Total number on the exercise or total number used in one sortie/wave?Tempest414 wrote:It was 9 Chinook , 6 Puma , 4 Apache and 2 Wildcats so 21 helicopters there were also 3 A400 and a C-130 used for Para drop and resupply
Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
from the video all 21 helicopters were used in the first wave and then came back to move a second wave
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Mosharak's largest single movement was 1200 troops, which is well under a half of the 90 Chinook lifttopman wrote:or total number used in one sortie/wave?
- but you can't do 'airmobile' by just dropping troops; you'll have to sustain them, relocate them, bring in support (whatever; like artillery and may be loads of reloads)
So, yes, without digging into the quoted exercise, sounds like an advance element brought in by transport planes (2 companies worth) and the rest of the BG and all the further movements by the rotary assets listed?
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Each wave 350-400, and the quoted BG strength was 1300Tempest414 wrote: all 21 helicopters were used in the first wave and then came back to move a second wave
- the rear echelon (HQ and supporting elements) moving / following by other means and/or positioned close the the frwd companies by further, single lifts - as opposed to operating in further waves?
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Isn't there a Future Vertical Lift Programme thread you could discuss this all in rather than a Puma helicopter thread?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Hello, @SKB
Would it be reasonable that you would submit an opinion, into the discussion, rather than the fore-ever technicalities as to where x, y or z touches too close to the boundaries
... like "I THINK this, but as it falls more UNDER THAT, may be the further discussion should continue 'under THAT'?
Just a suggestion, I am not saying that you are sniping at others, or anything like that
- rather: applying the oil can to keep the discussion, err 'fluid'
Would it be reasonable that you would submit an opinion, into the discussion, rather than the fore-ever technicalities as to where x, y or z touches too close to the boundaries
... like "I THINK this, but as it falls more UNDER THAT, may be the further discussion should continue 'under THAT'?
Just a suggestion, I am not saying that you are sniping at others, or anything like that
- rather: applying the oil can to keep the discussion, err 'fluid'
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
No. FVL is a specific program with defined goals and is one strand of a number of UK studies to replace Puma, it isn't a catch-all term for the entire replacement effortSKB wrote:Isn't there a Future Vertical Lift Programme thread you could discuss this all in rather than a Puma helicopter thread?
Otherwise one could be accused of discussing NMH/AW149 in a FVL thread despite specifically not being FVL related
There is such a thing as too many stovepipes.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Silo'ed management, it has made its way from mgt speak to defence 10-15 years ago, if not earlierDefiance wrote:There is such a thing as too many stovepipes.
Some people think that a particular piece of kit is the same as ' a capability'
.... well, the time (after all those years) to think again
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
The Capability driven approach was supposed to remove the siloed mentality where a specific piece of kit was to replace another in a very focused manner. Capability Management was to recognise a role and its requirements and then take a step back and decide what system(s) could meet those needs. This could be new equipment or the re-use of existing equipment. A reasonable example would the the need to fill the capability gap after the Commando Sea Kings were retired and the solution found was to transfer the Merlins form the RAF to the FAA.
So after the Command Paper we have learned that a Common design is to replace four existing Helicopters in Service with the RAF and AAC. But the capabilities of these four aircraft do differ quite significantly, so where is the primary capability we are looking the replace, that of the Puma for the RAF or that of the three platforms in AAC service? Who will actually operate the new platform? to say that it has to be the RAF may be an error dependant on what the role of the new platform is to be, and what capability requirement is it aimed at?
So after the Command Paper we have learned that a Common design is to replace four existing Helicopters in Service with the RAF and AAC. But the capabilities of these four aircraft do differ quite significantly, so where is the primary capability we are looking the replace, that of the Puma for the RAF or that of the three platforms in AAC service? Who will actually operate the new platform? to say that it has to be the RAF may be an error dependant on what the role of the new platform is to be, and what capability requirement is it aimed at?
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Do they? The 4 helicopters mentioned for replacement are all used to deliver or extract small teams into confined or urban areas and provide a search and rescue response.Lord Jim wrote:But the capabilities of these four aircraft do differ quite significantly
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
@SKB could now start a new thread, on these linesLord Jim wrote:The Capability driven approach was supposed to remove the siloed mentality where a specific piece of kit was to replace another in a very focused manner. Capability Management was to recognise a role and its requirements and then take a step back and decide what system(s) could meet those needs. This could be new equipment or the re-use of existing equipment.
... if there was a category to be found; for it to be put under
Pls report back by sending a postcard; or setting up the said thread
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
I think, price and support costs are more important to the government, than carrying out some roles like "used to deliver or extract small teams into confined or urban areas and provide a search and rescue response".
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
But Puma took part in Wessex stormSKB wrote:Isn't there a Future Vertical Lift Programme thread you could discuss this all in rather than a Puma helicopter thread?
and talking about it replacement in context is fine
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
https://www.army.mod.uk/news-and-events ... programme/
A broad range of recent advances in technology, production methods and operational concepts will be used in the design of the bespoke medium helicopter that will bring maximum capability and cost saving benefits to all three services, and keep the Army at the leading edge of technology.
The helicopters will be operated jointly by the Army and RAF under Joint Helicopter Command and will be able to be deployed rapidly and access terrain which is less accessible to heavy lift helicopters. As part of Future Soldier, the Army will become more agile, more integrated and more expeditionary, with more of the Army deployed across the globe more of the time.
Work on this programme is at an early stage with effort primarily focused on developing and refining key user requirements. Details in relation to the procurement strategy, basing locations, fleet size, delivery schedule and organisational structure are all being assessed.
A broad range of recent advances in technology, production methods and operational concepts will be used in the design of the bespoke medium helicopter that will bring maximum capability and cost saving benefits to all three services, and keep the Army at the leading edge of technology.
The helicopters will be operated jointly by the Army and RAF under Joint Helicopter Command and will be able to be deployed rapidly and access terrain which is less accessible to heavy lift helicopters. As part of Future Soldier, the Army will become more agile, more integrated and more expeditionary, with more of the Army deployed across the globe more of the time.
Work on this programme is at an early stage with effort primarily focused on developing and refining key user requirements. Details in relation to the procurement strategy, basing locations, fleet size, delivery schedule and organisational structure are all being assessed.
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Oh no.
Just buying AW149 a bit to straightforward for them? Need to build on the stunning success of TRACER / FRES / AJAX etc and design something bespoke...
Just buying AW149 a bit to straightforward for them? Need to build on the stunning success of TRACER / FRES / AJAX etc and design something bespoke...
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Good to know the big brains of army procurement and staff officers are all over this...
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Not bad going but a way short of 35.Tempest414 wrote:from the video all 21 helicopters were used in the first wave and then came back to move a second wave
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
I agree however at the start of this I was only putting forward what could be done if we had say 55 Chinooks and 50 Aw-149's and we now have seen what has been done with 55 Chinooks and 20 Puma's in peace time so in war time 16X could get all Puma's and 20 Chinooks plus one sqn of Apachetopman wrote:Not bad going but a way short of 35.Tempest414 wrote:from the video all 21 helicopters were used in the first wave and then came back to move a second wave
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
OK, what's new in this
"The [2012 rotary wing strategy] study confirmed the following plans:
to move the MOD’s rotary wing capability to four core fleets, the Chinook, Wildcat, Merlin and Apache helicopters;to complete the Puma life extension programme, which extends the out of service date for Puma Mk2 to 2025; this offers resilience to the Department’s lift capability as it transitions to the four core fleets; and
to transfer the Merlin Mk 3/3a to the Royal Navy’s commando helicopter force
That study mentions that the AW strategic partnering agreement runs out in 2026 (never heard of such agreement before), which is within a year of the above mentioned 2025
- so, some AW will come
How that will pave the way to 2035, when the 'new' medium helo is expected to surface/ take to the air... well, that's anybody's guess
- medium lift will be needed (and that need has now been confirmed in the IR)
- defence industrial strategy will need to facilitate the leap from 2025/ 26 to 2035
... this speaks volumes as for which helo is actually going to straddle that gap. AND let's not forget about the Merlins (now fully navy assets) that will bow out 2040-ish
"The [2012 rotary wing strategy] study confirmed the following plans:
to move the MOD’s rotary wing capability to four core fleets, the Chinook, Wildcat, Merlin and Apache helicopters;to complete the Puma life extension programme, which extends the out of service date for Puma Mk2 to 2025; this offers resilience to the Department’s lift capability as it transitions to the four core fleets; and
to transfer the Merlin Mk 3/3a to the Royal Navy’s commando helicopter force
That study mentions that the AW strategic partnering agreement runs out in 2026 (never heard of such agreement before), which is within a year of the above mentioned 2025
- so, some AW will come
How that will pave the way to 2035, when the 'new' medium helo is expected to surface/ take to the air... well, that's anybody's guess
- medium lift will be needed (and that need has now been confirmed in the IR)
- defence industrial strategy will need to facilitate the leap from 2025/ 26 to 2035
... this speaks volumes as for which helo is actually going to straddle that gap. AND let's not forget about the Merlins (now fully navy assets) that will bow out 2040-ish
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Merlin bows out in 2030 unless further funding and life extension is authorised.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Yes, the normal game of putting down markers, so that those who have fallen asleep, over the l-t budget spreadsheets, are kept awakeSW1 wrote: unless further funding and life extension is authorised.
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5612
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
Puma going now to make way for AW-149 will help keep Yeovil going until Merlin replacement around 2035
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
That would look like a straigth, well arranged time line. BUTTempest414 wrote: going now to make way for AW-149 will help keep Yeovil going until Merlin replacement around 2035
- can a medium helo do the Merlin ASW job
- it is easier to do the AEW, roll on & off job, especially if there will be a rear ramp (highly likely with a troop transport)
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Puma Helicopter (RAF)
I think there was a road map for future lift released a while ago that suggested the working assumption was that merlin asw and aew would be replaced with unmanned systemsArmChairCivvy wrote:That would look like a straigth, well arranged time line. BUTTempest414 wrote: going now to make way for AW-149 will help keep Yeovil going until Merlin replacement around 2035
- can a medium helo do the Merlin ASW job
- it is easier to do the AEW, roll on & off job, especially if there will be a rear ramp (highly likely with a troop transport)