The first Jupiter HC2 helicopter has begun flying operations at RAF Benson, marking its entry into UK service and the start of a programme that will replace ageing Bell 212 and 412 aircraft in Brunei and Cyprus from early 2026.
The Joint Aviation Command is acquiring six H145 D3 aircraft as part of a rapid procurement effort intended to fill rotary wing gaps for overseas commitments. The helicopters will support troop transport, jungle training in Brunei, emergency response, and provide an aerial firefighting capability for British forces in Cyprus.
Group Captain James Brooks, Senior Responsible Owner for the programme, said the pace of delivery demonstrates an effort to close capability shortfalls rather than allow legacy fleets to run on indefinitely. “Delivering the first aircraft, in under two years, to fill critical capability gaps is a testament to the outstanding collaboration between the UK Armed Forces, DE&S and Airbus Helicopters UK. This rapid acquisition programme will deliver important capabilities to Brunei and Cyprus, whilst enhancing the UK’s global overseas presence and investing in UK industry. Operating Jupiter HC2 at RAF Benson is the first major step towards full delivery.”
Training of instructors has now begun at Benson. Once qualified, they will form the instructional core for 667 Squadron Army Air Corps in Brunei and 84 Squadron RAF in Cyprus.
Wing Commander John Longland, Commander Air Wing at RAF Benson, highlighted the unusual speed of the transition. “It’s incredibly exciting to see the first Jupiter HC2 operating from RAF Benson under the Joint Aviation Command. To be operating the aircraft only 18 months after the first aircraft order is remarkable and represents the culmination of exceptional teamwork and dedication from all those involved. RAF Benson will provide a safe and supportive environment for this new capability to take flight, and we look forward to its deployment to Brunei and Cyprus next year.”
Initial sorties have paired RAF and Army Air Corps personnel to reflect how the joint force will operate once deployed.
Some of the less well informed media are calling Jupiter a Puma replacement – I hope that thought doesn’t get to the Treasury otherwise they might pull funding for NMH!
Interesting that this smallish helicopter might be operated by both RAF and AAC. Previously any helo under Puma size/weight has not been operated by the RAF. The RAF seem to want a slice of every pie going! Incredibly, before introduction of Apache AH Mk1 they made a serious pitch to operate Apache instead of the AAC!
Pretty typical for the media, Graham.
They only see the stopgaps put in when the Bells and Griffon were originally cut some years back.
Recently Chinook has been used at Akrotiri, I shudder at their ignorance if they think this replaces those as well.
“Previously any helo under Puma size/weight has not been operated by the RAF”
84 Sqn in Cyprus has operated the Bell Griffin since 2003.
No 1 FTS also operates the Airbus H135 and EC145 in the rotary training role.
Also in the past, the RAF have operated the Gazelle, Eurocopter Squirrel, Westland Whirlwind and Westland Sioux. All of those are smaller than a Puma.
One of the main reasons the RAF were created was the inter-service rivalry between the RN and Army leading to inefficiency and lack of coordination of aerial operations to the detriment of the nation. This comment demonstrates that this rivalry is still alive today, and would seriously hinder the nation’s aerial operations, even in a time where the three services operate in unity with joint commands such as flying training, rotary force and strike command.
The Army’s Apaches have operated from carriers, as have the RAF’s Chinooks, who have also supported the Army on the battlefield. RAF fixed wing assets have also supported troops on the ground with battlefield observation with SIGINT assets, close air support and battlefield troop movements and casualty evacuation. There is no reason why the RAF could not effectively operate Apache, nor any other air asset. It’s literally been their remit since inception because the Army and Navy squabble over it.
“Padre” 🤔🤦♂️🫡😁
Not criticising Graham at all, but good to see a pro RAF comment here. It’s usually endless drivel wanting the RAF absorbed into the FAA and the AAC.
Agreed, and a brand new poster too. 🙂
Of late, yes.
I think Padre has posted before, though.
Well I have seen a few Preachers lately !
Thanks for your positive comments Danielle and Halfwit.
If people knew my life story, they would say I’m biased. I spent the first 11 years of my life living on RAF stations. I’ve always kept up with defence news, and spend a lot of my time here reading and learning. I’ve made a few comments, but only when I feel I have something to add and avoiding the toxic debates.
Hi Daniele- any idea on force split – is it 3 to each (RAF Akrotiri and Brunie)? Interesting that the RAF elected to outsource SAR in the Falklands and not also use the Jupiter in that role. I’d be keen to see how the cost options weigh up.
Hi Chris.
No. Assume 3 3 or 2 2 with balance at Wallop?
Assume range regards SAR a factor wanting a bigger type.
The fleet air arm was needed because the RAF gave low priority for ship based aircraft
I totally understand the need for the FAA to operate carrier aircraft. No complaints here.
Morning Sir, I read about this a while back and the article did mention these will also carry out some of the work that Puma does.
I guess people just don’t read things properly ( happens all the time on here too !!! ) 👀👀
Speak for yourself sir!
Not the first time Graham has been called “Sir” here, and befitting given which his rank and experience deserve.
Exactly Madame 😁
Unlikely puma replacement I’ve worked with puma a number of times with light gun from 80 until the early 90s can’t see that lifting anything underslung
Everyone except the bean counters know it’s not. It’s only said as such by clueless media as it has “replaced” Puma which were drafted in out of necessity to these roles as there was nothing else.
