A unique paint scheme has been unveiled by the Royal Air Force to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Puma helicopter.
The Puma, a medium-lift support helicopter, has flown on combat and humanitarian operations around the world over the last five decades, including Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Mozambique and the Caribbean.
According to the Royal Air Force:
“On 29 January 1971, the first to Royal Air Force Puma helicopters were delivered into service. To commemorate 50 years of service, Puma HC Mk2 XW224 has been given a unique new paint scheme. Today it flew its maiden flight in its new colours. The aircraft scheme is similar to that which the first Puma HC Mk 1 aircraft were painted when they were delivered in 1971 but with several notable differences:
- the engine housing boasts the badges of all the squadrons who have flown the Puma, both as a HC Mk 1 and a HC Mk 2;
- the tail fin is emblazoned with the union flag; and,
- the standard Royal Air Force logo on the cabin door has been replaced with the bespoke Puma 50 logo.
XW224 was due to be repainted this year. In honour of the 50th anniversary of the Puma helicopter in service with the Royal Air Force, it was agreed that a unique new paint scheme would be used on the aircraft.”
The RAF add that the helicopters have also supported Defence in the UK such as providing helicopter lift capability to flood relief efforts and the coronavirus pandemic.
In early 2020, the Pumas deployed at short notice to Kinloss Barracks to provide vital transport for personnel and equipment in Scotland and Northern England in the early stages of the pandemic, as well as remaining on standby 24/7 to support any task required in the UK.
The aircraft will howevr be replaced in the near future.
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.
As a 9 year old in 1970 I went to the official opening parade at RAF Odiham. Dad was a Ch/Tech on 33sqn
Lovely memories Dennis. You must have been very proud of Dad. My memory of 1970 was turning 21, getting pissed at my party, and getting up terrified and inebriated to make a speech..
“I would just like to….”
And that was it!!😅
The RAF has certainly had great use out of the fleet in 50 years, even if todays Hc 2 Puma is actually quite different from the rolled out Hc1….
Cougar power train and avionics I believe??
A bit of a triggers broom in reality!
Lynx and Puma ( plus the excellent Jaguar) were certainly a high point for Anglo French cooperation in the late 60’s and early 70’s.
Hi John. So sad that the Westland of those days was British owned and a major designer and manufacturer and is now basically a totally foreign owned assembler and sub-contractor. as part of the UK’s newly found independence wouldn’t it be nice if we could at least buy back some shares in Agusta Westland along with the likes of JLR and Airbus to give us a bigger say and dare i say salvage some pride?
This country totally lacks an industrial strategy so will not happen.
The FT were reporting today how after a mere 18 months Cobham has been stripped and sold off into different chunks.
40 years of political short sightedness.
Agree entirely. Such poisonous asset strippers must be reined in.
Couldn’t agree more guys, Tony Blair sold off the last of the family silver, nothing left to sell….
I would agree that some government shares ( amounting to a real stake and some control) should be had in certain industries …. I best have a lay down in a darkened room with a cold compress, I appear to be suggesting nationalisation!
I’ll be considering demarcation, 3 day weeks, working to rule and an ‘everybody out’ ballot for the cup final next…..
Your last suggestion i can identify with er assuming we are in the Final 😀!!
And what exactly, is wrong with nationalisation? It’s funny how ‘tory types’ use nationalisation how, when and as it best suits them, and their arguments. Like re-nationalising part of the failed rail franchises, which is ‘in vogue’ now.
Nationalisation is a bad idea, the public sector is proven to be massively inefficent. However you don’t need state ownership the protect UK industries from takeover, there are plenty of other ways to do it, as proven by many blocked European takeovers and even the home of capitism the US
What’s wrong with nationalisation Tom, ask anyone who lived through the 70’s….
I’m just about old enough to remember that car crash economy era…..
The perfect storm of Government controlled industries in the hands of a government controlled in turn, by the Unions … A couple more years of Callahans Labour and this country would have been broken beyond repair….
Clunking State controlled industries performed ‘poorly’, to say the least … As stated above, I’m not however totally opposed to some government shares in certain strategic industries…. To provide a measure of control.
Well I lived through the 70’s, and the reality is, those days are gone! They will not return under any circumstances. However thats all that is ever rolled out every single time … oh remember the 70’s. 1970 … 2021 = 50 years ago!
