Helicopter in-flight re-fuelling
 

Is there a specific reason why UK Military helicopters don't do this, but US Military helicopters do?

Here is a clue :E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO0sRWCf9k4

Oddly enough I watched this yesterday, some better none helicopter ones..

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ckOaHGMEQ68

In a word 'cost'.

The Chinook purphase of the Mk 3 is probably the classic case study of this. The idea of increasing the available cabin space by not having to use internal extended range tanks is a good idea. Unfortunately the price you pay for increasing the size of your external tanks is that you need more power to hover and for the Chinook this reduces the All Up Mass, and therefore payload by about a ton. The US use their Chinooks by getting them airborne with a modest fuel load and then topping it up by Air to Air refuelling. The UK didn't buy the refuelling probe probably because of the extra expense of fitting C130s to perform the A2A refuelling. Even had the MK 3 not had the issues it did, the reduced payload alone would almost certainly have precluded its use by SF for long range operations.
Incidently I never understood why SF simply didn't buy bespoke internal fuel tanks that covered the cabin floor to a depth of 18", leaving nearly 5' headroom.

Reworded....you ain't got enough Fixed Wing Aircraft to carry out the mission.

You have too few Helicopter AAR capable Delivery Aircraft and to provide the coverage you would need would tie up too many of too few aircraft.

Sad really, but that is the nature of Budget Cuts and having far too few Resources to draw from. It is a simple question of priorities driven by the reality of tight budgets and a failure to see the need for a fully capable Military.

Ask yourself why you have no MPA capability?

Did the Submarine Threat disappear?

Does the RN still perform HIFR from the deck of a ship to a helicopter, or has that stopped?

The budget cuts began in 1957 and haven't really recovered since. The most recent reason was them that coined the phrase "The Peace Dividend".

I must admit, I haven't noticed much peace breaking out anywhere recently.

Both the original Chinook Mk 3 and Merlin Mk 3 were fitted for AAR.

Merlin CAE Sim had AAR missions programmed?
 

IIRC, the CAE run Merlin sim at the MSHATF in sunny Oxon had a program written in for AAR missions?

I asked the question during one of our few meetings held there over a decade ago,

Now it does not seem relevant as they have gone to the Senior Service.

Cheers

AAR refueling first
 

And this first,

Cheers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkayWPUCniY

Boudreaux Bob wrote: That's incorrect. The RAF has no AAR platforms capable of refuelling a helicopter. The Atlas certainly could, but guess what - the RAF hasn't included a tanker role requirement for the Atlas :ugh:

The answer is plain and simple. The Government is ****e at what is does and that includes ****e procurement.:ugh:

Am I right in thinking that part of the reason is that the UK does not have a mission set that requires AAR for a helicopter? Most of those nations that do perform rotary AAR (thinking the US and Italy mainly) do so for personnel recovery, or combat search and rescue, which is a mission that the UK has decided it doesn't need.

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.

Of course a Nimrod could have dropped survival aids, but certainly couldn't have done much more apart from acting as on-scene co-ordinator.

Surely the RAF must have thought about Atlas-supported Chinook operations? If not, why on earth not?

The focus here seems to have moved to concentrate on AAR rather than the OP's question about HIFR, which can be different...

There's no articulated or funded requirement. The Mk3 Chinook came with full AAR capability but most of it was ripped out during the 'reversion' programme. The Chinook retains the ability to fit up to 3 internal fuel tanks which, if fitted to a Mk3, give you (theoretically) about 12 tons of gas - enough for 10 hours or so....fine for ferrying or carrying a small load a long way! You can also FARP from the C130 and, if cleared, C17, not forgetting that the T45 and T26 have both got Chinook compatible deck (as have several RFAs). There's always a trade between floor space, range and refuel options.

So, whilst it is a limitation not having AAR capability, there are other options available. Isn't the lack of Atlas kit more a reflection on the exclusivity clauses in the FSTA contract?

P6 - IFR/AAR have become, it seems, interchangeable. I don't think the OP means HIFR....and yes, the RN still do it (as did RAF Sea Kings I believe).

Because it's not natural.

For clarification - I meant what is being termed AAR, rather than establishing the 20ft hover and getting some fuel from the Flight Deck.

Beags,

You mean not one single RAF C-130 has that ability (AAR Helicopters)?

If so....then the situation is far worse than i imagined.

As small as the USMC C-130 fleet is, they maintain a very good capability for that task.

Maybe there's no HAAR capability for UK military helicopters because nobody has specified a requirement for the capability?

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.