Merlin latest
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Anywhere there's ships and aircraft available
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flypro and Tucumseh,
I have waited and watched the biaised, uninformed drivel that you guys have written in this thread for too long. Your last 2 post are to be quite frank, complete b*$@$%ks.
A few facts:
Even before the Dipping body was in use the Merlin was better at ASW than the Sea King. In fact with the ability to carry 15+ CAMBS buoys (a Sea King in a box) we successfully proved ourselves able of getting better ranges against all Sub targets than the so called mighty King.
The ADS itself is not a British idea but one which every major power is buying including the Yanks for the SH60 and the French for the NH90. It is by far and away the best of its type and can detect all types of subs at ranges which would see Sea King crewman drool. We have been asked on many occasions by the staff at FOST to go away from ASW serials in order for the PWOs to get some training value since we could dip at the beginning of a serial and stay in contact for ALL of it without breaking dip.
As for flexibility I am sure that a Sea King ASW with all its kit in could carry a Land Rover or 6 stretchers and their accompanying attendents. Or maybe 18 troops in crashworthy seats who had a reasonable chance of escape. Oh and did I mention the GPMGS on both sides of the aircraft and Flying at FL100 at 100 KIAS with no vibration or handling issues.
I will freely admit we have technical issues from time to time but I seem to remember doing my whole frontline SK6 tour without night dipping. And on another note yes I have been into the dip at night in a Merlin with 600m plus of cable (yes that's 600m not 600ft).
Many of the so called serviceability issues with this aircraft are stores driven (a perennial story for all UK aircraft fleets) and recieve all due attention from those who manage the fleet.
And finally, because I could go on for ever here, I have done some research.
1998 to 2004 Merlin ASW write-offs 2
1969 to 1975 Sea King ASW write-offs 5
If someone replies and says these weren't all technical failures then fine - but its overall safety that counts and the Merlin wins hands down.
If you want to slag something off get the FACTS right.
Fly to test....Test to learn
I have waited and watched the biaised, uninformed drivel that you guys have written in this thread for too long. Your last 2 post are to be quite frank, complete b*$@$%ks.
A few facts:
Even before the Dipping body was in use the Merlin was better at ASW than the Sea King. In fact with the ability to carry 15+ CAMBS buoys (a Sea King in a box) we successfully proved ourselves able of getting better ranges against all Sub targets than the so called mighty King.
The ADS itself is not a British idea but one which every major power is buying including the Yanks for the SH60 and the French for the NH90. It is by far and away the best of its type and can detect all types of subs at ranges which would see Sea King crewman drool. We have been asked on many occasions by the staff at FOST to go away from ASW serials in order for the PWOs to get some training value since we could dip at the beginning of a serial and stay in contact for ALL of it without breaking dip.
As for flexibility I am sure that a Sea King ASW with all its kit in could carry a Land Rover or 6 stretchers and their accompanying attendents. Or maybe 18 troops in crashworthy seats who had a reasonable chance of escape. Oh and did I mention the GPMGS on both sides of the aircraft and Flying at FL100 at 100 KIAS with no vibration or handling issues.
I will freely admit we have technical issues from time to time but I seem to remember doing my whole frontline SK6 tour without night dipping. And on another note yes I have been into the dip at night in a Merlin with 600m plus of cable (yes that's 600m not 600ft).
Many of the so called serviceability issues with this aircraft are stores driven (a perennial story for all UK aircraft fleets) and recieve all due attention from those who manage the fleet.
And finally, because I could go on for ever here, I have done some research.
1998 to 2004 Merlin ASW write-offs 2
1969 to 1975 Sea King ASW write-offs 5
If someone replies and says these weren't all technical failures then fine - but its overall safety that counts and the Merlin wins hands down.
If you want to slag something off get the FACTS right.
Fly to test....Test to learn
"serviceability issues with this aircraft are stores driven"
Is that the stores contract we procurred for £259M for 5 yrs of spares? (that's nearly £52M/yr), and we supplied the building for them as well.
Is that the stores contract we procurred for £259M for 5 yrs of spares? (that's nearly £52M/yr), and we supplied the building for them as well.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Temporarily unsure of my position
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Si,
Let's just look at YOUR facts.
