First Wildcat handed over at Farnborough

HAVE YOUR SAY

11 July 2012

More penny-packet purchases of inevitably over- expensive kit.
34 for the Army - so 8 or 9 deployable at any one time? Let's hope for no collisions in training.
28 for the Navy - well that's 2 per ship with the way that's going.
Chris - London

11 July 2012

I'd like to know where the Light Assault Helicopter variant went in all this fuss.

In 2011 the MOD de-scoped the Army Wildcat requirement to 30 airframes, and re-roled the 4 removed plus 4 new airframe to be built in addition to Light Assault Helicopter, probably for the Special Forces.

Now, less than one year later, the 66 Wildcat order is already back down to 62 and the Light Assault Helicopter done.

Is it the fastest cut in the story of the MOD, is it an option not firmly contracted for yet, or is the MOD forgetting its own decisions...?

The LAH options exercised were described in the NAO Major projects report 2011.
So, what...?
Gabriele - Piacenza, Italy

11 July 2012

62 replace 100 plus. When one adds Gazelle it is even worse, though mitigated some what by Watchkeeper.

I have exchanged several FOIA requests with MoD over the years demanding how they mitigate for that and what changes there would be to the force structure as 34 could never equip the units currently so equipped.

5 squadrons in 1 and 9 regiments, plus the JSFAW squadron plus the squadron in 5 Regiment in Northern Ireland, plus 847 supporting 3 Cdo, so some 8 squadrons worth.

They, the MoD, actually tried to tell me there were only 5 Lynx Squadrons ( I know better ) then said there would be no change to the number of squadrons. As if!

Pure lies, which they are not meant to do in FOIA requests.

Of course, it now comes out 1 and 9 Regiments are to merge.

I hope this is an initial order or that the recently upgraded AH9's are retained as well.

Numbers far too few.

Why is there no mention of Sea Skua?
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

11 July 2012

The Lynx3 prototype had a stretched cabin. Anyone know how much longer it was than a Wildcat cabin? Or why the Wildcat did not get this longer cabin?
John Hartley - Woking/Surrey/UK

18 July 2012

how about this for a suggestion
army:
60 blackhawks combat proven
67 + 16 more apaches combat proven
62 chinooks combat proven(i believe already in service or on order)
multi role brigades as already envisaged + 2 3500 man air assault brigades and 2 3500 airborne brigades

navy
32 hm2 merlins
28 wildcats
16 ch.53k sea stallions
24 approx f.35b to operate from the next generation of lhd/lha/lph
60 f.35c to operate from cvf

marines/navy
16 ah.1z viper
24 uh.1n venoms
8 ch.53k sea stallions

royal marine to re-raise 41,43,44,46,47,48 RM commandos so that as a nation we can launch and maintain in the field an entire marine division

RAF to concentrate on UKADR coupled with several multi role air wings to support british army's multi role brigades so say 40 basic air defence typhoons(to be used by a new air national guard with a 50/50 split between full & part time former raf/fleet air arm pilots for QRA north & QRA south duties + 120 FGA4 multi role variants + maybe 40 - 50 f.35b to support army/navy in addition i would like to see the raf continue to operate 25c.130j (perhaps operated by the new national guard as mentioned above) and more c.17/a400m so as to support the above mentioned army air assault/airborne brigades

i hope this makes sense if anyone would like comment say so
andy - solihull

19 July 2012

Great if the government will add several billions a year to the defence budget!

The RAF will have to agree to the army operating larger helicopters,and taking over the RAF SHF. They will want compensation. Maybe extra ISTAR and transports/AAR?

Like the Blackhawks for the army.

I don't think there will be a replacement for Ocean, a scandalous decision, so no need for F35B's solely for a new LPH.

Agree the RAF needs more C17/Atlas, don't forget the ISTAR force. Reaper, Sentinel, Sentry, Shadow, Air Seeker should all be retained.

You are keeping all 160 odd Typhoons when we are about to retire early the first 50 or so.
Barking.... not you the government. So more money will be needed to fund that.

I would like to see the Royal Auxiliary Air Force and Royal Naval Reserve expanded if they can be properly trained and funded. Not just manpower as of now, but with reserve ships, MCMV, Landing Craft, etc, to try and boost our numbers, which are too small for a P5 nation.

I don't think your expansion of the RM is realistic. The army would do its nut! You would also need to buy several extra Bay class to transport them.

I would be on my knees if we kept the 4 Bay, 2 Albion and 1 Ocean LPH we had recently, plus the 2 carriers, never mind buying all these extras!

Nice ideas but will never happen. The government of this country is only interested in votes for their own careers. That means benefits, foreign aid and corruption get all the money while the forces are starved.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

19 July 2012

My plans for the typhoons are based on the current order which i think is 160 not 232 as previously envisaged the current plan is retire(scrap) 53(one has since crashed) and keep just 107 my plan would see 40 of the remaining 52 for UKAD and the balance upgraded to the more multi role FGA4 standard.

RAF will keep and perhaps expand ISTAR force the decision to scrap the sentinel will i believe be reversed in 2015(madness not to)

i am x 45 cdo RM so i admit i am a bit biased but i do believe the plan is correct and yes i know the army would kick up a fuss but again i think they could be persuaded with the promise of sole responsibilty for the chopper force.

As for the cost i do not pretend to know how much it would cost but being a global power does not come cheap and i firmly believe that at some point we will regret not having a larger defence budget and i think a 50 billion budget is well within our resources if we chose to do so. The cost of detterence is cheaper than the cost of war
andy - solihull

19 July 2012

You are correct Andy, it is well within our means to expand the defence budget, and we should if we want to be a P5 player like the government want.

Politicians are defence blind and the will is not there. Trident coming into the core budget will not help, but it means Hague can have Trident swinging between his legs at the UN and stick his chest out like a big boy.

I believe we must keep our nuclear capability AND strong conventional forces.

Would it be even possible to raise that many extra Commando's over extra line infantry battalions given the extra qualities of a RM?

As far as the RM are concerned I would like to see 847 NAS expanded, and the RM get their own armoured regiment above the current Vikings.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

20 July 2012

Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

The only problem with recruiting extra Marines is the increased requirement in Womens underwear that bootnecks like to wear . . .

The Army already supply an Infantry Battalion to 3 Cdo Brigade to ensure it remains a Square Bde, along with its Artillery (29 Cdo), Engineers (24 Cdo) and a large proportion of the Cdo Logs Regt in Chivenor.

We have survived with 3 RM Cdo's for thirty odd years now, though I do take your point, the re-raising of 41 Cdo and the extra quality that Marines bring to the table would be a boon, I just don't see Navy Command stumping up the cash for it and in fairness to them, if they were to recieve extra funding they and I would rather see it spent on more surface combatants and Attack Submarines.

More Marines would be nice, but a Line Infantry Battalion in a Cdo Brigade is still a good addition to the unit and can hold its own in most areas though accept that they are not as good as the Royal Marines.
Rob - Telford

20 July 2012

Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

Sorry, just to continue, Armour is better off with dediacted tarined personnel, I would like to see an Independant (Commando Trained) Royal Armoured Corps FRES SV Squadron, (along with an Airborne Squadron), these would be real prestige outfits which would attract high quality personnel from across the whole Armoured Corps and would still complete all arms Commando (and P Company). Thes would be specialist troops, who crew armoured vehicles day in day out (Im biased as I'm ex-Armoured Corps myself). It wouldn't take proper Commandos away from their real jobs as well.

I would also have support helicopters where they are needed, Merlin HC3 and HC3A with CHF in Yeovilton and Chinook (and Blackhawk) with AAC.
Rob - Telford

20 July 2012

Hi Rob.

Agree on all points, as usual.

Lol at the underwear reference. I did wonder if my reference to the qualities of the RM would bring any army types out lol!

Agree on your ideas for the armoured units for the airborne and for the RM. This was along the same lines as i was thinking.
I believe a squadron of the Household Cavalry currently provide cvrt support to 16AA Bde.

Agree too that it would be better money spent on escorts and ssns, or the RFA, if fleet were lucky enough to get any.

Will be interesting to see the structure of 3cdo after the
cuts. The Commando engineer reg is back to 59 cdo engineer squadron, as much of the regiment were never raised. No mention yet if 1st Rifles will remain with the marines either.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

20 July 2012

andy - solihull

Just read you wish list, which reads like an advert for the USMC. Love Service loyalty, however I believe by re-raising all of those Commando Units, you will disolve the quality that we have in the Royal Marines now, they would no longer be the superb "soldiers" they are now, they would be at the level the USMC is now, which from experience, frankly is not as good as the hype.

I would re-raise one more Commando so that 3 Cdo Brigade could become a Square Bde without relying on Army Units, though you would still need Army Support (Armour, Arty, Engineers, Logs).

