Helicopter Replacements?
 

Okay i know there are plenty of threads on here recently about the various orders and lack of airframes.
But as of January 2007 the British Forces had the following (together with their Out of Service Date)
It just shows an insight of what we have and won't have.
112 x British Army Lynx AH7/9 and 73 x Royal Navy Lynx HAS3/HMA8 with an OSD of 2012. Total of 185 (+/- a few)
To be replaced with 70 x Future Lynx, 40 for the British Army, 30 for the Royal Navy. This is costing over £1bn.
So, the £1.2Bn going towards the new MAN 4x4 and 6x6 utility trucks to replace the Bedford 4 tonner (and other variants - a lot of which are still going well) could have gone towards another 75 Future Lynx to bring the replacements back up to 145 atleast... still short of the replacement order but better than 70!
44 (ish) x Puma HC1 of the RAF with an OSD of 2010. We currently have no replacement on order as i am aware of. It's now nearing 2008 so why haven't the MoD pulled their finger out for an urgent requirement?
115 x Gazelle AH1 of the British Army with an OSD of 2018. These are dwindling already with some Gazelles being replaced i believe by the Lynx AH7 in the Scout role. So what helicopters are filling the gaps for the Lynx?
We currently have no replacement on order for the Gazelles either.
33 (ish) x Seaking HC4/6 with the Royal Navy with an OSD of 2012. We currently have no replacements on order. We have 4 years left to acquire it.
4 x Agusta 109 of the British Army for the SAS. OSD of 2008. We currently have no replacement on order for next year.
6 (ish) x Lynx AH7 of the Royal Marines. OSD of i take it the same as the Army airframes. No replacement on order, and no replacement on order for the Gazelles they lost either.
34 x Chinook HC2 with an OSD of 2015. We currently have no replacement for these on order. We have 6 more HC2A's downgraded from HC3 standard which have been sitting in a hangar for 8 years and they still haven't been re-configured, this will take a few years. OSD for these will be 2025.
I have left out the Merlin HM1 and HC3/HC3A as these won't be mothballed until atleast 2030.

Puma HC2:

Source.

This includes i take it, airframe fatigue being sorted out in all the aircraft, so basically a big overhaul with enhancements and new engines. Not exactly a replacement though just an MLU which will need addressing later on down the line which is like saying "ahh sod it, lets put a new engine in it, make it a bit more powerful and worry about replacing it in a few years time"
By then we will still be in the same situation as we are now, strapped for cash and no incentive to procure anything 'new'.

Lets all overhaul the old Seakings, fit Carson Blades and worry later on...
:hmm:

Or put some Carson blades on it and extend it to 2017.

44? You wish! OSD is 2012. There is no replacement as we cannot afford it. See below for the urgent requirement.


The fleet leaders are at just over half life in terms of airframe hours, and its taken us 36 years to get that far, so another 10 or so won't run them out.

Not too far off, more like "a life extension programme which will need addressing later on down the line which is like saying "we can't afford a new helicopter now, so lets put a more powerful and fuel efficient engine with anticipators in it, about 25% effective extra payload, about 20% more fuel, add in a glass cockpit, sufficient nav and comms equipment to make it CNS/ATM (or whatever its called this week) compliant, and sufficient, open architecture, secure comms to enable to it work properly in theatre, and worry about replacing it in about 10 years time along with the Sea Kings in one big buy".

Regards

PCD

Thanks for clearing that up PCD,
Now throw in the number of years it will take to do those upgrades plus the number of years they will be delayed to get it started in the first place.

Other nations just bought the Cougar. But we can't afford too. We spend £1.2bn on trucks we don't really need instead.

Razor,
Take your point about lack of future funding completley, however to say that replacement of a 20-30yr old vehicle with a modern and reliable workshorse is a little aviation centric!. Undoubtedly there will always be a bun fight over who gets money and new equipment, I suggest that the funds spent on new vehicles is money very well spent. The issue of new rotary platforms across all three services is one which has continually been highlighted over the past 6 years, since the NAO report.

That said....doubt it will make much difference. A lesbian single mother with one arm has a higher priority (A Vote) to Gordon Brown.

Ralph

The process is already well underway. Timescales are tight, aren't they always, but much of the preliminary work has already been done so they are not starting from scratch right now. Whether all the Mk2s are in service by 2012 remains to be seen, but we should be good way along at least.

Bit out of the loop at the mo but wasnt their a SABR project that was to replace Puma and possibly Sea King?

M4

Once upon a time (~1997) there was FASH (Future Amphibious Support Helicopter), which in about (2001?) transmogrified into SABR (Support & Amphibious Battlefield Rotorcraft). There were also BLUH (AH7/9 & Gazelle replacement) and SCMR (Lynx HMA replacement)

SABR died in 2004 (ish?) and became FRC (Future Rotorcraft Coherence/Capability depending on who you believe) when "senior people" realised there wasn't enough money in the EP to replace SK4, Puma, Lynx AH & Lynx HMA.

