Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

MoD reported to have shunned the chance to hire more helicopters.

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

MoD reported to have shunned the chance to hire more helicopters.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Jun 2007, 10:27
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 85
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MoD reported to have shunned the chance to hire more helicopters.

It is reported in the Daily telegraph that the Ministry of Defence has for a year ignored a £20 million deal to hire transport helicopters from a British firm which could have resolved the transportation shortage in Afghanistan.
The desperate lack of air transport, highlighted at the weekend by The Daily Telegraph, could have been resolved if ministers had agreed last year to an offer from Security Support Solutions Ltd to provide four Mi17 Hip helicopters and an Mi26 Halo transporter, capable of carrying 20 tons.
But the deal foundered because the MoD was reluctant to fly troops in Soviet era helicopters despite the aircraft being specifically designed for the heat and dust of Afghanistan.
Security Support Solutions had the aircraft, flown by former British and European special forces pilots, available immediately to carry troops, food and ammunition in Helmand province.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...18/nwar118.xml
If this is correct is there any logic behind in the MoD's thinking?
MReyn24050 is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 10:32
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Under a stone
Age: 68
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They don't want to be accused of "shooting from the Hip".
Release-Authorised is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 11:39
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Darling - where are we?
Posts: 2,580
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
is there any logic behind in the MoD's thinking
Of course there is. Rather than forking out for a handful of ancient ex-Soviet helicopters, it makes for much better headlines to buy new cabs that won't be seen on the battlefied for months if not years!

If the Armed Forces in Afghanistan say they desperately need more RW assets and the govt then goes and puts an order in for 6 Mk3A Merlins and pays to sort out the CH-47mess, they can argue that they are responding to operational concerns and showing how they are in tune with the realities of the current ops situation as well as supporting British jobs.

The fact that the extra cabs were needed last summer, that the Mk3As are unlikely to deploy to Afghanistan any time soon (in fact I'd be gobsmacked to see any more than 2 of them on the flight line before the end of the year) and that it will take God knows how long to re-engineer the CH-47s is all incidental.

Headlines dear boy, headlines and spin. That is the logic behind not taking up the cheap as chips offer for aviation assets designed to operate in those conditions and with a proven capability.
Melchett01 is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 12:05
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Chinook helicopters fly over the Paktia's mountain province near Khost, southeast of Kabul
I don't claim to be a Chinook expert, however the helicopter behind the Chinook looks distinctly like a Blackhawk to me
LBGR is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 12:30
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oop North
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 6 Posts
The logic may stem from the devil in the detail. What kind of self defence kit would the cheap aircraft have for example?? I guess we don't know, but:

I don't fancy flying around in a cab with antiquated self defence kit.

Even if we bought 30 cabs tommorrow, who's gonna fly them? Don't fancy being flown by mercenary pilots either.
Marly Lite is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 12:32
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hants
Posts: 144
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Indeed LBGR, what a howler. It completely detracts from the essence of the story. I for one, feel sick to the stomach at this blatant misuse of the letter 's'.
talk_shy_tall_knight is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 12:39
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only an observation.
LBGR is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 15:08
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LBGR,

Just a thought but if the pic was taken from the ramp of a CH47 flying in formation with the other two, possibly even more, aircraft then perhaps the use of the "s" in this context was correct.................whatever the main thrust of the story was not really about a recognition error
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2007, 15:30
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ilchester
Age: 51
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Come on guys, don't believe everything you read.
herbaceous is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.