Helicopter in-flight re-fuelling
Boudreaux Bob wrote:
Correct......
[banter]Courtney Mil, nothing about helicopters is natural![/banter]
You mean not one single RAF C-130 has that ability (AAR Helicopters)?
[banter]Courtney Mil, nothing about helicopters is natural![/banter]
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
[banter]Courtney Mil, nothing about helicopters is natural![/banter]
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Primarily because RAF has zero helicopter AAR tankers. The drogue/basket for helicopters is quite different than the one for fixed wing aircraft and RAF has none. What tanker capability RAF has is dedicated to fixed wing AAR. And I'm not certain but I think all of RAF's tankers are jets, so they can't go slow enough to refuel a helo anyway. RAF's A400 could go slow enough to do the job, but the A400s delivered to RAF do not include wing refuel pods. The UK Parliament appears to be loathe to fund any kind of helo AAR capability.
Interestingly, US Coast Guard (which belongs to Homeland Security and not DoD) has C-130 tankers and AAR capable SH-60s for long range SAR duties. So it's not necessarily a military-only requirement/need.
Interestingly, US Coast Guard (which belongs to Homeland Security and not DoD) has C-130 tankers and AAR capable SH-60s for long range SAR duties. So it's not necessarily a military-only requirement/need.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possibly because all the UK military helicopters can fly unrefuelled from the East coast of the UK to the West coast of the UK, whereas none of the US military helicopters can fly unrefueled from the East coast of the US to the West coast of the US.
It's why the US Coast Guard has C-130 tankers and AAR capable SH-60s to enable long-range SAR.
Originally known as the HH-60, but redesignated as MH-60. Has commanality with Navy SH-60's and was technically an add on to a Navy contract, but the Coast Guard has never had SH-60's.
There are a few cases where AAR would be great, and some still pitch to add a probe to the USCG 60's, but it has not come to pass.
Some versions of the H-60 have a probe, most notably CSAR and special forces versions, but not US Coast Guard versions.
Last edited by sandiego89; 12th Dec 2014 at 18:37.
The Atlas certainly could, but guess what - the RAF hasn't included a tanker role requirement for the Atlas 
Seems they feared cancellation/reduced orders for Voyager if the A-400 was a competetor.
Clever lawyers on ther part- very shortsighted of the MoD to sign it. Shamefull. The UK got hosed (pun intended) on that deal.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correction Ken, the US Coast Guard C-130's are NOT equipped to pass fuel in flight, nor are the USCG MH-60's equipped to recieve fuel in flight. No pods/hoses on the C-130's, no probe on the 60's.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 55
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But for long overwater flights (or long flights over hostile territory) AAR is pretty much a necessity.
If the USAF/USMC's entire intended theatre of operations fitted between Boston and Cincinnati would they need/have AAR capability ?
Do I recall correctly that those clever folks that wrote the UK tanker deal get it expressly written that the A-400 in UK would NOT have the abilty to pass fuel?
Seems they feared cancellation/reduced orders for Voyager if the A-400 was a competetor.
Clever lawyers on ther part- very shortsighted of the MoD to sign it. Shamefull. The UK got hosed (pun intended) on that deal.
Seems they feared cancellation/reduced orders for Voyager if the A-400 was a competetor.
Clever lawyers on ther part- very shortsighted of the MoD to sign it. Shamefull. The UK got hosed (pun intended) on that deal.
At one ARSAG we had an excellent presentation about an AAR-supported SAR mission way out in the Atlantic successfully carried out by the US with its UK-based Jolly Greens supported by C-130 AAR. Well beyond the range of a land-based Sea King.
Two Brawdy cabs (moi captain of R190) sat at Shannon as the casualty had come into range but were ordered to remain on the ground so that the UK based JG's and C130, which had taken rather a long time to get there but nonetheless had Presidential approval, overflew us in a fine display of capability. We could have been at the casualty a good hour or so before them. Don't believe all that you are told in official presentations!
Last edited by Al-bert; 13th Dec 2014 at 10:27. Reason: typo
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he RAF's helicopters were designed/procured to move stuff around the UK and northern Europe, not to make long flights over water or hostile territory. Granted it didn't quite work out like that...
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct that AirTanker contract is not to provide Voyager, but to provide AAR capability, however, its my understanding that the contract DOES preclude the UK from using any other domestic source for its AAR. So RAF-owned and operated A400M is not allowed to dispense AAR as that would be a breach of the contract (ie monopoly) that AirTanker were clever enough to negotiate. Yes we could use A400M refueling, but AirTanker would have to provide it. Knowing how good we traditionally are with these contracts, that would probably involve us giving AirTanker a brand new Grizzly for free and then paying them to lease it back.......
The Italians do not have AAR for their existing S-61R 'Pelican' like their retied M/HH-3E Jolly Green Giants. Their CSAR framework was the above and AB212 and now equipped with AW HH-139 and will equip with the HH-101 Ceasar (my pix from Farnborough) and probably the AW149 as it achieved Italian MoD certification on the first day of the show.
