MoD confirms AgustaWestland as strategic partner, Future Lynx as future platform
Ah thanks for the clarification. If bergen carrying is an issue, don't I recall an artist's impression of a non-structural strap on ventral pannier for Lynx, some years ago?
How does the maritime sensor fusion compare with that in the latest (Thai/Malay) Lynxes? With its higher AUW capability would there be any percentage in the SCMR FLynx carrying an extra crewmember?
And what legacy kit is to be reused?
How does the maritime sensor fusion compare with that in the latest (Thai/Malay) Lynxes? With its higher AUW capability would there be any percentage in the SCMR FLynx carrying an extra crewmember?
And what legacy kit is to be reused?
Jacko,
The external stowage option may well be looked at again, but I believe that the AAC have tried out the cabin volume demonstrator and declared that they are happy with it.
As to the missing data fusion and other systems integration capability, I'm not sure that it will be an immediate limitation. It will take time for crews to get up to speed with just what FLynx has to offer and it may well prove to be better to shape the required level of systems integration after initial front line experience.
FLynx has very little in common with the Thai/Malaysian/Omani SL300. It has a completely different cockpit and mission system, much better sensors and DAS fit, and a significant improvement in radar fit for the SCMR variant.
I can't tell you on a public forum the exact details of legacy kit that's being re-used, as I'm sure you will appreciate. Suffice to say that it won't pose a problem for the AAC guys and girls and will only (hopefully) be a minor issue for the FAA.
VP
The external stowage option may well be looked at again, but I believe that the AAC have tried out the cabin volume demonstrator and declared that they are happy with it.
As to the missing data fusion and other systems integration capability, I'm not sure that it will be an immediate limitation. It will take time for crews to get up to speed with just what FLynx has to offer and it may well prove to be better to shape the required level of systems integration after initial front line experience.
FLynx has very little in common with the Thai/Malaysian/Omani SL300. It has a completely different cockpit and mission system, much better sensors and DAS fit, and a significant improvement in radar fit for the SCMR variant.
I can't tell you on a public forum the exact details of legacy kit that's being re-used, as I'm sure you will appreciate. Suffice to say that it won't pose a problem for the AAC guys and girls and will only (hopefully) be a minor issue for the FAA.
VP
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the design is so much better than AH for the find role then can I assume that all the sensors are mast mounted, it comes with a radar on the mast and all manner of new gizmo's?
Nyet,
Mast mountiing is incapable of giving the resolution/range needed, due to the stabilisation problem. The compromise has to be to put the EOD where it can be adequately isolated from rotor vibration, so allowing high magnifications with adequate stabilsation to make geo referencing work to an acceptable degree.
As the Find requirement is not primarily NOE, this is not a significant limitation. For the primary recce role the A/C will be at significant altitude, so mast mounting isn't an advantage.
There is no radar requirement for Land Find, only for Maritime Find/Attack. Go figure..............
VP
Mast mountiing is incapable of giving the resolution/range needed, due to the stabilisation problem. The compromise has to be to put the EOD where it can be adequately isolated from rotor vibration, so allowing high magnifications with adequate stabilsation to make geo referencing work to an acceptable degree.
As the Find requirement is not primarily NOE, this is not a significant limitation. For the primary recce role the A/C will be at significant altitude, so mast mounting isn't an advantage.
There is no radar requirement for Land Find, only for Maritime Find/Attack. Go figure..............
VP
Jacko,
Roof mounting was an option, but the desire to make the AAC and Fleet versions the same led to the nose mount being adopted. Fleet have a need to look down at moderately high angles and that fact that land recce required a relatively high altitude anyway (to get the required range), meant that there is no appreciable penalty from nose mounting the EOD.
As it happens, the Land Find version will have an EO capability that is significantly greater than that required, as commonality means that it gets the maritime device. Fleet have a requirement for target ID at greater ranges than the AAC, but it doesn't make sense to have two different EOD's.
VP
Roof mounting was an option, but the desire to make the AAC and Fleet versions the same led to the nose mount being adopted. Fleet have a need to look down at moderately high angles and that fact that land recce required a relatively high altitude anyway (to get the required range), meant that there is no appreciable penalty from nose mounting the EOD.
As it happens, the Land Find version will have an EO capability that is significantly greater than that required, as commonality means that it gets the maritime device. Fleet have a requirement for target ID at greater ranges than the AAC, but it doesn't make sense to have two different EOD's.
