RAF Boeing H-47ER 2 billion deal agreed

[chopper2004]

So it’s agreed for the Boeing H-47ER 2BN purchase deal.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/u-k-reaches-2-billion-deal-to-buy-14-boeing-chinook-helicopters/

Exciting time ahead for Odiham and Benson

Leta get cracking with AAR oh hang on we retiring the Herk,

cheers

[chopper2004]

And now

https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/1-4-billion-modernised-chinook-fleet/?fbclid=IwAR3S2Zo6r3Pg7upzQaX_Y2SRnnjLA-AUGefGaTkyvWWoAFv9jpyMFrINUMI

A £1.4 billion contract to modernise the Chinook fleet over the next 10 years has been agreed. The deal will see British forces benefit from 14 of the latest iconic heavy-lift helicopters.

Proven in battle and operated in every major conflict since the Falklands War, the Chinook is a highly-versatile aircraft. The helicopter can operate in a diverse range of environments, from the desert to the arctic, and transport up to 55 personnel or ten tonnes of cargo.

With a top speed of 300 kilometres per hour, the new H-47(ER) aircraft will have a range of new capabilities, including:

- an advanced digital cockpit
- a modernised airframe to increase stability and improve survivability
- a digital automatic flight control system to allow pilots to hover in areas of limited visibility

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said: “From assisting emergency repairs to UK flood defences, providing vital logistics support during COVID-19 to its warfighting role on Afghan battlefields, the Chinook has been the workhorse of the Armed Forces for over 40 years. The cutting edge H-47 (ER) will be at the forefront of our specialist requirements in dealing with threats and logistic support. Our £1.4 billion investment will mean we will be one of very few air forces with this capability.”

Full story: https://bit.ly/2QaFcKg

[hoodie]

Leta get cracking with AAR oh hang on we retiring the Herk,

Although...
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x801/akrbqynghzc4tku457rpcuk3gu_jpeg_94a69164d7835588b44a782e5f46 ec8742eefdf8.jpg

[minigundiplomat]

Well done Airbus - Nice to see the rotorheads still attached.

[ORAC]

Exciting time ahead for Odiham and Benson
In a while….

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/05/13/britain-buys-14-new-chinook-helos-but-itll-take-a-decade-for-full-delivery/

LONDON — Britain has confirmed it will acquire 14 Boeing-made Chinook helicopters (https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/04/15/with-new-ch-47-variant-back-in-flight-tests-boeing-hopes-for-production-contract/), but the government has prolonged the delivery schedule over the next decade years due to budget issues.

The deal was made through the U.S. Defense Department’s Foreign Military Sales process and will see Britain pay £1.4 billion (U.S. $2 billion) for the helicopters and associated equipment. Deliveries are scheduled to start in 2026 and be completed in 2030.

That’s about three years behind the original plan, as the British Defence Ministry has prioritized more pressing modernization needs ahead of the helo acquisition….

[ASRAAMTOO]

My maths is quite flaky but 100 million a helicopter seems quite a lot even if it does include support equipment.

[Melchett01]

I’m well out of the loop these days on these things, but a genuine question over costs. The Seattle Time article notes the US Army is saving close to $1Bn by cutting 28 cabs, yet we’re paying close to $2Bn to buy 14?
What am I missing because they seem very expensive for SH at those prices.

[ORAC]

When did £1.4B become “close” to £2B? I’ve heard of inflation, but that’s ridiculous….

I would imagine the contract includes spare engines, spares, software, manuals, support, training etc, plus the UK extras such as radar - But for details we will have to wait for the FMS contract to be published.

[Melchett01]

When did £1.4B become “close” to £2B? I’ve heard of inflation, but that’s ridiculous….

I would imagine the contract includes spare engines, spares, software, manuals, support, training etc, plus the UK extras such as radar - But for details we will have to wait for the FMS contract to be published.

£1.4Bn isn’t close to £2Bn, but it is far closer to $2Bn US - which is my question.

But I await with interest to see where the rest of the charges come from. As one of the biggest CH-47 operators in the world, it’s not like we’re starting from scratch here.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I’m well out of the loop these days on these things, but a genuine question over costs. The Seattle Time article notes the US Army is saving close to $1Bn by cutting 28 cabs, yet we’re paying close to $2Bn to buy 14?
What am I missing because they seem very expensive for SH at those prices.
I think it's been known for a while that the US costs per airframe and UK programme costs are formulated totally differently, so you're definitely not comparing fruit with fruit with that comparison - UK often includes support, training and spares costs in the same overall bill, sometimes along with simulators, whereas I'm not even sure the US considers the rubber on the tyres in what they say the airframe cost is!

Also, you're not comparing the same type of aircraft there, if you look at the options list that was in the FMS approval the H-47(ER) referred to above is definitely not a standard off the shelf F-model as used by the US Army.​​​​

[NutLoose]

Plus there will be the 7 years of storage costs and the demodding of the cockpit to consider. ;)

[Baldeep Inminj]

...and when looking at costs, don't forget to price in a new Sim with 20+ years through-life support. They are not cheap (but worth every penny IMHO)

[RAFEngO74to09]

FMS delivery order via US Special Operations Command for 14 x Chinook Block 2 for UK at $580,598,636 to be delivered by July 2026

MediaRoom - News Releases/Statements (https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=130882)

[chopper2004]

Been approved by his goodself

https://www.forces.net/technology/weapons-and-kit/special-forces-get-new-chinooks-can-fly-twice-far

cheers

[SLXOwft]

We have been discussing the H-47ER deal including today's announcement on the SDSR thread. Mods, just wondering if it makes sense to move the relevant posts here?

Start from about here:
https://www.pprune.org/11608713-post1368.htm (https://www.pprune.org/11608713-post1368.html)l

[Evalu8ter]

ASRAAM - Have a look at the DSCA note when this deal was agreed. Take a gander at the complexity of the role equipment and work out which birds these are….worth every dime…https://www.dsca.mil/press-media/major-arms-sales/united-kingdom-h-47-chinook-extended-range-helicopters-and-accessories

[N707ZS]

With the government buying 14 new ones does that mean they will retire the current fleet.

[Davef68]

With the government buying 14 new ones does that mean they will retire the current fleet.

Plan is to retire some of the older aircraft, but these are specifically SF configured aircraft. Think MH-47G-like

[Mil-26Man]

Plan is to retire some of the older aircraft, but these are specifically SF configured aircraft. Think MH-47G-like

I think that was the case before £350 million was magically shaved off the contract cost. I can't imagine where they got such a saving without watering down some of the SF configuration.

[ORAC]

https://x.com/gabriel64869839/status/1768349177782632752?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


As always, there's a bit of a mystery on the air to air refueling part. DE&S in its post notes the ER is capable of refueling in flight. This is only true-true if the probe is fitted; we were not expecting it to be. Wonder if renegotiation included a rethink on that somehow...?

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/558x856/image_cac6529f9ee6621935d15df3c33d39ae7f6097fb.png

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/750x400/image_b17c3e164ea456c8133fe8879067f8aefe2df50b.png
​​​​​​​

[Mil-26Man]

I think that 'capable of aerial refuelling' means they are plumbed for it, rather than they will have the probe and it will be a capability that will be supported (at least for now).

[SLXOwft]

Plan is to retire some of the older aircraft, but these are specifically SF configured aircraft. Think MH-47G-like

Final fleet number is planned to be 51. The retirement of older airframes has already started, IRC 23 to be retired in total - includes ZA718/BN having gone to RAFM Cosford.

On the AAR I am pretty sure I read somewhere they are to be fitted for but not with. Given the restrictions of the Voyager PFI one assumes if they were fitted they would have to refuel from another nation's tanker e.g. a KC-130 or an A400M. How this fits in with OPSEC for a covert SF insertion I do wonder.

[Mil-26Man]

Given the restrictions of the Voyager PFI one assumes if they were fitted they would have to refuel from another nation's tanker e.g. a KC-130 or an A400M. How this fits in with OPSEC for a covert SF insertion I do wonder.

IIRC, the PFI states something along the lines of Airtanker delivering all AAR when/were it is able to, and so using the A400M to refuel the Chinooks wouldn't fall under the PFI. That said, I still don't think it is a capability that the UK will be looking to resource (hence the decision to buy Extended Range Chinooks, rather than Standard Range with AAR as the Germans have done). Just IMO.

[ORAC]

On the AAR I am pretty sure I read somewhere they are to be fitted for but not with. Given the restrictions of the Voyager PFI one assumes if they were fitted they would have to refuel from another nation's tanker e.g. a KC-130 or an A400M. How this fits in with OPSEC for a covert SF insertion I do wonder.


The force has been supporting France on operations in Africa. If requested again it raises the possibility of the FAF providing any required AAR. The area is so large that AAR would be far preferable to FARPs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barkhane

https://www.france24.com/en/africa/20220216-barkhane-takuba-sabre-french-and-european-military-missions-in-the-sahel

[Mil-26Man]

The force has been supporting France on operations in Africa. If requested again it raises the possibility of the FAF providing any required AAR. The area is so large that AAR would be far preferable to FARPs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barkhane

https://www.france24.com/en/africa/20220216-barkhane-takuba-sabre-french-and-european-military-missions-in-the-sahel

The Chinooks supporting French operations in North Africa are HC.5 fat tank helicopters, presumably to offset this range issue.

[Martin the Martian]

With regard to AAR, I believe the reason we reduced from 25 to 22 Atlas C.1s was that the missing three would be configured for AAR, until the issue of SkyTanker's exclusivity came into play. I guess the intention was to have two of them on rotation in the Falklands rather than one of one and one of another.

[ORAC]

https://x.com/gabriel64869839/status/1768568406859501656?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


Chinook ER purchase is only Tranche 1 of Chinook Capability Sustainment, by the way of what used to be 60 CHINOOK until recently.

38 are very old (albeit extensively upgraded) and past 11K flown hours. Of those 38, 9 are going without replacement, and 14 will be replaced by ER.

That means there are another 15 that are bound to require a solution in a non distant future.

The rest of the fleet is made up by the much younger HC5 (8x) and HC6 (14x).

[Evalu8ter]

ORAC, there's also the old HC2a aircraft (six-off) which are the same build standard and Lot number as the HC5s, just with standard tanks. I'd imagine these are likely to also be retained and upgraded to the new standard. We may not have a dedicated RW tanker, but given what these aircraft are and their intended use, the MC-130Js at Mildenhall would be an option, as would the Franco/German KC-130Js.

[Mil-26Man]

ORAC, there's also the old HC2a aircraft (six-off) which are the same build standard and Lot number as the HC5s, just with standard tanks. I'd imagine these are likely to also be retained and upgraded to the new standard. We may not have a dedicated RW tanker, but given what these aircraft are and their intended use, the MC-130Js at Mildenhall would be an option, as would the Franco/German KC-130Js.

The new Chinooks are not being fitted with the probe, so no AAR regardless of there being a tanker aircraft or not.

[SLXOwft]

ORAC, there's also the old HC2a aircraft (six-off) which are the same build standard and Lot number as the HC5s, just with standard tanks. I'd imagine these are likely to also be retained and upgraded to the new standard. We may not have a dedicated RW tanker, but given what these aircraft are and their intended use, the MC-130Js at Mildenhall would be an option, as would the Franco/German KC-130Js.

The current fleet stands at 54 (as reported to the HCDC by Lt-Gen Magowan), apparently two of those already withdrawn are from that batch, so I presume the withdrawals are on the basis of airframe hours not absolute age, which IMO would make sense.

[falcon900]

I think it's been known for a while that the US costs per airframe and UK programme costs are formulated totally differently, so you're definitely not comparing fruit with fruit with that comparison - UK often includes support, training and spares costs in the same overall bill, sometimes along with simulators, whereas I'm not even sure the US considers the rubber on the tyres in what they say the airframe cost is!

Also, you're not comparing the same type of aircraft there, if you look at the options list that was in the FMS approval the H-47(ER) referred to above is definitely not a standard off the shelf F-model as used by the US Army.​​​​

Thank you for that explanation Uncle Sam, where would you like me to sign? And should we drop our trousers and bend over now.??