Fury at Def Sec over Helicopter Shortage

[baboon6]

Better than the Buffel was the Casspir, which the Force Protection Cougar is based on; the Cougar is used by the British Army as Mastiff (6x6) and Ridgback (4x4); so, indirectly, you do have some South African vehicles with v-shaped hulls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar_(vehicle)

[Herc-u-lease]

It's not often i get the chance to watch the commons debates. two things struck me today:

the lack of politicians actually in the house.

the inability of Bob Ainsworth to pronounce the "aitch" in helicopter.

Bob's reply to Liam Fox was "any suggestions as to how the helicopter shortage would be addressed?"

Any suggestions? - answers on a postcard please

[MaroonMan4]

Answers on a post card.....

Some interesting posts, and as always we on this thread start mud slinging without offering a solution. I admit as I believed that that the CH47 line had a significant back log of orders that the options open to DEC ALM and JHC to make a difference within the next 18 months was extremely limited.

However, it is not about helicopters being the total solution but being a part of the solution and providing commanders on the ground the option to move their boots on the ground by air during a patrol or resupply should they wish to. Of course if helicopters become the only method of movement then the enemy will adapt and overcome, but it is the variation of means of manoeuvre that makes the difference - one patrol on foot, one patrol by vehicle, one patrol by helicopter and the numerous permutations in between that can see helciopters bounce foot patrols from grid to grid and if capable (i.e. CH47) can lift vehicle patrols around and add to surprise and mobility, which affords protection.

At the moment although helicopters are not the solution, there is not even the choice for the commander on the ground to routinely elect to manoeuvre his patrol using helicopter lift.

But with some political leverage, will and a true allocation of resources it appears that there may be a 'quick win' to the current and future helicopter shortage. We would have to accept what we have always known in crewrooms and that despite dreaming of Osprey or CH53s or some other platform in the very long winded procurement process that the future UK force mix will be AH, CH 47 and Merlin (with the side show of BRH to ensure that the Fisheads and AW kept a Lynx replacement on track and admittedly the really small one or 2 men moves that the Gazelle used to do that would see Merlin as an over kill).

So with that 'mind set' now over come it appears that there are Merlin availible (potentially more Danish models and the now defunct US EH101 Presendential version) and according to the CHAPS programme more CH47 (to add to our HC3 reversions when eventually they do arrive for tasking).

Theoretically with the correct political will the hardware could be purchased in sufficient numbers very quickly (a few months). This leaves the remainder of the 18-24 month 'UOR' window to train aircrew and engineers in a system that is already established but will just need expanding - and I am sure that if there was a true will that this can be delivered by 24/7 use of Benson Sims and relevant OCUs. Also, whilst the training was ongoing the hardware could be converted to UK specs - all of the technical hardwork and development cost has already been done in the conversion of the Danish Merlins and HC3s, so just use the same templates.

Where do the aircrew and engineers come from I hear you ask? Well again, a bold decision, with short term pain will see significant increase in gain. Stop the inter service willy waving and JHC make the decision - current Puma force to Merlin, Sea Kings to CH47 or split current Puma and Sea King force (one RN Sqn CH47 one RN Sqn Merlin) or just absorb both the Puma and Sea Kings into the current RAF Merlin and CH47 establishment.

As you know I detest the one airforce, one nation rubbish, but I do believe in best practice and if giving the Fisheads a true future amphibious capability also helps current ops then be so it (and may stop me having to go on the boat!) - but if JHC and the DEC believe that the Commando force should be absorbed into the current CH47/ Merlin establishment then again if that is the best practice then someone just make a decision and stop in fighting and get on with it - how long has everyone in the DEC, JHC and IPTs had to talk, discuss and 'navel gaze' about the options - stop the constant 'reviews' and just make a decision.

With a coherent and coordinated push and if we really are serious about increasing lift capability here and now as well as trying to put right some of the under resourcing for the future - Odiham, Benson and Yeovilton could all re-role and increase lift capability within 18-24 months if someone actually made a decision and put their money where their mouths were.

It will be interesting to see whether this is a load of political 'hot air' or if there is a real determination to right the wrongs of chronic under investment that is sadly having an effect on the frontline.

[Fortyodd2]

"coherent and coordinated"

What? From the current government?? Your havin' a laugh mate!!

[sitigeltfel]

Liz Hunt gets stuck into the Deaf Sec in today's Telegraph...

He's supposed to defend our boys, not Brown - Telegraph

Anyone who describes him as "NCO" material is gravely insulting the real NCO's.