And by the way, 70’s Britain was better than the 2000’s in many ways.
Go on Tom, name 5 ways the UK was better in 1975 than it is today…..
Certainly not my recollections, we may have nut job, looney left Woke issues to deal with today …. But, we have wealth, country and personal, beyond the wildest dreams of average joe in the 70’s.
We have a much cleaner, much richer country, with ‘far’ more opportunities for all….
Some believe Britain is a as bleak and dreary as a depressing Jimmy McGovern TV series unfortunately….. Poor old Jimmy is stuck in a miners strike, 1984 ground hog day, were it’s always winter and raining…..
Only 5??
You Have wealth? Oh goody … the majority don’t!
We didn’t have food banks in the 70’s!
We didn’t have millions living below the poverty line!
We didn’t have kids going without food, especially school meals!
We DO NOT have opportunities for all! We have postcode lotteries.
We didn’t have zero hour contracts!
We had more open space.
We had more school fields to play on.
We had lots of public housing.
We had more human rights.
We had more workers rights.
I could go on, and on. Try looking at BOTH sides of the coin.
Oh, I see you drank the Corbyn cool aid, as our American cousins would say…..
The majority aren’t more wealthy than 1975, I’m going to assume you live in Albania perhaps….
Food banks and kids going without food, dreadful, odd thing is we have never had so many fat waddling people pooling about on Obescycles…
Fattest people in Europe apparently Tom….
Let’s pick a couple … More human rights, unless you were black, or Irish or a woman perhaps..
If you think 1970’s levels of human rights were really better, you best go live in Russia.
Better workers rights, you have to be joking, I was brought up in the North East, family all involved in industry. If you think working conditions and workers rights were better then, you are away with the fairies mate…
The 1970’s workers socialist paradise exists only in your and Mr Corbyns imagination I’m afraid….
Britain was the lazy, dirty man of Europe in the 1970’s, the Unions and weak government (of both colours) reduced this country to a laughing stock……
For the sake of looking at both sides of the coin….
More School playing fields …. Agree
More Public Housing ….. Agree, but much of it was very poor.
More open space ……. Not sure about that one.
.
..
..
.
Dude … I know and have very close friends from right across the political/wealth spectrum.
You were brought up in the North East … very nice part of the world, and among the worst hit by your ‘brave new richer world. For you to be lambasting the mid late 70’s, something serious must have effected you
Maybe you turned into one of ‘Thatcher’s children’. She was an amazing woman to very many, including people like you maybe, my father, uncles of mine etc, who were persuaded ‘your not working class any more’ and so voted tory the rest of … well my fathers life anyway.
Those same Thatcher children still are a very useful tool in the political makeup of this country. Any time the 70’s are mentioned, out come the ‘children’ with their rheumy eyed view on things.
The other thing they have in common, is hate politics.
“I see you drank the Corbyn Cool aid” .. this is where you show your true colours ‘mate’.
If it were legal I would have shot him, his cronies, and those who thought the sun shone out of his arse!
All he ever did for Britain, was increase the ‘them and us divide’, leading to more people voting blue, many of whom will regret that decision one day.
However that was the opposition, for good or bad. It’s called democracy I believe.
Frankly sir, you have very little notion of reality, other than your own, which was of course perpetuated by ‘divide and conquer’, (which is still part of the curriculum at Sandhurst I believe) … anyhow I digress.
The world was better, simpler, less egotistic, with much less hate than there is now, in this brave new millennia. Of course those things did start to change in the later 70’s … riots, civil unrest etc and soforth.
However I’m sure ‘yuppy’ oap’s could still turn anything positive into a negative … as they were coached to do so long ago now.
We could go on and on, round and round, and it would go no here. Your position is fixed … maybe try a degree in politics. You have to go into it open minded though …
Live long, prosper s&f, etc and soforth.
The 70s were the collapse of 30 years of postwar failure to adapt. Something european nations had done in less time hence rhe constantly unflattering comparisons.
In terms of your comments on less hatred – ask an ethnic minority person what they think of that statement for the period.
What we worry about as hatred now is nothing to the ingrained and unapolgetically outspoken racism and sexism that existed, not to mention regardign sexuality.
