BFBS have run a great series of reports this week focussing on helicopters in Afghanistan.
Task Force Jaguar provides ‘combat aviation support’ for ISAF forces in Southern Afghanistan.
You can also see plenty of evidence of the RUBB Shelters I covered earlier this week
A few questions on helicopters…
Accepting the move of Merlin to CHF and all things being equal, does anyone think Merlin is a bit of an odd one out and would more Chinook have been preferable?
Does the Lynx Mk9a have a viable role after Afghanistan and the introduction of Wildcat?
How will we afford upgrading the AH64′s, what’s going to have to give?
If an Apache is 100, what number would an armed Wildcat be, or maybe an armed King Air 350?
Compare costs in the above scenario
Sol at SNAFU has been covering this series as well if you want to pop over for additional comments
Based on my limited knowledge, more Chinook would probably have been better but perhaps Merlin does something I don’t know. I used to think of Chinook being this big lumbering beast, and then I got shot at in one and have been there when the thing comes in for a casualty on the ground. It is unbelievable – I remember one coming in so fast I thought it had missed us, but its nose went down to almost vertical and it stopped, spun around like a top and threw itself down so hard the moulded ear defence in my ears blew out.
Amazing bit of kit, so versatile.
But I can’t help thinking there is something I am missing since we insist on keeping PUMA and MERLIN.
Apache is far, far better than Wildcat in every sense when it comes to attack roles. In high intensity warfare its advantages are obvious, in Afghan type scenario’s that thing is a TiC stopper of the highest order. Wildcat can have a role but it is nothing like Apache. You get what you pay for.
Presumably the upgrades to Apache are funded, it is a very important core weapon system with a role across almost the entire operational spectrum.
Nice chinook display at Riat http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/08/amazing-boeing-ch-47-chinook-v.html
If its hot and high tail rotor helicopters always suffer and is the most demanding environment for any a/c. Merlin and puma are smaller than chinook can have benefits away from afghan. If you were operating somewhere very cold long overwater transit or require a quite long range insertion I think I’d choice merlin.
Apache is one of the most capable anti tank helicopter you can buy cost us 4b to buy and it’s supposed upgrade is in the 1b region so it should be. Wildcat has a bigger role if it gets armed as the navy version is intended to have. The us scout requirement is reasonably similar to wildcat. A lot of potiental in helicopters I think.
Must say though don’t see much service rivalry out the looks like a gd team effort are the baggers still out there
Phil, IIRC, the Chinook was the fastest CH of it’s time. Not so sure now with newer ones, but I do remember that it’s faster than the Apache. That’s saying something.
As for why you keep Pumas, maybe for ziplining? Trying to zipline from a chook is.. a bit problematic, and it does need a bit of space to unload as opposed to the space needed for 4 ropes.
Not to mention that not all jobs need a heavy-medium lift, some work fine simply with a single Puma, which allows you to get more done simultanously. Not sure bout the Merlin though, never been in one.
We all know the heli strategy. It seems a logical one to me. I would have liked to have replaced the Puma but finances do not allow and they are getting upgrades.
The odd one out is surely the Army variant of the Lynx Wildcat. It doesn’t really do anything well. Industrial/political policy however dictated.
Merlin needs Vigilance and putting in place with appropriate Naval features. I wonder whether the SAR should have been Merlin though, but thats PFI.
Apache will get its upgrade, will the money extend to all of them? It makes no sense not to.
I think it is a shame we don’t have special forces spec Chinooks though, but the MOD only have themselves to blame for that – although it will be the people in the field that suffer the consequences
Apache is one of the slowest helicopters out there most things are faster than it but then its well armoured.
Merlins gear box which is its Achilles heal is thanks to the multinational nature of its design and the requirement to use the Italian designed one rather than the origional spec gearbox
Is there a point ie a date at which point we can say the time bar for the international partnership is finished and do an upgrade on the gearbox? politically this would be providing work for the UK and would be encouraged. I know that friends of mine were involved in the apache integration to the army and they said it was coperate nightmare, conditions and sub conditions, saw some of it efffecting the shopfloor, however if it was just Uk cabs (shame as i’m sure it would be bought by others) would that be a problem.
IIRC didn’t one of the first merlins down at yeovil end up on the deck with the gearbox sitting where the passengers normally sit? Not sure if that was due to the pants automatic rotor brake.
Paulg you would like to hope so. Ive not seen it put fwd as an option but maybe the maritime conversion assessment will look at it. However did we not sell westlands to the Italians. Multi national programs were there is no single overriding nation in charge should in my view be avoided.
TD
“Does the Lynx Mk9a have a viable role after Afghanistan and the introduction of Wildcat?”
I suppose one of the questions to be asked is how near are some of them to their airframe hour limit. If it is a large number, will it be considered worthwhile to keep them?
I would imagine, though, that 34 Wildcats will be not nearly enough to carry out all the roles the AAC is responsible for. They might not even be enough for reconnaissance requirements. Unless the 9As are retained, which cabs will do all the utility, liaison etc. work?
“Multi national programs……………… should in my view be avoided.”
Fixed for you there Mark.
Watching these vids makes me very concerned about the complexity of these aircraft… when they don’t really need to be complex. Systems, yes I can understand, but when the mechanics of the aircraft get too complex their availability rates drop considerably.
We will really miss Sea King / Jungly due to its relatively simple maintenance requirements. I hope we don’t make the same mistake with Wildcat over Lynx. I hope Wildcat is a well thought out mechanical design… although I doubt it.
I thought Wildcat was a 9A with a Max Headroom skin!!
“Unless the 9As are retained, which cabs will do all the utility, liaison etc. work?” – autogyros?
http://www.c-lvl.com/
TD asked: Does the Lynx Mk9a have a viable role after Afghanistan and the introduction of Wildcat?
Yes, Wildcat is supposed to be an armed scout helicopter, Lynx Mk9A is a “Light Battlefield Utility Helo” – different roles, and not enough Wildcat to do them all…..
Phil – the MoD / Army was clear on why we need Puma – Chinook is too big for some LZ’s in some other potential operating environments, e.g. urban and jungle ops; that was their official published reason d’etre for keeping a small transport helo.
The transmission in any rotor aircraft is only one “weakness”, if that’s even the right word, the AW101 does not suffer more here than any other. You don’t see Sikhorsky, Bell or Hughes complaining about licensed gearboxes manufactured at the dedicated Agusta plants.
So why does the Merlin have a more complex transmission in order to carry three engines at all? One not-often talked about advantage is countering the engine-based equivalent of the “Thundering Herd” problem.
A simplified discussion of the issue and the solution:
For efficient and reliable flight you want to divide the total required power across all power plants. In a two-engine airframe this could be split 50/50.
50% – 50%
Power can be increased above these splits in order to provide the top-end of your performance envelope, however most operations would be conducted within or close to this range.
In the event of an engine failure, the other power plant would need to spin up a further 50% to take over the burden:
100% – 0%
This means that your remaining engine has had to increase its power output by a full 100% (50% to 100% is a 100% increase over 50%) in order to take over. It also takes time to build up this power, the second engine cannot instantly deliver this increase.
In a three engine arrangement, the same principle applies:
33% – 33% – 33%
Only now in the event of an engine failure, the two remaining engines spin up and continue to divide the load between them.
50% – 50% – 0%
In this scenario each engine has only had to increase it’s output by 17% of each units available total, or an increase of around 50% of current power levels when the failure event occurred.
This provides a shorter amount of time for the remaining engines to distribute the load between them, meaning the pilot is restored to a reasonable operating power level much faster. This reduces pilot workload during the recovery period from the failure event and decreases the window of opportunity for additional human error.
The increase in workload for each engine is much reduced, decreasing the risk of a second engine failure in short order. The “Thundering Herd”.
As mentioned before, this is a simplified presentation of the issue. Practical operating procedures are environment and mission dependent. Planners need to assess the risks.
The trade-off mechanically is the increased weight and complexity of the transmission, though this is a small percentage of the overall unit. There is also an additional software control challenge, though again compared to the overall complexity of the unit this is not an overriding factor.
@TOC
I appreciate it’s only a brief overview and admit I’ve not had much to do with Merlin, but aren’t only 2 engines providing power to the rotor, the third driving the accessories g/box? So you’ve down to a 50/50 split anyway, or can the 3rd drive the rotor if req’d?
Are you thinking of the two-engine cruise mode?
@ TOC
I’m just asking about the g/box function, from my understanding of Merlin 2 provided power to the rotor, the third provided/acted as driving the sps/accessories. Is that not the case?
@Jed
Goodo. As long as there’s a reason for it. I have nothing against updating them.
I see where you’re coming from. The third never completely shuts down cold and would be available for auxiliaries, yes. Typically you cruise to your destination under two engines as the primary, then the third unit is (or can be) brought up to speed for critical operations. Hover, etc.
50% – 50% – 10%*
Would move to:
0% – 50% – 50%
Engine 2 in this contrived example would likely increase power to compensate while Engine 3 spooled up, the management system would balance the two as soon as possible.
Interesting to note the EASA Certification [1] lists two engine operation in an emergency situation, rather than cruise-mode.
[1] http://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/type-certificates/docs/rotorcraft/EASA-TCDS-R.012_Agusta_EH_101–300_and_310-02-23012012.pdf
*10% is just a guess at an idle power rate with auxiliary generation.
@ TOC
But does the third ever drive the rotor or just brought up to drive sps?
Just seen your edit.
Aye, apologies, I got Tab-happy and posted prematurely. It’s available to drive the rotor.
Just had it pointed out to me that the model updates may mean the third engine can be secured fully for a cruise, rather than left running. I’ll have to confirm that.
Opinion 3
“I think it is a shame we don’t have special forces spec Chinooks though”
The Chinook HC3′s were meant to be for special forces use… came with the fittings for inflight refueling as well. But we all know what happened between Boeing and MoD et al. Now they are part of the core fleet, no doubt sometimes used by the special duties flight for their extended range. The Special blokes prefer chinook or Puma for their activities.
I can see a recon/light transport role for the Lynx 9A in the AAC post ’15, but I think it’ll become a target for army cuts. Re wildcat, I’m more questioning why the Naval varient hasn’t any radar… sorta a step back from the HMA8+ back to the HAS3… perhaps now with ship-bourne radar so effective, the shorter ranged flynx doesn’t need it.
I think Merlin will do well in the CHF role, the CHF will just have to adapt on certain ops regarding maintenance, which they’ve always done with changing tech.
Mike, the naval Wildcat variant does have radar, am pretty sure
How much “electric” does a Merlin “need”?
The APU alone in the EH-101 [1] is parts-listed as a 56hp device [1], about 40kW. I don’t know about the main units.
[1] Sundstrand
Ah yes! The army one has the smooth underside, cheers c:
Topman – as far as I know, all 3 engines in a Merlin provide their output to the main gearbox, which in turn has a an auxiliary drive to the ancilliaries, I don’t think one particular engine is linked directly to them !
Phil
According to AFM the “new” Defence Helicopter strategy states Upgraded Puma is purely an interim solution !!
Apparently core helo fleet will have only four types:
1. Apache
2. Wildcat (Army and Naval)
3. Merlin (HM2 and HC3)
4. Chinook
Sounds like more Treasury forced cuts to me, as in Army says we need lift smaller than Chinook for Urban, RAF says “OK, upgraded Puma will do it” and Treasury says “fuck you, Commando Helicopter Force Merlins can do it”.
RN Wildcat has this under the cockpit.
http://www.selexgalileo.com/EN/Common/files/SELEX_Galileo/Products/Seaspray5000E.pdf
@Jed
In their defence I think the interim Puma extension is more about acknowledging that the existing Puma’s are reaching the end of their service life and we won’t be buying new airframes of that Type.
At no point has a decision been made to never increase the size of the other fleets in the four core Type strategy.
Pessimists may point out past history. Optimists may point out that no government has ever claimed a balanced defence budget book before.
One idea in Brown’s Future British Surface Fleet was auxiliary MCMV’s. The GRP hulls with electric motors were prepositioned near potential hotspots and containerised deisel generators, CIC units and the actual mine clearing gear would be flown out with the crew to slot together with the hull.
I can’t find a link at the mo but will keep looking…