UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1453
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 23 Oct 2018, 19:57

Lord Jim wrote:Did we really need to splash out this amount of money on these platforms when other programmes are having serious issues due to lack of funding? In my mind the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
Im happy to wait until the details become clearer before passing comment on this but I think it's a good illustration of ensuring that the money available is spent in the right areas.

For example, this £2.7bn is pretty much the same amount it would take to scrap RN's T31 programme and built 13 ASW T26's to replace the T23's.

Could this money have been better used to increase the MPA purchase up to the suggested number of 16x P8 Poseidons?

With the price continuing to drop how many F35's could £2.7bn actually purchase now?

As you say many programmes would benefit from a cash injection at the moment, but as ever, it all comes down to a question of priorities and this time it was the Chinooks that have been deemed the biggest priority. I hope it was the right call.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 25 Oct 2018, 05:26

Pongoglo wrote: 18 and 27 Squadron aircraft out of Odiham, rotated all the time

To be washed down, on land, as the lifts were not able to take them away from the deck? Ref: the quote below
Poiuytrewq wrote:Should they be marinised?

Powered folding rotors?


Caribbean wrote:effectively, these are a replacement for Ocean's LCVPs? Seems like a reasonable idea - can they carry an M777?

+
Poiuytrewq wrote: highlights the fact that the UK's Amphibious vessels are badly under equipped for this transition. Just not enough Chinook capable landing spots.


Bays have been trialled with two on the back... makes for 6, for starters. Plus the ones flying to and fro the carrier. Call it ten; how many can you fit in the (high) hard-hat area of the hangar?
- and why ;) is the highest part of the hangar called with that name?

SW1 wrote: May well see a trimming of Hercules numbers and potientially an aar capability added to the remaining depending on helicopter clearances on a400m

Agree; do as the French do? Would go well with supporting an SF operation at scale (a oxymoron? For SF ops you sometimes need more than just the SF) and at a distance.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 25 Oct 2018, 05:53

SW1 wrote:what replaces merlin puma wildcat

A god question as we were already unbalanced (too little in the medium category) and going forward will be even more so.
Lord Jim wrote:I thought all this was to be covered by the MDP?

+
serge750 wrote:does seem strange to announce purchase decisions before the review is known

= sugar coat the announcements (cuts) by pre-announcing investments that were coming (but later) anyway?
RetroSicotte wrote:This matching up with the retirement of older Chinooks likely represented a politically easy way to fund them given those helos would need replacing anyway.

yes
RetroSicotte wrote:these 16 are to replace 20+ or something and the total fleet of 60 will actually drop, because they never learn their lesson about having enough of something

could happen
jimthelad wrote:Ahh the much rumoured TERAUTOFIDE system

Remember the helicopter crash in Iraq when the pilots assigned to supporting SF were eager to show off to their PAX how good they were in contour flying; overmatched only by the incident of 'mooning' to a low-flying Herc... only to be slapped (a bit more than that :( ) on the buttocks by the load ramp already in a lowered position
Lord Jim wrote:all the bells and whistles that make the ones we are buying so capable are going to take up quiet a bit of room in the cabin, having seen inside a Pave low III a while back.
Well, we don't have any Vulcan bombers, anymore, from which to strip radar warning systems and the like for the battlefield Chinooks. And as for your "I would still like to know where the money is coming from" has everybody forgotten about the TWO BILLION MORE that Cameron promised for the SF in the 2015 review?

SW1
Member
Posts: 681
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby SW1 » 03 Mar 2019, 22:21

This year could see the MoD destroying the official files relating to the 1994 Chinook crash on the Mull of Kintyre, meaning the true cause of the crash may never been known.

The MOD has confirmed to the News Letter that all files relating to the crash which were closed in 1995/96 will be reviewed this year for disposal or disclosure under the 30-year rule. Two RAF air marshals had accused the pilots, Flt Lts Jonathan Tapper and Richard Cook, of gross negligence over the crash. However, after a campaign of almost two decades by supporters to clear their names, a fresh review in 2011 found they should not have been blamed and the earlier ruling was set aside. But David Hill, a retired MOD helicopter engineer and Dr Susan Phoenix, whose husband RUC Det Supt Ian Phoenix was killed in the crash, note that the 2011 review which restored the pilots’ reputations had no remit to inquire into the actual cause of the crash.

Now they are both concerned that internal MoD housekeeping could see a slew of files relating to the crash destroyed this year as a matter of routine, thus ending all hope of getting to the definitive cause of the crash.

Read more at: https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/truth ... -1-8776839

There is a parliamentary petition for anyone interested

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/237925

Little J
Member
Posts: 549
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby Little J » 03 Mar 2019, 22:57

Signed and shared... Don't think it will make a difference though (unfortunately).

S M H
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby S M H » 04 Mar 2019, 21:57

Mr Haynes whom was a retired Major was also on the flight. He was from Crewe. He was at school with my father and always called me by my childhood nickname when I saw him. I hold little hope of disclosure as it will open a nasty can of worms.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 05 May 2019, 10:49

Let's see what happens with the order for nearly half a thousand improved Chinooks
" Boeing granted CH-47F Block II contract after cancellation fears
On Jan 11, 2019
The US Army granted Boeing a low rate initial production contract for the CH-47F Block II Chinook "
... all four of them, with an option for 10 more
WHEN [from FlightGlobal]
"the aircraft's payload capacity will increase more than 1,814kg (4,000lb), Boeing says.

The full programme calls for the upgrade of 473 CH-47F models and 69 MH-47G models, a variant used by US Special Operations Command."

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 1576
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby bobp » 05 May 2019, 15:01

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The full programme calls for the upgrade of 473 CH-47F models and 69 MH-47G models, a variant used by US Special Operations Command."


I believe there is some talk of cancellation of the block II program with respect to the F model as the requirement (Afghanistan) has gone away for the time being.

https://www.janes.com/article/86870/us- ... cy-weapons

https://www.defensenews.com/newsletters ... e-chinook/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 06 May 2019, 09:12

That would make sense; we might still be getting our G's
- but JLTV would need doors and armour removing, to be lifted by them or will this
"the aircraft's payload capacity will increase more than 1,814kg (4,000lb), Boeing says.
apply to the G's as well as to F's
... and will that increase be enough?

Anyway, now we can go on and replace the LG with a 155mm piece with super-expensive titanium parts put into it, in order to squeeze it into the weight limits
= hang on :lol: , the rounds are still made of cheaper (and heavier) stuff

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby Scimitar54 » 06 May 2019, 09:32

The MoD will get around to it some day. :mrgreen:

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 1576
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby bobp » 06 May 2019, 09:37

The US is talking about a reduction in JLTV orders as well. They say like the Block II Chinook it was designed for Afghan type warfare and now question if they need so many when they have lots of Humvees available. Cant find the link as to where I read that though.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 5204
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby SKB » 14 Jun 2019, 14:57



RAF Chinooks are involved with building flood defenses after the River Steeping (Lincolnshire) burst its banks when 2 months of rain fell in 2 days.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-l ... e-48633669

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2940
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing Chinook (RAF)

Postby Lord Jim » 14 Jun 2019, 18:47

IF the US Army thinks that possible peer opponents haven't taken note of the effectiveness of IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that platforms need to have the level of protection offered by the JLTV as against that of the overloaded Humvee, then they are headed for the US version of the "Snatch" Land rover debacle. Some peer opponents will probably saturate the areas behind the front with artillery deployed munitions that are even more effective than the IEDs and harder to detect and neutralise. Yes you can keep the Humvees in their vanilla form back in the US but in theatre they will need the JLTV as will we.


Return to “Royal Air Force”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests