BREAKING NEWS – you were right, more Chinooks.

From the ARES blog:

22 More Chinook – first ten delivered by 2013
SeaKing to be withdrawn early
Puma to retire in 2022 (!)

Strategy to focus on 4 aircraft types, WildCat, Apache, Merlin and Chinook.

the very long link to the blog posting is:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a364853e2-7c18-4deb-9a61-b840e239e70c&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

The proposed HH-71 did have changes to the doors I’m pretty sure that the doors slid backwards so that they did not block the weapon mounts. This required a re-design of the sponsons so existing airframes could not be fitted with the same arrangement sadly which would have been ideal. Ideally what should have happened with the Merlin fleet is what was proposed for Canada when they were interested in the helicopter. The idea was to buy a large common fleet of airframes ‘Green Airframes’ and then when funds allowed the specialist ASW equipment would be fitted. In theory it should work easily as the equipment could be fitted with the dipping sonar using the hatch normally used to sling loads via a hook. The problem I see is that any future Merlin bought will be and should be a different variant which will muddle the concept of commonality which is annoying but that’s what happens when things are not thought through. What I mean by different is that it should include the revised door layout of the HH-71 and some other design features of that aircraft so will differ from the current 2 or 3 variants.

Jed, I support the NH-90 as while it is not a better helicopter than the Merlin it is a more cost effective helicopter to maintain and operate compared to the Merlin. If I was starting from a blank page I would not choose the Merlin and would go with a large common NH-90 fleet to capitalise on economies of scale. The NH-90 would operate as the sole shipboard helicopter type as well as the sole land based medium support helicopter. The attack helicopter function would be fulfilled with the updated Apache and the heavy lift role would be fulfilled with the Chinook both of these could be afforded in larger numbers if needed. This would enable a core helicopter fleet of only 3 different airframes excluding training types which by any standards should be much cheaper to support and operate.

Jed, I was refering to the lack of the ramp on the HM1 and the fact that we didn’t buy a hybrid version so that both RAF and Navy versions did not share a common airframe. Much of the info on the HH-71 has disappeared from the web, but even if the large door was only on one side, both doors slide rearwards and thus did not block the gun positions. The DAS were located all over the airframe with sensors and dischargers mounted on the side pods and the tail rotor amongst others. The Merlin was supposed to be designed with the provision for a 20mm chin-mounted cannon.

Phil – I am not sure I understand your comments ref Merlin HC3 – they do indeed have the tail ramp !

As for HH-71, it may or may not have a different door sliding arrangement, but I believe it still only has a starboard ‘large’ door, the port door still being just the main ‘crew access’ door.

The Sar / CSAR brochure on the AW web site does not provide any details ref siting of defensive weaponry. I do have an old ‘dead-tree’ publication at home which depicts a Merlin Junglie with a Lucas chin mount for a single barrel .50 cal MG.

Mark/Admin, I was working on figures for just that scenario. The figures are based on the latest published figures from the JHC (see attached)

UK Helicopter type available in 2008-2009 (The Forward Fleet) versus Total purchased.

ROYAL NAVY
Forward Fleet (Available to JHC) Totals %age available
Merlin HM1 23 42 55%
Lynx Mk 3 21 61 67%
Lynx Mk 8 20
Sea King Mk 2/7 9 12 75%
Sea King Mk 5 11 15 73%
Sea King Mk 4 and 6c 29 42 69%
TOTAL 113 159
71%

ARMY AIR CORPS
Apache 50 50 67 75%
A109 4 4 4 100%
Gazelle 42 42 42 100%
Lynx Mk 7 and Mk 9 59 94 63%
TOTAL 155 207
75%

ROYAL AIR FORCE
Chinook 29 35 (includes 8 HC3s) 83%
Merlin Mk 3 17 28 61%
Puma 23 34 67%
Sea King Mk 3/3a (Search and Rescue) 17 25 68%
TOTAL 86 111
77%

Grand Total 354 477 74%

NB: The gazelle and Lynx mk7 figures scew the totals as neither of these are suitable for deployment to Afghanstan.

Sorry this hasn’t formated correctly. I c\n let you have the Work file if you can re-format.

Regards

Phil

Hi Mark,

Welcome to Think Defence

We covered the issue of availability here

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/07/afghanistan-and-the-case-of-the-missing-helicopters/

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/07/on-the-subject-of-helicopters/

the number of chinooks the uk has is correct only on paper ,the number of airworthy aircraft would be a much better thing to look at.it would be interesting to see out of the whole helicopter fleet how many we acctually have that work.also as to new aircraft we all know the uk always buys the wrong thing at the highest price .

Jed (re:NH90). I agree there is no point in removing the AW101/Merlin’s from the equation now. As you say their size and particular range and IFR capability makes them a superb helo. IF on the other hand we had gone the NH90 route, we could have reduced the need to two different types (Lynx and Merlin). The NH90 was designed to replace both Lynx, S61 and Puma (amongst others), so overall we could have ended up with fewer types.

My frustration is that the layout of the current Melin’s (putting the failure to have a hybrid airframe with both marinised airframe, folder tail/rotors AND a rear ramp), the layout on the HC3s is pants. There is only one main troop door (which I believe is on the starboard side slides forward and this blocks the gunner. The other side has a smaller door where the gun window is on the starboard bur the door folds to the rear. The yanks with the HH-71 suggested a much better design with 2 gun positions imediately behind the cockpit and then two verlarge doors (large enoughfor a basket/cradle thing to be loaded sideways). The doors slide rearwards and thus did not obstruct the gunners!!!

This layout seems logical to me, so why not AW and / or the RAF???

The type is also crying out for a 20+mm cannon mounted on the nose or the .50 minigun designed for the Osprey.

ref the NH90 – nothing wrong with actually, a good piece of kit in a specific weight class, my objection to it is purely a force mix one, I can’t see why anyone would want to replace an EH/AW101 with an NH90 – the higher gross weight and third engine make for a more useful helo – we have broached the subject of usable weights and payloads on this site before, and while I don’t think NH90 is too small to be useful in the medium lift role, I just prefer the AW101 as a platform.

In the Naval role there is no doubt that its an “in between” – obviously more capable than a Lynx size airframe (in any guise) but again why would you get rid of EH/AW101 maritime variants if you already had them.

So I have no political, racial, religious or other bias against the NH90, but I might be guilty of being “size-ist” ! :-)

Jed, That’s OK then. Anyway, what’s wrong with the NH90? I think its a mighty fine Helicopter. It’s a pity that we pulled out of the programme and went for the EHI01 oh sorry Typo EH101!!!!

Alas we are where we are and we’re stuck with some Merlin’s that fall short of their potential and the AW159 Wildcat. It looks like the SAR is going to be S92, so no synergy there. It should have beem the Merlin, so both the airframes and the crew could be used in an emergency. I hope that the RAP/FAA or AAC (i.e. within JHC) keep some form of military SAR. As I said the HH-71 looks to fit the bill perfectly.

Regards

Phil

Phil – I was not having a dig at anyone in particular, just poking fun, honest… :-)

And yes, could Augusta Westland numbering be any more arcane….!

Jed, I don’t know if your NH90 comment was also directed to me as (if you had bothered to read the post) actually support the Merlin. The NH90 was for the AAC, perhaps I didn’t make this clear but my thoughts were and I will clarify them here and now.

RAF Chinook (heavy lift only)

NAVY AW159 and Merlin (both HC3/3a amd HM1/2)

AAC AW159 AH9as and AH1 Apache

if the clock could be turned back and money was no object then:

RAF Chinook (possibly some Merlin’s of the HH-71 type for CSAR) but any of the services could perfom that role.

Navy AW159 Merlin HM2 and new Merlin’s (HH-71 type configuration for the Marines).

AAC EC635 NH90 (MRH90 spec) which could be used by the Navy if needed in an emergency.

I am not a fan of PPP or PFI so would have used the HC3/3a for the UK SAR with new build Merlin’s taking their place. Basically the S61/Seakings being replaced by EH101/Merlin’s which was what they were designed for.

AW159 retained in the Navy role only if we can’t get out of the contract or if we really do need something that small! The NH90 will fit on a T23 and a T45 and would make sense to standardise on one medium helicopter type. However I would agree to operate the NH90 and Merlin in essentially the same role would not make sense, so it makes sense to keep the Merlin’s for the Navy and buy more to replace the HC4.

My argument for the NH90 for the AAC or whoever is going to provide the utility / battlefield support helicopter role is that this is a tried and tested aircraft that has much in common with the Merlin (engines rear ramp basic layout etc) and this is preferably to the totally new and untested AW149!

Am I the only one that thinks they have messed up the numbering of these helicopters
the Future Lynx is smaller than the AW139 so they should have renamed it the AW139 made the 139 the 149 and made the 149 the 159 or a least called it something that signifies its smaller than both of them (i.e AW137 or AW139M or N something)

What is it with you guys and the NH90, are you all members of the fan club ? I digress….

This might work IF:

1. RAF becomes “sole type’ heavy lift force with a 70 aircraft Chinook only fleet.

2. At least some of the money assigned for FMSH program goes to refitting RAF Merlin HC3 / 3A with folding tail / rotor. According to Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_Kingdom_military_aircraft)

there are a total of 37 SeaKing HC4 (Junglie) and 7 SeaKing HAS6(CR) for a total of 42 transport helicopters in the RN’s fleet. So 28 Merlin’s is not going to be enough and at least 12 additional new Merlin’s should be purchased to replace the ‘Commando SeaKings’ in the Joint Support Helicopter Command alongside the RAF Chinooks. Advantage is in having RN / FAA as the sole Merlin operator.

3. All SAR should be passed over to civilian contractors working for the HM Coast Guard. A CSAR capability should be kept, but there should be no specific maritime or mountain search and rescue capability vested in the RAF or the RN.

