The Lynx Mk9A has been in Afghanistan since May this year and are performing rather well.
This is a report from may this year
Commenting on the new(ish) aircraft Deputy Squadron Commander, Captain Pete Marfleet said;
“It’s fantastic to have the new Lynx MK9A with its upgraded engines as it means we can be here throughout the summer, supporingt the troops on the ground through the toughest time of the year. Success for us means we’ve got a convoy or a support helicopter in and out of a patrol base without any trouble. Just our presence in the overhead and the threat from our weapons systems means that the enemy wisely keep their heads down.”
One of the squadrons instructors said;
“This is a massively capable aircraft. The environment in Afghanistan is challenging to say the least but it copes extremely well. The manufacturers have done a fantastic job. Its capability means that we can take the fight to the enemy if required.”
Hats off to Agusta Westland then, clearly a well regarded aircraft has been substantially improved.
The upgrade of the Mk9′s means they will be in service until 2016, there are 22 upgraded airframes. The new engines are the same as those being fitted into the Lynx Wildcat.
The upgrade has cost about £4.5million per aircraft for the second batch, the first batch cost about £6.5million
This might not seem exceptional value for money but compare that to the cost of the Lynx Wildcat at £1.7billion for just over 60 aircraft.
Here is a quick idea on how we can save a lot of money.
Cancel the Lynx Wildcat and simply upgrade a few more Mk 7′s
We really have to ask ourselves if the extra capabilities offered by Wildcat are worth the money when the upgrades are doing so well. It might also be interesting to ask Agusta Westland what capabilities and performance we will in fact be losing in the upgrade as well.
For the price of a Wildcat we could perhaps squeeze 5 upgrades out of the budget.
As they say on Big Brother
Who goes, you decide!
Digg it!
Add to Delicious!
Share on Facebook!
Share on Reddit!
Stumble it
Add to Technorati
35 Comments
Yep, should have done this years ago. Cannot upgrade anymore AH9′s as all 22 have now been included in the upgrade to 9a standard. Could upgrade the AH7s. As these are fitted with skids rather than wheels it would make a version usuful alternative. As there are loads more AH7 airframes you could configure for different roles e.g. ARH (Armed Reconnaisance role), Medevac etc..
The Wildcat is an unfortunate choice, but to have introduced another type would have been very expensive. The problem was made when we went for Merlin, great though it is its too big for many things and too small for other!!!
With regard to the Merlin, had very interesting chat to one of the Merlin crew ar RIAT! The HC3a does not give them what they really wanted, it has a few Danish specific quirks that make it less than ideal, namely on the LHS of the aircraft there is no provision for a door that can be opened in flight, the Danes having gone for an “Airstair” which can only be opened on the ground. This precludes the fitting of a gun in that position.
We also spoke about the transfer of the Merlins to the RN. It seems that this is a real possibility, the blades can be made to fold relatively easily, the tail cannot, but the RN is willing to accept that. The issue is that the RN seems to be wanting its entire fleet to be standardised (HM1,HM2 HC3 and HC3a). It makes sense as the flight control software is quite a bit different and is causing issues with the RAF, but the fear is that this will delay the transfer and is impacting on the order for the extra 14 (of the proposed 24 extra Chinooks).
It seems that the RAF is willing to let the Merlin’s go if they get 70ish Chinooks!!!
NH90 sems to be havving a few problems, so maybe a good thing we didn’t buy it after all, shame as it is a good size (falling between the Lynx and the Merlin).
I think AW139 or Aw149 should have been selected instead of the Wildcat. If the AW149 could take the RTM322 that would make it even more attractive in terms of support and standardisation.
Well spotted on the 9′s Phil, wasn’t 100% sure how many there was but I thought it was more than 22. Will amend the post
Remind you why we need the WildCat – OK, well because the Army thought it needed an armed recce helicopter to work with the Longbow Apache – its as simple as that. An upgraded AH9 cant do that. An AH9 is a small battle taxi thats all, no sensors, no datalinks, no missiles.
Wildcat has EO, Radar, datalinks and weapons. Did it really need the new rear fuselage, meh, I don’t know……
Is the ‘requirement’ a cold war relic – maybe. We had Gazelle as the spotters for TOW armed Lynx AH7′s. But things have moved on, and perhaps the requirement should have been re-examined.
Personally I think 70 x AW149 in a multi-role config, that can act as battle taxi, medevac OR anti-tank missile carrier with up to 16 Brimstone would be better, with the Longbow Apache being used as the armed recce helo, datalinking its targets back to the AW149 “missile truck” – but hey, what do I know….. :-)
Good to hear that the MK9A is a success (and a cost effective one at that).
