Short term helo solutions - what's happening & what would we like to see happening?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PTT - A good point. I'd agree that if we want something quick (like a new ML Helo) and someone like EC could offer it to us when we needed it, but AW couldn't, then to buy offshore is the way ahead. There may be an over-riding factor such as other Lines of Development though that make us choose the 'devil we know' rather than mix fleets just for the sake of a quick win. The DIS is not so blind as to make the answer always AW despite better offers from overseas. On balance though, if we take the Danish Merlin as an example, there were simply no alternatives in the timescale that made sense. We then contract with AW to modify the Danish merlin as required, as they are the DA, and then contract with them again to procure replacement aircraft on behalf of the Danes.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all due respect - and perhaps an excess of cynicism - possibly the real reason we go with AW is that, to a politician, voters jobs are more important than the lives of voters who live in another constituency.
I agree that we need something fast to get more capability, and that the Danish Merlin is a fast and easy answer, but I am questioning the use of Merlin as SH at all. Like I said earlier in the thread, a 2 aircraft mix is certainly good enough for a force the size of the UK military.
I agree that we need something fast to get more capability, and that the Danish Merlin is a fast and easy answer, but I am questioning the use of Merlin as SH at all. Like I said earlier in the thread, a 2 aircraft mix is certainly good enough for a force the size of the UK military.
Thread Starter
PTT,
Are you seriously suggesting that servicemen's lives are more endangered flying in the Merlin than in the Chinook or Puma?
Are you seriously suggesting that Puma's serviceability record in the Middle East makes it better suited to form part of a two-type JHC force than Merlin?
You're mad!
Are you seriously suggesting that servicemen's lives are more endangered flying in the Merlin than in the Chinook or Puma?
Are you seriously suggesting that Puma's serviceability record in the Middle East makes it better suited to form part of a two-type JHC force than Merlin?
You're mad!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you seriously suggesting that servicemen's lives are more endangered flying in the Merlin than in the Chinook or Puma?
It can also be argued that either the Puma or the Chinook are safer under fire, but I will not go into such details here for obvious reasons.
Are you seriously suggesting that Puma's serviceability record in the Middle East makes it better suited to form part of a two-type JHC force than Merlin?
I would, however, argue that the Puma (come Cougar/Super Puma) is a better compliment to a Chinook in a two-type JHC fleet, and I have made that argument a few pages back in the thread.
You're mad!
Thread Starter
I'm not, you know. Especially not when I've been rendered incoherent by entirely admirable but over-stated enthusiasm for someone's own type.
Puma is dying on its ar.se. Short of going out and buying loads more (and upgrading them at massive cost) they are on their way out. Good aircraft (especially in more temperate climes) but yesterday's aeroplane, too small for many tasks, too noisy and increasingly costly to support. And before you start on EC725s or AS332s or whatever - that would be a new aircraft, requiring a new logistics chain, albeit with some useful commonality for training, etc. And it would provide no UK jobs, and no UK tax revenue, and it would cut the ground from under what has already been a sucessful export programme.
A logistics chain is already in place for Merlin (the grey ones, remember) and the aircraft has proved its capabilities and (where it counts, in theatre) its availability. The figures have been distorted by the MoD's incomprehensible attitude to spares (as being optional) and by the tail rotor and other fixes to inevitable teething troubles. But look at serviceability and availability in theatre.
Of course Merlin is a bit big to be ideal for some tasks, but it represents a more capable and more useful asset than would a Cougar or an NH90.
Puma is dying on its ar.se. Short of going out and buying loads more (and upgrading them at massive cost) they are on their way out. Good aircraft (especially in more temperate climes) but yesterday's aeroplane, too small for many tasks, too noisy and increasingly costly to support. And before you start on EC725s or AS332s or whatever - that would be a new aircraft, requiring a new logistics chain, albeit with some useful commonality for training, etc. And it would provide no UK jobs, and no UK tax revenue, and it would cut the ground from under what has already been a sucessful export programme.
A logistics chain is already in place for Merlin (the grey ones, remember) and the aircraft has proved its capabilities and (where it counts, in theatre) its availability. The figures have been distorted by the MoD's incomprehensible attitude to spares (as being optional) and by the tail rotor and other fixes to inevitable teething troubles. But look at serviceability and availability in theatre.