Child abuse was tolerated and rampant in institutions, schools and the church, which still had pernicious power and influence (now an irrelevence).
In terms of meritocracy, class was all, and good luck rising in the world with a regional accent!
Equally if you werent in the 5% at university, which was cushy experience paid for by the other 95%, then a life of drudgery and low pay beckoned. Want to step outside what the unions offered you / had deciced what should be done and how, and good luck getting a job at all.
No food banks? Not sure thats true. But compare a supermarket now and then, and compare the cheapness of food now.
In terms of wider hatred, there was high levels of terrorism both Ireland related (where the status qou had been oppression and gross injustice) and of course related to the middle east with hijackings galore.
Violence was endemic, in the household, in the streets – and half of it BY the police! This is before we consider health and safety at work and your chances of suffering a serious injury – or safety on the roads for instance.
Meanwhile things that routinely killed people in the 80s are now easily treatable and are. Yes we complain about the NHS but consider what you get now in A&E or maternity or for cancer vs what you got i the 70s. It’s probably the smae building but the outcomes and depth of the service is no contrast.
Yes there was social housing, and Im no fan of modern estates quality, but their comfort, services are incomparable.
As for wealth, look at the spread of cars, holidays, consumables – granted the bottom 5-10 dont benefit perhaps, but the bottom 5-10% in the 70s literally lived in squalor with nothing. The rest of the 90-95% population vace vastly more wealth from home ownership (now high 60% vs low 50s iirc) to savings and assets, even if consumable ones.
The UK in the 2000s is a vastly better place than it was then. Hell just look around at the quality of the urban environment, indeed, the environment generally!
Maybe I am an ethnic minority person, and lets not go near physical and mental abuse dude.
Your view on the 70’s has been tarnished, manipulated and has resulted in you trashing those times.
Better in the 21st century than then … oh please. When you whine about strikes and piles of rubbish, thats the only memory you have left of that time. Enough of the attempts at counter arguing with food banks etc. At that point, you are merely insulting the unfortunates of today, not those of the 70’s. I’m done with this now.
But I think we all know you aren’t. Nor do you even seem to have empathy for those that very much suffered in what compared to today was a rubbish place to be if you didnt fit into the accepted types of people. Hence the “brain drain” of the brightest who were able to get out.
My view is my view, as it can only ever be, the one manipulating things here is yourself as you try desperately to claim that today is awful and then was great – in the face of repeated evidence to the contrary. Although I do grant that if you were a white male union official then life probably was much sweeter and you had much more power than you do today. Although the rest of the population are pretty glad for that changing!
Happy for you to qoute where I “whine about strikes and piles of rubbish”.
Yes I quite agree, your ability to argue a point is very obviously over and done with. Indeed, has been for some time.
Buy “we” do you mean that HMG should partly nationalise these companies? If not who do you think the “we” should be?
I mean several things. Firstly although am a Free Market man, I believe the broadly ‘laissez faire’ environment which has characterised the British economy starting with Maggie Thatcher’s tenure has brought both benefits but also many ills. We have sold off much of the family silver and in so doing lost control over real and intellectual property-in particular the loss of the latter has allowed other nations to reap the benefits of developing these.
As to the ‘whoms’ .Some State intervention initially to secure a base for local participation, but structured to give management a maximum say and mandarins only a minimum necessary input. Then via flotations on the Stock Exchanges and encouraging local large scale enterprises to look at buying stakes in these concerns
Well said Geoff….
Thank you John. Hope you are well.
Well said indeed. As for the Westland ‘affair’ ah I remember it well. Merge with British Aerospace and Augusta (a French outfit), or merge with Sikorsky … Heseltine was lobbying hard for the ‘European option’ and many wondered why …
“So sad that the Westland of those days was British owned and a major designer”
I am sorry but that is not true. The only design they did was Lynx with French and Merlin with Agusta.
Westland had no design and no product line later except legacy. That is why they were sold to Agusta.
Hello Alex. I understand what you say and my comment was poorly worded. Appreciate that they started by producing old American designs-as Wessex and Whirlwind(from memory-haven’t Googled!) nevertheless it represented a British design facility with the potential to design and build helicopters locally. Britain needs indigenous hi-tech manufacturers as part of its rebranding and regenerating so i don’t see why we cannot have a local plant that cannot at least partner with say the Italians in the whole spectrum including some local equity ownership. I also think that allowing employee shareholding is also a great incentive even though with the larger corporations such as e.g. JLR its weight would be very small.
