British armed helicopters

Attachments

  • Westland W.G. 44.jpg
    Westland W.G. 44.jpg
    29.4 KB · Views: 366
  • Westland W.G. 44 attack helicopter.jpg
    Westland W.G. 44 attack helicopter.jpg
    25 KB · Views: 349
hesham said:
What was this Program,

I found only this Info;

Click to expand...

There is lots of information about the Joint Helicopter Experimental Unit, which became the Joint Helicopter Unit for its operational use during the Suez invasion. I didn't find anything about the JHEU working on armed helos, though, just on their experiments with airborne assault using transport helicopters.
 
There are photographs in the Putnam's Westland volume ( Westland Aircraft Since 1915, Derek James, 1991) showing two Whirlwinds of JEHU in Army markings.
  1. A Whirlwind 2 (XK969/'D') with 'an experimental machine-gun installation' , what looks like a water-cooled Vickers machine gun, on tripod, mounted to fire at 90 degrees to the direction of flight, through the main door.
  2. A Whirlwind 2 (XK970/'E') with two forward-firing box launchers for 'small air-to-ground milssiles' ( I assume Vigilant) suspended from the hoist mounting.
Both photgraphs are credited to Fred Ballam.
 
It seems that some Whirlwinds may have been armed with Nord SS.11s, according to this research thread on the WT Forums which I have taken part in:
forum.warthunder.com

British Helicopter Tech Tree - Discussion Topic

Might prove difficult to find images if only 3-4 Whirlwinds of a single squadron (225) were capable but there’s an IWM recording of an oral account of Whirlwind being equipped with SS.11 It’s in the 15th reel of 24, from 10:45 onwards: We got to Singapore, and they demanded that I fly off...
forum.warthunder.com forum.warthunder.com

It seems that a few of the helicopters of 225 Squadron, which operated HAR.10s, were modified to to carry SS.11 ATGMs according to the following sources:


WHIRLWIND HELICOPTER FIRES ROCKETS AND A WESSEX TESTS SS.11 MISSILES [Allocated Title]

(i) A Whirlwind from HMS Albion fires a salvo of 2.75-inch rockets into the sea. Aerial views of Albion and other ships of the Far East Fleet. (ii) Albion is visited by a senior officer - C-in-C Far Eastern Fleet ? (iii) Wessex helicopter fires SS.11 wire-guided missiles at target hulks on a...
www.iwm.org.uk www.iwm.org.uk


Here is an audio recording from the IWM of Roland Roper describing his time in service. The excerpt is from the 15th reel of 24 from 10:45, with further reference to the missiles at 18:45, when being referred to as Nord AS.11s.

Interview with Roland Barry Roper

British apprentice at No 1 School of Technical Training, RAF at RAF Halton, GB, 1950-1954; served as aircraftman at RAF Helmswell in GB, 1954-1956; NCO served with 284 Sqdn, RAF at RAF Nicosia in Cyprus, 1956-1958; served with Engineering Wing, RAF Dishforth, GB, 1958-1959; served with C Flight...
www.iwm.org.uk www.iwm.org.uk

We got to Singapore, and they demanded that I fly off all four Whirlwinds. Now, I knew that they just wanted one Whirlwind with the maximum amount of flying hours, fitted with Nord because we only had a few that were fitted and that it was to be used for training purposes.
…
It was required with the maximum flying hours so they could do the training for firing the Nord
Click to expand...

Borneo Boys: RAF Helicopter Pilots in Action Indonesia Confrontation, 1962–66 by Roger Annett may show a Whirlwind HAR.10 with what may possibly be SS.11 launch rails above the landing gear, which is attached below.

Not sure whether these would be related to the JEHU, but it could be possible that these were lessons learnt which had been put into action.

Any further information about this would be greatly appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • 0dcc060d1b425f19a3293d1baf33f11f1928f916.jpeg
    0dcc060d1b425f19a3293d1baf33f11f1928f916.jpeg
    41.9 KB · Views: 220
Kiltonge said:
I do t have the book to hand right now but it does mention that the SS.11 installation was fully operational, not just for testing, and regular training was performed in Borneo firing the missiles against rock outcrops.
Click to expand...
SS.11s, 2-in rockets, and Browning fixed machine guns were indeed operational armament, at least on the HU.5. Rockets and missiles were mounted underneath a flat platform braced to the landing gear and the fuselage. The guns were mounted on top of the platform. I have pictures of the guns both faired-in and unfaired.

