Apache Attack Helicopter (British Army Air Corps)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
WAS
THEN came around the so-called "hundred" series SAMs, and obsolescence arrived faster than anyone had suspected (ie. there was no nxt-gen plan in the pipeline, exc. for some musings about an ARM variant of Meteor... all that did was to pre-empt the purchase of nxt-gen hi-speed missiles - in our case, not so e.g. in Italy's).
THEN came around the so-called "hundred" series SAMs, and obsolescence arrived faster than anyone had suspected (ie. there was no nxt-gen plan in the pipeline, exc. for some musings about an ARM variant of Meteor... all that did was to pre-empt the purchase of nxt-gen hi-speed missiles - in our case, not so e.g. in Italy's).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
ALARM was canned because there was no money to upgrade it and the TAs that were run said we wouldn't require anything like it until the mid-2020s at least. Make of that crystal ball what you will.
-
Onlinewhitelancer
- Member
- Posts: 619
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
That wouldn't have been a Threat Assessment, it would have been wishful thinking.
It seems to be a common theme to spend large sums of money developing a particular capability, then failing to maintain it.
It seems to be a common theme to spend large sums of money developing a particular capability, then failing to maintain it.
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Perhaps they assumed F-35 would be in service by then.whitelancer wrote:That wouldn't have been a Threat Assessment, it would have been wishful thinking.
It seems to be a common theme to spend large sums of money developing a particular capability, then failing to maintain it.
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
That's a good point you make there, Ron.Ron5 wrote:Perhaps they assumed F-35 would be in service by then.whitelancer wrote:That wouldn't have been a Threat Assessment, it would have been wishful thinking.
It seems to be a common theme to spend large sums of money developing a particular capability, then failing to maintain it.
-
Onlinewhitelancer
- Member
- Posts: 619
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
On what could they base such an assumption?Ron5 wrote:Perhaps they assumed F-35 would be in service by then
As I said wishful thinking!
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Hey! You forgetting the steerable death beam from the wonder-AESA... missiles redundant from thereon for SEAD/ DEAD!whitelancer wrote:On what could they base such an assumption?Ron5 wrote:Perhaps they assumed F-35 would be in service by then
As I said wishful thinking!
- even Libya needed the Americans for kicking the door in (they did not have any of the "hundred" series SAMs, to set that in context)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Again we need to speed up our procurement process. nearly all of the TAs used when drawing up capability requirements are well out of date by the time any hardware actually arrives. Add to that the next and the next TA. Usual result is the programmes are rebooted time and time again increasing costs and greatly increasing the timeframe for actual delivery if at all.
At the moment the UAS is NATOs kick in the door operator. Germany and Italy can support them but they have not fully kept their capability up to date but at least they have one. With us, because there is never enough money, TAs said we could go without and spend the money else where, or give it back to the Treasury.
At the moment the UAS is NATOs kick in the door operator. Germany and Italy can support them but they have not fully kept their capability up to date but at least they have one. With us, because there is never enough money, TAs said we could go without and spend the money else where, or give it back to the Treasury.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Do you mean Tornado version , plus HARM (that can go onto a Typhoon, as long as you have some of those missiles) , or something more?LordJim wrote: At the moment the UAS is NATOs kick in the door operator. Germany and Italy can support them but they have not fully kept their capability up to date but at least they have one.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Yes I was referring to the Tornado ECR used by Italy and Germany, both equipped with HARM. I know the German ones were updated fairly recently but am not sure regarding the Italians. I am also unsure as to with version of the HARM they both currently use but it may not be the latest one.
HARM requires targeting data from sensors either fitted to the launch platform or podded. In both cases additional work on the launch platforms electronics is needed to operate the Missile. All of this is possible on the Typhoon but no country has yet gone for it. You cannot simply hang a HARM on a platform and use it in any but the most basic modes if that.
HARM requires targeting data from sensors either fitted to the launch platform or podded. In both cases additional work on the launch platforms electronics is needed to operate the Missile. All of this is possible on the Typhoon but no country has yet gone for it. You cannot simply hang a HARM on a platform and use it in any but the most basic modes if that.
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Italy's ECR are quite likely more up to date than the german ones, actually. Italy is also procuring the new AGM-88E AARGM, being partner in its development and production with the US Navy, although the 155 Sqn, the ECR unit which is based a few miles away from my home, for some reason hadn't yet seen one delivered as of three months ago.
