Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Gabriele »

Well, actually Chinooks are there all the time, pretty much, although in small numbers. Can't do any heavy lift without them.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Pongoglo
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 10:39
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Pongoglo »

Agree in full. It was very rare to see Ocean going anywhere without at least a couple of Chinooks carried onboard. Good news about Gen. Carters appointment as CDS - NOT! :-)
HangarfirstHMSQueenElizabethweathersstormyseasBiscay_2.gif
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tinman
Member
Posts: 290
Joined: 03 May 2015, 17:59
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Tinman »

Ocean has gone, Ch47 will be role specific. Merlin has been trialed with boom recently in an attempt by RM/RN to generate an off the book JPR capability.

Which is to there credit as when the RAF got into the game with the same Merlins and were told by DSF that it’s the requisite of SF.

Funny how during Op Elemey we might have used USN/USMC assets on ocean. Allegedly.

jimthelad
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 14 May 2015, 20:16
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by jimthelad »

Give Carter a chance, He has quite a lot of combat time and has made himself quite unpopular with the bean counters which is a major win in my books.

indeid
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by indeid »

Tinman wrote:Ocean has gone, Ch47 will be role specific. Merlin has been trialed with boom recently in an attempt by RM/RN to generate an off the book JPR capability.

Which is to there credit as when the RAF got into the game with the same Merlins and were told by DSF that it’s the requisite of SF.

Funny how during Op Elemey we might have used USN/USMC assets on ocean. Allegedly.
It was USAF cabs on Ocean wasn't it? My issue is that putting a AAR probe on a Merlin does not make it a JPR/CSAR capability. It is part of one, but there are a lot of other assets needed to operate in anything but a permissive environment.

Pongoglo
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 10:39
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Pongoglo »

It most certainly was not USAF Chinook ! Dont think I ever saw USAF embarked, they were 18 and 27 Squadron aircraft out of Odiham, rotated all the time.Funny how you only really appreciate something now she has gone.....
Ocean Chinook 2.jpg
Ocean Chinook 3.jpg
Ocean plus Chinook 1.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Gabriele »

For Libya they embarked Pave Hawks from 56th Rescue Squadron, RAF Lakenheath, for CSAR duty was it to become necessary.

http://www.airforcesmonthly.com/2011/09 ... eployment/

It is no mystery. Image

And the USAF, of course, does not have Chinooks. The US Army aviation brigades have Chinook. How radical a concept, huh...? Army helicopters in army hands? No way!
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Pongoglo
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 10:39
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Pongoglo »

Thank you Gabs as always and I stand corrected but my point about Chinook remains, and Gabs loves Nick Carter too, almost as much as me ! Of course USMC Osprey were a regular visitor to Ocean and we hope to QE too....
HMS-Ocean-V22-Osprey.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

indeid
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by indeid »

Pongoglo wrote:It most certainly was not USAF Chinook !
I know, that’s why I never said it was USAF Chinooks.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »


"They were practicing for the RAF 100-year celebration flypast of 103 aircraft over London (on 9 July 2018)."
That'll be something to behold.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5625
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by SW1 »


dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by dmereifield »

SW1 wrote:Possible FMS 16 MH-47G for the RAF

http://dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/united ... ccessories
To increase the number of Chinooks in the fleet, replace older Chinooks (on a like for like basis in terms of numbers), or perhaps replace Puma? Or something else?

Also, $3.5 billion seems like an awful lot....

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Ron5 »

Oooooo yet another single source contract with Boeing.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

dmereifield wrote:$3.5 billion seems like an awful lot....
It does, when you divide it by 16... what do you get (an F-35 :o :shock: )

Then again, reading the headline
(Extended Range) Helicopters and Accessories
it clearly is "code" for :) one of those past tinkering projects (Special Forces special UK edition of Chinook) that only burnt money - lots of it! - but did not get anywhere :(
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by dmereifield »

If this, and the Wedgetail, go through we will have signed up to about $10 bn worth of Boeing kit (Apache upgrades, P8, Wedgetail and the Chinooks) over a period of a couple of years (all non-competitively tendred too, which is fair enough for the most part given lack of options)...despite Boeing's antics with Bombardier. In contrast, Boeing has invested about £20 million in the UK (one small factory)....I hope that they are planning to invest a bit more back into UK given the fact that we are throwing money at them hand over fist

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3923
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

dmereifield wrote:To increase the number of Chinooks in the fleet, replace older Chinooks (on a like for like basis in terms of numbers), or perhaps replace Puma? Or something else?
Could these 16 extended range Chinooks be used to keep HMS Prince of Wales that little bit further Over The Horizon?

Should they be marinised?

Powered folding rotors?

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-expl ... licopters/

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 659
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Dahedd »

Seems excessive. Why not upgrade or purchase new Merlins at the Italian spec. The HH-101A Caesar as they've called it.


Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2779
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Caribbean »

Poiuytrewq wrote:Could these 16 extended range Chinooks be used to keep HMS Prince of Wales that little bit further Over The Horizon?
So effectively, these are a replacement for Ocean's LCVPs? Seems like a reasonable idea - can they carry an M777?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5625
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

These are the special forces long range insertion helicopters. They will replace older chinooks most like, unless mdp has decided to ditch puma as well. Though pumas urban capabilities would be lost. May well see a trimming of Hercules numbers and potientially an aar capability added to the remaining depending on helicopter clearances on a400m

https://defence-blog.com/wp-content/upl ... q95-12.jpg

Boeing has had a lot of single source contracts with little in return. This is the west’s heavy lift helicopter of choice and already in service so less controversial than the two recent fix wing aircraft purchases.

On cost yep very expensive goes to show why banging on about fly away cost of under $90m ect ect is complete pointless load of nonsense unless all your interested in is a big paperweight and a catchy headline

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3923
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Caribbean wrote:....can they carry an M777?
Yes :D
image.jpg
So effectively, these are a replacement for Ocean's LCVPs?
Its possible but PoW just won't have enough Marines on board to make full use of the large numbers of Chinooks and landing spots.

With the change of Amphibious doctrine to OTH Lilly Padding, it highlights the fact that the UK's Amphibious vessels are badly under equipped for this transition. Just not enough Chinook capable landing spots.

If it turns out that these Chinooks are going to spend a high proportion of their service life at sea I would seriously look at marinising them where possible and it must now be time for someone to bite the bullet and invest in powered folding rotors?

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Ron5 »

dmereifield wrote:Boeing's antics with Bombardier
Boeing complained about Canadian Bombardiers being dumped in the US at less than cost in order to gain market share.

Just like the UK complained when China dumped steel into the UK market at less than cost in order to gain market share.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5625
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

Of course only after Boeing dumping old aircraft into its own market and then offered second hand Brazilian jets to competite the contract in a vain attempt to keep the US market as a Boeing only one while demanding every overseas competition is a fair and open one, Boeing were hypocritical chancers and attempted to play up to trumps rhetoric sad.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 892
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by downsizer »

If this is correct it’s a win. Proven product with nothing comparable in existence.

Armchair generals should shut their word holes.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2779
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Caribbean »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Caribbean wrote:....can they carry an M777?
Yes :D
Seems like a sensible choice, whether they are replacements, or an addition to the current fleet. Seems that they may be useful for SF purposes as well.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

Right now can we get some M777s for the RM.

Post Reply