The New Medium Helicopter Programme will see four of the medium-sized helicopters currently in service across the armed forces replaced by one new helicopter, say the British Army.

It is understood that the helicopters will be operated jointly by the Army and RAF under Joint Helicopter Command.

According to a news release:

“The announcement was made in the Defence Command Paper. It will form part of the Army’s programme of transformation, Future Soldier, which will deliver an Army that is leaner, lighter, faster to respond, and more effectively matched to current and future threats.

The New Medium Helicopter Programme will see four of the medium-sized helicopters currently in service across Defence replaced by one new helicopter. This will include the Bell 212 that is used by the Army Air Corps in the jungle areas of Brunei.”

Work on the 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, say the Army.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

276 COMMENTS

  1. What constitutes a ‘medium sized’ helicopter? Okay, so the Puma goes and a sprinkling of Bells in far away lands…I don’t see any other choppers except those used for training! Do they mean AAC Wildcat (hardly a medium helicopter) …….or even Merlins? If not then, asides from the Puma fleet, we are talking about penny packets….hardly an exercise that is going to wrack the brains of military leaders. Perhaps they are talking about a central pool that each of the services get to fight over when needed!

    • I think this will replace the Gazelle and Puma mainly but then also the Bell 212s operated by the army in Brunei and the RAF in Cyprus.

      • It’s the imprecise language that is used (MOD?) that is confusing! Gazelle is a light helicopter used in a recce role. AW149 is a medium helicopter that can haul up to 18 passengers if needs be. Do they mean that it will replace four types of helicopter…if so, why not say so….or hasn’t the communications secretary been told. Coming on the back of an official document claiming that the AAC operate Chinooks, I suppose this is hardly surprising!

          • The positive me, hope we will learn the lessons of the past and finally have enough.
            However the cynical me can see the order cut to 5 as a drone will be able to do the work by 2035…….

          • How many total frames would that mean replacing?

            According to wikipedia

            Bell 212 = 5
            Dauphin = 5
            Puma = 23
            Bell 412 = 3 – not owned

            So somewhere south of 33 owned platforms, allowing for the figures above to include non-operational frames..

            I would guess 35 is the straight replacement number.

          • You forget the 28 Gazelles that were also specifically mentioned in the review. @60 in total if you add them all up.

          • I didn’t include them as they weren’t mentioned in the Jane’s article, so assumed they would be quietly retired and not replaced.

          • Go look at the official Review, it clearly says 23 Gazelles, 20 Pumas and 5 Bell 212’s will be replaced with a new medium lift Helicopter. You can also see it by searching “Review” on this site, it’s under the British Army Heading. As a side, They do quote different figures to other sources.

          • Gazelles are pretty dated and probably not much use in a battlefield, so even if it’s half the numbers they will be far more useful and flexible. Just a question of whether we can realistically afford the number considering how expensive the wildcat was.

          • I don’t understand why we ordered wildcat. It would have made more sense to order AW139, have the manufacturing moved to the UK,1 version kitted out for anti submarine like it was for the wildcat, then we would have ordered the other model to replace Puma, Lynx, Gazelle, Bell, Dauphin and saved on the cost of refurbing the Puma’s. We probably could have ordered 60 or more airframes if we where saving on the wildcat order and Puma refurb costs.

          • Hi Capt, the French are doing something similar and replacing 6 different types across 3 services with Airbus H160M, some 160-190 helicopters. It includes all their Gazelles and Pumas. H160 is a smaller (6ish ton) helo then the AW149.
            AW149 has got to be favourite if they are going to be built in UK, only thing that strikes me is that it is not a good fit for Gazelle replacement, far to large a beast. But then, we are in a period of multi role is best as it’s cheapest, so who knows!!!!!

          • At the same time perhaps the French can procure a ‘heavy helicopter and we can bring our three chinooks home.

          • The paper does not mention Gazelle – that is twitter speculation. What is says exactly is ‘Investment in a new medium lift helicopter in the mid-2020s will enable a consolidation of the Army’s disparate fleet of medium lift helicopters from four platform types to one; including the replacement of Puma. The Army will also retain and upgrade Watchkeeper.’

          • It clearly states it and was published here last week. Don’t really know what else I can say. Maybe have a look ?

          • The Gazelle is classed as redundant within the modern battlefield, Army with its Drone Fleet and Wildcats is see as a easy target.

          • Pugwash, you are repeating what George wrote. George was wrong. Nowhere in the reviews was anything said about gazelle being replaced as part of the puma program.

          • Runs , There is and has been for some time a plan to replace Gazelle, You state that George is wrong, if he is then that’s fine by me but I’d like to know what will replace Gazelle if anything at all. Nice to see you back here posting some good points it’s just a shame you keep posting so many false and incorrect ones.

          • You claimed that you had read in the official report that Gazelle was being replaced by the interim medium helicopter purchase.That was an outright lie that you’ve repeated ad nauseum.

          • No Lies here RunS…….. I’m only quoting what has been published. I can see that you have to write stuff like that as you fail to write anything sensible here or elsewhere now that you lost the Downvote argument both here and STRN…. RALMAO.

          • Gazelle is not a medium helicopter. Not even close! There is a good reason for having different types of Helicopter. Now I fully support replacing all medium lift ones with one single type. But you can not replace the Gazelles qualities with a medium lift machine…

          • No, 5 max and not full kit either. It is purely a liaison and scout helicopter. For its age its is still a very agile and nippy airframe. Though it is bloody noisy.

          • There are 23 Gazelles being replaced, but not by this it’s way too big
            MoD have bought 5 Airbus H135 light helicopters to replace in training role, hopefully we’ll see another 20 licence produced in the UK.

          • Would be surprised at that, the dauphins are used because they are fast and blend in with the commercial air traffic. But it is strange about a new medium lift replacing 4 types because it is overkill the H145 would easily replace the Gazelle, Bell 212 and the Griffin. The only ones that it would replace would be the Puma, Merlin, A109 and the wildcat in the SAS support role.

      • RAF operate Bell 412s in Cyrpus not 212s like Army in Brunei. That explains two of the four. For my money the others are SAS Dauphins and RAF Pumas.

      • The Merlin is also a medium helicopter. and that would make up the 4th model as detailed. Given how brilliant the Merlin is, I hope they are not planning on getting rid of them! We should be building more of them and potentially equipping the RAF with them again.

        • In no way will Merlin be replaced here by the Medium Helicopter mentioned. That,s pure rubbish talk.

        • I agree with you the RAF should e equipped with a new Merlin fleet. It has proved itself many times when it was in service with RAF before it went to the Navy.