The pictures below show the platform installed on an aircraft at a base in Sarawak and operating from carriers. I also have an old book somewhere that shows HUs that are covering the evacuation of Aden and armed with everything: SS.11s, 2-in rockets, fixed Brownings, and GPMGs in the cabin windows.

1217299F.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Wessex HU Mk 5 XS507.jpg
    Wessex HU Mk 5 XS507.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 118
  • ks05.jpg
    ks05.jpg
    312.2 KB · Views: 106
  • Wessex Bario FOB Sarawak 1966.JPG
    Wessex Bario FOB Sarawak 1966.JPG
    698.8 KB · Views: 105
  • 3588221_800.jpg
    3588221_800.jpg
    216.1 KB · Views: 112
  • large1.jpg
    large1.jpg
    290.7 KB · Views: 108
  • armed.jpeg
    armed.jpeg
    153 KB · Views: 113
  • armament.jpeg
    armament.jpeg
    319.1 KB · Views: 128
Next, a somewhat scarier armament fit, a WE.177 nuclear weapon on an HAS.3. As far as I can recall, this was intended as a feasability test for using the bomb as an ASW depth charge or for developing something similar specifically for ASW. But I don't really know at this point.
 

Attachments

  • we177-wessex-edited.jpg
    we177-wessex-edited.jpg
    59.4 KB · Views: 173
Jason Dykstra (Wyvern) said:
It seems that some Whirlwinds may have been armed with Nord SS.11s, according to this research thread on the WT Forums which I have taken part in:
forum.warthunder.com

British Helicopter Tech Tree - Discussion Topic

Might prove difficult to find images if only 3-4 Whirlwinds of a single squadron (225) were capable but there’s an IWM recording of an oral account of Whirlwind being equipped with SS.11 It’s in the 15th reel of 24, from 10:45 onwards: We got to Singapore, and they demanded that I fly off...
forum.warthunder.com forum.warthunder.com
Click to expand...
Yes, this is confirmed by the official RAF staff history of helicopter operations from 1987:

Offensive Armament. In accordance with the policy to allow limited offensive armour to be fitted to SRT Helicopters (see Chapter 9), it was announced in January 1962 that the Nord SS-11 wire guided missile (optically guided from the cockpit) was to be available for optional fitting to the Mk 10 Whirlwind. Four pilots attended a course on the weapon in Paris in January.

Four aircraft were so fitted, ant it was noted as a 'specialty' spread amongst Whirlwind crews. It was, however, RAF policy that helicopters were purely for transport and should not be hazarded in an offensive role. Which lead to the use of Navy Wessex helicopters (under RAF command) as missile-firing platforms without troops on board being described as 'a highly embarrasing mistake'.

The RAF was, in general, concerned that allowing helicopters (of any service) to be armed, and to carry out operations other than in direct support of their own troops, would undermine the need for fighter/ground attack aircraft. By 1967, though, the C-in-C Air Support Command was stating that there was a need for a dedicated attack helicopter, even outlining requirements (250 knots, two hours airborne Fighter Air Controller at a radius of action of 75 nautical miles, able to fire SNEB rockets, 30 mm cannon, 7.62 light machine guns, grenades and ATGWs), and that if the RAF didn't propose it then the Army would do it for themselves.

The RAF continued to oppose the attack helicopter. And the Army did do it for themselves.
iverson said:
Next, a somewhat scarier armament fit, a WE.177 nuclear weapon on an HAS.3. As far as I can recall, this was intended as a feasability test for using the bomb as an ASW depth charge or for developing something similar specifically for ASW. But I don't really know at this point.
Click to expand...
WE.177A was always in part a nuclear depth bomb; I'm not sure what platforms it was cleared for, but I expect this was part of trials for that role on the Wessex.
 
Does anyone have any further information about the use of the Westland Wessex Commando Mk.1? These were utility versions of the HAS.1 which could carry missiles
 
iverson said:
Next, a somewhat scarier armament fit, a WE.177 nuclear weapon on an HAS.3. As far as I can recall, this was intended as a feasability test for using the bomb as an ASW depth charge or for developing something similar specifically for ASW. But I don't really know at this point.
Click to expand...
Nuclear depth charges are good for dealing with a poorly localized sub. A 50kt boom will kill any sub within 1500y of detonation point, and a 250kt any sub within 3200yds (Inverse square rule sucks)
 
Scott Kenny said:
Nuclear depth charges are good for dealing with a poorly localized sub. A 50kt boom will kill any sub within 1500y of detonation point, and a 250kt any sub within 3200yds (Inverse square rule sucks)
Click to expand...
The only variant used as an NDB, WE.177A, had a 10kt yield at most, and a selectable 0.5kt yield for use in coastal waters.
 
