New data from the Ministry of Defence (MOD) reveals that the timeline for the New Medium Helicopter programme has been extended by three years, while the project’s whole-life cost has also seen a notable increase.

The data, extracted from the MOD’s annual report on major projects for the financial year 22/23-Q4, highlights the challenges and revisions encountered in the project’s journey.

In the MOD’s latest update, it was disclosed that “compared to financial year 21/22-Q4, the project’s end-date at 22/23-Q4 increased from 2028-07-07 to 2031-09-30.” The primary reason for this extension is “further analysis on the programme schedule” and amendments made during the Ministry of Defence’s Annual Budget Cycle 2022.

UK’s ‘New Medium Helicopter Programme’ detailed

Simultaneously, the Whole Life Cost, compared to the previous financial year, has seen a substantial uptick from £1,172 million to £1,329 million. The MOD cited this increase was mainly “due to the programme receiving an uplift to safeguard the capabilities that the New Medium Helicopter programme plans to deliver.”

The Infrastructure and Projects Authority’s Delivery Confidence Assessment rating for the programme, however, remains at Amber. This rating is primarily linked to “the delay in securing the Outline Business Case approval.”

Despite this delay, the MOD states that “significant work is ongoing to secure approval which will enable the main part of the New Medium Helicopter competition to proceed.”

The New Medium Helicopter programme aims to rationalise five rotary wing requirements through the procurement of a single new medium lift helicopter, a move that is expected to * “maximise commonality allowing improvements in efficiency and operational flexibility.”*

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

126 COMMENTS

  2. “” The primary reason for this extension is “further analysis on the programme schedule”””

    Well that’s a new way to define, passing the buck onto the next government, allowing the Tory party to slag off the new government for not equipping the military with the kit it needs.
    What makes this even more damning is this present government dithered in the first place and extended the life of the Puma, when it should have been replaced. (Not only that but due to a loss of capability we sent them to Romania to be upgraded) Looking forward, I feel that whoever wins the next election, will bin the entire program 

    • Well that’s a new way to define, passing the buck onto the next government,

      Precisely.

      I am afraid this is the same crap that happened to FRES: A miraculous AFV that can go into C-130 and replace tanks.
      For me it is clear that the ideologues of futurism in MoD want a V-22/V280 type so they are dragging their feet. But as with FRES reality is always stronger than futurist fiction.
      But the heavy costs of that non choice remain.

      • Not sure why you slag of the logical choice of the V280, which beats any rival platform on every available metric, such as; range, speed, load capacity, fuel consumption etc.

        • There is nothing logical about it.
          Price, cost use, too big size, maintenance, altitude limitations, not operational plus the certain American complexification.

          • V280 is a better bet than a V22 as they are never going to purchase V22 as £-per unit over £-per mile is higher than a C130s, RAF have no desire on V22 and neither does the RN, Looking at what the USA replaces the BlackHawk, if you didnt you would have to be stupid.

        • Although the v280 is very good and a capability that would be great to have it’s not really in the traditional sense a medium lift rotor and cannot and does not fulfill the same requirements that a lot of the platforms it would be replacing need to undertake ( some of these are relatively small 12,000Ib fully load rotor as the small end of medium lift) as a few of these are not very large rotors. I would like to see the V280 taking over the role of the Merlin’s in the future, after all it’s got a 30,000+In take of weight which is the same the Merlin…but we still need 15,000 to 20,000 take off wait rotor for general duties…it’s also not ready yet and still has a lot of derisking to do..but in a decade..it would be a good slot for the maritime medium lift. But we need a good modest traditional medium lift battlefield taxi now ish.

          • Not only can’t we wait, we can’t risk what happened to the multi-role vehicle (protected) programme, where around 2016, we were going to piggy back on the US JLTV order, getting a great price. Until six years later when we weren’t, leading to yet more delays and indecision.

            There’s a good chance we wouldn’t get V-280s for the army until the early 2040s, making them the candidate to replace HMH if we get a move on and buy those now.

          • Nor is V-280 medium weight. What’s now a corvette would have been a frigate 20 years ago. Times change. I’d be willing to stick a tenner down on the Oshkosh making a Boxerlike comeback,

          • V280 is medium lift ? Merlin is Heavy Lift based on what’s available now. and that Merlin fleet only has 7 more years. you need to have covered your bases

          • Hi Jon, no anything below 50,000Ibs is considered medium lift anything below the 12,000ibs mark is intermediate and light. Heavy lift is 50,000Ibs and above.

          • People keep repeating this nonsense. All navies in developed countries are smaller than they were during the post war era, when are people going to stop living in the past!