Since then, we've had the Superlynx buy (after they'd decided that they really did have to buy another maritime helo and couldn't just assume that the 42 remaining Merlins could do the job). Sticking plaster fixes (Merlin 3A and Wokka fix to field) will deliver 14 new airframes in two/three years.

Meanwhile, SH hours are going through the roof, SH people are going through the door and Nero in Whitehall is still fiddling.......

"Other nations just bought the Cougar. But we can't afford too. We spend £1.2bn on trucks we don't really need instead."

If its the Support Vehicle contract you are on about, then the £1.2bn we are spending on the vehicles is money well spent. We are in desperate need of these replacement vehicles. Its all very well buying new aircraft but the money needs also to be spent on the support of them. Although it may not seem it, the vehicles that get the spare engines, spares, food and even lads to service the new aircraft need to be up to standard as well. 20-30yr old vehicles we are using now just are not up to it anymore.

The danger inherent in this thread is the apparent acceptance is that the rotary wing fleet is adequate now, with the numbers outlined in the first post.

It ain't.

With smaller commitments and the same number of airframes (no South African Pumas, but without subsequent attrition) the 2007 total is broadly the same as it was when the NAO reported on battlefield helicopters - identifying a 38% shortfall in lift, and a 67% shortfall in amphibious lift.

Piddling about with an extra Puma here, Six merlins there or eight Chinooks is a drop in the ocean.

What is needed is to boost numbers and address the shortfall with a really big buy of about 24 new helicopters (a fully folding Merlin would fit the bill) and then replace the aircraft being retired with new aircraft on a one-for-one basis. 44 NH90s or Cougars to replace the Pumas, a similar number of amphib Merlins to replace the Junglie Sea Kings and CH-47Fs to replace the Chinooks.

I wonder how many helos one could afford with the £3.9 Bn earmarked for the construction of CVF, even if that number does not escalate?

Or how many more helicopters would be purchased if you got rid of JCA as well?

I wonder what % of airframes are necessary for front line ops, and whether the 'plan' is to bring in more civilian support for other taskings?

I actually seem to recall reading a Flight International article about the SAS replacing their A109s.

Might've been tail end of last year/begining of this one

As noted, the trucks are a good investment. How about taking some of the cash from the £127 Billion spent on quangos per year (a quadrupling of the cost as part of the previous Chancellor's 'war on wasteful quangos' that began 10 years ago. Apparently.)

chops
 

"I wonder how many helos one could afford with the £3.9 Bn earmarked for the construction of CVF, even if that number does not escalate?

Or how many more helicopters would be purchased if you got rid of JCA as well?"

Yeah or the £6-7bn which will be flushed on tranche 3?
It's just cheap and stupid to use that inane argument in this discussion. We need all three, we need more money - anything else is not sufficient.
:ugh:

dum_my
 

10 Jul 07: Contract looks into longer life for Puma

Eurocopter has been awarded an Assessment Phase contract for the life extension programme, which will include up to 35 of the helicopters getting new Turbomeca Makila engines, ‘glass’ cockpits, and new communications, navigation and defensive systems.

Not again DHSA went through all this nearly 10 years ago the decision then was that it was unaffordable. Why will it be any different this time round and the airframes are almost ten years older?

In 1997 all we had were a couple of aircraft in Kosovo, and NI was still going strong.

Now we are fighting 2 foreign wars and need all the helicopters we can get. There appears to be, finally, the realisation higher up the chain that the Pumas really are now obsolete, that they cannot continue (for a variety of reasons) in their current form past 2012, that the lack of SH lift is such a political hot potato at the moment, and that we cannot afford to lose the capability they bring (small though it is when compared to the chinook fleet) but they need replacing. A new platform is, however, utterly unaffordable right now.

Also, when the question was asked 10 years ago, was the upgraded gearbox and transmission included in the spec, because that added massively to the cost? That is not in the picture this time.

PlasticCabDriver
 

Also, when the question was asked 10 years ago, was the upgraded gearbox and transmission included in the spec, because that added massively to the cost? That is not in the picture this time.
Why is that not the case now i.e. why is it not necessary to upgrade the gearbox and transmission now? Surely the increased available torque from the Makila engine will require these changes more so today with a much older airframe. Why do we have to go for these "making a purse out of a sow's ear" programmes which as we all know will result with a far greater bill than going for a modern replacement aircraft.

You don't need a new transmission to cope with all the extra torque of you don't have a torquemeter in the first place to know how much you're pulling. Ignorance is bliss...