[knocker88]

Its all very well buying loads of Chinooks but who will operate them? If im not mistaken the river is certainly dry at RAF Odiham. Unless they break open the emergency chinny crew box which robs Peter to pay Paul? Oh wait......that has already happened.....!!!!

What we could do is wait till the next bunch of brave lads pay the ultimate price and re hash the same argument again and again.

[Rob To Service]

Maroon Man, the US Presidential variant of the EH101 is completely unsuitable as a Support Helicopter. It was designed purely as a VVIP aircraft and has no ramp or cargo door.

[Al R]

Brown credibility and integrity called into question. Again.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | PM challenged in helicopter row

Interesting too, because it'll be a chance to see how John Bercow handles his first media leak.

[chasbang]

Helicopters For Afghanistan

Somebody should be asking the question as to why the MOD are going through an expensive excercise/review of upgrading RAF Puma HC to Makila 1A engines.
For the last 6 months PUMA 330s already modified, overhauled and zero timed in last 3 years, fitted with the powerful Makila 1A1 engines, Glass Cockpit, Sand Filters, wirestrike etc are available on the open market.These being ideally suited for Afghanistan.Up to twelve of these are available now.Adapted to service requirements under an urgency programme, there is no reason that at least six of these cannot be in service before the year end.

MOD procurment and IPT management executive were already aware of these last year.

These Helicopters are still available now, fully serviceable and doubltess can be obtained at a modest cost compared with what Eurocopter and its consortium are proposing under the present PUMA in service extension date review, a contract for which could be announced shortly? If so, at what cost and delay to our forces and the taxpayer.

[old-timer]

Winston Churchill

We need another Winston Churchill ! - I doubt we'd find one though.......


A modern day version of Winstons famous speech might read :

" we will fight them on the beaches within very restricted budegtry constraints "

Give the lads & lasses the kit they need for heavens sake, they deserve the whole nations complete backing including those at the top who control the purse strings.

[Guzlin Adnams]

Cyclops

Isn't the danger that if Brown does decide to provide more helicopters because it's deemed politically expedient to do so (as that's how he works ) what would have to be cut to pay for it? Sure as hell is a bit on the warm side, he won't come up with the extra cash.

[AHQHI656SQN]

All the talk is about buying more helicopters, great. The accute shortages of machines are there for all to see, if we do buy more how are the aircrew going to be trained to fill the seats to crew the machines?
The training system is max'd out training the numbers we need for the current fleet and coping with the steady stream of fokkered crews walking into the civil market.
The fleet of AH is training as many as it possibly can and we have fewer pilots at front line now, than we did two years ago!
I dare say that other aircraft types are in a similar position.

[Jackonicko]

They are claiming an increase of 60% - what does this mean?

Channel 4 TV news just interpreted it as meaning as a 60% increase in overall helicopter numbers?

That can't be right.

Is it a 60% increase in the number of helicopters in Afghanistan itself?

That would seem at least possible.

Air Commodore Simon Falla (described as Chief of Staff, JHC) says we have enough to do key tasks, and that we can 'surge', and that we plan to do more.....

He declined to give a number of helicopters 'in theatre' but did give the snippet that it represented "25% of the useable total."

I'm starting to get a bit impatient with the lack of openness on numbers. I have every sympathy with legitimate military security, but I fail to see why the overall number of aircraft deployed should NECESSARILY be secret, and start to suspect that the reticence on this is more to do with preventing political embarrassment than with airing information that would be of any aid or comfort to the enemy.

Falla seemed to confirm this when he remarked that giving an accurate number would "leave us a hostage to fortune" - it being clear that he was referring to the media impact - and not to a security concern.

Following the Wildcat ceremony at Yeovil, I asked Quentin Davies about what the Government were going to do to address the shortfall in helicopter lift identified by the NAO. He listed the return to service of the eight Chinook HC3s, the acquisition of the six Danish Merlins, and the 12-Lynx UOR, and stated that this was all that was necessary, dismissing my concern that this (while a start) fell far short of addressing the 38% shortfall in battlefield lift and the 67% shortfall in amphibious lift). He dismissed my contention that there was any immediate need for a Puma/Sea King replacement.

If these clots can't see, or won't admit the underlying problem, then how can we expect a mature and intelligent debate about what is, in effect, a sub-set of that problem? (Since the shortfall in helicopters in Afghanistan must be a function of the overall shortfall......)

[northseaguy]

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | UK troops 'need more helicopters'

hmmmm....the Commons Defence Select commitee stating "the government should buy new craft, rather than revamping old ones".

I wont hold my breath!

[ORAC]

Torygraph: Shortage of helicopters undermining 'protection' of troops in Afghanistan

A shortage of helicopters is undermining the "protection" of British troops in Afghanistan, a group of MPs has warned.