VP
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wattisham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the AAC does not get a Lynx replacement, it is history as the very patient RAF move in. However, the AAC does need Future Lynx as there are not enough AH and AH without radar does not satisfy the limited movt of men materiel capability (4 man signal re-bros and C2 teams cannot be done by AH and certainly a waste of a Merlin).
So no, not a Blackhawk and no not another AH - but a good compromise in this cash strapped resource driven MoD.
As alluded to, the clever bit is now not in the airframe but the sights, sensors and connectivity. Otherwise it will not be able to conduct its primary role of cueing the Strike assets to do their job. IR or I2 or MMA or SATURN or HQ2 or Link 16 or IDM - we are all different at the moment and so hopefully Future Lynx for force an industry/Defence standard.
Oh and you Navy guys that are banging on about Cobra - you are doing yourself no favours-you are not getting it and also wasting so much effort in trying to convince people that you will. I reckon that you should concentrate on why you need Future Lynx and what your Squadron is going to bring to the party when AH fails to tip up because 16 bde have the priority over their assets.
So no, not a Blackhawk and no not another AH - but a good compromise in this cash strapped resource driven MoD.
As alluded to, the clever bit is now not in the airframe but the sights, sensors and connectivity. Otherwise it will not be able to conduct its primary role of cueing the Strike assets to do their job. IR or I2 or MMA or SATURN or HQ2 or Link 16 or IDM - we are all different at the moment and so hopefully Future Lynx for force an industry/Defence standard.
Oh and you Navy guys that are banging on about Cobra - you are doing yourself no favours-you are not getting it and also wasting so much effort in trying to convince people that you will. I reckon that you should concentrate on why you need Future Lynx and what your Squadron is going to bring to the party when AH fails to tip up because 16 bde have the priority over their assets.
Oh and you Navy guys that are banging on about Cobra - you are doing yourself no favours-you are not getting it and also wasting so much effort in trying to convince people that you will. I reckon that you should concentrate on why you need Future Lynx and what your Squadron is going to bring to the party when AH fails to tip up because 16 bde have the priority over their assets.
Re AH and small scale. The reason is that the politicians are v unlikely to commit AH to a small scale op it would send the wrong political message.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wattisham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Timex,
My point exactly, Al Faw, Sierra Leone, Bosnia - wherever - stop bleating about what could have been and make sure that you focus on the futre and drive to ensure that your bootnecks are looked after on the next Op! I am flying the same flag with the rest of the British Army as I dont see too much of 1 and 3 Div getting a look in with AH and funny old thing lets just weigh up who is working the hardest with deployed units at the moment - 16 Air Assault Bde or the rest of the British Army?
So you are right - but the answer is not Cobra, just ensuring that you too dont get left with something that can't really Find, won't be able to Fix and hasn't got a hope in hells chance of Striking let alone providing the bread and butter of rotary CAS or even self protection (which even your beloved Al Faw example saw the US do the most of the serious work by all accounts - not undermining your efforts as they were very professional, but just imagine what you could have done with a truly rounded capability). Don't forget, I am sure that Royal also needs the small 2-4 man teams lifted just as he needs the bunker door opened
My point exactly, Al Faw, Sierra Leone, Bosnia - wherever - stop bleating about what could have been and make sure that you focus on the futre and drive to ensure that your bootnecks are looked after on the next Op! I am flying the same flag with the rest of the British Army as I dont see too much of 1 and 3 Div getting a look in with AH and funny old thing lets just weigh up who is working the hardest with deployed units at the moment - 16 Air Assault Bde or the rest of the British Army?
So you are right - but the answer is not Cobra, just ensuring that you too dont get left with something that can't really Find, won't be able to Fix and hasn't got a hope in hells chance of Striking let alone providing the bread and butter of rotary CAS or even self protection (which even your beloved Al Faw example saw the US do the most of the serious work by all accounts - not undermining your efforts as they were very professional, but just imagine what you could have done with a truly rounded capability). Don't forget, I am sure that Royal also needs the small 2-4 man teams lifted just as he needs the bunker door opened
What the Army/RMs need is SCMR ie a radar fitted find a/c with a light attack capability. You will then be able to have one of those Heineken moments - gets to places others can't.
(which even your beloved Al Faw example saw the US do the most of the serious work by all accounts - not undermining your efforts as they were very professional, but just imagine what you could have done with a truly rounded capability).
Yes we do need a light lift capability, but we need multi-role in that case, Find Fix and Strike!
Whose bleating? just very concerned that when the next one kicks off Royal is left hanging
And finally will the new Lynx be armed and will it be the same wpn as was planned for SCMR?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wattisham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Timex,
I will suck back - you are not bleating but boy are some of your colleagues in your world (Cobra this and Cobra that - let it go, get over it, it ain't happening!). Of course AH is not rounded - it was procured for one purpose and one one purpose only - death and destruction (predominantly against tanks).
