Another military aircraft retires - Merlin HM Mk1
to be fair it was very easy to miss, was it not?
Sandy
To be fair, the initial radio fit/buy was delivered in the mid-80s, although the specified SIMOPS (which drives all comms designs) was unnecessarily complex brought about by the endorsed dual role (ASW and HC). The role mod to convert from Primary (ASW) to Secondary (HC) roles involved removing 2 Station Boxes and 2 Secure Amps, and adding a CDA and BID unit. The Merlin airframe lagged and by the time it entered service this dual role had been abandoned but it still needed an immediate avionic MLU. The comms sub-system was well over 15 years old at ISD, but by no means the oldest.
(Sea King HAS Mk6 comms was in many ways an upgrade to Merlin although some cheap and nasty elements were retained which negated much of the money spent. ASaC Mk7 was a further and far more substantial upgrade, getting rid of these nasties, but which was also degraded when the programme was moved to Yeovilton in 2001 just as the MAR/RTS was being prepared. The build standard that was successfully trialled in 2000 was changed to a pre-1996 and unsafe standard, an act approved by non-technical staff who were permitted to overrule the correct, certified design. This contributed to the 2003 mid-air, as it degraded situational awareness).
To be fair, the initial radio fit/buy was delivered in the mid-80s, although the specified SIMOPS (which drives all comms designs) was unnecessarily complex brought about by the endorsed dual role (ASW and HC). The role mod to convert from Primary (ASW) to Secondary (HC) roles involved removing 2 Station Boxes and 2 Secure Amps, and adding a CDA and BID unit. The Merlin airframe lagged and by the time it entered service this dual role had been abandoned but it still needed an immediate avionic MLU. The comms sub-system was well over 15 years old at ISD, but by no means the oldest.
(Sea King HAS Mk6 comms was in many ways an upgrade to Merlin although some cheap and nasty elements were retained which negated much of the money spent. ASaC Mk7 was a further and far more substantial upgrade, getting rid of these nasties, but which was also degraded when the programme was moved to Yeovilton in 2001 just as the MAR/RTS was being prepared. The build standard that was successfully trialled in 2000 was changed to a pre-1996 and unsafe standard, an act approved by non-technical staff who were permitted to overrule the correct, certified design. This contributed to the 2003 mid-air, as it degraded situational awareness).
There were 13 AEW/ASaC Mk7 cabs, against an actual requirement of 16. (8 Mk2s, 2 existing attrition airframes and 3 extra conversions). But rumour is that only 8 Merlins will be modified, probably reflecting a significant change in the operational requirement. (Originally expressed in xx hours continual coverage from a CAG). MoD don't like talking about this, because the winning "Mk7" bid was Merlin with a Blue Vixen variant - it was the only bid that was remotely compliant with the requirement. But a political overrule was made stating the radar upgrade part of the programme WOULD be awarded to SE England (specifically, Crawley), not Edinburgh or Los Angeles. This was related to job retention in a Tory seat.
"Not really military though was it?
A typing error, a failed civvy heliliner, a redistribution of taxpayers' money to the West Country....it won't be missed."
Not really military? So the RAF and FAA and half a dozen other air arms haven't been using it for military applications, I guess. And a typing error obviously makes it a failure, while the civilian version was as successful as many other big commercial helicopters that didn't get past first base. And as for a redistribution of taxpayers money to the West Country... well, we could have sent it all the way to Philadelphia or Connecticut or Marignane instead which would obviously been a much better idea. Muppet.
It won't be missed... because we have the Mk.2 in its place.
A typing error, a failed civvy heliliner, a redistribution of taxpayers' money to the West Country....it won't be missed."
Not really military? So the RAF and FAA and half a dozen other air arms haven't been using it for military applications, I guess. And a typing error obviously makes it a failure, while the civilian version was as successful as many other big commercial helicopters that didn't get past first base. And as for a redistribution of taxpayers money to the West Country... well, we could have sent it all the way to Philadelphia or Connecticut or Marignane instead which would obviously been a much better idea. Muppet.
It won't be missed... because we have the Mk.2 in its place.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed - the Merlin still continues to serve in the RN - and most of the HM1s have simply been upgraded to HM2 and continue to serve - so are we now to mourn the upgrade/replacement of individual variants of types?
Conduct a new commemoration thread for each serial number?
Conduct a new commemoration thread for each serial number?
