwithstanding whether they could be made, and in what timescales, it's suitability for the Cyprus/Brunei (and the 'other one') roles is non-existent.

Apparently they have flown the Wildcat simulator in Brunei conditions and the feedback was that it performed a lot better than expected.

[ShyTorque]

Seen as Australia is dumping their entire MRH90 fleet and replacing with Blackhawk, does it not make sense for the UK to do the same under AUKUS?

We were talking about replacing the Puma (and Wessex) with Blackhawk as long ago as 1979!

[[email protected]]

Apparently they have flown the Wildcat simulator in Brunei conditions and the feedback was that it performed a lot better than expected. ISTR they claimed the Lynx could work in Belize to replace the Puma, forced the RAF out and then discovered the Lynx was no good in that environment.

And just because a simulator says it will work is not that much of a recommendation.

BERP blades and tight jungle clearings are not a good mix.

[ShyTorque]

Belize…. various Army brains there thought they knew more about helicopters than the RAF.

I recall a certain non air crew Major at Rideau who couldn’t understand why Pumas (the underpowered HC1 back then) couldn’t fly with the full complement of 16 seats, put soldiers on all of them, add luggage or an underslung load and fill right up with fuel. We normally flew in 12 seat fit. He was convinced we were “short changing” him.

Having been advised otherwise he later claimed that the RAF were over estimating the weight of the average soldier and therefore more soldiers should be carried than we said we could.

As far as he was concerned, if a helicopter had floor space, it could be filled!

He instigated a formal “checkout” procedure where every soldier was individually weighed before flight. He shot himself right in the foot with that because his men were actually considerably heavier than the average weights previously used, so it was decreed from on high that we carried fewer than before. He deservedly earned the nickname “The bathroom scales Major”.

One particular flight we were regularly tasked for on Fridays was to take soldiers and a local policeman to an offshore island for “R & R” barbecue over the weekend (we weren’t invited). The load included passengers, various equipment but most importantly a large (cubic metre?) heavyweight aluminium trunk containing their food and drinks, in ice. Loading was supervised as usual by my crewman just before planned departure but the army delayed their flight by some hours. When we finally lifted off from the raised helipad, which was actually only just big enough to get the wheels on with care, being sized for a skidded Scout, I realised we were very much overweight and the Puma wouldn’t transition away as normal. I had no option but to continue trying to fly because the helipad was just behind us and the ground ahead was riddled with vegetation covering deep drainage ditches. We got very, very close to crashing into the ammo compound but just scraped over the trees!

When we landed at the island the soldiers couldn’t lift the food trunk off the aircraft. We shut down and then found that it was inexplicably full almost right to the brim with water! It had to be bailed out to get the weight down.

An investigation discovered that the Army, concerned about the delay causing their beers to get warm, had kept going back to the aircraft and topping up the ice as it melted without telling us. A cubic metre of water weighs a great deal!

[Hot_LZ]

I completely empathise with your story of the ‘scales Major’s’ ignorance towards your professional advice but I find it very rich that a crab is complaining about a few Army blokes having a BBQ and a few beers on the beach. I’ve never met a crab yet that’s willing to get their feet wet.

LZ

[212man]

Apparently they have flown the Wildcat simulator in Brunei conditions and the feedback was that it performed a lot better than expected.
What is meant by ‘conditions’? The climate isn’t that extreme - it’s equatorial/maritime.

[Baldeep Inminj]

Apparently they have flown the Wildcat simulator in Brunei conditions and the feedback was that it performed a lot better than expected.

This statement is completely meaningless without context and standard. It could be that it was expected to be utterly useless, but was just quite bad. In this case it would be better than expected, but still totally unsuitable.

I have not met an RAF pilot yet who does not think that Blackhawk is the most suitable solution.

[MOSTAFA]

I have flown 1400+ Hours in Brunei and was perhaps the man who finally got the Lynx **** canned in favour of the 212 the last time. I briefed the then Defence Secretary (George Younger) with his MOD team. I then flew demo’s to the types of LP’s we flew into; in the 3 training areas we used. The were: Labi, Ulu Tutong and the Temburong districts, by far the hardest on the aircraft was Temburong, an average LP in that district had an average temperature of +32 with DA of 5500’ the Tutong, +34 DA 4000’ and the Labi +34 and a DA of 3000’. The other area that has to be taken very carefully into account is using the winch! The Scout MRG oil temp limitations in the hover at those DA’s I forget but I can tell you that it got dangerously high, dangerously quickly. Having a 1000+ on Lynx and being pretty efficient with the ODM it came out with the ability of less payload than the Scout could! Not even seen the New Lynx Mk10 ODM so I’ll leave that to them. Hope that gives a clue!

[tigerfish]

Not the dreadful Mildcat - It can't carry fully equipped troops like the Puma can. The Blackhawk is far more suitable!

TF

[NutLoose]

Sikorsky are pitching Polish built Blackhawks as Puma replacement

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/sikorsky-pitches-polish-built-black-hawks-as-uk-puma-replacement/146812.article

[jimf671]

I have flown 1400+ Hours in Brunei and was perhaps the man who finally got the Lynx **** canned in favour of the 212 the last time. I briefed the then Defence Secretary (George Younger) with his MOD team. I then flew demo’s to the types of LP’s we flew into; in the 3 training areas we used. The were: Labi, Ulu Tutong and the Temburong districts, by far the hardest on the aircraft was Temburong, an average LP in that district had an average temperature of +32 with DA of 5500’ the Tutong, +34 DA 4000’ and the Labi +34 and a DA of 3000’. The other area that has to be taken very carefully into account is using the winch! The Scout MRG oil temp limitations in the hover at those DA’s I forget but I can tell you that it got dangerously high, dangerously quickly. Having a 1000+ on Lynx and being pretty efficient with the ODM it came out with the ability of less payload than the Scout could! Not even seen the New Lynx Mk10 ODM so I’ll leave that to them. Hope that gives a clue!

British helicopters are temperate zone naval weapons.

[ShyTorque]

I completely empathise with your story of the ‘scales Major’s’ ignorance towards your professional advice but I find it very rich that a crab is complaining about a few Army blokes having a BBQ and a few beers on the beach. I’ve never met a crab yet that’s willing to get their feet wet.

LZ


I wasn't complaining....apart from the Army overloading the aircraft.

But we RAF dry footed folk did have our own barbecue, usually on Sundays at Caye Chapel - until the Army insisted that it was unfair that they weren't invited.

[chopper2004]

Here is the tender folks

https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/013386-2022?origin=SearchResults&p=1

cheers

[JulieAndrews]

MD & also the Head of UK Campaigns sacked at LH.
Always sorry to hear when that happens but apparently deemed medically unfit - severe case of lack of long-sightedness !
Sounds like recent press article clarified that there is a far better use for Yeovil than being pre-occupied with hawking a poorly-selling hash-up.

[Baldeep Inminj]

I understand the Blackhawk’s will be provided/modified by a 3rd party in the UK - Teeside I believe.
I also heard yesterday that Bell are very likely to attend the party, bringing the 525 Relentless along as their date.