Images of Scouts armed with AS.11 are fairly common. I only have one showing a gun, a 7.62-mm GPMG fixed to the landing gear. I believe that they could also carry a similar gun on a pintle mount in the starboard rear door.
 

Attachments

  • westland_scout_ah1_xt626_53_of_54.jpg
    westland_scout_ah1_xt626_53_of_54.jpg
    368 KB · Views: 122
  • armedTeenieWeenie.jpg
    armedTeenieWeenie.jpg
    65.5 KB · Views: 105
  • 1259512.jpg
    1259512.jpg
    278.3 KB · Views: 107
  • 1152199F.jpg
    1152199F.jpg
    539.9 KB · Views: 100
  • 1049985F.jpg
    1049985F.jpg
    175.1 KB · Views: 89
  • 0228264.jpg
    0228264.jpg
    198.4 KB · Views: 96
Here are an operational Scout with all three GPMGs installed and an exhibition example with four, boxy, faired rocket launchers ore missile launchers. Does anyone know what they might be?
 

Attachments

  • Westland_Scout_XR628_Habilayn-Radfan-1967.jpg
    Westland_Scout_XR628_Habilayn-Radfan-1967.jpg
    1,009.1 KB · Views: 104
  • 7A4A752C-7859-4E65-AF7A-C70B698DCB06.jpeg
    7A4A752C-7859-4E65-AF7A-C70B698DCB06.jpeg
    309.6 KB · Views: 106
Finally, Wasps with the larger AS.10 anti-ship missiles, the SS.11, and the WE.177. The latter highlights the Wasp's size and load capacity.
 

Attachments

  • xt788missiles.jpg
    xt788missiles.jpg
    177.6 KB · Views: 100
  • 0726217.jpg
    0726217.jpg
    699.5 KB · Views: 90
  • Westland Wasp HAS Mk-1.jpg
    Westland Wasp HAS Mk-1.jpg
    93.7 KB · Views: 98
  • we177-waspaa.jpg
    we177-waspaa.jpg
    146.6 KB · Views: 104
Last edited:
A page from Flight of a Westland Sioux AH.1 (Bell 47) armed with GPMGs in Belfast and a Scout armed, presumably experimentally, with a 7.62-mm GE Minigun, also from Flight (1968).
 

Attachments

  • 1972 - 0049.pdf
    2.7 MB · Views: 27
  • minigun.jpg
    minigun.jpg
    121.6 KB · Views: 144
YP's link at #13, the pics above, and CJG/Hood's 3 Project Tech Profiles give us as much as we may ever have on Br. armd helis. I doubt JEHU did more than GPMG: disbanded, their a/c passed 1/60 to RAF 225 Sqd, whose 4xWhirlwind HAR.10 in Kuching, 1964 included RAF's probably sole ATM/heli opnl. firing (1xSS.11). Hood's Adm'y & Heli Profile, P.16 has "both Wessex Commando variants {i.e.: RN HU.5, RAF HC.2} could carry 4xSS.11 or {he meant 2x} AS.12", but here is no pic of an armed HC.2. YP's link P.415 has 9/71: “RAF remained (unarmed for) SAR and SH (Support Heli} but with fittings for (GPMGs) in the Support Helis.” Look at CJG's Air Staff & Heli cover, Spraying Mantes (pl?) in action, and contemplate vulnerability. US Forces in SE Asia would lose >3,000 helis, 1965-72, some or more with a slick of grunts.

My devilling gives 1st. opnl. deployments: SS.11: Wessex Cdo.1 11/62, HU.5 12/3/65 (both/Albion), Wasp/Leander 1/67; FEAF Whirlwind HAR.10 12/63; AAC Scout/BAOR mid-'70; RN AS.12 after 6/68 on Wessex HAS.3, HU.5, Wasp, By then many others had many more.
 
I can't say I have ever seen a photo of a tooled-up HC2, which I've always found strange give the HU5 could bristle with weapons. Could it be that ridiculous RAF/Army restriction on who could do what?

I think the only armed HC2 I've ever seen is this one:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaM9WA15JNY


Chris
 
How's this for a fun Whiff?