Of course Merlin is a bit big to be ideal for some tasks, but it represents a more capable and more useful asset than would a Cougar or an NH90.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nigit
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really believe we needed more Merlins. What we really needed was more spares for the Merlins we already have. Without the correct spares package in place, the new Merlins will just join the rest in the shed being cannibalised to keep the few flying.
What is actually a pretty capable airframe has been blighted by 2 things. Firstly, and most significantly IMHO, is the inexcusable approach to spares procurement we see before us. Secondly is the interminable time it is taking to getting the MAR and full RTS from QinetiQ. If Westlands say it's good for X, surely it's good for X? In the litigation crazy world of today surely WH would be commiting commercial suicide to not produce the goods? Or am I being naive? And why couldn't QinetiQ have been more involved in the development in the first place, thus reducing the timeframes to MAR.
The upgrade of the Puma to HC2 standard will give it a new lease of life and provide a pretty capable bit of kit. We still need a frame of Puma size and the HC2 seems a pretty good compromise.
The Merlin has it's niche but isn't really as capable as the hype often suggests, and having seen it in action first hand on ops, it will struggle a reasonable amount if deployed in the Stan. It is, on the other hand, smooth, fast and quiet - considerably quieter than the Chinook (sorry wokkameister
). So ideally suited for certain missions.
The Chinook is still our most capable type. Not the answer to all things, but to most. The fact that it's almost impossible to get onto the production line is testimony to that.
What we have is a fleet of oranges, apples and kiwifruit, and it's pointless comparing them. What we undeniably need, however, is a suitable support chain for what we already have.
What is actually a pretty capable airframe has been blighted by 2 things. Firstly, and most significantly IMHO, is the inexcusable approach to spares procurement we see before us. Secondly is the interminable time it is taking to getting the MAR and full RTS from QinetiQ. If Westlands say it's good for X, surely it's good for X? In the litigation crazy world of today surely WH would be commiting commercial suicide to not produce the goods? Or am I being naive? And why couldn't QinetiQ have been more involved in the development in the first place, thus reducing the timeframes to MAR.
The upgrade of the Puma to HC2 standard will give it a new lease of life and provide a pretty capable bit of kit. We still need a frame of Puma size and the HC2 seems a pretty good compromise.
The Merlin has it's niche but isn't really as capable as the hype often suggests, and having seen it in action first hand on ops, it will struggle a reasonable amount if deployed in the Stan. It is, on the other hand, smooth, fast and quiet - considerably quieter than the Chinook (sorry wokkameister
). So ideally suited for certain missions.The Chinook is still our most capable type. Not the answer to all things, but to most. The fact that it's almost impossible to get onto the production line is testimony to that.
What we have is a fleet of oranges, apples and kiwifruit, and it's pointless comparing them. What we undeniably need, however, is a suitable support chain for what we already have.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The logistics chains for the two Merlin types are far from common, so while there is one in place for the grey Merlin, another is in place for the green one. Upgraded Puma/Cougar/Super Puma would simply replace the Puma supply chain after a period of overlap, and minimal training for 2 squadrons of crews would be required.
I agree that the figures for serviceability are distorted by the poor supply chain, but provision of spares is all a part of provision of an aircraft. No spares = no aircraft = poor serviceability rate. The utopia of a supply chain with surplus will never happen, so that must be taken into account when looking at serviceability rates. To the man on the ground, the "why" of there being no aircraft to support him is irrelevant, merely the fact that there is no aircraft matters, which is why I discount any argument about jobs, tax revenue and export programmes.
An aircraft is only as useful as how well it carries out the role it is designed for. The F3, for example, is an utterly utterly useless ( 
) fighter but a very useful interceptor. Similarly, the niche role the Puma has found itself (excelling?) in is not a role the Merlin could carry out at all well, and neither can the Chinook (nor the SK4 quite as well).
Yes, the Merlin is good at lifting stuff from a decent-size LS and moving it to a decent-size LS, but then so is the Chinook, and both are better than the Puma at that. Of the three, in terms of pure lift capability, I pick the Chinook. The conclusion is that a Chinook/Puma mix is the most efficient.
I agree that the figures for serviceability are distorted by the poor supply chain, but provision of spares is all a part of provision of an aircraft. No spares = no aircraft = poor serviceability rate. The utopia of a supply chain with surplus will never happen, so that must be taken into account when looking at serviceability rates. To the man on the ground, the "why" of there being no aircraft to support him is irrelevant, merely the fact that there is no aircraft matters, which is why I discount any argument about jobs, tax revenue and export programmes.
Of course Merlin is a bit big to be ideal for some tasks, but it represents a more capable and more useful asset than would a Cougar or an NH90.
) fighter but a very useful interceptor. Similarly, the niche role the Puma has found itself (excelling?) in is not a role the Merlin could carry out at all well, and neither can the Chinook (nor the SK4 quite as well).Yes, the Merlin is good at lifting stuff from a decent-size LS and moving it to a decent-size LS, but then so is the Chinook, and both are better than the Puma at that. Of the three, in terms of pure lift capability, I pick the Chinook. The conclusion is that a Chinook/Puma mix is the most efficient.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't uderstand why there is such a push for PumaIt is going out of service in wnat 2017/2018, whereas the Merlin Mk1 is going through a CSP at that stage and will see service until 203X A Mk3 CSP programme was always on the cards as well so thats an option still.
So far we have Chinny for HL, Merlin/Puma/SK for ML with the latter 2 going out in 2018. Depending on the outcome of the Future Medium Helicopter programme, I would reckon that Merlin is in a far stronger position in terms of coherency than Puma.
Or - Is it not acceptable to the RAF because the Fleet Air Arm fly it?
"Puma is dying on its ar.se. Short of going out and buying loads more (and upgrading them at massive cost) they are on their way out"
Damn, who told the Journo the master plan...
For heaven's sake don't tell them we're going over the top at dawn....!
I think that a Puma 2 with the new engines/avionics/extra fuel will give a Merlin a bit of a fright when it comes to disposable payload.
I remember planning a sortie for a Merlin once, about a 4 hr beano around the UK. We were taking a Chinny with one bob tank, so no snags, plus 30ish troops (TOW 18 500Kg) - so, marginal safe single with a bit of breeze. The Merlin crew crowed that they could get round the route on internal fuel........but only if they carried themselves and no pax/kit - and they were most definately not safe single! The Chinny of course, could have carried a 6000Kg underslung as well if we'd wanted to....
This is the fundemental difference between hype and capability. I don't give two hoots if a CH47 is noisier than a Merlin - in a Chinook (a FAR more survivable platform than Merlin, but we can't go into that here) I've only got to go once to put 40 troops on the ground, not twice.
The Merlin, a wizard PR machine for Westlands, a good "follow-on" aircraft in a low density altitude theatre and a gravy train for all concerned.
Damn, who told the Journo the master plan...
For heaven's sake don't tell them we're going over the top at dawn....!
I think that a Puma 2 with the new engines/avionics/extra fuel will give a Merlin a bit of a fright when it comes to disposable payload.
I remember planning a sortie for a Merlin once, about a 4 hr beano around the UK. We were taking a Chinny with one bob tank, so no snags, plus 30ish troops (TOW 18 500Kg) - so, marginal safe single with a bit of breeze. The Merlin crew crowed that they could get round the route on internal fuel........but only if they carried themselves and no pax/kit - and they were most definately not safe single! The Chinny of course, could have carried a 6000Kg underslung as well if we'd wanted to....
This is the fundemental difference between hype and capability. I don't give two hoots if a CH47 is noisier than a Merlin - in a Chinook (a FAR more survivable platform than Merlin, but we can't go into that here) I've only got to go once to put 40 troops on the ground, not twice.The Merlin, a wizard PR machine for Westlands, a good "follow-on" aircraft in a low density altitude theatre and a gravy train for all concerned.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But, you forget the most important thing about Merlin is that it looks FAR sexier than a Puma, which looks like something my kid would draw if given a few crayons.
You comments re: survivability and not for here, ok - that's fine but some of this is public knowledge - like the curent DAS fit on both. To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
.You comments re: survivability and not for here, ok - that's fine but some of this is public knowledge - like the curent DAS fit on both. To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You comments re: survivability and not for here, ok - that's fine but some of this is public knowledge - like the curent DAS fit on both. To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't everyone have some relevant points amidst the white noise that seems to be spouted here?
Chinook - noisy heavy lifter with some (very) opinionated crews. Good at high DA, quite fast and quite serviceable - also well funded by JHC.