This will be interesting to watch. Blackhawk is combat proven, 149 is ‘jobs for the lads in the SW’, H175 is ‘jobs for the lads in N Wales’ and uses the same avionics as H135 and H145 used on MFTS, and Bell just makes brilliant helicopters.

Popcorn ready!

[JohnDixson]

A lot will depend on the RAF mission description. If it is admin support, the 525 will compete well. If it involves combat requirements, the ballistic survivability and crashworthy requirements imposed by the US Army in all aspects of the design, ( just one example: to include for instance rotor blade survivability to 23MM HEI hits at various angles ( and provable by actual firing tests ) but the list is pretty long ) will be in play.
But basically those same requirements applied to the AAH competition, so the Apache specs in that regard should be familiar to the MOD folks.

[torqueshow]

Is the 525 even in many civil operators’ fleets? It’s been a bit late to the party for the super medium category with the AW189 and H175 already with a fair bit of time under their belt proving their capabilities (or lack thereof).

I was under the impression that the 525 is still a very unknown quantity.

[Evil Twin]

Is the 525 even in many civil operators’ fleets? It’s been a bit late to the party for the super medium category with the AW189 and H175 already with a fair bit of time under their belt proving their capabilities (or lack thereof).

I was under the impression that the 525 is still a very unknown quantity.
Don't think it's even certified yet is it?

[EESDL]

I understand the Blackhawk’s will be provided/modified by a 3rd party in the UK - Teeside I believe.
I also heard yesterday that Bell are very likely to attend the party, bringing the 525 Relentless along as their date.

This will be interesting to watch. Blackhawk is combat proven, 149 is ‘jobs for the lads in the SW’, H175 is ‘jobs for the lads in N Wales’ and uses the same avionics as H135 and H145 used on MFTS, and Bell just makes brilliant helicopters.

Popcorn ready!

I wouldn’t advertise the H175 / H145 / H145 avionics commonality if I was Airbus.
it is not MOSA and woe betide anyone wanting to use it for stores management etc.
even in basic O&G operation you pay through the nose for any changes. It’s great for O&G and had every confidence in autocoupling approaches - although the odd moment when trapped water in the pipes initiated a descent whilst turning at low level......
Bell’s rationale is simply “why can’t you wait a little bit longer as you’ve delayed to this point”
quite confident that it won’t hit FOC within next 7-10 years with all bells n whistles attached.
latest events in Somerset indicates that someone has finally recognised where the company should be focused / heading.
timeframe requires an existing tried n tested machine and that narrows field to the Blackhawk or an updated Huey. Budget and fleet numbers points towards the midlife Blackhawk out of Alabama / Teesside at approx 60% OEM price but more importantly - a viable delivery target date as LM/ Sikorsky’s European facility is backed-up with orders now that the world has got a lot more serious and you’ll be lucky to see a machine within 3-4 years.
that was direct from the guys at PZL.

[Mee3]

I wouldn’t advertise the H175 / H145 / H145 avionics commonality if I was Airbus.
it is not MOSA and woe betide anyone wanting to use it for stores management etc.
even in basic O&G operation you pay through the nose for any changes. It’s great for O&G and had every confidence in autocoupling approaches - although the odd moment when trapped water in the pipes initiated a descent whilst turning at low level......
Bell’s rationale is simply “why can’t you wait a little bit longer as you’ve delayed to this point”
quite confident that it won’t hit FOC within next 7-10 years with all bells n whistles attached.
latest events in Somerset indicates that someone has finally recognised where the company should be focused / heading.
timeframe requires an existing tried n tested machine and that narrows field to the Blackhawk or an updated Huey. Budget and fleet numbers points towards the midlife Blackhawk out of Alabama / Teesside at approx 60% OEM price but more importantly - a viable delivery target date as LM/ Sikorsky’s European facility is backed-up with orders now that the world has got a lot more serious and you’ll be lucky to see a machine within 3-4 years.
that was direct from the guys at PZL.
customize avionic in today's tech is always expensive. No difference between AH's own helionix and Leonardo's honeywell solution. If you do not go with the OEM, you risk ripping out everything and get someone to redo your entire interface. But at least AH and honeywell last forever, sort of. Better than your mix and match electronic nightmare in a decade down the road.

[chopper2004]

Is the 525 even in many civil operators’ fleets? It’s been a bit late to the party for the super medium category with the AW189 and H175 already with a fair bit of time under their belt proving their capabilities (or lack thereof).

I was under the impression that the 525 is still a very unknown quantity.

Nope there’s only four flight test vehicles (should have been 5 but there was sadly a fatal crash in summer 2016).

PHi was Launch customer a decade ago Heli a expo 2012 when it was unveiled, then it was meant to be Bristow Group…

When I attended Heli Expo 2020, the final development test vehicle had Norwegian offshore company as launch customer …

And the Teeside company is offshoot of Ace Aeronautics

https://acehawkaerospace.com

cheers

[torqueshow]

Nope there’s only four flight test vehicles (should have been 5 but there was sadly a fatal crash in summer 2016).

PHi was Launch customer a decade ago Heli a expo 2012 when it was unveiled, then it was meant to be Bristow Group…

When I attended Heli Expo 2020, the final development test vehicle had Norwegian offshore company as launch customer …

And the Teeside company is offshoot of Ace Aeronautics

https://acehawkaerospace.com

cheers

Great info, thanks. Seems like a long shot in that case.

[212man]

Nope there’s only four flight test vehicles (should have been 5 but there was sadly a fatal crash in summer 2016).

PHi was Launch customer a decade ago Heli a expo 2012 when it was unveiled, then it was meant to be Bristow Group…

When I attended Heli Expo 2020, the final development test vehicle had Norwegian offshore company as launch customer …

And the Teeside company is offshoot of Ace Aeronautics

https://acehawkaerospace.com

cheers

Yes - it's not even certified yet: Bell continues 525 certification push but timeline depends on FAA | News | Flight Global (https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/bell-continues-525-certification-push-but-timeline-depends-on-faa/147201.article)

737Max has probably been a factor in the delays.....

[JulieAndrews]

Mee3......you mean a bit like what the folk at Ace have done?
The stuff Ace have put on Youtube is not cgi - you can ask the Austrians.
That was the whole point of ripping everything out and starting again - to take a great aircraft and make it better for many years to come. Garmin avionics, L3Harris mission controller, GE engines plus a playbook of DAS, CSW etc

[JulieAndrews]

Teeside AceHawk is not an 'offshoot' of Ace Aeronautics - not that it matters at this point. From what I read Ace Aero will be a supplier of the airframe and IP. The expensive stuff such as avionics, engines, DAS sourced and fitted through UK outlets?

[lowfat]

What ever is chosen I expect it will be a balls up.. prove me wrong.

