THE MOD has announced the contract to re-engine the remainder of the Army Air Corps (AAC) Lynx Mk 9 helicopters, to bring them up to Mk 9A standard.
The contract, worth £41.8milllion, has been awarded to AgustaWestland and will see the final 10 airframes upgraded. These are in addition to the previous 12 which began conversion at the end of last year. The out of service date for the Mk 9A has also been extended to 2016. The Minister for Defence Equipment and support, Quentin Davies said:
“This improved version of the very successful Lynx helicopter will greatly benefit our troops in Afghanistan when it deploys there for the first time next month. The enhancements will allow it to perform in the extremes of climate and geography that characterise that theatre of operations.”
Quentin Davies was right when he said it will greatly benefit our troops as operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq were severely limited by Lynx’s inability to operate in hot and high conditions, especially during the summer months. At times the troop carrying capability has been reduced to one, which makes something of a lonely patrol.
Quentin Davies was not so correct however in calling the Lynx successful.
The naval version may have sold a respectable number, but the only service to actually use the ‘battlefield’ version is the British Army. All the other Lynx operators stick to using it where it belongs, in the naval role. One also wonders if Quentin Wilson is also aware that the Lynx was known to be underpowered when it took part in the first Gulf War back in 1991?
A point which has been raised many times on this blog.
It should be noted that the Mk 9 is not the only Lynx version operating in Afghanistan. The Mk 7 (skid version), also has a presence in theatre. The question that needs to be raised is will any of the Mk 7’s be re-engined to Mk 7A standard? Or will they be left to struggle in the heat of the Afghan summer?
Given that the fact that the Lynx’s replacement, the Wildcat, is not due to enter service until 2014, this means the AAC will have to soldier on with the underpowered Mk 7 for another four years, possibly longer. At around £4.2million conversion cost per aircraft would the modification of a small number be acceptable if it means such a quantum leap in capability?
The main rotor gearboxes and LHTEC CTS800 engines of any converted aircraft could be re-used on the Lynx Wildcat.
Readers may be aware that the Lynx Mk 7 has been in service for quite a while, since 1988 in fact, and many of these were upgraded from the original Mark 1’s which entered service in 1978.
The advantage offered by a re-engined Mark 7 is that they are lighter than the Mk 9’s due to their simple skids instead of a heavier set of wheels and associated oleos. This would give them an improved hot and high capability over the Mk 9.
Although the Lynx is not a true battlefield helicopter and has its limitations, this additional capability should be a welcome improvement in a very difficult environment.
Digg it!
Add to Delicious!
Share on Facebook!
Share on Reddit!
Stumble it
Add to Technorati
38 Comments
Westland first suggested re-engining the Lynx in 1991; they even flew a demonstrator. We are so far behind at this point, you have to wonder why we don’t just buy some UH60′s rather than wasting yet more money on upgrading ancient platforms like the Lynx (or the Warrior, come to that)
We’re going to get the Wildcat whether we like it or not, a decision which I believe has more to do with politics and keeping AgustaWestlands with a full order book than anything else. Unfortunately the AAC will have to wait a few years before it arrives, by upgrading the existing Lynx at least our forces will get a really useful, albeit expensive, aircraft in the mean time rather than the under-powered, semi-useful/seasonal one they’ve got now.
It’s not an ideal solution I know, but in the circumstances it will improve our helicopter capability in Afghanistan.
Also, it’s not just ancient Lynx being upgraded, don’t forget the Puma’s forthcoming £300million upgrade. The Blackhawk itself is no springchicken, it entered service in 1979, but unlike the Lynx they’re plentiful and quite cheap in comparison. Personally, I’d keep the Lynx Mk 7 & 9 in service until the AW149 becomes available.
very good points richard, it also gives us a ecent medevac platform out there, it’s just not feasible to use chinooks all the time, it takes it away from troop carrying/resupply and the downwash often causes problems, i really think we should bin the puma upgrades it’s an old airframe, it’s like putting a new engine and dashboard into a ford capri! At the end of the day it’s still a capri.
With reference to the uh60 you’d have the same problem we (yes i was there) had with apache it’s all AF not metric so it’s paineven now the apache techs have to carry AF tools as parts of the apache are AF while the rols royce engines are metric, pain in the ar*e!! however i do agree with the AW149 if turkey doesn’t buy it then back to the politics decision you made i think it will come in, reading forums on other sites it would be better than NH90 (weak floors, no ground clarance).