Puma - old, tired, capable in role and operated with some humility by its crews.
Merlin Mk3 (not the RN one) - capable and nowhere near tasked to its full potential, quiet, fuel effcient and its crews would like to do more than 'bus runs'. Could do with some more money.
SK4 - tired and getting some attention.
As for the mixed fleets issues, why do we operate Lynx LUH as well?? We have a long history of proactive groundings, so perhaps a mixed fleet is a blessing given our small fleet sizes since there is an element of being able to soak up short-term pain...
This won't change anything and Wokkameister will tell you Chinook is best, but all types have their niche.
Chinook - noisy heavy lifter with some (very) opinionated crews. Good at high DA, quite fast and quite serviceable - also well funded by JHC.
Puma - old, tired, capable in role and operated with some humility by its crews.
Merlin Mk3 (not the RN one) - capable and nowhere near tasked to its full potential, quiet, fuel effcient and its crews would like to do more than 'bus runs'. Could do with some more money.
SK4 - tired and getting some attention.
As for the mixed fleets issues, why do we operate Lynx LUH as well?? We have a long history of proactive groundings, so perhaps a mixed fleet is a blessing given our small fleet sizes since there is an element of being able to soak up short-term pain...
This won't change anything and Wokkameister will tell you Chinook is best, but all types have their niche.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
Merlin Mk3 (not the RN one).....Could do with some more money
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
In a word, no.
To my mind, the Mk3 has the more up to date, and more capable package doesn't it?
In a word, no.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Compstall.
Nice to see you adding your opinion and defending the Merlin. To be honest, I wouldnt have much respect for you if you didn't. However I do respect both you and your opinion as you talk from a viewpoint of experience.
Likewise I have offered my own viewpoint based on my own quite considerable experience of the Chinook. What greatly grips my proverbials, is that Jacko, having started this thread under the auspices of canvassing opinion, refuses to accept any point of view as valid unless it supports the Merlin as the be all and end all.
If the Merlin was the answer to modern civilisations problems.....why ask the bloody question?
I have added my opinion to the list, and it seems everyone is in no doubt what it is. I will not be adding to this thread, and I will bid you farewell.
Fly Safe, Report Facts.
WM
Nice to see you adding your opinion and defending the Merlin. To be honest, I wouldnt have much respect for you if you didn't. However I do respect both you and your opinion as you talk from a viewpoint of experience.
Likewise I have offered my own viewpoint based on my own quite considerable experience of the Chinook. What greatly grips my proverbials, is that Jacko, having started this thread under the auspices of canvassing opinion, refuses to accept any point of view as valid unless it supports the Merlin as the be all and end all.
If the Merlin was the answer to modern civilisations problems.....why ask the bloody question?
I have added my opinion to the list, and it seems everyone is in no doubt what it is. I will not be adding to this thread, and I will bid you farewell.
Fly Safe, Report Facts.
WM
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,133
Received 28 Likes
on
17 Posts
As a neutral (bluntie) I must say I'd take the experience of someone who actually operates SH types over that of an opinionated hack everytime. Janes Defence can only tell you so much about helicopters and no matter how well-respected a reporter may think they are they still won't get the whole truth from those really in the know.
My 2 pence worth is give us more Chinooks, just as long as they can be made quieter. Our little building towards the end of the Odious active doesn't have very good sound-proofing and sometimes it can be difficult to hear Terry Wogan in the morning.
My 2 pence worth is give us more Chinooks, just as long as they can be made quieter. Our little building towards the end of the Odious active doesn't have very good sound-proofing and sometimes it can be difficult to hear Terry Wogan in the morning.
Thread Starter
Would you indeed, you shiny a***ed blunt b@stard? (If you can resort to witless and low abuse about journos then I can be just as rude about your... 'profession', I guess?)
That's why you listen to Wokka while dismissing Compressorstall and Wizard?
Any impartial and air-minded observer (especially a current pilot) will listen to all aircrew from all of the types under discussion, and to the users, and will then form a balanced judgement, and not just listen to the loudest voices who happen to post on PPRuNe.
There's only one RAF Merlin squadron, and I'm not surprised that those not lucky enough to be posted at have a bit of a chip on their shoulders.....