  4. Well there’s a surprise. An MOD procurement project delayed and over budget.
    Sheezus when will these guys learn. Set a budget, set a project plan and deliver.

    • It comes as no great surprise, as the projected internal costs for an exquisite, all singing, all dancing bespoke gold plated UK built batch of 40 Helicopters becomes unaffordable within the projected budget, it becomes 25, the reduced numbers procured puts the unit price through the roof and the whole lot gets binned with a small additional order of Chinook to replace them and a continuation of the lease contracts for twin Hueys….

      Same old sh*it, different day chaps …

        • We certainly did mate, unfortunately what the RAF and Army actually want isn’t of the slightest importance!

          No BH, just spin and BS Daniele, followed by sweet FA!

      • This reminds me of the French FREMM procurement disaster.

        Reduced from 17 to 8 to cut costs, the 8 FREMMs ended up costing about the same as the 17…

        They should learn that such cost-cutting is rarely a good choice.
        I think that continuing to buy and then sell them is a better plan…

          • There are “funny” things going on with supply in armies around the world, and probably with everyone.

        • Is that true??
          I’m sorry for you, as I believe you’re our French contributor here? Apologies if I have that wrong.
          But on the other hand, I’m delighted! It is not just us!!!

          • Yes, it’s even worse, since the contract for 17 FREMMs was 6.5B€ and ended up at 7B€ for 8, unit costs having doubled after the cancellation of the other units.

            Initially, the contract was for a ship costing less than 300M€, and it skyrocketed to 670M€ because of the government, not the industrial… (at least, not only).

            It’s one of the most disastrous programs, even though the ship is good.

          • Don’t tell people what’s going on in France, this can only happen in the U.K. Everything everywhere else must be better. You’ll have people having heart attacks, it must be better in France!

    • Easy to say when very few of us understand the complexity of procurement. And that the vast majority of MOD projects are delivered on time, and within budget. But we don’t hear about those, because good news doesn’t generate comments.

      • Hi Robert, I take issue with this, we post both the negative and the positive. It is not my aim to “generate comments”.

        • Firstly – keep up the great work George.

          Secondly – It genuinely would be a benefit to persuading the British public that MOD isn’t just flushing their cash down the toilets if an article tabulating the procurement successes (NLAW, CAMM and loads of small but essential projects) could be produced?

          I dare say the MOD press office would be very happy to assist?

          It would also assist the (mostly) good people at Abbey Wood who were very unjustly blamed for some very silly political decisions (can down the road type) by the Defence Select Committee.

          • Hi DM, I wonder how these costs might play out with a bog standard “off the shelf” Backhawk buy? Surely there must be some economies of scale piggy backing off the Americans?

          • Not a chance mate! Westlands jobs remember. Maybe they could be built there under licence like what was planned in the 80s.
            That the military need around 40, and that they have wanted, for years, Blackhawk, is of not the slightest importance to politicians.

          • yes but Westland dont have a work force of capacity to manufacture these in the UK. unless parts are shipped from the cheapest Italian run factory in Asia

          • Problem is it is sometimes very difficult to buy a purely off the shelf platform. If you have to, for eg, bolt on a uk radio to allow it to talk to the uk army or a widget (which the US may insist on a military exemption for) that is officially required to fly in euro civvie airspace etc, it is no longer off the shelf.

            Even a small hardware change like this may mean you have to modify core software, databus messages and re-certify safety critical bits. At this point it may be significantly more expensive than the brochure price and longer to procure. That change may also impact future upgrade as every future platform manufacturer core software upgrade will require a uk specific version massively impacting whole life cost.

          • Hi Dave – thanks for the detailed reply, good insights. I should have clarified I was referring to the airframe, engines and primary control suite. Totally accept there will be a need for customisation re local requirements.

        • Keep up the good work George,

          Most of the mainstream media ( not uk defence journal) and especially left leaning US and UK publications in conjunction with Russia, Indian, Chinese propagandists constantly jump on any negative UK news story.

          The public narrative is that we spend £50 billion a year on forces incapable of fighting or whipping their back side without US involvement. This narrative is a threat to national security now and needs to be challenged.

          • “incapable of…whipping their back side without US involvement.”
            Whatever floats their boat as long as everyone consents.

        • The issue is that things are reported without “context” and taken to be representative. So, we never hear of comparative failures of other programs and commentators assume there are none and that ours most be the worst and most incompetent.
          Whilst this site is better than most, the lack of contextual comparisons does leave a void, which is often filled by nonsense.

      • Hi Robert. I imagine much of the increase for this project is attributed to inflationary pressure. I don’t think the MOD can be hold to blame for this. The sad reality is we are likely to see more of this in the future. I am concerned how this will play out under a Labour governments.

      • Agree procurement of complex stuff is not easy and sometimes it’s better to delay and get it right that order a 15,000ton monster destroyed that you only ever build 10% of the planned number..because they were just to expensive and not what you needed.

        This issue come with the political delays…this costs money and time..but the government alway manage to plop the political delays onto the laps of the civil service.

      • Or it’s because Major Projects is where most of the delays lie, and when a Major Projects report comes out, the slew of bad news hits us in a lump. Mechanised Infantry (Boxer, I think) has moved out of green into amber as has Defence Infrastructure, so we could be getting stories on those too.

        I count 2 out of 48 non-exempt Major Projects for the MOD in the green, Martlet and the Fleet Solid Support ships. This means to me either something is very wrong with the procurement or the reporting or both. Probably both.

        Given the current position of H&W, I’d say calling FSS green suggests we have no serious ability to show risk, and our RAG reporting is misleading at best.

  6. “due to the programme receiving an uplift to safeguard the capabilities that the New Medium Helicopter programme plans to deliver.”
    This sounds like the MOD is taking out some kind of insurance policy. I would be interested to know what capabilities are at risk of not being available when we want to incorporate them into the helicopters. Are we paying for some company which would otherwise cease production to stay in business until we decide to start building these machines?

  7. GOLD PLATING REQUIREMENTS = DELAY = INFLATION = FEWER AIRCRAFT.

    Sorry for shouting but how can Poland decide to fairly quickly decide to buy the AW149 and AW101 and we can’t do likewise. BW said it last week 80% is good enough.
    When you look at what they are replacing this isn’t exactly rocket science.

    Inward investment wherever possible actually helps to grow the economy and when our defence budget is based on a % of GDP that is a double whammy.

    • Yes and no,

      Inward investment helps grow the economy, yes
      Does that actually help the ring fenced pool of money that’s the defence budget, no.

      Is the job of the Ministry of Defence to support the economy or actually procure equipment to defend the nation??

      The teeth of the dog should be at the sharp end of procument, but it’s the wagging tail calling the shots!

      • Well accept in certain circumstances and if we can build an equivalent product here and at a reasonably comparable cost the answer has to be yes wherever practicable.
        The MODs job is to ensure the Defence of the Realm and the economy is what provides its budget.
        If there is one key lesson from the Ukrainian war it is that we as a Nation have to be able to provide the majority of our own equipment to avoid ITAR issues.
        France actually has a strong buy French policy and 90% of their kit is sourced in France. If you want an example of the effects of the multiplier effect in the economy of targeted and planned inward investment then read this article from January. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-warship-orders-significant-to-scottish-economy/
        That doesn’t preclude real and honest partnerships with like minded countries, but it helps if we are a credible partner.
        We presently have a huge gap in our ability to provide new heavy AFV such as new MBTs, we no longer can even build gun barrels.
        So if you want to secure our Helicopter industry then buy the AW139 or AW149.

        • I agree to a point, i.e Ships and Subs and especially Tempest.

          But you have to admit ( using your example) if the UK developed and manufactured an MBT and ordered 148 of them, the unit cost would be absolutely astronomical!

          Our Helicopter industry is really smoke and mirrors jingoistic spin in the shape of a AW149 in a Union flag wrap!

          In reality, somone left the gate open and that horse dissapeard years ago, probably in a Romanian Horse meat factory by now…

          Wildcat was the last throw of the dice for UK helicopter design, it was poorly conceived and should have never been built, but political will forced it ever onwards and we got an eye watering expensive helicopter that few doubt will ever exceed 90 units sold…

          So the UK helicopter industry consists of a wholly owned Italian company and factory, assembling Italian designed helicopters from Italian parts kits…

          Nice Union flag wrap job though, you can’t take that away from them….

          That sir, is a dead parrot!

          Just for fun…..

          What do we need to replace Puma with?

          We need a proven medium helicopter, given such platforms are currently in stupidly short supply in the UK, they need it to be as flexible as possible, so capable of carrier deployment when needed.

          Blackhawk, proven, maritime deployable, affordable, available and does exactly what it says on the tin, nothing fancy, just works as advertised.

          It’s the builders transit van of Medium Helicopters…

          Available as a Spec ops version that would come in very handy too alongside the SF Chinnok fleet.

