Re: AW159 Wildcat Helicopter (RN & AAC)
Posted: 02 Sep 2018, 18:24
Next year should be a lot better already, though. More complex F-35 trials, and almost certainly more jets on board. Apache will finally go on as well.
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
Considering she is not operational until late 2020, it matters little at this point.serge750 wrote:She does seem a bit toothless for the next couple of years
I'm 90% sure the plan for 2019 involves 7 F-35B, then 2020 is 12 aircraft.Gabriele wrote:Next year should be a lot better already, though. More complex F-35 trials, and almost certainly more jets on board. Apache will finally go on as well.
Happens to be the IOC definition (Maritime), too.Defiance wrote:then 2020 is 12 aircraft.
Problem is endurance carrying all that stuff tho the Korean helo's had extra fuel tanks.ArmChairCivvy wrote:THe present for some
"The Philippine Navy (PN) is currently testing its first AW-159 helicopter in the UK. "As confirmed by the Commander Naval Air Group (CNAG), the AW159 has just started initial test flight as part of the manufacturer's trial. It is still scheduled for a series of test flights before scheduling its handover to the Philippines. According as well to CNAG, the flight signals the completion of the first unit," defense department spokesperson Arsenio Andolong, said in a text message to the Philippine News Agency (PNA) on Tuesday. The PN ordered two AW159 Lynx Wildcat naval helicopters for $114 million in March 2016. The helicopters will give the PN a long sought after anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability, carrying active dipping sonar (ADS), sonobuoys, and torpedoes, while for the anti-surface warfare role it can be armed with anti-ship missiles, rockets, and guns." from DID of today,
but could be useful in optimising the RN mix of assets, going forward
... littoral ops have been talked about for a decade; and Merlin numbers are tight
V true, in ASW (the kit weighs "some") endurance is also close to zilch.Ron5 wrote:Problem is endurance carrying all that stuff tho the Korean helo's had extra fuel tanks.
The old plan, to take 4+4 from the navy and army orders and fit them for "light attack", disappeared without a trace. However, I read somewhere that this has been done, with 2 for the RM and 2 for SF. Was not able to assess the quality of this information - if it is in the public domain, could only have emerged from a FOI request (as nothing has been announced?).Lord Jim wrote: again if things had been thought through.
Half a year later, I am no wiser on the above topic. But here's a good fit-out for Wildcats on any such duties:ArmChairCivvy wrote:" it was decided to save money by disbanding 657 Sqn and establishing the SF Wildcat Flight" says nothing specific about it and is contradicted by others stating that the Wildcats for such service are drawn from the general pool. And it seems that this one, about the same topic, https://www.janes.com/article/73702/uk- ... s-aviation has been pulled.
Lord Jim wrote:16 Air Assault needs a bigger and more balance organic air component than it currently has and one solution is Wildcat. We currently have one Regiment currently tasked as Recce. These need to be modified to take on the task of Armed Recce in a similar vain as the US Army did converting the OH-58D Kiowa in to he Kiowa Warrior, possibly equipped as mentioned above. WE also need a further Regiment of a utility variant, similar in load carrying capability to the retired Lynx AH-9. This would give the Brigade the ability to move Platoon and even Company sized units rapid around the battlefield without relying on the RAF of RN helicopters. Together with one of the AAC's Apache Regiments this would for the revised air component of 16 Air Assault.
No-one is going to equip land based Wildcat with anything more substantial than a machine gun until the Apache E order is all safely delivered, lest someone in the Treasury start thinking its a gunship. It's the same reason that Brimstone hasn't been integrated with Wildcat, land or sea based, which would make a lot of sense (arguably more than LMM/Martlet). The CRV7 PG never got much interest, which was surprising. It would probably be cheaper than Martlet as well (as would APKWS). Larger warhead with slightly shorter range. Which leads me to believe that LMM is very much a make work for Thales in Belfast. The only potential advantage it has is the ability to be used for anti-air/drone work.Lord Jim wrote:These need to be modified to take on the task of Armed Recce in a similar vain as the US Army did converting the OH-58D Kiowa in to he Kiowa Warrior, possibly equipped as mentioned above.
An E/O turret is pretty much a given for all military helicopters now, as is a self protection suite. But more Wildcat would be a waste of money. As a scout/naval helicopter its superlative, but for any other role it is fantastically over-equipped and expensive, plus offers very limited capability in any utility role due to its size constraints. The only investment we should be putting into it at present should be integration of more weapons and a datalink.Lord Jim wrote:As for the Utility variant this would go in the opposite direction, though having them FFBNW a decent RO system to allow nigh operation would be of benefit. If it was possible refitting all ACC Wildcats to the same maritime protection standard as those operated by the FAA would also be very useful allow extended operations form Naval vessels if 16AA were to deploy by sea.
Not all targets are MBTs and having multiple (7?) shots available can be no bad thing?Timmymagic wrote: the same reason that Brimstone hasn't been integrated with Wildcat, land or sea based, which would make a lot of sense (arguably more than LMM/Martlet)
Indeed, the order was swapped from a quantity for something else (sharing parts) that was not deemed as urgentTimmymagic wrote: leads me to believe that LMM is very much a make work for Thales in Belfast.
No Wildcat will be carried by the QE Class. They may use one from an escort for plane guard. But it would need to be equipped with a rescue hoist. Quite frankly we need to take a leaf out of the Marine Nationale's book on this, they can't teach us much more about naval air but sticking a cheap plane guard helo on a carrier is one lesson we should heed, they've only just retired their Alouette III's after 45 years of service. They've currently got Dauphin aboard, but it looks like H160 will take the role on c2025. There aren't going to be many Merlin or Wildcat for all of the other jobs, we could well do without them using up their (very expensive) flight hours on plane guard or indeed HDS.serge750 wrote:Sorry if this sounds dumb but does anybody know if a naval Wildcat is going to act as a plane guard for the carriers, As i thought it might be a lot cheaper than running a Merlin ? I'm sure I read that they will use Merlins for downed aircraft inland but does that include plane guard duties ?
True. But CRV7 either unguided or in its Precision Guided mode made a whole lot more sense than LMM/Martlet. Brimstone at sea with its MMW and volley fire ability would have been more effective in an anti-FAC role than LMM could ever be.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Not all targets are MBTs and having multiple (7?) shots available can be no bad thing?
It was Starstreak 2. Given the paucity of anti-air weaponry in UK land forces I'll let you decide if that was a great idea or not....ArmChairCivvy wrote:Indeed, the order was swapped from a quantity for something else (sharing parts) that was not deemed as urgent
Ten very small men with no equipment? Wildcat will carry the 2 pilots and 6 in the back. Thats it.Lord Jim wrote:A utility variant of the Wildcat could carry up to ten men plus three crew including a door gunner.
It's massively more expensive than other options. By all accounts its about twice the price. And its ongoing costs are just as over the top in comparison with other helo's.Lord Jim wrote:Purchasing more Wildcat to fulfil this role would definitely be cheaper than bringing in a new type. Jobs would be retained in Yeovil both for the new build and the modification to existing platforms. Development work would be minimum as most has already been carried out for the FAA variant and for export studies.
Even if we have 8 Merlin HM.2 and 2 Merlin HC.4 on the carrier and 1 Merlin and 1 Wildcat on the escorts that is actually less than is needed for normal ops. The RN believes that 8-9 Merlin are needed for ASW protection of a CSG, let alone any with a Crowsnest fit. So thats all of the Merlin HM.2 otherwise engaged, add in HDS and Vertrep and maintenance, crew fatigue and there just isn't slack. Realistically to provide ASW, Crowsnest, TRAPS cover, HDS and vertrep for a CSG we'd need 9 Merlin HM.2 for ASW, 4-5 Merlin HM.2 for Crowsnest, 4 Merlin HC.4 for vertrep and TRAPS and 3 Wildcat for HDS and planeguard. Thats 21 helos...realistically we might have 12-13 in a CSG at the moment. We have to try and maximise those resources on the tasks where they're effective and cut out the waste. A simple small helo for planeguard and HDS saves a lot of money, crew and resources.serge750 wrote:That's what I was thinking that Merlins were to valuable in their ASW role so why not use something cheaper to run for the equally essential role of planeguard
Surely a navalised EC135/145 or AW109 (all of which we already use), equipped for SAR would be an ideal (and cheap) fit for this task.Dahedd wrote:Using a wildcat or merlin as a plain guard is surely a waste of platform
Also makes an awful lot of sense as a Gazelle replacement on land. Simply put high ranking officers will always demand to be carried around...sometimes for good reason. At present we're going to be using one of our key battlefield ISTAR assets (if the reports are true) to do it, for want of anything else.Caribbean wrote:Surely a navalised EC135/145 or AW109 (all of which we already use), equipped for SAR would be an ideal (and cheap) fit for this task.
Spot on. The last AH9As was only upgraded in 2011. They could actually lift stuff and carry people. Simple, rugged and powerful.Dahedd wrote:I've no knowledge of this but ref the earlier discussions on the Lynx AH9 & the need for a light utility. We're the AH9 & the navy's lynx not rushed out of service too quickly to make way for the wildcat or were they all knackered . Would it not have made more sense to retain some for the above roles.
Using a wildcat or merlin as a plane guard is surely a waste of platform & likewise the AAC wildcats should be far heavier armed & keeping the tricycle equiped AH9 would free up wildcard for their recon role.