The Ministry of Defence has provided an update on the status of the New Medium Helicopter (NMH) programme in response to a parliamentary question from Luke Akehurst, Labour MP for North Durham.
Akehurst inquired about the current progress of the NMH programme.
Maria Eagle, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, confirmed the progress of the programme, stating, “The second stage New Medium Helicopter (NMH) competition commenced on 27 February 2024 with the release of the Invitation to Negotiate and the tender returns are due back on 30 August 2024.”
The NMH programme aims to acquire a modern medium-lift support helicopter to replace up to five different aircraft types currently in use. This consolidation is expected to enhance efficiency and operational flexibility, positively impacting the UK’s defence capabilities across various missions, including fighting, humanitarian efforts, and global operations.
Earlier this year, during the previous Conservative government, the Minister for Defence Procurement at the time, James Cartlidge, announced the next stage of the NMH programme. Cartlidge highlighted the significance of the programme at the International Military Helicopter conference in London, stating that the NMH would deliver a single aircraft type capable of undertaking multiple Defence tasks.
“This means that the platform will be able to undertake Defence tasks that were previously undertaken by up to five different aircraft types, streamlining our capabilities,” said Cartlidge. “This will improve efficiency and operational flexibility, positively impacting ongoing and future UK operational capability.”
The NMH competition involves three candidate suppliers: Airbus Helicopters UK, Leonardo Helicopters UK, and Lockheed Martin UK. These suppliers are currently compiling their bids, which will be evaluated by the Ministry of Defence.
The competition is managed by Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S), with proposals set to be evaluated through 2025.
Subject to government approvals, a contract award is anticipated thereafter.
Recent data from the Ministry of Defence revealed that the timeline for the NMH programme has been extended by three years, with the project’s end-date now set for 30 September 2031. Additionally, the whole-life cost of the project has increased from £1.172 billion to £1.329 billion.
The MOD attributed the extension to further analysis and amendments made during the Annual Budget Cycle 2022. Despite these challenges, the programme’s Delivery Confidence Assessment rating remains at Amber.
I hope which ever one they choose they put a big Union Jack on it and tell us how British it is 😀
Then maybe how many London buses it can carry.
I wish it could be Farnborough every daaayyy…
There is an excellent slew of good news coming through at the moment.
We just need to organise major air shows for the rest of the year and the defence of the nation will be sorted!
Noisy round here, I have a home near by.
The itinerary is always pretty dull though, so I’d never pay to go in.
I was planning to go on Friday, when it is free for under 18’s so good for me 😉 but am in France with family at the moment so couldn’t.
Not all bad, though, had a tour of retired french SSBN this morning, good fun 😊
Cruise? Cherbourg?
No, we sailed across the Channel
The name isn’t for nothing, you know 😁
Good thing to do, real Hunt for Red October vibes.
Ahhh, brill.
Have you been to Cherbourg yourself?
Not a long ferry journey across from Portsmouth
The French build their subs there, in a big shed with “Naval group” on the side
Yes, that’s why I asked if you saw it in Cherbourg. We went during a cruise, 1dt stop out from Southampton.
Found it a bit of a dump if I’m honest!
Another three years and another £200 million. WOW.
How hard can it be to buy some helicopters?
Very easy until you add polictics. I would be amazed if they announce or decide anything until after the defence review is done, which is due to be published sometime next year. So more delays.
You delay two or three times, pick one, change the requirement a couple of times and the the configuration of the chosen chopper by which time you can only afford half what was needed. As Igor would say ” It’s simples” 😉
for how many airframes as some of the requirement has already been met by a more suitable type and the SAS may follow with similar type leaving only the old Puma (which was never a great lifter anyway) to be replaced. So going from 5 types to 2 rather than one. 20 – 24 airframes may be all that comes from this when we really need a lot more to make the small army more mobile and effective. Who knows ?
The army and RAF went all in with Chinook. That is out lift platform for mobility. The medium hello should be casevac , recon and rapid air assault purposes.
Only RAF operate Chinook, not the Army.
Well quite, my personal preference is well known, but whatever platform is procured, go for UK assembly of a minimum of 40, preferably a lot more. Procurement of 20-24, then just order off the shelf, or explore a simple lease option. What does 24 airframes actually equate too, two small squadrons of 8, a single larger squdron?? Such a small bespoke fleet is of extremely limited utility. The only other ‘small order’ alternative that makes any sense to me, is ordering another 25 Merlin HC4’s to increase maritime and all round airlift. A pool of 50 HC4’s would make sence… Read more »
Maybe that’s what they have in mind? UK jobs, 6 x big MRSS?