          You can always paint it black, put a union flag wrap on it and even throw fish and chips out the sides if you want a British look to it🤣

          Oh, and the RAF and Army want it too, so there’s that….

          • “maritime deployable” AW 149 is in service as Mistral LHD helicopter for Egypt Navy. AW189(civil version) is in use in UK Coast Guard and in service in Falklands.

          • It is, but there’s a world of difference between operating a helicopter from a deck in a relitivly benign environment, to operating genuinely maritime capable helicopter, physically designed for the environment

            I will guarantee the Egyptian Navy only operate by day, in extremely benign sea states.

            Take a look at the 149, its centre of gravity appears relitivly high, that makes it dangerous on a pitching deck. Same reason that the Puma only operates from flight decks in emergencies only.

            The Mod prohibit its use from flight decks, because it’s top heavy design is actually considered dangerous in most sea states.

          • no one shoots @ the Coastguard. Show Pony related to a VIP air taxi. like taking a Ferrari into a ploughed field

          • Isn’t the RWUAS three ton drone for the Navy being designed at Yeovil? I don’t think the parrot is quite dead yet.

          • Possibly. But Westland always had limited design capability.
            Wessex, Sea King were all Sikorski designs. Lynx is maybe the only helicopter fully designed by Westland.

          • That’s interesting Jon, so still a glimmer of life perhaps, is it being designed in Italy though?

            I’m under the understanding that Yeovils design department is no more?

          • The announcement states it’s UK, also it’s the third phase of the programme which has been UK led. While the earlier phases adapted the Italian Solo, this was described as being a clean sheet design. I’m inclined to take it at face value as a UK led and designed project.

            In 2021, Leonardo kicked this off alone (as I recall it). It later partnered with Northrop Grumman who make the Fire Scout. Then in 2022, the MOD finally kicked in funding for phase 3 of the RWUAS programme.

          • If it forms the basis of the Fire Scout D, which is unlikely but not impossible, the dead parrot will become a blazing phoenix. I won’t hold my breath over it, just cradle a tiny seed of hope.

          • The most damning aspect of this all is the MOD and RAF had concluded that the Puma was coming to end of life and needed to be replaced in the mid 1980s! This leading to Westlands to getting a license production deal for the Blackhawk from Sikorsky…the Peace dividend and Options for change put paid to any idea of replacing the Puma in the 1990s as should have been done (with Blackhawk).

            On a side note another thorn in the side of any attempt to getting a Medium helicopter replacement was the EH101 a type that many ill informed people think to be a medium helicopter. It isn’t considering it has the same landing footprint as a Chinook but with less payload and passengers as well as a sling load no better than an uprated Puma all with extremely expensive and intense maintenance requirements.

          • What a missed opportunity that was, had we started manufacturing Blackhawk in the 1990’s, then Westlands would have had a good steady flow of work, builds, repair, overhaul and upgrades of a huge fleet of international customers as a regional hub.

            The RAF would likely have replaced their first gen models with new build M’s.

            Poland have lifted that prize and good for them quite frankly.

            It’s interesting re the Melin, again excellent Naval helicopter, but wanting as a tactical transport for the RAF, not particularly wanted and forced on them by the government.

            History sort of repeated itself with Wildcat, again excellent Naval platform, but this time forced on the Army, who still really don’t know quite what to do with it!

            At least the delicate Merlin could actually carry a useful number of troops!

          • OMG, are we still in the death throes of the Westland Affair? How long does the stench of a screwed up decision linger?

          • AW159 Wildcat is not exactly doing well on the export market, I always felt it should have been a larger clean sheet design than a warmed over Sea Lynx. The Lynx made sense when countries were replacing tiny helicopters like the Wasp and frigate/destroyer flight decks and hangers were tiny. These days when a country buys a new frigate or destroyer and even some Corvette/OPV they put a flight deck and hanger on it big enough for Seahawk or NH90. When your ship has that amount of room why bother with Wildcat?! MH-60R is currently getting the lions share of orders these days whilst Wildcat has the sum exports of two nations South Korea and the Philippines … primarily due to South Korea being a prior Sea Lynx operator and the need to operate off the smallish Incheon class frigate whilst the Philippines needed to operate off the Jose Rezal class frigate which is a derivative of the Incheon class. I think it is telling that the South Korean navy has now ordered a batch of MH-60R.

          • It amazes me how blinkered folks are regarding transport helicopters, the Merlin was certainly found wanting in Afghanistan, far to fragile due to its composite construction, and excessive maintenance requirements.

            Frequently grounded awaiting repairs.

            Chinook and Black Hawk flew into a hail of bullets again and again, got patched up and straight back into the fight!

