U.K. expands H145 fleet for Brunei and Cyprus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,021
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
U.K. expands H145 fleet for Brunei and Cyprus
Purchasing another Six. So they are “critical military capabilities is essential to our nation’s security”…… In Brunei and erm Cyprus…… How is the Puma replacement coming along BTW?
”avoiding unnecessary over-speccing” why does that sound like doing it on the cheap, that will require more funding later to make it fit for purpose.
Or am I just being cynical.
The Airbus H145 is not new to the UK Defence sector, being integral to the UK Military Flying Training System where it aids in the training of helicopter aircrew across various conditions including maritime, mountain, and search and rescue operations.
The newly acquired helicopters will primarily support operations in Brunei, aiding in jungle training and critical medical evacuation tasks. In Cyprus, stationed within the Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs), the helicopters will facilitate training, joint military exercises with the Republic of Cyprus, and are also tasked with emergency response and aerial firefighting duties.
Since 2022, the interim aviation support in these regions has been provided by the Puma HC2 helicopters. The transition to the Airbus H145 marks a continued commitment by the UK to its defence activities in Brunei and Cyprus, enhancing operational efficiency and effectiveness through fleet commonality.
Minister for Defence Procurement James Cartlidge said:
“Reforming defence acquisition to make every pound count and rapidly provide our Armed Forces with . As I announced at the International Military Helicopters conference, purchasing the H145s will support our forces in Brunei and on Cyprus with a trusted capability whilst avoiding unnecessary over-speccing, and overspending.”
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-e...icopter-fleet/
”avoiding unnecessary over-speccing” why does that sound like doing it on the cheap, that will require more funding later to make it fit for purpose.
Or am I just being cynical.The UK’s Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) has finalised a contract valued at £122 million for the procurement of six Airbus H145 helicopters, aimed at bolstering aviation support for British forces stationed in Brunei and Cyprus.
This announcement follows the Ministry of Defence’s (MOD) November 2023 disclosure through a Voluntary Transparency Notification of its plans to acquire the H145s.The Airbus H145 is not new to the UK Defence sector, being integral to the UK Military Flying Training System where it aids in the training of helicopter aircrew across various conditions including maritime, mountain, and search and rescue operations.
The newly acquired helicopters will primarily support operations in Brunei, aiding in jungle training and critical medical evacuation tasks. In Cyprus, stationed within the Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs), the helicopters will facilitate training, joint military exercises with the Republic of Cyprus, and are also tasked with emergency response and aerial firefighting duties.
Since 2022, the interim aviation support in these regions has been provided by the Puma HC2 helicopters. The transition to the Airbus H145 marks a continued commitment by the UK to its defence activities in Brunei and Cyprus, enhancing operational efficiency and effectiveness through fleet commonality.
Minister for Defence Procurement James Cartlidge said:
“Reforming defence acquisition to make every pound count and rapidly provide our Armed Forces with . As I announced at the International Military Helicopters conference, purchasing the H145s will support our forces in Brunei and on Cyprus with a trusted capability whilst avoiding unnecessary over-speccing, and overspending.”
Last edited by NutLoose; 18th Apr 2024 at 21:04.
The following users liked this post:
I saw some purchase contracts recently between UK MOD and AH UK. I'll be polite and say that the UK MOD's negotiation team didn't know what they were doing. The less charitable answer is that the UK MOD got royally taken to the cleaners.
The following 4 users liked this post by nowherespecial:
No wonder Lenny is laughing -
£122M for 6 poxy civvy aircraft and only 2-yrs support - with the first year under warranty….it wouldn’t be so bad if they could take the ‘M’ from the price tag and stick it after the model number…….
£122M for 6 poxy civvy aircraft and only 2-yrs support - with the first year under warranty….it wouldn’t be so bad if they could take the ‘M’ from the price tag and stick it after the model number…….
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,021
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
In 2020 the US bought 16 new Lakota for $116 mil (approx £93.6 mil) I realise prices have risen, but still.
https://www.army-technology.com/news...kota-aircraft/
https://www.army-technology.com/news...kota-aircraft/
Also, AHUK are setting up two fully staffed maintenance operations so the contract price includes purchase of 6 aircraft, modification of the aircraft, set up two operations, staff wages and subsistence for three years and of course a margin.
