Lynx on the horizon, but which one?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember hearing about the proposals for the Army's now defunct BLUH (Battlefield Light Utility Helicopter) - one of the requirements was that it was to have more space than the Lynx, in order to carry more troops, and accommodate stretchers.
The favourite for the contest? Another Lynx.
Well done, Whitehall, well done.
While the F.Lynx does seem to suit the RN's needs, could AW revive the WS-70 (licence built Blackhawk) programme again for the Army? Or is the NH90 a better proposal?
The favourite for the contest? Another Lynx.
Well done, Whitehall, well done.
While the F.Lynx does seem to suit the RN's needs, could AW revive the WS-70 (licence built Blackhawk) programme again for the Army? Or is the NH90 a better proposal?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's be frank. Lynx replacement is... another Lynx. What's the chance of getting a replacement that's either OTS or an original degisn that fits the requirement - may I suggest the one on Team America?
Apparently, FRES was sorted out in a day by the Shrivenham ICSC(L) students, so should we give it to them?
Apparently, FRES was sorted out in a day by the Shrivenham ICSC(L) students, so should we give it to them?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Lynx replacement should be another Lynx. Why would you want to replace the worlds fastest, most capable lightweight helicopter?
The requirement for the Army to have a bigger cabin was removed due to cost.
The requirement for the Army to have a bigger cabin was removed due to cost.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK, m o s t l y
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"could AW revive the WS-70 (licence built Blackhawk) programme again for the Army"
Taffer, nice idea - you're forgetting that it's cheaper to buy just one type - so therefore no.
Taffer, nice idea - you're forgetting that it's cheaper to buy just one type - so therefore no.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F.Lynx is government preferred builder for good reasons.
The RN desperately want and need the capability that it will give them. It meets all Army stipulated requirements and some. It is far beyond Super Lynx and way beyond current Lynx fleet - New airframe, new avionics, new engines, new sights, new comms suite, new weapons, new front and rear seats, new undercarriage, higher AUW, lower maintenance, more reliable. But no it is not a Support Helicopter although it can move small numbers around. The biggest worry is how far it will outstrip Apache in the ISTAR role and making sure Apache can integrate with FLynx more advanced Modem and picture handovers.
Come and visit us at Yeovil if you want more details. We need to buy this sooner rather than later and we need lots. Look how well Merlin has done. FLYnx will build on that, coupled with the lessons learnt delivering Apache (early and under budget! remember it was the Army that hosed implimentation and training - kind of like the RAF said they would).
I am involved in project but am neither Westlands or Army.....but have concerns that the government are going to delay and delay this much needed new capability for all of us.
The RN desperately want and need the capability that it will give them. It meets all Army stipulated requirements and some. It is far beyond Super Lynx and way beyond current Lynx fleet - New airframe, new avionics, new engines, new sights, new comms suite, new weapons, new front and rear seats, new undercarriage, higher AUW, lower maintenance, more reliable. But no it is not a Support Helicopter although it can move small numbers around. The biggest worry is how far it will outstrip Apache in the ISTAR role and making sure Apache can integrate with FLynx more advanced Modem and picture handovers.
Come and visit us at Yeovil if you want more details. We need to buy this sooner rather than later and we need lots. Look how well Merlin has done. FLYnx will build on that, coupled with the lessons learnt delivering Apache (early and under budget! remember it was the Army that hosed implimentation and training - kind of like the RAF said they would).
I am involved in project but am neither Westlands or Army.....but have concerns that the government are going to delay and delay this much needed new capability for all of us.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CSRO
You are obviously barking.
Great though the merlin and Lynx may be as designs, Westlands consistently bend the MOD over and do us dry.
Dont buy another product until they see us right for spares and other contractual issues on the ones we have
You are obviously barking.
Great though the merlin and Lynx may be as designs, Westlands consistently bend the MOD over and do us dry.
Dont buy another product until they see us right for spares and other contractual issues on the ones we have
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having flown Lynx 7 and 9 in most environments, I have to say it is one of the most versatile helicopters we could choose. It is an outstanding platform. BUT we have been massively let down by the money saving measures, resulting in no spares , no decent sight systems, and a long wait for a replacement. I have to agree with Tourist, the aircraft itself is fantastic - give it new engines, a decent avionics suite, and decent ISTAR capability and it will be an awesome platform - but we have to look further ahead. If we are going to be held to ransom for the next 20 years is it really worth it? Repeating the same mistakes??
