Inventory of British Military Helicopters
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: France
Age: 83
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inventory of British Military Helicopters
This is the list the Gordon Brown says he knows nothing about !!
Where British helicopters are stationed
Chinooks
Total 40 in fleet
10 in Helmand
29 in Hampshire
8 to be sent to Helmand
1 being used in an exercise
Pumas
43 in fleet
None in Afghanistan
Merlins
Total 70 in the fleet
None yet in Afghanistan
8 to be sent to Afghanistan
Sea Kings
Total 90 in the fleet
5 in Afghanistan
Apaches
Total 67 in the fleet
8 in Afghanistan
Lynx
Total 176 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Gazelles
Total 133 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Other
Total 47 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Where British helicopters are stationed
Chinooks
Total 40 in fleet
10 in Helmand
29 in Hampshire
8 to be sent to Helmand
1 being used in an exercise
Pumas
43 in fleet
None in Afghanistan
Merlins
Total 70 in the fleet
None yet in Afghanistan
8 to be sent to Afghanistan
Sea Kings
Total 90 in the fleet
5 in Afghanistan
Apaches
Total 67 in the fleet
8 in Afghanistan
Lynx
Total 176 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Gazelles
Total 133 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Other
Total 47 in the fleet
None in Afghanistan
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the plan for Chinnies is, out of 40 frames, 37 on det, 1 on exercise, presumably leaving 2 for rects and deep maintenance, aircrew training (OCF and continuation training / currency), routine UK tasking, national standby etc etc. Can't see those figures adding up.
Global superpower miltary aspirations on a Vatican City defence budget.
Global superpower miltary aspirations on a Vatican City defence budget.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im not sure that any of those figures are correct..... They all seem a little high. Its the active fleet that you should be looking at ...not the total. In the active fleet we don't have 176 Lynx for instance.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC NEWS | UK | England | Devon | MoD uses 'cut and shut' chopper
Am I alone in wondering exactly what the problem here is? Is a "cut and shut" chinook really a problem? Seems to me to be good use of resource!
Am I alone in wondering exactly what the problem here is? Is a "cut and shut" chinook really a problem? Seems to me to be good use of resource!
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
...and most definitely not 67 Apaches, unless you want to count the world's most expensive air-conditioned spares kits in the world.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The land of the green and grey
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only 2 baggers in Afghan at the moment. A few more than 5 Mk4's in theatre. Certainly don't think we've got 90 Mk4's in the fleet to send out. think realistically it's more like 30. not all of them are at a mk4+ standard.
Am I alone in wondering exactly what the problem here is? Is a "cut and shut" chinook really a problem? Seems to me to be good use of resource!
No scandal, we have one more Chinny than we would have otherwise, it flies just like the rest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PS Where did RogerK get those figures from - the Observers Book of Aircraft?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I sympathise with the deceased soldier and his family, the BBC Chinook story has no relevance whatsoever to his case. Whilst the Argie/Brit combo is true, they speak of the aircraft as if it has been welded together in some dodgy backstreet garage. Would anyone really believe such garbage - no doubt the tabloids will as soon as they get a whiff of it.
Only SH are relevant here, and the figures include the grey Merlins, Lynxes, etc, SAR aircraft and trainers.
They are not inventory of SH figures.
And as someone said, Forward Fleet (defined as aircraft which are serviceable and those which are short term unserviceable - eg aircraft undergoing minor works, forward maintenance or unforeseen rectification work) is more useful.
And more useful still is the fit for purpose figure - eg those aircraft that are serviceable and available to JHC for operational and training purposes. The Fit for Purpose figure varies from day to day, but is always (obviously) less than the Forward figure
I don't have a Commando SK4/6CR set of figures, but the figures below were publicly released.
Inventory Forward
Chinook HC2/A: 40 29
Merlin HC3/3A: 28 19
Puma: 34 25
What this means is that 10 of 29 (not 40) Chinooks are in Helmand, and that 8 more are to be sent!
8 of 19 Merlins are to be sent to Helmand.
These aren't bad percentages of the Forward Fleet.
The problems are that:
1) Forward Fleets are too small
2) We don't have enough SH that would actually be useful in Afghanistan
They are not inventory of SH figures.
And as someone said, Forward Fleet (defined as aircraft which are serviceable and those which are short term unserviceable - eg aircraft undergoing minor works, forward maintenance or unforeseen rectification work) is more useful.
And more useful still is the fit for purpose figure - eg those aircraft that are serviceable and available to JHC for operational and training purposes. The Fit for Purpose figure varies from day to day, but is always (obviously) less than the Forward figure
I don't have a Commando SK4/6CR set of figures, but the figures below were publicly released.
Inventory Forward
Chinook HC2/A: 40 29
Merlin HC3/3A: 28 19
Puma: 34 25
What this means is that 10 of 29 (not 40) Chinooks are in Helmand, and that 8 more are to be sent!
8 of 19 Merlins are to be sent to Helmand.