I think we should now be bold. Enough with refurbing older helicopters; it’s a short term fix but only eats into funding of future helicopter programmes in the long run and makes it more difficult for us bring ‘ruthless commnality’ to our helicopter fleets.
We need now to set out a more ambitious long term helicopter strategy.
RAF one type of Chinook, RN/RM one type of Merlin, one type of Wildcat, AAC one type of Apache, one type of AW149.
The Army did need something to FIND but that has been taken over by UAV’s now so Wildcat is a solution looking for a problem
What we actually need is something to provide tactical mobility and the myriad of ‘utility’ roles
I’ve had this one out with the ‘powers that be’, but I think the saga is ongoing and too early to write a post about it. The fundamental problem is there were only 22 Mk 9′s left, 24 were manufactured, 2 of which crashed during service. There is another Mk 9, XZ170, which was the prototype and that, I believe, is sat in a hanger at the SEAE at Arborfield unconverted.
The problem with the Mk 7 is that the skids restrict the maximum take-off weight (MTOW), which was one of the reasons they went for the tricycle undercarriage. The wheels permit a greatly improved MTOW. To upgrade a Mk 7 to what would essentially be a Mk 7A, the undercarriage would need a complete re-design, plus other parts of the fuselage are different as well, which would also need a re-design. This would take time and undoubtedly cost a packet. It would also introduce yet another aircraft into the inventory when the MOD is trying to reduce the number of different types, as this affects the supply chain.
As eight of the original Mk 9′s started life as Mk 7′s, I believe the best solution would be to convert the Mk 7 to Mk 9 and then to Mk 9A. This would of course be carried out concurrently and not consecutive. The second problem is that the Mk 7 fleet is getting old. The number of airframes remaining that have enough fatigue life remaining to make conversion financially viable must be pretty low. Although the exact number would be anybody’s guess. Given that the Mk 9A conversion contracts had ten/twelve aircraft tells me that anything less than that becomes financially difficult to justify. So, although it sounds simple, it is far from it.
As for alternatives, the Bell 212 also suffers in the heat like the Mk 7 did, and the AW149 is nowhere near ready. As alternatives go, we could:
1. Manufacture a number of brand new Mk 9A’s.
2. Convert the few remaining Mk 7′s with enough life left to Mk 9A’s.
3. Let the RN take the Wildcat, which will be an excellent naval aircraft, and handover the navy Mk 8′s to the AAC/Marines and convert them into Mk 8A’s.
Phil, I believe the RTM322 is way too powerful for the AW149. The AW149 needs around 1400 SHP and the RTM322 is over 2000.
When the upgraded Puma becomes available why not transfer to AAC control (Army Cooperation Squadrons or some such). This alongside AH9A could be the interim solution prior to an all AAC AW149 fleet in the future.
Richard Stockley made an excellent point. The naval variant will be an excellent aircraft in its role. I think it is important to mention that and make the differentiation between a relatively poor and no longer necessary battlefield helicopter and an excellent naval helicopter.
As long as you were only talking about cancelling the battlefield variant in your post i’ll happily agree with you. But I wouldn’t necessarily cancel them all, but try and convert some or all of the battlefield helos to the naval variant (shouldn’t be an issue since they haven’t been built yet). I’m sure they’d make a welcome sight aboard CVF.
Apart from that i’d like to see Mk7′s upgraded for a while until the AW149 can be finished and acquired. I’d like to see a helo that can be used a weapons platform effectively and make a half decent transport aircraft, make it as versatile as possible and it might be easier to justify the cost.
Jasons,
Good point about the Puma. I’m sure JHC wouldn’t have too many problems running a mixed bag of Mk 9A’s and upgraded Puma’s until the AW149 was ready.
As long as the AW149′s were built in the UK there shouldn’t be much of a political problem……only an inter-service one!
I wish Puma had gone and not been upgraded, it is a horrible platform. I know a couple of Puma pilots, they say the same.
But it does appear that the Puma does a lot of Special Forces work. Anyone know much about this? What might be needed as a replacement?