Perhaps so….
Another 25 Merlin HC4s, now you’re talkin! Makes a lot of sense, makes for a simpler fleet with an already established support mechanism, it’s a known entity and would lead to more jobs in the UK.
Yep, ticks the boxes…..
Merlin is a bit big for NMH I’d have thought.
I want to see cheap and numerous.
Im not sure any of the options are really cheap…I’m just going for numerous..as in over 40 as a win.
Yes, I know. I had in my mind me and John’s beloved BH as cheap….not going by recent articles here.
40 is just ultra greedy given we’ve got the 6 H145s for long term commitments abroad. 😀
I’d consider it an utter, utter miracle if we get 30, and I’m expecting around 22.
Im working on 2 light rotors being the equivalent of 1 medium rotor..so those 6 H145s count as 3 mediums 😆 as the spec is for 44 I’m holding out for 41 medium rotors….although 1.3 billion as a whole life cost makes it more difficult to assess what they will get for it..
that 44 number was airframes one for one. And already the units the 145’s are being purchased for are down sizing as with only 3 each that means one on the line most of the time and for some the available hours are 0800-1800 daily only or there abouts not 24/7 as was the case in the past. The SAS need a swift small airframe which the 145 could serve well for and that bring the 23 Puma’s (not that many actually serviceable) to replace. If such a small number then just get them off the shelf and save a… Read more »
If the spec is for 44 we be lucky if we get 20. It went back to re tender as no one managed to meet the requirement, which tells me the money isn’t there for the full number.
Plus no doubt we will go for UK build which will add to the cost further.
Yes, this is my thought too. But as J says, we need sovereign build,
and HMT do not take the UK tax benefits into account re MoD budget.
So Yeovil will be happy, and the military get a handful.
And so the wheel turns!
I have no idea if the tax return is taken into account but if it’s not that is stupid.
Saying that your probably only talking maybe 5% of the cost in tax revenue maybe (tax is only on profits and most of that will be funneled to their overseas parent, plus income tax on employees), so unlikely to be a decider.
ideally 30 for two sqns +OCU I’d be happy
Exactly. Any more is a bonus.
Puma force was 2 Sqns so this must be likewise.
Brueni and Cyprus dealt with, 7 Flight at BATUS I’ve no idea, and 658, well, who knows. They’ve already taken the Hercs away, the SF must have dedicated aircraft, especially for the niche role 658 is for.
cheers Mate👌
Merlin is massive and expensive compared to the Puma, a totally different requirement and role.
Merlin wasn’t built as a front line helicopter, it doesn’t have the armour for it. Armour was added during the afgan conflict but not being designed with that in mind means I suspect it’s not hugely effective.
Better to buy something that was designed from the ground up to take troops to the front line.
When the Merlin HC1 was RAF. They had internal armour fitted to the cabin prior to Iraq GW2. Initially only the cockpit had additional armour. But this later became a full fit. Unlike other UK military cargo helicopters, Merlin’s have armoured windows in the cockpit.
Meanwhile, the French armed forces have brought 160 French made H160s…. Sometimes I do wish we’d take a leaf out of their book…
True, but they have nothing that comes close to the utility of our substantial Chinnok fleet.
I read the numbers are being reduced on the Chinook, but you are quite right. They don’t a ship board helicopter as capable as the Merlin. We really should order a few more of those / upgrade all of the fleet to the latest standard as well as place this NMH order, but I suspect some spreadsheet jockey will say it will be cheaper to buy Bell Invictus based on some very ambitious costings in 15 years time….
60 to 51.
Agree on Merlin, but HM2s for the FAA.
The 11 Merlin HM1 were all cannibalized years ago reportedly. They should have been updated and used to reequip 849 NAS, the ASCS outfit, keeping the 30 precious HM2s for their key task.
That would have made sense.
Won’t all the AEW Merlin airframes become available when it is withdrawn early. Only just get IOC and the budget is blown that we retire them?
Love the Merlin, a good solid helicopter, but I can see the need for more nimble medium with only 2 engines.
A large order of NMH would make sense just like the french have with the Gepards but I won’t hold my breath with the budget paying for new Frigates and MRSS, Tempest and new Tanks.
Yes I’d settle for 30. Original Puma order was for 40ish if I recall, but the fleets dropped a lot since then, where’s the Chinook force has grown.
