RAF Puma Replacement?

[SK2]

I was quite upset for the Puma replacement plans years ago, which first started with a re-engined Puma instead of purchasing new UM-60M with similar budget and possibly quicker delivery. The re-engine programme was eventually delayed and cut back with a few airframes less (sounds familiar?)

And now the same fiasco again......what can 23 airframes do?

 

[Purpletrouble]

DEFStan 00-970, MIL-STD-1390A

Source for former and what has latter got to do with this? (Repair analysis?!?)

What organisation signed its certificate..z

 

[SteveO]

AW149: Designed to Survive on the Modern Battlefield – Part 1

In the first of a two-part series analysing the AW149's survivability, we look at how the platform was designed with battlefield survivability in mind. There will be a focus on the airframe’s crashworthiness and minimised susceptibility to enemy fire, in addition to its unparalleled gearbox run...

uk.leonardo.com

AW149: Designed to Survive on the Modern Battlefield – Part 2

In the second of a two-part series analysing the survivability of Leonardo's latest-generation AW149 multi-role helicopter, we move beyond the airframe and the inner layers of the ‘Survivability Onion’. We will now focus on explaining how a reduced exhaust Infrared signature, next generation...

uk.leonardo.com

Sexy, sexiness from Leonardo. Seriously, some interesting information.

Having flown a 139 I will say that it is a fine flying helicopter. In fairness Airbus has some great platforms as well. Having done Blackhawks for some time, in a former life, I am partial to it as an assault platform, The UK has three great options to choose from.

Quotes from above articles.

From the start of its development, the AW149 was designed to meet the most exacting military crashworthiness standards set by the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) and our international military customers.…

This simulation was subsequently compared with actual observed behaviour of a crash test that witnessed a fuel cell dropped from 50 feet. In this case, it hit the ground at 56 feet per second on impact, which is 34% higher than the maximum speed required in DEFStan 00-970. The structural failure modes and deformations in the test correlated extremely well with the simulation results. Once again, the cabin remained intact. In addition, AW149 fuel tanks and fuel cut-off features are designed to prevent fire in the event of a crash, and are compliant to international MIL standard 1290A.

 

[Purpletrouble]

Quotes from above articles.

So PR puff pieces.

Still, what was its type certification base and who certificated it…

In contrast to the Blackhawk.

I get 149 looks lovely and shiney but having been a passenger many times on and off the battlefield in helos, I want it to be something that will look after me. Not just look after the money pit that is Yeovil.

 

[Dr Ron]

Dear Hood,
Don't feel bad.
In terms of Canadian Defense purchases, nothing goes as promised by politicians.
Hah!
Hah!
And it is often delivered decades later than promised.
Hah!
Hah!
The poor bloody infantry end up priority last in the purchasing process.
Hah!
Hah!

I have been involved in three Canadian procurements and they were all disastrous. Government would launch a programme, withdraw and then re-issue the requirement. Spend lots of money and then cancel. Or pick S92 for ASW work (with no track record of that capability), when they already had a Merlin variant in the fleet. Or make a down-select, only to have a change of Government, followed by an immediate change in direction.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Still, what was its type certification base and who certificated it…

NATO spec, and a US MILSPEC.

We get it.

NOTHING BUT A BLACKHAWK IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU.

 

[Purpletrouble]

NATO spec, and a US MILSPEC.

What NATO spec? (DEFSTANs are a UK MoD thing).

And the MILSPEC is irrelevent.

Does anyone here actually understand what type certification means? It is rather more than just throwing letters of the alphabet in!

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDS_EASA_R510_LHD_AW189_Issue_09.pdf

CS-29, large rotorcraft for 189 (and aiui 139). But what for 149…

We get it.

NOTHING BUT A BLACKHAWK IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU.

Actually, I said just get more Wildcat, Merlin and Chinook and so benefit from economies of scale on existing training and support pyramids and be able to scale deployments much easier. That probably isnt “visionary” enough….

 

[Scott Kenny]

Does anyone here actually understand what type certification means? It is rather more than just throwing letters of the alphabet in!

Yeah, it's a CIVILIAN thing. Not military.

 

[CJGibson]

Actually, I said just get more Wildcat, Merlin and Chinook and so benefit from economies of scale on existing training and support pyramids and be able to scale deployments much easier. That probably isnt “visionary” enough….

Well, if you've read The Air Staff and the Helicopter, which I'm sure you all have, you will know that the reason for having a medium helicopter ie Puma (and any putative replacement) is to get into places (with a useful payload) that Chinooks and Merlins can't.

Me? I'd hang on to the Pumas and go for what the US Army goes for.

Chris

 

[Purpletrouble]

Yeah, it's a CIVILIAN thing. Not military.

eh?

Regulatory Article (RA) 5810: military type certificate (MTC) (MRP Part 21 Subpart B)

RA covering the route to certification of UK military registered air systems and responsibilities of the MTC holder.

www.gov.uk

 

[Purpletrouble]

Well, if you've read The Air Staff and the Helicopter, which I'm sure you all have, you will know that the reason for having a medium helicopter ie Puma (and any putative replacement) is to get into places (with a useful payload) that Chinooks and Merlins can't.

That’s a tad self publicising but I think the answer isnt another type pyramid, its dont buy Merlin in the first place (footprint of a chinny, maintenance pain and a horrible downwash) and/or buy something more useful than a Wildcat.

The old “i wouldnt start from here”.

If one has been so foolish as to do that, just live with it and make the best of a bad job by aiming for some economies of scale.

Then try and learn from it. That is probably me being very optimistic!

Me? I'd hang on to the Pumas and go for what the US Army goes for.

I think they are well and truly shagged out. Mk2 hasn’t been a great experience in many respects.

Ordinarily I’d be tempted by the US Army but they seem to be going all extravagent and exotic again at insane cost. I can’t help but feel they’ll end up with another Blackhawk. Which brings me back to recommending that

 

[Scott Kenny]

Well, if you've read The Air Staff and the Helicopter, which I'm sure you all have, you will know that the reason for having a medium helicopter ie Puma (and any putative replacement) is to get into places (with a useful payload) that Chinooks and Merlins can't.

Me? I'd hang on to the Pumas and go for what the US Army goes for.

Chris

I'm not sure there's enough life left in the Pumas to delay until the US is buying V280s... And V280s are about half the capacity the UK wants. Pumas carry ~24 (almost a full platoon), so do Ospreys. That's what the US makes in that passenger load class.

eh?

Regulatory Article (RA) 5810: military type certificate (MTC) (MRP Part 21 Subpart B)

RA covering the route to certification of UK military registered air systems and responsibilities of the MTC holder.

www.gov.uk

Ah, a UK term.

Compare the H-60 and the S-70. The S-70 is NOT the same thing, it's the civilian production Type Certificate. There are times where a manufacturer did take a military type and run civilian production directly off the military line. Things like the Huey (Bell 204/205) and Jetranger (206). But an H60 is not just an S70 with military radios. Rarely can a company buy the military production paperwork and get it directly civilian certified. The only time I'm aware of that happening is the Skycrane (I think Chinook existed as civilian helos). And that's something of a dodge because it's used for commercial load hauling and firefighting, not passenger ops.

 

[Purpletrouble]

I'm not sure there's enough life left in the Pumas to delay until the US is buying V280s... And V280s are about half the capacity the UK wants. Pumas carry ~24 (almost a full platoon), so do Ospreys. That's what the US makes in that passenger load class.

Not sure where you’ve got 24 from but that is at least 50% greater than its pax capacity, let alone fully kitted pax.

It’s pretty equivalent to Blackhawk/V22 classes.

Ah, a UK term.

Compare the H-60 and the S-70. The S-70 is NOT the same thing, it's the civilian production Type Certificate. There are times where a manufacturer did take a military type and run civilian production directly off the military line. Things like the Huey (Bell 204/205) and Jetranger (206). But an H60 is not just an S70 with military radios. Rarely can a company buy the military production paperwork and get it directly civilian certified. The only time I'm aware of that happening is the Skycrane (I think Chinook existed as civilian helos). And that's something of a dodge because it's used for commercial load hauling and firefighting, not passenger ops.

This program is for a UK helicopter.

Regardless of 149 or Blackhawk, any aquired military register (as these will be) platform will have to go through that type certification process - even if its a desktop mapping exercise.

The point is Blackhawk was designed against the US military specification for a battlefield helicopter.

AW139/189 were against civillian specifications, JAR now CS. (Which actually basically cribbed everything from US FAA FARs).

