Merlin
Guest
Posts: n/a
Apart from the fact that you are wrong....the pencils are no longer required... It seems that youre entire argument is centred around..."well at least its better than yours"
I agree that the Merlin is a better aircraft than the Lynx. There is little doubt in that. BUT my argument is that if I were to spend the GDP of a small European contry on a helicopter, I'd want it to work when I asked it to.
The merlin has been a complete joke for a long time and its about time it was sorted out.
The people of the United Kingdom paid for 44 Merlin and currently there are 21 in Service. We have been hoodwinked, ripped off and robbed. We want our money back!
I agree that the Merlin is a better aircraft than the Lynx. There is little doubt in that. BUT my argument is that if I were to spend the GDP of a small European contry on a helicopter, I'd want it to work when I asked it to.
The merlin has been a complete joke for a long time and its about time it was sorted out.
The people of the United Kingdom paid for 44 Merlin and currently there are 21 in Service. We have been hoodwinked, ripped off and robbed. We want our money back!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is just a question of money. Sure Merlin HM1 is a fantastic machine BUT...... at what cost. With UK defence living off a fix or possibly diminishing budget it is simply not OK to accept an open cheque book scenario for something like Merlin. It is claimed that Merlin CPS may cost up to 30% of the total pot available for UK military tri-service helicopter support/upgrade. How do you expect Army or RAF helicopter types to look at that?
So, can we have a little more reality from the Merlin drivers on this forum? Yes, a wonderful beast and slowly clawling out of the unserviceability pit BUT let's face up to the true cost in £ sterling against what we have been delivered by industry/DLO.
So, can we have a little more reality from the Merlin drivers on this forum? Yes, a wonderful beast and slowly clawling out of the unserviceability pit BUT let's face up to the true cost in £ sterling against what we have been delivered by industry/DLO.
Suspicion breeds confidence
fagin's goat is correct. In terms of value for money the Merlin cannot be considered a wise buy, but the money has been spent now and we won't get it back. After the tragic loss of two 0f 849's SK7s, would it not have been wiser to fit out two Merlin airframes with Searchwater 2000 and low and behold you have MASC several years early and under budget 
Its going to happen anyway. IIRC the Italians already have an AEW Merlin
Its going to happen anyway. IIRC the Italians already have an AEW Merlin
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting point by Navaleye. Was not the original concept of the Merlin to provide a common platform across which various roles could be supported. The key word is 'commonality', particularly of stores. It is the logistics support that has failed, not the aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem we are facing is that the whole thing is somebody's empire and everyone has different objectives.
MASC could quite easily be achieved if managed correctly but Lockheed would need to be out of the plan as nut and sledgehammer spring to mind - just consider MSCP!
'SMART' does work but it can go very wrong very easily!
The Merlin platfrom is underdeveloped in many areas and there are engineers just waiting to give the RN the aircraft they want and need!
MASC could quite easily be achieved if managed correctly but Lockheed would need to be out of the plan as nut and sledgehammer spring to mind - just consider MSCP!
'SMART' does work but it can go very wrong very easily!
The Merlin platfrom is underdeveloped in many areas and there are engineers just waiting to give the RN the aircraft they want and need!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trying to look at this issue without being too emotive we should be asking how much Value For Money we get from the Merlin.
To my SKASaC eye the Merlin programme has cost the tax payer £4bn (cradle to grave) the last I heard. Some would say this is about £100m each airframe, others would say this is about £500m per serviceable airframe (I too have heared that the spares can only support 8 a/c). But who cares how much each flying Merlin costs if it can defend the Crown against the modern threat - like nuclear subs !!!!
Now the SKASaC's new capabilities are another story entirely ... and we get no funding whatsoever - which is why our radio fit is from the cold-war. To make us even more useful to the Marines and the Army (i.e. allow us to communicate with them) would cost about £2m - for the entire SKASaC fleet.
To my SKASaC eye the Merlin programme has cost the tax payer £4bn (cradle to grave) the last I heard. Some would say this is about £100m each airframe, others would say this is about £500m per serviceable airframe (I too have heared that the spares can only support 8 a/c). But who cares how much each flying Merlin costs if it can defend the Crown against the modern threat - like nuclear subs !!!!
Now the SKASaC's new capabilities are another story entirely ... and we get no funding whatsoever - which is why our radio fit is from the cold-war. To make us even more useful to the Marines and the Army (i.e. allow us to communicate with them) would cost about £2m - for the entire SKASaC fleet.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In A Galaxy Far, Far Away...
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEEP! BEEP!
The "Kick the new aircraft while it is down" Bandwagon is just about to leave...........
...........All Aboard!!!!!!
Hey, waitaminute! I've got a really great, radical idea. Now it's a bit out of the box (which is not on fire and you don't need a bear suit..) but stick with me..........
Why don't we just let the aircraft mature, the initial support problems be sorted out like most brand new entry into service aircraft, and give it our support - or at least defer judgement and give it a chance? (Especially all those rumour mongers who are actually speaking from a point of ignorance)
The "Kick the new aircraft while it is down" Bandwagon is just about to leave...........
...........All Aboard!!!!!!
Hey, waitaminute! I've got a really great, radical idea. Now it's a bit out of the box (which is not on fire and you don't need a bear suit..) but stick with me..........