[EESDL]

Now hearing of a fire at the Airbus H175 and H160 MGB factory.........add that to the upheavals at Leonardo .....finger of blame is going to start pointing at Ace as the ones to benefit ;-)

[helihub]

Now hearing of a fire at the Airbus H175 and H160 MGB factory

@EESDL - you are either clutching at straws to discredit AH here, or your news network needs beefing up. This fire happened on Sunday 9th January (report (https://www.20minutes.fr/faits_divers/2949247-20210110-bouches-rhone-important-incendie-entrepot-site-airbus-helicopters-vitrolles)) and I have only heard it mentioned as affecting H160 deliveries

H175 deliveries are another thing imho. For example, what happened to the order for two from China Rescue at Heli-Expo 2019, given Leonardo announced six AW189s for the same customer at Heli-Expo 2022?

[helihub]

Teeside AceHawk is not an 'offshoot' of Ace Aeronautics - not that it matters at this point. From what I read Ace Aero will be a supplier of the airframe and IP. The expensive stuff such as avionics, engines, DAS sourced and fitted through UK outlets?

@JulieAndrews when you say "From what I read...." could you point us to the article online please, or do you have closer involvement in Acehawk Aerospace Ltd than you are letting on?

[FloaterNorthWest]

@JulieAndrews when you say "……or do you have closer involvement in Acehawk Aerospace Ltd than you are letting on?

Ditto EESDL.

[Cyclic Hotline]

I wonder if any of the other platforms being proposed for this programme can provide such detailed information in the public domain, including acquisition costs? I would be very interested to see any similar data.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2019_SARS/20-F-0568_DOC_80_UH-60M_Black_Hawk_SAR_Dec_2019_Full.pdf

[JulieAndrews]

@JulieAndrews when you say "From what I read...." could you point us to the article online please, or do you have closer involvement in Acehawk Aerospace Ltd than you are letting on?
the info is out there - and who said it was online?
that said - the Antares article is pretty clear
but please let us not forget that this is a rumour network !

[KiwiNedNZ]

Here is the link to Antares and the story starts Page 148. Paul Kennard interviewed all the key players in the project so its not rumours but facts from those spearheading it.

Antares - UK Hawk Feature (https://indd.adobe.com/view/4d51bf34-4fba-4e97-9ca1-70c6fbe350c1)

[JulieAndrews]

no mention of the Mike-models not reaching their 8000-hr life for composite beam??? Ask the Saudis

[Mee3]

having a lot of glass is really not adding substantial improvement over gauge with needles. The real benefit of electronics are on the automation of flight that involves a lot of autopilot fine tuning which these guys will not have access to or the cost benefit over airframer.

[Lonewolf_50]

no mention of the Mike-models not reaching their 8000-hr life for composite beam??? Ask the Saudis
I probably misunderstood your post, but isn't the Saudi UH-60M buy only within the last couple of years? How would they have run into an 8,000 hour life problem?
(If you were referring to a different aircraft's M model, that would explain my confusion).

[JulieAndrews]

I probably misunderstood your post, but isn't the Saudi UH-60M buy only within the last couple of years? How would they have run into an 8,000 hour life problem?
(If you were referring to a different aircraft's M model, that would explain my confusion).
that is exactly the point - it hasn’t reached the forecast 8000-hit life.
Ace Aeronautics LLC are classified as the OEM for the avionics upgrade STC.
they have plenty of expertise in any area you could possibly imagine when it comes to the UH-60; as do their neighbours the other companies specialising in leveraging the design and capability advantages of the machine down in sweet Alabama

[Lonewolf_50]

Antares - UK Hawk Feature (https://indd.adobe.com/view/4d51bf34-4fba-4e97-9ca1-70c6fbe350c1)
Many thanks for the link, good article.

For Julie Andrews: OK, wasn't sure if the Saudis had made unhappy noises about the M regarding service life.

While I would, being massively biased from having flown the SH-60 and the UH-60 (L's), of course recommend the Blackhawk, I can appreciate the desire to keep the defense industrial base warm and thus the urge to "make it somewhere domestic" informing the ultimate decision. John D I am sure knows a few details that I don't, but I recall an issue with CH-53E swashplate bearings (which ended in tears) that could have been sourced from a German company (the name escapes me, over two decades ago) but a "buy Domestic" imperative was involved and Kaydon supplied them. (They also built/supplied the bearings for the 5" gun mounts on various USN surface ships).
Granted, that's a sub system, or a component, and not the whole aircraft but when large amounts of the tax payers funds are being spent, the pressure to "spend it at home" can be profound.

As this is an interim step to the longer term medium lift requirement, and NGR, the arguments made for 'off the shelf' seem to be pretty strong. (Ned's linked article covers them pretty well).
PS: if you know anyone in the business, please don't let anyone convince the program manager to put the Hontek coating on the M blades if the M is chosen. The US Army ended up with a case of buyer's remorse on that one.

As a matter of curiosity: is the VL-60 related to the US Army's UH-60V (putting the M style glass cockpit into L's) or is it a separate thing entirely?)

[chopper2004]

Early morning musings and if there is any conspiracy theories on the upcoming procurement may I suggest a Crystal Ball or speak to a famous East Anglian UFOlogist from this region called Gary with the same family name as our famous Parliamentarian who both swung the Mace and Yeovil which has led to us being in this situation today lol. Maybe they are distantly related!!

Without stating the bleeding obvious that the H175M and AW!89 are less than ideal for what is expected of a true battlefield utility helicopter, and the obvious is the UH-60M/S-70i airframe! There is an old saying that 'one size' fits all with the 4/5 existing platforms. However one question keeps popping into my head and that is about the 658 Sqn AAC.

Unlike 160th SOAR Nightstalkers our 658 formelry * Flt has operated pseudo civvy airframes be it the captured Argentinian A109A or now 365N£...so for good reason their MO is blending into civvy world for the likes of urban assault / hostage rescue. It will give the game away if a Blackhawk airframe comes over the top to drop Herefords finest to rescue say a damsel in distress/ beautiful princess and her kids from the forces of evil. So maybe and a big maybe likes of an AW149 or H175M will do nicely ....

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers

[[email protected]]

The point where the aircraft arrives overhead makes it pretty obvious something is up, whether it is a civ model or not.

It is much of the other tasking where anonymity is desirable.

Unfortunately spotters soon learn what is being used and put photos on line anyway.

[ericferret]

"Without stating the bleeding obvious that the H175M and AW!89 are less than ideal for what is expected of a true battlefield utility helicopter, and the obvious is the UH-60M/S-70i airframe! There is an old saying that 'one size' fits all with the 4/5 existing platforms. "

I would have gone with the Blackhawk. However the Ukrainians are showing that even helicopters designed for the battlefield are extremely vulnerable, not to mention tanks!!!!
Time for a rethink. .

[JulieAndrews]

Many thanks for the link, good article.

For Julie Andrews: OK, wasn't sure if the Saudis had made unhappy noises about the M regarding service life.