They badly need to up arm the existing marine merlin before buying any more.
Just having a machine gun means they couldn’t provide much in the way of air support for the troops once they drop them off. Give them some brimstones or even just a rocket pod.
Yes, agree on armament.
Just clarifying, I’d like to see more HM2 ordered, not the CHF ones.
Was it ever announced why the army gave up all it’s merlins? I assume there was a reason for it.
The RAF, not army.
Your answer, Gordon Brown.
Gordon Brown won’t have decided that. There would be an operational reason for it. Well affordability reason. Since they weren’t just cut it indicates to me that there was concerns about the fleet for non maritime activities.
He is usually remembered as he was chancellor and did not fund all of SDSR 1997,98, as well as when the RAF RN was cut to pieces in 2004 so we could fight in sandy places.
Just to expand, and I have explained this tale here many times. Regardless of whether the RAF liked the aircraft or not, and reportedly they preferred Chinook, we were robbing Peter to pay Paul, again. In the mid 2000s, during the endless Labour defence cuts which I keep reminding people happened but which so many here just blame the Tories for, the MoD/FAA had a program called SABR – “Support Amphibious Battlefield Rotorcraft” to replace the 30 plus Sea King HC4s in service at the time with 845,846, and 848 NAS of the FAA’s CHF. The RAF Merlins of 28… Read more »
Edit, Merlins expanded to 28, not 26! 🙄
Doesn’t quiet add up as their were other platforms they could be cut if they wanted yo keep the merlin fleet.
All decisions are ultimately budget decisions but if there is choice between options and you cut one it indicates keeping the other options provided better capability.
Maybe not as they were transfered and maintained in the overall budget but seems odd to me.
P.s. all parties will cut defence that is a read, as money has to be found to fund the other more core public services but no question bigger cuts under the Conservatives. If nothing else the % of gdp spent went way down.
Debatable there Steve, depends what areas are included in “bigger” The bigger cuts under the conservatives are certainly in personnel, especially army manpower, fiddling the books with pensions, CASD, and so on.
If we are talking numbers of RN escorts, SSN, and fast jet Squadrons, I may have some surprising data for you!
Would be interesting to have that data. I guess could look at every sdsr since 1979 and compare but as the Conservatives had been in power for most of that period it’s difficult
It would. I’m not defending the Tories on this, they’ve been abysmal. I always make the point for balance that they all have since FLF 1995. Okay. From 98 to 2010, so in Labours time. Fast Jet Sqn numbers 23 to 12. 2010 to 2024, so Tory. Fast Jet Sqns from 12 to 9( includes the GR4/Typhoon fiddle to be fair, where 2 extra Typhoon number plates were formed as the 3 GR4 Sqns were cut ) Also worth noting, and again it goes so far back I’m starting to lose it, there were nearer 30 Sqns after GW1 so… Read more »
Yeah I don’t think either party priorities defence.
I only have hope in labour for other public services. If you look at how the NHS or local council budgets or just average wages adjusted for inflation etc have gone for the wall under maggy and then rebuilt under Labour and then back to wall over the last 14 years. I have hope for this goverment on that front, defence na.
Time will tell if I’m wrong but my money is on that increased to 2.5% never happening.
Depends on Russia / China I guess?
How about keeping the % and returning Pensions and CASD capital costs back to where they came?!
Big extra chunks of money for conventional defence, not political defence.
Neither is a threat to the UK, not really. Russia is a spent force and almost none of our trade comes from Asia outside China, so we would just be a supporting role in any war and realistically a war with China would destroy every western nations economy, so much so that it will never happen.
Our military however needs to be ready for a US China proxy war, somewhere in Asia or Africa.
That’s not strictly true. We have a shed load of trade with Taiwan. In particular semi-conductors.
Inwards trade yeah outwards na. Realistically no-one is getting involved if China attacks Taiwan, no one realistically has the capability to take on China within range of its land bases and missile units, plus we have way more inwards trade with China than Taiwan. Neither do we have much outward.
Great summary Daniele! 👌
Yes, that is the thing, you’d then have to include Options for Change in 91 and Front Line First in 95 where the forces were also cut.
I like to draw the line from SDSR 97 onwards, simply because it was a well planned review setting a decent force level for the post Cold War world and it did not happen.
What would be interesting is to compare the actual money, since it’s hard to compare capabilites as newer stuff is typically more expensive.
% of gdp seems a fair comparison although I would personally go with % of tax revenue if that data is available as it gives a better idea.
