Dutch Apaches

[Teddy Ruxpin]

The problem with the other platforms you mention is capability.  One of the major benefits of both the AH-64 and the AH-1Z is their ability to mount extensive surveillance suites and to use them from a relatively static position.  A propellor-driven aircraft cannot do this.  Moreover, A-10s aside, they possess very limited firepower.  Frankly, I'm not fussy on what helicopter is bought.  The Super Cobra seems decent, inexpensive and in use by the Americans.  It also has many of the features of the Apache on a smaller, lighter platform.

In a previous thread, I highlighted some of the potential benefits of an attack aviation capability.  As I see it, these are:

• Ability to conduct stand-off surveillance of static and moving targets
• Ability to engage static and moving targets of virtually any description
• 24-hour capability
• Extensive communications
• Training, spare parts and doctrinal compatibility with major allies
• Outstanding deterrance/show of force capability
• Deployability at least equal to that of the ADATS, which we're intending to use in an AT role
• Austere/no airfield capability

These are just a few.  Doubtless the better educated can come up with more.  I believe that attack aviation would be enormously useful to the CF, just as it is to the Dutch.  As I said earlier, ISAF was screaming when the Netherlands announced the withdrawal of their AH-64s, for very good reason.  Just because we haven't bothered to write the doctrine for it doesn't mean that it isn't needed.

 

[Inch]

Teddy, I'm not sure I would classify the Super Cobra as "lighter and smaller" than the Apache. They're within 6 inches of total length of each other (approx 58' rotors turning, for comparison, the Hornet is about 58' as well while the Sea King is 72'), the Apache is about 18" higher to the top of the rotor and they're within 350lbs max takeoff weight of each other.

The Super Cobra shares the same engine/transmission/tail boom with the Twin Huey to give you an idea of how big it is.

Nitpicking I know, but size wise, they're pretty damn close.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/index.html

That site has a lot of the specs on pretty much every US aircraft.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Seen and thanks.  I had read that the SC was somewhat bigger than a typical "old" AH-1...probably got my wires crossed that way...

Cheers,

TR

 

[Gunnerlove]

Interesting that the last army cobras were replaced by kiowas.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/oh-58.htm

 

[a_majoor]

Just because we haven't bothered to write the doctrine for it doesn't mean that it isn't needed.

I can hardly disagree with that, but perhaps a historical analogy? The French invented one of the first practical machineguns (mitralleuse) prior to the Franco Prussian war of 1870, but hadn't developed a doctrine for its use (it was considered a type of artillery). When war came, everyone watched to see how the French "wonder weapon" would crush the Germans, but the Mitralleuse were too few and far between, and employed so ineffectually that they were mostly curiosities.

The French had a capability (the Mitralleuse), a need (defend against mass infantry attacks, support French infantry assaults), but couldn't get a doctrine together so the two were matched. Perhaps not too surprisingly, the French had a similar problem in 1940, where they had more and better tanks than the Germans, but hadn't created a doctrine to use them effectively.

In our case, once we know and understand the need and reflect on the capacities we really require, then the answer may turn out to be the Agusta A129 Mangusta, or an armed version of the Blackhawk rather than an AH 64 (or something more exotic. Who knows?)

 

[Britney Spears]

Crossposting from Militaryphotos.net

Bell Helicopter, a unit of Textron Inc., (NYSE: TXT) was awarded a $2.2 billion contract by the United States Army to build its next generation Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter, or ARH. The ARH will replace the Army's OH-58D Kiowa Warrior Helicopter also produced by Bell. The contract calls for Bell Helicopter to build 368 aircraft for delivery during fiscal years 2006 through 2013.

â Å“We are honored to have been chosen by the U.S. Army to continue our legacy of providing outstanding Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter technology,â ? said Mike Redenbaugh, Chief Executive Officer of Bell Helicopter Textron. â Å“The Army requires a state-of-the art Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter and that's exactly what Bell Helicopter will deliver.â ?

Bell's ARH is a militarized version of its highly successful 407 single engine light helicopter. Capable of being equipped with a wide variety of weapons, the Bell ARH will provide the Army with exceptional mission versatility and with the flexibility to accomplish armed reconnaissance, light attack, troop insertion, and special operations missions with a single aircraft. The Bell ARH will also provide greater deployability, interoperability and survivability.

â Å“We look forward to this partnership both with the Army and with our world-class aerospace suppliersâ ”to provide a premier aircraft to America's troops,â ? Redenbaugh said.

Bell Helicopter Textron Inc., a subsidiary of Textron Inc., is a leading producer of commercial and military helicopters and the pioneer of the revolutionary tilt rotor aircraft. Globally recognized for customer service, innovation and superior quality, Bell's global workforce of over 7,500 employees serves customers flying Bell aircraft in over 120 countries.

Textron Inc. is a $10 billion multi-industry company with 44,000 employees in 40 countries. The company leverages its global network of aircraft, industrial and finance businesses to provide customers with innovative solutions and services. Textron is known around the world for its powerful brands such as Bell Helicopter, Cessna Aircraft, Jacobsen, Kautex, Lycoming, E-Z-GO and Greenlee, among others.

<a href=http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/military/ARH/bellARH3.cfm>slick videos and website</a>

If we paint it in a non-threatening color (pink), maybe  the gov't won't notice that they are armed?

