Apache Attack Helicopter (British Army Air Corps)

[tomuk]

Sovereign capability SW1, do you think it's still 1930?

Sovereign weapons capability, get real, we haven't even been able to produce our own small arms since 1994 when ROF Nottingham closed down....

Horse long gone to the glue factory, gate rusted off its hinges and stable roof collapsed years ago.

What has making small arms got to do with anything. It is just low value commodity work. Which if we really wanted to we could get back into at a drop of a hat but to no real advantage.

[SW1]

[
Point absolutely taken, Brimstone is superior in every way, however my caviat would be that AGM-179A is already integrated, in service, with vast stocks to call on in wartime.

Going by the usual UK procurement standard, Brimstone integration on the E, would end up taking at least double the predicted timescale and cost three time as much!

Yes because in a war we would be the only ones looking to call on those stocks wouldn’t we! As was seen in the recent Covid issues use of the defence production act. If the US needs them we don’t get them. Hence why for expendables you need to be able to produce your own if you’re serious about having a sovereign capability.

Sovereign capability SW1, do you think it's still 1930?

We have sovereign capability in warship shipbuilding and to a lesser extent SSN/SSBN's with some reliance on US reactor elements.

We have a golden opportunity to be a big player again in military fast jets thanks to GCAP too.

.... And, well nothing else comes to mind really...

Sovereign weapons capability, get real, we haven't even been able to produce our own small arms since 1994 when ROF Nottingham closed down....

Horse long gone to the glue factory, gate rusted off its hinges and stable roof collapsed years ago.

We still make the ammunition for small arms..

https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/produc ... sent%20day.

I’ll add I’d give them a simple choice integrate the U.K. weapons on it or the helicopters will be decommissioned and sold. That would be the tinkering I would do with them.

[mrclark303]

Sovereign capability SW1, do you think it's still 1930?

Sovereign weapons capability, get real, we haven't even been able to produce our own small arms since 1994 when ROF Nottingham closed down....

Horse long gone to the glue factory, gate rusted off its hinges and stable roof collapsed years ago.

What has making small arms got to do with anything. It is just low value commodity work. Which if we really wanted to we could get back into at a drop of a hat but to no real advantage.

Morning Tom, providing your armed forces with its primary infantry rifle domestically, is the absolute foundation of defence, the first building block of sovereign capability.

[mrclark303]

[
Point absolutely taken, Brimstone is superior in every way, however my caviat would be that AGM-179A is already integrated, in service, with vast stocks to call on in wartime.

Going by the usual UK procurement standard, Brimstone integration on the E, would end up taking at least double the predicted timescale and cost three time as much!

Yes because in a war we would be the only ones looking to call on those stocks wouldn’t we! As was seen in the recent Covid issues use of the defence production act. If the US needs them we don’t get them. Hence why for expendables you need to be able to produce your own if you’re serious about having a sovereign capability.

Sovereign capability SW1, do you think it's still 1930?

We have sovereign capability in warship shipbuilding and to a lesser extent SSN/SSBN's with some reliance on US reactor elements.

We have a golden opportunity to be a big player again in military fast jets thanks to GCAP too.

.... And, well nothing else comes to mind really...

Sovereign weapons capability, get real, we haven't even been able to produce our own small arms since 1994 when ROF Nottingham closed down....

Horse long gone to the glue factory, gate rusted off its hinges and stable roof collapsed years ago.

We still make the ammunition for small arms..

https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/produc ... sent%20day.

I’ll add I’d give them a simple choice integrate the U.K. weapons on it or the helicopters will be decommissioned and sold. That would be the tinkering I would do with them.

, I like your hard ball negotiating tactics SW1!

On a serious note, as touched on before, I think the almost inevitable next Labour governments first SDSR, will be cutting as much low hanging fruit as it can reach.

Brimstone integration on the E would without doubt be such an example.

[Little J]

Saw a tweet earlier from somebody or other (not really important), the US is stopping the export of small arms and ammunition to stockpile in case ww3 kicks off. That's the smallest and simplest weapons to produce, do you think they'll be that worried about us while they get there stocks of JAGM up?
Labour would probably love to cut Brimstone, but when the fit hits the shan, you can bet they'd wish they had Brimstone in the stores.

[mrclark303]

Saw a tweet earlier from somebody or other (not really important), the US is stopping the export of small arms and ammunition to stockpile in case ww3 kicks off. That's the smallest and simplest weapons to produce, do you think they'll be that worried about us while they get there stocks of JAGM up?
Labour would probably love to cut Brimstone, but when the fit hits the shan, you can bet they'd wish they had Brimstone in the stores.

Who knows, Uncle Sam has always come through for us in the past and in fact what were taking about here equates to rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.

