Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Contains threads on equipment developed by the UK defence and aerospace industry, but not in service with the British Armed Forces.
Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3260
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Timmymagic »

Took a while...is this the Wildcat order mentioned in August?

Just the 3 helos...

These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Ron5

User avatar
Jensy
Moderator
Posts: 1109
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Jensy »

Was there not also a mention of additional AW101s?

I'm guessing this is for Algeria. They've got an existing fleet of newish ASW Super Lynx that might need supplementing, rather than replacing, for their rather lofty naval ambitions.

I'm might be misremembering but I think I saw one of their final aircraft on the line in 2013, alongside the first Wildcats.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)

Meriv9
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Feb 2016, 00:19
Italy

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Meriv9 »

They asked also a second LDP if not wrong.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3260
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Timmymagic »

Jensy wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 15:13 Was there not also a mention of additional AW101s?

I'm guessing this is for Algeria. They've got an existing fleet of newish ASW Super Lynx that might need supplementing, rather than replacing, for their rather lofty naval ambitions.

I'm might be misremembering but I think I saw one of their final aircraft on the line in 2013, alongside the first Wildcats.
Yes AW101 was mentioned in August as well (presuming they are talking about the same customer). Everyone seems to think its Algeria.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Jensy

User avatar
Jensy
Moderator
Posts: 1109
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Jensy »

Timmymagic wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 15:59
Jensy wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 15:13 Was there not also a mention of additional AW101s?

I'm guessing this is for Algeria. They've got an existing fleet of newish ASW Super Lynx that might need supplementing, rather than replacing, for their rather lofty naval ambitions.

I'm might be misremembering but I think I saw one of their final aircraft on the line in 2013, alongside the first Wildcats.
Yes AW101 was mentioned in August as well (presuming they are talking about the same customer). Everyone seems to think its Algeria.
Morocco might be a possibility. Considering the modest order.

Egypt, also needs to replace their Sea Kings and their Super Seasprites aren't getting any younger.

Until the mention of North Africa, I actually presumed both orders were for South Korea.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)

Meriv9
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Feb 2016, 00:19
Italy

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Meriv9 »

These users liked the author Meriv9 for the post:
Jensy

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3260
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Timmymagic »

A good spot from Gabi...

Looks like Poland is going to order 22 troop carrying AW-101...this is in addition to the 4 ordered by the Polish Navy already for SAR.

These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
wargame_insomniac

Clive F
Member
Posts: 178
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Clive F »

How long will that keep Yeovil going?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3260
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Timmymagic »

AW101 order....

Japan this time, numbers haven't been revealed. Plus upgrade of the rest of their AW101 fleet.

https://www.leonardo.com/en/press-relea ... e-in-japan

Press Release Text

Leonardo and Kawasaki Heavy Industries sign contract for additional MCH-101 helicopters and the start of a mid-life update programme for the type in Japan
Paris 20 June 2023 13:01

The MCH-101 is a licence-built version of the world-class Leonardo AW101 helicopter, operated by the Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force

The signing coincides with Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI), Leonardo, and Marubeni Aerospace Corporation celebrating a 20-year partnership in the helicopters market

Leonardo and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI) signed a contract for additional MCH-101 naval helicopters for the Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF), and it marked the start of a mid-life update (MLU) programme for the type in Japan. The MCH-101 is a license-built version of the Leonardo AW101 helicopter. The signing, which follows the order for one aircraft placed in 2022, was made as Leonardo, KHI, and Marubeni Aerospace Corporation celebrate a 20-year partnership in the helicopter market and the Japanese AW101 programme.

The JMSDF has ten MCH-101s for mine countermeasure and transportation missions and three CH-101s for utility transport used to support Japan’s Antarctic research activities, ensuring commonality within the fleet. The update programme, which launched this year, will see a batch of aircraft updated to the latest avionics configuration for the MCH-101, aligned to the new helicopters’ configuration and enabling the enhancement of the JMSDF’s operational effectiveness.

For two decades, Leonardo, Kawasaki Heavy Industries and Marubeni Aerospace have collaborated on the MCH-101, with KHI as the prime contractor and Leonardo providing technical support for the platform. Marubeni Aerospace Corporation acts as Leonardo’s Distributor and is responsible for spares, ground support equipment and services.

