Upgraded Pumas for the Falklands??
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: grimsby
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upgraded Pumas for the Falklands??
Due to the SARH contract now not involving the Falklands, I understand that the upgraded Puma is being touted as the most suitable replacement platform for the ageing Seaking down south. The combination of upgraded engine and transmission, giving it a higher lift capability (in a temperate climate) at sea level has led to it being identified at this early stage. This combined with the perceived current lack of role should ensure the continuation of this RAF stalwart for many years. Also, its ease of transport by C-17 (in theory at least) should ensure a smooth change over.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, a single internally mounted crank out hoist makes the Puma ideal for SAROPS...Unless Puma Mk2 includes a new hoist as part of the silk purse sows ear makeover. I am proposing a wessex re-engined with the T800 engine for the Falklands role, any takers?
Caveat: been out of the loop for the Mk2 for a while so not all the following may still be true!
Nope, no upgraded transmission, but the additional power from the Makila engines will give a MAUM that is 7400kg permanently, rather than the 7000kg with 7400kg available for a couple of very limited roles currently authorised. Performance at temperate sea level will be remarkably similar and still be transmission limited, it is hot and high (where the current Mk1 is engine limited but the Mk2 won't be) that the performance increase will be the most noticeable. With that in mind, now where do you think it might be headed?
Exactly. And although the Mk2 will have a little extra fuel, it still will have much much less range than the Sea Kings currently do, and be far less capable in that role.
Of course, 10 years on virtually continuous ops, taking a well-earned break, suddenly it has no role?
The combination of upgraded engine and transmission, giving it a higher lift capability (in a temperate climate) at sea level
Apart from not having a clearance to land on ships which must be a requirement for SAR Ops down south.
This combined with the perceived current lack of role
"perceived current lack of role ". Nonsense I'm afraid. Mk1 Puma will have a vital, if unsung, role till OSD and Puma II will have a crucial role in "other places" given the expected turmoil likely to be caused by other ac upgrade programmes over the next decade or so.
Didn't realise that the FI provision of SAR was outside SAR-H; perhaps the "revolving door" in/out of the SAR world in future will include a 4-6 monther in the FI flying extra ac covered by a seperate contract?
Didn't realise that the FI provision of SAR was outside SAR-H; perhaps the "revolving door" in/out of the SAR world in future will include a 4-6 monther in the FI flying extra ac covered by a seperate contract?
If this is infact true, I am extremely envious. I hope the Puma Mates enjoy the FI as much as the Chinook fleet did.
No flying complaints/wires/avoids/horses/JHC nonsense
Plenty of good flying/long tasking days/above all else....fun.
Enjoy it.
No flying complaints/wires/avoids/horses/JHC nonsense
Plenty of good flying/long tasking days/above all else....fun.
Enjoy it.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick review of the "facts":
1) SAR-H no longer encompasses the Falklands, meaning:
2) the next FI ac has to be drawn from the military
3) Chinook and Merlin are committed to war roles
4) Puma has no dedicated role (or am I missing something?)
5) The RAF SAR Sea King force has had 30 years of continuous ops and has never been granted a rest.
1) SAR-H no longer encompasses the Falklands, meaning:
2) the next FI ac has to be drawn from the military
3) Chinook and Merlin are committed to war roles
4) Puma has no dedicated role (or am I missing something?)
5) The RAF SAR Sea King force has had 30 years of continuous ops and has never been granted a rest.
Lover..removing the hook from my mouth.....
1. The next FI ac does not have to come from the military. It could be COCO (like the Erics & Brintels) or COMO (such as the Brunei 412s).
2. Puma 1 & 2 will have some very important dedicated roles.
3. SARF v "continuous ops" hmmm........think Benson/Odiham/Aldergrove might beg to differ....
1. The next FI ac does not have to come from the military. It could be COCO (like the Erics & Brintels) or COMO (such as the Brunei 412s).
2. Puma 1 & 2 will have some very important dedicated roles.
3. SARF v "continuous ops" hmmm........think Benson/Odiham/Aldergrove might beg to differ....
Bighead (aka Robbie Williams),
Another fine thread which has prodcued the required results. Have recently bumped into someone who bit hard on your thread about SAR rearcrew FRI and couldn't help but chuckle. Keep 'em coming!
TOTD x
Another fine thread which has prodcued the required results. Have recently bumped into someone who bit hard on your thread about SAR rearcrew FRI and couldn't help but chuckle. Keep 'em coming!
TOTD x
Apart from not having a clearance to land on ships which must be a requirement for SAR Ops down south.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Its always been no landing on ships. The french do it but our lot didn't trial it. If you did land in the past ........ ooops!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its always been no landing on ships. The french do it but our lot didn't trial it. If you did land in the past ........ ooops!
The last time an RAF Puma landed on a ship was about 4-5 years ago. It must have been trialled and cleared as current FRCs have 3 pages devoted to ship operations!
The down side is that the ships motion limits are pretty restrictive.
If you did land in the past ........ ooops!
Happy Daze.
CG