It is an interesting debate (if you work in this world, probably not if you dont) as there has been some harmonisation of these and use of “CS specs with military delta”.

But the 149 unarguably is a civillian design specified helicopter - even if is painted green and has been tweaked to meet some defence type standards in some areas.

I would suggest that makes it quite a different beast from the Blackhawk in terms of suitability for war. I would have hoped the enthusiast world would want the best kit for our troops and be keen not to fall for shiney stuff.

 

[SK2]

Not sure where you’ve got 24 from but that is at least 50% greater than its pax capacity, let alone fully kitted pax.

It’s pretty equivalent to Blackhawk/V22 classes.


This program is for a UK helicopter.

Regardless of 149 or Blackhawk, any aquired military register (as these will be) platform will have to go through that type certification process - even if its a desktop mapping exercise.

The point is Blackhawk was designed against the US military specification for a battlefield helicopter.

AW139/189 were against civillian specifications, JAR now CS. (Which actually basically cribbed everything from US FAA FARs).

It is an interesting debate (if you work in this world, probably not if you dont) as there has been some harmonisation of these and use of “CS specs with military delta”.

But the 149 unarguably is a civillian design specified helicopter - even if is painted green and has been tweaked to meet some defence type standards in some areas.

I would suggest that makes it quite a different beast from the Blackhawk in terms of suitability for war. I would have hoped the enthusiast world would want the best kit for our troops and be keen not to fall for shiney stuff.

Not too sure why you put V-22 and Blackhawk into same class per pax capacity, the Blackhawk normal load is 11/12 seated troops only, and when they want to fit more passengers S-92 was developed (19 pax). The V-22 in comparison can seat 24 troopers.

Seems you have a lot more experience than the enthusiasts, would you mind to share your view?

 

[Purpletrouble]

Not too sure why you put V-22 and Blackhawk into same class per pax capacity, the Blackhawk normal load is 11/12 seated troops only, and when they want to fit more passengers S-92 was developed (19 pax). The V-22 in comparison can seat 24 troopers.

Seems you have a lot more experience than the enthusiasts, would you mind to share your view?

Because broadly they are the same in terms of category. I cannot imagine how horrible it’d be to be one of 24 people in an Osprey. It was bad enough an experience being one of half that.

I also doubt Blackhawk really carries 12. Again half that was my experience albeit hot and high. S-92 is a civilianised airframe, flew in those in Afghan (contracted to save on Blackhawk hours aiui), 19 seems a stretch, maybe sea level on oilrigs or something.

But broadly these are medium helos vs say Wildcat/MH6 at the lighter end and Chinnok/CH53 at the heavy end. NH90 sits in this middle bit as does Merlin (albeit at the cost of a heavy…).

I dont think its controversial to group them tbh, although clearly not a direct match or anything.

 

[CJGibson]

19 seems a stretch, maybe sea level on oilrigs or something.

<19 (usually 18) porkers broad-shouldered pax in immersion suits plus <20kg baggage each in a S-92 to the Forties Field, typically 16 to the Beryl Field which is more than twice the distance. The much hated EC225s could possibly carry 18 pax to the Beryls, but I have expunged EC225s from my memory.

Chris

 

[SK2]

Because broadly they are the same in terms of category. I cannot imagine how horrible it’d be to be one of 24 people in an Osprey. It was bad enough an experience being one of half that.

I also doubt Blackhawk really carries 12. Again half that was my experience albeit hot and high. S-92 is a civilianised airframe, flew in those in Afghan (contracted to save on Blackhawk hours aiui), 19 seems a stretch, maybe sea level on oilrigs or something.

But broadly these are medium helos vs say Wildcat/MH6 at the lighter end and Chinnok/CH53 at the heavy end. NH90 sits in this middle bit as does Merlin (albeit at the cost of a heavy…).

I dont think its controversial to group them tbh, although clearly not a direct match or anything.

Blackhawk - yes for places within sea-level, with reasonable load, and I "heard" some people love to overload them......
S-92 - originally it was conceived as enlarged version of Blackhawk, with both military (shorter cab) and civilian versions (longer cab). As the programme progress it became a pure civvie chopper
NH-90 is...sad...
Merlin should be classed as super mid size as it's still not the same class as Chinook or Sea Dragon