Richard,
The official AW149 site and others have always stated engines in the 2000 SHP class,
http://www.agustawestland.com/product/aw149
At 2000 shp this fits on to the bottom end of the RTM322 power range 2100 to 3000 (see link)
http://www.rolls-royce.com/defence/products/helicopters/rtm_322.jsp
The Turkish Utility Helicopter programme (TUHP) actually states the RTM322, see link.
http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detail.html?model=AgustaWestland_AW149
So an RTM equipped AW149 for the Army would make a lot of sense. If we could afford to replace the Lynx HM8 for the Navy that would be ideal, as it would eliminate the need for Lynx altogether. I still think we need a light scout type helo for the Army (a Gazelle replacement if you will) but to perfom the role of the Kiowa and Little birds of the Us Army. Maybe a modified Lynx could fill this role.
That would leave Chinooks for the RAF
Merlin and AW149 for the RN/RM
AW149, Apache and Another for the AAC
Three of the 4/5 all fitted with RTM322 variants. The Merlin’s should be harmonised but that is just going to be too expensive!!!
This is my pie in the sky dream fleet
CH53K for RM/Army
AW149/NH90 for Army/RN
Apache
3 types, 2 engines
I might be persuaded on a light model but I dont think they are essential if we have enough of the others
Phil, point taken on the RTM. I agree there is a need for a scout of sorts, but I feel the Lynx is still big and expensive for the job.
I believe an ideal candidate would be the UH-72A/EC645. There’s always a need for a small utility/liason helicopter.
“I might be persuaded on a light model but I dont think they are essential if we have enough of the others”
Depends what size “light” is and what you expect it to do.
From the Captains Quotes, it sounds like the Lynx is being used a convoy escort.
Now, as long as you have convoys moving through bandit country, helicopter escorts are useful.
But once the convoys are gone, so is the need, and really, Lynx is much to big for that anyway.
Do we really need anything bigger than an EC135?
Get the Royal Engineers to knock together a pintel mount for a 40mm grenade launcher or a GPMG/.50cal that can fire out of the door and there, you’ve got exactly what you need.
Cheap to operate, and if Johnny Taliban shows up, it has more than enough mobility to negate their cover and plenty of firepower to kill them.
Useless if you want to fight a proper war, more than enough if your fighting a part time goat herder.
“There’s always a need for a small utility/liason helicopter.”
I’m not sure I’d agree thweres a need, theres always demand for one, but I think theres better ways of doing what it does.
Its scouting role is better carried out by UAV.
I do really wonder what people expected the attrition rates of Wildcats to be if they were actualy expected to fly around Soviet positions looking for juicey targets.
Having a utility/liason ability is nice, if you need to transport a key assest somewhere quickly, but is it worth the cost? Are there cheaper way to do it?
Surely it would be cheaper to simply keep spare pieces of kit where they might be needed, rather than keep a fleet of helicopters around to transport these key pieces of kit.
Personel will just have to wait for a supply helicopter to have chance to take them, or drive.
If its not safe to drive, perhaps the money spent on flying taxis should be spent securing the roads instead.
admin why AW149 and NH90? they are both in the same class just one has a ramp (a very small ramp) and the 90 is getting some dog reports at the moment,apart from the floor the forward door is getting bad stick as it screws up having a door gunner, obviusly 149 isn’t in service so unfair advantage! I would stick with 149 if only to get it noticed and be cosidered by others for export get britain back on market. as for heavy lift CH53k very nice but very expensive. going off track it is worth noting the the russians have increased defence spending from 13 trillion roubles to 20 trillion and they are ordering 1000 more helos, on the last major ex they conducted the wash up pointed out the need for more and better heavy lift helos, something they are very good at building,should be interesting to see what comes out.
Paul, It was an either or thing
Dominic, the only problem I see with bolting MG’s/GL’s to a light helicopter is the aircraft’s vulnerability to small arms fire. If you use a GPMG for fire support then you’re also well in range of enemy weapons. This is probably why the AAC have fitted the 0.5 M3 in the Mk 9A rather than the GPMG, to give it a better stand-off capability.
What I’d like to see for small helos is something like the Mistral/ATAM. A light(ish) general purpose missile that gives the helicopter an ability to blat most targets, coupled with a good stand-off range to reduce its vulnerability.
“There’s always a need for a small utility/liason helicopter”
Maybe for UK exercise support, a la the US Army use of the “non-combat” UH72A.
Any helicopter for use in even a moderate threat areas needs to be able to lift usable payload PLUS:
* Radar / laser warning
* Missile Approach warners
* Chaff and Flare launchers
* Active Infra-red countermeasures
* Defensive armament (at least 12.7mm HMG)\
* Armour (for crew and preferably sensitive bits of power train etc)
* Self sealing, explosion suppressed, crash worthy fuel tanks
* Quite a few radios……..
and the list goes on.
Gazelle, or a replacement has no utility outside of the UK in peace time IMHO :-)
Tend to agree with you Jed, hence me thinking a 2 type strategy for helicopters would be the way to go
Something big that can perform heavy lift, the at sea requirement points me away from Chinook and to the CH53K
Something medium that can provide utility whilst having all the non optional extras you mentioned yet is small enough to operate from frigates, have a usable load , do casevac, carry Cerberus, be fitted with dipping sonar etc. This means to me the NH90 or AW149
Something menacing to do the pointy stuff, Apache
3 types, 2 engines
Richard, for the missile need your described the Lightweight Modular Missile would seem to be ideal or even a CRV-7 PG although that might not be the absolute best solution, cheap though!
Jed,
Just about everything you mentioned is on the OH-58D Kiowa and that is no stranger to the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it can carry Hellfires. Unfortunately any passengers would have to hang on the skids.
The UH-72 in this case could probably do with an engine and transmission upgrade to improve its hot and high performance, but it is feasible. Also, if you’re carrying a couple of missiles you can forgo the 0.50 defensive armanent to save weight…..
…..and the French used Gazelle in Afghanistan until it was replaced by the Tiger.
Hi Guys,
How does this sound for a light scout/utility helo, looks like a bloody good idea to me.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:47232937-e382-4a39-ae62-8a0574b9b27a
Will the real “Future Lynx” please stand up ?
Augusta Wesltand announce AW169 at Farnborough airshow:
http://www.agustawestland.com/news/agustawestland-unveils-aw169
Civil helo at 4.5 tonnes, 8 to 10 pax, (read that as 8 x squaddies in fighting order only)….. Looks like a slightly smaller version of AW139, but more composites (?) and to be built in UK ???
Richard – OH58D Kiowa Warrior – has older IR jammer, no DIRCM as far as I know, but point taken EXCEPT it is an armed scout, no ‘utility’ role what-so-ever, so it is in fact the same as the Lynx Wildcat (except it has mast mounted EO and no radar), with less HP and poorer hot and high performance. Earlier versions of OH58C also still in use, not sure if they have ‘utility’ role, but US Army has plenty of UH60 and UH72A for “utility” missions.
As for French Gazelles in AF – where did they fly them and what for ?
Kiowa rebuilds get a mention in this nice short article entitled “US Army eyes Joint Multirole Helo” :
http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=4713228&c=FEA&s=CVS
Just noticed this on the british army website, it quite interesting.
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.army.mod.uk/images/images-microsites/AirCorps/aac_lynx2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/aircraft/11128.aspx&usg=__QF6FRsvOeUbjD5I4i0G4jHD7fmU=&h=102&w=200&sz=8&hl=en&start=58&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=rVsj9sn-EBhWSM:&tbnh=53&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3Daw159%26start%3D42%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enGB300GB300%26ndsp%3D21%26tbs%3Disch:1
Looks like the MOD want a universal light helicopter prob so it can be surged into either theatre land or sea, whether it actually turns out that way is another matter.
prob so it can be surged into either theatre land or sea, whether it actually turns out that way is another matter.
Admin-
As much as I would like to see more numbers of less helicopters in service I’m not entirely sure CH-53K fits in there, previous models of CH-53 are well known death traps, I’d like to see how many USMC personnel are murdered through dangerous design before I advocate a UK purchase [not only because nobody wants to see anybody die but helicopter accidents are close to the top of the list of "things that make the public hate defence expenditure]
Gazelle/ARH has had a bit of a mention, there’s certainly a niche for that type of system if the UK were to move away from Lynx sized utility helicopters to AW149 equivalents as that is a bit large and cumbersome for use as an ISR/ARH asset but a whole new type for a requirement of 25-40 light helicopters isn’t quite justifiable until 2020+ [Post Afghan and in better economic climes] if ever… as much as I’ve fallen in love with AH-6S it’s hard to justify it
Richard
Do the Taliban have a moderate chance of shooting down a light helicopter if we dont give them one?
It was my understanding that our losses had been during ambushed landings, which wouldnt really be the case, we’d be flying high, althugh quite slow and level I suppose if we want a chance to hit something.
But I dont have any strong feelings against the bigger machine gun, it was just a moderate attempt at cost saving.
Stick a 20mm autocannon in ther if you want.
Mounting a rocket or missile system sounds expensive and limits us to aiming by pointing the helicopter at the target. If we can mount 4 rocket pods on a remote turret under the airframe, all the better.
