Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
was no requirement in Afghanistan for more helicopters at the time, just a utility to
having more helicopters so we could meet future requirements. The military view
was also that there was no requirement for a new small helicopter.”692
1320.  Asked if he was concerned whether the MOD had an insufficient number of
support helicopters capable of being deployed in the threat environment of Iraq,
Lord Drayson wrote:
“Yes … However it was difficult to get the military to agree on the requirement.
Helicopters specifically were not seen as the responsibility of any particular service
and therefore suffered from the lack of a ‘service champion’. It was not believed that
helicopters could be procured quickly …”
1321.  ACM Torpy disagreed with Lord Drayson’s view on helicopter ownership and
prioritisation. He told the Inquiry that the Joint Helicopter Command did have advocates
and champions:
“Actually it was owned by a single service. It was operational command CINC
Land Forces … So there was an advocate for Joint Helicopter Command, and if
I look at the interest that the three Chiefs took in Joint Helicopter Command it was
pretty key.”693
1322.  The Inquiry asked ACM Stirrup for his view of the helicopter situation during his
time as Chief of the Air Staff, from 2003 to 2006. He replied that it “was not a significant
issue” in Chiefs of Staff discussions during that time.694 There was a requirement to
make modifications as lessons were learned, but “there was no sense that … we
needed – urgently needed twice as many helicopters than we had, although it was quite
clear that we could always have used more”.
1323.  ACM Stirrup told the Inquiry that, between 2006 and 2009, when he was Chief of
the Defence Staff, the constraint on the helicopter fleet was twofold:
“First was we had eight Chinooks sitting in a shed unable to fly. That is a significant
percentage of the total Chinook force …
“Secondly, we were operating in two theatres, which was well beyond our planning
assumptions and although it was a strain to generate sufficient infantry battalions for
the rotation between the two theatres, the really critical elements were the enablers.
They were the strategic and tactical mobility. They were the helicopters, they were
the ISTAR, they were all of those specialist areas that are so important for any
operation, wherever it is and whatever it is.”695
692  Statement, 15 December 2010, page 8.
693  Public hearing, 18 January 2011, page 81‑82.
694  Public hearing, 1 February 2010, pages 17‑18.
695  Public hearing, 1 February 2010, pages 66‑67.
223
Previous page | Contents | Next page