While I would, being massively biased from having flown the SH-60 and the UH-60 (L's), of course recommend the Blackhawk, I can appreciate the desire to keep the defense industrial base warm and thus the urge to "make it somewhere domestic" informing the ultimate decision. John D I am sure knows a few details that I don't, but I recall an issue with CH-53E swashplate bearings (which ended in tears) that could have been sourced from a German company (the name escapes me, over two decades ago) but a "buy Domestic" imperative was involved and Kaydon supplied them. (They also built/supplied the bearings for the 5" gun mounts on various USN surface ships).
Granted, that's a sub system, or a component, and not the whole aircraft but when large amounts of the tax payers funds are being spent, the pressure to "spend it at home" can be profound.

As this is an interim step to the longer term medium lift requirement, and NGR, the arguments made for 'off the shelf' seem to be pretty strong. (Ned's linked article covers them pretty well).
PS: if you know anyone in the business, please don't let anyone convince the program manager to put the Hontek coating on the M blades if the M is chosen. The US Army ended up with a case of buyer's remorse on that one.

As a matter of curiosity: is the VL-60 related to the US Army's UH-60V (putting the M style glass cockpit into L's) or is it a separate thing entirely?)
no link - the V’s cockpit is dated even though a recent introduction!
The VL-60 cockpit is streets ahead again.
Coupling the 4-axis ap and using DVE is not the key - it’s the ability to link ‘everything’ and update ‘everything’ through the mission system which keeps the workload and cost down

[Lonewolf_50]

no link - the V’s cockpit is dated even though a recent introduction!
The VL-60 cockpit is streets ahead again.
Coupling the 4-axis ap and using DVE is not the key - it’s the ability to link ‘everything’ and update ‘everything’ through the mission system which keeps the workload and cost down I was thanking Kiwi Ned for the link to the article advocating for the Black Hawk. :)
Yes, the V upgrade is the UH-60M package glass cockpit to replace the steam gages I flew L's with.
Makes sense that the VL digital cockpit takes advantage of a more recent vintage.
I hope it clears the political hurdles, and I also hope that they can manage to keep the defense industrial base warm in Yeovil - keeping that kind of capability and talent 'warm' is important for so many reasons.

[Cyclic Hotline]

Interesting timing to say the least.

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/leonardo-helicopters-rocked-by-sudden-departure-of-uk-chief-as-nmh-campaign-kicks-off/148796.articleLeonardo Helicopters rocked by sudden departure of UK chief as NMH campaign kicks offBy Dominic Perry (https://www.flightglobal.com/dominic-perry/263.bio)25 May 2022









Save article (https://www.flightglobal.com/sign-in)

Leonardo Helicopters’ bid to secure the long-term future of its Yeovil plant by winning the UK’s New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirement has hit early turbulence with the abrupt departure of its UK managing director Nick Whitney.

Whitney – whose time with the company dates back to its Westland days – left the business suddenly on 19 May, barely 24h after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) formally launched the NMH contest.

https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/0/5/3/87053_nickwhitneycrop_450816.jpg

Source: Leonardo Helicopters

Whitney departed on 19 May – barely 24h after launch of the UK’s NMH contest

No details surrounding his exit have been disclosed, although company insiders say it came out of the blue.

Save to confirm Whitney’s departure, Leonardo Helicopters declines to comment on the reasons behind the move. It is unclear who is running the operation in Whitney’s absence.

The apparent vacuum at the top of the company could not come at a worse time: prospective bidders for the £1.2 billion ($1.5 billion) NMH contract have until 20 June to submit a Dynamic Pre-Qualification Questionnaire to the MoD. Invitations to tender will then be issued by 30 September.

London is seeking up to 44 rotorcraft through the NMH procurement to replace the Royal Air Force’s 23 Puma HC2 transports and three other smaller fleets of medium-weight helicopters.

https://d3lcr32v2pp4l1.cloudfront.net/Pictures/480xany/0/5/4/87054_aw149_477084.jpg

Source: Leonardo Helicopters

AW149 would be built in Yeovil if selected for NMH requirement

Leonardo Helicopters is pitching its 8.5t AW149 for the requirement, which it is promising to build in Yeovil. It will also assemble export examples at the UK facility. At present the AW149 is built at the manufacturer’s factory in Vergiate, Italy.

While the Yeovil plant is not under immediate threat if Leonardo Helicopters does not win the NMH competition, the fact remains that new work would silence questions around its long-term future.

Speaking at the DSEI show in October last year (https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/leonardo-helicopters-boosts-uk-content-on-aw149-for-nmh-bid/145462.article), Whitney acknowledged that a failure to secure work through NMH could make the wider Leonardo group reconsider its investment in the UK.

“My concern would be if our own MoD doesn’t show confidence in the rotary-wing provider which is already established in the UK that does lead to questions,” he said.

Other declared contenders for the NMH deal include the Airbus Helicopters H175M, Sikorsky S-70M Black Hawk and AceHawk Aerospace ML-70 – a pre-owned Black Hawk extensively updgraded with new dynamic components and a Garmin G5000 glass cockpit.

[ericferret]

"Speaking at the DSEI show in October last year (https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/leonardo-helicopters-boosts-uk-content-on-aw149-for-nmh-bid/145462.article), Whitney acknowledged that a failure to secure work through NMH could make the wider Leonardo group reconsider its investment in the UK.

“My concern would be if our own MoD doesn’t show confidence in the rotary-wing provider which is already established in the UK that does lead to questions,” he said."

Firstly a veiled threat to U.K jobs if Leonardo don't get the contract
Secondly confidence in the product is more important than confidence in the company.

The U.K military has had to deal with sub standard equipment on more than one occasion of U.K manufacture.

[Evalu8ter]

Eric, 'However the Ukrainians are showing that even helicopters designed for the battlefield are extremely vulnerable' is a fairly sweeping statement. There is far more to helicopter employment than making judgements based upon seeing curated (and sometimes falsified) video clips on MSM/SM without context. I would postulate that Russian TTPs are poor, and they are deficient in both DAS/ASE and Night Vision equipment / training. After all, there is no sane reason why you would elect to air assault an airfield in broad daylight if you could choose to go at night (I've briefed to do one twice, both daylight, both 'at the rush' and I'm probably only still here because they both got cancelled….). They are also showing limited ability to plan/fight collectively in complex mutually supporting packages. Based on what we're seeing, and aware that much of it is false/exaggerated, those are the conclusions I would draw. I would be very cautious writing off all helicopters flown by all nations as 'extremely vulnerable'. In Vietnam, the US lost one helo approximately every 7000 hours - which stacks up very well against some of the Fast Movers (yes, looking at you F105 community…) and, similar to Iraq/Afghan, about 50% were accidents caused by CFIT, loss of control, heavy landings etc rather than enemy action. I've seen some figures worked out from OS info which suggests that the Russians are losing a helicopter every 75-100 sorties, and we've also no data on how many are recoverable having been forced down - which, let's face it, not many FJs are. Fit the right kit, train the crews properly and learn how to integrate with Fast Movers / FIRES and helicopters are far less vulnerable than the Russians are making them seem to be.

Chopper, as Crab notes, 658's 'secret' cabs are photographed and tracked all the time by the spotter community, and the moment one makes a flare to a fast roping approach all hope of remaining anonymous is lost. The replacement aircraft could easily be a Black Hawk as, if NMH opt for it, in itself it would become 'non-signature'. I would, however, suggest that as they are UK-based assets, a handful of leased AW169s would be sensible, or even H145Ms in pseudo police / VIP markings if there was a desire to leverage the advantages of the MFTS aircraft and 'blend in' with the Met Police.

[tucumseh]

"Speaking at the DSEI show in October last year (https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/leonardo-helicopters-boosts-uk-content-on-aw149-for-nmh-bid/145462.article), Whitney acknowledged that a failure to secure work through NMH could make the wider Leonardo group reconsider its investment in the UK.

“My concern would be if our own MoD doesn’t show confidence in the rotary-wing provider which is already established in the UK that does lead to questions,” he said."

Firstly a veiled threat to U.K jobs if Leonardo don't get the contract
Secondly confidence in the product is more important than confidence in the company.

The U.K military has had to deal with sub standard equipment on more than one occasion of U.K manufacture.


Part of the reason might be this will be a long haul, and as he's nearing retirement it might be best if fresh legs are there at the beginning.

That the military has had to do with sub-standard kit is true, but irrelevant when discussing Westland; and mostly irrelevant when discussing industry in general, for the simple reason MoD signs to say it is content with the design, development and production, at every stage of the process. Very few companies will risk their own money to deliver what the MoD needs, rather than what it asked for. Westland (as was), in my experience, happened to be one of them. But these days there may be too much influence from abroad. I feel the company has lost its identity, as did (e.g.) Ferranti.

[FloaterNorthWest]

New leadership for AHUK.

https://helihub.com/2022/06/23/airbus-helicopters-in-the-uk-announces-leadership-transition/?fbclid=IwAR092NDwyZUSP2nqEr0sm5hqRb3lk29HTfY-fa3uYJjlZ9fS6PspQxrpNqI

[NutLoose]

Leonardo Helicopters is pitching its 8.5t AW149 for the requirement, which it is promising to build in Yeovil. It will also assemble export examples at the UK facility. At present the AW149 is built at the manufacturer’s factory in Vergiate, Italy.

Which one is it? Why would you need to assemble export examples if you are building them in house... or are the supposed built in house examples simply assembled in house?

[Self loading bear]

I read it that in case of a UK order for AW149, the assembly line will be moved to the UK so other AW149 orders for export to outside UK will then also be assembled in UK.
Assembly (not necessarily complete production)

[Cyclic Hotline]

I posted this in the Tiger MkIII thread, but this article provides a rather interesting insight into the relationship between the French Government, Airbus, and their Customers and or partners. It is equally relevant here.Tiger Mark 3: it's decision time for Germanyhttps://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/le-tigre-mark-3-n-aura-pas-d-equivalent-au-niveau-mondial-bruno-even-airbus-helicopters-905626.html

The Berlin Air Show (ILA) will give indications on German orientations in terms of cooperation with France and Europe. Germany will have to say whether or not it remains in the Tiger Mark 3 program

.https://static.latribune.fr/full_width/1879157/tigre-mark-3-france-espagne-airbus-helicopters.jpg

The signals from Germany "are not positive at the operational level and at the Ministry of Defense in relation to the priority which would be given to the Tiger Mark 3" underlined the CEO of Airbus Helicopters, Bruno Even. (Credits: Airbus Helicopters)There is no longer any doubt that Germany should announce shortly - possibly at the ILA air show in Berlin - that it will not participate in the modernization program of the Tiger combat helicopter by upgrading its aircraft to standard 3 under prime contractor Airbus Helicopters. Once again Berlin proves to be an unreliable partner for France in terms of European cooperation in the field of armaments. The list is long, too long of German renunciations on programs in cooperation with France launched in July 2017: armament of the Tiger (MAST-F missile now Akeron-LP), program of maritime patrol aircraft MAWS (Berlin ordered P-8A Poseidons from Boeing) and, finally, most certainly the Tiger Mark 3.

If Germany confirmed the decision to release the Tiger Mark 3, it would cause a new legitimate frustration in Paris and above all would not generate confidence in France while the latter has privileged Berlin as a major partner in the field of defense. Finally, France would take a new slap in the face, especially since Emmanuel Macron has invested a lot in bringing out and launching all these cooperations. The next speeches by Sébastien Lecornu, the new Minister of the Armed Forces very close to the President, will therefore be scrutinized in the light of German decisions.

Tiger Mark 3 is not Berlin's priority

The Germans have until around the end of June to communicate to France and Spain their decision to remain in this program. At the Paris Forum held in early June, Airbus Helicopters CEO Bruno Even seemed pessimistic about Germany's participation in this program. Asked if he had had any positive signals from Germany, he replied that "They are not positive at the operational level and at the Ministry of Defense in relation to the priority, which would be given to the Tiger Mark 3". “Nevertheless, I consider that everything is possible because the decision on this type of program is political,” he added cautiously, leaving the door open to German politicians. At the ILA show, the Germans should confirm that they are staying at the dock.

Bruno Even does not "believe in an American option", which is "unrealistic". The whole question is whether Berlin will offer compensation to Airbus Helicopters, naturally favoring the German factories of the manufacturer. Beyond the maintenance and treatment of obsolescence of the current German Tiger, which has not been called into question, will Berlin acquire lighter combat aircraft of the H145 type, or even H135s, from Airbus? Helicopters? It would seem logical. Finally, the skills of Donauwörth will be used within the framework of the Tiger Mk3, independently of the arrival of Germany on this program.

The differences between Paris and Berlin

Between France and Germany, "we have a fundamental subject, which will not necessarily be reduced given the additional means that the Germans will invest in their defense", it was estimated not long ago that Paris. Crucial differences. In France, the armed forces express operational needs, which manufacturers strive to meet. "In Germany, things don't work that way. Defense manufacturers produce defense equipment and the armies buy it or not", we explain to the Tribune. Thus, as soon as Berlin announced the defense fund of 100 billion euros, German industrialists presented their invoice to the German authorities, including one that could supply up to 42 billion euros in military equipment.

In addition, "there is not the equivalent of a DGA in Germany. This creates a difficulty for us French. The lack of symmetry means that we sometimes have difficulty finding interlocutors, identifying them and identify the places of decision-making. It's not easy", we explain in Paris.

Finally, the German government is very sensitive to the concerns of German industrialists. "Seen from France, it is difficult to understand that when an industrialist is reluctant, the German government cannot orient, incite, convince, persuade certain industrialists that it is important to see the problem differently, and therefore to try to provide a solution", we explain in Paris. This is the case with the MGCS program (tank of the future) blocked by Rheinmetall and the SCAF (Future air combat system), blocked by Airbus (phase 1B). This point "shows a significant difference between France and Germany". In the end, Franco-German cooperation is very complicated to launch. Especially since we must add the problems of coalitions, the relations between the Chancellery and the Bundestag, the German institutional rules...

[casper64]

I read it that in case of a UK order for AW149, the assembly line will be moved to the UK so other AW149 orders for export to outside UK will then also be assembled in UK.
Assembly (not necessarily complete production)
I bet Poland will like that idea… as they apparently just ordered the 149 as it is made there….

[EESDL]

I hear the Italian aerospace company is up to their old tricks at the Air Chiefs Conference. Briefing 1-star DCOM Cap on the 189/149 'sustainability' and 'end-to-end' manufacturing angle (although not sure how 'sustainable' carbon fibre is and how bolting on blades counts as 'manufacturing'?) This is despite both parties knowing the confidentiality limitations once DPQQs submitted. No doubt LM and Hairbrush will be up to similar at FIA - kind of makes a mockery of the MOD's procurement rules.
Is it a case of OEM-itis?

[Ammo Boiler]

I hear the Italian aerospace company is up to their old tricks at the Air Chiefs Conference. Briefing 1-star DCOM Cap on the 189/149 'sustainability' and 'end-to-end' manufacturing angle (although not sure how 'sustainable' carbon fibre is and how bolting on blades counts as 'manufacturing'?) This is despite both parties knowing the confidentiality limitations once DPQQs submitted. No doubt LM and Hairbrush will be up to similar at FIA - kind of makes a mockery of the MOD's procurement rules.
Is it a case of OEM-itis?

Noting said 189/149 blade was designed, developed and manufactured at Yeovil one would hope their involvement is more than simply bolting it on.
Not the main question of your post but worth clarifying none the less.

[EESDL]

that's noted - but point still stands - they'll be bolted on at Yeovil - with the 'rest' being provided from Poland or Italy

[FloaterNorthWest]

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-07-airbus-announces-h175m-task-force

[FloaterNorthWest]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CgCFypiq-sT/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

[[email protected]]

The UK produced element promised for the 175 seems as vague and woolly as the Leonardo one.

There are, at least, existing helicopter production facilities at Yeovil

[Northernstar]

Is yeovil not busy building more 101’s now they have stopped Italian airframe production line? And also supporting or even rebuilding more old Lynx parts into the Mk10, sorry Wildcat? I hear it’s a cracking airframe, literally!! At least the new engines coming from commanche programme won’t die when oil starved, that killed a few army pilots over the years.

Either way where is the room for producing a black 189? And now they will produce in Poland supposedly then are 3 production lines realistic or would anyone else see the abject contempt the PR machine down there is showing towards our intelligence? Surely just bolting blades and mission kit on like they did with WAH64, another wildly inflated price point political nightmare that was.

[Ammo Boiler]

The UK produced element promised for the 175 seems as vague and woolly as the Leonardo one.

There are, at least, existing helicopter production facilities at Yeovil

Agreed,

With the costs to re-qualify any dynamic or significant structural component following a change of manufacturing location i would be suprised if either product ended up with more than an assmbly line or "just bolting the blades on" in country.

[Ammo Boiler]

Is yeovil not busy building more 101’s now they have stopped Italian airframe production line? And also supporting or even rebuilding more old Lynx parts into the Mk10, sorry Wildcat? I hear it’s a cracking airframe, literally!! At least the new engines coming from commanche programme won’t die when oil starved, that killed a few army pilots over the years.

Either way where is the room for producing a black 189? And now they will produce in Poland supposedly then are 3 production lines realistic or would anyone else see the abject contempt the PR machine down there is showing towards our intelligence? Surely just bolting blades and mission kit on like they did with WAH64, another wildly inflated price point political nightmare that was.

Unless ive missed something when was the last significant 101 or Wildcat order placed?

[Northernstar]

Poland, and I believe a press release not too long ago regarding future 101 production solely in U.K. May have been related to proposed Canadian upgrade but Norway and Italy continue to accept deliveries. Won’t U.K. airframes be re-engined in yeovil too?

Very true that Lynx orders are thin on the ground, but a 300m plus support contract surely means something.

[Ammo Boiler]

Poland, and I believe a press release not too long ago regarding future 101 production solely in U.K. May have been related to proposed Canadian upgrade but Norway and Italy continue to accept deliveries. Won’t U.K. airframes be re-engined in yeovil too?

Very true that Lynx orders are thin on the ground, but a 300m plus support contract surely means something.

A quick google suggests Poland was a grand total of 4 airframes, i imagine all of which will be complete prior to the NMH winner being announced.

[chopper2004]

I attended both Royal International Air Tattoo and Farnborough Air Show over the last fortnight and saw both up close and personal the Airbus Helicopters H175M and Leonardo AW149.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/23191a55_b499_4d52_a5d0_10cd1698e59d_2e17ba3a6a5981295fbce80 cd39969b44a924a07.jpeg


At RIAT i attended the H175M brief as they announced the H175M Task Force consisting of

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-07-airbus-announces-h175m-task-force

Airbus Helicopters themselves
Babcock
Martin-Baker
Spirit Aerosystems

Leonardo AW149 NMH (the one I flew in a Year ago) performed the first Display of Friday RIAT



https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/4bb7cbf8_d775_4836_91df_98be5c171be5_fe4f11fffcafd3e8216790a 17e4db60ec1e02764.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/fae02ea0_6bed_40d1_bf7b_3670b251c60a_e32ccf729539afc0dfbf3af c6d6535a74a81ff36.jpeg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/c5d272ff_bc8c_4907_9a5b_c771e993d77d_5f775ab1540a1d4594fd4ed 309445b6c4f9e4bd7.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/b60dafac_d8c7_4d1e_b38e_471dc8af5578_32edbdfb0f943552ede7af2 beafde16647b402f5.jpeg


So above my photos from RIAT

cheers

[chopper2004]

Then couple of days later on Monday finally made it into the show (big Thankyou to BJ for opening up and the anti BJ / XR what not mob for creating a temp car park in center of the town ) just in time for the Leonardo demo. So here are my photos from my adventures…


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/18d1aa3d_492a_4123_9810_64d9b3490ece_82bb2f91e13d98213d82a68 849daa4cc8c061e7e.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/86105b5d_babc_4a18_8fc7_4b3febc57251_7e04cf81ae9847850ebdc08 9ff3d08dd3d130823.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/6bec3bc3_b017_4256_9aad_f33491a04ef7_32c85d5959c66a1da638470 61b60118e05e9b950.jpeg

Then wandered over to Lockheed Martin for UK Blackhawk brief and walk around of the PZL Melec assembled Firehawk hybrid with ESSS stores on the port side.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/3dd55c34_dc26_413c_a4f5_a5a24da3b03d_0beee8ed6a219b689f8f470 53e3c740257e048df.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/d7b3e229_57fb_46e5_baab_12aec2afc89b_5554d76e4057fc776cc2595 5e6a09f3093755ef3.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/ba75c7bf_2e74_4256_9e5e_369462a2bdb6_f8eb8b39bd484f1a5974ec3 b7442907a249f13b9.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/c57c8ff4_c778_44cc_8af3_0b3ce00c304a_4f10614483cfc069084d43f 9475e0ec9c216e4e1.jpeg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/7e186036_d3f3_4316_bf9d_97683a405947_c19bf5e1e31418e035c6212 4c6299237084e2330.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/e6c731da_818e_4f3b_ab67_627c2b165050_f636830cf7ab038db191cdf c4a1b711cd64e06b5.jpeg

