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

F/Lynx all systems go at AW

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.

F/Lynx all systems go at AW

Old 17th Nov 2008, 10:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 13
F/Lynx all systems go at AW

GKN Aerospace delivered the first complete, state-of-the-art, Future Lynx Airframe to AgustaWestland, a Finmeccanica company, on schedule, yesterday. The Company has achieved challenging technological goals for this airframe including an 80% reduction in parts count when compared with the existing Super Lynx airframe.

AgustaWestland, as the design authority for Future Lynx, has worked in partnership with GKN Aerospace to implement an effective design-to-cost methodology which has driven the product design.

Marcus Bryson, Chief Executive of GKN Aerospace comments "Our goal has been to create a highly effective operational airframe with an extremely efficient design and a truly cost effective manufacturing cycle. We have achieved this through innovations across the manufacturing process and through a close working relationship between AgustaWestland and GKN Aerospace Yeovil and our UK-based supplier team."

GKN Aerospace has made extensive use of monolithic machined components, replacing a traditional fabricated detail structure, to realise the dramatic reduction in parts count. In addition, 3 dimensional digital modelling has ensured highly accurate part-to-part assembly, whilst state-of-the-art assembly tooling has been introduced which can rotate through 360 degrees and has vertical movement for ease of access. Assembly personnel then use a stand alone wireless IT workstation to apply digital assembly instructions developed by GKN Aerospace directly from CATIA. This has eliminated the need for hard copy drawings and will enable future configuration changes to be communicated instantly and efficiently to the required personnel.

Bryson continues: "Throughout the design phase and immediately following contract award by the UK MOD, in June 2006, we placed a dedicated team of engineers within the AgustaWestland design office. This allowed a fully integrated team to develop and this has been critical to our success, and to our meeting - and in a number of cases exceeding - some ambitious goals for the new airframe. Together, our teams have done a quite remarkable job."

GKN Aerospace is responsible for supplying the complete, assembled airframe for 70 Future Lynx helicopters for the Royal Navy and Army. The Company manages the supply chain and carries out airframe assembly, which takes place at its Yeovil facility. GKN Aerospace, Yeovil, has been supporting AgustaWestland through the supply of assemblies for the Lynx family, which now includes the complete assembled airframe, throughout the Lynx programme life. For the last 7 years GKN has supplied all Lynx airframes - including for a number of successful export programmes.
SuperDouper is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 06:36
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London
Age: 66
Posts: 237
I know that the RN has announced that it is going to call its future lynx "Wildcat" - is the army going to use the same name (I assume so).

.
phil gollin is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 09:34
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 53
Posts: 1,051
THREAD DRIFT (apologies)

Can I please ask a quick question.

What was it about the WG30 that was not up to scratch?
I know virtually nothing about the proposed WG30 (other than the airframes littering the helicopter museum at Weston Super Mare), but can only assume that Westlands thought it would be the way ahead, and a possible Puma replacement.

Once again, sorry for thread drift, but the WG30 looked like it would have solved many of the lynx's shortcomings, assuming it had enough power/ceiling/lift etc.
barnstormer1968 is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 17:45
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Land of the Angles
Posts: 324
Costly, with poor range and performance spring to mind. If you want to know what became of the WG30, take a good look at the AW139.
Hilife is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 17:58
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Throwing stones from my glass house
Posts: 40
FLynx

Well that all sounds very promising indeed . With all that 3D modelling going on, I wonder, has the Army version got a nose wheel that we can actually steer?
RotatingPart is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 21:50
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 580
I wonder if it has a busbar, digital AFCS and a much larger cabin capable of lifting a full section of eight?
mutleyfour is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 23:20
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Thailand
Posts: 53
When I did my spanner benders upgrading course II-I back in 72 at Middle Wallop, we where told about the WG 13, the new heli for the AAC.
Two crew up front and Nine Fighting troops in the back was the line, a mini Huey.
No one ever said the AAC will get this cab because it's the Heli the Navy needs for it's Sub hunters.
The Lynx was a Navy Heli that was forced on the Army.
I understand the navy with their massive, by army standards, small ships crews considered their aircraft a Good Un. As a Nuc Sub Hunter it would have been high on the Spares Supply line.
Army helis where not high on the supply line, unless you where in NI on Operations or during the disastrous deployment of Lynx down to the Falklands, long after the shooting stopped.
it now seems that they navy's latest choice will be the AAC's latest do all.
john
jonwilly is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2008, 23:33
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kammbronn
Posts: 2,051
Originally Posted by mutleyfour
I wonder if it has a busbar, digital AFCS and a much larger cabin capable of lifting a full section of eight?
I wonder if you'll be able to fit a GS stretcher in it without having to hack the handles off each end?

Last edited by diginagain; 19th Nov 2008 at 13:26.
diginagain is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2008, 09:02
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: germany
Posts: 21
FLYNX wish list!