My guess is it’s probably a wash, both as bad as each other.
Pretty much, if you add all reviews post Cold War.
I just cannot ever get over the 35 escorts to 23 and 23 Sqns to 12 in Labours time then have them complain now about force levels.
The current DS Healey was actually in the Treasury in those years when the axe was falling.
The irony.
To be fair all nations have cut back in that period, even the US.
The issue is prices of stuff just keeps going up and that is compounded as the orders are reduced
https://www.statista.com/statistics/298527/defense-spending-as-share-of-gdp-united-kingdom-uk/
Seems someone did the maths
Interesting. Seems to have dropped a lot post 97 to 2005.
I don’t trust 2.3 at present, as what is placed in it must be taken Into account.
Well yes, plenty of other heli assets were cut, like the 150 plus Gazelle and Lynx fleets that were replaced by 34 Wildcat and 67 Apache, the Wessex of 65 Sqn RAF, the, at one time large Sea King fleet of the FAA all contracted at that time.
Under the Tory plans the future Chinook fleet was reducing from 60 to 51.
Did the 60 ever happen? I have read the 60 number a few times but from what I could tell there was only ever 50.
Yes. I think….the mix was 38 HC2’s,14 HC6, 8 HC5.
Older examples are getting withdrawn as new versions come in, for example the legendary BN.
In a nice change where, as far as kit goes, we were well resourced, we could only operate so many with the people available for 7,18,27 Sqns, and the JSFAW.
I wouldn’t say the Invictus, but probably the Valor. The Invictus is Bell’s entry for the US Army’s possible future scout/attack helicopter. Whereas the Valor is replacing the Blackhawk.
The NMH requirement was initially published as an interim solution. Which means what exactly? That they will likely have a short service life then replaced with something like the Valor. Hurry up and wait is the order of the day!
The French have their own problems though, and bloody big ones
Which are? Cheer me up that it is not just us!
yeah – just ask the Aussies about their HH90 experiences.
These are light rotors..not medium lift..apples and pears..they have purchased 160..light essentially civilian rotors pained green..the H160m is a very light military rebuild, it does not have the ballistic protection of a military medium rotor it does not have the run dry capability or the G resistance of true military ground up builds…It’s also a light rotor…they are replace their Puma numbers with a light rotor..that’s bonkers really …this thing has a max takeoff of around 6000kgs..vs a proper medium rotor of around 11,000Kgs. It can carry around 5 troops…this is essentially a far less good analog of a wildcat..infact… Read more »
We have the better mix of aircraft for sure, which is an even better reason to support our own industrial base (which is the bit I like about the French approach)
But the Mk4/4A are not what is required of the NMH. True the Merlin is a highly capable airframe but it has a different capability/role.
Merlin is not really a medium lift rotor..it’s a hoofing great Maritime rotor really sits between medium and heavy lift…. It’s very big and over engineered…specifically for the marine environment ( three engines ect) ….They are looking for a 5-6,000 Kg empty weight rotor not an 11,000kg rotor.
Totally get that Jonathan, but, if we are talking only 25 airframes, that money is far better spent bolstering the HC4 fleet.
25 HC4 would actually represent a serous force multiplier ‘uplift’ in medium capably, when pooled with the Navy’s existing HC4 fleet.
A fleet of 50 Chinook and 50 HC4 gives you truly flexible options.
If Leonardo get their way (we all expect them too), the result will be a small fleet of ‘extremely’ expensive, UK modified medium helicopters, procured in such small numbers that it almost seems pointless.
Both points are valid. We need more cabs for ASW and AEW (Crowsnest will be around for a while) and there is defo a case to be made for more CSAR and assets for the Marines. I know what you mean about non-standard, but the Merlin is a bit big and expensive for what they want these to do. Is that initial higher cost and inherently better flexibility offset by fleet commonality? Well I think the Navy tried that before with the plan to go all Merlin and we still have the Lynx because they couldn’t afford all Merlin’s…. Hopefully… Read more »
The RAF passed them over as it didn’t fit the operational set laid out by the Army but works well in the Navy/Marines also the FAA manages to work them better than the RAF ever did. RAF first deployment to Bosnia was a joke and they never worked them else where.
