Slater Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 Interesting that the Chinook was the USAF's selection for the CSAR-X requirement some years ago (although this program was later canceled after protests by other competitors). The aircraft's payload and range were attractive in the combat rescue role, although a big, noisy helicopter like that would seem to make a bigger target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsprop Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 8 hours ago, Lord Riot said: I was thinking more along the lines of second hand US ones, even cheaper. A quick refurb and off you go. That would just be paying to switch from one out of date aircraft to another. The requirement would still exist to upgrade to a modernised aircraft. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent K Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 11 hours ago, Lord Riot said: I was thinking more along the lines of second hand US ones, even cheaper. A quick refurb and off you go. OK, hear what you're saying, although I don't think the requirement is to just replace the Puma, and by buying second hand equipment, to replace new build, you'd gain nothing perfomance or operationally speaking and incur additional infrastructure and operational expense. The opportunity exists to procur a new fleet of a new type with the inherent commonality, and up to date specification and equipment, and lower operational and support costs. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blimpyboy Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 On 3/29/2021 at 11:39 PM, wellsprop said: The competitors (that I can immediately think of) are; AW149 NH90 H175M Back Hawk By all the gods (and for the love of Mike), please don't go for NH90. It's the gift that keeps on taking. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7045731/defences-38b-helicopter-fleet-plagued-with-major-risks-and-issues/ https://adbr.com.au/army-seeking-interim-helicopter-capability/ https://www.overtdefense.com/2020/10/06/adf-mrh-90-taipan-to-be-retired-mh-60-to-be-adopted/#:~:text=Rumours within the Australian Defence,programme known as Plan Corella. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evalman Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 (edited) On 3/30/2021 at 5:33 PM, junglierating said: 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣the performance of a Puma .....oh my word that has to be the joke of the year.....Dunno if you are ex RAF but your light blue PR team played a blinder..to be fair the RN PR is pretty dire but getting better? I've no doubt that the AW149 will be superior to the Puma. I know it's old, space inside is limited (I have flown in one). I was basing my statement on what I have witnessed while out taking photos. We are seeing more Pumas locally in recent years, the ones I have seen out on the Moors usually appear suddenly, you very rarely hear or see them coming until the last moment. When they arrive they are nimble and good at getting in a tight spot. Of course much of this is down to the skill of the aircrew. I wouldn't like to comment on the Pumas reliability, I've noticed it's the same (very few) airframes that seem to fly. Can't be any worse than the Merlin, I was on the Moors yesterday and could hear a Junglie coming several minutes before it arrived. The chaps next to me let off smoke when we first heard it, the smoke ran out and I finished my sausage roll before it actually arrived (at least it arrived - had many wasted journeys waiting for cancelled Merlins). Edited April 1, 2021 by Evalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent K Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 On 3/30/2021 at 8:40 PM, EwenS said: More like 1960s tech. First flew 1965. The first ones arrived in the RAF in 1971. Wasn't the Mk 2 a (relatively) recent upgrade with new engines and a glass cockpit? notwithstanding the structure and a lot of the mechanical bits would still be original (design) I suspect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Evalman said: I've no doubt that the AW149 will be superior to the Puma. I know it's old, space inside is limited (I have flown in one). I was basing my statement on what I have witnessed while out taking photos. We are seeing more Pumas locally in recent years, the ones I have seen out on the Moors usually appear suddenly, you very rarely hear or see them coming until the last moment. When they arrive they are nimble and good at getting in a tight spot. Of course much of this is down to the skill of the aircrew. I wouldn't like to comment on the Pumas reliability, I've noticed it's the same (very few) airframes that seem to fly. Can't be any worse than the Merlin, I was on the Moors yesterday and could hear a Junglie coming several minutes before it arrived. The chaps next to me let off smoke when we first heard it, the smoke ran out and I finished my sausage roll before it actually arrived (at least it arrived - had many wasted journeys waiting for cancelled Merlins). Clearly I was talking from a SK4 perspective which was (by chance not design) remarkably stealthy...from a noise pov.😄😁 Could lift a lot more too ....which is useful. Puma is pretty though....er that's it . Edited April 1, 2021 by junglierating 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsprop Posted April 2, 2021 Share Posted April 2, 2021 Hrm, I'm not convinced with Bell's pitch. "Bell touts ‘ideal' 525 for UK New Medium Helicopter requirement" https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/bell-touts-ideal-525-for-uk-new-medium-helicopter-requirement To the best of my knowledge, the 525 has been designed as a civilian aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Riot Posted April 12, 2021 Share Posted April 12, 2021 It will be the same old story. Puma retired without replacement, promises of new but fewer helicopters in a few years, so resources stretched even thinner to cover the ‘capability gap’, until the bean counters then decide we managed with said capability gap thus proving we don’t need replacements. RAF shrinks further, famous old squadrons never return and the lads and lasses at the pointy end have even less air support to call on when we find ourselves suddenly needing it. 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hairystick Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 On 4/1/2021 at 7:54 PM, Blimpyboy said: By all the gods (and for the love of Mike), please don't go for NH90. It's the gift that keeps on taking. +1 !!! I wonder if the Germans ever sorted out their list of problems they had with it. Not being certified for operations in a combat zone was an interesting one. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blimpyboy Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 (edited) 37 minutes ago, hairystick said: I wonder if the Germans ever sorted out their list of problems they had with it It would seem that every user has had a growing list of problems with the NH90. I suppose that, when you buy off the plan, you are always going to have teething troubles - it's just that some of the problems seem linked to such fundamental components and functions. For a combat helicopter intended to carry combat troops and associated loads, my favourite complaint has to be: "Clearance is so limited that soldiers have trouble getting in and out of the helicopter; the rear ramp is too weak to support fully equipped soldiers; the plane's floor is so sensitive that it can be cracked by boots; and the seats are unable to accommodate more than 240 pounds". Go figure. As many colleagues have opined: "When you buy American, you tend to get what's written on the tin. When you buy European, you tend to get some of what's promised - eventually". https://defense.info/defense-decisions/2020/08/royal-australian-navy-to-move-on-from-mrh-90/ https://romeosquared.eu/2018/02/19/helicopter-scandals-for-everyone-blackhawk-to-the-rescue/ Edited April 13, 2021 by Blimpyboy 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coors54 Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 59 minutes ago, Blimpyboy said: When you buy American, you tend to get what's written on the tin KC-46 anyone? 🤣 5 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo88 Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 On 12/04/2021 at 11:40, Lord Riot said: It will be the same old story. Puma retired without replacement, promises of new but fewer helicopters in a few years, so resources stretched even thinner to cover the ‘capability gap’, until the bean counters then decide we managed with said capability gap thus proving we don’t need replacements. RAF shrinks further, famous old squadrons never return and the lads and lasses at the pointy end have even less air support to call on when we find ourselves suddenly needing it. Sadly you are probably right. At some point in the future there must surely come a time when the very existence of the RAF has to be questioned. If civilian contractors can do so much already might they eventually do everything? I'm thinking particularly about the eventual demise of manned combat aircraft and their replacement by UAVs. Who might operate these and under what rules? I would love to think I'm just being unduly pessimistic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsprop Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 @Blimpyboy the NH90 programme certainly hasn't been smooth! As I see it the only viable options are the Black Hawk and AW149. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exdraken Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 4 hours ago, Coors54 said: KC-46 anyone? 🤣 Did Boeing ever promise that they'd deliver on time and better than Airbus? was a political decision, no? 1 hour ago, wellsprop said: @Blimpyboy the NH90 programme certainly hasn't been smooth! As I see it the only viable options are the Black Hawk and AW149. And then why would the AW149 not have military teething troubles with the RAF /Army Do you think they would buy it off the shelf??? I do not think that the requirements or the AW149 combat capability are clear yet either... And the Chinook HC3 story is also not the best example of military procurement if I remember correctly! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slater Posted April 13, 2021 Author Share Posted April 13, 2021 In hindsight, the Airbus KC-45 would seem to have been a more trouble-free choice than the KC-46. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blimpyboy Posted April 13, 2021 Share Posted April 13, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, Coors54 said: KC-46 anyone? I did say tend! Admittedly, all manufacturers have problematic designs over time - I s’pose some seem to have consistently worse ones. Puma was a great European design - the Black Hawk of its day, if you ask me. Edited April 13, 2021 by Blimpyboy 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted April 14, 2021 Share Posted April 14, 2021 On 4/13/2021 at 9:16 PM, Blimpyboy said: Puma was a great European design - the Black Hawk of its day, if you ask me. Really ?I would say Sea King was and still is a far superior product whereas Puma 'sure is pretty' for a furious palm tree 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slater Posted April 14, 2021 Author Share Posted April 14, 2021 Another somewhat messy issue for he KC-46: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/04/14/the-kc-46-has-a-messy-problem-with-its-palletized-toilet/ 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blimpyboy Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 8 hours ago, junglierating said: On 4/14/2021 at 6:16 AM, Blimpyboy said: Really ?I would say Sea King was and still is a far superior product whereas Puma 'sure is pretty' for a furious palm tree Licensed production differences notwithstanding, I still consider the Sea King a US design! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 4 hours ago, Blimpyboy said: Licensed production differences notwithstanding, I still consider the Sea King a US design! Hmm when you look at that there aren't many British Designs ....arguably Wildcat ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Bunker Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 And as I write this I expect there is somebody at MoD hunting through the military aircraft equivilant of Autotrader looking for low hours Pumas so they don't have to spend lots on new Puma replacement helos. Beancounters win as always Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuartp Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 On 3/29/2021 at 6:04 PM, wellsprop said: The air ambulance couldnt do anything (so they sent a second air ambulance)?! Second one usually has the HEMS doctor or aneasthetist/similar on board. Round here (Yorks) they quite often get sent to accidents where there us no need for helicopter transfer because the AA carries morphine which road ambulances don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 On 4/13/2021 at 11:38 AM, Blimpyboy said: the plane's floor is so sensitive that it can be cracked by boots; and the seats are unable to accommodate more than 240 pounds". Merlin had that problem in the Mk1 until they changed to a freight floor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted April 15, 2021 Share Posted April 15, 2021 On 3/29/2021 at 6:04 PM, wellsprop said: It makes me wonder how good the Black Hawk would be in the SAR role... EDIT: forgive my ignorance, turns out the Black Hawk has been doing SAR forever. Although it only has 2/3 the range of the 149... The Blackhawk was touted as a Wessex replacement for SAR in 1987. When Westland sent their WS-70 demonstrator to Finningley, it received a unanimous thumbs down from the SAR aircrew for the lack of cabin space. Regards Tim 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now