- Joined
- 16 April 2008
- Messages
- 9,191
- Reaction score
- 13,169
Why? Acquiring any of the identified super-medium helicopters like AW149/189 would be cheaper than buying more Merlins and WAY cheaper than V-22.
RAF Puma Replacement?
- Thread starter JohnR
- Start date
Why? Acquiring any of the identified super-medium helicopters like AW149/189 would be cheaper than buying more Merlins and WAY cheaper than V-22.
- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,130
- Reaction score
- 6,263
My brain hurts
- Joined
- 16 April 2008
- Messages
- 9,191
- Reaction score
- 13,169
How does Merlin change that? It's still an AW product, with assembly done at both Yeovil (UK) and Vergiate (Italy). The AW189 already has an assembly line at Yeovil as well, so whatever import issues exist should be the same for both types.
Oh yes terrible idea, simplifying logistics and training.
No we really must have yet another type to maintain...anything but embarrass the RAF.
How is it cheaper?
Purchase cost?
Spares?
Training?
Because Merlin Training and spares are both known costs and extent expenditure. More Merlin only requires expansion of existing stocks and Training.
These alternatives are new types in RAF service, new stocks of spares, new Training regimes.....
What if:
RAF "borrow / rent" a few US ARMY Blackhawks to fill the gap, at the same time we commit to buying x amount of whatever they pick for the future?
We get a proven aircraft with existing supply chain, and no teething problems of a new aircraft, we can even have the aircrew and engineers trained in an existing school if required.
Then, when the new aircraft come on line we do like we do now with the F35 training and joint train in the US.
The winning manufacturer gets to go "look we have multiple users already!"
Obviously thats far to sensible a suggestion, i'll get my coat
RAF "borrow / rent" a few US ARMY Blackhawks to fill the gap, at the same time we commit to buying x amount of whatever they pick for the future?
We get a proven aircraft with existing supply chain, and no teething problems of a new aircraft, we can even have the aircrew and engineers trained in an existing school if required.
Then, when the new aircraft come on line we do like we do now with the F35 training and joint train in the US.
The winning manufacturer gets to go "look we have multiple users already!"
Obviously thats far to sensible a suggestion, i'll get my coat
- Joined
- 16 April 2008
- Messages
- 9,191
- Reaction score
- 13,169
No need to get mad at me; I'm talking about what I think is likely, not necessarily what they should do. But Merlin is a dead letter for the RAF. Not happening, barring a radical change in thinking.
Purchase cost, probably. Also, one less engine translates to less operating and maintenance cost. Yes, more costs to add another training pipeline, but conversely, they probably push everything beyond front-line maintenance back onto a commercial vendor (which might not be cheaper, but fits with recent practice...)
- Joined
- 25 January 2020
- Messages
- 1,222
- Reaction score
- 1,786
Aren't AW189s already in service with Bristow and the Coastguard? Wouldn't that bring down training costs?
Yes but a very different type of flying, yes the basic systems and simple flight would be same / similar but you would still need to learn to tactically operate the aircraft
- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,130
- Reaction score
- 6,263
I still think the RAF will duck this one.. The Pumas were a legacy from the 1960s Anglo French helo deal
Worth reading how the RAF ended up with them and kept not getting Chinooks.
I think the RAF will do anything to keep its Chinook numbers untouched..
None of the off the shelf options will appeal to the Air Staff unless they involve new money.
On reflection the Army has enough problems with its Lynx fleet to want another helo. It also will do anything to keep its Apache numbers up.
Worth reading how the RAF ended up with them and kept not getting Chinooks.
I think the RAF will do anything to keep its Chinook numbers untouched..
None of the off the shelf options will appeal to the Air Staff unless they involve new money.
On reflection the Army has enough problems with its Lynx fleet to want another helo. It also will do anything to keep its Apache numbers up.
- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,130
- Reaction score
- 6,263
Going way off thread but a Rotodyne configuration would avoid the tilt rotor transition. It also offers a nice big fuselage to replace all those Chinooks with a British chopper.
From various pieces on the Rotodyne (one of my personal favourite WIF's) a perceive problem in tactical operations was the noise level and the light of the type jets giving away the position of the aircraft in night operations. I have asked before what technical advances have happened in the intervening time and how that would have affected the Rotodyne.
Tony Williams recently posted this link on the thread about Rotodyne, which shows some recent developments;
f
In the late 80's I talked with a friend about a Light Tactical Helo using a conventional rotor system and a ducted fan of the type used on the Optica Observation plane - I don't know if the still exist - and he did a brilliant sketch for me (he was a brilliant artist) I have no idea what happened to it, probably fell victim to one of my mum's purges of my accumulated information - AKA that mess. I have a vague hope that it may turn up one day stuck in the pages of a book. One thing I did wonder about was if the ducted fan would generate enough tork to counter the main rotor or would some sort of fenestron be necessary in the tail plane.
Tony Williams recently posted this link on the thread about Rotodyne, which shows some recent developments;
f
In the late 80's I talked with a friend about a Light Tactical Helo using a conventional rotor system and a ducted fan of the type used on the Optica Observation plane - I don't know if the still exist - and he did a brilliant sketch for me (he was a brilliant artist) I have no idea what happened to it, probably fell victim to one of my mum's purges of my accumulated information - AKA that mess. I have a vague hope that it may turn up one day stuck in the pages of a book. One thing I did wonder about was if the ducted fan would generate enough tork to counter the main rotor or would some sort of fenestron be necessary in the tail plane.
Last edited:
Worst case: Wait fo the MOD / Parliament announcement in the future, "We have decided that we do not need the capabilities the the RAF PUMA fleet provide so they will be retired immediately, in addition RAF Benson will no longer be required so will be closed down, this will save the tax payer £xx Million
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,277
And then years later it will be discovered that it actually cost the taxpayers £xx Billion, and furthermore the former RAF Benson had been flogged off to ye old politically connected property developers for a song. Sigh.
And we've realised we have a capability gap and will be buying the new Bell / Sikorsky aircraft, we will also be opening RAF "closed prematurely" the infrastructure of which needs fully rebuilding, which will cost £250 million, but the builders will charge us £500 Million.
This is all great news for the UK aviation industry as we have secured agreement for them to provide a nuts a bolts selection to the manufacturer, this package will be worth £250 per year.
Yep think that sums it up nicely
D
Deleted member 2278
Guest
Is the V-22 that noisy though? I get a 2-ship about once a week and would say it is quieter than a Chinook. In fact the noisiest offender from Mildenhall are the RJs*! They always seem to have their gear down and thrust levers up earlier, certainly compared with the KCs. Perhaps the price of those hamster cheeks? I haven't experienced an Osprey in vertical mode though.
(*The 48th's Eagles are obviously much louder than the other players in these parts but are pretty considerate for the most part, throttled well back over town and back up again when they hit the outer edge
).On topic, if the Pumas have to go to balance the books and keep the Chinooks then that's a no-brainer IMO! In the current climate, something has to give and that it should be the least capable fleet makes sense to me. We do not live in an ideal world.
kaiserd
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 25 October 2013
- Messages
- 1,665
- Reaction score
- 1,708
It appears to be a potential (miss-guided and self-fulfilling) Catch-22 that “having” to use Chinooks for almost all “lift” missions would render a smaller, cheaper and more efficient (for a given sub-set of missions) complimentary helicopter somehow unaffordable. This would be a classic example of a false economy.
- Joined
- 6 September 2006
- Messages
- 4,652
- Reaction score
- 8,699
The retirement of Puma and Hercules would leave the RAF as heavy-lift operators. Is there a hidden theme here? Probably not but its a likely outcome.
As to bob225's comment on RAF Benson, the 2010 SDSR confirmed that Benson would be secure until 2022... (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-engla... RAF Benson is,34 Puma helicopters until 2022.)
As to bob225's comment on RAF Benson, the 2010 SDSR confirmed that Benson would be secure until 2022... (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-engla... RAF Benson is,34 Puma helicopters until 2022.)
- Joined
- 26 January 2011
- Messages
- 2,228
- Reaction score
- 605
Noise was one of the reasons why they stopped the development of the Rotodyne. How noisy was it though? According to most references it was "about 60 decibels" which is about what a jet aircraft of the day sounded like. Yet, when they tested a prototype Rotodyne at the heliport at Battersea, they received no complaints. Now, a V-22 Osprey is as noisy and more, apparently. The Westland engineers were working on revising the tip jets that were let to spin the rotor and which apparently were the main cause of the "excessive noise". Now, they (the military) are prepared to work with the Osprey quite happily, despite its level of noisiness, they would be prepared to live with the Rotodyne.
As for the amount of light generated, was it more than a chopper working at night in the Arabian Gulf/Afghanistan today? Apparently the stray sand particles when struck by the rotor blades spark and light up. While quite spectacular on wide exposure, low speed film, in reality it is still pretty dark. The Rotodyne did not emit spectacular amounts of light from it's tip jets. It would have been quite workable at night IMO.
- Joined
- 26 January 2011
- Messages
- 2,228
- Reaction score
- 605
That is how it is done by the Australian Army and the RAAF. The RAAF still owns and operates the Angry Chooks and the Army the Blackhawks. Just as long as the British Army doesn't do what the Australian Army did which was to try and hang big drop tanks on the fuel points on the stub wings for excessive distances - they wore out their rotor hubs far too fast and that practice has since basically stopped.
D
Deleted member 2278
Guest
Again, @Rickshaw, the Osprey's noise levels are being somewhat overstated, I feel. It is no more obnoxious than a Chinook, Apache (the WAH Apache has a very "bass" noise profile to my ears) or the screechy medivac helicopters (EC-something-or-others) that land in the school field 2-300ft away. I get MC-130s so infrequently that I can't form a comparison really. Not a fortnight ago I saw a CV-22 2-ship from my kitchen window and had to strain to hear them! Honestly, I've heard worse from a modded Fiat Punto!
Of course, I am a bit biased - I like seeing Ospreys. There's still something a little sci-fi about them.
Of course, I am a bit biased - I like seeing Ospreys. There's still something a little sci-fi about them.
- Joined
- 26 January 2011
- Messages
- 2,228
- Reaction score
- 605
You do realise we are discussing the Rotodyne and the Osprey during landing and take off when they are using far more power than they would while cruising along. Closer the ground also results in sound being reflected. I used to hear Blackhawks cruising overhead and they sounded just like piston engines when compared to the Iroquois which I used to train with.
D
Deleted member 2278
Guest
Yes, of course but an aircraft has more than one flight regime and I thought some first-hand experience would be informative (but by no means comprehensive).
- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,130
- Reaction score
- 6,263
I claim no authorship of the plan I was merely projecting what the RAF has made clear over the years. As Rickshaw mentioned, that is what the Aussies did. Also with Wildcat a lemon the Army are more likely to get money for something like a UH/LOH platform.
- Joined
- 26 January 2011
- Messages
- 2,228
- Reaction score
- 605
Oh, your experience is useful. I enjoy reaching about it.
- Joined
- 26 January 2011
- Messages
- 2,228
- Reaction score
- 605
Today, it would be significantly quieter and have more lift. The 1950s technology would be superseded with carbon fibre and kevlar for the fuselage and rotor blades. The tip jets would benefit from more research on noise cancellation. Sure, it would still be a bit noisier than a plain chopper but not by much IMO. Bring it back. All the IP is owned by Britain and it would be within British reach to rebuild it.
If it delivers a superior capability to current and projected Helicopter developments.....then yes why not?
- Joined
- 6 September 2006
- Messages
- 4,652
- Reaction score
- 8,699
Only a couple of years ago there were strong rumours of retiring the Wildcats, presumably as a cost-saving measure.
That seemed to fade away, but if Wildcat and Puma did both end up unreplaced then there would be quite a big gap in tactical airlift and would leave the AAC holding a bag of Apaches and not much else.
I don't doubt that RAF Vs AAC rivalry is a tense now as it has been since 1950.
As to noise, I have never seen an Osprey in flight, but Chinooks pass over fairly regularly over work and you can usually always hear them coming with enough time to amble over to the nearest window. Saying that in the right conditions even a little Robinson can sound like a flight of Hueys...
That seemed to fade away, but if Wildcat and Puma did both end up unreplaced then there would be quite a big gap in tactical airlift and would leave the AAC holding a bag of Apaches and not much else.
I don't doubt that RAF Vs AAC rivalry is a tense now as it has been since 1950.
As to noise, I have never seen an Osprey in flight, but Chinooks pass over fairly regularly over work and you can usually always hear them coming with enough time to amble over to the nearest window. Saying that in the right conditions even a little Robinson can sound like a flight of Hueys...
Having seen a V-22 at the Yuma Airshow a few years ago where it did a demo flight right in front of the crowd, I'm not sure where all this 'it's very noisy' comes from, I thought it was really quite quiet while it went through it's hover display.
One of the multitude of photos I took of it and you can get an idea just how close it was.
One of the multitude of photos I took of it and you can get an idea just how close it was.
Attachments
Wrong the RAAF refused to keep the chinooks once the blackhawks were give to the army
Nick
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 24 September 2009
- Messages
- 110
- Reaction score
- 125
From working in central London I can make the following observations:
I can tell a Chinook is coming from 3 miles away by the low whop-whop-whop beat that precedes it, it's usually a dot in the sky beyond the Houses of Parliament at the time.
If I hear a diesel tractor flying above then it's an Apache within a mile.
Diesel vans with blown exhausts overhead must be the Met Police EC145s. Very annoying when they hover right above you.
Low pitched squeal is the Air Ambulance MD902, very cute and agile to watch.
A deep scream nearby is a red and white Coastguard AW189 or an executive charter AW109 from Battersea.
The noisy clatter of an eggwhisk is the Robinson R44 on sightseeing from Biggin Hill.
A mild drone is possibly the beautiful Dragon Rapide sightseeing from Duxford.
Merlin whispers? BBMF!
I can tell a Chinook is coming from 3 miles away by the low whop-whop-whop beat that precedes it, it's usually a dot in the sky beyond the Houses of Parliament at the time.
If I hear a diesel tractor flying above then it's an Apache within a mile.
Diesel vans with blown exhausts overhead must be the Met Police EC145s. Very annoying when they hover right above you.
Low pitched squeal is the Air Ambulance MD902, very cute and agile to watch.
A deep scream nearby is a red and white Coastguard AW189 or an executive charter AW109 from Battersea.
The noisy clatter of an eggwhisk is the Robinson R44 on sightseeing from Biggin Hill.
A mild drone is possibly the beautiful Dragon Rapide sightseeing from Duxford.
Merlin whispers? BBMF!
I completly agree with that. It matches my own experience.
D
Deleted member 2278
Guest
Just one more little helicopter noise anecdote (sorry). A Merlin HM.1 managed to sneak up behind me when I was on the deck of Lusty during a Navy Day (sigh, I miss those). I really to this day don't know how it managed to do that. It was ascending through deck level (bad pun) as I was turning round so maybe the hull masked it but you'd think you would hear it long before it got close. Sound waves, you just can't keep them straight.
Ah, I remember seeing those Dragon Rapide tours over north London! Always brought a smile to my face, seeing the old girl.
Anyway, while I could tolerate the loss of either Puma or (Army) Wildcat, the loss of both would be an intolerable capability gap, especially coupled with the loss of the Hercs as well. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.
Ah, I remember seeing those Dragon Rapide tours over north London! Always brought a smile to my face, seeing the old girl.
Anyway, while I could tolerate the loss of either Puma or (Army) Wildcat, the loss of both would be an intolerable capability gap, especially coupled with the loss of the Hercs as well. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.
