Chinook - Why dont the AAC deal [with it]?

#1
(I have searched)...

...watching a couple of documentaries on the chinook, I've been impressed with the size, capacity, and sheer coolness of the chinook. As far as transport copters go, it's a beast :D .

So I'm sorry if this has been covered before, but is there any particular reason the AAC don't fly the chinook, considering its main role is ground to ground transport?

What the lynx can do (capacity wise!) the chinook can do better, right?*

So why don't the AAC have Chinook squadrons? :?

*No prior experience to back this up*
 
C

cloudbuster

Guest
#2
WTF is a 'Chinhook', Squiddly?

If you mean 'Chinook', then your question is best answered with an analogy; which would you prefer to drive - a bus or a Ferrari?

They fly the transport types because we let them.
 
#3
Support helicopters have always been within the RAF's (and RN's) remit. The AAC have Lynx by default of their AT role.
 
#4
I'd like to know what exactly we could deal?

maybe:

Here you go Mr RAF, here's a collection of old gazelle ground equipment, now be a good fellow and give us your Chinooks!

or

Give us all your SH or we'll scweam and scweam and scweam!
 
#5
cloudbuster said:
WTF is a 'Chinhook', Squiddly?

If you mean 'Chinook', then your question is best answered with an analogy; which would you prefer to drive - a bus or a Ferrari?
Anyway, if you're asking my personal opinion, I'd love to fly a chinook, they're massive :D . Not to say that I wouldn't love to fly any helicopter - I love the things :D .

As for "chinhook", drunken spelling :wink: .
Anyway, here's another vote for NCO pilots - all the ossifers featured in a documentary on military helicopters just made me cringe with the sheer amount of "fyarr fyaa" poshness.
 
#6
Just out of interest - the AAC have, and alway have had, more Heli than the other services put together. The Navy have them for ships (Junglies/pinger mix), the RAF for moving the Army and the Army (5 types plus exchanges) for getting the job done.

Not a bad life if you do it? - beats working for a living I guess
 
#7
The Army don't have more helicopters than other services... (seraches for figures...)

There are a lot of Helicopters in the RAF SH fleet (100+) whilst the Navy operate an impressive collection. AFAIK, the Army have quite a small fleet, although with the introduction of the Apache it has ballooned somewhat. But then the Gazelle isn't going to be around for much longer.
 
#8
Before Frog Prince was even a tadpole, maybe when the War Office, the Admiralty and the Air Ministry merged to form the Ministry of Defence, there was a deal done by which the Army got RW below a certain size and weight and the RAF did the 'big' stuff. That deal still stands, even though helicopter capability has grown considerably.

If ever the MoD found a pot of money at the end of the rainbow to buy Blackhawks - which is what many AAC pilots would like to replace Lynx - the RAF would try and get first dibs on them. Incidentally, the Army pays for the RAF's Support Helicopters anyway.
 
#9
army-hopeful said:
The Army don't have more helicopters than other services... (seraches for figures...)

There are a lot of Helicopters in the RAF SH fleet (100+) whilst the Navy operate an impressive collection. AFAIK, the Army have quite a small fleet, although with the introduction of the Apache it has ballooned somewhat. But then the Gazelle isn't going to be around for much longer.
You don't have to search for figures as I've done it for you.

http://www.armedforces.co.uk/army/listings/l0052.html

Worth looking at the planned "out of service dates" although some have been amended. Puma - 2022 Chinook - 2040 Skg Mk4 - 2017

It took me all of 20 seconds to get this info, probably worth looking next time before making any "factual statements".
 
#10
The AF vs Army Aviation debate has going on for decades within many militaries. For the UK, the public and policy makers tends to have hard-on for the RAF relative to the Army. So it probably more about what the RAF is willing to let go rather than what the AAC wishes to have.

Possibly the easiest separation would be fixed wing for the AF and rotary for the AAC - less complicated for the UK since it doesn't operate the A-10.
 
#11
If a bit of kit is used primarily to support army operations, then it should 'belong' to the army. That way those running that bit of kit and those they report to, will identify with and better understand the requirements of their their 'customers'. my 2d.

Having said that, if the equipment and personel were transferred to the army, the RAF buget would be decreasd accordingly, and the army would have to pay for the new resource out of its current budget. Or is that just my cynical view of how this government runs our armed forces.

Ski.
 
#12
Fair enough, I didn't find that page myself, but looking at it, you have missed some fairly vital points:

1) A note at the end of the table shows that Lynx and Gazelle aircraft we're to be withdrawn as Apache entered service - which has now/is now happening.
2) This table is incomplete - it doesn't show the Lynx Marks that the Navy operate exclusively.
3) It fails to show the Navy's Merlin aircraft, which again they operate in fewer numbers than the Lynx, but they do have them.

Further down the page these aircraft are listed, and if you include them in any figures then you can see that the AAC doesn't have an overwhelming number of helicopters in comparison.

Although not 100% reliable, this link shows a more up to date view than the JHC one which is 2.5 years out of date: Wiki List

(Editted to add that you can effectively ignore the Gazelle from the AAC listings now)
 
#13
army-hopeful, don't be to hopeful.

I work with the people that can count and the AAC still do, and will do, for a fair time to come.

Gz - another 11 years (funded)
Lx - None to be withdrawn and 48 new ones
Apache - loads of them
Not to mention 109, 212 possibal new COMAR and if you want a little light relief from Heli - loads of fixed wing assets that have just recently been added too.

Try the Civil Service - they make announcements without checking, probably suit you!!!! :oops:

(edited to say - no you can't)
 
#14
How many apaches is "loads" ? :D

And I'm glad about the Gazelles - I've got a soft spot for them (only wellipeller I've ever flown in).
 
#16
army-hopeful said:
Fair enough, I didn't find that page myself, but looking at it, you have missed some fairly vital points:

1) A note at the end of the table shows that Lynx and Gazelle aircraft we're to be withdrawn as Apache entered service - which has now/is now happening.
2) This table is incomplete - it doesn't show the Lynx Marks that the Navy operate exclusively.
3) It fails to show the Navy's Merlin aircraft, which again they operate in fewer numbers than the Lynx, but they do have them.

Further down the page these aircraft are listed, and if you include them in any figures then you can see that the AAC doesn't have an overwhelming number of helicopters in comparison.

Although not 100% reliable, this link shows a more up to date view than the JHC one which is 2.5 years out of date: Wiki List

(Editted to add that you can effectively ignore the Gazelle from the AAC listings now)
Army - hopeful

I'm sorry mate but you are talking utter garbage. The wiki entry is at best 10% correct and so far out in most things that it should be binned, that includes fixed wing.

I'm not going to expand any further because clearly the fact that I work in a tri-service establishment helping to manage (or mis-manage) the UK rotary fleet is going to have no bearing on what you think you know.
 
#17
Pocoyo, if you read gndie's post, and then mine, you'll see that i've accepted what's been said! :thumright:

I'm just asking for clarification on what the hell COMAR stands for?
 
#18
It should read COMR and it means commercially owned, military registered. In other words we lease them. ie: Squirrel
 
#20
[quote="Pocoyo]I'm sorry mate but you are talking utter garbage. The wiki entry is at best 10% correct and so far out in most things that it should be binned, that includes fixed wing.[/quote]

quite right. the Agusta 109 entry says "3 - leased" instead of "3 - looted" :)
 

Similar threads

Top