No wonder Lenny is laughing -
£122M for 6 poxy civvy aircraft and only 2-yrs support - with the first year under warranty….it wouldn’t be so bad if they could take the ‘M’ from the price tag and stick it after the model number…….
£122M for 6 poxy civvy aircraft and only 2-yrs support - with the first year under warranty….it wouldn’t be so bad if they could take the ‘M’ from the price tag and stick it after the model number…….
The warranty only covers parts but no labour.
Also, AHUK are setting up two fully staffed maintenance operations so the contract price includes purchase of 6 aircraft, modification of the aircraft, set up two operations, staff wages and subsistence for three years and of course a margin.
Also, AHUK are setting up two fully staffed maintenance operations so the contract price includes purchase of 6 aircraft, modification of the aircraft, set up two operations, staff wages and subsistence for three years and of course a margin.
No one is paying 10m for a basic 145 these days, specially not for a job lot.
there is a lot of ‘fat’ in this - and a lot of urine being extracted by the OEM.
both locations are mature operations familiar with helis. Valid point though as 3-years supply of Kokineli can mount up ;-)
it looks like all OEMs are at it though and AH shareholders should be chuffed.
Single-source - it’s nothing short of embarrassing imho. Those whom have witnessed our Defence negotiating skills will know why.
The following users liked this post:
Julie,
For the tape, how much do you think a clean basic H145D3 costs these days? What would you include in your 'basic' H145D3? What do we think these aircraft will come with?
For the tape, how much do you think a clean basic H145D3 costs these days? What would you include in your 'basic' H145D3? What do we think these aircraft will come with?
This comes in short succession after we bought 6 H135 from Airbus, also single sourced, and then found we didn't need them. WTAF is going on at DE&S?
Also, the rationale for single sourcing the H145 was, according to DE&S, that it was 'an accepted type' - yes, it was accepted to be operated under a civilian CAMO and operated for training in LFA1 and slightly beyond, not SAR/EMS and Jungle Ops in hot n high environments.
This comes in short succession after we bought 6 H135 from Airbus, also single sourced, and then found we didn't need them. WTAF is going on at DE&S?
Also, the rationale for single sourcing the H145 was, according to DE&S, that it was 'an accepted type' - yes, it was accepted to be operated under a civilian CAMO and operated for training in LFA1 and slightly beyond, not SAR/EMS and Jungle Ops in hot n high environments.
Also, the rationale for single sourcing the H145 was, according to DE&S, that it was 'an accepted type' - yes, it was accepted to be operated under a civilian CAMO and operated for training in LFA1 and slightly beyond, not SAR/EMS and Jungle Ops in hot n high environments.
The 145 operates with other Forces in tropical environments and at high altitude, it's not a new platform.
If anything it shows we can actually get stuff done without the nonsense that is prevalent under "normal" procurement time lines and bureaucracy. The alternative was to wait for NMH which would have likely been more unsuitable than 145 in those environments, and far more expensive.
Join Date: Apr 2024
Location: Wantage
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's the civilian H145, not the M. Likely a winch but they're already using them at Valley. 2 years engineering support from Airbus included in those costs. I'd imagine they're looking at building shiny new hangars in Brunei and Cyprus. I'm fairly certain they were doing the same with the 135 contract that got cancelled
The 135 decision was not down to DE&S, that was a ministerial call.
The 145 operates with other Forces in tropical environments and at high altitude, it's not a new platform.
If anything it shows we can actually get stuff done without the nonsense that is prevalent under "normal" procurement time lines and bureaucracy. The alternative was to wait for NMH which would have likely been more unsuitable than 145 in those environments, and far more expensive.
The 145 operates with other Forces in tropical environments and at high altitude, it's not a new platform.
If anything it shows we can actually get stuff done without the nonsense that is prevalent under "normal" procurement time lines and bureaucracy. The alternative was to wait for NMH which would have likely been more unsuitable than 145 in those environments, and far more expensive.
2. There are a range of platforms that other forces operate in H&H environments, but given we had a range of platforms in Afghanistan (H&H) that sat around unused during the summer, or lifted no meaningful payload, I would have expected some rigorous requirements; not just 'we accepted it for Ascent and its fine in LFA1'.