But you don’t get that without will from people building a helicopter company.
What you have to offer that others do not – not just comercial product, but to workers, how do you get the best engineers, the best ideas? It is just not magic wand.
Also Britain is not able to be in all pies when technology increase complexity every generation. Not even USA can. Their naval gun manufacturing was sold to BAE.
Westland had no tech depth and no world service depth, since they were only a military company concern, competing only for Government(s) money.
While Agusta is at another level selling a couple thousand of civilian helicopters all over the world in last 30 year beside the military.
Perhaps I am letting my absurd patriotism(Laurence Olivier’s words) cloud my brain Alex! What you say makes sense but all I think I want to say is that there should be no barrier to allowing some shareholding in Britain and that the British wing of Agusta should be in a position to take a more prominent part in the creation of new material. In essence, time to buy back some of the spoons from the Pawnbroker for many good reasons
Cheers from Durban
I hope when the MOD select the replacement for the Puma that they choose a helicopter that is as sturdy and robust and has the same capability .
Cough, cough, Blackhawk, Cough …. Sorry cleared my throat now …. Obviously the answer is a political one, an expensive, fragile and complex Italian offering perhaps….
Blackhawk , Defiant or NH90 would be good , but I have a feeling it is going to be the much publicised AW149.
Blackhawk is going obsolecent , Defiant will be ridiculous expensive and whatever gremlin will have about new tech.
AW-149( And civilian brother AW-189 and family AW-139,169 ) is operating with a lot of forces and comercial and it is the helicopter for SAR in Home Coast Guard UK and Falkland service so whatever it is. not fragile or expensive or complex.
This helicopters family already sold more than 1000 helicopters, so not a small number.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHFdujvqbFA
Link is for AW 189 in Falklands
AW-149 for the 2 Egyptian Mistral LHD’s
https://www.aviacionline.com/2020/09/sale-a-la-luz-el-primer-agusta-westland-aw-149-de-la-fuerza-aerea-egipcia/
If they go for AW149 Leonardo have said that they would move the production to Yeovil.
I am very much in the ‘Let’s buy Blackhawk camp’ and respectfully disagree with your assertion that it is going obsolescent (it’s younger than Chinook), the latest variants are cutting edge systems wise when it comes to helicopters and a known equation which would allow us to operate with many coalition partners seamlessly. Personally the AW149 would be near the bottom of the list one step above the H175 (too much Chinese content) and below the AS532 Cougar, NH90 and Blackhawk respectively. The only positive for AW149 is its British built and frankly I would rather have Blackhawk preferably with the same T700-GE-701D engines fitted to UK AH-64E Apache Guardian.
I read somewhere that Westland got a licence to build Blackhawk many years ago. Wonder how that would still work
I think you are correct about Blackhawk I think it was in the picture around the time the Puma being chosen , Also I think it was offered also during the Afghanistan conflict to plug the gap in the RAF helicopter short fall.
Ive always been a fan of Blackhawk having been in them and they feel solid.
But talk to people who’ve flown them, Puma and others and its a very different story with Blackhawk being a bit of a nightmare. Equally on the maintenance front and availability – works for the US with deep pockets, lots of people and infra, not so much if you dont have that.
AW149 is a cert apparantly, due to Westland’s political clout and that being reinforced by UK politics.
Blackhawk’s design was completed in 1972 – first flew in 1974. It’s a very old aircraft!
Let’s hope for a sensible solution that fits the needs best. I don’t know what the needs are but an example could be, able to carry 9-10 soldiers 200-300 miles, lift a light gun or 5000lbs, very serviceable and desert and maritime friendly.
And most of all a good price and deal for UK plc.
See what fits around that and what u would compromise on, expand on and you have what’s needed. Can I have 50 please
I have a feeling it won’t be that simple tho
In the link i posted above AW 149 has the diagram.
18 troop ferry
or 12 troop + 2 gunner
or for csar : 4 combat+2 medic+2 strecher+2 gunner
I think the AW149 satisfies a lot of the requirements and also the fact that it could end up being built in the UK put it up the list .