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 27th Nov 2021, 09:07
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: South
Age: 59
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by Mee3 View Post
It was EIS with 800 but gaining more every year.
Without casting doubt on your claim, what has the 800hr TBO 'gained' so far?



Each airframe 800hr inspection requires the MGB to be removed anyway,for the airframe structure inspection,with many MGB being returned to airbus for precautionary inspections, in certain areas, on a fast turn-around basis.



Certainly too, MG​​​​​B's are being regularly rejected well short of the 800hr TBO.
BTC8183 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2021, 17:04
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,612
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
That has never happened in the history of RAF procurement - why should they start now?

We would have been flying Blackhawks since the 80's if we had been given what we needed.
You have a valid point as politics/Tarzan/Mace all contributed to what-should-have-happened-but-did-not.

One of my thermodynamics lecturers worked at RR before his PhD worked at Rolls-Royce Leavesden and did a few test flights with G-RRTM (only S-70 on CAA register)

Cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2021, 04:13
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: NW
Posts: 98
Without casting doubt you are in the know, it has gained multiple of 800 so far. Although well short of the 5000 TBO designed for.

800h inspection does not require dynamic removal if it is not due.Precautionary is rather often due to obvious reasons and also because the hums are now real time monitored as long as GS plugs into internet.

It is true some older production still have shorter than expected life but cases has been reducing as they move on to component made by new supplier.
Mee3 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2021, 06:41
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: South
Age: 59
Posts: 44
I have no doubt that airbus, consider themselves to be in a theoretical 'good place', regarding the 175. MGB TBO 'gaining by multiples' is just fantastic!



However, enter a offshore operators hangar and the 175 on a 800hr insp will almost certainly have its MGB out of the airframe. In fairness, it is very easy to remove.



To return to thread, Blackhawk gets my vote. Leonardo make a solid and robust MGB,it is just a shame about the flimsy airframe and (allegedly) poor support.
BTC8183 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2021, 07:16
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Alles Über
Posts: 168
Any option for skids on the NMH offerings?
trim it out is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2021, 08:51
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: NW
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by BTC8183 View Post
I have no doubt that airbus, consider themselves to be in a theoretical 'good place', regarding the 175. MGB TBO 'gaining by multiples' is just fantastic!



However, enter a offshore operators hangar and the 175 on a 800hr insp will almost certainly have its MGB out of the airframe. In fairness, it is very easy to remove.



To return to thread, Blackhawk gets my vote. Leonardo make a solid and robust MGB,it is just a shame about the flimsy airframe and (allegedly) poor support.
We are sitting in one of those hanger you described and fairly certain what I am talking about.

But this is a 189's contact to lose.
Mee3 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2021, 15:42
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 2,020
Hmmmm….Leonardo or Airbus UK?

Well, let me see…

Leonardo UK (Yeovil?) can’t be any worse than the main factory in Italy for delivery erm…standards (yes, thats the word).

And AHUK seem to have aspirations for becoming second only to BAES for military maintenance and spares profits - probably basing a few very long term business plans on those two items alone...and then there are the Mods…(Whooppee!!)
Rigga is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 10:06
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Land of the Angles
Posts: 326
As has been pointed out in previous posts, both contender solutions are merely spinoffs of ‘Commercial Platforms’ and neither has any proven combat experience, let alone demonstrated that the multitude of bolt-on equipment options required in-role have yet to be designed, built, evaluated on-wing and certified to the satisfaction of the end-customer.

Add the multitude of customer SIRFC, comms, mission planning, datalink, hoist, fast-roping, rappelling, weapons mount, A2A refuelling and survivability options (electronic, structure, material safety, defence, etc.) Provisions, let alone Completions, I dread to think what the useful load and performance of either platform would be at final delivery.

A recipe for delay and cost overruns that is for sure and for what, to save a few hundred jobs that would be lost without this win?

Neither solution offers any real benefit to the UK taxpayer, as irrespective of what is ‘Promised’ for future export sales, if either helicopter were any good for the requirement, they would already have sold well to credible militaries in previous competitions, but alas not the case for either platform.

