RAF announces Puma Replacement plan
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,581
Likes: 73
From: England
Perhaps some lateral thinking is required.
LH are obviously going hard for NMH, but everything I read indicates that the AW149 is simply not fit for purpose where NMH is concerned. The Blackhawk seems to be the best contender of the available options in terms of lift, size, and proven battlefield capability, but it is not built in the UK. 'Social value' will undoubtedly play a significant part in the assessment criteria and scoring of the 3 likely bids.
What are the chances that LH decide to 'no-bid' rather than bidding and losing, and then partner with Sikorsky and offer to build the NMH Blackhawks at Yeovil? I appreciate it sounds rather far fetched, but it gets LH a slice of the pie, and gives Sikorsky the social value piece that they currently lack. I know there are multiple 'devil in the detail' issues with this, but if Airbus can partner with Boeing for NMH, why not LH and Sikorsky?
LH are obviously going hard for NMH, but everything I read indicates that the AW149 is simply not fit for purpose where NMH is concerned. The Blackhawk seems to be the best contender of the available options in terms of lift, size, and proven battlefield capability, but it is not built in the UK. 'Social value' will undoubtedly play a significant part in the assessment criteria and scoring of the 3 likely bids.
What are the chances that LH decide to 'no-bid' rather than bidding and losing, and then partner with Sikorsky and offer to build the NMH Blackhawks at Yeovil? I appreciate it sounds rather far fetched, but it gets LH a slice of the pie, and gives Sikorsky the social value piece that they currently lack. I know there are multiple 'devil in the detail' issues with this, but if Airbus can partner with Boeing for NMH, why not LH and Sikorsky?
https://hushkit.net/2021/02/12/whate...-70-blackhawk/
Joined: Feb 2006
Aviation Qualifications: LAME
Posts: 36,137
Likes: 5,738
From: Falling off the end of the thread
Puma HC3 has a nice ring to it… the 21st century MRCA Must Refurbish Choppers Again.
it’s a farce isn’t it, when you look at the likes of Turkey’s myriad of new types in development from helicopters to supersonic UAV’s to fighters and the once great aircraft manufactures of the U.K. haven’t produced any indigenous military aircraft since the Hawk. And I’m talking U.K., not some multi country efforts. Ohh the Government will talk the talk while quietly killing off home produced military production.
it’s a farce isn’t it, when you look at the likes of Turkey’s myriad of new types in development from helicopters to supersonic UAV’s to fighters and the once great aircraft manufactures of the U.K. haven’t produced any indigenous military aircraft since the Hawk. And I’m talking U.K., not some multi country efforts. Ohh the Government will talk the talk while quietly killing off home produced military production.
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 491
Likes: 21
From: nowhere special
NumbersCount - UH60 formally listed at 11 troops with full equipment (SIK brochure lists at 290lbs/ 130kgs). AW149 brochure shows anywhere from 10-16 seats. H175M lists as 12 - 15 seats.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...M-brochure.pdf
https://helicopters.leonardo.com/en/products/aw149
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-s...h175m-missions
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...M-brochure.pdf
https://helicopters.leonardo.com/en/products/aw149
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-s...h175m-missions
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 48
Likes: 47
From: California
NumbersCount - UH60 formally listed at 11 troops with full equipment (SIK brochure lists at 290lbs/ 130kgs). AW149 brochure shows anywhere from 10-16 seats. H175M lists as 12 - 15 seats.
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
Lift capacity Internal Space Fully equipped troops lift with 3 crew
Wildcat ~1.2 tonnes 6 sq metres ~5 troops Leonardo
AW149 2.5 tonnes ~ 6.5 sq metres ~6 troops
Airbus H175M <1.6 tonnes ~ 6-7 sq metres ~ 6 troops
Blackhawk 5 tonnes ~ 12 sq metres - ~11 troops
The Blackhawk has double the troop capacity of either the 149 or 175, and at least twice the USL capacity according to their figures. Given the operating cost per hour, this makes LH and Airbus options up to 3 times as expensive to achieve the same section lift.
Guest
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 180
NumbersCount - UH60 formally listed at 11 troops with full equipment (SIK brochure lists at 290lbs/ 130kgs). AW149 brochure shows anywhere from 10-16 seats. H175M lists as 12 - 15 seats.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...M-brochure.pdf
https://helicopters.leonardo.com/en/products/aw149
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-s...h175m-missions
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...M-brochure.pdf
https://helicopters.leonardo.com/en/products/aw149
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-s...h175m-missions
I doubt very much you could get 16 fully equipped troops into a 149 given the seating type and ability to egress safely into a battle zone so the like for like is likely the 10 seat assault layout in the AW149 vs standard 11 seat in the Hawk and either 12 or 15 in a 175M. I'm still 100% sure I'd rather go into battle in a Hawk with fewer troops, bigger doors, more robust landing gear, weapons hanging off both sides and a famously crashworthy air frame than a 175 or a 149 but that's a personal view of course.
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
Likes: 26
From: Australia
Most machines don't run seats in combat zones anyway first thing to get dumped , seats are for peactime ops , 4 seats across the back in a UH-60 and one rear facing between the gunners seats and you can fit 18-19 in a B/hawk easy , 5 on seats , 6 sitting in doorway with guns pointing out and 6-8 on the floor in cabin. Std assault load.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 497
Likes: 31
From: A very long way North
From the Defence Synergia paper (link earlier in forum), taking into account fuel load and typical operating environments.
Lift capacity Internal Space Fully equipped troops lift with 3 crew
Wildcat ~1.2 tonnes 6 sq metres ~5 troops Leonardo
AW149 2.5 tonnes ~ 6.5 sq metres ~6 troops
Airbus H175M <1.6 tonnes ~ 6-7 sq metres ~ 6 troops
Blackhawk 5 tonnes ~ 12 sq metres - ~11 troops
The Blackhawk has double the troop capacity of either the 149 or 175, and at least twice the USL capacity according to their figures. Given the operating cost per hour, this makes LH and Airbus options up to 3 times as expensive to achieve the same section lift.
Lift capacity Internal Space Fully equipped troops lift with 3 crew
Wildcat ~1.2 tonnes 6 sq metres ~5 troops Leonardo
AW149 2.5 tonnes ~ 6.5 sq metres ~6 troops
Airbus H175M <1.6 tonnes ~ 6-7 sq metres ~ 6 troops
Blackhawk 5 tonnes ~ 12 sq metres - ~11 troops
The Blackhawk has double the troop capacity of either the 149 or 175, and at least twice the USL capacity according to their figures. Given the operating cost per hour, this makes LH and Airbus options up to 3 times as expensive to achieve the same section lift.
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 276
From: GMT
Most machines don't run seats in combat zones anyway first thing to get dumped , seats are for peactime ops , 4 seats across the back in a UH-60 and one rear facing between the gunners seats and you can fit 18-19 in a B/hawk easy , 5 on seats , 6 sitting in doorway with guns pointing out and 6-8 on the floor in cabin. Std assault load.
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 165
From: Hobe Sound, Florida
Re Blackhawk 9 and his observation re seats. The unit I joined had B model UH-1s and the lift platoons had the seats across the rear cabin wall, and at was it.
Remembering that experience, when we were involved in a competition with Eurocopter in eastern Turkey, which was in fact a very realistic evaluation ( almost too realistic on one memorable occasion ) we had made a plan beforehand and upon arrival in Diyarbakir, took out all the cabin seats, leaving only the gunners and troop commander seats (3). Thus unencumbered, our typical troop load of Jandarma soldiers ( think infantry ) was 25-26. They were fully armed, spare ammo etc We had installed cargo tie-down straps in a matrix across the floor and had posters made with the assistance of an interpreter, showing how the troops should situate themselves.
Support’ressupply missions included the usual: food/water/ammo. Jandarma eschewed military rations-they used real food, which made for interesting loading challenges: usually we’d slide the cabin door shut on one side and load all the food etc up to the ceiling in the back. Slide the open cabin door shut. The two SA crew and the Turkish pilot would enter thru the gunners windows, strap in and we launched.