Admittedly, as the rules of war change and the asymetric threat and non contiguous battlefield replaces the old FLOT/FEBA and FLET, AH does have flexibility to use its superb sights and sensors, poise, deterrence, and if needs be lethal munitions (certainly beats my current stab binos - ofh that's right, the SQMS doesn't have any - so it undoubtedly beats my naked eye!!!). However, it appears that Royal wants a bit of everything and AH is one large sledge hammer to crack a nut on 75% of Royals outings. By all means have it up your sleeves when another Al Faw or higher intensity Op kicks off, but for routine sailing around the ogsplosh I would agree with you in that you do want a capability that can Find, Fix, Track, Strike and Exploit - and a limited movement of men and materiel would be a real bonus and one favourably absorbed by the booties I believe.
I will suck back - you are not bleating but boy are some of your colleagues in your world (Cobra this and Cobra that - let it go, get over it, it ain't happening!). Of course AH is not rounded - it was procured for one purpose and one one purpose only - death and destruction (predominantly against tanks).
Admittedly, as the rules of war change and the asymetric threat and non contiguous battlefield replaces the old FLOT/FEBA and FLET, AH does have flexibility to use its superb sights and sensors, poise, deterrence, and if needs be lethal munitions (certainly beats my current stab binos - ofh that's right, the SQMS doesn't have any - so it undoubtedly beats my naked eye!!!). However, it appears that Royal wants a bit of everything and AH is one large sledge hammer to crack a nut on 75% of Royals outings. By all means have it up your sleeves when another Al Faw or higher intensity Op kicks off, but for routine sailing around the ogsplosh I would agree with you in that you do want a capability that can Find, Fix, Track, Strike and Exploit - and a limited movement of men and materiel would be a real bonus and one favourably absorbed by the booties I believe.
I will suck back - you are not bleating but boy are some of your colleagues in your world (Cobra this and Cobra that - let it go, get over it, it ain't happening!). Of course AH is not rounded - it was procured for one purpose and one one purpose only - death and destruction (predominantly against tanks
Great in its own unique way, but not as flexible (read cheap!)or as deployable for what expeditionary warfare demands in todays conflicts. Small light AH (just so happened that Cobra was the frame of choice.)
Most of us know that we will never get AH but for the sake of RM deployments we need to let people know of the very serious gap in our Op Orbat.
Oh well we can all dream
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This Link shows what the Future Lynx will 'probably' look like....according to AgustaWestland, complete with AH support 
Basically a mix between the HMA-8 and AH-9 but with
stealthier lines
Basically a mix between the HMA-8 and AH-9 but with
stealthier lines
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SE490618
Age: 64
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is SCMR.........they just changed the name to F.Lynx....same thing..diff name. Can't wait for it to enyetr service.....Iv'e flown the equivalent and its a superb aircraft...just what is required. Now al we need is FASGW to come on line at the same time and Bob is D'Oncle
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will be interested to see how F Lynx (Naval Version) is used to support land ops (coastal). With the Sea Spray 7000, they will have a GMTI capability as is used by SK Mk7 to detect and track land vehicles. In addition they will have a SAR (Synthetic Apeture Radar) mode to find stationary targets and gather intel. I am very surprised that AAC would not get this capability which the Sea King Mk7 uses very well to support AH. Opens up the land war to navy F Lynx....RN Observers should be looking forward to what good be a great platform to fight in.
Fly-Friendly
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around the middle
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chaps
Am I being a bit daft? As the current Lynx is on the way out (5Reg is no longer a Reg but a Sqn) and I am sure there will be a large gap between Lynx and FLynx entering service. If we can do without the Lynx for so long and it has been very limited in the hot and dusty places why do we really need another Lynx ???
Surely the money would be better spent on more support for AH and SH ??
Heads down !!!!!!!!!!
Am I being a bit daft? As the current Lynx is on the way out (5Reg is no longer a Reg but a Sqn) and I am sure there will be a large gap between Lynx and FLynx entering service. If we can do without the Lynx for so long and it has been very limited in the hot and dusty places why do we really need another Lynx ???
Surely the money would be better spent on more support for AH and SH ??
Heads down !!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is the current Lynx on its way out|? I understood the OSD is 2018 and so with F.Lynx ISD Circa 2014 there will be a few years where we operate a mixed fleet (Much like we do at the moment really - IIRC There are currently 11 different types of Lynx in RN Service)