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea, ****off kintyred
It bloody well would be missed. What was wrong with redistributing a bit of taxpayers money down the west country anyway? How much did we have to shell out to keep the so called go get 'em right wing bankers to keep the system afloat anyway? Remind me?
Nationalisation was never ever as bad as many make out.
Nationalisation was never ever as bad as many make out.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And as for a redistribution of taxpayers money to the West Country... well, we could have sent it all the way to Philadelphia or Connecticut or Marignane instead which would obviously been a much better idea. Muppet.
If we had sent the money to the US we would have been able to afford a fleet twice the size - and those calculations include the redundancy pay-offs at Westlands. Now I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, but whenever I have had to make a business case to whoever is providing the finance - it's not a good place to start from.
The UK does not exist purely to keep Yeovil from diversifying its industrial output and Westands isn't the only helicopter engineering company in the UK (contrary to popular opinion).
If we had sent the money to the US we would have been able to afford a fleet twice the size - and those calculations include the redundancy pay-offs at Westlands. Now I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, but whenever I have had to make a business case to whoever is providing the finance - it's not a good place to start from.
The UK does not exist purely to keep Yeovil from diversifying its industrial output and Westands isn't the only helicopter engineering company in the UK (contrary to popular opinion).
"What was wrong with redistributing a bit of taxpayers money...."
Really needing a Chinook, but only having half a Merlin. How many lives may have been saved in recent campaigns if we'd had the additional 30+ Chinooks the Merlin Mk3 money would have bought......the RAF and Army agreed, just the Govt at the time didn't.
Mk1/2 is just a platform for the mission / weapon system and does a credible job at doing it.
Really needing a Chinook, but only having half a Merlin. How many lives may have been saved in recent campaigns if we'd had the additional 30+ Chinooks the Merlin Mk3 money would have bought......the RAF and Army agreed, just the Govt at the time didn't.
Mk1/2 is just a platform for the mission / weapon system and does a credible job at doing it.
The fact MoD chose Merlin is not an excuse for kicking Westland.
I have always been clear - I'm a big fan of Westland. They have dug MoD and other more favoured contractors out of a hole so many times it is downright embarrassing. For a time the job they moaned about most was Puma Nav Update, mainly because the contractor and MoD took all the credit when it was over, not even mentioning Westland who had taken over when the others hadn't a clue.
I suspect that example was overtaken by Sea King ASaC, which would have been "another Chinook Mk3" had it not been for Westland (and GEC-Marconi & Boscombe) and their willingness to work for years without contract or means of payment. Let's face it, MoD asked for trouble letting the contract on a company who hadn't bid, then standing back as they were bought by a company who had withdrawn because the job was too complex. Westland immediately knew were the problems (abrogation) would be so just calmly took over.
In all my time in MoD, Westland remain the only company ever to approach me with an admission they were on target to make too much profit, asking me (and the RN) what features we'd like to spend it on. A good move. They'd be post-costed anyway so this brought clawback forward a couple of years. The important thing, which we both understood, was in this case the RN benefited; whereas under post-costing it would be the Treasury, another random programme or a general QMAC adjustment. Post-costing to ensure there is a cap on profit margin? Surely largely unheard of given the comments about the cost of their products. Or perhaps MoD don't do it now.
I'm afraid most people don't see those little details.
I have always been clear - I'm a big fan of Westland. They have dug MoD and other more favoured contractors out of a hole so many times it is downright embarrassing. For a time the job they moaned about most was Puma Nav Update, mainly because the contractor and MoD took all the credit when it was over, not even mentioning Westland who had taken over when the others hadn't a clue.
I suspect that example was overtaken by Sea King ASaC, which would have been "another Chinook Mk3" had it not been for Westland (and GEC-Marconi & Boscombe) and their willingness to work for years without contract or means of payment. Let's face it, MoD asked for trouble letting the contract on a company who hadn't bid, then standing back as they were bought by a company who had withdrawn because the job was too complex. Westland immediately knew were the problems (abrogation) would be so just calmly took over.
In all my time in MoD, Westland remain the only company ever to approach me with an admission they were on target to make too much profit, asking me (and the RN) what features we'd like to spend it on. A good move. They'd be post-costed anyway so this brought clawback forward a couple of years. The important thing, which we both understood, was in this case the RN benefited; whereas under post-costing it would be the Treasury, another random programme or a general QMAC adjustment. Post-costing to ensure there is a cap on profit margin? Surely largely unheard of given the comments about the cost of their products. Or perhaps MoD don't do it now.
I'm afraid most people don't see those little details.