GS Stretchers? No bastardised AFCS? Next you'll want mast mounted ISTAR or nose mounted sights that have more than ten degree look down!!!!!
penny pincher is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2008, 17:53
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
The Navy are getting what they want , because they know what they want. The Army are getting.....
......go figure!
Bismark is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2008, 19:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
GKN Aerospace delivered the first complete, state-of-the-art, Future Lynx Airframe to AgustaWestland,
I was wondering where one of our Mk9s went? We left it at Westlands a few weeks ago for a couple of 'minor mods'. When we went back to pick it up they said they'd 'lost it'. All is clear now.


Mutley, you'll fit a full section of eight in it no problems. So long as they are dwarf Gurkhas carrying no more than a small water biscuit each.


Bismark. The Army are getting what the Navy want because it suits the potential export market for AW.

wg13_dummy is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2008, 19:48
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 210
The Navy don't want it - it's another white elephant. It is being forced on us by the government - "you can have whatever you want to replace the Lynx as long as it is made by Westland and called Lynx".

And it was never a sub hunter - no sonar.
I'm Off! is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2008, 21:06
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
WRONG............... The Navy do want it.... it is not a white elephant and to be honest I wouldn't want to fly an aircraft built by the Japanese or the sceptics....


It is slightly wrong to call it state of the art though...... unless you mean state of the art for the 20th Century.

We need a Lynx replacement and this airframe is perfect for the job. The avionics however are a crock of poo and the Lynx IPT need to get to work and purchase a decent Radar.... an IO device that wasn't invented 10 years ago...and maybe some "state of the art" stuff..... The trouble is that the IPT are being driven by what AW will provide them. The Lynx IPT should be demanding a capibility rather than being provided with a solution....
spheroid is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2008, 18:34
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Spent 4 and a half years working in Lx IPT supporting in service.
Guess what, all this kit costs, new kit costs even more.
Buy it with guchi digital AFCS, Radar ETC not a problem.....but sorry for a fixed budget you'll get less airframes and that's when it gets non supporting.
Digital AFCS possibly as a MLU.
jim2673 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2008, 19:23
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
The Lynx IPT should be demanding a capibility rather than being provided with a solution....
Spher,

I think you'll find that from the Navy's perspective that is exactly what has happened...ie a capability was demanded and it has been solved with FLynx.
Bismark is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2008, 16:27
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Spheroid

You also need to do some research on the selected radar and EO, you are off the mark.

regards

retard
engineer(retard) is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2008, 18:32
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Do you mean the Seaspray 7000E radar which was first placed on the open market in 2004 and so will be over 10 years old when the "future" Lynx comes into service....? And do you also mean the MX 15 which has been flying in operational aircraft for the past 5 years and so will also be over 10 years old when the "future" Lynx enters service.... (Please don't buy the MX 15...... please, please IPT....buy the MX 20 HD....its much much better)

The only thing "future" about the Wildcat is the airframe..... the avionics are all just collected from various lock up garages and shoved into the airframe without any thought of what the aircrew will do with all these old bits of kit. Maybe we should delete the word "future" and insert the word "yesterdays"..... there you have it..... Yesterdays Lynx.



That said, it will be an improvement on the current aircraft....although not a significant improvement....it could have been much better and it could have gone much further...... there is little ground breaking technology in this aircraft. The biggest problem the Wildcat will face is its introduction into service. Unless a home is found for this aircraft soon and unless the infrastructure to welcome it into the Service is developed soon, then we may well end up with hangars full of them but no one trained to fly or maintain them.
spheroid is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2008, 13:15
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Spheroid

Same family as 7000E but a few more planks. The AESA system started development flying in 2004 and was not put into production until last year, for the USCG I believe. Given the gestation period of most aircraft programmes you will not get brand new technology the day it comes into service.

Do not confused with the model numbers for EO. Its a bit like like saying you have a Ford Fiesta. In isolation it means nothing unless you state a model and year. The difference between the 15 and 20 families is turret size, the important part is the payload and that is being continually upgraded. If you ask the IPT I think you will find the selected 15 has the toys you are looking for but again it will not be in service for a while yet.

regards

retard
engineer(retard) is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2008, 14:50
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
The biggest problem the Wildcat will face is its introduction into service. Unless a home is found for this aircraft soon and unless the infrastructure to welcome it into the Service is developed soon, then we may well end up with hangars full of them but no one trained to fly or maintain them.
What on earth are you talking about Spheroid. There is a place not 5 miles from the manufacturing base that currently operates more Lynx than will arrive new from the factory and thus should have all the space and people that Wildcat will require.
Bismark is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2008, 18:52
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Very true....but you are assuming that the Current Lynx Force will be responsible for the introduction of the Wildcat.....Not so ...... Not so... A poor assumption to make ...

You are correct in stating that VL has the space to welcome the wildcat....but it does not have the people...
spheroid is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.