1 You could fit a SeaKing with the Merlin ASW kit and add '15+ CAMBS buoys', as I have already mentioned.
2 ADS......see above!
3 Yes, the ASW SeaKing can lift a Landrover in when still in ASW mode, and stretchers (after quick role change). Can the Merlin?
4 GPMGS from Both sides? - well if anyone bothered to mount a gun in the crew door, then no problem. If the Army wanted to move sticks of 18+ they can call on the Chinook's. As for crashworthyness?, judging by the Cu stoof you are correct - any troops in that could just have unstrapped and walked away, as there was no A/C left after all violent motion had stopped!.
I don't recall any problems at 100' & 100Kts either.
5 Giving a SeaKing a longer string could be accomplished almost overnight.
6 See 6Z3 response.
7 So we have 2 Merlin Write-offs in 6 years (that would be just RN then) & 5 Seakings in a similar period. Have you looked at the flying hours/type over those periods?. Please don't talk down to me about FACTS!!!!
I would also mention that most Seaking's that have 'crashed' have been rebuilt by Wastelands. Let's see them rebuild a Merlin.
Rant ongoing!
Let's just look at YOUR facts.
1 You could fit a SeaKing with the Merlin ASW kit and add '15+ CAMBS buoys', as I have already mentioned.
2 ADS......see above!
3 Yes, the ASW SeaKing can lift a Landrover in when still in ASW mode, and stretchers (after quick role change). Can the Merlin?
4 GPMGS from Both sides? - well if anyone bothered to mount a gun in the crew door, then no problem. If the Army wanted to move sticks of 18+ they can call on the Chinook's. As for crashworthyness?, judging by the Cu stoof you are correct - any troops in that could just have unstrapped and walked away, as there was no A/C left after all violent motion had stopped!.
I don't recall any problems at 100' & 100Kts either.
5 Giving a SeaKing a longer string could be accomplished almost overnight.
6 See 6Z3 response.
7 So we have 2 Merlin Write-offs in 6 years (that would be just RN then) & 5 Seakings in a similar period. Have you looked at the flying hours/type over those periods?. Please don't talk down to me about FACTS!!!!
I would also mention that most Seaking's that have 'crashed' have been rebuilt by Wastelands. Let's see them rebuild a Merlin.
Rant ongoing!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has cost a truly incredible amount of money to produce something that is less capable than that which it replaces.
You Muppet!!!!
Si Clik said:
Flypro and Tucumseh,
I have waited and watched the biaised, uninformed drivel that you guys have written in this thread for too long. Your last 2 post are to be quite frank, complete b*$@$%ks.
>>> My first post on this thread Si Clik, and I think I stuck to facts. One cannot really compare two aircraft types, one designed in the 60s and the other in the 80s/90s/00s (with some 70s avionics) except to say that it is only to be expected that advances in technology, extended time taken to get it right and much more funding should of course produce a “better” aircraft.
A few facts:
Even before the Dipping body was in use the Merlin was better at ASW than the Sea King. In fact with the ability to carry 15+ CAMBS buoys (a Sea King in a box) we successfully proved ourselves able of getting better ranges against all Sub targets than the so called mighty King.
>>> You are extolling the virtues of CAMBS. I recall that in the mid-80s these were not scheduled for the SK6 because Merlin was due in service in only a few years.
The ADS itself is not a British idea but one which every major power is buying including the Yanks for the SH60 and the French for the NH90. It is by far and away the best of its type and can detect all types of subs at ranges which would see Sea King crewman drool. We have been asked on many occasions by the staff at FOST to go away from ASW serials in order for the PWOs to get some training value since we could dip at the beginning of a serial and stay in contact for ALL of it without breaking dip.
>>> Similarly, an expanding array submersible unit was fully trialled in the SK in the early/mid 80s, but scheduled for Merlin as it was imminent. Effectively, a technology demonstrator programme for Merlin. SK5 got the 195 single beam/fm and stave mods, and then the 6 got a fully integrated active and passive system. This is called incremental acquisition and technological progress, made possible by applied research (and in this case, private venture money from GEC). The range performance of the ADS is nothing to do with Merlin, but is a function of the aircraft equipment.
