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

RAF announces Puma Replacement plan

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

RAF announces Puma Replacement plan

Old 1st Apr 2021, 13:49
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 8,709
As someone said below, pretty rubbish architecture if there's a single point of failure across the entire cockpit
Taking the 139 as an example, the two MAUs sit pretty much next to each other under the bonnet so 1 round could quite easily do them both in - not much left in the cockpit without the MAUs.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 16:12
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 54
Posts: 5,050
Originally Posted by jimf671 View Post
Something like that. Is there a hot n high H225/725 because an off the shelf H225 is optimised for those long crew change flights over the ocean and we'd be back where we were several decades ago?
I don't believe that is strictly correct - the EC725 (later H225M) is the primary design, for long range CSAR, and the EC225/H225 is the civilian derivative (as has always been the case with the Puma family). I don't know exactly how its hot and high performance ranks, but bear in mind that most of the current operators are in 'hot' countries (Brazil, Malaysia etc), the French have been operating it in Afghanistan, and where are the primary theatres the French military are historically involved in (which would be factored into the design brief)? Chad, Niger, Mali, CAR etc
212man is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 17:25
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,225
225 temperature limits according to the EASA Type Certificate:

-30°C to ISA +40°C, limited to 50°C See RFMS SUPP 2 for lower temperature operation down to -45°C.

I never had a problem with the 332L in Karratha with temperatures up to 40 degrees.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 18:49
  #44 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Beyond the black stump!
Posts: 1,289
And now the Bell offering. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...-requirement01 APRIL 2021

Bell touts ‘ideal' 525 for UK New Medium Helicopter requirement

by Gareth Jennings



Bell has described its 525 Relentless has being “an ideal aircraft” for the UK New Medium Helicopter (NMH), telling Janes that it is in constant touch with UK acquisition authorities as the country defines its Puma replacement plans.
The 525 Relentless would be ‘an ideal solution’ for the UK’s New Medium Helicopter requirement, Bell told Janes citing the aircraft’s ‘superior payload and range performance’. (Bell)

Speaking on 1 April a company representative said that Bell’s ‘super-medium’ 525 would be an ideal solution for the United Kingdom with its “superior payload and range performance”, while the company also has in its military portfolio the UH-1Y Venom and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor it has co-developed with Boeing.

”Our teams are in constant contact with the UK acquisition authority as the United Kingdom continues to define their New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirements. Bell remains committed to providing the right solution based on those requirements and we are certain our aircraft offer the most capable and versatile performance options,” the representative said, adding that the 525 is on track to be issued its certification by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later this year.

The 525 designation reportedly stands for 5 blades, 2 engines, 500 n miles. Developed as a commercial platform tailored for offshore oil and gas operations, as well as for corporate, VVIP transport, and parapublic roles, the 525 can carry 16 passengers and/or 1,814 kg of payload out to 500 n miles (926 km; 575 miles) at a cruise speed of 162 kt (300 km/h; 186 mph). Other performance specifications include a service ceiling of 20,000 ft, as well as a hover ceiling of 11,200 ft (in-ground effect)/ 8,600 ft (out of ground effect). Bell recently announced that the 525 had completed flight testing, and
Cyclic Hotline is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 19:01
  #45 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 13,367
Originally Posted by pba_target View Post
As someone said below, pretty rubbish architecture if there's a single point of failure across the entire cockpit . However, I'd be more disappointed about the loss of ballistic protection given by all those steam gauges in front of you - I've yet to see an MFD marketed as bullet proof!
The AW109 has a single DAU.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2021, 21:20
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by Cyclic Hotline View Post
And now the Bell offering. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...-requirement01 APRIL 2021

Bell touts ‘ideal' 525 for UK New Medium Helicopter requirement

by Gareth Jennings



Bell has described its 525 Relentless has being “an ideal aircraft” for the UK New Medium Helicopter (NMH), telling Janes that it is in constant touch with UK acquisition authorities as the country defines its Puma replacement plans.
The 525 Relentless would be ‘an ideal solution’ for the UK’s New Medium Helicopter requirement, Bell told Janes citing the aircraft’s ‘superior payload and range performance’. (Bell)

Speaking on 1 April a company representative said that Bell’s ‘super-medium’ 525 would be an ideal solution for the United Kingdom with its “superior payload and range performance”, while the company also has in its military portfolio the UH-1Y Venom and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor it has co-developed with Boeing.

”Our teams are in constant contact with the UK acquisition authority as the United Kingdom continues to define their New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirements. Bell remains committed to providing the right solution based on those requirements and we are certain our aircraft offer the most capable and versatile performance options,” the representative said, adding that the 525 is on track to be issued its certification by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later this year.

