Could this helicopter replace the British military's Puma? 

And it’ll be built in Yeovil

Thats a very fair argument plus they are very well in with the MoD on Typhoon, F-35 and other projects. And as its been said they will be built at Yeovil unlike the other contenders. Apart from which they are an excellent fit to replace Pumas.

If the helicopter comes with an actual radar, then absolutely, the only choppers with radars are the AH.1 Apaches

@@c00sto assembled in Yeovile, there is a difference.

It's also by far the best option.

I think it’s because the US is incredibly self-conscious, and they don’t like the sound of an Italian type of name being on one of their newest helicopters, so as usual they’ll go for a dark cool military sounding name that sounds so tacky.

@@danielwhyatt3278 And they'll also somehow put it through an American aviation company The same company that killed 346 people in the span of 5 months.....

Looks agile but does not have much in the of troops space. It also looks frigile.

There will be a gap again, it's too usual to now go without for a while: see aircraft carriers, marine patrol, AWACS etc.

poland won’t be the main customer, so i’d imagine the uk would be first

You forget that if Leonardo win the UK contract as they should it will be built in Yeovil not Italy.

They are all roughly comparable. So it'll come down to other factors like place of construction and politics. Leonardo are likely in the best position for that as they bought AgustaWestland, so have the site in Yeovil. Airbus have a decent chance too though as they have UK sites. Boeing have the lowest chance largely due to no significant UK sites and as far as I know no helicopters to show.

@@mrr-ee6ui Poland itself produces these helicopters at its factory in Swidnik.

Our country's airforce (Singapore) will be replacing our Super Pumas with H225M.

A lot of exaggeration there. We have two of what are arguably the best carriers in the world (certainly technology-wise), a permanent expeditionary force, and several global bases. It could and should be more, but it's nowhere near a national defence force.

@@tams805 you seen the 2040 plan for the RAF and how small and consolidated it will be? How few bases there will be? As well as reducing the army to 72,000 ish. Carriers are great. But like the army and RAF, with the great kit, you need the people to operate it. I think a lot of people are currently getting burnt out by quick turnaround times for deployments.

I was thinking that., looks more like a lynx. what's wrong with the PUma anyway? An updated Puma seems to be a choice too.

@@dnmurphy48 The cabin is significantly larger than the Lynx and the Puma has already been updated once, there can't be that much life left in the old airframes.

Inside it's virtually the same size and can carry exactly the same amount of 12 fully equipped troops that the Puma can. But it can also carry slightly heavier freight loads than the Puma. It's also much faster and more agile than a Puma.

@@andywilliams7323 , cheers for the confirmation re load space etc

Instead of scraping or mothballing The old puma's, many could easily be upgraded and changed into a Gunship or flying artillery like Brazil and South Africans done to theirs, they could be made to fill many roles, even half and half type roles..and made to fit these in a short period of time if need be..

It can carry 12 fully loaded troops, the same number the American Black Hawk helicopters carry. Also troop carry versions most likely wouldn't have rocket launcher pods attached in front of the doors like that demonstration version has.

Irish AW139s have 8 troops seats (daysack under seats)

They want something smaller as well.

@@tams805 then make an upgraded lynx

Transfers are S92 but yes, more or less the same-ish platform as the 189

Offshore is dead

@@Jimmyboy1674 1. It's not. There will for a long time be a need for some domestic gas production for national security reasons. 2. Renewable offshore energy generation will inevitably end up with some offshore bases for maintenance.

@@Jimmyboy1674 you realise Bristow operates more helicopters out of Louisiana than the whole of the UK right? It ain't dead, nowhere close.

The Puma is a bigger chopper and can has a greater load carrying capability. I personally would not class this in the same category. Its no bigger than a Huey...

It's not as small as it looks. It can carry 12 fully laden troops. The same number the American Blackhawk helicopters can carry.

It's nothing like as small as you're thinking it is. It's virtually the same size as the Puma helicopter it's possibly going to replace. And only slightly smaller than the American Black Hawk Helicopter. It can easily carry 2-3 injured people. It has exactly the same person capacity as the Puma and Black Hawk, which is 12 fully equipped combat troops, or 16 - 18 ordinary passengers.

This has been considered for a couple of years now. I suspect, as most of the entrants are proposing existing already in production aircraft, that they are expected to be able to start production quickly.

Despite what it may look like, The AW149 can carry more troops than the Puma, has been tested with AGM missile pods (could carry Brimstone) and can also go faster and more range...Its a big step up from the Puma in every regard

This and the Wildcat are nothing alike.

It's definitely got more size on it than the WIlldcat

@@Dr.D00p Do you think it would be able to carry artillery like the puma does?

@ The AW149 has an extra 720kg of payload capacity over the Puma, so anything the Puma can carry, AW149 can carry just that little bit more, faster and further.

That was lucky, of course if you weren't in Ireland where you are not wanted, then it would never have happened

@@richy3084 😂😂😂 nice one boring

@@richy3084 Northern Ireland chose to be part of the U.K. .. cry harder .

@@factsdontcareaboutyourfeel7204 Only crying whinger is some Brit getting blown up in Ireland. As for NI choosing to be part of the UK, you know FA about history. Stick to the bits of history you like - spitfires and Churchill

"West Britain" Richy :-)

The same as any other helicopter would a brown out is a brown out the same as white out aswell..

No, AW149 has a maximum takeoff weight of 8.3 to 8.6 metric tons, while the Puma is 7.0 metric tons.

Exactly what I thought NB. I was in coin-ops in Africa, way back when and flew several times in Puma choppers of Nam era. I see no comparison. 🙂

Agree ! can it go upside down?

@@Then.72 If it lands poorly in a strong wind, yes. 😕

@@nivek5031 😂

It's not another Wildcat. It's much bigger. It can carry 18 ordinary passengers or 12 fully equipped combat troops. The same amount the current Britsh Puma and American Black Hawk helicopters can carry.

How not? Puma can lift what 3200kg? AW149 can can lift 2800kg, Wildcat and actual light heli can only muster 1200kg

The AW-149 massively exceeds the capabilities of the Puma. It can lift a heavier load than the Puma, has a much greater range than the Puma, and is significantly faster, more agile and better armed than the Puma.

No that replaced the Sea King, being of a similar size. The Puma is smaller, so this may be a direct replacement.

@@AtheistOrphan Merlin is substantially bigger than Sea King.

Going into tight places the Merlin is as limited as the Chinook.

@@normanboyes4983 Portugal replaced their Pumas with Merlins in 2006 and they perform the same tasks, they're great platforms.

@@psycho_chicken_9589 Yes, but that has been a consolidation of their forces. Something Portugal are doing a lot more than the UK.

they are actually all heavier, except H175M, if i remember correctly Puma is 7,5 tons, H175M is 7,5 tons, AW149 8,7 tons, Bell 9,3 tons and BH ~10 tons, although for example AW149 has more space for passengers/cargo than the rest, the only i dont know is how much space Puma and Bell 525 have

In many ways, it's still a UK-made helicopter. It's designed and built in the UK by what is now Leonardo's UK division. Also setting up homegrown factories is not something the MOD does or can do.

Blackhawks are proven and capable. Sure they're dated but there's a reason they've lasted this long.

BlackHawks are being retrofitted with new engines and a glass cockpit. The Austrians are really happy with theirs. Easy to hang weapons on too. All approved!

@@RhysMorgan69 The newer Blackhawks were the preferred option by the Army but lost out to the NH90. Funny thing is we ended up with the updated Blackhawks anyway as we are handing back all the NH90 as they have so many flaws they were never going to properly reach serviceability standards.

Doo diddly do diddly do - Do blah blah

Very much doubt it.

No the Puma can hold 16, this thing can hold about 8.

Despite what people who clearly have no clue are saying, the AW149 holds more and has a higher payload.

@@cerperalpurpose Higher payload, carry x passengers but how many fully kitted troops on combat mission?

@@cerperalpurpose 12. It can hold 12. 12 is less than 16. If you want to lift stuff call a Chinook.

Why on earth would the UK do that? The MH-53 Pave Low is an obsolete heavy lift helicopter permanently retired from service 14 years ago. The UK already has an up-to-date and perfect heavy lift helicopter in the CH47 Chinnock. The obsolete Puma is a medium-lift helicopter and so naturally needs to be replaced with a new current-gen medium-lift helicopter such as the AW-149.

No, just no. Heli-planes are an extremely unreliable, expensive and unfeasible technology. Hence why they are very rare in comparison to conventional helicopters. They're too expensive and just not suitable for the transport and combat environment. The US military tried extremely hard to make the heli-plane concept viable with its V-22 Osprey but failed. The V-22 is the most unreliable, most difficult to operate, most expensive to maintain and statistically most dangerous to fly military helicopter in the world.