Thne wandered over to Airbus chalet for a look see into the H175M


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/e4a64066_068c_4a49_88ff_5c142437e16f_cdd1c395e7929d986dee1dd 6b92e8f4130646d7d.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/22b3e01e_f58b_4bf9_a475_b8beb1cba1f1_8dc7a0599129a0d21bf0dbb 304667c78bf87c8c2.jpeg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/bcee1492_329f_48bf_822a_5b64bc77b096_eefcf548cb734f7062f9e5b 94e4088901b83e44f.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/0b8ba70b_1f81_4ee0_9a7b_e5543b8289b4_b6de7a7bff06d1d1dd1811a 779888316fd3b8961.jpeg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/091b8cf8_389f_4521_b361_39d80a2f5458_562dc5af875771021ca69c0 56e1061481097570e.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x960/c2664605_8c8b_49fd_9ae1_80671560a29b_c437dc59cdc2809d575d599 03929f0e857c4a9f4.jpeg

[melmothtw]

The UK produced element promised for the 175 seems as vague and woolly as the Leonardo one.

There are, at least, existing helicopter production facilities at Yeovil

I'd disagree. The UK element of the H175M would be full up production for the UK and exports on the only H175M line in the world. For the AW149, it's unclear how the Yeovil plan fits in with the Polish and Italian lines.

[MightyGem]

Hmmm. Not the ideal place for the gun. :ugh:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1500/6bec3bc3_b017_4256_9aad_f33491a04ef7_32c85d5959c66a1da638470 61b60118e05e9b950_59b196a592bbd22fd5e796ec1f71e1ddccfa30fa.j peg

[collectivethrust]

Hmmm. Not the ideal place for the gun. :ugh:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1500/6bec3bc3_b017_4256_9aad_f33491a04ef7_32c85d5959c66a1da638470 61b60118e05e9b950_59b196a592bbd22fd5e796ec1f71e1ddccfa30fa.j peg
How does it compare to H175 or Blackhawk?

[sycamore]

Looks like the air vent on the door opens outwards...?:ugh:

[Nescafe]

Looks like the air vent on the door opens outwards...?:ugh:


The standard AW139 window hatch opens inwards, but there is a 25kt restriction on use. It’s not really designed for use as a vent because the A/con is excellent.

[trim it out]

The standard AW139 window hatch opens inwards, but there is a 25kt restriction on use. It’s not really designed for use as a vent because the A/con is excellent.

No doubt we will pay extra to have the Aircon removed :ok:

[EESDL]

Significant difference with the types shown ? - the stuff you see strapped to the Black Hawk - they're not for 'show' - they have already gone through extensive trials and approvals and in current use with fellow operators on the battlefield. The other guys? - If they ever get near a battlefield - they'll be on their own.....and late.

[JohnDixson]

Might have mentioned this previously, but with the new blades I inquired as to whether the 23mm ballistic tests were repeated and they were.Same test requirement since the A model. Also for instance had to build a drop test structure for the main fuel tank. Had to have all the structure surrounding the tank. Fill up the tank. Get a crane and lift the whole thing to 65 ft and drop it. No leaks allowed.
These design features are just two of a long list.

[NutLoose]

Looks like the air vent on the door opens outwards...?:ugh:

Is that not a Direct Vision ( DV) window, not an air vent?, in case the windscreens get obscured for any reason, birdstrikes, oil, shattered screen, smoke etc, to aid in getting it down onto the ground, low enough not to cover the pilots face in say oil or whatever is obscuring his vision, while still allowing him to visually look out.
I would also say it has folded inwards, the reflection is over the seal area, if it had folded out the seal would not have a reflection across it.

Good to see they are still following in the tradition of putting the bloody flag on the wrong way round!


..

[OldFairy HeHimTiger]

I take it the AW149 can accommodate a load hatch / pole?

[helihub]

The UK element of the H175M would be full up production for the UK and exports on the only H175M line in the world.

As of now this is PR hot air as no countries (notably not France) have ordered any H175M helicopters.

For another stat, Airbus have not yet delivered 50 H175s, Leonardo have delivered more 120 AW149/189s and Sikorsky over 5000 Blackhawks

[212man]

As of now this is PR hot air as no countries (notably not France) have ordered any H175M helicopters.

For another stat, Airbus have not yet delivered 50 H175s, Leonardo have delivered more 120 AW149/189s and Sikorsky over 5000 Blackhawks
I assume the GFS 175s are Ms in all but name?

[EESDL]

I assume the GFS 175s are Ms in all but name?
hell - I hope not!!
If they are then that will explain why no other military has purchased them.

[casper64]

As of now this is PR hot air as no countries (notably not France) have ordered any H175M helicopters.

For another stat, Airbus have not yet delivered 50 H175s, Leonardo have delivered more 120 AW149/189s and Sikorsky over 5000 Blackhawks

That is also because Airbus never have offered the 175M up till now. The 5000 blackhawks tells you it is a good but very old military helicopter…😉

[TUPE]

Hmmm. Not the ideal place for the gun. :ugh:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1500/6bec3bc3_b017_4256_9aad_f33491a04ef7_32c85d5959c66a1da638470 61b60118e05e9b950_59b196a592bbd22fd5e796ec1f71e1ddccfa30fa.j peg
Keeps the door clear for entry/egress.

[chinook240]

Hmmm. Not the ideal place for the gun. :ugh:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1500/6bec3bc3_b017_4256_9aad_f33491a04ef7_32c85d5959c66a1da638470 61b60118e05e9b950_59b196a592bbd22fd5e796ec1f71e1ddccfa30fa.j peg
Perhaps more qualified door gunners could comment on the effect on aiming when your whole body is out of the side door at 120 kts? Never mind windchill, rain, snow, etc. Most of our current types site the gunner inboard. What arc of fire forward would the gunner have?

[Northernstar]

Perhaps more qualified door gunners could comment on the effect on aiming when your whole body is out of the side door at 120 kts? Never mind windchill, rain, snow, etc. Most of our current types site the gunner inboard. What arc of fire forward would the gunner have?


Nobody will know until the government have rammed it down the crews necks and the back or neck injury claims start coming in. The only 139's out there with similarly positioned weapons restrict crew to inside but I would view window size the same.

Interesting point re a 50 year old type in the Blackhawk. Surely that is not an issue given sales backlog in USA, and comparing F15, C130 and CH47 all selling whilst being as old or older. Is it a bad thing?

[TUPE]

Perhaps more qualified door gunners could comment on the effect on aiming when your whole body is out of the side door at 120 kts? Never mind windchill, rain, snow, etc. Most of our current types site the gunner inboard. What arc of fire forward would the gunner have?