          • Do the RAF need Merlins again? No, the only people who need them is the Army (RFC) and Navy.

            For their purposes the RAF need a combination of their own kit for transport and liaison and setting up field airfields who does that? Does the RAF go begging?

            The whole thing is out of whack due to trying to do too much with too little.

            Treasury is sabotaging the combined forces.

    • I’m a tad cynical myself H, this bit here is utter bollox business speak….

      “It will form part of the Army’s programme of transformation, Future Soldier, which will deliver an Army that is leaner, lighter, faster to respond, and more effectively matched to current and future threats.”

      So cuts then. And as said, I’m not sure what they’re talking about with the 4 different wocka-wockas, more hypebole. Still, I’m sure it will get someone a knighthood.

    • Puma and Gazelle are the two main choppers mentioned in the review, plus Bells…. there are a few others dotted around too. I don’t think it includes Wildcats though….. well I hope not !

      • I think that the hope was that the Wildcats would find their way to the Navy! I still think that that should happen and the Army should get a new general purpose light/medium chopper in decent numbers!

      • The announcement did originally include the Gazelles, I recall, along with the various Bell variants and Puma.
        Hopefully it means that the new aircraft can replace the Bells and Puma directly, and allow the Wildcats to take over the Gazelle liaison role by giving the AAC a similar troop carrying capability that the old Lynx provided

        That would make sense, I think?

    • A medium helicopter is one which weighs over 5 tonnes but less than 25 tonnes approx.

      So far and this isn’t confirmed the manufacturers have said they are pitching the following models for the requirement, indicated to be around 20 units initially rising to 30 units.

      Lockheed Martin/Sikorsky – Black Hawk
      Bell – 525 Relentless
      Boeing/Leonardo – MH139 Grey Wolf
      Leonardo – AW149
      Airbus – H175
      NHindustries (Airbus/Leonardo) – NH90

      • So, technically the west does not have a heavy lift helicopter…Chinook comes in at 23 tonnes max take off weight. Or has the latest variant exceeded that? 5-25 tonnes is an awfully large range….basically the Wildcat is in the same weight class as a Chinook. How odd!

        • Stallion, King Stallion, Skycrane, some versions of the Chinook (as I said they are approx weight classifications that will vary according to commentator/time period), V22 Osprey.

          • I would say 8 tons up is heavy lift.
            Chinook is Superheavy weight.

            Those MoD civil servants again, a funny bunch!

          • I can’t see that a band width of 20 tonnes is meaningful. To say that we have a medium lift aircraft available…could be a merlin….could be a dauphin….a pointless description!

      • The only issue with these 6, is 2 are the same aircraft, AND there all old airframe designs and are being lined up for replacement.

        and say 30 units ordered MOD wants one Airframe so you have to look towards the Merlin replacement as well.

        So another 40 plus airframes better deal ordering 80 airframes than 30

        its another procurement headache,

        but this is why the RAF gave up the Merlin fleet.

      • Funny there are so many models to choose from. Are any of them military spec..?
        I can’t find anything official mentioning gazelle just speculation

  2. Interms of a replacement of Gazelle that really has already occurred with wildcat. This new helicopter would be more of a late replacement for Lynx. Although unfortunately the sceptic in me would presume that this will result in a significant drop in aircraft numbers.

    • Lynx was surely replaced with Wildcat. If we are going to replace at least four airframes with one common one that would actually make sense in servicing,parts etc. Hopefully it will be on a one for one basis as we are short on airlift as it is.
      Perhaps there is at last common sense starting in our buying policy!!?

    • I think the Wildcats replaced some of the original Lynx… Battlefield Lynx ? but not really the Gazelles which have dropped in numbers quite significantly over the years.

      • I think it was the Mk9 Lynx. Gazelle numbers have dropped as both watchkepper and Wildcats can perform the role better.

    • Yeah no one official has mentioned gazelle that I can find, just the 4 types (bell, bell, SAS AW’s, puma and VIP , queens choppers

    • you know they say they aren’t gonna reduce the armed forces size but here they are. what if the entire fleet of this new Heli is wiped out what will we relay on then?

      • The MoD plan is to replace 4 types of middle weight helos, with one type of middle weight helo, across the services.
        We do Not know the numbers of the new middle weight helo yet.

        • The reason is the timescale your looking at these being delivered and into service say 30 airframes, right as the Merlin is then being earmarked to be replaced. one Airframe for Medium lift will include eventually the Merlin replacement.

          its complicated and better options on the horrison.

          • No you are wrong, Stonehenge was built because the Sun’s rays burnt Woodhenge down……

          • Indeed, I often used to pull up there with a KFC ( Zinger Tower Meal ) on the way back from London. Durrington Walls, a Superhenge much missed by tourists.

          • My theory is that Stonehenge was the observatory and Woodhenge was the calendar to count which day of the year. They worked in tandem.

          • You can’t make any useful astronomical observations other than the winter solstice from Stonehenge! For a faming community, this would be incredibly important for the timing of the agricultural year to come!

          • Not quite: the Blue stones form an artificial horizon so from a fixed point in the centre you can reliably sight the bearing on the on the circle where an astronomical object say the sun, moon or a star rises and sets. The people of the time would without doubt have observed that the sky appears to rotate about the fixed Pole star. As the seasons progress the morning sun rises at a different point on the horizon each day except for the 5 days following the winter and summer solstice when it appears not to move. ( this is why Xmas day is 5 days after the winter solstice).
            The concentric circles of Woodhenge actually make a nice abacus if you assign X2 and x4 values to the 2 inner circles. It counts up to 180, exactly half a year between solstices except for the magic 5 days.
            The inner circle of Woodhenge is 19 posts which is quite close to the 18 and a bit years of the Saros cycle. I think the people of Stonehenge had a Druidic priestly caste who were competent astronomers.

          • Yes, we can imagine many reasons for their construction! The blue stones have been re-arranged so many times as to preclude an original intent. When it comes to a fat lump of stone, you can ascribe any astrological alignment that you like! Fact is, the only proven alignment is the winter solstice…clearly the most important factor for an agrarian community. The Druids were an iron-age priestly class of around, at the earliest 700 BC, There is no evidence for Druids at any time during the the Neolithic or early Bronze age…which at minimum was some 2000 years before the Druids!

          • They didn’t have Tandems back then……. no-one had invented the Chain and Sprocket yet.

    • Exactly. Blackhawk, one of the most successful and versatile helos ever made. But no. The RAF had to throw the proverbial toys out the pram so the army couldn’t have it. It’s In the back end of its lifecycle though which sort of rules it out, maybe.