The Turkish pilot in the troop commanders seat had the assignment from his command to record every detail of every sortie. A lot of the time, that pilot would not have English.
The evaluation consisted of placing and supporting, various Jandarma platoons as they chased and brought to contact, the PKK terrorist units in far eastern Turkey.
Sound familiar, Blackhawk 9 ?
Remembering that experience, when we were involved in a competition with Eurocopter in eastern Turkey, which was in fact a very realistic evaluation ( almost too realistic on one memorable occasion ) we had made a plan beforehand and upon arrival in Diyarbakir, took out all the cabin seats, leaving only the gunners and troop commander seats (3). Thus unencumbered, our typical troop load of Jandarma soldiers ( think infantry ) was 25-26. They were fully armed, spare ammo etc We had installed cargo tie-down straps in a matrix across the floor and had posters made with the assistance of an interpreter, showing how the troops should situate themselves.
Support’ressupply missions included the usual: food/water/ammo. Jandarma eschewed military rations-they used real food, which made for interesting loading challenges: usually we’d slide the cabin door shut on one side and load all the food etc up to the ceiling in the back. Slide the open cabin door shut. The two SA crew and the Turkish pilot would enter thru the gunners windows, strap in and we launched.
The Turkish pilot in the troop commanders seat had the assignment from his command to record every detail of every sortie. A lot of the time, that pilot would not have English.
The evaluation consisted of placing and supporting, various Jandarma platoons as they chased and brought to contact, the PKK terrorist units in far eastern Turkey.
Sound familiar, Blackhawk 9 ?
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
Likes: 26
From: Australia
Never seen that setup before , Turkey? , only seats that are crashworthy are the 4 x Sik seats along the backwall, obviously not a requirement by that operator. would sooner be on the floor than try and move around those seats with gear on.
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 165
From: Hobe Sound, Florida
hello SAS-re facts: On that first Turkish competition Phil Pacini ( Mayaguez USAF pilot) and I were spelled after 3 months by Gary Kohler ( Cav-Vietnam ) and Andy Evans a West pointer too young for that event. Gary and Andy have the unofficial record: 53 troops-never heard whether they were equipped or even dressed, for that matter!
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 34
Likes: 1
From: Long way south
UAE H225s , now going cheap
With the news that the UAE has dropped its order for a dozen Caracal's
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/05/...ment-official/
perhaps Airbus should offer the H225 as a late contender.......
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/05/...ment-official/
perhaps Airbus should offer the H225 as a late contender.......
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 497
Likes: 31
From: A very long way North
Never had to get to seating individuals by weight, but yes, it can get quite tight CofG wise. Sometimes it’s beneficial to have more passengers rather than fewer, to bring the CofG forward enough to get all the bags/fuel in. As long as the troops load from front to back it will probably be fine. In that context anyway…
Joined: Feb 2006
Aviation Qualifications: LAME
Posts: 36,137
Likes: 5,738
From: Falling off the end of the thread
But looking at the images, if you bin those two centre fore aft row seats, the four rear facing seats, the two outboard (door) forward facing seats and retain the two forward facing inner ones, that gives you the equivalent of a current Puma's fully equipped troop capacity with plenty of room to move around the cabin.. the extra possible seating for other roles is a bonus.
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 367
Likes: 7
From: Land of the Angles
I recall a press release from an MoD/JHC source several years’ ago, saying something along the lines, that the price to sustain the Puma HC2 fleet in-service post 2025 was more than a ‘King’s Ransom’, so I dread to think what the cost to the UK taxpayer will be in its final years of service, until its well overdue OSD arrives.
Yet another example of the UK MoD’s inability to make a procurement selection on time, more so when you note that all three platforms in the run-off are OTS options.
Yet another example of the UK MoD’s inability to make a procurement selection on time, more so when you note that all three platforms in the run-off are OTS options.