Gian Piero Cutillo, Managing Director of Leonardo Helicopters, commented: “We are proud of our close partnership with Kawasaki Heavy Industries and Marubeni Aerospace and today we are excited to celebrate this important milestone and contract. It emphasises the AW101’s important role in Japan’s defence, as well as the outstanding capabilities it delivers among operators worldwide.”

Adam Clarke, Managing Director of Leonardo Helicopters UK, said: “This contract demonstrates the key role that Britain’s only helicopter manufacturer plays in global defence. Through this significant partnership with Japanese industry, exports from Leonardo’s helicopter business are contributing millions of pounds to the UK economy. We look forward to many more years working together, creating important technologies to help the customer deliver a range of challenging missions.”

Kenya Takaha, Executive Senior General Manger, Marketing Division Aerospace System Company at Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI), said: “We are proud that Japan's MCH-101 programme was able to launch additional procurement with the latest specifications and the MLU. Japan, the United Kingdom, and Italy all have this excellent platform. We anticipate that there may be common operational requirements in each country, and the introduction of common equipment on the platform can effectively contribute to strengthening the defence capabilities of each country.”

KHI delivered the first AW101 aircraft to the JMSDF on 24 May 2006. In 2015 the first Airborne Mine Counter Measures equipped MCH-101 was delivered to the JMSDF. The AW101/MCH-101 primary task is Airborne Mine Counter Measure and is one of only two helicopter types capable of towing the AN/AQS-24A, the only operationally-proven, high-speed airborne mine hunting system in the world. The unique 3-engine configuration allows for safe operations when towing at low altitude and slow speeds. The first aircraft entered operational service in 2016 and the operator achieved more than 25,000 flight hours in 2021.

Leonardo’s helicopters have been in operation in Japan since the mid-1980s in a number of key programmes. Today there are some 160 Leonardo helicopters of different types in service with the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF), Coast Guard, Police and Fire Service, with specialised operators for medical and commercial services.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Ron5

User avatar
Jensy
Moderator
Posts: 1109
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Jensy »

That looks a great deal more like Vergiate, Italy than Yeovil...



Hopefully some breadcrumbs down the line with the above mentioned further orders.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)

Meriv9
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Feb 2016, 00:19
Italy

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Meriv9 »

Guys put yourself in our shoes(Italians) when you read about radar development(thus Edinburgh if I'm not wrong right?) and capital destined to that branch (like the 25% Hensdolt buy)

Everyone gets somethings.
These users liked the author Meriv9 for the post:
Jensy

User avatar
Jensy
Moderator
Posts: 1109
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Jensy »

Meriv9 wrote: 07 Aug 2023, 20:51 Guys put yourself in our shoes(Italians) when you read about radar development(thus Edinburgh if I'm not wrong right?) and capital destined to that branch (like the 25% Hensdolt buy)

Everyone gets somethings.
No hard feelings, it's the way the game is played.

Successive UK governments have had opportunities to secure the UK helicopter industry. Each have either failed or had no interest to begin with. With little regard for UK taxpayer investments.

Nearly everything goes back to the fallout from the Westland Affair.

British business culture has a proud tradition of selling off assets far too willingly, far too rushed and for far too little. Defence is no different.

Leonardo has been better to this country than it ever needed to be.
These users liked the author Jensy for the post:
Meriv9
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 878
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by mrclark303 »

Jensy wrote: 07 Aug 2023, 21:43
Meriv9 wrote: 07 Aug 2023, 20:51 Guys put yourself in our shoes(Italians) when you read about radar development(thus Edinburgh if I'm not wrong right?) and capital destined to that branch (like the 25% Hensdolt buy)

Everyone gets somethings.
No hard feelings, it's the way the game is played.

Successive UK governments have had opportunities to secure the UK helicopter industry. Each have either failed or had no interest to begin with. With little regard for UK taxpayer investments.

Nearly everything goes back to the fallout from the Westland Affair.

British business culture has a proud tradition of selling off assets far too willingly, far too rushed and for far too little. Defence is no different.

Leonardo has been better to this country than it ever needed to be.
I'm not so sure, Leonardo have a UK base, not for altruistic reasons, but because the UK is the largest European procurer of military helicopters. It's that simple

There's a lot of 'home grown' clever PR ( retaining Westland name, fancy Union flag wraps on the 149 etc), but in reality Westland is now dead and buried, it's a wholly owned Italian company, assembling Italian helicopters from Italian parts.

