Integrated Review - Changes to Rotary Fleet

Chinnok for all the lifting makes sense, but…

Thanks to a couple of decades of 'Its the wrong Helicopter Grommit', we've ended up with a mish mash of too small to do anything but act as a VSO's VIP ride utility helos; very small shiny ones with eye watering costs per hour to operate.

Wildcat was absolutely positively the most pointless purchase for the Army imaginable.
Too small to carry a section, armed to the teeth with the mighty GPMG, slower than the AH-64's its supposed to lead - and with inferior sensors. All at more cost than real helicopters, even an AH-64
I couldn’t agree with you more.

as I say. No expert of fixed or rotary wing. So I’d agree that you need to be able to move A section at a time as a minimum.

But theoretically. If you had a Cab that could deliver 4 sections at a time if required (chinook) or a cab that can only move 2 sections at a time (Puma)

would you not be better off going for the bigger cab for more flexibility. Or is there stuff Puma does that Chinook can’t?
 

Cyberhacker

War Hero
And however the only naval operator of H145M is the Royal Thai Navy but theirs replaced their Hueys In the Marine Corps role, coastal / Inland Riverine patrol

Interesting... the Thai Navy has UH-72A (with the traditional tail) whereas that shows the UH-72B (with the Fenestron)
 
I couldn’t agree with you more.

as I say. No expert of fixed or rotary wing. So I’d agree that you need to be able to move A section at a time as a minimum.

But theoretically. If you had a Cab that could deliver 4 sections at a time if required (chinook) or a cab that can only move 2 sections at a time (Puma)

would you not be better off going for the bigger cab for more flexibility. Or is there stuff Puma does that Chinook can’t?

Puma / Bell 212 will be cheaper to operate and so where Chinook isnt needed make more sense economicaly

They are also smaller so can fit places it cant -

Down wash is a lot less as well - which has its own implications - not goung to win many hearts and minds if your chinook has blown all the huts apart (ok silly example but you get the Gist
 
I couldn’t agree with you more.

as I say. No expert of fixed or rotary wing. So I’d agree that you need to be able to move A section at a time as a minimum.

But theoretically. If you had a Cab that could deliver 4 sections at a time if required (chinook) or a cab that can only move 2 sections at a time (Puma)

would you not be better off going for the bigger cab for more flexibility. Or is there stuff Puma does that Chinook can’t?
Puma can land in smaller area’s, buildings etc as its lighter.
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
According to this website, each Osprey flying hours costs well over twice as much as a Chinook (£8500 v £3500) and a Puma hour will be much less than that.

Bottom line is that the only way that the UK is getting Osprey would be to get rid of a FJ!

but when you compare V-22 vs naval helicopters, it’s not too bad.
a Wildcat sets you back £5k, while. Merlin is somewhere out in the stratosphere - see the RAF most happy to be shot of them.
 
Interesting... the Thai Navy has UH-72A (with the traditional tail) whereas that shows the UH-72B (with the Fenestron)
No it’s the Thai Army has UH-72A (supplied from USA Airbus Helicopters Inc and US Army) under the FMS.

Their Navy has the Donauworth assembled H145M (not Uh-72B)

it’s confusing as their Navy h145M is in camou Paint.

cheers
 
but when you compare V-22 vs naval helicopters, it’s not too bad.
a Wildcat sets you back £5k, while. Merlin is somewhere out in the stratosphere -


Let me guess your alluding to the Pprune quoted £43000 / Hr operating cost.

Neglecting of course that that figure includes not only direct operating costs but Training costs , support infrastructure, depreciation

Much as you do with the Merlin cost 95Million each - ignoring that figure is development costs not aircrafme price

Or that Wildcat costs 27 Million each vs 6 Million for black hawk**quoting total project costs with individual unit price of a bare airframe .

So I think i will also take your wildcat operating cost with a massive handful of salt - because if im being polite id say your interpretation was unreliable

If i wasnt id point out that this has been pointed out repeatedly and that you persist in this fallacy is quite frankly nothing more than yet another blatent attempt to disparage European / UK products, reliant oh half truths and missrepresentations because you have, despite your allusions no access to facts or insider info as nobody would actually trust you to do more than make the tea and only then if closely supervised

but i am being polite so i will say i think youre interperataion of the figures is in error


**For more sensible posters the Korean UH 60 buy would indicate a unit price of 57 Million - if you did a Photex and ignored spares training etc Making it twice as costly as Wildcat
 
Puma can land in smaller area’s, buildings etc as its lighter.
Fair enough. I suspected it was that.

I suppose it’s always a trade off. One big fleet of big helicopters mean you can’t land in small areas (although one might question with a winch and fast rope, how many parts of the world can’t be accessed by a chinook)

hiwever, does it befit having two different types just in case you have problems? I mean if you have all chinook and you identify gear box problems, then that’s the whole of your fleet grounded.

please don’t think I’m trolling on this or trying to be like some other posters making outlandish claims.

This is a topic I know very little about and I’m enjoying reading the comments from
More knowledgable people than myself and hoping to get some answers to fill my lack of knowledge
 

Bad CO

Admin
but when you compare V-22 vs naval helicopters, it’s not too bad.
a Wildcat sets you back £5k, while. Merlin is somewhere out in the stratosphere - see the RAF most happy to be shot of them.

I know Merlin is expensive but I'm very surprised that Wildcat is that much. What is your source for this?
 

Bad CO

Admin
Fair enough. I suspected it was that.

I suppose it’s always a trade off. One big fleet of big helicopters mean you can’t land in small areas (although one might question with a winch and fast rope, how many parts of the world can’t be accessed by a chinook)

Both methods are relatively slow compared to landing so there are tactical considerations. Consider the MERT in Afghanistan which not only had the medics but quite a sizeable FP team.

It's also notable that TF Black never used Chinook in Baghdad even though I'm sure they would have been available if they had been asked for. I have no personal knowledge of the situation but am sure they preferred Puma due to their size.

hiwever, does it befit having two different types just in case you have problems? I mean if you have all chinook and you identify gear box problems, then that’s the whole of your fleet grounded.

That's a good point but there is also the issue of cost. A medium helicopter will be cheaper so you can either have more of them or you can get away with a smaller budget!
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
Last edited:
Both methods are relatively slow compared to landing so there are tactical considerations. Consider the MERT in Afghanistan which not only had the medics but quite a sizeable FP team.

It's also notable that TF Black never used Chinook in Baghdad even though I'm sure they would have been available if they had been asked for. I have no personal knowledge of the situation but am sure they preferred Puma due to their size.



That's a good point but there is also the issue of cost. A medium helicopter will be cheaper so you can either have more of them or you can get away with a smaller budget!

Are medium helicopters cheaper to buy? Or cheaper to run?

as I’ve said earlier, even if you look at the break down of your council tax bill, you’ll see that the greatest running cost of an organisation is its wage bill. Not the kit it uses. So theoretically the one off outlay for a bigger airframe theoretically should be a one of payment.

A medium size helicopter and a heavy lift helicopter have the same number of crew and theoretically should have the same amount of ground crew (both have avionics. Both have two engines etc etc etc)

again, apologies for coming across as a tw@t. Not a wah, or varying or trolling.
 
I know Merlin is expensive but I'm very surprised that Wildcat is that much. What is your source for this?
He flip flops from saying USA strong to Russia stronger, he derides everything Westland has ever built, has repeatedly claimed we would be gifted M1a2, MV22,UH60 etc.

He then compares through life costs of for example Merlin, with the bare airframe costs of the Blackhawk.


Then claims big gay vlad is itching to stroll into the Baltic’s and there’s nothing we can do about it.
He should be banned from the serious side of the forums and left to fester in hole.
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
Let me guess your alluding to the Pprune quoted £43000 / Hr operating cost.

Neglecting of course that that figure includes not only direct operating costs but Training costs , support infrastructure, depreciation

Much as you do with the Merlin cost 95Million each - ignoring that figure is development costs not aircrafme price

Or that Wildcat costs 27 Million each vs 6 Million for black hawk**quoting total project costs with individual unit price of a bare airframe .

So I think i will also take your wildcat operating cost with a massive handful of salt - because if im being polite id say your interpretation was unreliable

If i wasnt id point out that this has been pointed out repeatedly and that you persist in this fallacy is quite frankly nothing more than yet another blatent attempt to disparage European / UK products, reliant oh half truths and missrepresentations because you have, despite your allusions no access to facts or insider info as nobody would actually trust you to do more than make the tea and only then if closely supervised

but i am being polite so i will say i think youre interperataion of the figures is in error


**For more sensible posters the Korean UH 60 buy would indicate a unit price of 57 Million - if you did a Photex and ignored spares training etc Making it twice as costly as Wildcat


EH101 was costing the Danes £11k/hr in 2014.
 
A medium size helicopter and a heavy lift helicopter have the same number of crew and theoretically should have the same amount of ground crew (both have avionics. Both have two engines etc etc etc)
Not necasserily
Its bigger therfore it may require more bodies to service especially on deep maintenance / modification to take an extreme example D check on a 737 30 guys trip over each other - 747 circa 200 guys are just swallowed by the beast - Whilst thats only once every 5 years it adds to opertaing costs

You may need more bodies to move it - watching tips etc - now they will usually be any spare mech unlucky enough to get dicked so not a cost as such - but that will be an issue for restricted landing zones

As for crew its possible you will have an extra body on larger machines to watch the self loading cargo - which generally cant be trusted -
Civil aviation requires X crew / Y pax - but i doubt A330 aside that is a requirement

The bigger engines will cost more to buy / rent and run.

Bigger / more blades are likely to cost more

Avionics - yes special equipment aside and of course who made it - In principle its the same basic fit on everything
 
Not necasserily
Its bigger therfore it may require more bodies to service especially on deep maintenance / modification to take an extreme example D check on a 737 30 guys trip over each other - 747 circa 200 guys are just swallowed by the beast - Whilst thats only once every 5 years it adds to opertaing costs

You may need more bodies to move it - watching tips etc - now they will usually be any spare mech unlucky enough to get dicked so not a cost as such - but that will be an issue for restricted landing zones

As for crew its possible you will have an extra body on larger machines to watch the self loading cargo - which generally cant be trusted -
Civil aviation requires X crew / Y pax - but i doubt A330 aside that is a requirement

The bigger engines will cost more to buy / rent and run.

Bigger / more blades are likely to cost more

Avionics - yes special equipment aside and of course who made it - In principle its the same basic fit on everything
Cheers for that.

Thanks for taking out time for the explanation.
 
Are medium helicopters cheaper to buy? Or cheaper to run?

as I’ve said earlier, even if you look at the break down of your council tax bill, you’ll see that the greatest running cost of an organisation is its wage bill. Not the kit it uses. So theoretically the one off outlay for a bigger airframe theoretically should be a one of payment.

A medium size helicopter and a heavy lift helicopter have the same number of crew and theoretically should have the same amount of ground crew (both have avionics. Both have two engines etc etc etc)

again, apologies for coming across as a tw@t. Not a wah, or varying or trolling.
well yes and no depending how high tech the platform is...

cheers
 
Also. General question out there.
How unreliable/unsafe is something like an Mi 8?

I never hear of them crashing other than pilot error and they appear to be agricultural in their maintenance requirements.

I know people get scared in them due to leaking hydraulics and I still remember seeing Lee flying over Kabul, dropping 20 feet at a time as it backfired belching out black smoke.

but is their not a market for a Billy basic, cheap to build, easy to maintain airframe out there that has more availability than a top of line western helicopter?

I mean, if it’s job is ultimately taxi on a battlefront. Does a flying box not fill the need?
 
Also. General question out there.
How unreliable/unsafe is something like an Mi 8?

I never hear of them crashing other than pilot error and they appear to be agricultural in their maintenance requirements.

I know people get scared in them due to leaking hydraulics and I still remember seeing Lee flying over Kabul, dropping 20 feet at a time as it backfired belching out black smoke.

but is their not a market for a Billy basic, cheap to build, easy to maintain airframe out there that has more availability than a top of line western helicopter?

I mean, if it’s job is ultimately taxi on a battlefront. Does a flying box not fill the need?

Russian kit is ok and in recent years Russian Helicopters products are being certified approved by likes of EASA ...anyhow MI17 is the new kid on the block, only other privately owned companies do upgrades or makrket the MI8 like this one I saw at Farnborough Air Show 2016 belonging to Ukrainnian Helicopters that had modified MI8SMB-1 (my pics below)

18192408_10155669227561490_9217660407549910452_o.jpg


18156196_10155669226986490_5445474742488875503_o.jpg
18192529_10155669226521490_4849051005301804171_o.jpg
18156109_10155669226766490_4585128883995921914_o.jpg
18156445_10155669227051490_8276673408867004354_o.jpg
18216498_10155669226541490_1041588043760189145_o.jpg




Or Motor Sich Engines from Ukraine which are modernising engines for the MI8 and MI2 range here are my photos from Dubai Air Show 2017

26219450_10156423906146490_2939508718128199839_n.jpg


26731606_10156423906306490_8098674818214245513_n.jpg



Yes under Project Currium as everyone knows from a decade and half we had some MI8/17 over the wiltshire countryside in raspberry ripple RAe colors training Afghan crews from a cadre of Joint Helicopter Command instructors.

Hell during the AAC AH competition 2 and half deacdes ago, Kamov offered the KA-50 Werewolf as it was skint post cold war Russia and desperate to export.

Granted that Soviet era and WarPac eqeuipment are tough, can be maintained with bare minimum of tools esepcailly on the battlefield but it wouldnt work plus the basics of .//support tooling and equipment comes from Mother Russia!! Likes of Slovak, Czech rely on other companies within the west that can support and sustain the MI8/17 fleet. Plus give it a few years they will be replaced.

Anyhow here are my photos nof SLovak Republic Air Force CSAR/SAR MI17 performing in my other neck of the woods in Austrian Airpower

70133399_10157925894961490_8756511986587533312_n.jpg
73357351_10158037536436490_302199061497249792_n.jpg




Cheers
 

Latest Threads

Top