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that spares is what has let down current Lynx fleet and FLynx comes with a decent spares package and some form of long term servicing agreement is in the offing too I think. Merlin is overkill for the requirement, think small, fast versatile, small ships operations. The Army recconaissance role also requires something manoeuverable and agile, admittedly Merlin would be great for some of the command and control roles though.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much as I hate to play the cynic,
The Army Lynx requirement had to be rewritten because several people embarrassed themselves trying to justify the aircrafts capability against the original requirement. The phrase ‘so what if it can’t carry a single section of troops, so send two aircraft’ springs to mind as a classic example of the original requirement to carry a properly constituted infantry section.
As a player on the battlefield, Lynx was just about ‘okay’. Yes, I have flown Mk 1, 5, 7, and 9 and they have gradually improved but with nowhere like the expansion capacity required for modern self-defense systems to be incorporated and the like. It has very little crash survivability built in and little or no systems self protection (not the DAS). I have always found myself wanting to be able to do more than the aircraft was capable of providing!
With an Apache as capable as it already is then why not buy some extra D models without the Radar. A force multiplier and let the current Longbows carry out the recce?
There are other systems out there such as MX15 and the like than can provide recce with stand-off where an AH would be not politically correct and with much greater loiter capability!
Considered opinion from an old bold Lynx operator who acknowledges its limitations and has always wanted to be able to do what I should be able to do with it but never could!
HEDP
The Army Lynx requirement had to be rewritten because several people embarrassed themselves trying to justify the aircrafts capability against the original requirement. The phrase ‘so what if it can’t carry a single section of troops, so send two aircraft’ springs to mind as a classic example of the original requirement to carry a properly constituted infantry section.
As a player on the battlefield, Lynx was just about ‘okay’. Yes, I have flown Mk 1, 5, 7, and 9 and they have gradually improved but with nowhere like the expansion capacity required for modern self-defense systems to be incorporated and the like. It has very little crash survivability built in and little or no systems self protection (not the DAS). I have always found myself wanting to be able to do more than the aircraft was capable of providing!
With an Apache as capable as it already is then why not buy some extra D models without the Radar. A force multiplier and let the current Longbows carry out the recce?
There are other systems out there such as MX15 and the like than can provide recce with stand-off where an AH would be not politically correct and with much greater loiter capability!
Considered opinion from an old bold Lynx operator who acknowledges its limitations and has always wanted to be able to do what I should be able to do with it but never could!
HEDP
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wattashame
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HEDP, it may have escaped your attention, but the Apache is an ATTACK HELICOPTER hence AH! So why buy more AH to allow the current Longbow fleet to fill a Recce role, come on mate, think about it. The Lynx is too big for recce, the Apache is far too big and too expensive. The US Army have binned the Commanche and are now looking towards the EC 145 or something like it, small light and cheap, just like the Kiowa Warrior. The British Army would do well to jump on that wagon and share with the development costs.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
AHQHI656SQN
Scout AH1, Gazelle AH1, Lynx AH1, AH7, AH9 Can we all now go to the attack helicopter pilots dinner? 
Ignoring things like the extra engine, payload capacity, greater MTOW, U/S load capability and cost, please remind me how the EC145 is like the Kiowa Warrior.
Or (b), let the US pay for the development and we can save a bit of cash. Please advise me of your shareholdings , just incase I have shares in the same companies that I need to sell!
SS
HEDP, it may have escaped your attention, but the Apache is an ATTACK HELICOPTER hence AH!
Scout AH1, Gazelle AH1, Lynx AH1, AH7, AH9 Can we all now go to the attack helicopter pilots dinner?
now looking towards the EC 145 or something like it, small light and cheap, just like the Kiowa Warrior.
The British Army would do well to jump on that wagon and share with the development costs.
SS
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the reasons that Apache won the AH competition was its enhanced survivability due to the radar (27x greater) plus its further self protection in terms of HIDAS. Once it finds its target it can then do something about it. OH58 has struggled massively with payload issues as electronics has competed with weapons in order to do something about what it finds.
If you consider crew survivability as a factor, and most pilots would, how does converting another civilian helicopter for the battlefield rate against something designed for the battlefield?
We use these machines differently as well, we dont have the numbers that the Americans have. However; what we find we can despatch quite effectively!
If we introduce another type to the inventory then we will end up with two fleets that will compete for funding and never really have enough of anything to do either one of the jobs effectively. If you purchase the same type then you will enhance the attack capability whilst retaining the good ISTAR capability it already has.
IMHO
HEDP
If you consider crew survivability as a factor, and most pilots would, how does converting another civilian helicopter for the battlefield rate against something designed for the battlefield?
We use these machines differently as well, we dont have the numbers that the Americans have. However; what we find we can despatch quite effectively!