Well of course if you are looking to use the word 'disgraceful' then you will make up a pack of BS. As you just did. And forgive me but if something has already been 'built' how can it then be 'assembled' elsewhere?..... 😏 Yeovil is not just an assembly line it is a manufacturing plant. It actually makes sub assemblies for the Agusta / Leonardo plants in Italy and will manufacture this new aircraft just as it does the Merlin and Wildcat variants.

@@1chish The real machining and building of components is done abroad, then shipped to the UK and bolted together, meaning all the skilled well paid work is given away, surely you understand this?

No that’s the AW159 wildcat

It's not an updated Lynx. It's based on the Agusta-Bell AB139 that started development in the late 1990s, achieved first flight in 2001 and became the AW139 after Bell withdrew. The AW149 is slightly larger and heavier and designed for military applications.

it's literally same size as lynx.....

I doubt it'll go to Sikorsky. In the last few decades there's been no interest by the MoD in anything they have to offer. And the civil servants also do want domestic production. And considering the US are looking for a Blackhawk successor, getting on that bandwagon seems rather silly.

A nation can not and will not survive treachery from within, the reason its starting to crumble at the moment..

Blackhawk isn’t the cheapest out there

Too big. This is a smaller helicopter

Yeah right ... lets close down our aerospace industry and just buy American ...... smh.

I agree that the Blackhawk should be considered, however the AW149 can carry a similar internal load despite being physically smaller. Arguably the Blackhawk is a bit big for what it does; the NH90 is the same size as the Blackhawk but has a significantly larger cabin size.

@@Akm72 I would be very surprised if the blackhawk was not considered at the initial stage. What would be interesting to know is how long did it stay as a viable option during the selection process...

Looks are deceptive. It carries more troops, further and faster.

@@SV_DETOUR Can you post a link to an author active reference?

@@SV_DETOUR, 16 troops, same as Puma.

No. Capacity: 18 max or; 12 combat laden troops or 2,720 kg external sling load

Very few dinosaurs ever went on to complete their rotary wing training, as a species they had immense difficulty getting into the cockpit snd strapping in. Allegedly...

Your comparison is poor & it is inaccurate. The species that survived the end-Cretaceous mass extinction 66 million years ago were not the "most adaptable" they were just lucky that their physical characteristics enabled survival for a few vital months - they just happened to have the right 'lifestyle' to survive - e.g. living deep in the ocean or in deep burrows - they didn't "adapt" one bit, they just won the lottery of life. Being warm blooded might have helped. being very small & having a hibernation cycle probably helped too. All top predators died out. All large herbivores that require immense amounts of greenery died out. The rock wiped out three-quarters of the plant & animal species - not just dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are still with us - the birds all around you are dinosaurs. It is also not true that the dino species that did die out "died out overnight" - dinos came in all sizes & with an immense variety of lifestyles just like say the mammals. You can be sure that some dinosaur species lived on for hundreds of thousands of years after the big rock hit, because dinosaur eggs can survive for months until the climate improves from months of night & day darkness & the poisonous fumes from immense forest & grassland fires. It is believed that a small fraction of bird species survived because that small fraction were burrowers, or built nests in tree trunks or lived out on the marshes. It is a truism that nations, economies & armies that can throw away outmoded concepts the quickest tend to win battles, campaigns & wars - that is what you mean by "most adaptable", but that is not what "adaptation" in evolution is referring to. You are also using "fittest" wrongly - it is absolutely true that it's the survival of the fittest when it comes to evolutionary success, but "fittest" in evolution is about how well a species matches the environment it lives in & has nothing to do with gym/track stats. But it also isn't certain that those that "adapt quickly" survive - you can still be crushed if you don't have access to materials, manpower or fuels or if national will falters. As an example the Soviets, Brits, French, the USA & others have lost wars because the public perception back home was that the cost was far too high - sometimes patience & persistence [backed by a robust ideology often] will win a war against a superior enemy.

Interesting to think about adaptation and helicopters in battle. I love helos, and when a child, wanted to become an apache pilot, but the reality is that they're so unsafe, and in war zones, they're some of the first heavy equipment lost.

No it's bigger

Smaller than what the Puma has become in the Super Puma, but bigger than the old Puma's that are being replaced.

