Finally proven wastelands is a con
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outrage Removed
JEMster
In that case my outrage is distinctly mollified. The Mail article did suggest it was a direct step from one role to the other but it wouldn't be the first time they gave a wrong impression to promote a story.
Interesting first post by the way
In that case my outrage is distinctly mollified. The Mail article did suggest it was a direct step from one role to the other but it wouldn't be the first time they gave a wrong impression to promote a story.
Interesting first post by the way
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For once, this has been an informed and interesting discussion. Westlands have produced some very good products, but the overwhelming discussion has been about the politicization of the decisions to procure. The US does the same thing - look at the outcry when EH101 was pitched for the Presidential aircraft - but they can afford and need LOTS more helicopters, therefore the unti cost is cheaper. The UK chose to retain helicopter manufacturing as a defence capability. What rankles with the majority here has been the detachment between the needs of the frontline and the perceived political needs. Sprinkle across this the Army/RAF helicopter debate, and we are always going to present a confused picture. I am cynical about defence companies, but I have seen the personal touch that Westlands offer too and you don't get that from many companies these days.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 58
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what, I have had my beefs with AW and, on the hole, I stand by my previous statements. Just chatted to some people who have looked at the Wildcat and they are very happy with the aircraft - when it is here it will work well and do what it is designed to do, Blue or Green (fact that it is the wrong design aside!!!)
There are doubts about it actually being in service on time - now that is an AW trait that I still can't get over - good but late seems to be a phrase I have heard a lot?
There are doubts about it actually being in service on time - now that is an AW trait that I still can't get over - good but late seems to be a phrase I have heard a lot?
DIS - Helicopters
CS, I'm not sure that
The DIS states that, for helicopters, the following should be retained:
So we have stated a need to support what we've already got and to have systems integration capability on new stuff, rather than manufacturing per se. I would see the improved avionics and engines on our Apaches as an example of this, and the previously cited improved versions of the Wessex and Sea King that Westlands are rightly lauded for.
Some might see final assembly as an important political factor (they were "built" in this country after all), but whether or not that is a true "manufacturing" capability is debatable.
So, the DIS states we need AW to have the continued capability to support, modify and improve those platforms already in service, and the UK (as distinct from AW) needs to retain a systems integration capability for future helicopters.
A pedantic point perhaps, but political parties' manifestoes are usually equally as evasive.
Of course, the much vaunted DIS2 might change all of this.
Nick
The UK chose to retain helicopter manufacturing as a defence capability
B5.16
Support of current aircraft – The retention onshore of those
skills critical to the through-life support of our current UK designed aircraft
is essential, in particular to ensure the airworthiness of the platform.
This includes modification and programmed upgrades, which typically
includes the provision of new sensors and defensive aids, structural repair
and the urgent insertion of new capability in direct support of ongoing
operations. These skills are primarily resident in AgustaWestland, the
original manufacturer of much of the in-service fleet, and will need
to be sustained to ensure our current aircraft can be supported.
B5.17 Systems engineering – In order to address the demands of the
future network-enabled battlespace a broad spectrum of systems engineering skills will be required, not least to help ensure the support of our existing aircraft can be undertaken. Without these skills we may not be able to upgrade and insert new technologies into the existing fleet. These skills range from the integration of platform, powerplant, navigation and communications systems through to the more complex integration of mission system, sensors and processors. We would also wish a modelling and simulation capacity to be retained within the UK. We expect that these skills will be sustained through ongoing helicopter acquisition and upgrade programmes and other major Defence activities outside the helicopters environment. For example, Merlin CSP will help maintain and enhance those required skills at Lockheed Martin in Havant (the Design Authority for this system) and Thales UK (as a significant equipment provider). We would also wish to exploit the wider capacity available to multinational companies, not least by managing workloads more efficiently across the breadth of those companies.
skills critical to the through-life support of our current UK designed aircraft
is essential, in particular to ensure the airworthiness of the platform.
This includes modification and programmed upgrades, which typically
includes the provision of new sensors and defensive aids, structural repair
and the urgent insertion of new capability in direct support of ongoing
operations. These skills are primarily resident in AgustaWestland, the
original manufacturer of much of the in-service fleet, and will need
to be sustained to ensure our current aircraft can be supported.
B5.17 Systems engineering – In order to address the demands of the
future network-enabled battlespace a broad spectrum of systems engineering skills will be required, not least to help ensure the support of our existing aircraft can be undertaken. Without these skills we may not be able to upgrade and insert new technologies into the existing fleet. These skills range from the integration of platform, powerplant, navigation and communications systems through to the more complex integration of mission system, sensors and processors. We would also wish a modelling and simulation capacity to be retained within the UK. We expect that these skills will be sustained through ongoing helicopter acquisition and upgrade programmes and other major Defence activities outside the helicopters environment. For example, Merlin CSP will help maintain and enhance those required skills at Lockheed Martin in Havant (the Design Authority for this system) and Thales UK (as a significant equipment provider). We would also wish to exploit the wider capacity available to multinational companies, not least by managing workloads more efficiently across the breadth of those companies.
Some might see final assembly as an important political factor (they were "built" in this country after all), but whether or not that is a true "manufacturing" capability is debatable.
So, the DIS states we need AW to have the continued capability to support, modify and improve those platforms already in service, and the UK (as distinct from AW) needs to retain a systems integration capability for future helicopters.
A pedantic point perhaps, but political parties' manifestoes are usually equally as evasive.
Of course, the much vaunted DIS2 might change all of this.
Nick
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,068
Received 2,939 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
That's the question being raised, after the Labour Government announced it will be buying 22 new Chinook Helicopters from American firm Boeing and not from Yeovil based Augusta-Westland
FT.com / UK / Business - Boeing offers to assemble Chinooks in UK
I always thought whilst the Lynx is good at what it does in the world we live in, a Blackhawk would do it a lot better and with a greater capability.
An off the shelf Blackhawk would be better than Lynx as a small ships helicopter (SCMR as was)?
I don't think so.
An off the shelf, cheap Blackhawk would be a better light observation/recce/ISTAR helicopter?
Hardly.
And that's what FLYNX was specified for.
Where Blackhawk might have made sense (especially with RTM engines for commonality with Merlin/Apache) would have been as a Puma replacement. Or had FLYNX actually been bought as a 'Soup Dragon' Lynx replacement.
I don't think so.
An off the shelf, cheap Blackhawk would be a better light observation/recce/ISTAR helicopter?
Hardly.
And that's what FLYNX was specified for.
Where Blackhawk might have made sense (especially with RTM engines for commonality with Merlin/Apache) would have been as a Puma replacement. Or had FLYNX actually been bought as a 'Soup Dragon' Lynx replacement.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: England
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also interesting to note that along with the involvement of an ex-PUS, ex-Policy Director and ex-Chief Scientific Advisor, an ex-Chief Operating Officer (Deputy CDM) of DE&S (David Gould) has a consultancy appointment with Selex Sensors & Airborne Systems (owned by Finmeccanica)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick
I was generalising, but thank you for in the in-depth explanation. Overall, it is good to have choice, but perhaps people worry that we do not have freedom of choice. Lynx will be good in the FIND role, but as we move to rationalisation of types in the future - Chinook/Apache/Merlin/Wildcat/Puma - it just seems to me that perhaps we should rationalise in the best possible manner to get value for money and capability that suits.
For the record, Westlands have some really good capabilities and I have a lot of respect for them.
I was generalising, but thank you for in the in-depth explanation. Overall, it is good to have choice, but perhaps people worry that we do not have freedom of choice. Lynx will be good in the FIND role, but as we move to rationalisation of types in the future - Chinook/Apache/Merlin/Wildcat/Puma - it just seems to me that perhaps we should rationalise in the best possible manner to get value for money and capability that suits.
For the record, Westlands have some really good capabilities and I have a lot of respect for them.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Thailand
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Navy requirement for a shipborn small heli has always been too small to justify building a UK designed heli.
The Army where roped in back in Mountebatten's reign and the navy got the Wasp and the army the Scout.
Fast forward the navy wanted a larger cab and the Lynx, WG 13, was designed for them. The Army wanted a larger cab liaison & anti tank, so had no choice but to take Lynx and make it a practical build number.
Now the navy has gone for upgraded Lynx so if the Army likes it or not they get the Wildcat.
john
The Army where roped in back in Mountebatten's reign and the navy got the Wasp and the army the Scout.
Fast forward the navy wanted a larger cab and the Lynx, WG 13, was designed for them. The Army wanted a larger cab liaison & anti tank, so had no choice but to take Lynx and make it a practical build number.
Now the navy has gone for upgraded Lynx so if the Army likes it or not they get the Wildcat.
john