As for flexibility I am sure that a Sea King ASW with all its kit in could carry a Land Rover or 6 stretchers and their accompanying attendents. Or maybe 18 troops in crashworthy seats who had a reasonable chance of escape. Oh and did I mention the GPMGS on both sides of the aircraft and Flying at FL100 at 100 KIAS with no vibration or handling issues.
>>> Agreed, but the SK was not specified to do this, whereas much emphasis was placed on the Merlin having to have a secondary (commando) role (hence the 103). What you describe is nothing more than was intended, whereas the SK continues to surprise at its ability to adapt to emerging requirements.
I will freely admit we have technical issues from time to time but I seem to remember doing my whole frontline SK6 tour without night dipping. And on another note yes I have been into the dip at night in a Merlin with 600m plus of cable (yes that's 600m not 600ft).
Many of the so called serviceability issues with this aircraft are stores driven (a perennial story for all UK aircraft fleets) and recieve all due attention from those who manage the fleet.
>>> Fully agree, and those who manage this are hamstrung by lack of funds and politics – not to mention money being wasted on kit that’s not required.
And finally, because I could go on for ever here, I have done some research.
1998 to 2004 Merlin ASW write-offs 2
1969 to 1975 Sea King ASW write-offs 5
If someone replies and says these weren't all technical failures then fine - but its overall safety that counts and the Merlin wins hands down.
>>> Can’t speak for Merlin, but RN lost 6 SK1s to 17.11.75. At least half were at sea, as opposed to trials/shore based training. The causes were resolved by the Mk2 mods and since then the record has been excellent, with quite a high proportion lost during various conflicts. Lessons learnt have benefited the wider SK fleet, with SK4 having a particularly good record – in fact astonishing. And, statistically such a difference would be expected given the higher population of SKs. Attrition is not measured in absolute losses, but in losses per 1000s of flying hours, factored by circumstances.
Please, I have nothing against the Merlin but in many respects the “better than SK” doesn’t actually relate to the air vehicle, but to the aircraft equipment in it. In many respects, the vehicle is just a taxi. From memory, the Merlin sonics, comms and ESM are all developments of what was in, or trialled in, SK. The Doppler was to have been that of the SHAR. The IBT that of Lynx/SHAR. The radar is essentially an upgrade from Lynx (this may seem odd, but it is obvious if you study the designer’s technology road map) although I’d hope that it is significantly better by now. It’s 18 years since I saw it working for the first time (time…time!!). For the sake of the Senior Service, I sincerely hope the Merlin provides such long and distinguished service as has the Sea King.
Flypro and Tucumseh,
I have waited and watched the biaised, uninformed drivel that you guys have written in this thread for too long. Your last 2 post are to be quite frank, complete b*$@$%ks.
>>> My first post on this thread Si Clik, and I think I stuck to facts. One cannot really compare two aircraft types, one designed in the 60s and the other in the 80s/90s/00s (with some 70s avionics) except to say that it is only to be expected that advances in technology, extended time taken to get it right and much more funding should of course produce a “better” aircraft.
A few facts:
Even before the Dipping body was in use the Merlin was better at ASW than the Sea King. In fact with the ability to carry 15+ CAMBS buoys (a Sea King in a box) we successfully proved ourselves able of getting better ranges against all Sub targets than the so called mighty King.
>>> You are extolling the virtues of CAMBS. I recall that in the mid-80s these were not scheduled for the SK6 because Merlin was due in service in only a few years.
The ADS itself is not a British idea but one which every major power is buying including the Yanks for the SH60 and the French for the NH90. It is by far and away the best of its type and can detect all types of subs at ranges which would see Sea King crewman drool. We have been asked on many occasions by the staff at FOST to go away from ASW serials in order for the PWOs to get some training value since we could dip at the beginning of a serial and stay in contact for ALL of it without breaking dip.
>>> Similarly, an expanding array submersible unit was fully trialled in the SK in the early/mid 80s, but scheduled for Merlin as it was imminent. Effectively, a technology demonstrator programme for Merlin. SK5 got the 195 single beam/fm and stave mods, and then the 6 got a fully integrated active and passive system. This is called incremental acquisition and technological progress, made possible by applied research (and in this case, private venture money from GEC). The range performance of the ADS is nothing to do with Merlin, but is a function of the aircraft equipment.