You, ummm, do realise that Italy are part of the F-35 programme as a manufacturer? That they have an aircraft carrier (compared to zero you have)? And that the UK also operates Pendolino trains and they don't seem to breakdown anymore than other trains? Yeah, something can be said for Italian laziness at times, but their arms industry is generally very good.

@@tams805 Yes.

The AW-149 Helicopter isn't really Italian. It's British. It was designed by British engineers and all of them are manufactured in Britain by British engineers. Italy is the owner but Britain is the designer and builder. It's a larger version of the proven excellent and also British designed and built AB-139 and AW-159 helicopters. Be assured the AW-149 is an excellent British helicopter, not Italian.

Blackhawk is less capable than this though, and not made in the UK like this would be.

@@Retrosicotte less capable how? in terms of manoeuvrability?

@@Retrosicotte These helicopters are made in Italy as far as I know. The only UK benefits would be minor and not much more than the blackhawks.

US Air Force has just ordered a load of the AW139 another civvy design

@@timmynator2002 it’ll be built in Yeovil

18 max or; 12 combat laden troops or 2,720 kg external sling load (per wikipedia) vs. 6 passengers, including door gunner for Wildcat. Enlarged version of the AW139 which has sold over a 1000 units to civilian, government and military. So nothing like Lynx/Wildcat.

Care to outline how it is outdated? If you're going by just looks, then the Super Puma is 'outdated' as it looks very similar to the Pumas being replaced. But that would be silly as the Super Puma is a much more modern helicopter. The same applies to this.

Nha they've been trying to replace 4 different current helicopter types with a new multirole one for the past few years, they cancelled a few tenders and have now put out an operational requirement... again.

@@jamiegray6931 The video says it is a Puma replacement and there is no way it could replace the Chinook.

@@charlesphillips4575 Not the Chinook no, but the RAF Puma HC2, the Bell Griffin HAR2, the British Army 212HP AH1 and the Dauphin used by special forces. All to be replaced by the same airframe, but god only knows if that'll happen.

Because Westland was sold. I still remember the endless news and debates about it. Blame Maggie. Recently, UK defence companies have been sold again. Cobham. Sold and gutted. Ultra Electronics and Meggit will be next. "Taking back control".

@@VanderlyndenJengold Yeah it's utterly shameful, painful and gutting all at the same time. I heard about some companies being sold recently. I honestly thought they learnt their lesson back then but it just goes on and on and on. No doubt it's probably even more costly now that we aren't in the EU. I fear there is going to be a huge brain and technology drain due to all of this. I thought it was humiliating the UK had to source simple items of PPE from other countries during the pandemic considering how much the UK shouts about its engineering prowess.

@@simonbrown7455 I wouldn't pay too much attention this fellah he is an EU Luvvie and is always slagging off the UK. Just don't get suckered in. I can't see his comments as I blocked the clown. And by the way 70% of all PPE bought was made in the UK. Always worth checking some data.

@Simon brown - We do. In a place called Yeovil. It plays a very significant part in Leonardo helicopters R & D.

We do in part and Leonardo are the company that do so. But really, we don't need to design every piece of military equipment ourselves. This is 'just' for transport helicopters. Obviously very important, but we design plenty of other things ourselves.

Blackhawks are gonna be out of US service in 2030. Supply chain costs will rocket up with them not producing en masse

That’s sounds to much like common sense, the MoD won’t go with that 😂😂😂

We rejected UH-60s in the 70s and we'll do it again. They are cheap, and little else. Leonardo are already building the production line ready for NMH.

Less capable though.

No.

Except it absolutely is modern. It's like claiming an Abrams or Apache isn't modern to say that.

@@Retrosicotte guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about

@@Retrosicotte the guy is going off look and doesn’t even realise how out of date the puma is, the puma struggled to run in Afghanistan with the heat, engine is always been replaced and its hard to get parts for the puma now. But yeah lets not look init other helis if they look like they are from the 80s …when the puma is from the 70s 😂

Tell me you know absolutely nothing about the 80s without telling me you know nothing about the 80s.

That would be more equivalent to the merlin

Australia just got rid of their early… very early, apparently they’re not all that great and have major maintenance issues.

@@carwyngriffiths I think Norway got rid of there’s, so not all the kinks worked out! Aw-149 it is then :) cheers carywn