Why don't we just let the aircraft mature, the initial support problems be sorted out like most brand new entry into service aircraft, and give it our support - or at least defer judgement and give it a chance? (Especially all those rumour mongers who are actually speaking from a point of ignorance)
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Why don't we just let the aircraft mature,
It's meant to do what it says on the tin, not take 10 years to develop a full, round flavour with hints of nettles and blackberry!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Oxfordshire
Age: 54
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trouble is, it's not a mass produced comsumer item with a huge lawsuit waiting if it goes wrong.
Like it or not, it's our lot to develope anything new and shiney until it does what we need it to - long gone are the days when the military did the R&D and advanced technology, which then filtered down to civvy street.
It's all civvies doing the inventing these days, as there's only enough of us to man the front line. Mostly that works, but they have to make a profit, whereas military developers of old didn't. So if something crops up during their R&D, and it costs more, they have to pass that on or go under I guess.
The real issue is that we seem to cock up the contracts and penalty clauses so often, and change our minds with the winds - which can't help.
Like it or not, it's our lot to develope anything new and shiney until it does what we need it to - long gone are the days when the military did the R&D and advanced technology, which then filtered down to civvy street.
It's all civvies doing the inventing these days, as there's only enough of us to man the front line. Mostly that works, but they have to make a profit, whereas military developers of old didn't. So if something crops up during their R&D, and it costs more, they have to pass that on or go under I guess.
The real issue is that we seem to cock up the contracts and penalty clauses so often, and change our minds with the winds - which can't help.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those who dismiss the problems of Merlin as the teething problems of a new aircraft are deluding themselves. It's been in Squadron service for over 6 years now, the pre-production aircraft were flying trials 15 years ago and the aircraft uses technology that was designed 20 years ago. 
Last edited by Toxteth O'Grady; 29th Jan 2005 at 07:32.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I thought that there was nothing wrong with the aircraft and that all the problemns were due to logisitcs and spares.... Are we now saying that the aircraft has something wrong with it.? Whilst Im here. Any truth in the rumour from MOD that the logistic support can only maintain stores support for 6 aircraft and that the rest of them are going to be mothballed? If thats the case and if my maths is correct, that would mean somewhere in the region of £171,000,00.00 sat in the hangar....Hmmmm
Now try explaining that to the little old lady waiting 18 months for her hip replacement !
Now try explaining that to the little old lady waiting 18 months for her hip replacement !
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said junglyAEO
You ask any Bagger and he will not be able to tell you which aircraft the MASC should be based on - but he will tell you which it shouldn't be based on.
The undeniable facts are this: in the main, the bag is short of three things - height, speed and endurance. In the main, any helicopter replacement for the SK7 would not significantly alleviate these shortcommings.
We could even surmise that if the bag is replaced by Merlin it is absolute proof that we do not procure on the grounds of capability, we provide jobs for the defence industry (and that brings us back to Merlin again - sorry!). In the past this was fine because shortcommings were never brought to the forefront by people dying at the front line due to inadequate equipment!!!
You ask any Bagger and he will not be able to tell you which aircraft the MASC should be based on - but he will tell you which it shouldn't be based on.
The undeniable facts are this: in the main, the bag is short of three things - height, speed and endurance. In the main, any helicopter replacement for the SK7 would not significantly alleviate these shortcommings.
We could even surmise that if the bag is replaced by Merlin it is absolute proof that we do not procure on the grounds of capability, we provide jobs for the defence industry (and that brings us back to Merlin again - sorry!). In the past this was fine because shortcommings were never brought to the forefront by people dying at the front line due to inadequate equipment!!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well,
I was poised all ready to join in the Merlin slagging thread. After just finishing an Exercise in East Anglia with 6 AH, Lynx and CH 47 with rumours around that the Merlins were not quite up to the job and have already pulled out of this years NITEX. The ammunition was there.
However, Si Clicks post reminded me that the Merlin appears to be suffering from the same lack of support as the AH does. People (IPTs/DPA etc) want all the bells and whistles of new technology but dont want to support the aircraft with spares, software and infrastructure. Just enough, just in time philosophy does not work in a financially strapped environment.
So, Si - well done. Gossip is great and so is rumour, but sniping from the sidelines is just negative and doesn't do anyone any favours. If you fly the aircraft and you think that it is the best capabability there is and the issues of serviceability are for those well away from the cockpit/airframe...then good on you. Good to see some moral backbone.
In the AH world we too have endured some really ill informed comment from arm chairs afar. Speak to the crews, identify where the issues are and focus energy on the heart of the problem (dont just put yourselves in a flat spin out to see whingeing and whining like an astazou).
I was poised all ready to join in the Merlin slagging thread. After just finishing an Exercise in East Anglia with 6 AH, Lynx and CH 47 with rumours around that the Merlins were not quite up to the job and have already pulled out of this years NITEX. The ammunition was there.
However, Si Clicks post reminded me that the Merlin appears to be suffering from the same lack of support as the AH does. People (IPTs/DPA etc) want all the bells and whistles of new technology but dont want to support the aircraft with spares, software and infrastructure. Just enough, just in time philosophy does not work in a financially strapped environment.
So, Si - well done. Gossip is great and so is rumour, but sniping from the sidelines is just negative and doesn't do anyone any favours. If you fly the aircraft and you think that it is the best capabability there is and the issues of serviceability are for those well away from the cockpit/airframe...then good on you. Good to see some moral backbone.
In the AH world we too have endured some really ill informed comment from arm chairs afar. Speak to the crews, identify where the issues are and focus energy on the heart of the problem (dont just put yourselves in a flat spin out to see whingeing and whining like an astazou).