I think rather than each Farnborough when AW has exhibited either a RAF or a Danish Merlin with an IFR probe - for marketing purposes, I think the AMI are going to go with AAR.
Cheers
I think rather than each Farnborough when AW has exhibited either a RAF or a Danish Merlin with an IFR probe - for marketing purposes, I think the AMI are going to go with AAR.
Cheers
Pave Hawk
In my neck of the woods, the local Pave Hawk unit did a rescue out this side of the Atlantic, 5/6 years ago (saw pair fly past my old office in Midlands heading west)
Saw them do touch n'go at the Hall earlier this year, hopefulyl they'll get re equipped with the Whiskey model in 10 odd years. Heres my capture of the action.
Saw them do touch n'go at the Hall earlier this year, hopefulyl they'll get re equipped with the Whiskey model in 10 odd years. Heres my capture of the action.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: GREAT BRITAIN
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags posted the following:
"At one ARSAG we had an excellent presentation about an AAR-supported SAR mission way out in the Atlantic successfully carried out by the US with its UK-based Jolly Greens supported by C-130 AAR. Well beyond the range of a land-based Sea King."
Al-bert then posted the following:
"If it's the one I was involved in Beags, not strictly true!
Two Brawdy cabs (moi captain of R190) sat at Shannon as the casualty had come into range but were ordered to remain on the ground so that the UK based JG's and C130, which had taken rather a long time to get there but nonetheless had Presidential approval, overflew us in a fine display of capability. We could have been at the casualty a good hour or so before them. Don't believe all that you are told in official presentations!"
Well Al-bert, below are details of all the long-range SAR's that the USAF have completed using UK-based Pave Lows, Combat Shadows and Pave Hawks so take your pick of the last two HH-60 missions.
14 Jan 1989 - "Yarrawonga", 240 miles west of Ireland, 2 x MH-53, 2 x MC-130, 32 saves.
21 May 1998 - Russian Trawler, 200 miles south west of Iceland, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
21 May 2002 - "Persuader", 500 miles south west of Lands End, 2 x MH-53, 2 x MC-130, 2 saves.
10 Dec 2008 - "MV Anna Rickmers", 460 miles offshore, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
26 Jun 2009 - "Pascha", 700 miles west of Ireland, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
Maybe they had taken "rather a long time to get there" but refueling a Helicopter in-flight is a highly dangerous and complicated activity. Have you tried it? How long would it have taken you, in your limited-range Helicopter, to fly a 920 or 1400 mile round trip into the North Atlantic and where would you have refueled?
Was the grand plan really to transfer the casualty from the HH-60 to your cab once the Jolly Greens were within range of your aircraft?
"We could have been at the casualty a good hour or so before them"
Really?! Could have been where? Rather than protesting that you could have done it better, give credit where credit is due and ask yourself why the UK has never exploited the enviable and unique capability to refuel a Helicopter in-flight.
"At one ARSAG we had an excellent presentation about an AAR-supported SAR mission way out in the Atlantic successfully carried out by the US with its UK-based Jolly Greens supported by C-130 AAR. Well beyond the range of a land-based Sea King."
Al-bert then posted the following:
"If it's the one I was involved in Beags, not strictly true!
Two Brawdy cabs (moi captain of R190) sat at Shannon as the casualty had come into range but were ordered to remain on the ground so that the UK based JG's and C130, which had taken rather a long time to get there but nonetheless had Presidential approval, overflew us in a fine display of capability. We could have been at the casualty a good hour or so before them. Don't believe all that you are told in official presentations!"
Well Al-bert, below are details of all the long-range SAR's that the USAF have completed using UK-based Pave Lows, Combat Shadows and Pave Hawks so take your pick of the last two HH-60 missions.
14 Jan 1989 - "Yarrawonga", 240 miles west of Ireland, 2 x MH-53, 2 x MC-130, 32 saves.
21 May 1998 - Russian Trawler, 200 miles south west of Iceland, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
21 May 2002 - "Persuader", 500 miles south west of Lands End, 2 x MH-53, 2 x MC-130, 2 saves.
10 Dec 2008 - "MV Anna Rickmers", 460 miles offshore, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
26 Jun 2009 - "Pascha", 700 miles west of Ireland, 2 x HH-60, 1 x MC-130, 1 save.
Maybe they had taken "rather a long time to get there" but refueling a Helicopter in-flight is a highly dangerous and complicated activity. Have you tried it? How long would it have taken you, in your limited-range Helicopter, to fly a 920 or 1400 mile round trip into the North Atlantic and where would you have refueled?
Was the grand plan really to transfer the casualty from the HH-60 to your cab once the Jolly Greens were within range of your aircraft?
"We could have been at the casualty a good hour or so before them"
Really?! Could have been where? Rather than protesting that you could have done it better, give credit where credit is due and ask yourself why the UK has never exploited the enviable and unique capability to refuel a Helicopter in-flight.