4. As new Merlin’s come into the fleet ALL Seaking HC4 and HAS6(CR) should be deployed to Afghanistan and supported by a Joint Services organization – and they should be flown to death in respect of tasking hours / fatigue hours. An upgraded SeaKing can carry much less payload in theatre, with perhaps 10 to 12 infantry plus door guns etc. If not flying logistic, troop lift and medevac missions themselves, they could fly as escort to Chinooks and provide armed overwatch for patrols and convoys etc.Perhaps if we ‘donated’ the cabs to this effort, other SeaKing flying NATO nations could provide aircrew and maintainers or even just cash !

I had been just about to put my five pennyworth in to the UK Support Helicopter discussions. I would have said something along the lines of:

Given a clean sheet and a big enough budget I would have selected the following.

EC635 for the Army providing a light scout/utility / armed reconnaissance helicopter role. This would have replaced the Gazelle/Lynx and added additional capability, proving most of the capabilities of an MD300 “Little bird and an OH-58D Kiowa with a decent utility role similar to 2/3rds of an UH-1 Iroquois.

I would then have selected the NH90 in the MRH90 version as selected by Australia. These could have replaced the both the Army and Navy Lynx (or the Wildcat), plus the Puma and in fact could also have replaced the Merlin’s already in service. Having said that I am in fact a bit of a closet fan of the Merlin, with the proviso it is developed fully (along the lines of the design that was proposed for the CSAR-X i.e. the HH-71 version). This really takes the design to its ultimate capability; it protects the investment already made in the type. One could either replace all existing versions with this common standard or probably, more practically just the HC3/3a versions, the freed-up airframes being re-rolled to replace the Seakings and S61s used by the RAF/Navy and Coastguard. This would avoid leading the S92, which is really not up the SAR role and provide a high degree of commonality which will ease logistics and training, especially id the older Merlin’s a brought up to the same standard in terms of engines, avionics and rotor-blades etc.

That then leaves the attack and heavy lift types. Attack is a no-brainer. The AH64, just more of them. Some time in the future update the engine and gearbox to take the more powerful engines now available and on the drawing board, plus add DIRCM to the HIDAS suite.

The heavy lift has to be the Chinook, I believe the airframe is already marinised, so it’s just buying more of them and fitting folding rotors (4 blade version if possible).

Well the Pink elephants are not flying past my Window yet (nor expected in my life-time), so the chance of another 30 Chinooks in the current financial climate is more than I was expecting this poor excuse for a government to come up with. I had expected the Future Medium Support Helicopter project to be cancelled full-stop, with nothing to plug the gap. So 68 Chinooks (assuming they are CH47F/G types plus 30+ wildcats, plus the 22 re-engined AH9, together with upgraded Puma’s is not bad…. Really is it?

If they do transfer the 28 Merlin’s to the Navy to replace the Seaking HC4s that is certainly in terms of numbers) more than would could have hoped for within the Future Medium Support Helicopter project. I am guessing that they WILL have to provide them some form of upgrade (folding rotors and/or tails, plus other upgrades to allow them operate at sea for extended periods). So I think, on balance this is not too bad! Yes it’s wrong and we should have 80+ medium utility Helicopters and more Chinooks and something better than the AW159 Lynx wildcat, but as that is just a pipe dream, this is not too much a compromise in my view.

I didn’t expect to be saying that a few days ago….

I would expect it to be published before 10 December just so that it could be used as a point for Labour to say they are sorting it. This of course will be fantasy unless it is backed with hard cash (Which we don’t have). I suspect some lines are going to be run off by Labour members of the panel such as “we have committed to blah de blah” all of course will be complete bollocks. All I can hope for is members of the public and everyone concerned will look at the plain facts and realise the hollowness of anything published.

The idea of cancelling the Future Medium Support Helicopter is madness as we still need a medium support type. Saying they will be replaced with Chinooks might sound good but in reality it does nothing but create a capability gap in my opinion. Furthermore the Merlin HC-3 fleet if it gets handed over to the RN is not a wise idea by a long stretch because as far as I am aware they will need extensive work. Work for instance to fit folding tails and rotors as well as ideally fitting the harpoon deck lock system and anything else that would be essential. Coupled to that the fleet will be far too small to replace the Junglies and will create a shortage of airframes. In my view a better option would be to convert the HC-3 fleet to SAR duties something which should be fresh on the minds of politicians after the recent flooding. Of course additional airframes would need to be bought but 28 air frames would allow some of the oldest members of the current fleet to be retired.

The more I think about it the more I seem to think replacing all of the current Merlin fleet with the NH-90 would be an ideal solution. This of course would be suited to a mantra of spend to save as switching to a large common fleet would save quite a bit of cash over the expected airframe life. Furthermore taking such a radical step would offer commonality with EU allies for those of us with an eye towards a European military, of course those who read the comments often will know my view on the EU. Anyway that is my 2p thanks for reading.

Oh re-shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic – very apt. So as UK SOP seems to suggest a quarter of a fleet is in the maintenance pool / attrition spares we would have approx. 50 Chinook available for ops, but only if we rob the aircrew and maintainers from the Merlin fleet, ‘oy vay’ as one of my friends would say……