I certainly would not go back to Airborne Bdes, when was the last Combat drop (Suex 1956), you need at least five Armour / Mech / Multi role Bdes.
Rob - Telford

22 July 2012

Hi danielle if trident replacement comes out of the current budget i think we are all in for more nasty surprises

I have never understood why the army directly supports the RM engineers/lgistics/artillery (extra rifle battalion instead of 1 additional commando) there quality is however not in question more to do with army jealousy i suspect.

womens underwear does prevent chaffing has to be commando green though.

ps is there a debate on here about a possible need for a special operation squadron or wing for uk forces

pps i have been told many times that a gurkha soldier can not join other regiments or corps of the british army just be assigned on a temporary basis is this the case or just BS would love to know
andy - solihull

23 July 2012

hi rob i would like too see you argue that with USMC.

1956 & suez was the last combat drop for uk airborne forces but their has been drops since, US airborne into grenada, panama i still believe they have a part to play if the transport choppers/aircraft were available to deploy the force within let's say 48-72 hours.

Not sure you argument holds out with regard to increased royal MARINE COMMANDOS (not soldiers) the current size of the future british army is approx 82'000 & 16AAB is approx 8'000 ADMITTEDLY THE MARINES ARE A BETTER QUALITY.
andy - solihull

23 July 2012

Hi again Andy.

"ps is there a debate on here about a possible need for a special operation squadron or wing for uk forces"

Do you mean by that airpower? There is such a formation. Joint Special Forces Aviation Wing, based at RAF Odiham mainly. And yes it is certainly needed as our SF must have their own dedicated aircraft, in my opinion.

" pps i have been told many times that a gurkha soldier can not join other regiments or corps of the british army just be assigned on a temporary basis is this the case or just BS would love to know "

The Brigade of Gurkha's includes squadrons from the RE, RS and RLC as well as Infantry so Gurkha's do serve in other Corps.

Whether they serve individually in other corps I have no idea, maybe Rob is better placed to answer that.

Infantry wise I do know the Brigade of Gurkha's included incremental infantry companies that served with other battalions short of manpower. If that is still the case I am not certain.

Other Gurkha companies are with RMA Sandhurst and ITC Brecon.

Hope this helps.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

24 July 2012

andy - solihull

I can hold my own in an argument with USMC, I have seen them first hand on three of my six Op Tours, they are better than the US Army, however they are no better than British Army Line Infantry Battalions.

As for the Royals, I was posted to Chivenor for two years and had a bunk in the mess there, had numerous rounds of banter with (at the time) peace chest Marines who hadn't got any medals, since changed, I work with an ex-bootneck here and my cosuin is still in 40 Cdo.

I think we are too far down the road for the Royal Marines to take on all tasks for a Combined Arms Brigade, recruiting the extra personnel, the training required to be good at all of the tasks required would impact on the qualities that the Royal Marines have now, which make them the superb fighting force they are (and will have to agree they are better than 16 Air Assault).

I think my argument does hold out, to increase the Royal Marines to the size you mention and take on all of the support arms task, would mean incraesing the size from 7800 to well over 20,000, plus extensive work would be required on Defence Infrastructure, I admire your loyalty to your Corps but why would you need to that. The raising of an extra Royal Marine Commando (approx 800 men) is more realistic for both the Marines and our defence requirements.
Rob - Telford

24 July 2012

hi rob

agree and disagree but if saw my early post a budget of 50 billion is clearly possible with our nations resources

I guess it comes down to what we want our forces to be able to,what we want to defend,what we want our ambitions to be militarily, what we want to do on our own, when/how/where we want to intervene on our own and influence our future coalition partners, me personally i would like us to launch & maintain a marine division while at the same being in a position to conduct offensive military action elsewhere say in a land locked afganistan

So what i am saying is that as a nation & permanent menber of UN we should be in a position to deploy (amphibious ships/aircraft/helicopters from all 3/4 services) fight and maintain two falklands size wars (land and sea).

however i fear we have given up any hope of ambition, and if the only reason why we are still a p5 member is trident and it's future replacement then we have given up any right to lecture nations such as Iran.

p.s just in case anyone is confused i do believe we should continue as a nuclear power.
andy - solihull

24 July 2012

andy - solihull

Generally agree with what you say, I just don't see the need for A Marine Division, I took part in the first CCRF Exercise in Poland, 1 Commando Group (I think it was your old unit 45 Cdo), took the ports area with an amphibious assault, 3 Para took an airfield with a Para drop, then my Bde (4th Armd) came in by ship, to support both the Royal Marines and link up with the Paras, it was a great exercise and it seemed to work really well.

You need your specialist troops to (Commandos and Paras) to kick the door in, but your follow on forces can be normal green army to do what they are paid for, without the expense of having more "elite" troops.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I wouldn't want to dilute the Commandos (and Paras) by making them larger, they are good a what they do but I lot of it is down to the fact they can be more selective and bin (transfer them to other units if neccessary) anybody who does not meet the mark. If you expanded the Corps to 20,000 pax, you would not be able to be so picky, you would also have to look into opening up branches to females!!!
Rob - Telford

25 July 2012

andy - solihull

Slip of the tongue, not CCRF (though I did do the fisrt one of those as well) I meant JRDF exercise in Poland
Rob - Telford

30 July 2012

hi daniele thanx for response what i meant to ask and should have asked is what is/has/will/should happen to the chinooks we ordered for SF?

why no SF optimised blackhawks? (you may have guessed i am a fan of the s70)

With the planned expansion of UKSF i believe the need for more choppers/fixed wing support will be required i hope the politicians have take this into consideration, but i doubt it.

With regards to the gurkhas it was something i heard on a tv or radio debate when joanna lovely was campaigning for the gurkhas if it is true i think it is scandalous and bordering on discrimination (i am a fan of the gurkhas as well)
andy - solihull

31 July 2012

Hi Andy

The extra Chinooks ordered in the mid 90's included 8 to be fitted out as similar to the US Army special forces Chinooks. I guess it is these Chinooks that you are refering to?

Having been "hanger Queens" at Boscombe Down for a decade due to them not working and the Labour government starving the forces of cash, including support helicopters, they are being re converted back into standard HC2 Chinooks to joint the existing Chinook force along with the 14 new builds ordered.

7 Squadron RAF operates Chinooks in support of special forces. What modifications they have I do not know.

Re aviation assets supporting UKSF, you have the following assets I am aware of.

7 Squadron RAF - Chinook ( JSFAW )
47 Squadron RAF - Hercules
14 Squadron RAF - Shadow R1 ( may have UKSF support role )

657? Squadron AAC - Lynx ( JSFAW )
651 Squadron AAC - Defender ( May have UKSF Support role )
8 Flight AAC - Dauphin ( a 5th recently added )

There are also reports of Russian "hip" helicopters being used by SF and there are also 2 other secretive entities, which may support SF in an unspecified manner, the "Special Duties Squadron" and the "Special Duties Flight"
Daniele mandelli - Guildford

31 July 2012

Daniele mandelli - Guildford

Agusta A109's captured during the Falklands War are used by SF as well, as they have all of the CAA certified instrumentation required to fly in all UK airspace.

As for the 8 SF Chinook HC3 as you correctly stated they have all / or about to be converted to the same standard as the rest of the fleet
Rob - Telford

01 August 2012

andy - solihull

Hi Andy, the last Labour government scuppered the plans to purchase 60 x nearly new UH-60L Black Hawks. We were offered them for the same price as upgrading (about, not sure of the exact number) 30 RAF Pumas. It was deemed more important to keep the work in the UK, plus other issues of training and equipment support for bringing in a new fleet of Helo's. To me it was a bargain and would have enhanced the air mobility across all services no end, you could easily carry 12 - 16 on Ocean / Lusty for the Marines, the Army could have a Regiment of 36 for 16 Air Assault, with remainder for Spares / Attrition / Training.
Rob - Telford

01 August 2012

Rob - Telford

Agree on the Blackhawks, a scandalous decision.

As far as I know the A109's of which 2 we got off the argies and 2 were new build, were the helicopters replaced by 4 Dauphin's with a 5th recently added.

I was not aware they had been retained in addition to the Dauphin's, if so good news.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

02 August 2012

Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

I would go with your knowledge, for example I wasn't aware that 24 Cdo Engr Regt had been folded in July of this year until you mentioned it, you are probably correct if you say you think they had been withdrawn.
Rob - Telford

10 August 2012

hi guys thanks for your info much appreciated.

a109 as i understand have been scrapped

why credenhill flight operate the dauphin is beyond me!!

blackhawks for me everyday

are we going to replace SF chinooks with off the shelf as we clearly need them?

i received some info some time ago that SF were to receive a small number of nh90? What about SF dedicated merlins: 3 engines, great survivability. just read about(i think)SOF dedicated c.27 with bushmaster cannon could that be a cheaper alternative to c.130 variants for UKSF?

once again thanks for info guys
andy - solihull