As for flexibility I am sure that a Sea King ASW with all its kit in could carry a Land Rover or 6 stretchers and their accompanying attendents. Or maybe 18 troops in crashworthy seats who had a reasonable chance of escape. Oh and did I mention the GPMGS on both sides of the aircraft and Flying at FL100 at 100 KIAS with no vibration or handling issues.
>>> Agreed, but the SK was not specified to do this, whereas much emphasis was placed on the Merlin having to have a secondary (commando) role (hence the 103). What you describe is nothing more than was intended, whereas the SK continues to surprise at its ability to adapt to emerging requirements.
I will freely admit we have technical issues from time to time but I seem to remember doing my whole frontline SK6 tour without night dipping. And on another note yes I have been into the dip at night in a Merlin with 600m plus of cable (yes that's 600m not 600ft).
Many of the so called serviceability issues with this aircraft are stores driven (a perennial story for all UK aircraft fleets) and recieve all due attention from those who manage the fleet.
>>> Fully agree, and those who manage this are hamstrung by lack of funds and politics – not to mention money being wasted on kit that’s not required.
And finally, because I could go on for ever here, I have done some research.
1998 to 2004 Merlin ASW write-offs 2
1969 to 1975 Sea King ASW write-offs 5
If someone replies and says these weren't all technical failures then fine - but its overall safety that counts and the Merlin wins hands down.
>>> Can’t speak for Merlin, but RN lost 6 SK1s to 17.11.75. At least half were at sea, as opposed to trials/shore based training. The causes were resolved by the Mk2 mods and since then the record has been excellent, with quite a high proportion lost during various conflicts. Lessons learnt have benefited the wider SK fleet, with SK4 having a particularly good record – in fact astonishing. And, statistically such a difference would be expected given the higher population of SKs. Attrition is not measured in absolute losses, but in losses per 1000s of flying hours, factored by circumstances.
Please, I have nothing against the Merlin but in many respects the “better than SK” doesn’t actually relate to the air vehicle, but to the aircraft equipment in it. In many respects, the vehicle is just a taxi. From memory, the Merlin sonics, comms and ESM are all developments of what was in, or trialled in, SK. The Doppler was to have been that of the SHAR. The IBT that of Lynx/SHAR. The radar is essentially an upgrade from Lynx (this may seem odd, but it is obvious if you study the designer’s technology road map) although I’d hope that it is significantly better by now. It’s 18 years since I saw it working for the first time (time…time!!). For the sake of the Senior Service, I sincerely hope the Merlin provides such long and distinguished service as has the Sea King.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Laugh....I nearly
Good banter on this thread...keep it going boys. I agree that you cannot compare an aircraft designed and buit in the 60's with a more modern version BUT at the end of the day...if the siht hit the fan...which aircraft would you prefer to fight in..?
Invertron
Now? Merlin, no contest (assuming it has the necessary clearances). But in the years between the planned Merlin ISD and the acheived ISD there was no choice. Everyone talks about ISD slippage, but it is very difficult to manage the complementary OSD extensions. I think those involved in Sea King ASW in the late 80s - to date did a fantastic job given that on any given day they were being told "no more cash for upgrades, Merlin's round the corner". By 1991 funding for avionics and build standard was restricted to safety issues only. In 1992 the RAF (by this time in control of RN support funding) even ditched safety. (Suppliers - They were ignored). So, when Merlin finally appeared people compared it with the SK they flew last week, but actually that SK had a build standard that was more or less frozen 15 years ago. There were a few exceptions - it is no co-incidence that the development continued on the Sonics, for example, so as to avoid gapping the availability of expertise and losing momentum. And of course SK was the first aircraft / system to benefit from Differential GPS, albeit at OEU Boscombe Down. This was the single most cost-effective device in sonics development for decades, as it allowed the MoD to tie the company down for the first time on accuracy/ranging issues, which hitherto they had got away with as we had to rely on Radar / Doppler / GMC for positioning info during trials - all of which handed large tolerances to them on a plate. Good times.