The Commons Defence Select Committee also said that key battlefield operations were being inhibited due to a lack of air transport. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) must increase the number of helicopters and train more crew, the MPs argued.

The criticisms came in a specially-produced report, amid a row over military equipment sparked by the deaths of 15 UK service personnel in Afghanistan in just 10 days...........

.....committee chairman James Arbuthnot said: "It seems to us that operational commanders in the field today are unable to undertake potentially valuable operations because of the lack of helicopters for transportation around the theatre of operations. We are also concerned that operational commanders find they have to use ground transport, when helicopter lift would be preferred, both for the outcome and for the protection of our forces."

The committee said improved maintenance and support structures had been "paying dividends" in terms of the available flying hours for helicopters such as the Chinook in theatre. But it added: "Nevertheless, helicopter capability is being seriously undermined by the shortage of helicopters, particularly medium-lift support helicopters, capable of being deployed in support of operations overseas. We believe that the size of the fleet is an issue, and are convinced that the lack of helicopters is having adverse consequences for operations today and, in the longer term, will severely impede the ability of the UK Armed Forces to deploy."

The MoD's plan to bridge the "capability deficit" by patching up "ageing" Sea Kings and Pumas before the introduction of a new generation of helicopters was "not the best option, either operationally or in terms of the use of public money". "Only a procurement of new helicopters can meet the original objective of reducing the number of types of helicopter in service within the UK Armed Forces," the MPs insisted.

Referring to concerns about the military's ability to protect troops and undertake key operations with current helicopter availability, the MPs said: "We are troubled by the forecast reduction in numbers of medium and heavy lift battlefield helicopters, which will make this worse."

The committee warned that the intensity of the campaign in Afghanistan had "stretched the manning of the helicopter fleet". "It is therefore unfeasible to surge helicopters into theatre," it added.

There were also worries that crews were training in aircraft which did not have the same equipment as those in the combat zone. "It is unacceptable for personnel to encounter new equipment for the first time in theatre," the report said.

Later today there will be a full-scale Commons debate which will give MPs a fresh chance to air their misgivings......

Session 2008-09, 16 July 2009 -Publication of Report: Helicopter capability

[andyy]

If we accept the fact that the UK Govt are not likely to buy any more helos, and even if they did, the lead time for getting them in service and training sufficient maintenance and aircrew would be significant, how do we provide more (suitable) helos to the front line? The UK is reported to have c500 helos but I assume that includes a significant number that are in storage or deep maintenance. Are there lower priority tasks which could be set aside (or contractorised) in order to divert existing aircraft & crews to 'stan?

Also, are there a reasonable number of recently retired (PVR) aircrew and maintainers who could be compulsory recalled to back fill?

[Madbob]

The real trouble for Gawdon is that, like on many other things, his credability with the public is now totally blown by spin and nobody believes a word he says.

He pledges that the govenment will "listen and learn" but his Tx button is stuck and he plainly cannot Receive.......

When a military commander is denied the option of making a manoevre by air because of the unavailability of suitable helicopters and is forced into doing so on the ground (perhaps also with unsuitable vehicles i.e. snatch LR) against his own judgement and soldiers die, then, ipso facto, lives could be ( or already have been) lost bacause of a direct consequence of the lack of helos.

All he needs to do his heed the advice of his military advisers who've been saying so for months if not years.

Mark my words ... he'll regret his spin at the polls in less than 12 months' time....

MB

[ORAC]

Afghanistan: James Arbuthnot bombards Gordon Brown

James Arbuthnot, the Tory chairman of the Defence Committee, has Gordon Brown pinned down under heavy fire over the Government’s backing for the Armed Forces in Afghanistan.

Mr Arbuthnot is hardly the flashiest of Commons performers. Lugubrious is the word most frequently attached to him. But he knows the subject and his deliberative approach is ideal for the committee room. Today’s session of the Liaison Committee was an excellent illustration.

Quizzing Mr Brown on Afghanistan, Mr Arbuthnot asked whether the PM would admit that he rejected a request from the Chief of the Defence Staff to send another 2,000 troops to Afghanistan? (It’s hardly a secret: we’ve been reporting it since April.)

But would Mr Brown admit it? Here’s his answer:

“We discussed, both in Committee and together, a number of options and we decided on the mission we are now engaged in.”

That’s a “yes” then. Not that Mr Brown would say so. Pressed to be explicit about the 2,000-soldier request, all he would say is: “A variety of options were discussed.”