Nothing wrong with that, they make excellent helicopters, but let's not pretend there's anything British about the company, a British PR arm perhaps???

It's no more British than MG.

It's our fault, as said, we just sold everything off. At least BAE Systems still has a dog in the fixed wing fight, but let's not pretend we still have a UK domestic helicopter design and development industry. We don't.

GarethDavies1
Member
Posts: 89
Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by GarethDavies1 »

Leonardo being partly owned by Italian Govt, which is a model we should be following.
These users liked the author GarethDavies1 for the post:
Little J

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 878
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by mrclark303 »

GarethDavies1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 12:35 Leonardo being partly owned by Italian Govt, which is a model we should be following.
I'm not sure, I think state ownership just encourages an attitude of Joe tax payer will pick up the tab no matter what....

Nationalisation simply doesn't work.

By example, most of the folks who complain about our rail system today, probably weren't around when we had the unmitigated car crash of wholly government funded incompetence that was British Rail!

High end military supply companies need to stand or fall on their products, nothing like the threat of loosing your job to concentrate the mind ...

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5804
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by SW1 »

So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
serge750

Little J
Member
Posts: 979
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by Little J »

Full state ownership is never good, but government having a small percentage of a strategically important enterprise (to guarantee in country ability) would be a good idea.
These users liked the author Little J for the post (total 4):
SW1new guyserge750zavve

topman
Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by topman »

Better structured realtionships between industry, the services and DE&S might help.

Some work well, some are awful. Including between services and DE&S, although perhaps that's just my experience.

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 878
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by mrclark303 »

SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5804
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by SW1 »

mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 2):
serge750new guy

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 878
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by mrclark303 »

SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:29
mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
Come along now SW1, are you seriously trying to say the RAF has a better fast jet line up than Australia at the moment?

Really, I don't know what your choice of tipple is, but I would suggest you lay off it a bit.

Just point me in the direction of the RAF's dedicated
fast jet jamming platform that's the equivalent of the Growler, let's start there shall we....

I've looked but can't see it, perhaps it's a super stealth classified platform??

The Australians have an absolutely first class line up from top to bottom. (even better once they have got rid of their tardy European Helicopters) C17, C130J, Airbus MRTT's, F35A and two flavours of Super Hornets....

If you think the RAF's fleet is better than that, then I would love to know what your definition of 'better' is.....

You hear no complaints from the RAAF that's for sure...

The Thypoon isn't even getting an ESA radar until 2030, then only 40 of them, it's bloody pathetic quite frankly....

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5804
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by SW1 »

mrclark303 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:20
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:29
mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
Come along now SW1, are you seriously trying to say the RAF has a better fast jet line up than Australia at the moment?

Really, I don't know what your choice of tipple is, but I would suggest you lay off it a bit.

Just point me in the direction of the RAF's dedicated
fast jet jamming platform that's the equivalent of the Growler, let's start there shall we....

I've looked but can't see it, perhaps it's a super stealth classified platform??

The Australians have an absolutely first class line up from top to bottom. (even better once they have got rid of their tardy European Helicopters) C17, C130J, Airbus MRTT's, F35A and two flavours of Super Hornets....

If you think the RAF's fleet is better than that, then I would love to know what your definition of 'better' is.....

You hear no complaints from the RAAF that's for sure...

The Thypoon isn't even getting an ESA radar until 2030, then only 40 of them, it's bloody pathetic quite frankly....
The RAF has excellent aircraft top to bottom.

So to my original statement how many sustained air operations are the Australian airforce running at present and on how many continents are they doing them on?

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 878
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by mrclark303 »

SW1 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:44
mrclark303 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:20
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:29
mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
Come along now SW1, are you seriously trying to say the RAF has a better fast jet line up than Australia at the moment?

Really, I don't know what your choice of tipple is, but I would suggest you lay off it a bit.

Just point me in the direction of the RAF's dedicated
fast jet jamming platform that's the equivalent of the Growler, let's start there shall we....

I've looked but can't see it, perhaps it's a super stealth classified platform??