Jed, the AW169 looks ok but given its size does it really offer much more than the existing Lynx or Wildcat? Ok, it’s newer with more advanced technology, but its a civillian aircraft and will need a host of mods to bring it up to mil spec. It does look a smart helo though.
Re: the OH-58D, you’re right the only thing it lacks at the moment is the utility capability, I only used it as an example that all the self-defence kit you listed could be fitted on a light helo. Although, if you took the Kiowa’s armed scout capabilities and married them to an EC645 or an MD902 Combat Explorer airframe, it would provide a useful battlefield asset. The ALQ-144 used on the Kiowa covers most of the MANPAD threats available and since the Lynx was brought down in Basra I believe it has been modified to suit. I think a DIRCM would be too large and cumbersome for a light helo and suits (IMHO) a larger aircraft.
As for the Gazelle’s, I believe they were based near Kabul. There were three of them based alongside the EC725 Caracal’s. There were plans to deploy them with HOT ATGM, but I don’t know if they did. They were recently replaced by Tigers anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/v/Lzcc9f5G_mw&hl=en&fs=1
Richard
I am not advocating for military version of AW169 for British services – I was just pointing it out, as the true ‘son of Lynx’ from the Finmeccanica stable due to its size / weight range.
French doctrine was to use 20mm cannon armed Gazelle’s as ‘escorts’ as well as scouts, however they would still be well underpowered for the hot and high theatre – just a case of the French deploying what they had at hand, just like early Lynx AH7 deployments.
I agree with the 3 types arguments, only I think we should stop faffing around and get the following:
- AH64 Apache
- UH60 Blackhawk
- CH47 Chinook
I know the Blackhawk well. It’s a superb aircraft with an excellent payload carrying capacity and good combat survivability. It replaced the venerable UH 1 and leveraged everything the Americans had learned about using helicopters in combat during the Vietnam war. Westland should have started building them under licence years ago. The Blackhawk is certainly better than any current Westland/ Agusta model in production or planned. Constant upgrades by Sikorski have dramatically improved what was always a good machine from the start. The Blackhawk can fulfil recce, liaison, casevac and troop transport roles. It is truly a multi-role workhorse. Critically, it can carry a fully equipped 10-12 man section. This has to be the minimum payload requirement for any general purpose chopper. In fact, can anyone tell me why we haven’t already bought it?
A light utility helicopter is a nice idea, but most mission requirements could be fulfilled by a Blackhawk while a smaller machine would not necessarily perform all of the Blackhawk’s roles. We know that money is an issue, so I think most people would rather have more larger helicopters.
nicholas, while i agree the blackhawk is a great aircraft (i have experience of the beast too), even if AW got the license again (it has run out) i can see a fight about engines and if not then that’s a shedload of spares and tools (AF as opposed to metric). plus i would like to see a comparison with the 149 before deciding, the 139 has a good press the 149 can carry 12 fully equipped troops, newer more efficent engines mated to glass cockpit can be weapons mounted, and above all it’s built here (and not under license) which means if successful it can be exported, which marries into the let’s kick-start the defence export market again.
Jed,
Agreed, the AW169 is what the Lynx should’ve look like the first time around.
Nicholas,
I agree that the Blackhawk is a good aircraft, although not having had your experience with it, I have to rely on reports from the media. However, I think the major advantage the Blackhawk has as a helicopter is that it is relatively cheap and there are plenty of them. For all its advantages it has the downside of a small cabin given the size of the aircraft and it lacks a tricycle undercarriage for shipborne operations, hence the Seahawk’s shorter track length. I’ve also heard reports of it having a ‘clunky’ main rotor gearbox, whatever that means.
Given this and the fact the Blackhawk entered service circa 1980, I believe the AW149 is the future.
Andy,
You’re right about the design, it is a good concept. I believe Piasecki did something similar to prototype Blackhawk a few years ago, also its very similar in layout to Sikorsky’s recent X2 prototype.
I say get it built, get it tested and get it on the battlefield. It definately looks the way to go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_X-49
Interested to get peoples thoughts on the ‘leak’ (take it with a pinch of salt) surfacing in the Guardian today regarding the Helicopter fleet
‘A secret internal Ministry of Defence memo sets out demands for £3.96bn savings across the rotary wing fleets operated by the Royal Navy, army and RAF, the London Evening Standard said.
Options outlined in the document include scrapping the £1.7bn fleet of 62 new Lynx Wildcats for the aavy and army, phasing out the navy and RAF’s Sea Kings and the “deletion” of the RAF’s Puma helicopter, the paper reported. Other scenarios could see numbers of Chinooks, Merlins or Apaches reduced.’