On a plus note regarding politics good to see the yeovil MP putting ainsworth on the back foot in the commons regarding ignoring AW’s license to build chinooks and going to boeing who put the order on a waiting list, well done MOD!!!
Paul G
There was an article, either here, or on Micheal Yon, showing Chinook Medical Evacuations.
Anything smaller, men would die.
Its that simple.
If you just want to pick up a corpse or a sprained ankle, a lynx is fine, if you need to perform surgery in flight, well, we could use a wider Chinook to be honest.
agreed dominic, however every situation is different and we relying on the US UH60 for many medevacs, it would be far from perfectbut as mentioned if we can more lynx out there then they will be available for the sprained ankle or something inbetween that and operating so we kindof agree (sort of, no need for pistols at dawn)!!! with ref to wider chinooks if you look at the cabin layout on the AW149 it is bang on for the job, lots of countries who have been complaining about the NH90 are now having the doors refitted as the forward sliding doesn’t do it in the field.
So to summerise probably didn’t get my point across well there more lynx out there will be a good thing to aid the chinooks (even if only air cover whilst carrying med duties and bin the puma upgrades and look at home built AW149′s
ps whilst i was still in green went to a westland presentation on wildcat and the westlands bloke got sevre flak as it was only going to be able to carry 6 troops, as cabin size would be smaller (think that has been addressed need to check). during our slating he assured us it was still possible to have 2 stretchers a med team and a gunner in there, qoute back from the warrant officer on my right was “my arse you fool” summed it nicely i thought!
note to self : read before submitting and clean this flippin’ keyboard!!!
“and clean this flippin’ keyboard!!!”
I just buy a knew one every 6-12 months for a couple of quid.
Have a nice wireless laser mouse, but never saw the point of expensive keyboards.
PaulG said: “On a plus note regarding politics good to see the yeovil MP putting ainsworth on the back foot in the commons regarding ignoring AW’s license to build chinooks and going to boeing who put the order on a waiting list, well done MOD!!!”
Well call me a conspiracy theorist, but if you have to put your orders on a Boeing waiting list, it means:
a) you don’t have to pay for them now
b) you can still cancel them before the build starts
c) your passing on any issues to the next government
Of course, I may be over analysing this and it really might just be due to amazing incompetence !
hey jed,
i’m sure it would be easier to deal with westland and as it would be keeping fellow brits in work i went with that remark. If the MOD had it’s head screwed on (lets all pause til the giggling stops) you could order the aircraft in blocks maybe 5 at a time or work into the deal some AW149′s with that in place we could spank the hours out of the puma airframe before retiring it (and just to put the cat amongst the pidgeons give the 149 to the AAC).
obviously if westland did a good job, then maybe more orders may follow, maybe!!!
i meant more orders from other countries! plus if the 149 was worked in to maybe to get some sort of deal on that aircraft. and before anyone slates me for removing medium lift from the RAF, i would give the RAF some wildcats to act as top cover for chinooks, i believe as battlefeld asset the 149 should be operated from the battlefield ie AAC FOB’s helmet on, preparing for incoming!!
PaulG
I agree entirely. Keep the Junglies going until the Westland built Chinooks are ready, donate the Puma’s to the other big Puma using nation in the region – Pakistan.
Purchase the Aw149 (at least 70) as a replacement for the Lynx Wildcat (give all 60 Wildcats to the RN as they are only going to have 38 Merlin HM2).
Give the Aw149 to the AAC where there would be some ‘role reversal’ – well protected radar equipped Ah67 would be the ‘armed scout’ using its radar to designate targets for AW149 launched Brimstone (in a WWIII ‘German plains’ type anti-armour scenario). Meanwhile in AF AW149 could be used as ‘gunship’ with 70mm rockets and side door MG’s – as transport in place of Lynx AH9 and to supplement Chinook in MedEvac.
There you go, I solved all our problems…. ;-)
what no wildcats to taxi army 4 stars around!!! and while being catty let’s not replaced the red freds aircraft that they pranged, save some more money!!!!
Jed, you make a couple of good points, give the Puma’s to the Pakistan AF, like it, I’m all for international relations, give the Wildcats to the RN, agree entirely, they could do with a few more.
AW149′s with Brimstone? Don’t like the sound of that, horses for courses. Leave the heavy stuff to the Apaches and let the AW149′s just have doorgunners with 7.62 gpmg’s or 0.5′s tops. We had all this when someone decided to bolt TOW onto the side of the Lynx because it was cheaper than buying or deveoping a dedicated gunship. If it wasn’t designed for the job in hand, trying to make it something else will cause nothing but problems.
The fatigue life of the Lynx was 7000 hours or 250 TOW missiles, Hellfire/Brimstone being a lot bigger and more powerful would put the airframe under greater stress and reduce the fatigue life. Plus all the extra LRU’s and weapons pylons etc would increase the aircraft weight and reduce the usable load accordingly.
If we need a gunship that can carry bods we should buy a few Mi-25′s and hand them over to Afghan’s as we leave.
For anyone who knows how a Lynx goes together and wants to see how the Wildcat is constructed I found this on Youtube. Unfortunately it’s presented by spotty teens for spotty teens, but it gives a very good insight on how the things put together, if you pause it at the right moments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqfpk-vHl-g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFPbAreay2U&NR=1
Richard – your missing my sarcasm ref Red hordes pouring across the inner German border necessitating Brimstone armed AW149′s…. I think….. !
Seriously though, AW149 is designed from beginning to carry armaments, and that was my other point about AH67 being the well protected ‘armed scout’ with its radar and armour etc passing back firing co-ords to less well armoured ‘missile carriers’. This is the ‘role reversal’ compared to Lynx Wildcat being the lighly armed (not well armoured) scout for the main force of Apaches.
So to buy the AwW149 you have to show that it fits as a Wildcat replacement as well as a Lynx AH9A ‘Light Battlefield Utility’ cab, and so should go to AAC not RAF (as a medium transport).
Besides flexibility is good, you don’t know what the next fight will bring, and the ability to hang Brimstone, LMM and laser guided 70mm rockets on your AW149 might well be needed in the next scenario we find ourselves in :-)
Sorry Jed, I missed it…it was late…I was tired, armed AW149…hmm (Richard thinks)didn’t they trial a Blackhawk in a similar way? Or was that the other way around? I’ll have to have a dig around on that one.
I could see the laser guided rockets working, I remember reading about a rocket armed Gazelle using a small island as target practice en-route to the Falklands and missing!
Jed good ideas especially the possibility of gifting the Puma’s to Pakistan as which could be spun quite well by the Government of the day if new AW-149’s were bought for the Army. For some reason I’ve always had this barmy idea in my head that the RAF should not really operate helicopters the Army should. I know its shocking isn’t it the Army fly the helicopters that are used to move them around and support them it would make the RAF look a bit bad however operating only fixed wing aircraft. Also in regards to the Chinook fiasco then I totally agree it’s easily exposed as a dodgy situation especially since they are only ‘supposed’ to appear as most people will be starting to leave Afghanistan.
Jed, the Blackhawk I was thinking of was one with 16 Hellfires mounted on ESSS pylons, although I’m sure it acted as a drone and couldn’t self designate. I wasn’t sure if you meant your missile carriers idea were drones or self designators.
As a comparison the MH-60L ‘Gunhawk(?)’ carries cannons and Hellfires on the ESSS and can self designate. This can undoubtedly work in conjunction with the Apache, so it does prove that a heavily armed, medium troop carrying helicopter does work. As the weapons are mounted on ESSS the AW149 could use them as role kit, but I feel this may tread on the toes of the Apache. Good idea though, especially in a COIN environment.
Guys your missing my point a little on the AW149 being armed. Yes its similar to ‘BattleHawk’ concept. As proposed to Turkish Army AW149 has external weapons mounts and nose mounted EO/IR turret and thus it is what you describe as a “self designator” – so the AW149 is a truly multi-role battlefield helicopter.
My thinking on using it as an ‘armed’ helicopter is to “sell” it to the MoD. If the current army CONOPS is a “scout-gunship (Missile carrier)” team, with Wildcat as scout and Apache as gunship, then we re-cast that with Apache as Scout (for which it is much better equipped than Wildcat – IDASS, ballistic protection etc) and AW149 as ‘gunship’ because it CAN if operations really need it, carry Brimstone, LMM, rockets etc.
That is not to say the army would want to use it in this way. Instead it may normally use it as a well equipped battlefield taxi capable of carrying a full squad of 8 men with full weight of kit, and two door gunners with .50 cal. and due to the EO/IR turret in the nose, fully capable of night ops without relying on NVG’s.
Cast in this way, perhaps we could get 70 and send all the Wildcat’s to the FAA :-)
Cool, gets my vote.
not forgetting jed that as it has winch capabilitally (damn that word) it has a minefield/jungle/sea medevac role as well, the cabin is wide enough (see AW139 photos on AW site) and it will be bigger/deeper than 139.
as as subnote as all the apaches are longbow they can target and send info to gunnery systems in the 149, who are out of the way of nasties!!
also i believe the US has restarted the “smart” 70mm rocket system bit like other smartening of dumb weapons really cheap gps system.
Also agree on heavy lift ie transport with RAF everything else with rotors (on land) with the AAC as battlefield assets.
PaulG says “as as subnote as all the apaches are longbow they can target and send info to gunnery systems in the 149, who are out of the way of nasties!!”
Exactly !
I certainly agree that the Army should fly as many helicopters as possible. At one point, when we considered buying many more Apaches than we have now, there was talk of Cavalry regiments becoming helicopter regiments instead of tank regiments.
The Chinook is excellent, the Apache is excellent, but the Lynx is rubbish – not least because the design is ancient now. From working with the Americans in Central America, I can say from my own experience that the Blackhawk is a truly excellent helicopter. Why on earth did we not acquire the rights for Westland to build it under license?
Hi Nicholas, welcome to Think Defence
Westland’s did have a licence to build the Blackhawk would you believe!
politics, remember heseltine!
the sticking points (at the time) american aircraft are put together using AF not metric, even now the apache maintainence crews have to carry 2 sets of tools and also the engine problem, not been RR was a big political whoo ha.
Yes the british apache has better engines note we are flying with longbow in the sandy place americans aren’t but thanks to having to fit metric engines to AF frames and getting type certification put another 7+ years on it’s entry to service, note the talk about the americans would convert to RR engines to justify the delay, has strangely melted away. there would be no sense in buying blackhawk now as the AW149 has started flying trials and therefore would enter service quicker with common parts to “wildcat”
we would’ve had more apaches if we had bought a mix of longbows and (AH-D) and non longbow (AH-A) as advised by the american apache users!
another point for jed the block 3 upgrade allows the apache co-pilot to control a UAV (firescout in the demo) from the cab and that can also supply targetry info to the aircraft. there is a video on this on you tube with the ex navy seal mac on future weapons (hope is regarded in the same vein as Mr page on here).
meant to say hope the future weapons guy isnt compared with Mr page!!
“there would be no sense in buying blackhawk now as the AW149 has started flying trials and therefore would enter service quicker with common parts to “wildcat””
Paul G, apart from a few nuts and bolts and several avionic items, nothing on the AW149 is interchangeable with the Wildcat. The engines, transmission, main rotor head, blades are all completely different.
With regards to putting the RTM 322 in the Apache, it reminds me of the time they put Rolls Royce Speys in the UK Phantom. As a result a UK Phantom cost four times as much compared to an American J79 powered one.
i stand corrected, in my defence i was going off info given by someone on the inside working with the team, i thought he said the whole cockpit was common knew about the engines, as a sidenote (i’m good at them) the FLIR is top mounted and therefore cannot look directly down ie there is a blindspot good design AW class leader!!!!
Yup and the J-79 powered Phantom was superior in many aspects as well even although the Spey’s had more power, a typically British cock up. Although in fairness I think the RAF just wanted the same aircraft as the USAF with the J-79 engine it was the RN’s needs and politicians causing the problems.
On the topic of the AW-149 I still quite like the aircraft it’s hopefully going to sell quite well as it should cost a fair bit less than the NH-90 although more than a UH-60 so fits’ in-between. It’s also not American which will suit some buyers nicely which will be worth the additional cost in their minds. One thing that I’ve noticed for a while is the variety of the Italian rotary fleet Merlin’s, NH-90’s and most likely AW-149’s as well; all of these are closely grouped in class a bit of a mixture. However I can see some of the reasons why they have the mix of aircraft still not what most nations are doing these days.
Paul G, apologies, if your contact is on the inside of the project says the whole cockpit is the same, I’d go with what he says. I was looking at the aircraft from more of a mechanical perspective, hence the ‘several avionic items’. However, having done a quick google I’m sure that the Lynx Wildcat has four 10 x 8 displays, whereas the AW149 has four 6 x 8, sounds pickey I know.
Mind you, these are just the display panels and not the whole system and these are just the flying prototypes. The actual production aircraft will probably have a higher degree of commonality. It would make more sense.
yep just checke on the AW site doesn’t surprise me, they can charge more different systems so not that surprised!!! I think it’s the actual bus systems, the 4-axis hover system and the FLIR.
The dimensions of the passenger section are pretty pants 1.78m wide by 1.37m which then narrows to 1.4m wide by 0.68m that’s the cat getting a headache, when you start swinging!!
Paul G, “FLIR is top mounted and therefore cannot look directly down ie there is a blindspot good design AW class leader”
Good point, why does the RN get to have the design lead in the commonality stakes? Underslung would be better as the above picture of the Lynx Mk 7 shows the FLIR ball attached to the port hardpoint to give improved downward vision. Mounted on top of the nose is great when you’re in the middle of the ocean with a clear view of the horizon, not so when looking down on a couple of insurgents from on high.
The space in the back is atrocious and has been an on-going debate since it came into service. You’d never believe that the Lynx was meant to be an updated Huey! Huey cabin volume would definitely give you a headache free cat!
Richard said: “Mounted on top of the nose is great when you’re in the middle of the ocean with a clear view of the horizon, not so when looking down on a couple of insurgents from on high.”
Yes, but unfortunately that is not what the Wildcat was designed for. It’s designed to scout for targets for the Apache and other weapons systems in ‘conventional battle’ scenarios – it was not designed specifically for Afghanistan type COIN scenarios. However, in reality I doubt its that much of a problem as the aircraft will always be looking at a ‘slant’ angle, not straight down, but your right in that it still reduces the field of view somewhat.
“The space in the back is atrocious and has been an on-going debate since it came into service. You’d never believe that the Lynx was meant to be an updated Huey! Huey cabin volume would definitely give you a headache free cat!”
Not really, there is not that much real estate in the back of a Huey, nor a UH60 for that matter, especially when you take up room for electronics (defensive aids suit etc) and door gunners.
Jed, its true, the cabin of the Huey isn’t Chinook-like in comparison, but there is definitely more volume than the Lynx. Cabin width on the Huey seats 4/5, whereas Lynx is 3/3 and a bit. With the Huey the space is taken up by door gunners (plural), with Lynx its door gunner (single).
I’m sure though that the single door gunner station on the Lynx is more to do with Centre of Gravity issues than actual space, I’ll have to check that one. Theoretically the Lynx could have two, they’d probably bump into each other now and again, and there’d be little room for anyone else other than the 3 guys sat in the rear seats, but it could be feasible…..theoretically.
Jed, I forgot to mention that the Lynx 3 was first proposed with a mast-mounted sight for anti-tank missions. If supporting Apache’s is a primary mission requirement, hiding behind and peeking over cover would be better than sitting in full view with an nose mounted optic.
if i remember rightly from the wastelands brief the rear seats now only seat two, hence the reduction in troop carrying capacity from the mark 7/9 i’m not slagging the aircraft itself (hard to believe i know) just the role, it’s not really a battlefield cab.
It’s too big for recce and too small for troop carrying medevac, just right for a 4* taxi though!!!
PaulG said: “it’s not really a battlefield cab.”
Arrrrgh – its not supposed to be ! That was the ‘old Lynx’ – this is the Wildcat.
Its designed as an Armed Scout helicopter – a job better done by a 2 seat tandem airframe such as Apache, Mongoose, Roovivalk etc, but we had Lynx’s which we could upgrade, which SHOULD have been cheaper……
Jed said “Arrrrgh – its not supposed to be”
You’re right, the AAC got a navy helicopter instead!
double arrrgh in argggh sack tied up with arrrgh string! that was the point the AAC are getting the lions share of the wildcat, which they will have to use………..on the battlefield where it will be about as much as a handbrake on a canoe