The Australians have an absolutely first class line up from top to bottom. (even better once they have got rid of their tardy European Helicopters) C17, C130J, Airbus MRTT's, F35A and two flavours of Super Hornets....

If you think the RAF's fleet is better than that, then I would love to know what your definition of 'better' is.....

You hear no complaints from the RAAF that's for sure...

The Thypoon isn't even getting an ESA radar until 2030, then only 40 of them, it's bloody pathetic quite frankly....
The RAF has excellent aircraft top to bottom.

So to my original statement how many sustained air operations are the Australian airforce running at present and on how many continents are they doing them on?
The relevance of current operations to force line up and bang for your buck is what exactly SW1?

Your refusal to acknowledge the painfully bleeding obvious, that Australia has a much more capable and rounded fixed wing capability is extremely telling, a gritted teeth agreement perhaps....

Now, want to compare how much this capability has cost the Australians compared to the UK?

I wouldn't if I were you, it shows you just how we spend £50 billion and get fu*k all for our money....

But no, let's stick to a no ITAR position, because that's clearly 'far' more important than actually giving the RAF the tools for the job....

The tail still wags the dog .

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5804
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by SW1 »

mrclark303 wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 08:45
SW1 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:44
mrclark303 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:20
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:29
mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
Come along now SW1, are you seriously trying to say the RAF has a better fast jet line up than Australia at the moment?

Really, I don't know what your choice of tipple is, but I would suggest you lay off it a bit.

Just point me in the direction of the RAF's dedicated
fast jet jamming platform that's the equivalent of the Growler, let's start there shall we....

I've looked but can't see it, perhaps it's a super stealth classified platform??

The Australians have an absolutely first class line up from top to bottom. (even better once they have got rid of their tardy European Helicopters) C17, C130J, Airbus MRTT's, F35A and two flavours of Super Hornets....

If you think the RAF's fleet is better than that, then I would love to know what your definition of 'better' is.....

You hear no complaints from the RAAF that's for sure...

The Thypoon isn't even getting an ESA radar until 2030, then only 40 of them, it's bloody pathetic quite frankly....
The RAF has excellent aircraft top to bottom.

So to my original statement how many sustained air operations are the Australian airforce running at present and on how many continents are they doing them on?
The relevance of current operations to force line up and bang for your buck is what exactly SW1?

Your refusal to acknowledge the painfully bleeding obvious, that Australia has a much more capable and rounded fixed wing capability is extremely telling, a gritted teeth agreement perhaps....

Now, want to compare how much this capability has cost the Australians compared to the UK?

I wouldn't if I were you, it shows you just how we spend £50 billion and get fu*k all for our money....

But no, let's stick to a no ITAR position, because that's clearly 'far' more important than actually giving the RAF the tools for the job....

The tail still wags the dog .
The royal airforce has a highly capable fastjet fleet able to conduct air superiority, long range strike and close air support.

Typhoon is a highly capable aircraft as is f35b. Your either ignorance or bias is quite telling. The RAAF has around 80 fastjets the RAF currently around 160.

The RAF is currently conducting several sustained combat air operations at significant distance from the U.K. which at the end of the day is what you acquire and train a force structure to do, it is how you measure bangs for buck or whatever other analogy you care to use. The RAAF is currently doing none.

The RAF is able to design and integrate what it wants from it own defensive and offensive capabilities from its own threat library and industry on its main fastjet aircraft the Australians cannot. The U.K. has sovereignty of capability in this regard the Australians do not.

Go to Luton or the air warfare centre or warton or Edinburgh and show me the equivalent in Australia.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
wargame_insomniac

new guy
Senior Member
Posts: 1320
Joined: 18 Apr 2023, 01:53
United Kingdom

Re: Leonardo (Agusta-Westland)

Post by new guy »

SW1 wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 09:10
mrclark303 wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 08:45
SW1 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:44
mrclark303 wrote: 09 Aug 2023, 20:20
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:29
mrclark303 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 22:04
SW1 wrote: 08 Aug 2023, 18:09 So if high end military supply companies need to stand and fall on their own products then i assume they can sell those products to whom ever wants them no government interference so they can get a return on their investment in making those products?

It isn’t a black or white argument. Our problem often is we jump around too much from one fad to the next rather getting big into the industrialisation of products we do make and rolling them out across the board. We don’t continue to invest in and iterate in build designs.
Well, it's a tail wagging the dog issue again, there's a good reason the UK spends upwards of 50 billion a year on its small armed forces, but still struggles to field new equipment.