The RAF used in Gulf War 2. Then subsequently in the following Op Telic policing and Also in Afghan for Ok Herrick. They had significant supply issues for replacement parts in Iraq. There simply wasn’t enough being made quickly enough by/for Leonardo/Westlands to keep up with demand. However, it was Afghan that proved to be the straw the broke the camel’s back. The Merlin proved to have a glass jaw. There was no “real” MANPAD threat. But this was made up by the amount of surface fire thrown at the cabs. It was significantly more than that faced when operating… Read more »
Fantasy fleets. This is a Puma replacement. There are 23 Puma HC2’s, equipping 33 and 230 Squadrons at Benson, the OCU at Benson, and the detachments in Cyprus (84 Sqn) and Brunei. MoD has already ordered Airbus H145 Jupiters to requip the Brunei detachment and 84 Sqn in Cyprus, there is a seperate replacement contract for the FOST Dauphins with one expected for the SF Dauphins as well.
As per my reply to Jonathan above, not a fantasy fleet, sensible use of money to maximise its effect.
Of course, we all know Leonardo pressure will mean the money is pissed away on a reassuringly expensive handful of helicopters…
I understand its even worse than that. SB1, an AAC pilot apparently, who posted here for a time last year, told me 230 has pretty much been wound up, partially for crews for 84 and the Brunei Flight. It is no longer a proper Sqn.
Leaving 33 and the Pumas in 28 Sqn, the ICU.
Hi Daniele. So effectively one operational Puma sqn? That is a poor state of affairs.
So SB1 indicated, yes. Seems to be like 216. A Sqn in name only with few personnel and no assets.
24 means we have almost enough for benign peacetime, but as soon as we fight a war they’d be eaten up PDQ. 50+ means you’re serious.
Unfortunately like it or not, if they go for UK build we will get way less than going overseas from an established production line.
All comes down to what is your preference propping up uneconomical companies in the UK or defending the nation.
The idea of having a domestic industry for self reliance are outdated, as everything now is based on parts from dozens of countries, if any of them block exports or delay orders your stuffed. Only the US can really afford to be pure domestic as they have the buy power, and even then they don’t achieve it.
“All comes down to what is your preference propping up uneconomical companies in the UK or defending the nation.”
Answers on a postcard what they go for!
6 H145s have been bought for the Cyprus role, with 84 Sqn, and to replace the Pumas in Brueni which had only recently replaced the Bells.
A very good move.
When you say SAS, it is the AAC who operate their support helicopters, though no doubt DSF has considerable input into any chosen type to replace the Dauphin used by 658 AAC.
Perhaps the H145 may be a solution for the SAS ACC detachment? There were also a a few Gazelles posted to Canada- unsure if they will be replaced.
Hmmm, not sure on those for the CT task.
thanks D.
The number was part of the requirement to start with to bring the type numbers down. All land operated helo’s come under JHC these days regardless only the Maritime Fleet is truly under the RN.
Interesting 🤔 in that understanding is H145ms have replaced or will replace some types? If H175m is successful Airbus will have had quite the win.
Depending upon importance on certain tasks AW149m looks the solution for me good stats apart from underslung loads & very agile & fast. UH60m still a good choice but design is long in the tooth agility meh, but if we’re hook & lift prob the choice. H175m seems to have great range in civilian fit & there’s the possible curve ball of the racer concept.
It’ll be interesting but it’s well overdue.
It’s about time we became the manufacturer of our own aircraft of all types. If France can why can’t we? We’ve got some of the most talented engineers in the world. Instead of taking billions out of our country. Let’s invest these billions into our nation for a change. Let’s manufacture what others want to buy from us like we used to. We’ve tried the other option & I personally believe it’s been a complete disaster for our country. There’s nothing wrong with Co operating with allies. But on our terms not there’s. Why the hell is it so hard… Read more »
And the government will award the contract to china as they are the cheapest, no thought to security, reliability,, performance, supply in the event of war or employment in the uk
China is not tendering a design to us
Dave is probably referring to the H175/AC352
Common sense is to standardise equipment so spares and repairs becomes easy. Let’s just hope which ever wins is the actual most capable one., not that common sense has been used in any of the new government actions so far
There is only 1 choice.. AW149.. it is the perfect all rounder.. CSAR. combat search and rescue. Special forces and personnel carrier.. 60+ is needed to help support our commitments around the world.
This will also help support jobs in the UK.. and sell to foreign customers
Apologies for the bone question but what are the 5 medium helos being replaced in this competition? Puma and?
Puma.
Griffon in Akrotiri with 84 Sqn RAF.
Bells in Brunei with the AAC. ( both of these have now been replaced by H145s.)
Dauphin in 658 AAC supporting the SAS.
5th….?
Thanks.