            The AW149 is no different from the merlin in this respect, an overly complex, fragile composite helicopter….

          • AW 149 overly complex haha.
            It is in heavy use in civilian market and it is derived from 1000 sold AW139.
            Do you think a civilian helicopter for oil platforms, SAR etc is “overly complex” ?

            From General Eletric
            November 18, 2021

            LYNN, Mass. – A Bel Air Aviation AW189 helicopter has surpassed 5,000 engine flight hours operating with GE’s CT7-2E1 engine. Since entering service in November 2014, this AW189 has had zero engine shop visits and stands as the AW189/CT7 fleet leader in total engine flight hours.
            “Reaching 5,000 engine flight hours with zero shop visits is an amazing illustration of the world-class reliability the CT7 offers our customers for a wide range of missions,” said Elissa Lee, GE Aviation’s CT7 Programs Director. “Congratulations to Bel Air. We’re very proud to continue supporting your CT7 engines.”
            Bel Air Aviation, based in Denmark, specializes in flights to offshore oil and gas and offshore wind turbine sites. With two CT7-powered AW189 helicopters in its fleet,

          • Be sure to point out the UK spec AW149’s that are developed and with a proven track record🤔

            I’ve looked, odd thing is I can’t find any…..

            If an oil and gas platform rocked and rolled like the pitching deck of of a frigate, you might need to be resurrecting Red Adare and his asbestos mittens, you can obviously see the difference there Alex, i.e an absolute world of difference!

            So you would build 25 ‘extremely’ expensive helicopters that can’t be deployed to sea when needed?

            Fragile helicopters that get grounded with bullet holes and require specialist repairs?

            Why not, let’s crack on with the next Wildcat type frasco shall we, it’s only money after all….

          • Is that an argument to cancel Tempest?

            And you don’t know what is fragile or pricey or require specialist repairs. Only a field comparison will show the advantages ties and disavantages.

            “The deadly helicopter crash that killed three members of the Idaho National Guard last week was just the latest fatal aviation mishap involving a UH-60 Black Hawk to strike the U.S. military in recent months.
            In the last year and a half, five Black Hawk crashes across the United States have resulted in the deaths of 12 U.S. service members, according to aviation mishap data reviewed by Task & Purpose.”

            But this wouldn’t the first time that the Army’s Black Hawk fleet has come under serious scrutiny following a fatal mishap. Indeed, the widow of a UH-60 crew chief who died in a deadly crash on a Maryland golf course in April 2017 sued Lockheed Martin’ over the incident, alleging that the Black Hawk manufacturer knew that some of the aircraft’s components were “unfit, unsafe, unairworthy and defective.”
            “The Army’s investigation found that an important internal laminate skin that bonds parts of the rotor system together had disintegrated, causing part of the vehicle’s tail rotor system to fall off midflight,” the Washington Post reported at the time. “It stopped short of determining why the laminate had disintegrated or who might be at fault for what it termed a ‘material defect.’”

            2021.

          • “Is that an argument to cancel Tempest?”

            Emm, ok, I didn’t think I have to draw a line between Tempest and a medium support helicopter, but go on Alex I enjoy a laugh….

            So,for you to draw the conclusion that Tempest is relevant to this discussion you have to make a couple of deductions.

            A, it will have a cargo hold and ramp

            B, will be capable of vertical landing and will in fact land in the heart of a fire fight to load/ unload troops and undertake medevac missions as well as deep strike and air defence, plus electronic attack and recon work.

            It will therefore be subjected to small arms damage…..

            You heard it hear first chaps, Alex clearly has inside project knowledge.😂😂👍

            Alex, let’s draw a line under this,

            I draw a simple conclusion based upon the feedback of friends who severed numerous tours in Afghanistan.

            Merlin, composite, complex helicopter and easily broken.

            Unable to withstand the harsh use and grounded by gunfire damage with composite structures requiring specialist repairs.

            Chinook and Blackhawk, tough and able to withstand the harsh workload, patched up, new plexiglass panels fitted and back into the fight…

            It’s not rocket science, one type can take the shit, the other can’t….

            It’s really that simple, perhaps Airborne can chime in here.

            A civilian based helicopter like the 149, composite, unnecessary easily damaged features like retractable undercarriage etc, etc etc.

            What’s needed is a reliable proven airborne builders van not a Lamborghini…

          • Agree with you completely John.

            Alex you mentioned that “the Black Hawk manufacturer knew that some of the aircraft’s components were “unfit, unsafe, unairworthy and defective”.
            Does it explain why these components were in the state that they were and what did the manufacturer do about it?

