Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

RAF announces Puma Replacement plan

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

RAF announces Puma Replacement plan

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd May 2023, 13:21
  #381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2023
Location: California
Posts: 46
Received 46 Likes on 18 Posts
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?

Last edited by Lucifer Morningstar; 3rd May 2023 at 15:01.
Lucifer Morningstar is offline  
Old 3rd May 2023, 20:41
  #382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: England
Posts: 1,459
Received 34 Likes on 20 Posts
Originally Posted by Lucifer Morningstar
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?
Not far fetched

https://hushkit.net/2021/02/12/whate...-70-blackhawk/
ericferret is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 00:58
  #383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,021
Received 2,902 Likes on 1,243 Posts
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.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 07:49
  #384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's some chat on Twitter about troop carrying capacities. What are the actual "fully equipped" capacities of the contenders?
Numberscount is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 12:06
  #385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: nowhere special
Posts: 470
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
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.
nowherespecial is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 13:08
  #386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks NWS. I cant see a photo or video of a 149 embarking or disembarking CEMO troops anywhere.
Numberscount is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 13:28
  #387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2023
Location: California
Posts: 46
Received 46 Likes on 18 Posts
Originally Posted by nowherespecial
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.
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.
Lucifer Morningstar is offline  
Old 4th May 2023, 18:24
  #388 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,264
Received 180 Likes on 106 Posts
Originally Posted by nowherespecial
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.
You can get loads of fully equipped troops into the 149, so long as you put their gear in the boot! Someone link to the Farnborough video!
PPRuNeUser0211 is offline  
Old 5th May 2023, 00:43
  #389 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 341
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
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.
Blackhawk9 is offline  
Old 5th May 2023, 07:24
  #390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: A very long way North
Posts: 469
Received 15 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally Posted by Lucifer Morningstar
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.
Sounds a bit more like it, although 6 is maybe a bit low. I would think 10-12 maybe. Our offshore fit in a 175 is 16 seats, it’s pretty full in there at max load, and of course there’s no bags in there. Disposable is about 2.7 tonnes, but that of course depends on the fit, remove dinghies but add Self Defence kit etc.
PlasticCabDriver is online now  
Old 5th May 2023, 11:03
  #391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: GMT
Age: 53
Posts: 2,070
Received 186 Likes on 70 Posts
Originally Posted by Blackhawk9
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.
Most do actually run seats (whether the customers are strapped in is a different matter), getting off the floor fully laden is difficult and seats are designed to collapse on impact, added to which sitting in the door for a TR failure is not a great idea.
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 5th May 2023, 17:51
  #392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 463
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by PlasticCabDriver
Sounds a bit more like it, although 6 is maybe a bit low. I would think 10-12 maybe. Our offshore fit in a 175 is 16 seats, it’s pretty full in there at max load, and of course there’s no bags in there. Disposable is about 2.7 tonnes, but that of course depends on the fit, remove dinghies but add Self Defence kit etc.
I understand from a colleague who operated the 175 in the NS that the CofG was quite critical, with individuals being seated depending on weight? An interesting concept in military ops.
chinook240 is offline  
Old 5th May 2023, 21:30
  #393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
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 ?
JohnDixson is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 6th May 2023, 00:47
  #394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 516 Likes on 215 Posts
Brother Dixson must stop this confusing the issue with facts.....it is so unfair.
SASless is offline  
Old 6th May 2023, 07:32
  #395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,719
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
I understand that there is a 20-seat fit in current European use for Black Hawks:

EESDL is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 6th May 2023, 11:58
  #396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 341
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by EESDL
I understand that there is a 20-seat fit in current European use for Black Hawks:

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.
Blackhawk9 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 6th May 2023, 14:48
  #397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
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!
JohnDixson is offline  
Old 6th May 2023, 16:04
  #398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,719
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Blackhawk9 - quite right, uncertified, but a case of 'needs must' for the mil operator during the fire season - I think.
EESDL is offline  
Old 10th May 2023, 03:03
  #399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Long way south
Age: 60
Posts: 34
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Grrr 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.......
CopterDoctor is offline  
Old 10th May 2023, 08:20
  #400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: A very long way North
Posts: 469
Received 15 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally Posted by chinook240
I understand from a colleague who operated the 175 in the NS that the CofG was quite critical, with individuals being seated depending on weight? An interesting concept in military ops.
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…
PlasticCabDriver is online now  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.