Saving money and improving operational capability
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wattashame
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saving money and improving operational capability
Isn't it about time that JHC stopped throwing good money after bad?
How about a purchase of UH60's to replace the Army Lynx fleet and RAF Puma fleet, in a single stroke of the pen, saving money (well ending the waste of money) and improving capability, giving tactical utility to the ground forces in AFG and Iraq. A UH 60 has an increase of about 2.5 tonnes over Puma, as for the Lynx, it's time for the cloakroom!
How about a purchase of UH60's to replace the Army Lynx fleet and RAF Puma fleet, in a single stroke of the pen, saving money (well ending the waste of money) and improving capability, giving tactical utility to the ground forces in AFG and Iraq. A UH 60 has an increase of about 2.5 tonnes over Puma, as for the Lynx, it's time for the cloakroom!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What, with a UH60 for SF and a SeaHawk for 847? Nah, dont be daft and let common sense get in the way of wasting money and protecting Italian owned companies here! Plueease!!!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 119K East of SARDOT
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about a purchase of UH60's to replace the Army Lynx fleet and RAF Puma fleet
A feasibility study/trial was carried out in the eighties (involved JATE, as it was then); we, in the SH Force, were all willing it to happen but the wise money was on EHI 01 - now there's an aircraft that was designed to be the ultimate utility helicopter. Very, very political at the time - as I'm sure Super Lynx etc is - guess which stable the Puma replacement will come from?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Story has it that the army changed the criteria for lift capability which excluded the UH60 from being the Wessex/Puma replacement.
Why:
Because the AAC wanted AH and someone realised that a UH60 could easily be converted to a gunship/AH and they would lose the justification.
Result: Long delay in Wessex and Puma replacement.
All rumour of course!!
R1a
Why:
Because the AAC wanted AH and someone realised that a UH60 could easily be converted to a gunship/AH and they would lose the justification.
Result: Long delay in Wessex and Puma replacement.
All rumour of course!!
R1a
Last edited by Role1a; 2nd Dec 2007 at 19:16.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wattashame
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall Tory minister resigning over an issue with helicopters in the eighties.
I seem to recall it was a Wastelands contract.
Back to the here and now. I am of the opinion that, just like CH47, the EH101 is too big to be in and out of the tactical battle. Just imagine how much bad press would follow a medium to large utility helicopter being taken out on the battle field. We in the UK Armed forces send heavy lift to do a light utility task, because we don't have a credible light utility helicopter. Wastelands is owed nothing by our nation anymore, they should be forced to compete and in doing so provide the customer with a helicopter that can do what it says on the tin.
Back to the here and now. I am of the opinion that, just like CH47, the EH101 is too big to be in and out of the tactical battle. Just imagine how much bad press would follow a medium to large utility helicopter being taken out on the battle field. We in the UK Armed forces send heavy lift to do a light utility task, because we don't have a credible light utility helicopter. Wastelands is owed nothing by our nation anymore, they should be forced to compete and in doing so provide the customer with a helicopter that can do what it says on the tin.
I seem to remember that someone moved the goalposts from airmobile to air portable and we had the ridiculous situation where Wastelands built a 90% scale model of a landrover to show that it could be driven up the ramp of a Merlin - voila instant air portability and a bucket of cash to the boys from Yeovil. Has anyone actually ever got a real landrover in yet without stripping it down and letting down the tyres?(ideal for a combat scenario)
Oh how I laughed when I heard their US101 was having to be completely redesigned because they only won the contract by blurring the capability/crashworthy requirements. The new one will be so heavy it will need a fourth engine to give it the required OEI performance
We would have no shortage of helicopter lift now if we had gone down the Blackhawk route then and would have been well placed to introduce S-92 since it shares many of the Blackhawks components. However, commonality of types to simplify engineering solutions has never been high on MoDs priority list.
Oh how I laughed when I heard their US101 was having to be completely redesigned because they only won the contract by blurring the capability/crashworthy requirements. The new one will be so heavy it will need a fourth engine to give it the required OEI performance
We would have no shortage of helicopter lift now if we had gone down the Blackhawk route then and would have been well placed to introduce S-92 since it shares many of the Blackhawks components. However, commonality of types to simplify engineering solutions has never been high on MoDs priority list.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: wallop
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is about time that we in all services are given the most suitable tools for the job. Comd JHC was apparently very keen on the US Blackhawk idea. However when the deal/feasability was closely examined it was not so hot!.
It is quite clear that FLynx (or whatever it is today) is not what the army wants. It might be suitable if the AAC hierachy are concerned that they will get nothing in Lynx 7/9's place!!.
When Comd 16Bde is happy to have it removed from theatre then that surely must be the trigger to get something which will support "the user".
Sadly I doubt any politcian has the bloody balls to cancel Lynx and pay Westlands off. That said a miracle may happen.
It would be a real tonic to see a replacement for Puma/Lynx procured and put to valuble use!
Not holding my breath!
Ralph
It is quite clear that FLynx (or whatever it is today) is not what the army wants. It might be suitable if the AAC hierachy are concerned that they will get nothing in Lynx 7/9's place!!.
When Comd 16Bde is happy to have it removed from theatre then that surely must be the trigger to get something which will support "the user".
Sadly I doubt any politcian has the bloody balls to cancel Lynx and pay Westlands off. That said a miracle may happen.
It would be a real tonic to see a replacement for Puma/Lynx procured and put to valuble use!
Not holding my breath!
Ralph
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we had bought UH-60s in the 80s/90s, they would have been built by Westland anyway.
You can usually guarantee by the time a decision is taken, the operational circumstances wil have moved on - sadly maybe not this time
You can usually guarantee by the time a decision is taken, the operational circumstances wil have moved on - sadly maybe not this time
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sausage side
IIRC, the 2* at RC (South) asked for something that had a 'Blackhawk'-like capability. Must be very frustrating having to rely on TF Corsair or ATF for most of your daylight moves.....
Fit the UH-60 with RTM322 and the commonality of spares with WAH-64 goes even higher than 65%, surely...
Fit the UH-60 with RTM322 and the commonality of spares with WAH-64 goes even higher than 65%, surely...
Last edited by FrogPrince; 3rd Dec 2007 at 17:29.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: germany
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wastelands
Well i for would like to congratulate the former director for rising above ALL the other applicants to become deputy stooge down thar in yeovs, not jobs for the boys tho, oh no. his brief (sales pitch) about FLYNX was most enlightening. Well if you lot down thar are reading this....WE DONT FCUKING WANT IT!!!!!!!!!!! CIAO
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more b@@@@@s from Crab
Speak to the guys at Benson before issuing utter garbage as you tend to do
A landrover will fit in, without lowering the tyres, so will a ATMP,
In what universe do you live where you think a company would get away with what you suggest?, any trials are witnessed by the IPTs and OEUs!!!!
The 'redsesign' you talk about is another Sikorsky myth promulgated by an ex employee, obviously for the VH71 the 4th engine was fitted in the cabin (so you couldnt see it on the pictures) and the ground under it was photoshopped away to make it look like it hovered and of course the USMC don't know this.
Unless you add anything worthwhile stop posting libelous accusations
And as for FLynx, don't bollock WHL, they are just responding to a requirement, have a go at the procurement and OR team
DM
A landrover will fit in, without lowering the tyres, so will a ATMP,
In what universe do you live where you think a company would get away with what you suggest?, any trials are witnessed by the IPTs and OEUs!!!!
The 'redsesign' you talk about is another Sikorsky myth promulgated by an ex employee, obviously for the VH71 the 4th engine was fitted in the cabin (so you couldnt see it on the pictures) and the ground under it was photoshopped away to make it look like it hovered and of course the USMC don't know this.
Unless you add anything worthwhile stop posting libelous accusations
And as for FLynx, don't bollock WHL, they are just responding to a requirement, have a go at the procurement and OR team
DM
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Fit the UH-60 with RTM322 and the commonality of spares with WAH-64 goes even higher than 65%, surely...
And we were talking about the feasibility of Blackhawk as a Wessex/Puma replacement in 1979.
Landrover fitting in the EH-101 became a worry when they introduced the newer "110 series" coil sprung versions of the vehicle, which were bigger overall and sat higher than the old leaf sprung ones.
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
Landrover fitting in the EH-101 became a worry when they introduced the newer "110 series" coil sprung versions of the vehicle, which were bigger overall and sat higher than the old leaf sprung ones.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Good for crew transport but not much use for the army who really want to bring their own vehicles!
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
The Growler was built for the USMC to fit in the Osprey (it's an M-151, re-jigged) - only trouble is that it's so narrow, and the CofG is so high that it tips over. It can't pull the skin off a rice pudding, and you could build one yourself for about $10,000, but Uncle Sam pays over twelve times as much.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Desert mainly, occasionally arctic and rarely jungle
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proven technologies available sooner rather than later...
Quote:
"I think that engine/airframe combination first flew in 1986, six years before they even ordered the RTM for the EH-101."
Another quote:
"In the combat search and rescue role the MH-60S will replace the current HH-60H starting in 2007."
http://www.andersen.af.mil/library/f...ID=7112&page=1
So there must presumably be development life left in the Blackhawk design. Likewise, the AAC is still expanding the operational envelope for the WAH-64 / RTM322 seven years on from the first UK delivery.
To my simple mind a stop-gap UOR of second-hand UH-60's 'as-is', with the carrot of a re-engining contract to RTM322 when funds allow, would provide a better solution in AFG than AAC can currently offer or that FLynx will ever deliver.
"I think that engine/airframe combination first flew in 1986, six years before they even ordered the RTM for the EH-101."
Another quote:
"In the combat search and rescue role the MH-60S will replace the current HH-60H starting in 2007."
http://www.andersen.af.mil/library/f...ID=7112&page=1
So there must presumably be development life left in the Blackhawk design. Likewise, the AAC is still expanding the operational envelope for the WAH-64 / RTM322 seven years on from the first UK delivery.
To my simple mind a stop-gap UOR of second-hand UH-60's 'as-is', with the carrot of a re-engining contract to RTM322 when funds allow, would provide a better solution in AFG than AAC can currently offer or that FLynx will ever deliver.