 

[Jeff Boomhouwer]

Hey maybe they will sell the Chinooks back to us, alot more useful in the thin air in most parts of a-stan.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

a_majoor:  As I indicated earlier, doctrine doesn't necessarily have to be developed by Canada in isolation.  We have the singular benefit of having close allies (UK, US and - soon - Australia) operating attack aviation.

As for the ARH, it has the singular benefit of being built in Montreal, so who knows?  However, IMHO (based in this case on a gut feel rather than any concrete evidence) I suggest it's just a dressed-up Kiowa - advertising aside.  It may well suit US doctrine where reconnaissance helicopters act in a different role than attack helicopters, but I am skeptical that its sensor suite is comparable to an Apache, Super Cobra, Tiger or the like.  I am also skeptical as to its level of protection and system redundency.  If we're after an LOH, it might work just fine.  However, I suggest that we need a platform that can do a bit more.  Otherwise, we might as well hang things off a Griffon and be done with it.

My two cents, as always.

TR

 

[Wizard of OZ]

Just a question,  Why is no one asking or talking about geting the Ch-53 instead of the chinook's.  Both are heavy lift choppers.  The Chinook may be a little tough to get ahold of but I would think that we could steal some Pav Low 4's for a fair price from the Americans.  Are they to small not strong enough or to expensive?  Thoughts......

 

[George Wallace]

Just a question,   Why is no one asking or talking about geting the Ch-53 instead of the chinook's.   Both are heavy lift choppers.   The Chinook may be a little tough to get ahold of but I would think that we could steal some Pav Low 4's for a fair price from the Americans.   Are they to small not strong enough or to expensive?   Thoughts......

I have brought this up in other threads....try looking into some of the Air Force threads.

 

[ringo]

I see no harm in acquiring a few Apaches, when forces deploy to a hot spot nice to a few of your own birds, earlier on this thread one of the poster's recommended paying off ADATS to pay for the Apaches IIRC the Apache fire control systems shares components with the ADATS.
RAF operates there Apaches off HMS Ocean do they have rotor folding?
I remember the forces selling the Chinooks off they did great work in the blizzard of 71 around London, I believe the forces should look at the CH-53 it may be better to operate of the navy's future support ships than Chinook.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I remember the forces selling the Chinooks off they did great work in the blizzard of 71 around London, I believe the forces should look at the CH-53 it may be better to operate of the navy's future support ships than Chinook

And you base that on....

 

[ringo]

The USMC uses Ch-53's from navy ships for heavy lift this helo is bigger than Chinook and has rotor fold for shipboard storage.

 

[Wizard of OZ]

personally i think the CH-53 might be a better buy then the CH-47.  As the 53 are more modern and would not require the upgrades that the 47's do.  I don't think 5 attack helo's of any kind would help the forces.  How do you deploy only five and train and have parts.  I think if you are going to do things especially in the CF we have to stop doing them half assed and either buy 18-25 of the birds or none at all.  Of course this is just MOO

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I was under the impression that the CH53 was no longer being made whereas the CH47S are. Both would serve our needs but is not the Chinook more prevalent throughout the world thus would be easier to get spare parts when needed from different sources vice the CH53?

 

[ringo]

IIRC the USMC is soon to order about 150 new Ch-53's, the Chinook has out sold the Sea Stallion but the latter is a much larger helo perhaps overkill for some nations.

 

[geo]

As has been said, critical mass being an issue, it does not make sense to buy 5 of anything.... unless you are required to deploy only 1 at a time. They you have to think about parts, maintenance AND training the pilots to fly the bleeding thing.
You can't take a Griffon driver, give him the keys to your new Cobra/Apache and expect him to drive it competently without a lot of practice.

When the CF disposed of it's CH47 heavy lift capabilities a long time ago - it retained airframes (?)and pilots (reroling them to CH113s) so we have the people capable of operating twin rotor aircraft AND a training program to bring up more as required...........

With respect to the Apache - if we chose to go with this kind of aircraft, think the Cobras the USMC continues to operate says it all..........

 

[George Wallace]

With respect to the Apache - if we chose to go with this kind of aircraft, think the Cobras the USMC continues to operate says it all..........

Let's see.   Marine Expeditionary Force.   Equipment prepositioned.  On ships.   One AH64 Apache takes up the space of....three AH1-Y Super Cobras.   I think that the Super Cobra will be around for a while, primarily due to this Logistical fact.   The Super Cobra also presents a much smaller target.

 

[Sf2]

Its my opinion, and mine only, that Canada's future rests with med lift and armed recce.  The apache was designed to hang out at the line of departure and kill threats to make way for an advancing mechanized force.  That isn't Canada's doctrine anymore, not to mention the crazy costs.

Todays assymetric threats require a more surgical, and in Canada's context, CHEAPER method of being able to spot a small group of enemy, and either destroy them, or guide in someone else to do it.  We need something small, fast, with excellent electro-optic equipment, and a decent defensive/light offensive weapon, augmented by another chopper that can move a QRF should the LOH helicopter be unable to do the job itself.

Bell 407/Chinnook combo sounds good to me.....

 

[Mud]

Ok I'm the guy who strted that discussion on CASR - it was just a thought.  But since the Americans have announced that the 407-based entry won the recce competition it seems like a good choice - armed scout, likely able (with some mods) to carry a small team of operators AND it's made in Quebec - even the politicians can dig this one!