Apache Attack Helicopter (British Army Air Corps)

[SD67]

That sounds like a line they've been given to trot out when asked about Brimstone.

Whether that is the case or not it doesn't explain why we are getting JAGM rather than Brimstone. Their may be a good reason of course, but I and it seems many others can't think of one.

This was a number of one to one chats in the mess Officer to Officer the number one thing for the AAC is to keep Apache as close as possible to the US army

And therein folks is conclusive evidence of why mid ranking officers should not drive strategic national procurement decisions

I mean by the above logic the State of Israel would not have any defence industry.

There are issues of sovereign action the industrial base exports and yes employment that trump any short term operational convenience.

Somebody really needs to take a grip of the army and explain the facts of life.

Problem being if you order something different it costs more. So if you want to keep the program keep as close to the US and its easier (not a magic bullet) to keep it within budget and get the product you want.

Theres no hard evidence for that whatsoever. Long term there are cost savings through localisation of support and supply chain, not to mention the elimination of USD risk (it tends to go up relative to GBP), and the ability to restock without needing to wait in line behind much more influential customers.
Integration is a one off and after that, well Brimstone is being mass produced so whats the problem.
The Israelis have been putting their missiles on US platforms for decades. RAF /RN are putting Meteor on F35.
If it were an alternative engine them sure that would be a money pit but seriously Brimstone shares the same basic airframe as Hellfire

[Tempest414]

Until brimstone comes into army service on mass it will not be fitted to Apache

[Pte. James Frazer]

That sounds like a line they've been given to trot out when asked about Brimstone.

Whether that is the case or not it doesn't explain why we are getting JAGM rather than Brimstone. Their may be a good reason of course, but I and it seems many others can't think of one.

This was a number of one to one chats in the mess Officer to Officer the number one thing for the AAC is to keep Apache as close as possible to the US army

And therein folks is conclusive evidence of why mid ranking officers should not drive strategic national procurement decisions

I mean by the above logic the State of Israel would not have any defence industry.

There are issues of sovereign action the industrial base exports and yes employment that trump any short term operational convenience.

Somebody really needs to take a grip of the army and explain the facts of life.

Problem being if you order something different it costs more. So if you want to keep the program keep as close to the US and its easier (not a magic bullet) to keep it within budget and get the product you want.

Theres no hard evidence for that whatsoever. Long term there are cost savings through localisation of support and supply chain, not to mention the elimination of USD risk (it tends to go up relative to GBP), and the ability to restock without needing to wait in line behind much more influential customers.
Integration is a one off and after that, well Brimstone is being mass produced so whats the problem.
The Israelis have been putting their missiles on US platforms for decades. RAF /RN are putting Meteor on F35.
If it were an alternative engine them sure that would be a money pit but seriously Brimstone shares the same basic airframe as Hellfire

Agreed, so they need to "piss or get off the pot" on Overwatch...

...another "unfunded" programme

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[topman]

That sounds like a line they've been given to trot out when asked about Brimstone.

Whether that is the case or not it doesn't explain why we are getting JAGM rather than Brimstone. Their may be a good reason of course, but I and it seems many others can't think of one.

This was a number of one to one chats in the mess Officer to Officer the number one thing for the AAC is to keep Apache as close as possible to the US army

And therein folks is conclusive evidence of why mid ranking officers should not drive strategic national procurement decisions

I mean by the above logic the State of Israel would not have any defence industry.

There are issues of sovereign action the industrial base exports and yes employment that trump any short term operational convenience.

Somebody really needs to take a grip of the army and explain the facts of life.

Problem being if you order something different it costs more. So if you want to keep the program keep as close to the US and its easier (not a magic bullet) to keep it within budget and get the product you want.

Theres no hard evidence for that whatsoever. Long term there are cost savings through localisation of support and supply chain, not to mention the elimination of USD risk (it tends to go up relative to GBP), and the ability to restock without needing to wait in line behind much more influential customers.
Integration is a one off and after that, well Brimstone is being mass produced so whats the problem.
The Israelis have been putting their missiles on US platforms for decades. RAF /RN are putting Meteor on F35.
If it were an alternative engine them sure that would be a money pit but seriously Brimstone shares the same basic airframe as Hellfire

Change does cost money.

I'm putting forward an idea as to why it happened. They will have done what they thought best, not everyone agrees with that. I'm not saying it was right or wrong.

People can come up with own thoughts as to why it came about.

Why do think it came about?