More importantly, neither is ‘fit-for-the-purpose’ in protecting those inside when things go horribly wrong.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Hilife is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 10:39
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Underneath the Radar
Posts: 153
Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.
rrekn is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 11:13
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N/A
Age: 44
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by rrekn View Post
Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.
FVL is a Joke…. I mean, these platforms are so complex that their survivability must be questioned just like their agility. Simply not comparable to a Blackhawk or puma….
casper64 is online now  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 13:25
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,606
Lost

Originally Posted by rrekn View Post
Not quite Hilife,

The AW149 was designed as a military platform and then adapted to become the civil AW189. I take your point it has no combat experience, but it would be available quickly (and cheaply) and suit most of the roles that it's likely to find itself in. It need only last 10 years until the FVL is available.
I appreciate that AW/Leonardo are familiar with having money thrown at them but are you seriously suggesting that the 189/149/WG30 should only last 10-years?
Is that your definition of Value 4 Money for UK- tax payer?
It will take more than 10-years for the WG30 to reach the frontline - it is simply a ‘cash cow’ for overseas shareholders - any re-config to cost a fortune in time and money.
All because Italy has given it a ‘mil approval’ does not mean it is a military aircraft.
EESDL is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 21:28
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 8,781
Since we need a replacement and we need it now - Leonardo 149/189 would seem the obvious choice as it is already in production.

No, it's not a Blackhawk but we'll never get those and the choice is limited - mostly due to politics.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 21:57
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Alles Über
Posts: 168
Something OTS would solve the 212/412 easily, just needs a winch. N3 replacement would just need a few add ons too. It's all the gubbins to make it a battlefield helicopter that is the difficult bit. Probably end up with a Mk2/3/4/5/6 etc when more and more things get added to the spec, finally followed by more powerful engines to carry all the extras.
trim it out is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2021, 23:33
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,606
We can have a ‘Black Hawk’

Got talking to some guys at GDH, Warsaw. They have worked out how to bring G5000H ‘Black Hawks’ over from Alabama. Latest engines, gearboxes etc and still half the price of 149/175 whilst outperforming competition - and all on FMS so minimal running costs. Teesside FreePort and the mayor all behind it.
‘Levelling up’ in truest form and helps to strengthen defence network by spreading it out.
Greenest of options as re-lifing existing airframes - just as new as the ‘new’ wildcat. To be produced in the Hydrogen Hub that is the North East - sounds to good to be true. They can even deliver earlier than required.
We might just get the beast after all !!
EESDL is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2021, 19:30
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by EESDL View Post
Got talking to some guys at GDH, Warsaw. They have worked out how to bring G5000H ‘Black Hawks’ over from Alabama. Latest engines, gearboxes etc and still half the price of 149/175 whilst outperforming competition - and all on FMS so minimal running costs. Teesside FreePort and the mayor all behind it.
‘Levelling up’ in truest form and helps to strengthen defence network by spreading it out.
Greenest of options as re-lifing existing airframes - just as new as the ‘new’ wildcat. To be produced in the Hydrogen Hub that is the North East - sounds to good to be true. They can even deliver earlier than required.
We might just get the beast after all !!
No chance!
Not enough fingers in pies....
Rigga is offline  
Old 30th Nov 2021, 22:02
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,005
EESDL. I’ve been to Guntersville and flown the Ace Hawk. Great aircraft, and superbly updated by Darryl and the team. But. It’s not an FMS aircraft as the US DoD don’t use it. Any UK buy would be DCS to Ace or a possible UK agent - ergo it would be without some of the cost benefits of FMS but, equally, also not tied to several of the constraints. As JD notes, of all the proposed NMH candidate platforms, only the -60 was designed with strict survivability requirements stipulated - including separation of systems (including the pilots…..), duplex/triplex redundancy in key areas, ballistic tolerance and ruggedness to accept high RoD landings. However, unless the Social Value content of a UK -60 is high, Politics dictates that Yeovil wins….again….
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2021, 00:40
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bristol
Posts: 398
I understand that the PUMA remains the current most efficient and reliable resource in the UK helicopter inventory. So why not extend its out of service relief until a decent replacement can be identified? CMon'y guys ditch the Politics give the armed services the bang bung for the politics

TF
tigerfish is online now  
Old 1st Dec 2021, 07:01
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,005
TF, this was the first question I asked. After all, the upgrade to Puma 2 included modern engines and cockpit. I think the date is key here. By 2025 there’s precious little work at Yeovil forecast; Wildcat/Merlin support will endure, but Apache will end - transferred to E model and Boeing. My guess is that Puma has to go to justify chucking £1Bn at the factory. Personally, I agree with a sentiment I heard last week - scrap NMH and use the money to buy more Wildcat and Chinook, keeping Yeovil and the military happy, and COMO the ‘odds and sods’. The urban argument, whilst valid, is not as is often made out. If you have to keep NMH, lease 15-20 for 15 years and see how FVL goes and if NGRC amounts to anything tangible.
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2021, 16:07
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,606
Evalu8tor
you might be surprised what you can get on FMS these days ;-)
EESDL is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2021, 19:36
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 8,781
Evalu8ter - why on earth would you want to buy more Wildcat? More Chinook I get but the Wildcat? How many troops does it lift again??
crab@SAAvn.co.uk 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.