If we introduce another type to the inventory then we will end up with two fleets that will compete for funding and never really have enough of anything to do either one of the jobs effectively. If you purchase the same type then you will enhance the attack capability whilst retaining the good ISTAR capability it already has.
IMHO
HEDP
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wattashame
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS, I might have known you'd jump on this one, here goes.
1. I know you've been out for a bit now, the Apache is AH, Lynx is LH, Chinnooks, Puma, Seaking etc are SH. I know the Gazelle was AH1, Lynx AH1,7&9 and that won't change. If you would like to go to the Attack Pilots Dinner give the Lord TT a call at Wallop and stake your claim.
2. EC 145 is smaller than Commanche and much smaller than Apache. It is in the same stable as Kiowa, it is a modern light utility helicopter, ideally suited to the recce role. It's twin engine will give it the power to lift much more. The civilian 145 does indeed have a hook for USL, then again so can the Jetranger.
3. If we share the cost of developing this new machine, we have a vote when it comes to deciding what goes in it. The US Army is strapped for cash, so any other cash injections will improve the overall product, and give the pilots a machine that will be fit for purpose. Something, I know you will agree, the pilots who go into harmsway deserve that.
HEDP.
I cannot agree more about the survivability aspect of any military helicopter. The Apache was designed with many features built in, that enhance the crew survivability. It is however built to fight, like a Chally tank is more armoured than a CVR(T), the roles are different.
I agree that given the money, build a specific military recce helicopter, but as I said, the US Army has just scrapped that idea as it was costing too much, given that time is short to get a replacement into service it will have to be a "off the shelf" buy, I don't like it the idea but its the lesser of two evils. The Lynx can't do the job, most of them don't even have sights as a starting point. We (UK Army PLC) need a "find" capability that will enhance the strike capability we have.
One thing is for sure, the Apache is not a recce platform, I conceed it can do Recce, indeed in the absence of a dedicated Recce platform, it will have to fill that role, but it is very costly.
If the AAC doesn't get a replacement for Lynx, it will become a single type unit, it will struggle to justify itself on the bigger stage, vast amounts of money for a single type. It could be argued that we will be specialist in our field, then again the Harrier force are specialist in the CAS role in the RAF!
1. I know you've been out for a bit now, the Apache is AH, Lynx is LH, Chinnooks, Puma, Seaking etc are SH. I know the Gazelle was AH1, Lynx AH1,7&9 and that won't change. If you would like to go to the Attack Pilots Dinner give the Lord TT a call at Wallop and stake your claim.
2. EC 145 is smaller than Commanche and much smaller than Apache. It is in the same stable as Kiowa, it is a modern light utility helicopter, ideally suited to the recce role. It's twin engine will give it the power to lift much more. The civilian 145 does indeed have a hook for USL, then again so can the Jetranger.
3. If we share the cost of developing this new machine, we have a vote when it comes to deciding what goes in it. The US Army is strapped for cash, so any other cash injections will improve the overall product, and give the pilots a machine that will be fit for purpose. Something, I know you will agree, the pilots who go into harmsway deserve that.
HEDP.
I cannot agree more about the survivability aspect of any military helicopter. The Apache was designed with many features built in, that enhance the crew survivability. It is however built to fight, like a Chally tank is more armoured than a CVR(T), the roles are different.
I agree that given the money, build a specific military recce helicopter, but as I said, the US Army has just scrapped that idea as it was costing too much, given that time is short to get a replacement into service it will have to be a "off the shelf" buy, I don't like it the idea but its the lesser of two evils. The Lynx can't do the job, most of them don't even have sights as a starting point. We (UK Army PLC) need a "find" capability that will enhance the strike capability we have.
One thing is for sure, the Apache is not a recce platform, I conceed it can do Recce, indeed in the absence of a dedicated Recce platform, it will have to fill that role, but it is very costly.
If the AAC doesn't get a replacement for Lynx, it will become a single type unit, it will struggle to justify itself on the bigger stage, vast amounts of money for a single type. It could be argued that we will be specialist in our field, then again the Harrier force are specialist in the CAS role in the RAF!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that what ever we, the users, require, the decision to replace the Lynx will be a political decision (and probably quite rightly). No doubt the decision will be based on Votes and jobs and will therefore roll out of the Yeovil factory and will look remarkably like a Lynx. Maybe thats a good thing. The Lynx is a first class aircraft and although it is now a little dated, in the mid 70's when it was introduced, it was looked upon by other Armed Forces with envy. It is now over 30 years since it was introduced into service and as such should be replaced....and thats now, not in 2014 when the Lynx will be gusting 40.