Sir Richard Fairey was DG/Br.Air Commission,DC11/42 when RN sent over a Lend/Lease Requisition for 250xSikorsky R-5A/RN +36/RAF. That was canx. 12/44 by US priority access to them, but that alerted Sir Richard to these devices and he caused his firm to allow his co-founder, E.O.Tips, to invent Fairey Helis with a NOTAR scheme. Tips went offto liberated Belgium, but Sir Richard hired Weir/Cierva's
Ch.Eng. Dr.J.A.J.Bennett, who brought his C.41 (to be Fairey-Bennett FB-1) Gyrodyne (so on later to be Rotodyne).

Under Lend/Lease UK did obtain 43xRN/ASW, 9xRAF/AOP Sikorsky R-4B Gadfly/Hoverfly I, 27xR-6 wef7/45. Inexplicably Sir Richard did not (?try to) stop Sister Firm being assigned to General A/c/Hanworth.

Back in UK he enthused over rotors, so, mid-46 Sikorsky offered him an S-51 licence. HE DECLINED!! Licensing is for also-rans.

Empty Westland took an interest in rotors and approached Bell for a B.47 licence: too soon they said, so E. Mensforth tried Sikorsky...

(Much of this is in Prof,War Studies, KCL, Dr.M.Uttley's thesis Westland & Br. Heli. Indy.,45-60,Cass,01,inc. P110).
 
Tooled-up RAF helis: RAFHS Jrnl 25,2001:

"in the early 1990s we looked at whether we ought not to be providing all of our helicopters with offensive armament. This provoked a very sharp Army reaction in the corridors of Whitehall". P.61 AM Sir Tim Garden.
"RAF has always equipped its helicopters with GPMGs, certainly, within my own experience, going back as far as the Whirlwind and on through the Puma and Chinook. More recently we’ve been equipping our Chinooks with mini-guns" P.63 AVM Niven.


​
 
I wonder if the (now defunct) Conventional Forces Europe Treaty that defined any helicopter equipped with other than GPMG as an attack helicopter, and limited the numbers to each side quelled more efforts to arm utility class helicopters?

It certainly did in the US.
 
yasotay said:
I wonder if the (now defunct) Conventional Forces Europe Treaty that defined any helicopter equipped with other than GPMG as an attack helicopter, and limited the numbers to each side quelled more efforts to arm utility class helicopters?

It certainly did in the US.
Click to expand...
Probably.

Though in honesty 7.62mm is probably the best compromise at the time for weight of ammo versus impact. These days, I'd want an MG338 for double the range at only double the weight per round. When .50BMG is something like 8x the weight per round.
 
yasotay said:
I wonder if the (now defunct) Conventional Forces Europe Treaty that defined any helicopter equipped with other than GPMG as an attack helicopter, and limited the numbers to each side quelled more efforts to arm utility class helicopters?

It certainly did in the US.
Click to expand...

CFE limited attack helicopters, but the definition really only encompassed helicopters armed with guided missiles. Combat support helicopters with rockets, bombs, and guns were not limited.

Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE Treaty)

2009-2017.state.gov 2009-2017.state.gov
(M) The term "attack helicopter" means a combat helicopter equipped to employ anti-armour, air-to-ground, or air-to-air guided weapons and equipped with an integrated fire control and aiming system for these weapons. The term "attack helicopter" comprises specialised attack helicopters and multi-purpose attack helicopters.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
@TomS - Thanks for the clarification. It does explain why the U.S. Army declined internal calls to use the UH-60 as a "missile truck," each carrying 16 X AGM-114, with a full reload carried as well. Used in conjunction with the OH-58D it would have made a good armor hunting team.
 
yasotay said:
@TomS - Thanks for the clarification. It does explain why the U.S. Army declined internal calls to use the UH-60 as a "missile truck," each carrying 16 X AGM-114, with a full reload carried as well. Used in conjunction with the OH-58D it would have made a good armor hunting team.
Click to expand...

Yep. The Kiowa is listed as a multipurpose attack helicopter, so counted under CFE. Black Hawk was not counted, but if any of them had been missile armed, I think all of them would have counted, which would have been very bad.

Though, arguably, if the Black Hawk "trucks" did not have their own laser designators, they would not count as having "integrated fire control."
 
I suspect the finer angulars of that argument would have been muted. A carrot to dangle and the potential risk someone might querry the cost of AH-64 was quelled.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom