14 New Chinooks
Wow, so that is ANOTHER 14 new ones, on top of the 2 attrition replacements announced a couple of months ago, and the 12 new builds announced 6 months ago, and the 22 new builds announced last year!
We must have loads of money in the kitty obviously, getting another 50 helicopters about 5 years late!
Bloody spin doctors!
We must have loads of money in the kitty obviously, getting another 50 helicopters about 5 years late!
Bloody spin doctors!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
I'm sure the BBC news lady just said "in a £1 million pound deal".
Bargain, if you ask me.
£1 billion, more like.
Bargain, if you ask me.
£1 billion, more like.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So.....when we disengage from the governments foreign adventures and the Army get fired en masse, just what are we going to do with 60 plus chinnys (apart from rob then blind)?
Why? Buying 14 new Chinooks that likely wont see service in Afghanistan doesn't find the money required nor make the Merlin suitable for the upgrades the Navy says it needs to go to sea.
I don't wont to get into the argument as to whether the Green Merlins should or should not go to the Navy (there is a sufficiently long thread for that already) just pointing out the two are not inextricably linked.
I don't wont to get into the argument as to whether the Green Merlins should or should not go to the Navy (there is a sufficiently long thread for that already) just pointing out the two are not inextricably linked.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the first RAF Chinooks date back to c. 1980 (pre Falklands War) and that they are now 30 plus years old it is hardly surprising that we have decided to buy some replacements. They have, after all, seen active service in all of our recent wars, and lest we forget, include places such as:-
Northern Ireland
Falkland Islands
Balkans - Bosnia, etc.
Beruit
Sierra Leone
Iraq - twice!
Afganistan
and this excludes the odd "excursion" to places such as Morocco, Pakistan, Norway or deployments on* an LPH. Not a bad record IMHO.
What surprises me is that they keep going with the high reliability they show, when many of their FW equivalents are totally clapped and sha**ed.
It's hard to see how we could do anything useful without them in the inventory.
MB
* note I said "on", not "in" an LPH. Maybe on the new ones we'll get folding rotors in which case this could change!
Northern Ireland
Falkland Islands
Balkans - Bosnia, etc.
Beruit
Sierra Leone
Iraq - twice!
Afganistan
and this excludes the odd "excursion" to places such as Morocco, Pakistan, Norway or deployments on* an LPH. Not a bad record IMHO.
What surprises me is that they keep going with the high reliability they show, when many of their FW equivalents are totally clapped and sha**ed.
It's hard to see how we could do anything useful without them in the inventory.
MB
* note I said "on", not "in" an LPH. Maybe on the new ones we'll get folding rotors in which case this could change!
Last edited by Madbob; 22nd Aug 2011 at 17:17.
PINCH OF SALT
Call me a cynic (that's a realist when seen by an idealist) if you will but I'd like to see the figures for our future rotary winged fleet set out on one sheet of paper with a delivery timescale, an explanation of which versions we're talking about and the out of service plot for each type and mark.
Words like 'double counting' won't stop flashing through my mind.
I'd also like to see the bill for the repairs likely to be required for the hard used wokka wokkas we have currently. I have a nasty feeling that some of these early airframes are suddenly going to be found not economic to keep in service.
Old Duffer
Words like 'double counting' won't stop flashing through my mind.
I'd also like to see the bill for the repairs likely to be required for the hard used wokka wokkas we have currently. I have a nasty feeling that some of these early airframes are suddenly going to be found not economic to keep in service.
Old Duffer
Given that the first RAF Chinooks date back to c. 1980 (pre Falklands War) and that they are now 30 plus years old it is hardly surprising that we have decided to buy some replacements.
You are correct, but the original ZA and ZD s went through a mid life update to D model standard in 1993-94 so they're not exactly in original condition. Still a great aircraft!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Age: 71
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mk4, Mk5 and new Mk6?
As an outsider not knowing too much about Chinooks could someone explain why that at the end of this cunning plan we will still end up with a mixed fleet of three different models whilst all of our major allies are standardising (re-builds and new buys) on just one, the model F. Future MoD cock-up and overspend by trying to operate fleets within fleets with short-term saving and massive future bill?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Quote:
Given that the first RAF Chinooks date back to c. 1980 (pre Falklands War) and that they are now 30 plus years old it is hardly surprising that we have decided to buy some replacements.
Madbob, You are correct, but the original ZA and ZD s went through a mid life update to D model standard in 1993-94 so they're not exactly in original condition. Still a great aircraft!
Given that the first RAF Chinooks date back to c. 1980 (pre Falklands War) and that they are now 30 plus years old it is hardly surprising that we have decided to buy some replacements.
Madbob, You are correct, but the original ZA and ZD s went through a mid life update to D model standard in 1993-94 so they're not exactly in original condition. Still a great aircraft!
I mean, if that gives them a life to 2040... if we'd been able to give the Camel a MLU in 1918 they'd have been able go on through WWII and eventually retired in 1976-8........
163627,
In simple terms, there will always be at least two fleets - the thin tank (Mk4/6) and fat tank (Mk3/5). In an ideal world the MoD will upgrade all of the Mk4s and Mk5s to a Mk6 (Mk7?) standard by fitting the CH47F (Mk6) unique "bits" to the Mk4/5s. There's already a lot in common - most of the differences revolve around the fuselage construction and Digital vs Analogue flight control systems. Interestingly, when faced with the rebuild from D to F, in many cases the US Army simply junked the fuselage and built new ones - it wasn't that much more expensive in the long term by the time the old frames were cleaned and repaired.
Any commonality programme will depend on how the finances go and how busy the fleet is post 2015. IMHO, the best thing we could do is order another 50 Mk6 ac in a variety of thin/fat tank configurations and sell our old cabs on the open market (except for -718, which really must go to Hendon..). Mind you, they have been "well used"...Hope that helps!!
In simple terms, there will always be at least two fleets - the thin tank (Mk4/6) and fat tank (Mk3/5). In an ideal world the MoD will upgrade all of the Mk4s and Mk5s to a Mk6 (Mk7?) standard by fitting the CH47F (Mk6) unique "bits" to the Mk4/5s. There's already a lot in common - most of the differences revolve around the fuselage construction and Digital vs Analogue flight control systems. Interestingly, when faced with the rebuild from D to F, in many cases the US Army simply junked the fuselage and built new ones - it wasn't that much more expensive in the long term by the time the old frames were cleaned and repaired.
Any commonality programme will depend on how the finances go and how busy the fleet is post 2015. IMHO, the best thing we could do is order another 50 Mk6 ac in a variety of thin/fat tank configurations and sell our old cabs on the open market (except for -718, which really must go to Hendon..). Mind you, they have been "well used"...Hope that helps!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As evaluater says... We all hope that in due course the long term fleet (whatever size that turns out to be post the Afghan withdrawal and SDSR 2015) will be to the Mk6 standard as being purchased today. That said there are always some important and often hidden differences resulting from significant production date differences which can be quite hard to standardise on at a sensible cost. A long lifed production line like that of the CH47 is subject to changed construction standards (often to improve reliability and safety) and newer bits of kit and components, often as a result of design upgrades, or simply the need to change component specs due to old variants having ceased production.
Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope the cash is available in due course to get them all up to the same standard...everyone in the loop is well aware of the advantages of such a move, but if the cash isn't there up front, the best plans can fail very quickly.
Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope the cash is available in due course to get them all up to the same standard...everyone in the loop is well aware of the advantages of such a move, but if the cash isn't there up front, the best plans can fail very quickly.
ORAC
I can remember the first time I heard that the RAF would be getting Chinooks. It was when I was at Seletar and the last of the Belvederes were about to go out of service. Wishful thinking of course, although they were operational in Vietnam then.
The year was 1967, 44 years ago. 44 years before that the RAF was still operating the Vickers Vimy! Changes in the field of aviation take a bit longer these days.
I can remember the first time I heard that the RAF would be getting Chinooks. It was when I was at Seletar and the last of the Belvederes were about to go out of service. Wishful thinking of course, although they were operational in Vietnam then.
The year was 1967, 44 years ago. 44 years before that the RAF was still operating the Vickers Vimy! Changes in the field of aviation take a bit longer these days.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Outside in the cold distance
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the mid-90s the RAF wanted more Chinooks rather than Merlins; looks as if they might get their wish about 20 years late ... albeit with not quite as many wokkas as they actually wanted.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original order for 15 A models was placed in 1965 as a Belvedere replacement on 66 at Seletar. It was a stupid bit of determined association by HM Treasury that lead to their cancellation in 1967 as part of the strategic announcement to bin any major UK mil presence East of Suez ( and the demise of the new CVA01 carriers too... The 1st HMS Queen Elizabeth BTW)... the logic went... Disband 66 ... Cancel CH47. No one seems to have spoken loud enough about NATO ops needing a few too! Even the resurrected buy in 1978 was squeezed through on "Addback" funds. Such was the tortuous and procrastinating birth into UK ownership of the most capable and versatile battlefield rotorcraft ever built.... And we wonder why Britannia weeps!