Wokkameister,
While I appreciate the "no stick, no vote" argument, I'm as entitled to an opinion as anyone else, and I voice mine having flown in and flown all three of the primary types now being discussed, and having had enough exposure to aircrew from all three to have heard the boasts, the real arguments and a good deal of the stuff that I would never, ever print.
That's why you listen to Wokka while dismissing Compressorstall and Wizard?
Any impartial and air-minded observer (especially a current pilot) will listen to all aircrew from all of the types under discussion, and to the users, and will then form a balanced judgement, and not just listen to the loudest voices who happen to post on PPRuNe.
There's only one RAF Merlin squadron, and I'm not surprised that those not lucky enough to be posted at have a bit of a chip on their shoulders.....
Wokkameister,
While I appreciate the "no stick, no vote" argument, I'm as entitled to an opinion as anyone else, and I voice mine having flown in and flown all three of the primary types now being discussed, and having had enough exposure to aircrew from all three to have heard the boasts, the real arguments and a good deal of the stuff that I would never, ever print.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,133
Received 28 Likes
on
17 Posts
Actually 'Jackonicko' (once again) you've completely missed the point so I will use smaller words just so you understand.
I will listen to any aircrew with experience on SH with regards to all SH over a reporter everytime. No matter how 'in the loop' you think you are most of what you constantly witter on about still appears to be just PR bumpf, guarded comments by individuals or recycled material from internet forums (in my ever-so-humble bluntie opinion of course).
During my years on TSW I worked with all manner of helicopter crews from all the branches of the Armed Forces and I've yet to meet one who isn't bloody good at what he or she does. Even when operating old, out-dated a/c (such as the Wessex crews of 72) they push their machines to the limit of what they can do and in doing so gain knowledge that you will never see on some glossy handed out to you at Farnbrough. These are the people I listen to and I respect their views.
Of course crews and support staff have pride in their aircraft fleets, often to the point that they will deride all other types but that doesn't mean that when the meat hits the metal they don't appreciate the support of other a/c types. We in the Armed Forces are consummate professionals and what many in the civil world fail to understand is the difference between bravado and honest beliefs.
I have the pleasure to work at Odious and even though morale is pretty much nil stock at the mo many of us will still take digs at the role of RAF Benson and their fleets because they are the other RAF unit within JHC. Not because 'we' honestly believe what is being said but because, like the Army has inter-regimental rivalry we in the RAF have inter-station and inter-aircraft type rivalries.
The service people who use this forum have (I believe) the experience to know what being said is barbed and what is just bravado whereas I believe you are wanting of this ability. Perhaps if BAe produced a pamphlet with the basic outlines of what bravado is you'd understand but then again a BAe version would be completely different to the RAF version and 12 years late.
I will listen to any aircrew with experience on SH with regards to all SH over a reporter everytime. No matter how 'in the loop' you think you are most of what you constantly witter on about still appears to be just PR bumpf, guarded comments by individuals or recycled material from internet forums (in my ever-so-humble bluntie opinion of course).
During my years on TSW I worked with all manner of helicopter crews from all the branches of the Armed Forces and I've yet to meet one who isn't bloody good at what he or she does. Even when operating old, out-dated a/c (such as the Wessex crews of 72) they push their machines to the limit of what they can do and in doing so gain knowledge that you will never see on some glossy handed out to you at Farnbrough. These are the people I listen to and I respect their views.
Of course crews and support staff have pride in their aircraft fleets, often to the point that they will deride all other types but that doesn't mean that when the meat hits the metal they don't appreciate the support of other a/c types. We in the Armed Forces are consummate professionals and what many in the civil world fail to understand is the difference between bravado and honest beliefs.
I have the pleasure to work at Odious and even though morale is pretty much nil stock at the mo many of us will still take digs at the role of RAF Benson and their fleets because they are the other RAF unit within JHC. Not because 'we' honestly believe what is being said but because, like the Army has inter-regimental rivalry we in the RAF have inter-station and inter-aircraft type rivalries.
The service people who use this forum have (I believe) the experience to know what being said is barbed and what is just bravado whereas I believe you are wanting of this ability. Perhaps if BAe produced a pamphlet with the basic outlines of what bravado is you'd understand but then again a BAe version would be completely different to the RAF version and 12 years late.
Last edited by The Helpful Stacker; 12th Jun 2007 at 18:27.