Just look at our absolutely creaking Amoured ability, with obsolete Warriors and ageing Chally 2 at its heart and Bulldogs that are as old as some of the soldiers grandparents!

We invest billions to buy tiny numbers of high end bespoke equipment and as a result our armed forces suffer and the money is syphoned away by defence contractors.

A long winded way of saying that our armed forces is now so small, the requirements so very limited, you have to think long and hard about developing or buying off the shelf.

The Australians have a similar problem, small armed forces, but Christ, they are well equipped for bear!

Super Hornet, Growler and F35A, makes the RAF look decidedly under equipped!

And we spend 'way' more.

Yep I know ITAR, but it doesn't seem to worry the Australians.....
Wasn’t industry that selected and developed boxer in 2003 then walked away for 20 years before deciding to order it. It wasn’t industry that decided not to spend a penny on challenger for 20 years and it wasn’t industry that decided it wanted to refurbish 20 year old warriors rather than building new hulls before walking away and it wasn’t industry that selected Ajax and then decided to redesigned it.

Cant blame uk industry for the rank incompetence that is e7 procurement can you

Do they? How many multiple and sustained air operations are australia running at present? The equipment the RAF is using is excellent.

You continue to pursue a it’s all uk industry’s fault narrative which is bollox quite frankly. The reason nothing changes is senior figures in defence in and out of uniform need a hard look in the mirror and admit they’re rank amateurs when it comes to managing procurement programs and industrial engagement and stop blaming everyone else.
Come along now SW1, are you seriously trying to say the RAF has a better fast jet line up than Australia at the moment?

Really, I don't know what your choice of tipple is, but I would suggest you lay off it a bit.

Just point me in the direction of the RAF's dedicated
fast jet jamming platform that's the equivalent of the Growler, let's start there shall we....

I've looked but can't see it, perhaps it's a super stealth classified platform??

The Australians have an absolutely first class line up from top to bottom. (even better once they have got rid of their tardy European Helicopters) C17, C130J, Airbus MRTT's, F35A and two flavours of Super Hornets....

If you think the RAF's fleet is better than that, then I would love to know what your definition of 'better' is.....

You hear no complaints from the RAAF that's for sure...

The Thypoon isn't even getting an ESA radar until 2030, then only 40 of them, it's bloody pathetic quite frankly....
The RAF has excellent aircraft top to bottom.

So to my original statement how many sustained air operations are the Australian airforce running at present and on how many continents are they doing them on?
The relevance of current operations to force line up and bang for your buck is what exactly SW1?

Your refusal to acknowledge the painfully bleeding obvious, that Australia has a much more capable and rounded fixed wing capability is extremely telling, a gritted teeth agreement perhaps....

Now, want to compare how much this capability has cost the Australians compared to the UK?

I wouldn't if I were you, it shows you just how we spend £50 billion and get fu*k all for our money....

But no, let's stick to a no ITAR position, because that's clearly 'far' more important than actually giving the RAF the tools for the job....

The tail still wags the dog .
The royal airforce has a highly capable fastjet fleet able to conduct air superiority, long range strike and close air support.

Typhoon is a highly capable aircraft as is f35b. Your either ignorance or bias is quite telling. The RAAF has around 80 fastjets the RAF currently around 160.

The RAF is currently conducting several sustained combat air operations at significant distance from the U.K. which at the end of the day is what you acquire and train a force structure to do, it is how you measure bangs for buck or whatever other analogy you care to use. The RAAF is currently doing none.

The RAF is able to design and integrate what it wants from it own defensive and offensive capabilities from its own threat library and industry on its main fastjet aircraft the Australians cannot. The U.K. has sovereignty of capability in this regard the Australians do not.

Go to Luton or the air warfare centre or warton or Edinburgh and show me the equivalent in Australia.
Australia fast jet fleet ( Existing+ on order) :
12 Growlers, 24 super hornets, 72 lightning II. total: 108.
no sounds as of yet for any more orders.

UK fast jet fleet ( Existing+ on order):
47 lightning, ~107 or so typhoons, total, ~155.
Sounds of a second lightning batch

Post Reply