            Over the many years that I have spent in aviation we have regularly identified aircraft components/systems that were unfit, unsafe and defective, resulting in an unairworthy platform. None of those platforms were BH. The maintain regime was in place to identify issues in most cases, sadly not all. It has to also be considered how many BH there are in operational service and also the manner and conditions in which they are flown, very different to civilian/commercial world.

            It is widely accepted in the military that catastrophic incidents will occur due to the nature in which we operate them. However, what is a little unpalatable to military aviators is that a sub optimal platform, and I say sub optimal because it was never originally intended to be flown in the military operational environment, is being touted as a top spec military aircraft because they have given it a drab matt paint scheme and added some bolt on components.

            Got to agree with John, only one of those platforms is designed for the rigours of the military environment. Lets forget for a moment the battle damage it may receive from an enemy’s weapon systems and just look at the day to day, a section or multiple of hairy arsed squaddies getting on and off, chucking their kit on and off, bergens, personal weapons, support weapons. Lumping stretchers on and off. Internal cargo loads, underslung loads. Putting down hard on an unprepared LS. The effects of environmental conditions, sand, gravel, dust, snow. Things that are considered from day 1 on a dedicated military platform that simply cannot be built in to a platform that started life in the civilian/commercial sector.

            In my previous life as a door gunner on Lynx I saw this first hand, even on a 2 week exercise. We would deploy with an aircraft that was in good order and could be ‘relatively’ well maintained in the field. And I’m talking about the REME’s with a basic tool kit hanging off the side of it in all sorts of shit weather. after 2 weeks they were in rag order. Take this to 6 month deployment to Iraq and it was a whole different ball game. I just cannot see this happening with 139, 149 and 175. 

          • Absolutely spot on mate (said way better than I could), exactly what my mates say, their universal option of Merlin was its a fragile piece of sh*t and not up to the rigors of operational use in a harsh hostile climate.

            Merlin was envisaged as a Military helicopter, but primarily a naval type, a task for which its ably suited and adapted for.

            The modified tactical transport variant has 100% been found wanting, as many a QRF force could attest to in Afghanistan, as they ran up the ramp of a patched up Chinook or jumped into a US Army Blackhawk and flew towards the blood, shit and bullets again and again again, while a poorly Merlin sat on the ramp awaiting specialists to rock up!

            Hopefully the Royal marines wont find the HC4 a problem, as they will be mainly raiding in and out with the machine.

            It staggers me that these modern fragile composite types are even being considered, simply not fit for purpose, not Tonka enough, end of..

            I’ll say it again, the political tail wags the bloody dog!

          • There were numerous occasions when I and a few other lads would be sitting on the HLS at our PB waiting for a pick up, either to head back to Bastion or to another FOB or PB. A Merlin would rock up and 1 or 2 of us wouldn’t be able to get on. The thing was practically empty but because of the amount of additional armour that had been added it didn’t have the performance to take much in the way of a load, the very reason that they were almost never used during any Heliborne assaults.

            As you say a really good maritime platform and a big upgrade in capability to 3 Cdo Bde over the Seaking, although this obviously comes with a bigger maint burden. However anything beyond, as you suggested, ship to shore raiding then there are serious questions about its robustness.

          • ok will answer this with a simple comparison. Sea King v Merlin in AEW format. Sea King a rushed development costing £250.00 and box of tea. Over Crowsnest. the strain on the original location of the bag on the Merlin led to failures on the Carbon built airframe. Which need main facility repairs, “Yeovil” Merlin battle damage in Afghanistan need main factory support to bond a patch repair or panel replacement.

            Accidents happen that’s life, do you work in MOD procurement as you must make some crap choices daily,

            i guess the choice over lucky charms and sugar puffs is the biggest

          • MAKES THE MOST SENSE, but i fear someone in Yeovil would like to waste more taxpayers money buy there kit, rather than one assembled in Poland. the feedback from the forces they want a proven platform, not a show pony with lipstick. Battlefield helicopters get shot at, repairing carbon fibre n glass in field didn’t work with Merlin. Black Hawk would lead you to replace Merlin with BH.