These aren't bad percentages of the Forward Fleet.
The problems are that:
1) Forward Fleets are too small
2) We don't have enough SH that would actually be useful in Afghanistan
spheroid,
This was posted on a similar thread and may answer your question:
This was posted on a similar thread and may answer your question:
Shirlely, some friendly state could wet or dry lease aerial assets to fill the gap?
MIL -8 anyone?
Problems for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order
Jun 1, 2009
By Sharon Weinberger
The U.S. Army signed off on an unusual procurement contract in December 2007: A $322-million order for 22 Russian helicopters bought through a U.S. defense company for Iraq. The contract was a rush order, designed to deliver Mi-17 helicopters in a bid to quickly reequip the Iraqi air force and allow it to perform counterinsurgency operations. But 18 months after signing, not a single helicopter has been delivered, despite full payment. The Army now concedes the contract is over budget and nearly a year behind schedule.
Such are the perils of buying Russian equipment through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system, a unique requirement that is rapidly escalating into the billions of dollars for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Buying Mi-17s, and other Russian equipment, for the Iraqi military seems logical. The Iraqis flew and maintained Soviet (now Russian) aircraft in the Saddam Hussein era. Another important feature: Russian rotorcraft are significantly cheaper than U.S. helicopters, at least in theory.
The Mi-17 is the export designation for the Mi-8 airframe (NATO designation “Hip”), and after 40 years the aircraft still has brisk sales, with new orders from India, China, Pakistan and Colombia, among others. That has been good news for the factories that produce Mi-17s: Ulan Ude and Kazan. Just a few years ago, work at the plants had slowed to a crawl, but now even getting a slot in the production line can be a challenge.
...
Problems for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order | AVIATION WEEK for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order
MIL -8 anyone?
Problems for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order
Jun 1, 2009
By Sharon Weinberger
The U.S. Army signed off on an unusual procurement contract in December 2007: A $322-million order for 22 Russian helicopters bought through a U.S. defense company for Iraq. The contract was a rush order, designed to deliver Mi-17 helicopters in a bid to quickly reequip the Iraqi air force and allow it to perform counterinsurgency operations. But 18 months after signing, not a single helicopter has been delivered, despite full payment. The Army now concedes the contract is over budget and nearly a year behind schedule.
Such are the perils of buying Russian equipment through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system, a unique requirement that is rapidly escalating into the billions of dollars for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Buying Mi-17s, and other Russian equipment, for the Iraqi military seems logical. The Iraqis flew and maintained Soviet (now Russian) aircraft in the Saddam Hussein era. Another important feature: Russian rotorcraft are significantly cheaper than U.S. helicopters, at least in theory.
The Mi-17 is the export designation for the Mi-8 airframe (NATO designation “Hip”), and after 40 years the aircraft still has brisk sales, with new orders from India, China, Pakistan and Colombia, among others. That has been good news for the factories that produce Mi-17s: Ulan Ude and Kazan. Just a few years ago, work at the plants had slowed to a crawl, but now even getting a slot in the production line can be a challenge.
...
Problems for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order | AVIATION WEEK for U.S. Russian Helicopter Order
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SW England
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
29 SK4 in the forward fleet. About 8 or so in Afghanistan.
I believe the raspberry ripple Mil is there for training Afghans, not sure what hoops would need to be jumped through to get the safety case signed off on those!
I believe the raspberry ripple Mil is there for training Afghans, not sure what hoops would need to be jumped through to get the safety case signed off on those!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using the long established (and well proven) western military ops and maintenance regs, they are actually more than a match for our stuff. Now, the preceeding is not based on the "only flown by a little old Hungarian lady, with low hours" birds, of which there are quite a few out there, complete with certs and passports.
Apologies to any little old Hungarian ladies.
Apologies to any little old Hungarian ladies.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South West
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Help the aged
On the subject of seakings in Afghanistan versus the TOTAL amount in the British inventory. It is unfair to compare all the UK seaking fleet with the amount currently deployed. Remember that only about 30 or so of the seaking fleet are the MK4 commando variant and of any use at all in the Ghan (although I admit that I recently saw a Bagger rear its ugly head on a dispersal at Bastion). The MK6 is a COMPLETE waste of time unless your moving bag rats on Salisbury plain!
Oh by the way Mr Royal Navy, government, procurement, upgarde, penny pincher man (whoever you are!) the clue is in the name, its a SEAKING (as in king of the sea). I doubt there are moves afoot to re-name it the 50 degree, Afghan mountain King!!!
As I remember The sea is still at 'sea level'. Isnt it? Pressure and temperature dependant obviously!!
Oh by the way Mr Royal Navy, government, procurement, upgarde, penny pincher man (whoever you are!) the clue is in the name, its a SEAKING (as in king of the sea). I doubt there are moves afoot to re-name it the 50 degree, Afghan mountain King!!!
As I remember The sea is still at 'sea level'. Isnt it? Pressure and temperature dependant obviously!!