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

Is this the end for CHF?

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.

Is this the end for CHF?

Old 17th Dec 2009, 15:36
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
What are the implications of the RAF flying just one RW type in the long-term?
Poor - good case for either RN or Army to take on the task.

How long will the RN take to convert to MK3/a?
Not long - they already have RN aircrew and engineers embedded in the Mk3 Force .
Where will the RN get the extra crews (Pilots/Cmn/Engineers)required to operate the MK3/a? (I know some AEops and Nimrod Engs looking for a job)
Er, from the CHF? The Mk3 is replacing the SK4 and will be based at Yeovilton. Any one with any sense will move the Mk3 sim to Yeovilton, keep it connected to the CH47 complex wherever that ends up and ensure that the Wildcat sim is also networked (indeed it should be in the same building).
Bismark is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 16:05
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,000
RAF will be flying more than one type long term. Puma 2 will be replaced. By what and in what numbers is not yet known - but there is an appreciation that the CH47 can't do everything.

Down trading to Ch47s from Merlins? Don't think so.....more payload, more range, more survivable, more flexible....oh, it's just a bit noisier and vibrates a bit more!!

The strategy is based on analysis that has been consistant for over 20 years - for a country of our size a fleet of 60-75 CH47s is the most cost-effective way to move kit around a battlefield. Only political belligerence and AW marketing/lobbying has stopped this happening before.

No case at all made for the FAA or AAC to take the SH force. Why? ASW aside the FAA will only have 28 SH cabs (Merlin) and the army 30-odd LUH Wildcat. Therefore, with 70 CH47s I'd argue that the SH force is better placed to absorb ALL SH assets, leaving the WAFUs to hunt subs and the AAC to hunt tanks.....
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 16:40
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: E MIDLANDS
Posts: 284
But surely the obvious answer is actually for the AAC to have ALL SH & CHF assets, and AH, as they support ground forces, whilst the FAA sticks to AEW,ASW & ASuW cabs?
andyy is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 16:50
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 134
Could Be The Last:

Many a true word said in jest as there is already a substantial cadre of various ex-Nimrod dudes being re-treaded through Shawbury.

Andyy:

Simple: AAC cannot recruit enough crew for what they have now. How many Light-Blue do you think would be thrilled at the prospect of transferring to the teenie weenies?
Father Jack Hackett is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 17:37
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
The Mk3 is replacing the SK4 and will be based at Yeovilton. Any one with any sense will move the Mk3 sim to Yeovilton, keep it connected to the CH47 complex wherever that ends up and ensure that the Wildcat sim is also networked (indeed it should be in the same building).
No, No, No.... It doesn't work. It has been tried and although it is a nice thing to do the training benefit is minimal and not worth the expense. In fact it will be cheaper to get a real Chinook and Wildcat airborne at the same time than to try and network the Sims when they are 50 miles apart.
vecvechookattack is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 18:50
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
But surely the obvious answer is actually for the AAC to have ALL SH & CHF assets, and AH
Problem is the AAC do not like going to see and are pretty awful when they get there (no land to nav by and the launch point has moved whilst they have been away).

VV,

Networked sims do work and can be, and indeed are, networked worldwide via broadband - ask the yanks.
Bismark is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 19:06
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: uk
Age: 47
Posts: 69
The Navy have been doing Amphib ops since the early 70's, ask 27 & 18 how much they enjoyed the trip down to the Gulf in 2003 . Hence SH will remain a firm part of the FAA and so it should. This is not mean't to be a slagging off of the lighter shade of blue, as i said just ask them how much they enjoyed it.
Misformonkey is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 20:15
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: See that little island just above France? Yeah, there...
Age: 34
Posts: 168
Why does any discussion about SH always descend into a massive "my service should have all the SH assets because....XYZ"

To be honest, at this moment in time, I think the assets are pretty sensibly divided up, with specialities going to pilots who have gone through specific training - i'm sorry, but what RAF or Army pilot has gone through amphibious or specifically naval training? So how can you say they would be better trained to operate off an LPH? You can't. Just like it's probably best that the AAC keep Apache, as they understand the ground war that little bit better than their crab or WAFU counterparts.

WAFU's do amphib and ASW, AAC do utility and tank hunting, RAF do heavy lift for a land campaign. Why does that need to change beyond a need to have everything?





NB: Before the small minded among us throw the respective teddies a considerably distance from their prams, YES 'm aware of the who joint aspect, and YES i'm sure WAFU's can tank hunt, and the RAF can do amphib - all well and good. My point is that the individual services will probably do it that little bit better.
Yeoman_dai is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2009, 21:24
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,000
Misfor,
I actually enjoyed NTG03 - having seen the privations ashore, returning to an air conditioned ship with cold drinks and hot food was quite a relief...well, it was until we dismebarked only to sneak back to find you gorging yourselves on our extra messing cheese!!
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 03:01
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: LONDON
Posts: 21
Absolute bollox

The RAF SH force, if required, can reconfigure to any battle space that is required. Dividing the requirement between the three services is a waste of cash that we simply no longer have. The sooner that CHF are acknowledged as irrelevant the better. Giving them our cast offs (Merlin) is acknowledgement that they are marginalised. Do not mistake me - I have every respect for the brave operators, but the asset has been a waste of time and money.

Waiting out...
spindrier is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 03:33
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Now there's a thought,

The RN could operate all those water based things

The Army could operate on the land (including those that arrive from the sea!).

The RAF could operate all those flying machines,

Simples

Climebear is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 09:21
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 56
Spindrier...

As long as an Amphibious Capability remains a pillar of defence, organic LitM lift (ie CHF) is here to stay.

Deal with it.
Talk Split is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 13:47
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
VV,

Networked sims do work and can be, and indeed are, networked worldwide via broadband - ask the yanks.
Thats because the Yanks have the same aircraft types splattered all over the US and in many ways they HAVE to network their synthetic training devices.

We however tend to put all of our eggs in one basket. Lynx at Yeovilton, Merlin in Cornwall, Chinook in Hampshire.

Trust me, I have looked long and hard at this and indeed conducted an extensive study into how the MSHATF works and in particular how the TCC operates. The wide area network facility works but the big question which was never answered during the writing of my paper was..... Why? Why spend millions networking simulators together when it is far, far cheaper to (and more importantly provides better training).... simulate.
vecvechookattack is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 13:55
  #34 (permalink)  
Gnd
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 55
Posts: 596
I think the Merlin MAY not be at yeovilton!!!!
Gnd is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 14:47
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
I do hope not.
It might also be the time to get the Booties their own Apache flight?

Its interesting to watch the debates on here between the RAF and FAA the RAF it would appear want to take over all service flying but don't want to go to sea where some of they kingdoms they covet work for part of their time. Maybe some people should just accept the status quo and get on with what they're ment to do support the Land operations.
NURSE is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 14:59
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
I'd agree but I'm not sure why they don't want to go to sea. You wont find a more challenging environment....
vecvechookattack is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2009, 19:34
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,193
As long as an Amphibious Capability remains a pillar of defence
But how long will it remain? With the demise of Nimrod and Harrier, nothing is sacred! If Afghanistan is to be the sole focus of HM Forces, then an amphibious capability seems like an ideal thing to get rid of...
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2009, 08:48
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Light Blue Heresy Mode: ON

Accepting that this may not be too popular with some, why is the RAF in the SH game at all? With no disrespect to the rotary girls and boys and the Regiment, we're not a land-centric force; the RM and the Army are. Therefore why not send the Chinooks and the Puma 2s to the AAC?

It works perfectly well for the Aussies and the US - and probably secures the rotary world a more secure funding structure in the bosom of the user of the service, rather than as an appendage of a very FJ focussed light blue world. Indeed, the same argument would (again, like the US) transfer land-based MPA to the RN, were we to have any left.

RAF then to focus on our core things - speedy, precise, projection of power at range, with the AT and support assets to make this happens. And protection of the UKADR....

Douhet had the right idea!

Light Blue Heresy Mode: OFF

Merry Christmas to all, especially those away on ops!

S41
Squirrel 41 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2009, 09:23
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 51
Posts: 386
In support of S41 as well...

There have been enough threads over the years about the JHC being 'too Army' from certain quarters.

So, is the All Arms Commando bit going to make it more or less attractive?
Finnpog is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.