3. You seem to look down your nose at 'normal procurement timelines'; does this mean you find competitive tenders tiresome? I can appreciate single source if only one platform is available, but tenders make the CS/MOD actually define a requirement and ensure (to some degree) taxpayer value. Have we just gaffed that off because its easier to write Francois a cheque?
Agree on NMH - its a sh1tshow and causing all sorts of unintended consequences.
The following users liked this post:
2. There are a range of platforms that other forces operate in H&H environments, but given we had a range of platforms in Afghanistan (H&H) that sat around unused during the summer, or lifted no meaningful payload, I would have expected some rigorous requirements; not just 'we accepted it for Ascent and its fine in LFA1'.
3. You seem to look down your nose at 'normal procurement timelines'; does this mean you find competitive tenders tiresome? I can appreciate single source if only one platform is available, but tenders make the CS/MOD actually define a requirement and ensure (to some degree) taxpayer value. Have we just gaffed that off because its easier to write Francois a cheque?
Agree on NMH - its a sh1tshow and causing all sorts of unintended consequences.
Agree on NMH - its a sh1tshow and causing all sorts of unintended consequences.
I'm just glad I'll be out before NMH even gets a fielding team in the cockpit and I know I'm not the only one. Add in all the changes to the RRP et al and the offer is so poor now I wouldn't even recommend military aircrew to the son of a bloke in the pub.
And pause
You'd be right to think a minister didn't wake up one day and decide to buy the helicopters, nor did one wake up one day and decide to cancel them. There were lots of forces in play shaping the decisions and results. A decision that has screwed several of our flying careers but that's the way the cookie crumbles and the world hasn't stopped turning so maybe it was the best difficult decision(?).
Afghanistan is not Cyprus, or Brunei, or LFA 1(9?). Completely different TTPs and requirements so not a fair comparison I think.
The problem with the tenders process is it's not purely requirement driven as much as it is steered by personalities in certain positions and strangled with bureaucracy. You only have to work in a HQ where the Boss or top corridor changes and the priorities or D&G can change within a week (see the many Land projects which suffer from capbadge rivalry). Add into that politicians driving projects for their own agendas (jobs for constituents) makes the process tiresome. Particularly amusing when people in Defence have LinkedIn style motivational quotes in their signatures (ones about mission command are my favourite), yet as an organisation are unable to make a decision on facial hair, contents of sandwiches, location of functions, dress codes etc without defaulting to a one-up for approval. We let people go and fly helicopters at night on NOE routes who are of a rank that can't even sign off their own FMT request form to go to a hospital appointment for goodness sake! There are plenty of other examples of similar ridiculousness out there.
I'm just glad I'll be out before NMH even gets a fielding team in the cockpit and I know I'm not the only one. Add in all the changes to the RRP et al and the offer is so poor now I wouldn't even recommend military aircrew to the son of a bloke in the pub.
And pause
Afghanistan is not Cyprus, or Brunei, or LFA 1(9?). Completely different TTPs and requirements so not a fair comparison I think.
The problem with the tenders process is it's not purely requirement driven as much as it is steered by personalities in certain positions and strangled with bureaucracy. You only have to work in a HQ where the Boss or top corridor changes and the priorities or D&G can change within a week (see the many Land projects which suffer from capbadge rivalry). Add into that politicians driving projects for their own agendas (jobs for constituents) makes the process tiresome. Particularly amusing when people in Defence have LinkedIn style motivational quotes in their signatures (ones about mission command are my favourite), yet as an organisation are unable to make a decision on facial hair, contents of sandwiches, location of functions, dress codes etc without defaulting to a one-up for approval. We let people go and fly helicopters at night on NOE routes who are of a rank that can't even sign off their own FMT request form to go to a hospital appointment for goodness sake! There are plenty of other examples of similar ridiculousness out there.
I'm just glad I'll be out before NMH even gets a fielding team in the cockpit and I know I'm not the only one. Add in all the changes to the RRP et al and the offer is so poor now I wouldn't even recommend military aircrew to the son of a bloke in the pub.
And pause
Best of luck on the outside - I can tell by your humour you will thrive.
The following users liked this post:
I shall leave you with this gem!