Now? Merlin, no contest (assuming it has the necessary clearances). But in the years between the planned Merlin ISD and the acheived ISD there was no choice. Everyone talks about ISD slippage, but it is very difficult to manage the complementary OSD extensions. I think those involved in Sea King ASW in the late 80s - to date did a fantastic job given that on any given day they were being told "no more cash for upgrades, Merlin's round the corner". By 1991 funding for avionics and build standard was restricted to safety issues only. In 1992 the RAF (by this time in control of RN support funding) even ditched safety. (Suppliers - They were ignored). So, when Merlin finally appeared people compared it with the SK they flew last week, but actually that SK had a build standard that was more or less frozen 15 years ago. There were a few exceptions - it is no co-incidence that the development continued on the Sonics, for example, so as to avoid gapping the availability of expertise and losing momentum. And of course SK was the first aircraft / system to benefit from Differential GPS, albeit at OEU Boscombe Down. This was the single most cost-effective device in sonics development for decades, as it allowed the MoD to tie the company down for the first time on accuracy/ranging issues, which hitherto they had got away with as we had to rely on Radar / Doppler / GMC for positioning info during trials - all of which handed large tolerances to them on a plate. Good times.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Temporarily unsure of my position
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sweep,
Now now, don't have a paddy old chap. Resorting to personal insults will get you nowhere - and you will upset your little friend Sooty!
Read Tucumseh above for a probably more reasoned response than mine.
I am sure that someday the Merlin will begin to pay it's way - the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned
Now now, don't have a paddy old chap. Resorting to personal insults will get you nowhere - and you will upset your little friend Sooty!
Read Tucumseh above for a probably more reasoned response than mine.
I am sure that someday the Merlin will begin to pay it's way - the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned
SiClik: I say again:
For a few minutes, forget the advantages of the avionics (in the Merlin), my concerns over the Merlin are orientated around the bloody cost of the airframe. Just for a few seconds (put your hand on your heart / swear on your kiddies lives!)
Ask yourself this:
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
Someone out there has got his promotion out of this and is currently sniggering into his brandy, as we speak
Now that Merlin has been jettisoned by N America and (in all due defference to the PR team for the 'VH101' lobby in yankee land) will undoubtedly be ejected by Bush.....who is going to buy this overengineered trojan's horse??????
Can anyone tell me, how many years the Merlin has NOT been able to dip in the dark?
How much has the Fleet Air Arm rotary wing training pipeline been 'delayed' due to the reliability of the Merlin?
How much does a 'Merlin' Mk4 replacement cost?
Ask yourself this:
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
Someone out there has got his promotion out of this and is currently sniggering into his brandy, as we speak
Now that Merlin has been jettisoned by N America and (in all due defference to the PR team for the 'VH101' lobby in yankee land) will undoubtedly be ejected by Bush.....who is going to buy this overengineered trojan's horse??????
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Anywhere there's ships and aircraft available
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well since you choose to ask me to reply directly let me answer a few of your questions since my origins, training and feelings on Merlin are well known.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone tell me, how many years the Merlin has NOT been able to dip in the dark?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Merlin's ability to dip in the dark was cleared after a detailed set of test and evaluation conducted by a team I was a member of at a well known test establishment. We were uprepared to allow the aircraft to dip at night without the duplex system being tested and its software proven to 'current' safety standards. The Sea King 5/6 would not pass this sort of testing under current regulations (that includes JAR). When we had done the testing the aircraft was cleared (in late 2002).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much has the Fleet Air Arm rotary wing training pipeline been 'delayed' due to the reliability of the Merlin?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The delays in the flying training pipepline are not all due to Merlin and in fact the Lynx pipeline has not been free of its own problems. Whilst it is disappointing that more ab intios have not gone through the course the current set who received their wings about 3 weeks ago are not the first.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much does a 'Merlin' Mk4 replacement cost?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know. The fact is the Sea King will go along with the Puma and are now all wrapped up in one program. I have no money on who will get this contract. The fact is the Danish and Portuguese aircraft are another generation ahead of the RAF/RN ones and were competed on an even basis against both the NH90 and S92.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a few minutes, forget the advantages of the avionics (in the Merlin), my concerns over the Merlin are orientated around the bloody cost of the airframe. Just for a few seconds (put your hand on your heart / swear on your kiddies lives!)
