That was a short hol, MGD. I hope it was a good one.

Having worked with Merlin on Ops and MERT in both theatres, I also assumed that the Merlin would be the better Casevac platform.

On speaking to the MERT guys though, this does not seem to be the case (to my surprise). I have yet to talk to a MERT member who would rather have the Merlin as their steed. Among the reasons for this view are more room, better protection, the ability to carry more support elements and more handsome crews (ok, so I made the last bit up...!).

When I raised the issue of smoothness and the ability to work in the cabin, I was informed in no uncertain terms that no-one has failed to get a line in down the back of a Chinook because the vibration was too great.

I look forward to seeing the Merlin guys in theatre and hope they have a safe and smooth transition to the rigours of Afghanistan (and make no mistake, it's whole different ball game out here).

What is the ballistic tolerance of the plastic Merlin like? There is a very interesting thread on rotorheads regarding composite structures, their susceptibility to damage and the difficulty of managing repairs.

It seems that the Chinnies are taking rounds on a regular basis but patching aluminium is much easier to do, especially in a battlefield environment.

Once pilots realise they will have to make aggressive landings to minimise threat exposure and brown-out, will the Merlin be man enough to soak up the punishment?

Balance Gentlemen (and Ladies) Balance
 

There are now 3 pages of effective willy waving – who can carry more pax – who is faster – who throws up the biggest dust cloud and so on. Most of this from aircrew of one or the other type with the odd stirring banter thrown in from the wings by aircrew from other types just to keep the thread amusing – and it is.

What seems to be lost here is the true voice of a user. Bottom line if you want to move heavy loads or lots of people to the same place Chinook is king of the castle. But planners need choice and flexibility. The major drawback of the Chinook is that it cannot be in two or three places at once and it’s also in short supply. Enter the only alternative on offer, the Merlin. Steady in the ranks SK4 drivers and supporters you do a great job too but you have limitations as well. Merlin is COMPLEMENTARY to the aircraft mix and allows planners and Operational Commanders loads more options. By the by I’ve never been in a Merlin, except static at an air show, nor have I flown one so I don’t have an axe to grind. But I have been a Commander of air assets in a Middle Eastern sandy place and I know I’d prefer flexibility and adaptability in what aircraft I had to conduct operations so that you can play to an aircraft’s strong points rather than provide over capacity.

I understand, leaving myself as a target and await incoming if wrong, that from the MERT standpoint Chinook will rattle (bad choice of word perhaps) along at 160knots if in a hurry but all aboard will require dental surgery to replace fillings on arrival. However if serious precision medical work needs to be attended to, and time permits, then 100knots is more comfortable so speed isn’t always an issue on MERT tasks, or is it?

LB

A major factor on MERT tasks may be the limiting speed of the escort! Therefore speed is not always a bonus....

I suspect that if the Merlin had a folding rotor head and belonged to the CHF then this thread would not exist and most customers would be very happy.

Thank you LowBall. I am sticking up for the Merlin because I flew it and I liked it. It is not a Chinook, but that doesn't make it useless - and I particularly second your point that it helps no-one to keep slagging it off, particularly to the customer. I distinctly remember arriving in Iraq and finding that the users there had been told all sorts of doom-and-gloom stories about what we'd never, ever be able to do as well as a Chinook. That took a lot of time and effort to put right and helped no-one.

I'm not saying that a Merlin is ever going to match the Chinook at everything - hardly anything does. However, actually there are some things it does as well, and some it does better. I've flown and/or commanded both types so I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance.

MGD - since when could a Chinook fill up with 10200kg of fuel WITHOUT putting a bob tank in? I'm getting tired of explaining that....

Merlin without bob tank goes further/longer than Chinook without bob tank.

Merlin with bob tank goes about the same as a Chinook with bob tank (smaller tank)

Chinook with 2 bob tanks goes way further than Merlin with one.

Understand now?

Until the Chinook Mk3s get out to theatre.

Not surprised your tired, that training bra must be a bit tight......

Always satisfying when the other party stops arguing and resorts to abuse - makes me think I'm probably right.

Easy, 3000 kg internal, 7200 kg underslung load. Why?How do you do it in a Merlin?
However I ll admit you can go far with internals ............cabin empty :E

Yesterday 23:51

Yes, you're right, wrong argument though. You are going to be, for the long haul, in an area the size of Wales, moving sh1t backwards and forwards. Range and endurance counts for very little - it's a hub and spoke operation. Lift, flexibility and versatility is everything.

You may have great range - but where do you think you are going to go? Iran, or the Stan's? I fear you over estimate the role you are about to inherit.

That bra must be really digging in....

Fair enough - all I'm saying is that Merlin won't be completely useless....

Lift: not as much as a Chinook, but enough
Flexibility: pretty good at that - yes, the ramp's steep, yes, you can't land it as hard, but it will do the job
Versatility: as above

So no, not a Chinook, but we'll make it work. If you accept that the Chinook force deserves a bit of a rest, who else would you put there? Sea King? Puma? Lynx? Thought not...