    • A better balance between Quality and Quantity. I’ve been suggesting it for years and will continue to do so. Just buy something that won’t fall out the sky and is “good enough”

        • Am I missing something here ? Firstly I mentioned the AW139 and AW149 and you have completely fixated on the AW149 (which is probably too big). Secondly none of the designs being considered are optimised for regular deployment on a ship.Yes the Black Hawk S70 can be marinised using features of the SH60 such folding rotors and tails, which the Army don’t really need.
          In fact adding that little nugget is the definition of Gold Plating a requirement when it is to replace the Puma as a land based workhorse.
          You seem to concentrate on the Sikorski Black Hawk which is the oldest and smallest of all the proposals being considered and has the least development left in the design. Also they will all be built in Poland, so its Political suicide.
          Yes in the 1980’s/ 90’s it was probably the best option available and instead we went for the Merlin, which was not really suitable but is a hell of an ASW helicopter (shades of the F111 naval version). But that was 40 years ago.
          To borrow your expression about “Dead Parrots” The US Army has already ordered its the replacement by the Bell V-280 Valor. And the USAF took the option to replace their remaining UH1-N with the MH-139 Grey Wolf rather than a SH60/70 variant.
          Helicopter building isn’t dead in the UK yet, but if we don’t breath some life into it soon; it sure will be.
          For me it is an MH139(AW139 variant) or and AW149 (bit too Big) but also buy a new tranche of AW101 for the Navy before they go to Poland as well.

    • Looking forward, Poland is just currently selecting what is the best option available now. and face replacing there old systems anything is better. Look around in the Medium lift and its the next 30 plus years. and combining 5 existing platforms into one. Merlin out of service 7 years, maybe one platform sat in the middle of the 2 could be better. AW101 doesn’t fit when you have Chinook. was why RAF pushed them out to RN.

      • AW101 was totally the wrong size fit for the Army but as an ASW platform they are the optimum size. The Airbus NH90 was an attempt to build an adequate ASW platform but smaller than the Merlin and how is that going ? IMHO they should be speaking to the other AW101 customers about a 2nd generation of new builds.
        But also go for a Medium Helicopter with as much commonality as possible hence a AW139 / 149

    • The crystal ball tells me an additional order for 10 Chinook plus a continuation of twin Huey contracts,
      another dependable old workhorse that just works!

      That’s what I expect to happen now, the money isn’t there for the wanted gold plated solution, so they no doubt wave the magic wand and make the problem dissapear!

      • The Bells are already gone mate, replaced by Puma.
        There are 14 ER Chinook that were deferred a few years back on cost grounds but they are for SF, not a suitable MH replacement.

        • Hi DM

          Any insight on how many of the Chinooks are currently operational? I imagine a fair few are in storage.

          • I understand, and I may be wrong, that of a fleet of 60, 38 are in the “forward” fleet, that is assigned to the Squadrons – 7,18,27, the OEU, 22 Sqn, and the Joint Puma/Chinook OCU, 28 Sqn.

            Some of the older types are being retired, or have already, like the legendary BN, reducing the fleet to 50. There are also the14 ER examples, no doubt for JSFAW ( 7 Sqn ) which we deferred due to budget issues, and there are also, reportedly, problems at the Americans end in Philadelphia.

            I’d expect them to also replace like for like older examples, not increase the fleet. Which is fine, and, I’d read, has no impact on the forward fleet.

            Though to be fair, they say that about every cut and look at our shortage of assets.

          • Thanks for the insight DM. I had a rough working number around 40 units, so your insights tally up nicley.

  9. A medium lift transport helicopter like the NMH is a pretty straightforward development. The MOD seems to be making particularly heavy weather of setting out its requirements.

    None of the 3 contenders will be built from scratch in the UK, they will at most be assembled here. I cannot see Leonardo setting up a full production line at Yeovil for 25 cabs, it would make them prodigious expensive.

    It is primarily a battlefield helicopter and needs to be robust enough to take some damage. The BH is well-proven in this respect, the AW149, with its composite material fuselage, has a lot to prove.

    It needs to be able to carry an underslung load of 4 tonnes, enough for instance to lift a 105mm gun, 30 shells and gun crew. BH can lift 4.1 tonnes, the AW 149 2.7. The 149 suffers from being essentially a stretched version of the 139. Its max TOW is 8 tonnes. It can be stretched to 8.6 tonnes, but aspects of performance – such as speed and rate of climb – dominish at the higher weight. The BH max TOW is 10 tonnes.

    In the air assault role, which is a key element for the US Army, it needs to be able to lift a section of 10 combat-laden troops plus two door gunners. Both BH and AW 149 can do that. In addition, the BH has 4 weapon pylons to carry missiles and rockets. We don’t generally do that, seeing the role of the Puma or Bell as transport. The AW 149 can fit weapons pylons and that would be a useful low-cost addition to permit suppressing fire.