The 525 designation reportedly stands for 5 blades, 2 engines, 500 n miles. Developed as a commercial platform tailored for offshore oil and gas operations, as well as for corporate, VVIP transport, and parapublic roles, the 525 can carry 16 passengers and/or 1,814 kg of payload out to 500 n miles (926 km; 575 miles) at a cruise speed of 162 kt (300 km/h; 186 mph). Other performance specifications include a service ceiling of 20,000 ft, as well as a hover ceiling of 11,200 ft (in-ground effect)/ 8,600 ft (out of ground effect). Bell recently announced that the 525 had completed flight testing, and
lest it’s April 1st LOL Anyhow 4 years ago Bell unveiled mil Transport version





chopper2004 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2021, 10:37
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the big blue planet
Posts: 976
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
lest it’s April 1st LOL Anyhow 4 years ago Bell unveiled mil Transport version
Bell also proposed the B525 as a replacement of H155/ AS332L1 for the German Federal Police ( Bundespolizei ). That was well before April 1st.

skadi
skadi is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2021, 21:57
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,193
One point which hasn't been mentioned yet on this thread is that the NMH is meant to replace three other niche military fleets as well as the Puma. The other three types are all much smaller, so the 225 looks rather big as a solution. As one example, having 225s in Cyprus would bring to mind the old adage about sledgehammers and nuts. For this reason as well as others, I suspect a smaller type will be selected.
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2021, 12:48
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 181
All the machines touted so far in the aviation press will come in very pricey for what will be a 'stop gap' machine - all be it a long gap if traditional new project intros are anything to go by......Not sure we'd get value for money opting for an unsuccessful Leonardo design or an over-egged AH one.......As for the 525, behave yourself
JulieAndrews is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2021, 13:19
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: england
Posts: 1,047
Originally Posted by JulieAndrews View Post
All the machines touted so far in the aviation press will come in very pricey for what will be a 'stop gap' machine - all be it a long gap if traditional new project intros are anything to go by......Not sure we'd get value for money opting for an unsuccessful Leonardo design or an over-egged AH one.......As for the 525, behave yourself
I mean, let's face it, we're not going to see shiny tilt-rotors in RAF colours until what? 2045 at the earliest? At the recent RAeS lectures they were talking 2040 iirc for the NGRC, and openly admitted that to achieve that they needed to have already started work. So worst case (best case?) you'll see 20-25 years of life out of the fleet, and that's in the Puma replacement role, let alone any of the other more niche jobs.
pba_target is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2021, 21:08
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Asia Pacific
Age: 50
Posts: 1,961
In a (Eurotrash?) H215M or H225M you can easily get two sections in CEMO plus a monster pile of ammunition. Bit of a hot n high issue with the H225M perhaps.
Only counts if you get there without the rotorhead falling off at 2000'
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2021, 07:26
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: nowhere special
Posts: 422
Now now MGD, let's not start that discussion up again
nowherespecial is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2021, 14:56
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bristol
Posts: 391
So it seems that we are back to people who have vested interests in promoting their own products, rubbishing everyone else's again are we?

Just let the MOD make up their own minds on this one!

TF
tigerfish is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 09:38
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: nowhere special
Posts: 422
Originally Posted by tigerfish View Post
So it seems that we are back to people who have vested interests in promoting their own products, rubbishing everyone else's again are we?

Just let the MOD make up their own minds on this one!

TF
I think the issue here is the MOD is run by politicians and civil servants and their angle is not always the same as MOD procurement. Politicians like to keep jobs going in the UK, so whatever wins will likely have to be built (under license potentially) at Leonardo in Yeovil (or another facility if someone else wins). If Leonardo say the 149 will be built there, they are already 50% of the way to winning IMO. Anyone who cannot match that has a considerable hurdle to overcome commercially or technically. I was involved in an aviation tender recently for a government where the value to the local economy was given the same weighting as the price.
You might see something similar with UK SAR now that the UK is not bound by EU procurement rules with overall value to the UK judged rather than just price and technical.