[Pte. James Frazer]

That sounds like a line they've been given to trot out when asked about Brimstone.

Whether that is the case or not it doesn't explain why we are getting JAGM rather than Brimstone. Their may be a good reason of course, but I and it seems many others can't think of one.

This was a number of one to one chats in the mess Officer to Officer the number one thing for the AAC is to keep Apache as close as possible to the US army

And therein folks is conclusive evidence of why mid ranking officers should not drive strategic national procurement decisions

I mean by the above logic the State of Israel would not have any defence industry.

There are issues of sovereign action the industrial base exports and yes employment that trump any short term operational convenience.

Somebody really needs to take a grip of the army and explain the facts of life.

Problem being if you order something different it costs more. So if you want to keep the program keep as close to the US and its easier (not a magic bullet) to keep it within budget and get the product you want.

Theres no hard evidence for that whatsoever. Long term there are cost savings through localisation of support and supply chain, not to mention the elimination of USD risk (it tends to go up relative to GBP), and the ability to restock without needing to wait in line behind much more influential customers.
Integration is a one off and after that, well Brimstone is being mass produced so whats the problem.
The Israelis have been putting their missiles on US platforms for decades. RAF /RN are putting Meteor on F35.
If it were an alternative engine them sure that would be a money pit but seriously Brimstone shares the same basic airframe as Hellfire

Change does cost money.

I'm putting forward an idea as to why it happened. They will have done what they thought best, not everyone agrees with that. I'm not saying it was right or wrong.

People can come up with own thoughts as to why it came about.

Why do think it came about?

Agreed that 'point' decision makes a lot of logival sense to the myopia of the AAC.

However, due to a lack of funded budgets for other programmes, e.g, Overwatch, as SD67 argues, there's no strategic thinking, rather knee-jerk stuff, from the BA.

It's been incoherent for decades, and they deserve all the opprobrium that's heaped on them because so.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[serge750]

Perhaps if more money becomes availiable when stocks run low brimstone may be an option .......

[Tempest414]

As said above if the army ops for Brimstone overwatch then it becomes a real option for Apache.

And as I said before the army really need Brimstone Overwatch on Boxer , HMT600 & trailer based. I would now be looking to give each battalion Brimstone in place of the AT troop and each dismounted section a NLAW or Carl Gustaf

[Tempest414]

That sounds like a line they've been given to trot out when asked about Brimstone.

Whether that is the case or not it doesn't explain why we are getting JAGM rather than Brimstone. Their may be a good reason of course, but I and it seems many others can't think of one.

This was a number of one to one chats in the mess Officer to Officer the number one thing for the AAC is to keep Apache as close as possible to the US army

And therein folks is conclusive evidence of why mid ranking officers should not drive strategic national procurement decisions

I mean by the above logic the State of Israel would not have any defence industry.

There are issues of sovereign action the industrial base exports and yes employment that trump any short term operational convenience.

Somebody really needs to take a grip of the army and explain the facts of life.

Problem being if you order something different it costs more. So if you want to keep the program keep as close to the US and its easier (not a magic bullet) to keep it within budget and get the product you want.

Theres no hard evidence for that whatsoever. Long term there are cost savings through localisation of support and supply chain, not to mention the elimination of USD risk (it tends to go up relative to GBP), and the ability to restock without needing to wait in line behind much more influential customers.
Integration is a one off and after that, well Brimstone is being mass produced so whats the problem.
The Israelis have been putting their missiles on US platforms for decades. RAF /RN are putting Meteor on F35.
If it were an alternative engine them sure that would be a money pit but seriously Brimstone shares the same basic airframe as Hellfire

Change does cost money.

I'm putting forward an idea as to why it happened. They will have done what they thought best, not everyone agrees with that. I'm not saying it was right or wrong.

People can come up with own thoughts as to why it came about.

Why do think it came about?

As said in 2019 the AAC were embarked on upgrading living and working conditions at Wattisham plus getting ready for the new E's they were even thinking of bring a HAS site back into use so a lot of money was going into this

[Pte. James Frazer]

As said above if the army ops for Brimstone overwatch then it becomes a real option for Apache.

And as I said before the army really need Brimstone Overwatch on Boxer , HMT600 & trailer based. I would now be looking to give each battalion Brimstone in place of the AT troop and each dismounted section a NLAW or Carl Gustaf

Let's hope so, before we give all the AAC weapons budget to LM rather than MBDA...

...and I agree that in the mechanised (possibly also the motorised/light mech) infantry battalions, the manoeuvre support company structure needs to evolve with the anti-tank function pushed down to platoon/section level e.g. with Javelin on RS4 mounts (Boxer), dismounts as you say with NLAW/Carl Gustav).......all part of "doubling the lethality", with apologies to the CGS.

A Battle Group MSC needs organic loitering ISTAR (from an Altius type multi-purpose asset), AAD (cannon + LMM), Mortar platoon with 120mm etc. - with a reach to ~ 10-20km - that were previously brigade level assets.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[topman]

[

As said in 2019 the AAC were embarked on upgrading living and working conditions at Wattisham plus getting ready for the new E's they were even thinking of bring a HAS site back into use so a lot of money was going into this

I did hear some of the barrack blocks and messes were little changed since we left wattisham years ago.

[Jackstar]

Practising for war, British Army Wildcats and Apaches are in Germany where the skills of more than 400 UK troops under being put under the spotlight.
They are being tested to see how well they can integrate with their American counterparts on Exercise Sabre Junction – a highly realistic warfighting training exercise.
After the conflict in Ukraine began in February 2022, the scale of the exercise increased, and now thousands of troops from across Nato are taking part, facing an opposing force in the training area who are getting ready to throw everything at them.

[andyshep]

what would people think of putting the Anduril barracuda 100M on apache and wildcats. Mini criuse missile 120 mile range

[Jdam]

Admittedly I don't know much about the Anduril barracuda but if it can be launched from a rail of an Apache, would the UK not be better putting the Spear Missile on it?

The Spear missile will be our mini cruise missile when its ready.

[andyshep]

the barracurda is the same size as hellfire

[Jdam]

Hellfire 1.6m Long with a 180mm Diameter and weights 49kg

Spear 1.8m Long with a 180mm Diameter and weights 90kg

Not that much difference in dimensions, don't know if the weight would be a killer for carry on the Apache.

I am all for more options I just dont want to see us buying foreign weapons when the have locally produced equivalent.

[whitelancer]

As the Army/MOD decided they were not even going to fit Brimstone the chance of getting SPEAR or anything else, would seem to be remote.

[sol]

Apache delivery coming through!

The 45th, 46th & 47th new attack helicopters are now with the @BritishArmy

https://x.com/BoeingUK/status/1894817440405582057

[Chris Werb]

the barracurda is the same size as hellfire

And designed for speed/ease of production using unqualified labour with a small set of standard tools. It SHOULD be much cheaper than SPEAR. My main worry is can we trust the US to provide/support anything anymore? That includes the helicopters themselves.

[Jdam]

I think regardless of what is said they will still take our money.

[Bazza]

I think regardless of what is said they will still take our money.

Unless we dare to go against their foreign policy objectives.

[Tempest414]

I am sure the UK is capable of maintaining and upgrading Apache if the the US were to pull out of supporting it.

As said a number of times the army needs to embrace Brimstone in the Overwatch role for it to become a real program for Apache

[AndyC]

Yes, we need Brimstone on 90 Boxer and 93 Ares Overwatch vehicles plus 34 Wildcat army helicopters and 16 Protector UCAV.

This, together with integraton on 50 Apache gets the volumes up to ensure a competive lower unit cost.

Simples!

[Tempest414]

We need to get Brimstone on to Boxer , HMT-600 and a 4 or 6 round trailer to cover the Infantry units alongside 120mm mortar first. Next we need to get it on to Apache and Areas I don't think we should fit it to Wildcat they should have 70mm rockets with APKWS fitted

[Jdam]

Yes, we need Brimstone on 90 Boxer and 93 Ares Overwatch vehicles plus 34 Wildcat army helicopters and 16 Protector UCAV.

This, together with integraton on 50 Apache gets the volumes up to ensure a competive lower unit cost.

Simples!

Do we the unit cost of JAGM yet? Given how ever new weapon seem to cost a lot more than the last Brimstone might already be cost effective compared to it.

[Ron5]

Yes, we need Brimstone on 90 Boxer and 93 Ares Overwatch vehicles plus 34 Wildcat army helicopters and 16 Protector UCAV.

This, together with integraton on 50 Apache gets the volumes up to ensure a competive lower unit cost.

Simples!

Do we the unit cost of JAGM yet? Given how ever new weapon seem to cost a lot more than the last Brimstone might already be cost effective compared to it.

Brimstone is significantly cheaper despite early promises that the JAGM would undercut it.