    The performance of the two helicopters is harder to compare, as Leonardo omits or ducks some elements. The BH likely has a superior rate of climb, the AW 149 may have a better combat range, both have about the same max speed. The BH has a good hot n high performance, proven in Afghan and Iraq, the AW claims to have but evidence is not available.

    The best way to decide on the choice would be by a fly off between the two types, where every element is tested as the USA does. I suspect that the BH would emerge as the better all-round choice and also the most competitively priced.

    The main thing Is for the MOD to get on with it and get the maximum number of cabs possible. The US Army specifies 10 frontline pet brigade; if we add on reserves, out-of-area flights in Brunei, Cyprus , wherever and the OCU, we should be talking 60+ units, not 25.

    The main casualty might well be Westland, as I doubt they would be keen to assemble Polish-made BHs, a direct competitor to the AW 149.

    • Makes perfect sense, a competitive fly off, unfortunately while UH-60M exists and could rock up for a competition tomorrow, the AW149 ( as UK configured) is still a paper design.

      The Mod still have to gold plate it and add all singing all dancing bespoke mods.

      • Every one is still a paper design by that definition or do you think there will not be a UK spec for the UH-60

        • It doy SEM to be a problem for our Chinook orders Alex, in they roll…

          UH-60M ticks all the boxes as a Puma replacement as is and deliveries could start next year.

          149, is years away…

  10. During a catch up with some mates about 6 weeks ago (one works for Leonardos and the other at DE&S Helicopters), I was told that the NMH program was currently delayed. This didn’t come as a surprise as I have quite a few friends who are at Benson on the NMH Transition team. However what was interesting is that one of them told me that the Leonardos proposal hadn’t quite met (being a slightly conservative there) the requirement. Now I would have expected that at this stage of the competition they would have been filtered out meaning that the program had now down selected to the 2 remaining options. The eyebrow raiser is that this appears not to have been the case. If this is true then it says to me exactly where the award is heading.

    • Are you suggesting that sometimes procurement competitions are prejudged? Surely it’s always a totally objective match against requirement criteria. Please don’t diss Santa and the tooth fairy as well. I don’t think I could take it.

      • Jon I wouldn’t suggest anything of the sort.

        Nothing to see here, move along folks, nothing to see!

        And as for Santa and the tooth fairy, I’m a firm believer. My little one would disown me if i suggested otherwise.

      • Procurement is a paper exercise to answer the question asked cheapest will win, but its how they hide the true cost in that answer

    • So the summary of all these conversations and comments is the Leonardo AW149 isn’t ready, can’t fulfill the requirement and would need expensive tinkering and redesign aka gold patting to fulfill the requirement.
      The Black Hawk was a helicopter type we should have adopted in the 1990s when we knew Puma was going to be leaving service instead of upgrading the Puma fleet.
      Now nearly 30 years later we are looking at the Black Hawk again but can’t bear to try to revisit the concept of a UK built BH.
      Surely the answer is go to Sikorsky dust off the old contract from the 1990s. Update it. Then ask for it to be delivered within budget and time. Otherwise Leonardo will likely get the work with the AW149 but an Ajaxed version, so delivered sometime before 2070 at X3 the initial budget.

      • Don’t I recall a second-hand refurbished Blackhawk option? I quite like that as an interim stopgap if we really want the V-280s in mid 2030s.

        • Jon, yes by Acehawk Aerospace based at Teeside airport. They were offering an ML-70 option (UK version of the Acedeck VL-60) built using previously used platforms. From what I remember the price per platform was considerably lower than all other options. They are UK based, in the north east of England, the proposal was very good (exactly what we needed) with room for a level of growth that would have easily carried us forward towards any future rotary solution. For some reason they either dropped out or they’re proposal was dropped. I think it was the latter.

    • The Word is that Leo have been a little guarded, on there information as they quote will be Manufactured in the UK. From Assembled parts. that statement goes against the requirement, A/B state a similar statement. B/O and S/K dont hide they will be made outside the UK but will build support for the platforms in the UK. for the life of the programme creating the same levels of workforce.

  12. Buy the best platform available now, or maybe secure and refurbish a currently platform,

    while the true winning and replacement for B/H is developed. Buy a workhorse not some flash European show pony.

    NH90 rest my case move along people move along, forget 26 jobs in Yeovil for ex Quick fit fitters

  13. Come on UKDJ where’s the update on the collapse of Airbus H175M and Blackhawk bids for NMH.

    I hope the MOD and Labour Gvt pull their fingers out and award these urgent replacements ASAP. buying at least 40 helicopters.

    If we can convince other NATO allies to buy some – Norway and Poland then it adds real value to the contract.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here