Ask yourself this:
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------These two questions are the inponderables. Should we have bought SH60s way back when or stayed in the NH90 project (over 800 aircraft ordered) probably. Unfortunately we did not and that was the previous Conservative governments decision. All I know is we have the Merlin now, it is one of the best aircraft in the world and as a small country with moderate Armed Forces we CANNOT afford to change. Things may change in the future and we may develop along the Dutch 'buy it off the shelf' model. I doubt this though because too many voters would lose their jobs and political suicide is never popular.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone out there has got his promotion out of this and is currently sniggering into his brandy, as we speak.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody here got promoted, or in the IPT, in fact I think most of the people involved were passed over or left. In fact both the guys who were key in the project PVR'd even before it was frontline.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that Merlin has been jettisoned by N America and (in all due defference to the PR team for the 'VH101' lobby in yankee land) will undoubtedly be ejected by Bush.....who is going to buy this overengineered trojan's horse??????
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well the Danes, Potuguese and Japanese did.
In the end we are where we are and in these days of tight budgets (which will only get tighter) we must strive to work together to get the best from the FAA. TEAMWORK is the key, not slagging off the other guy. As was proven in Telic the Merlin Lynx combo worked well and was commented upon by the good old USA.
Unfortunately the Sea King is a legacy aircraft now nearly 50 years old. Ours are cracking away gracefully and no-one makes them anymore. I have 1500 hours on the old queen but I still wouldn't go back because while you're seldom safe twin in a Merlin you can ALWAYS fly away from an ASW hover.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can anyone tell me, how many years the Merlin has NOT been able to dip in the dark?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Merlin's ability to dip in the dark was cleared after a detailed set of test and evaluation conducted by a team I was a member of at a well known test establishment. We were uprepared to allow the aircraft to dip at night without the duplex system being tested and its software proven to 'current' safety standards. The Sea King 5/6 would not pass this sort of testing under current regulations (that includes JAR). When we had done the testing the aircraft was cleared (in late 2002).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much has the Fleet Air Arm rotary wing training pipeline been 'delayed' due to the reliability of the Merlin?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The delays in the flying training pipepline are not all due to Merlin and in fact the Lynx pipeline has not been free of its own problems. Whilst it is disappointing that more ab intios have not gone through the course the current set who received their wings about 3 weeks ago are not the first.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much does a 'Merlin' Mk4 replacement cost?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know. The fact is the Sea King will go along with the Puma and are now all wrapped up in one program. I have no money on who will get this contract. The fact is the Danish and Portuguese aircraft are another generation ahead of the RAF/RN ones and were competed on an even basis against both the NH90 and S92.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a few minutes, forget the advantages of the avionics (in the Merlin), my concerns over the Merlin are orientated around the bloody cost of the airframe. Just for a few seconds (put your hand on your heart / swear on your kiddies lives!)
Ask yourself this:
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------These two questions are the inponderables. Should we have bought SH60s way back when or stayed in the NH90 project (over 800 aircraft ordered) probably. Unfortunately we did not and that was the previous Conservative governments decision. All I know is we have the Merlin now, it is one of the best aircraft in the world and as a small country with moderate Armed Forces we CANNOT afford to change. Things may change in the future and we may develop along the Dutch 'buy it off the shelf' model. I doubt this though because too many voters would lose their jobs and political suicide is never popular.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone out there has got his promotion out of this and is currently sniggering into his brandy, as we speak.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody here got promoted, or in the IPT, in fact I think most of the people involved were passed over or left. In fact both the guys who were key in the project PVR'd even before it was frontline.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that Merlin has been jettisoned by N America and (in all due defference to the PR team for the 'VH101' lobby in yankee land) will undoubtedly be ejected by Bush.....who is going to buy this overengineered trojan's horse??????
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well the Danes, Potuguese and Japanese did.
In the end we are where we are and in these days of tight budgets (which will only get tighter) we must strive to work together to get the best from the FAA. TEAMWORK is the key, not slagging off the other guy. As was proven in Telic the Merlin Lynx combo worked well and was commented upon by the good old USA.
Unfortunately the Sea King is a legacy aircraft now nearly 50 years old. Ours are cracking away gracefully and no-one makes them anymore. I have 1500 hours on the old queen but I still wouldn't go back because while you're seldom safe twin in a Merlin you can ALWAYS fly away from an ASW hover.