As always, courtesy of HMG.
Yup the mod seem to be getting into the habit of retirement of equipment before any replacement is in service its barking mad
Personally I have alway though the medium rotors should come under the army, a rule of thumb should be if it’s a tactical battlefield level transport, the army should get control if it’s above that the RAF..
A good, sensible development. The Jupiters are miles less expensive.than the AW 149 NMH but a capable light transport helo that can also do CSAR, Medevac etc
But when we remember that we had 9 Bells and 34 Gazelles for primarily overseas service just two-three years ago, 6 Jupiters is a tiny force really.
Would like to see another 9 ordered, so we at least have a squadron of 8 frontline. We clearly have nothing to support the 8 SFAB.and Rangers bns at present, which is not ideal.
I.could see a future batch of these getting weapons pylons and a recce mast to create a useful, relatively cheap light combat recon and utility version, filling some of the capability gap left by the non-replacement of the Gazelles.
15 LTH, 15 LCRUH would give us a useful little low-cost force. Leaving the NMH to support RAF utility and 3 Division air assault, utility, command and medevac.
Agreed. I too support this purchase for Akrotiri and Brunei.
By 8 SFAB, you of course mean 11 SFAB, which is now 11 Light Strike Bde.
Like our version of the USSOC Little Bird?
I’m liking your thinking on the additional 9 helo numbers, but IMHO the Brunei force needs a little more grunt around capability. I’d prefer to see additional AW149 onboarded for the role.
Let’s not forget the profound joke of the MOD purchasing five H135 helicopters in 2022, never using them, then flogging them to Australia for a pittance and within a few months of selling the 5 H135s ordering 6 H145s ..
I like this platform as it sits in a sweet spot for a lot of tasks.
What I don’t get is why order these when we had some H135s deemed surplus. I know that it’s smaller but for the tasking I don’t see a lot of difference.
Seems wasteful given we had these in stock & probably sold at a loss
Yep we had five sold them for a pittance to Australia as never used.. literally just before ordering 6 H145s.. basically the ordering of the H135 was essentially incompetence as they needed the H145 and proceeded to make up some cock and bull story why they did not need the H135 ( apparently the security situation in northern island changed so much for the better in 2022 that they just needed to bin the H13s still in there rappers).
Comments like ‘Delivering the first aircraft, in under two years, to fill critical capability gaps’ are nice to see… it suggests someone has a sense of urgency. This sense needs to be expanded to cover the entire armed forces.
The ‘8’ referred to the number of battalions, viz 4 SFAB and 4 Rangers. As you say, former now termed ’11 Light Strike Bde”. I am not a big fan of these fanciful MOD titles. This one allows them to suggest that we have some special new capability, when the reality is that all the Bde has is 4 former infantry bns, halved in size as part of another round of previous cuts and spread across 4 locations
Appreciate that it is a nominal Brigade, because the GOC is a brigadier, not an all-arms Bde Grp. It is the ‘Strike’ bit that doesn’t work for me. What are the 250 personnel striking and with what? – they don’t have any combat vehicles, helicopters or artillery, don’t think they even have fire support weapons.
In the past, we modestly called them British Army Training Teams. OK, they will now accompanying host units in combat if required, but a Strike Bde? Too many PRs at head office thinking up ways to make us sound bigger and more formidable than we are, in order to mask th3 reality of 14 years of serious army cutbacks.
Hi Cripes.
Got you re the 8 Battalions.
Yes, all full strength Bns once orphaned from their CS CSS as somebody cut them. Cap badge mafia must play into that in some respects? Easier to cut than a named County Battalion.
11 LSB is still pretty vague, I read they’re being equipped with Drones, but I know little else.
Like other Bdes of the forward force, 77Bde, ASOB, they are indeed light as a feather.
I support the ASOB concept, but my cynical side sees it as a convenient way to “dispose” of Infantry Battalions shorn of their support in real all arms Brigades.
“….exceptional teamwork and dedication…..”
It’s a handful of small helicopters…….
Look at the party at DE&S when they “delivered” Ajax.
Yeah it never ceases to amaze how these people reward themselves for just doing their job.
👌
Why do we keep changing the name, its very confusing for all but the most informed. Its an airbus h145, if you want to denote its a different variant call it a h145 Jupiter. They should of done the same with ajax and called it a ascod ajax like the ascod ulan and ascod pizarro. It just makes it much easier to know where equipment comes from and what designs we are using.
Agree Jonathan.
With each of the services using various helicopters and their requirements overlapping or differing, there is bound to be some push and pull about which service has ownership and is the custodian.
I think we have a pretty sensible division of responsibility as things stand: the Army Air Corps rightly has the battlefield combat helicopters, the Apache and non-naval Wildcats, the RAF has the transport and utility helis, the Chinooks and previously the Pumas.
The medium and light utility helos seem to fall between two stools. The SF Dauphins are Army Air Corps, which is sensible as they are on rhe combat end of things.
The NMH will likely be a utility heli and the first 30, if we get that many, should go to the RAF. However. The army needs a large batch of them to support combat brigades in the field, for troop and material supply, medevac, air assault etc. If we ever actually get some for the army, they should be operated by the AAC.
The Jupiters have an army role in Brunei and really an RAF role in Cyprus, doing SAR, firefighting etc. So no problem with them being on the RAF’s books, but the aquadron should include AAC Air and ground crew for the Brunei flight aka squadron.
i