      • I see the Americans are fitting their latest engine to the Blackhawk, so that may stretch out its production a bit longer.

        • the two new designs on the drawing boards are to replace Blackhawk. PUMA has been flying for 50 years. so the platform needs to be for the next 30 to 40 years. so anything over 10 years old or Airbus related would be discounted.

    • The Black Hawk is an early 1970’s design.Buying it 10 or 20 years ago would have made sense, but not now when the US has the FVL project to replace it.
      Best thing is to go with whatever the US decides, the Bell V-280 Valor or the Boeing SB-1 Defiant.

      • agree puma is 50 years old so this platform has to be future proof
        as it will feed into the Merlin replacement in 10 years

    • Blackhawk is indeed a great helicopter. I would point out that the US Army have ordered a version of the AW139 as the MH-139 Grey Wolf from Boeing.

      Would be interesting to see if that version gets selected for this programme, especially as we seem to be cosying up to the US at the moment.

      Cheers CR

      • Why would we buy a Leonardo AW139 from Boeing when we can buy a British made Leonardo Aw149….Boeing takes enough of British taxpayers money already.

        • I suspect Boeing only has a licence to make the aw139 for the US market. Leonardo still make the aw139 themselves and it could be make in The U.K. if we wanted it.

          • I think the Italian trade unions would balk at that…its one of their big sellers. I should imagine that bringing the AW149 production line to the UK would be unwelcome news to the them even if the sales are quite small at the moment. Twenty four for the Egyptian Navy and 5 for Thailand. They are just starting to deliver the Egyptian order, so I expect it is going to be a while before the line gets transferred to Yeovil!

          • I was only considering they would transfer the build of the uk military order. It would however probably end up more expensive than an Italian build.

          • Forgetting MOD contract would insist most production would be in the UK, NOT ITALY no tax £s put back into the system.

          • the clue is in the AW149 Name, developed by Augusta/Westland. not LEO, and the EU can suck its own vaccine.

        • I think @CR might have a point, depends if the Gazelle is in the mix with the 4 types to be replaced! The French are replacing 6 types with the Airbus H160 which is a AW139 size helicopter, as opposed to the much larger AW149!! If it was a AW139, would Leandro shift production to UK as they state for the AW149!!!
          It’s a bit horses for courses until we know what types are being replaced I imagine.

          • Would the aw149 be too big for sas use? It is stated by Leonardo to have the longest fuselage in its class.

          • I wouldn’t really know, AW 139 is closer in size to the Puma then the AW149. SF appear to like the Puma, so, its a choice between 12/18 troops in that respect. Is size important, we shall have to wait and see, only can’t see either being a good fit for Gazelle.

          • I read somewhere that the aw149 can carry 16 fully equipped troops, which means 2 could carry a platoon or 7 a company. While you would need 3 and 9 for Blackhawk or aw139.

          • There is that aspect too, more troops means less flights to get your infantry to any objective. I imagine it will depend on the over riding priorities when said choice is finally made, that and any industrial benefits to the UK!

          • Not when you add cockpit armour, additional radios, defensive aids, IR exhaust suppressors, door guns and ammo and gunners and do this above sea level on a non ISA standard day.

          • Puma only used and liked as that about all there is for the lads to use. And as a heli a puma is pretty cheap and expendable. Ideal SF use mate. Another newer and more capable airframe is all part and parcel of the promise to DSF as part of an acceptable deal to accept the removal of the C130 with minimum fuss.

      • The recent change in USA head idiot has led to a cooling effect in the UKGovs.

        as interference in something that happened years before he was even in the office, blaming the UK for its own racial problems before the little immigrant country was even formed, and generally being a jello sucker.

        has seen a cooling towards the USA current heads up its own arse. the country is only where it is because of the work trump did as strange as that man was….

        he never took USA to war, Biden has dropped more bombs in 4 months

    • Fine, the Backhawk is indeed a great helicopter and could be purchased for the Army. However, when did the US military last purchase any European-built aircraft?

  5. So what are the four types its replacing puma, the bells,are merlins included not much else to class as medium more gov speak for cuts no doubt

  6. I believe the 4 types are Puma, the Dauphin used by the SAS and the couple of Bell types used in Cyprus and Brunei.

    Obviously the specifics are typically vague but it looks to me that they will operate separate units but pooled maintenance and training.

    I think AW149 is the best all round choice. It’s low risk and the industrial benefits are hard to ignore.

    • Its civilian lineage means its availability rate should be very good! The Blackhawk is getting long in the tooth…..the NH90, with its tail ramp would have been good but has endured a painful gestation with unhappy customers!

      • Yep! AW149 should be very reliable and reasonably simple and cheap to support given its a derivative of a much larger family of widely produced helicopters.

        For me the clincher is the promise to relocate the production line to Yeovil. The government have just been saying they want to take a broader approach with procurement that takes UK industry and the support chain into consideration.

        Even if Blackhawk or NH90 could be built here under licence it wouldn’t offer any longterm industrial benefits or opportunities for growth.

        • I fully agree with your assessment. It will be great for the long-term future of helicopter production in Yeovil if it becomes the ‘only’ supplier of the AW149. I’m not sure what the precise specs for the Grey Wolf (the helicopter that strikes fear into the hearts of many) are, but the AW149 has a larger airframe and significantly uprated undercarriage and engines! I’ve also seen a mod that includes stub wings for various weapons!

          • The stub wings on the wildcat were designed to provide additional lift to compensate for the LMM weight. Could such wings be added to the aw149 to give it additional range instead of carrying weapons?

          • The civilian version of the aw149, the aw189, is used by our coastguard (11 of them managed by Bristow), so there might be some cost benefits with maintenance.

      • The cynic in me fears that if this is another 4 into 1 super contract, HM Treasury will look at the price & have a fit of the vapours. I know some on this site want only one item, per category, bought in bulk, but while that has scale merits, the large initial price scares politicians & HM Treasury. It may be easier to sneak this past in two bits, say 20 AW 169 for the smaller role & 20 AW189 for the bigger part of middle.

  8. UK forces must have one eye on the US FLRAA programme which would fit much better with the proposed ’tilt to Asia’, where long range and higher speed are a must. As both the Bell V-280 Valor and the Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant are some way from ready, I suspect the Army and RAF may be persuaded to accept a smaller order of helicopters now, on the promise of joining FLRAA later.

    • While the range of FLRAA is appealing, would the U.K. ever purchase enough of them to sustain a light inf btn for the time it would take our land forces to travel 1000+Km to relieve them? For the US this will not be an issue as they will purchase 100s of them.

      • Point taken, but I expect the scenarios envisaged in the far east wouldn’t involve large land forces but striking from the sea, and keeping assault ships away from Chinese anti ship batteries is definitely a good idea.

        • If there is anti ship defences there is probably anti air defences and ground troops. Not ideal for a large air assault. If you are thinking about a sneaky force landing then Flraa would work, but so would an sneaky sub landing.

      • The issue is the Order could be for 30 airframes with an option of another 30 over the lifetime of the program.

        Merlins are 9 years from Out of service date. one airframe for the future Medium lift.

        • The latest Merlins, post US Pres non version, are a hell of a lot better than the early versions UK forces are stuck with.

          • UK forces are equipping with Merlin HM2 & Mk4, they are the latest standard, they’ve gone through the MCSP, plus it’s already been announced they will have their airframe life extended to 2040 when the European medium lift program will replace it. This is already in the public domain on Hansard, can’t you be arsed to check your facts??

  9. Also says 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. Can infer from that the Navy will benefit somehow – will they get Army Wildcats – and that it will be manufactured in UK to a ‘bespoke’ design?

    • Sounds like an advert for Ted Baker! Bespoke….I think that the AW149 is operational with the Egyptian Navy. I don’t think the AAC will get enough to hand its wildcats to Navy….different role anyway!

    • The future medium helicopter program is aimed at replacing Merlin as well as the interim Puma replacement. Do keep up.

  10. By my calculations based upon the 4 types mentioned, we are looking at approx 60 helicopters or there abouts……. a pretty decent order if replaced like for like. That’s obviously a very big IF.

      • @23 Puma’s, 28 Gazelle’s 8-12 others….. It said replacement of 4 types……. I see you share the same doubts though !

        • 8 Dauphin (SAS & RN) and 4 Bell 412 and 4 Bell 212. So 16 others, Also RAF have an AW109 for VIP use.

          • 24 Puma (one crashed)
          • 16 Bell
          • 8 Dauphin

          Strikes me that these will be popular with the new Special Ops forces. and that may be the incentive for the programme.

          Total 48. I don’t think Gazelle is part of this, not a medium helicopter
          nor usefully replaced by one in NI.

          48 is a good run and the incentive is then on Yeovil and UK PLC to sell some to keep lime open.

          • I know Gazelle is not a Medium Helicopter, that’s why the official Review statement is so confusing but It does clearly state them together with Puma and Bell. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

          • Again mate, It clearly mentions them in the Review which was published on here last week. Why everyone keeps missing it I just don’t understand.

          • Gazelle was mentioned in the UKDJ article, it wasn’t mentioned in the “Defence in a competitive age” or “Global Britain in a competitive age” documents published by HMG. that’s what James is pointing out. I’ve looked in both documents and can’t find mention of it either. If you have found mention in the original documents please tell us where it is.

            The assumption in the UKDJ article seems to be that because Gazelle doesn’t appear in any of the diagrams in those documents, its therefore replaced by the Medium helicopter. I think that is an incorrect assumption.

          • Article dated 22nd March under the sub heading British Army, last Bullet point. This is what George and UKDJ Published here and that’s what I keep referring to. If UKDJ have got it wrong then maybe they can say so. I’m happy to go with what is said.

          • Except you have repeatedly claimed you read this in the government review papers which is clearly not true.

            Own up and move on.

        • Isn’t gazelle being replaced by another program? Surely it has been partially replaced already by UAVs and wildcat, which cannot perform the medium lift role the original Lynx did?

          • Yes the Peace keeper and the Wildcat, as Gazelle is seen as a soft target to be in a battlefield.

            no Russian tanks running across Germany….

            Gazelle is being slowly and quietly withdrawn from service.,

      • And it can pack quite a punch!

        Weapons:
        “Outrigger pylons can carry seven, 12 or 19-tube 70mm and 81mm rocket launchers, air-to-air missiles, and air-to-ground missiles.
        “The AW149 helicopter can accommodate 18 troops or 12 fully equipped soldiers.”

        The helicopter can be fitted with a 20mm machine gun pod or a 12.7mm machine gun pod with three tubes for 70mm rockets.
        The cabin can be fitted with window-mounted 7.62mm general-purpose machine guns. The helicopter is equipped with defensive aids subsystems.

  11. Anyone know if the separate Gazelle replacement is still progressing?

    From what I can see Gazelle is now only used for policing duties in Northern Ireland and BATUS in Canada.

      • Watchkeeper to be upgraded and a new tactical UAV in Command Paper. That is Gazelle, and/or hand over role to RUC/Border Force.

    • A British assembled Aw149 does seem to be the obvious front runner…

      A total fleet of 50 would be nice, but looking at the requirements, it will need to be 40 at least to provide 30 to a forward fleet.

      I would add, as we are wringing as much ‘multi roll’ out of any new assets as possible, it needs to be Carrier deployable when needed.

      So, maritime corrosion proofing and tie down points, plus excellent controllability in crosswinds and throttle response for landings on pitching flight decks, plus structure and landing gear able to withstand maritime operations.

      Here’s the rub, adding this level of redesign will probably double the unit cost and it’s imperative we keep this procurement affordable and costs under control …. So perhaps just basic corrosion proofing and tie down points for occasional Maritime use in relatively benign environments.

      • Hello mate, The Gazelles and Pumas and Bells mentioned are not really Carrier born/deployed, I think that this requirement might not apply.

        • True captain, but they represent procurement from the 1960’s to the 1990’s in effect.

          Our new rapid reaction ethos should mean that any procurement is scrutinised against this requirement.

          That means air transportable by A400 and C17 (without taking days to reassemble) and ship deployed, when required.

          • I’m pretty sure they (Whatever They are ) will be Ship deployed though or carried at least, just not in the same way as Merlins and Wildcats…….

      • The winning airframe will become the Merlin replacement so as the AW149 You could be looking @ 40 airframes for Army/Raf and 40 for Navy. dangle that carrot in from of Leo and see what the unit cost is, or to Bell, Sikorsky.

    • Suspect (hope) that the new Medium Helicopter will free the Wildcats up to replace the Gazelles. Would leave 4 basic types in service – Wildcat, Medium, Merlin and Chinook – as transport helicopters, plus Apache

      • Nothing from what I can tell. Gazelle is basically a liaison and low threat level observation helicopter. The Wildcat can do all that, and more. So replace the Wildcat in the battlefield role and move them to the role currently filled by Gazelles. Seems logical to me

  12. Please let’s learn the lessons of the past and stop the tug of war over who needs what! and we will have a potent mix of modern armed forces

    We also need to expand our helicopter numbers because if we are to be “pooling assets between Army and RAF and RN… again! Which I dont like at all

    Especially with the recent changes with expeditionary forces aka Future Commando needing them.

    We should allocate so many for only Future Commando aka RM use only, then the rest for the RN and the Army and RAF.

    There are plenty of decent Medium Helicopter options to choose from, and we are long overdue a replacement for some of the types we are operating, aren’t we 😉

    Lets get on with it and quick.

  13. Firstly, if you look at the US brigade combat teams they have significant air assets. If the uk is serious about our new smaller army it too will need significantly more air power or risk total destruction.

    so having said that, our helicopter fleet has reduced by 50% in 10 years at a time when most countries are increasing their fleets.

    I think we can standardise a number of types into a single platform and timing is everything here as new technologies are coming to the fore and we should probably adopt one of these to ensure our money is well spent and we get critical mass.

    if we assume that chinook and Apache are out of scope and that of this, then all other helicopter types can be replaced, what is the optimal platform?

    let’s also assume the UK wishes to purchase a minimum of 200 and a maximum of 400 platforms over the next 25 years, is the minimum enough to keep a British rotar manufacturing capability, can this be reinforced with a UAV requirement for a scheibel 100 type platform? If so, how many of this platform type would we order?

    If I had to make a decision today I would standardise on the Merlin fleet as it is a pretty stunning helicopter for its production price, and we have already paid for the design costs. If we are looking for something a few years out then we go for the defiant design and see if a European factory can be set up in the uk or more likely the leonardo factory is handed over to this endeavour.

    it’s certainly a conundrum, realistically if we are not going tilt rotar the we should probably go for defiant and gain from being a tier 1 supplier covering emea, which I believe Boeing and Sikorsky will be willing to go for.

    • Yes – when I was in Helmand way back when the guys at TFH were really envious of the US BCTs with organic everything including helicopters. I’m sure this is a demand..

      • I do hope we follow through on the BCT construct, as I do think commanders deserve to have a defined set of assets to call upon, with additional resources at the divisional level.

        given we are only likely to deploy 2 BCT’s at any time the other assets will be needed for maintenance and training.

        it’s gonna cost a fortune, but is the right thing to do.

  14. This is a very positive move for our future helicopter fleet. A brand new helicopter adding capability and availability. But reading the comments you would think it was dooms day. Jesus guys. 🤦

    • We’re old and cynical, seen this too many times. In practical terms this will mean a further numeric reduction of air power

    • Personally I think It’s fantastic news, I just hope they replace on a like for like number basis. The Review mentioned 48 in total but there are @ 10 more listed in the current published figures plus some other types in service that are not mentioned/included.

      • Yes, but we are talking about Puma & Gazelle, they are hardly battle winning kit in this day and age. And a new type would greatly improve availability and sortie rate.

          • Something that isn’t a 55 year old design. Puma is a great aircraft, but we can do better going into the 2020’s. Gazelle also great in it’s day. But it’s most advanced feature is a compass and radio and a seat for the pilot 😄

    • Agree. Doom is automatic til proven otherwise. We don’t know yet.
      I think this is Puma, the Bells, and possibly Dauphin. Not Gazelle.
      Gazelle has no front line role either now I believe. Wildcat and Watchkeeper have taken it’s scouting role, Apache it’s AT role.

  15. I think the future plan is that the Army will provide its own support Helicopters AW149 , which would be a better idea and leave Heavy lift with RAF Chinooks .
    The Navy would continue to provide its own support Merlins /wildcats

  16. We need to crack on with these changes. The requirements exercise should be along the lines of ‘can you make AW149 do the job?’.

  17. Been hearing a lot about this AW149 of late, of course. Bit surprised that does not seemed to have garnered much international interest. Anyone out there with a reason why?

    • As I have mentioned before, Egypt and Thailand have ordered roughly 30 between them! The Turks went for the Blackhawk (I suspect there was a strong quid pro quo from the US) and the Italian Navy went for the AW139 for its ASR requirement. Cheaper smaller and made by Leonardo anyway. A strong buy and operational service of the AW149 by the British might give confidence to countries that want a modern aircraft for their military requirements. Could be great news for Yeovil!

      • Certainly agree it would appear a natural family fit alongside the Merlin & AW159.
        However, reading the AW blurb you’d get the feeling that customers are fools unto themselves for not jumping at the chance. That is somewhat at odds with attracting two customers over 15 years, for which AW explanation is that they were not really concentrating on it – hmm.
        Suspicion over Italian / unions reaction occurred second in my mind. But then the Westland end has been the loser on a number of new models, I think? If so, it comes here as a winning contract. Italy will not be bereft of their other models for a design they were apparently not ‘concentrating on’ until recently.
        That’s my take anyway.
        Regards

        • I think that the aw149has been hit as much by the success of Leonardo’s own aw139 as other competition…….the aw139 has been very successful indeed.

        • It would seem to tick most, if not all, the boxes. It would be a significant and much needed replacement for an ageing fleet. As has been mentioned, the political brownie points on offer must make it the front runner. That said, we might end up with the smaller AW139M. I can’t see the other competitors really getting near! Thanks for the video, but why they need computer generated commentary I don’t know?

    • Bit surprised that does not seemed to have garnered much international interest. Anyone out there with a reason why?

      Maybe because AW 139 arrived first and sold more than 1000.
      AW 149 is an evolution, bigger and militarized from beginning. The non militarized is the AW 189 and is in use by Coast Guard – Bristow Helicopters for SAR work.

      A very nice video of AW 189 for Falklands service. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHFdujvqbFA

  18. Wouldn’t it make more sense to involve the Royal Navy in this and have whichever helicopter this is also replace the Merlin?

    Seems this would benefit from economies of scale as that would be replacing close to 100 airframes. Chances are economies of scale might allow for growth of numbers.

    • AW149 is a 9 tonne helicopter, the Merlin is near on 15 tonnes….it is really a heavy helicopter, not medium. You can shoehorn 30 plus troops in the back. If you have ever seen one go overhead you would realise what a big piece of kit they are!

      • Very comfortable ride even at low and fast. First time I ever flew in one, before the RAF chinned them off to the RM, I thought I was an extra in Alien!

        • Best I experienced was flying at very low level in a Bell Huey ….popping up over power lines and scaring road vehicles. All courtesy of those naughty boys in Oman….very cool!

    • The Merlin is a large Medium lift and the RAF gave them up as being to large for there needs,

      But the MOD wants one airframe going forward and the winning bidder, could have a future option for another 40 plus airframes for Merlin replacement.

      40 plus 40 airframes over a 10 year delivery program big carrot for any supplier

      • The RAF gave them up as it rightly sees Chinook as a battlefield support helicopter, never wanted Merlin in the first place and was only forced to have them due to the neverending politics of “Save Yeovil”.
        Merlin hasnt been the disaster that NH90 has but its not really a transport helicopter.

  20. Why bother to go through the cost for such few numbers? It is not cost effective and if the comments on here are anything to go by there won’t be enough to go around.

      • OK. If that is so then we should not skimp on the numbers and we should not skimp on the design.Look at all the options. If we are going to do something we should do it properly.

        • If the £450 million budget reported by the Express is correct then its 20-25 airframes. The Tukish buy of 109 UH60 airframes was $4 billion. The Egyptians paid $1 billion for 24 AW149 and 8 AW139.

          • James the express is probably guessing and if the user requirements aren’t in then everyone is guessing? Trying to shoehorn all the user requirements into one product, updating the tech, selecting only UK companies etc. is not going to be cheap. Might as well build a good number and be done with it otherwise the unit cost is going to look ridiculous and draw a lot of criticism.

            Last thing I would suggest is our forces don’t get what they need. Sometimes it is better to just give them more of what they have but if the UK is going to change the platform let’s do a proper job of it.

      • Hi Airborne, I suppose if they can get one airframe to satisfy all those roles successfully and perhaps provide a step change in tech which might give our forces the edge it should be done but don’t skimp on the numbers in my opinion – it is a false economy. We are supposed to be global – in my book that always mean more units.

  21. At this rate they may as well give the fixed wing fleet to the navy and rotary to the army. Easy way to disband the RAF.

  22. Just thought I’d have a rare look at the FB UKDJ Site……. Oh deary me, there’s a whole different level of stupid on there regarding this topic.

  23. I wonder now the navy have big carriers ,new helos for RAF ,Army what do you Guys think about a few chinooks for the RN to help out RM along side Merlin ,or is it crazy idea ?

    • The issue is Chinook is a Transport platform and falls under RAF, its why the Navy discounted the V22 as it falls under the RAF as a transport. the 3 services are supposed to join and act as one. or we just call the entire force the British Marine Corps. But it destroys decades of British Armed Forces history…. and Navy would have to service 6 to 10 Airframes That the RAF are doing….saving money

    • That is acheived by the RAF deploying a few Chinooks to sea. Chinooks are not suited to sea basing due to lack of marinisation and their huge footprint, but a couple is doable and is done.

  24. Biggest issue to this programme is its time scale, and there delivery time scale, the Future Helicopter programme and the Merlin replacement. The MOD wants one programme for the forces, the current mixed fleet is some 35 airframes 22 are Puma, and the mix of Bell 212s and 412s, A365s make up the rest. But the delivery date means they will be to early for systems on the drawing boards now, ie the,Bell 360 Invictus Sikorsky Raider X or a Rotal Variant. and leading into the Merlin replacement. so a Merlin/puma/212/412 and A365s could be for 80 plus aircraft and offer better terms…

    • No. The MoD wants two programs: replace Puma and the Bells now. Replace the Puma replacement and the Merlins later.

  26. Here’s a suggestion that’s a little bit left field. If the government was still supporting North Sea oil and gas exploration, they could give financial incentives for companies to operate the same type of helicopter as chosen by the MOD, thus giving a reserve force that could be called on in time of emergency.

    • Not as wild an idea as you may think. US Army was contracting private helicopter companies to resupply FoBs in Afghanistan to release combat helicopters for, well, combat.. RAF used contracted oil rig support helicopters in Brunei to support FoBs during the 1960s Konfrontasi with Indonesia too.

      • Spot on and some of those private heli lads were ex russkie vodka drinking crazies flying russkie assets……top blokes lol

    • They kind of did for a while, a lot of the O&G aircraft were EC225s, which are quite similar to Puma as I understand it. Problem is, they have/had a terrible safety record; they have a known problem with stress corrosion cracking to the main drive shaft, which is exacerbated by cold, wet, salty conditions (perfect for the North Sea). They haven’t found a proper fix for it yet, only greater maintenance inspections and suchlike. Because of that, their reputation plummetted, and operators started moving to S92s (not sure whether it was connected or just refreshing of fleets, or a bit of both).
      I used to work in the industry and flew on both types among others, and everyone in the briefing room would be waiting to see which safety video would start playing- as that woul dbe your first indication of what you’d be riding on. Muttered cursing if it was an EC225, quiet relaxation if it was an S92!

  27. This really has come at the wrong time! It is too soon for a decision on the US Army’s future medium lift program. Whose two competitors will be game changers in helicopter evolution and battlefield support. The outcome and series production of the winner to initial operating capabilities is probably 10 years away.

    The problem the RAF have is the Puma needs replacing a lot sooner as spares are getting scarce and requiring short production runs, therefore increasing in cost.

    The Army have the two Bells (212 and 412) and the Dauphin used by the SF community. The two Bells are used because the Army don’t have a true battlefield taxi anymore.

    The other issue is weight. I think it was during the 50’s when it was decided which service would get what helicopters based on weight. I believe it was based on the notional figure of 5000lbs. Anything on or above would be RAF and anything under would be Army Air Corps(AAC). Is this figure still used as a deciding factor? I’m not so sure as the Puma and Bell 412 are roughly the same. Which then begs the question, why are there two different helicopters doing the same job between the two services? Should the RAF therefore still do the medium support helicopter role? If the AAC are successfully using a similar sized helicopter, why does the RAF need to duplicate the effort?

    The Army are desperate for a battlefield utility helicopter. Where it can do all the myriad jobs that the Lynx used to do. The 212 and 412’s are a lot bigger and can carry twice as many troops. Which places it in the same league as Puma.

    Therefore, what do the Army actually require. A small nimble helicopter that can insert a small team of six like the Lynx. Or a larger support helicopter that can insert a platoon of 12 as per the Puma/412?

    Looking at what information is available, they are favoring the larger aircraft. Leonardo are pitching their AW189, which ok, but not a major advancement over the Puma/412 in terms of capabilities. Airbus have suggested the NH90, but that’s been plagued with problems. Finally, Sikorsky are promoting the latest version of the venerable Blackhawk.

    I would discount the NH90 straight away due to the negative feedback from Australia. On the face of it, the Leonardo offering sounds good, especially if it can be built in Yeovil. However, the Blackhawk is probably the best bet due to economies of scale. If bought direct from the US Army (as per the new Chinooks), it will come with a very comprehensive support package and probably at a discounted price.

    Whichever aircraft is chosen, will likely be an interim buy. Where everyone will be waiting on who wins the US Army competition. As either of these aircraft will be a step change in capability.

    • I agree that the 2025 OSD on Puma and Gazelle is unfortunate timing.

      As I think you know (but included for other readers), the UK signed an MoU agreement with the US in July 2020 that includes both the Future Attack reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) and the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA), per source linked below. That was clearly done with knowledge of what the review would contain.

      James Heappey, the minister who signed the agreement had also earlier commented to a House of Commons meeting on the future of UK vertical lift, stating that the UK had to be careful not to commit to new platforms, just as newer technology makes them largely obsolete (I’m paraphrasing).

      The MoU isn’t an order or a commitment to buy, but its a clear indication that the UK has a strong interest in these platforms, barring any show stoppers like in-affordability or technical execution issues. The issue is that about the earliest we might expect the platforms to be fully operational is 2030. We also might want to hold off until 2035 to let the US sort out any early manufacturing issues.

      For these reasons I also agree that medium lift has to be an interim solution. If we need 12+ troop carrying capability, then Blackhawk, possibly even as a boneyard refurb to minimise cost, would clearly be suitable and there would be a ready WW market to sell those on after a 10-15 year life. But there are a number of options here.

      If a smaller platform addresses most of the needs, then we could do far worse than the H145M (that I have advocated for previously as you know) for the utility, battle taxi, casevac, medevac role with up to 10 troops capacity, albeit a somewhat tight fit at that number. If it had to the H145M could perform an armed scout role for maximum flexibility in the fleet. It might even be available in Lakota form as a FMS.

      A future Joint Helicopter Command might then comprise something like Apache, Chinook, FLRAA, FARA, H145M. Puma, Bell 212 and Merlin HC4 would be replaced with the Army or perhaps USMC variant of FLRAA, Wildcat AH1 and Gazelle replaced with FARA for reconnaissance and H145M for utility. Thus a reduction from 7 to 5 vertical lift platforms with a major increase in capability.

      The Wildcat AH1s migrate to the FAA over the 2030s to support Wildcat life extension and for conversion to HMA2 to support increasing escort numbers and Multi Role Support ships. Possibly also Littoral Strike Ship, but those might require FARA and FLRAA.

      https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/us-uk-ink-pact-on-next-gen-aircraft-precision-weapons/

    • 10 years is still a long time away, ideally we should have ordered the Aw139 instead of wildcat and saved a fortune when it’s export chances where so limited. It also could have replaced the Puma rather than giving it a life extension program just to retire it anyway. I think we are at least 15 years away from having tilt rotara replace medium sized helecopters and at twice the price we will order half as many.

    • I agree with you that it’s slightly poor timing, but I think a “long term interrim” solution is a wise choice at the moment. I like the look of the FARA and FVL programmes in the States, but they’re liable to have a similar path as the V-22 in terms of how long it takes (and how much it costs) to make them relaible and affordable. I remember the poor safety record and scathing reports that surrounded the Osprey for quite some time, even after it entered service.
      I’d be happy with buying a good, modern medium lift helicopter now and replacing it in 10-20 years with something more exotic- once the technology is more mature and less expensive. Neither Russia nor China (or any other potential adversary less technologically advanced), nor any of our allies outside of the US, are going to have anything other than conventional rotorcraft in that timescale so I don’t see us losing a competitive edge by operating modern types like the AW149/189 or latest MH60.
      My preference would be AW149, built in Yeovil, to replace the 212s, 412, Puma and (maybe) AAC Wildcat. I appreciate the cost savings of jumping on the Blackhawk order, but if we can build something equivalent here and pump some cash back into the economy then I’m all for it. Trying to domestically get a Chinook equivalent would have been unachievable, but the 149 would be a good bet.
      Gazelle can go too, but I think that it’s best replaced by a rotary UAS (which can also be used by the RN, potentially?). I’m not sure where a Gazelle could safely and productively operate in a battle space, even somewhere like Syria or Libya- best leave it to a UAS. Similar with the AAC Wildcat in its “targetting” role, it has no teeth that I’m aware of beyond pintle mounted guns, so I don’t see the point for purely designating targets for Apache and dropping off 4-man SF teams. Give the targetting role to the UAS that the Apache Es can now control themselves, and the battlefield taxi role to a slightly larger utility helo (AW149)- I doubt the size difference makes too much impact in the vast majority of cases.

      • I would fully expect Bell have learned the lessons from developing the Osprey. Especially in regards to the control ergonomics for the combined collective/tilt control. As well as factoring for vortex ring divergence that the Osprey was/is more susceptible to.

        • Yes, I’m sure they have. But I’ll bet LM felt they’d learned a lot from the F-22 that would help them with the F-35 as well. I know that the two aren’t comlpetely analogous, and the F-35 project is a great whipping boy when it comes to project cost, schedule and specification slippage.
          But I think my point can still be valid; these concepts that Bell and the others are coming up with are new and/or different in many respects from the V-22, and none of them are expected to have flyable prototypes for at least a couple of years yet- if everything goes according to schedule and that’s just for the scout. I think the medium lift helo is 2026 or something like that for the first prototypes delivered to the US Army. That’s before there are any requests for change to the design, before it turns out that some of the performance criteria can’t be met, before GE finds they have developmental issues with the powerplant they’re all supposed to be using, etc. etc.
          If it all works out, then I’ll be very happy, but I find it truly unlikely that they’ll meet their ~2030 target for first issue to operational squadrons. It’ll only be at that point where we’ll start getting a really accurate idea of maintenance costs and difficulty and availability rates, too. Given the higher cost of operating and maintaining higher tech solutions, I’d be much more comfortable having a number of years’ data before we decide to take the plunge.
          That said, mid-2030s or even up to 2040 I’d call them a bit high risk. That means we’ll get plenty of use from an interim medium lift helo.

    • Why the debate on whether the Puma replacement should be an interim purchase or not? The MoD has said it is.

      Secondly, the UK has signed up to an international collaboration to build the eventual Puma & Merlin replacement. The UK is currently leading the concept phase. That has to be the favorite over a US purchase.

      • The debate is simple, should the RAF get the tried and trusted Blackhawk, that it should have got some 15 years ago? Which has a very large support base or go for the AW149, which is only used in small numbers by Thailand and Egypt?

        The issue the European manufacturers are and will be facing is how will their products be competitive with what the US will soon be producing. It can’t be emphasized enough on how much the Defiant and Valor are game changers in helicopter evolution. When the US Army specified a cruise speed over 200kts and a combat radius over 500km. This on the face of it, seemed an impossible task using current practices, which would normally limit speeds to well under 200kts max speed. At least Eurocopter have developed the X3, whilst Leonardo I’d say are struggling to keep up as, they haven’t really got anything on the cards. The AW609 is old V22 technology, whilst Project Zero is completely unsuitable as a medium lift platform. Their only hope would be to build on the X3’s research, which has the potential to outperform the Defiant and get closer to the Valor’s performance.

        Westlands have a history of licence building Sikorsky products, whilst Agusta-Westlands (now Leonardo) have used Bell licencing to produce the AW609. Will the US MoU allow the UK to licence manufacture the winner of the FVL program?

        • In addition to the question of whether a European project will develop something to compete with FLRAA performance, is the observation that both V-280 and SB-1 Defiant prototypes are already flying, and have been for a couple of years plus. Thus the risks against having a proven platform by ~2035, when the UK might wish to start operational use, are significantly lower than the European platform that doesn’t apparently exist in concept yet.

          It would be great if Europe could develop a stronger military helicopter business. But there isn’t a great track record for this in the last 2-3 decades, with issues across a number of programs that were specifically developed as military platforms, due to cost and/or technical problems. Perhaps its largely because dedicated military programs are defined/managed by a committee of countries, while commercial platforms are defined by Airbus or Leonardo individually.

          The greater commercial success has been with Europe dominating WW civil helicopter sales and leveraging these platforms to para-military (coastguard, police, ambulance, SAR) and military use. IMO that’s where Europe should continue to focus.

  28. A seven line press release doesn’t really cut it when it comes to detailing a programme. No a good headline.

  29. So the new helicopter will be a design compromise – Jack of all trades, master of none. It rarely works out well.

    • Personally I think it will be a small 20 airframe buy of a capable Special Ops variant for the new Rangers and the SF. SF lost their Lynx recently and there was talk of replacing them with re-roled Pumas. So my thought is:

      • 8 based in UK (replacing Puma and Dauphins) – SF use
      • 2 in Kabul – supporting Rangers
      • 2 in Brunei, supporting Rangers and Jungle Training
      • 4 in Cyprus, supporting Rangers and providing SAR cover
      • 2 in Kenya, supporting Rangers and LI School
      • 2 in Belize, supporting Rangers and Jungle warfare school

      Rest will wait until 2030s.

        • I’m sure they would benefit from one. I’m not playing fantasy fleets, I taking a stab at what I think will occur on the likely budget. They will probably have to live with Chinook.

  30. I have heard that the UK will buy BlackHawk from US apparently UK special forces have put pressure on MOD for this Helo

    • The SF community like the Blackhawk, as the gunners have separate windows to fire out off to provide support, whilst leaving the two side doors open for egress.

      They have have also been asking for a much smaller aircraft, that is quickly deployable, can land on roof top and is relatively quiet. The MH6 “Little Bird” has been top of their wish list for quite some time.

  31. USA Has just launched a procurement program for replacement of Sea Hawk and Fire Scout. due to the fear of being outclassed in the modern Battlefield.

    one to watch.

  33. So Gazzelle that keeps on being mentioned here is absolutely not one of the 4 platforms to be withdrawn as part of the medium lift project. There is already a programme underway to replace gazelle with another ‘suitable’ surveillance platform. The 4 platforms in question to be replaced as part of the medium lift project are, 212, 412, Dauphin N3 and Puma. Merlin will not go, Wildcat will not go.

  34. You are right JPC, the 4 helos to be replaced will be:
    Puma (24)
    Bell 212 (5)
    Dauphin (5)
    Bell 412 (3)
    The latter is an odd one, as the 412s are supplied by a contractor, not owned by the MOD. Wouldn’t be surprised if these 3 are quietly dropped from the programme when the estimates arrive.

    There is no confusion over what a ‘medium lift’ helo is. The US defines 4 classes of cargo (i.e. utility) helo, by max take-off.weight. From memory, you have light, medium (8-10 tonnes, as Blackhawk), medium-heavy (15 tonnes, as Merlin(, heavy (Chinook) and super heavy (Sea Stallion etc).

    The combat helicopters are separate classes, attack and scout. Wildcat is a scout helo and ideal for the army job but should be armed, as the US future scout helo will be. The scout needs to be small and agile, the last thing you need in that role is a medium lift helo, which is why the Wildcat is not part of the UK’s medium lift plan.

    The medium lift Blackhawk is used in the air assault role. The US army stipulates that it must carry a section of up to 10 combat-laden troops, so 3 can lift a platoon and 10 a company. Each US Divisional Aviation Brigade has 30 Blackhawks in the front line and as many again in reserve and training. Shows how far our helo force has been run down when we can field just 12 front line rather elderly Pumas to support our ‘warfighting division’.

    Anything larger than the Black Hawk is considered too big to land in restricted spaces and too risky to be carrying 30 or more troops at the hot end of the battlefield.

    The AW-139 is too small for the role. The AW-149 can carry iirc 12 combat-laden troops plus 2 door gunners, all seated on crash-safety seats.

    It doesn’t compare too well on cargo lift next to the Blach Hawk, if I remember it’s something like 2.5 tonnes to 4 5 tonnes. It probably needs a more powerful engine, 2 of the RTMs that power the Merlin would give it a better lift capacity, ceiling and I. of climb.

    The commercial problem will be the cost, the US Army buy Black Hawks for not more than £20m, the failed Leonardo pitch to Turkey had the AW-149 at over £40m, albeit including some training.

    There is no point waiting 10 years for the future US helos, because they will very likely be far more expensive than we can afford. But it would be good to follow the pusher-propeller etc route that Bell and Sikorsky are using to get these very high top speeds, surely Leonardo and Westland could emulate that without a great fuss and fanfare.

    To support our 5 combat brigades (we won’t really have 7) needs 50 front-line helos plus 40+ in reserve and training. A buy of 30-37 is woefully small and inadequate.

    Whatever else, please let’s not start factoring the RN into the picture. The Wildcat changed in size and weight to suit the RN and the Merlin, while excellent for ASW work, is too large and vastly too expensive for the army’s medium lift role and too small for the divisional heavy lift role performed by Chinook.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here