‘aiming’ 😂
Thanks for that, not laughed so much in ages 🤗

[ZH844]

Have Leonardos actually got the people to design and build the AW149? I’m told that the technical team at Yeovil have been loosing a lot of staff due to other companies in the south west offering higher salaries and the lack of career development of engineers. If this is true then this must be a major risk to them achieving the IOC, etc?

[megan]

Perhaps more qualified door gunners could comment on the effect on aiming when your whole body is out of the side door at 120 ktsHuey gunners had no problems what so ever, mind you it was tropical weather. The set up photographed above is not fit for purpose, I'm inclined to say it's a joke introduced to impress those who have absolutely no idea, look it's got a gun. Not going to be feeding a new belt in in a hurry.

[EESDL]

Nobody will know until the government have rammed it down the crews necks and the back or neck injury claims start coming in. The only 139's out there with similarly positioned weapons restrict crew to inside but I would view window size the same.

Interesting point re a 50 year old type in the Blackhawk. Surely that is not an issue given sales backlog in USA, and comparing F15, C130 and CH47 all selling whilst being as old or older. Is it a bad thing?
....and younger than the F-16 ;-)
Generally age is not an issue with a chopper unless you have some 'lifed' carbon composite components in the airframe.
As the Black Hawk and Chinook are proving on a daily basis - a purpose-built, proven military design, with updated avionics, DAS etc has so much more to offer the operator - including benefits of 'economies of scale' and supportability with similar types in the field.

[jimf671]

... ... comment on the effect on aiming when your whole body is out of the side door at 120 kts? Never mind windchill, rain, snow, etc. Most of our current types site the gunner inboard. What arc of fire forward would the gunner have?

USAF 56 Rescue used to share our hangar on visits so I got many chances to look at their Pavehawks. The gunner works from a seat inside the aircraft. The aircraft has a two-part sliding door that moves forward to provide a slightly wider and much deeper opening than shown on this 149. The gun pivot, on which several weapon types can be fitted, is closer to the fuselage than shown on this 149. M2 was usually fitted on the Pavehawks I was in or up close to. In most of their arcs no more than the Gunner's forearms would be outside the aircraft. Might need to lean out to fire forward. There are also quite a few videos on youtube of H-60 gunnery. What's this about aiming?

Overall, that AW149 set-up looks like the result of, "Oh sh1t, we need a gun on it. If I can find a gun can you mount it on there by tomorrow lunchtime?" :rolleyes:

[sycamore]

Mid `60`s we had Whirlwinds fitted with Bren guns,one mounted in the cabin door,one in the port side cabin window,co-pilot carried a Sterling SMG. If you wanted to be really `tooled-up` ,some aircraft could be fitted with 4 X SS11 missiles,wear `flak-jackets` and stick a 1/4 inch steel plate under your seat cushion,and my trusty Walther P38.
I think the Brens were .303`s(RAF issue-Army were .762 ) and the door gun firing position was lying on the floor...good for shooting at old oil drums in the S China Sea,or scaring crocodiles in the rivers.....

[Stratofreighter]

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/uk-delays-tender-process-for-puma-helicopter-replacement/150661.article

UK delays tender process for Puma helicopter replacement

21 October 2022

However, under a revised timeline,
the MoD is now not expected to issue invitations to negotiate
– essentially the precise requirements for the programme –
to manufacturers until the first quarter of 2023,
according to two sources familiar with the matter.

NH Industries is also a potential candidate with its NH90 helicopter. https://scramble.nl/forum/images/smilies/icon_exclaim.gif
It is understood to have responded to the DPQQ despite the presence of shareholders Airbus and Leonardo in the contest.

But the Puma has been selected to take over the operations in Brunei and Cyprus on a temporary basis,
potentially extending the HC2’s retirement date to 2027, https://scramble.nl/forum/images/smilies/icon_exclaim.gif
one source has suggested.
https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/uk-delays-tender-process-for-puma-helicopter-replacement/150661.article

[SASless]

Old design?

There are still Bell UH-1's flying but for those militaries that can afford newer aircraft they are usually replaced by Sikorsky Blackhawks.

Re the photos of the Gunner....tells me the aircraft is not designed for military use (Yes I know the USAF is buying some....but then recall the mission they are being used for....Missile Site Crew Transport).

The Gunner position in the photos is flat ridiculous and is only good for a laugh.

One thing that really stands out....is the empty brass collection bag (assuming that is what the OD thing on the right side of the door gun is just that...would be as useful as milk dispensers on a Bull.

As to aiming.....the short squirt and move the Tracers to the Target method works fine.....especially with a Mini-Gun.

Now...imagine what a Mini-Gun set up would look like on the side of that aircraft and how the Gunner would be limited in his ability to operate the weapon.

Then.....the most important issue...is the 139 built to a Military Combat Standard as is the Blackhawk?

[chopper2004]

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/uk-delays-tender-process-for-puma-helicopter-replacement/150661.article


https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/uk-delays-tender-process-for-puma-helicopter-replacement/150661.article

Quelle f*******g surprise....

We all know common sense prevailing the H-60 /70i airframe ticks the boxes, but politics may or may not dictate either Airbus or Leonardo as the solution

cheers

[ShyTorque]

2027? That means the RAF Pumas will have been in service for 56 years. Sceptics in 1971 said they wouldn’t last long compared to “proper” aircraft such as the Wessex.


P.S. Blackhawks would be nice….

[finalchecksplease]

Then.....the most important issue...is the 139 built to a Military Combat Standard as is the Blackhawk?

It is not a AW139 SASless, it is a AW149, the AW149 was first designed for the military (don't know if this was build to Military Combat Standard which I assume is an USA military standard) and then they made the civilian version the AW189.
Blackhawks are fantastically capable aircraft and an upgraded, up to date version would be my choice but as you know it being the best isn't always the first priority when politicians are involved.

[JohnDixson]

“ build to Military Combat Standard “ . But they don’t quote the standards to which the UH-60 had to meet. I did find a statement in an AW ad that cited the main blades were tested to accept hits from a 12.7mm projectile. The UH-60 was required to be flyable after main blade hits from various angles by 23MM HEI ammunition. When the new composite blades were introduced, those tests were repeated and the new blades passed. Big difference between those two projectiles. I’m just quoting one of multitudes of features required for the Army’s standard combat aircraft. If the AW 149 was built to the Army’s crashworthiness and ballistic survivability standards, AW would have said so.

[sycamore]

It would also be nice if it had metal control rods,rather than the `plastic` ones in the -139.....

[SASless]

Finals......I see there is the 139M....and the different Type 149....so two different versions.

The question raised by John Dixson is whether the US Army Design Spec's are met by the 149 is one that would bear answering as otherwise comparing the UH-60M to the 149 might be an Apples and Oranges comparison were that not the case.

The followup question would be which standard used....that by AW or the US Army is the superior set of critieria for a helicopter being built for use in combat.

Also....the final problem the RAF is going to have to confront is the lack of money considering the financial straits the UK Government thus the MoD finds itself confronting currently and for the foreseeable future.