And anyway, the training bras are elasticy and not that tight. It's when you start wearing the proper ones that they start to dig in.

What do you think then folks? One more complete circle of:

Mine is faster than yours. No it isn't!

Mine goes further than yours. No it doesn't!

Mine carries more than yours. No it doesn't!

Mine is quieter than yours. No it isn't!

Then another moderate post or two saying that we could use both because it would give flexibility which is - after all - the key to air power. Followed by another round of yeah but mine's still faster than his. No it isn't!

Yeah I think one more complete circle then we'll talk about something else, so you'd better get your shots in quickly!

:E

Ah, humour at long last!

Wholigan - fair point. MGD - I think you have been taking me too seriously!

Play nicely
 

Chaps

It is good to see that the predictable Chinook banter is till there. This is what this forum is about. The Merlin Force accept that they have a lot to learn and they will do. MGD it only goes wrong when you start believing the banter a little bit too much and the confidence-ability gap breeds arrogance. I note our chum Brandnew has decided to restrict his caustic comments.

There is a lot of work to do, but the aim is for us to fly and fight together and support the customer. If they see us fighting all the time with each other, they will simply dismiss us as RAF to$$ers and that we don't need. Can we accept that Chinooks lift heavy things, vibrate a lot and are battle-tested - Merlins are newer, lift a bit less, smooth and offer other capabilities and we all play our part?

Time for a glass of wine and to put the dog out in the garden.

Or had them restricted for him!:}

How does a British Chinnok Mk. III compare to a CH-47D?


I have in mind comparing Merlin and CH-47F/MH-47G/HH-47 for the re-opended CSAR competition.


"The CH-47F design features alterations to the airframe structure to reduce the effects of vibration ... "


Upgrades and orders

397 of the US Army CH-47D helicopters are being upgraded to CH-47F standard. The LRIP contract for seven systems was signed in January 2003. Deliveries began in July 2004 and will conclude in 2018.

In December 2003, the US Army ordered seven new CH-46F helicopters to replace those lost in action and, in January 2005, an additional ten new-build CH-47F helicopters. Deliveries began in June 2006 and are scheduled to complete in 2008. In January 2007, the US Army ordered 16 new and nine remanufactured CH-47F with options on 22 new and 19 remanufactured helicopters.

The CH-46F was approved for full-rate production and entered operational service in August 2007. In February 2008, the US Army ordered another 11 new-build helicopters, bringing the number of new CH-47F ordered to 59.

In August 2008, Boeing received a five-year contract from the US Army for 191 CH-47F helicopters, 109 new-build and 72 remanufactured.

...

In November 2006, a version of the MH-47G, the HH-47, was selected for the USAF combat search and rescue (CSAR-X) requirement for 141 new helicopters to replace the HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters. However, in March 2007, the USAF announced that, following General Accounting Office (GAO) recommendations, it would issue a request for the resubmission of the CSAR-X proposals. In October 2007, the USAF decided to re-open the contest and issued new request for proposals and a contract award was expected in 2008. In December 2008, the USAF again restarted the competition but did not specify a date for contract award.

The CSAR helicopters are primarily to be used for rescuing downed aircrew and isolated troops in combat areas but may also be used for civilian rescue operations such as disaster relief. CSAR-X is scheduled to achieve initial operating capability (IOC) in 2014. Boeing's team includes BAE Systems (digital flight control system), Keystone Helicopter (patient treatment area) and Kaman Aerospace (refueling probe).

...


The CH-47F design features alterations to the airframe structure to reduce the effects of vibration, as well as other structural enhancements to the cockpit, cabin, aft section, pylon and ramp.

The Rockwell Collins digital cockpit is fitted with the common avionics architecture system (CAAS) with improved electrical, avionics and communication systems. CAAS includes: five multi-function displays, moving map display; digital modem; BAE Systems digital advanced flight control system (DAFCS); data transfer system storing preflight and mission data.

The more powerful Honeywell T55-GA-714A engines are fitted with FADEC (full authority digital engine control) and [each] have thrust of 3,529kW (4,733shp). The operating range is increased to 609km (329nm) with mission radius of 370.4km (200nm).

CH-47D/F / MH-47E Chinook Heavy Lift Helicopter - Army Technology

Due to hilarious and rather pathetic "censorship" by oversensitive and precious little darlings, I will refrain from any "caustic" (Aw... Bless...) but truthful comments.

I just hope that the Merlin Force deal with enemy fire a little better than they deal with a little honest criticism! Somehow I doubt it...

On a brighter note the SH propoganda wagon rolls on:

"HOVIS TO ASK 28 (AC) SQN FOR BREAD SLICING ADVICE"

Fly safe, see you all again in HERRICK next year!