Si Clik makes a few important points here, but which will always place the older aircraft in poorer light.
……….software proven to 'current' safety standards. The Sea King 5/6 would not pass this sort of testing under current regulations (that includes JAR). When we had done the testing the aircraft was cleared (in late 2002).
>>> Standards continually evolve and change. Every Sea King contract (and those of other legacy aircraft) is caveated “The MoD acknowledge the (aircraft) was designed and built to standards of the day…….”. This is necessary as the design is Under Ministry Control and MoD has to acknowledge they simply cannot afford to keep up with ever changing standards. They are prioritised on safety and security grounds. For example, primary and secondary bonding standards changed in the late 90s – a safety issue – but it would never cross anyone’s mind to retro-fit every aircraft. So, specs for current programmes were amended, and life goes on. The aircraft is safe, but it’s not up to date. The cumulative effect however is that the manufacturer / MoD may make a decision to stop marketing / buying the product as it’s cheaper to start afresh.
This partially answers the following question……
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
Nobody here got promoted, or in the IPT, in fact I think most of the people involved were passed over or left. In fact both the guys who were key in the project PVR'd even before it was frontline.
>>> I know for a fact this is true, and that it extends to very senior people in the late 80s/early 90s. I knew one very well in various posts before he got Merlin and he was supremely competent. The RN lost a good man to politics. Still happening.
Unfortunately the Sea King is a legacy aircraft now nearly 50 years old. Ours are cracking away gracefully and no-one makes them anymore. I have 1500 hours on the old queen but I still wouldn't go back because while you're seldom safe twin in a Merlin you can ALWAYS fly away from an ASW hover.
>>>General point taken, and I’ve explained one very important reason why they’re not made, but the RN’s oldest SK is 35. There followed numerous production runs into the 90s, and many have relatively few hours on them. In general terms the life is 30 flying years so I suppose the MoD spin could be that Merlin has arrived at exactly the right time! So, Merlin’s not late at all, it merely missed the “stretch” target!
……….software proven to 'current' safety standards. The Sea King 5/6 would not pass this sort of testing under current regulations (that includes JAR). When we had done the testing the aircraft was cleared (in late 2002).
>>> Standards continually evolve and change. Every Sea King contract (and those of other legacy aircraft) is caveated “The MoD acknowledge the (aircraft) was designed and built to standards of the day…….”. This is necessary as the design is Under Ministry Control and MoD has to acknowledge they simply cannot afford to keep up with ever changing standards. They are prioritised on safety and security grounds. For example, primary and secondary bonding standards changed in the late 90s – a safety issue – but it would never cross anyone’s mind to retro-fit every aircraft. So, specs for current programmes were amended, and life goes on. The aircraft is safe, but it’s not up to date. The cumulative effect however is that the manufacturer / MoD may make a decision to stop marketing / buying the product as it’s cheaper to start afresh.
This partially answers the following question……
Has the cost / R and D / spares availability of this replacement airframe really been worth it (to date).
What could the 3 services have procured for that same sum of money if they had gone about it on a more practical basis [I.e. consulted with the end user?].
Nobody here got promoted, or in the IPT, in fact I think most of the people involved were passed over or left. In fact both the guys who were key in the project PVR'd even before it was frontline.
>>> I know for a fact this is true, and that it extends to very senior people in the late 80s/early 90s. I knew one very well in various posts before he got Merlin and he was supremely competent. The RN lost a good man to politics. Still happening.
Unfortunately the Sea King is a legacy aircraft now nearly 50 years old. Ours are cracking away gracefully and no-one makes them anymore. I have 1500 hours on the old queen but I still wouldn't go back because while you're seldom safe twin in a Merlin you can ALWAYS fly away from an ASW hover.
>>>General point taken, and I’ve explained one very important reason why they’re not made, but the RN’s oldest SK is 35. There followed numerous production runs into the 90s, and many have relatively few hours on them. In general terms the life is 30 flying years so I suppose the MoD spin could be that Merlin has arrived at exactly the right time! So, Merlin’s not late at all, it merely missed the “stretch” target!