The obfuscation was too much even for Mr Arbuthnot. It wouldn’t be fair to say he snapped, but his words to Mr Brown were damning: “There are two ways you deal with select committees. You can answer the questions or you can appear not to answer the questions.”

Most people watching the exchange will be clear which of those two approaches Mr Brown prefers.

[chopper2004]

Video: British Army chief forced to use US helicopter in Afghanistan - Times Online

The head of the Army was accused of playing politics after he flew around Afghanistan in an American helicopter and demanded more equipment for British troops.
General Sir Richard Dannatt made clear that he would have flown in a British helicopter if one had been available and called for greater urgency over the supply of new equipment.
Hours later David Cameron confronted Gordon Brown in the Commons about the provision of helicopters. In furious exchanges, Mr Brown was forced to reject accusations that the shortage of RAF Chinook or Sea King helicopters had contributed to soldiers’ deaths.
General Dannatt, who retires on August 28 as Chief of the General Staff, travelled by Black Hawk helicopter to visit troops in Sangin. Operation Panther’s Claw has claimed 17 British lives, and troops taking part have been ferried by American helicopters.
Related Links

• Army had to use a US Black Hawk to transport Dannatt

• 'Helmand forces are ill-equipped to succeed'

• The Light Brigade is back for a one-off tour of duty

Multimedia

• Pictures: Bodies of eight British soldiers arrive home

• Graphic: helicopters in the British forces

When asked why he flew in a Black Hawk General Dannatt replied: “Self-evidently . . . if I moved in an American helicopter it’s because I haven’t got a British helicopter.”
He said that Britain and America shared assets in Helmand. “But we’ve got to put as much into the pool as we need to take out of it,” he told Radio 4’s Today programme: “I would like to get more energy behind it if we possibly can.”
Labour seized on his remarks as a deliberate political comment on the shortage of British helicopters in Afghanistan. One senior Labour MP said: “The Army has a proud record of keeping out of party politics and the Chief of the General Staff should be very careful about his interventions.” A junior minister went farther, accusing General Dannatt of “playing politics” and saying: “This is a very difficult time and he should know better.”
Ministers fear that General Dannatt will launch an all-out attack on government policy when he retires as head of the Army next month. As a senior civil servant leaving a sensitive post he will receive a formal reminder of the rules limiting what he can disclose.
Downing Street said that the Prime Minister had “full confidence” in General Dannatt. Asked whether his remarks were “purely military”, Mr Brown’s spokesman said: “Yes.”
Ministers, however, made clear that they were angry that General Dannatt briefed Tory MPs about the request — rejected by Mr Brown — for an additional 2,000 troops for Afghanistan.
Earlier, Mr Cameron confronted Mr Brown during Prime Minister’s Questions. He said: “Isn’t the reason why we don’t have enough helicopters that we didn’t plan to have enough helicopters? When [Mr Brown] looks back to 2004 and his decision to reduce the helicopter budget by £1.4 billion, does he remember that the National Audit Office said that year there was a considerable deficit in the availability of helicopter lift? Does he now recognise that decision was a bad mistake?”
The Prime Minister replied: “I believe we are making the provision that is necessary both for helicopters and equipment on the ground. We will do everything we can . . . to support our brave and courageous Armed Forces, who are professional and determined and will have our full support.”
He said that the number of helicopters had risen by 60 per cent in the past two years. He added: “I ask the Conservative Party to look at the statements being made by those who speak for our Armed Forces on the ground. They have made it absolutely clear that in this particular instance, while the loss of life is tragic and sad, it is not to do with helicopters.”

Here is my analysis:

At a rough guess, how many exchange pilots that went to sunny Rucker, over the years have got H-60 stick time? 10, 15 ,20 in the Corps? I am hoping not counting the ones retired and ETPS staff nor RAF SHF

Where I am leading up to is what if the DoD loaned us x amount of Blackhawks say a squadron's worth, trained up the aircrewman and its good if there are 15-20 pilots already have flown the H-60 while on exchange. Or put it under RAF markings, obviously under the JHC umbrella with mixed crews than fingers crossed the numbers may (thats a big may).

Then there is the training of the ground crew to consider (this was raised in 1994/1995 when during ops in Bosnia, the US Army offered to loan A model Apaches as there was sufficient aircrew already trained on exchange but the ground support for the aircraft were not equipped or trained to handle the AH-64A)

[onthebumline]

from the defence committee report by afm


......"We take the training requirement very seriously and do not want our men and women to go out to Afghanistan and run any risk at all because they are suddenly confronted with something on which they have not already been properly trained. It is an absolute principle that before we send anybody out to a war zone they are given the best possible training on exactly the kit they will use in theatre......."

What a load of complete ocks.