Originally Posted by lanky

Like MM i agree that it is mad that it doesn't have a folding tail and blades. Complete and utter madness.

I spent a year or so testing the Merlin at Boscombe, and as people say a very nice airframe, and has some decent bits of DAS kit onboard (my main area at the time)

The folding blades/tail thing is complicated by the fact that the Mk3 has a drop tail door, so trying to get the structure in place for a folding tail is almost impossible. Have a look at the Mk1 to see the difference.

The only other thing I was never a fan of was the downwash, it's huge. Stand too close on takeoff/landing and you'll end up on your arrse. Not a problem normally but if they ever start using it for SAR work they may have some problems.

The best thing..finally comfey seats in the back..;)

S_R

Originally Posted by tangosix

...On the subject of funding,is it not proper that the Army decides whether funding for land operations is spent on Merlins or Mastiffs,Chinooks or Challengers?
It is the Army after all which has to deal with the consequences of those spending decisions,good or bad...

T6,
There are 2 issues here and I apologise for not being clearer in my arguments.

Firstly the RAF is often cited as not giving sufficient priority to rotary assets and this is regularly given as a reason why the AAC should take all BH. To an extent, I would agree with the prioritisation issue in that I think we have not always afforded appropriate efforts between fast jets, multi engined and rotary platforms. However, since JHC was formed Land is now responsible for BH funding and in this respect key rotary programmes have dropped down the funding priorities, some quite markedly. Ergo, would RAF SH not have been better off staying under light blue budgetary control? I ask that as a rhetorical question, it is not necessarily my belief. However, the point is that it is not a given that BH will be better resourced under Land control.

Secondly, whilst the vast majority of BH tasking will always be in support to the Land Component, it is not exclusively so. CSAR/JPR is an example of a key capability which also has read across to some SF tasks. Therefore, if BH funding is reduced, it is not just the Army who have to bear the consequences.

SR,

You make some valid points regarding the HC3 tail ramp and tail folding. Likewise, it is nice to see the crashworthy seats down the back of the Merlin. God forbid were we to lose a rotary asset with a full load of troops, the Merlin would be the most survivable in this respect. 'Customer' safety from this respect has been all too often neglected and has very real operational relevance. Were a battle damaged Merlin to make a forced landing in indian country, it may make the difference between life and death if the troops on board could defend themselves whilst awaiting CSAR rather than merely lying around immobile with back and leg injuries whilst the bad guys set about them with rusty garden shears.

Hopefully, we'll never have to find out.

Regards,
MM

Originally Posted by Bad_Crow

Originally Posted by trackbasher

From what I've read it SHOULD be good after all the money and years spent developing the thing.

What Like Bowman?
The SA80? (okay i'm being harsh)
The Eurofighter?

Hmm i'll leave you to mull that lot over.

Well I was being a touch ironic how many chinooks or black hawks could they have bought for what they spent on Merlin?
And I know what you mean about the others...

Aircraft that are to be used down and dirty supporting the troops if the field should be operated by Army personnel.
The RAF have their job where operating Large a/c at altitude and should be allowed to get on with that.
The US Marine Corps seem to have a sensible approach, where Aviators are concerned.
john
However in theses days of tight limited Budgets the service will just continue fighting for scraps from El Gordo's table.

Originally Posted by jonwilly

Aircraft that are to be used down and dirty supporting the troops if the field should be operated by Army personnel.

What are your arguments to support this position jon? I assume that you're arguing that whoever gets the most support from a specific asset should operate them. Playing devils advocate and using your logic therefore, the RAF would have taken control of several RE capabilities, all FAC manning, retained ownership of SHORAD and perhaps taken C-RAM. Logical? No, of course not. Likewise, neither necessarily is the Army taking control of RAF and RN BH.

Originally Posted by jonwilly

The US Marine Corps seem to have a sensible approach, where Aviators are concerned.

USMC aviation is a VERY poor example to use. With a few exceptions (eg V-22) they have the oldest and least serviceable aircraft fleets in the US military, the highest aircrew retention problems, the least capable weapons, they rely heavily on the USN and USAF to maintain their air and are certainly the least able to integrate into true Joint ops.

I would place a fair bit of cash on their fast air and probably their multi engined assets being subsumed into the USN over the next decade as financially they are increasingly difficult to justify.

Regards,
MM

Great aircraft but army pilots would get confused by all the flashing lights in the cockpit!! Of course we would need to transfer the Lynx AFCS system on to it as well just to make things interesting!!

Not a heli geek but as a passenger on a frequent basis while in Iraq I thought it was brilliant. When not carting blokes about it was bringing in spares and water for us, thanks to the heli and it's crews we managed to survive out in the land of sand and flies......

Originally Posted by easesprings

Always found the Merlin to be an Exceptional Airframe very reliable and the Air Crew always helpful and switched on whether as a Taxi between bases or being used on Ops.

Also v comfortable and safe

I beg to differ!

Originally Posted by Magic_Mushroom

CSAR/JPR is an example of a key capability which also has read across to some SF tasks.

Regards,
MM

JPR role withered on the vine I'm afraid, while we've got complete air superiority we'll leave that to the 'Septics' with their 'Blackhawk'! IMHO buying the extra Merlins from the 'Herdy Gerdy Bacon Boys' was bollox, we'd have been better off buying more spares for the original fleet of 20+, but no the powers that be wanted to see more airframes...................TWWWAAAATTTTSSSS!!!

MM are you the RAF's Sergy ?
Do you have a full time or only a part time Job protecting the RAF and it's policies ?
Soldiers would prefer to have aviators who have come up through the Army system as their first line of support. It's all about 'Understanding' some do it better than others.
I know it will never happen, even if their was the money available.
There always has been a cross over between services, each doing a little bit of the others main role for thats the real world.
john
I can't find the Montgomery reference anywhere, perhaps you'd care to publish.
The other matter that has baffled me for years is that the Kraut fought with total air inferiority from about mid 42 onward, yet did wonders and folks like the Viet Cong or whatever opposition in the Balklands still managed to put up a reasonable show without any serious form of airpower.

Was in one last weekend, Berkshire bound. Superb machine and the autorotate was a real scream.

Not been in one anywhere near nasties yet, but it is a fine thing to sit in the back of on your way to Berks.

Not bad for £130m a pop, or whatever it is