The unit is having a rough time since it is planned to move out of its historic base in Piacenza - San Damiano and to Ghedi. The move has been planned for a good few years now, yet the ministry isn't able to firm up a plan and properly inform the personnel. The resulting uncertainty isn't helping anyone.
The unit is having a rough time since it is planned to move out of its historic base in Piacenza - San Damiano and to Ghedi. The move has been planned for a good few years now, yet the ministry isn't able to firm up a plan and properly inform the personnel. The resulting uncertainty isn't helping anyone.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
One of Bae's finest I guess.marktigger wrote:its a shame as ALARM was the better missile
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Anyone know if from the readiness aspect the above is still the plan? I guess the real difference is in the deck landings (and deck ops, even if it is not the pilots who carry those out) rather than in what they do once up.Gabriele wrote:Each year, a regiment with 2 squadrons is to be at very high readiness, with one squadron focused on supporting the Airborne Battlegroup and one the Commando Battlegroup.
Assuming the squadrons stay at 8 helicopters each, you do the math.
- with Ocean going in the coming year, there might be some complications
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
The readiness mechanism has changed: now both regiments are at "permanent readiness". 3 Regiment is to support 3rd Division, and 4 Regiment supports the "specialists". 656 Sqn for the naval side, 664 in support of 16 Air Assault. 656 embarked recently on Argus as part of its preparations.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Gabriele wrote:Italy's ECR are quite likely more up to date than the german ones, actually. Italy is also procuring the new AGM-88E AARGM, being partner in its development and production with the US Navy, although the 155 Sqn, the ECR unit which is based a few miles away from my home, for some reason hadn't yet seen one delivered as of three months ago.
The unit is having a rough time since it is planned to move out of its historic base in Piacenza - San Damiano and to Ghedi. The move has been planned for a good few years now, yet the ministry isn't able to firm up a plan and properly inform the personnel. The resulting uncertainty isn't helping anyone.
Well, I don't see why are they moving them out in the first place. It's about 70 km from Piacenza to Ghedi. Nor I do see it as some major hurdle for their families...
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Back to Apaches (E Guardians), I wonder if our slots have been confirmed... it has all gone awfully quiet? RE
" a five-year $3.4 billion contract that will see the company provide Apache helicopters to both the US Army and the government of Saudi Arabia, marking the first multi-year agreement for the helicopter's “E” variant . Under the deal, Riyadh will receive 24 brand new Apache Guardians while the Army will receive 244 remanufactured aircraft, with work expected to be completed by June 30, 2022. Saudi Arabia's procurement of Apaches is part of an effort to build a 156-strong rotary-wing force and they have so far procured 36 helicopters in the last two years. " from DID of today
" a five-year $3.4 billion contract that will see the company provide Apache helicopters to both the US Army and the government of Saudi Arabia, marking the first multi-year agreement for the helicopter's “E” variant . Under the deal, Riyadh will receive 24 brand new Apache Guardians while the Army will receive 244 remanufactured aircraft, with work expected to be completed by June 30, 2022. Saudi Arabia's procurement of Apaches is part of an effort to build a 156-strong rotary-wing force and they have so far procured 36 helicopters in the last two years. " from DID of today
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Are we following the US and ditching the Longbow as part of the Apache E programme, instead having an ISTAR node able to link with UAVs, UCAVs and transfer and receive data over long range, amongst other capabilities?
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
The Apache E most definitely does not ditch the Longbow radar. It adds a littoral / maritime radar mode and other upgrades, actually. The MUM-TX data link for interoperability with UAS replaces the Fire Control Radar only on some of the helicopters. The intention is to have both and mix the mission fits.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
- Stevenrojes
- Junior Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 02 Apr 2017, 01:52
- Contact:
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
First 38 re-manufactures now are on contract. https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1180256/
12 still missing to get to 50.
12 still missing to get to 50.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Stretch out to 2024 as well....Gabriele wrote:First 38 re-manufactures now are on contract. https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1180256/
12 still missing to get to 50.
Is this an indication of losing the other 12?
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Well that would give us 2 regiments each with 2 squadrons of 8 Apaches and 6 spares. Would not be surprised given how everything is getting smaller in order to retain capabilities. Unfortunately this is the shape of things to come across the board for all three services.
Re: Apache Attack Helicopter (Army Air Corps)
Looks like 38 then with our growing defence budget blah blah.