Last edited by nowherespecial; 14th Apr 2021 at 09:39. Reason: grammar
nowherespecial is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2021, 20:19
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,614
MOD seem to be coping without influence of lobbyist/politicians with Apache using US FMS and new order for Chinooks. We can use Leonlardo for SELEX and for painting O&G aircraft warry colours if required for decoys ;-)
EESDL is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2021, 15:34
  #56 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Beyond the black stump!
Posts: 1,289

Airbus Helicopters claims Chinese content on H175 can be replaced if offered to UK military

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/airbus-helicopters-claims-chinese-content-on-h175-can-be-replaced-if-offered-to-uk-military/143437.articleBy Dominic Perry, Oxford23 April 2021

Airbus Helicopters insists it can overcome obstacles related to Chinese content on its H175 should the super-medium-twin be offered as a replacement for the UK Royal Air Force’s Puma fleet.

No military variant of the 7.8t H175 has so far been developed, in part due to restrictions related to substantial Chinese involvement on the civil programme, which is a joint development with Avicopter.



Source: Airbus Helicopters

No military version of the H175 has yet been developed

But Colin James, managing director of Airbus Helicopters UK, says the company would have no difficulty in providing a military version without the Chinese content.

While declining to reveal the precise details of the plans, James says: “We have a viable solution and we know how we would do it”.

“It is very feasible and there are scenarios for providing that aircraft without that problem,” he says.

He also notes that the current civil version of the H175 already has 10-15% of UK content.

In its recent Command Paper defence review document, London announced that it intends to withdraw the Puma from service in the mid-2020s, replacing it with a platform it calls the New Medium Helicopter (NMH).

Airbus Helicopters delivered a significant mid-life upgrade to the Puma fleet in the early part of last decade, adding new engines and avionics, which could have seen the platform operated into the 2030s.

While James says he is “disappointed” by the retirement decision, he understands the strategic rationale for the move as the UK eyes a next-generation capability in the 2040s.



Source: Crown Copyright

UK intends to retire its current Puma HC2s in the mid-2020s

No details of the requirements for the NMH have so far been revealed, although a team has been stood up within the Ministry of Defence to work on its plans.

Although the Puma is due to depart by mid-decade, James questions the realism of that, noting the time it takes to get a new aircraft into service.

He believes that once the procurement process begins and “sanity checks start being made”, 2027-2028 will emerge as a “more realistic timeframe” for the Puma’s departure, unless a capability gap can be tolerated.

While Airbus Helicopters UK is located at Oxford Airport, expansion of the site may not be required to house an assembly line for the NMH, as the wider Airbus group has a “lot of real estate in the UK”.

“Whatever solution we would employ would be to create sustainability and future business,” he says, including the production of helicopters for the export market. And while final assembly is one aspect of the process, bolstering the level of UK content on the H175 is also key, he stresses.

Should a larger platform be required, Airbus Helicopters has also touted the 11t H225 and NH Industries NH90 as possible solutions for the NMH requirement.

Any proposal of the NH90 is complicated by the make-up of the NHI consortium, which includes Leonardo Helicopters and Fokker as shareholders. “It would simply require Airbus and Leonardo to cooperate”, says James.



Source: Fabrizio Capenti

Egypt is one of only two current customers for AW149

Leonardo Helicopters has long pitched the 8.6t AW149 as an ideal Puma replacement which it would build at its site in Yeovil, the UK. The type is currently produced at the airframer’s main final assembly line in Vergiate, Italy and has secured two customers since launch in 2006: Thailand and, more recently, Egypt.

Although in many quarters the NMH contest is seen as Leonardo Helicopters’ to lose, James insists that as “the incumbent” Airbus Helicopters does not feel it is the underdog.

“[Airbus] has a very, very good record of bringing export success to the UK,” he says. “Everything our competitors have to offer, Airbus also has to offer, and more.”
Cyclic Hotline is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2021, 16:54
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 811
Question re the mission: will this be an aircraft doing an admin mission or will it be expected to go in harm's way? If the latter, will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability and crash-worthiness, along with maintenance and aircraft availability targets?
JohnDixson is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2021, 18:33
  #58 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 13,367
Well there certainly didn’t seem to be so for the Puma!
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2021, 19:14
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by JohnDixson View Post
Question re the mission: will this be an aircraft doing an admin mission or will it be expected to go in harm's way? If the latter, will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability and crash-worthiness, along with maintenance and aircraft availability targets?
It will be in harms way as it be battlefield utility helicopter,

cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2021, 10:00
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: The foot of our stairs
Age: 63
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by JohnDixson View Post
will there be related spec requirements for ballistic survivability?
It's many years since I spannered a Puma; mk1 of course, but one thing I remember is that, according to the aircraft maintenance manual, the self-sealing fuel tanks could cope with damage up to 7.5mm in diameter. It puzzled me that the specification was 0.12mm short of what seemed requisite.
Bayek Itsarumdu is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.