We have effectively unilaterally disarmed over the last 30 years, we are now utterly reliant on the US for our very defence, period.

We can thank the politicians for leaving us virtually defenceless, a hand full of fighter squadrons, a hand full of warships and 150 MBT's.

if WW3 kicked off, JAGM supply over our 3000 to be procured, would be purely acidemic.

Come to think of it, just what conceivable war would the UK get into with our 30 odd front line AH64E's, that we would expend our entire inventory of 3,000 missiles??

Are we thinking of trying to retake Hong Kong and take on China by ourselves

[downsizer]

Labour would probably love to cut Brimstone,

Basing this on what?

[Little J]

Based on one government after another doing their best to destroy anything and everything

[BB85]

Morning Tom, providing your armed forces with its primary infantry rifle domestically, is the absolute foundation of defence, the first building block of sovereign capability.

There is no domestic market to support a domestic manufacturer of automatic military rifles. Even France has gone down the German route with HK 416 and 417, who relied heavily on US sales to keep their production line afloat. There is no point in opening a factory and training machinists who know nothing about rifle manufacturing to assemble a one off order for the UK when they can be produced at a fraction of the cost in the US.
The money could be spent developing a sovereign defensive capability that is actually sustainable.

[mrclark303]

Morning Tom, providing your armed forces with its primary infantry rifle domestically, is the absolute foundation of defence, the first building block of sovereign capability.

There is no domestic market to support a domestic manufacturer of automatic military rifles. Even France has gone down the German route with HK 416 and 417, who relied heavily on US sales to keep their production line afloat. There is no point in opening a factory and training machinists who know nothing about rifle manufacturing to assemble a one off order for the UK when they can be produced at a fraction of the cost in the US.
The money could be spent developing a sovereign defensive capability that is actually sustainable.

"The money could be spent developing a sovereign defensive capability that is actually sustainable."

Taking us back round to warships and submarines....

In actual fact, an order for 80,000 individual service rifles is absolutely valid and sustainable.....

Big caveat though, set up a facility to assemble (or manufacture) and support the selected proven rifle design.

We have a few manufacturers making very high quality AR platforms in the UK in a small manner.

They could certainly scale up to manufacture a rifle like the KA1 in the UK.

[SW1]

There are some fantastic snippets in this 1995 piece in the New York Times (£):

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/13/busi ... tched.html

Copters : Pitched Battle Near Done
By Erik Ipsen, International Herald Tribune
July 13, 1995

After a three-year lobbying battle that has cost tens of millions of pounds and has involved everyone from President Jacques Chirac of France to the most senior American military brass, the British cabinet is expected as soon as Thursday to name the winner of a £2.5 billion contract to supply the army with attack helicopters.

The fact that so much money and political clout could be spent on lobbying speaks volumes about the state of defense contractors and their government paymasters. "Given the lack of major contracts around, this one is clearly very important," said Chris Avery, aer ospace analyst at Paribas Capital Markets Ltd.

The contract promises fat profits for the winner of the field of two British-American and one European consortiums.

What began as a simple military procurement battle has taken on ponderous political dimensions. It is widely seen as the first major test of the European leanings of Prime Minister John Major's new cabinet.

Some say the cabinet shuffle has helped the fortunes of the Tiger helicopter, the so-called Eurocopter, to be made by British Aerospace PLC, Deutsche Aerospace AG and Aerospatiale of France. "Tiger seems to be coming up strongly along the rails now," said John Apple by, a senior researcher at the Royal United Ser vices Institute for Defense Studies in London.

The other two bidders insist that the cabinet moves have strengthened their chances. Backers of the Apache - to be built by Westland Helicopters Ltd. of Britain in conjunction with McDonnell Douglas Corp. - happily point out that the new defense minister is the Euroskeptic Michael Portillo. So do those who support the Cobra, made by GEC- Marconi Ltd., a unit of General Electric Co. of Britain, and Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. of the United States.

The value of the order far exceeds the £2.5 billion for Britain's 91 helicopters. All three consortiums have been quick to calculate huge export orders. Jerry Fisher, the GEC- Marconi senior vice president who is leading his company's bid, said some of his rivals have cited figures for their expected export sales that exceed the total projected value of the entire market for attack helicopters over the next decade. "Everyone is promising the moon," he said.

GEC-Marconi is no exception. It has projected that a victory for the Cobra would mean 14,000 British jobs. That pledge is based in large part on expected orders from the U.S. Marine Corps to upgrade its fleet of 220 Cobras using British-made cockpits and control systems. GEC says that order is in the bag, but its rivals insist that is not true. They said the desire of the U.S. Congress to save American jobs and a tight defense budget all but precludes such an option.

Similarly, the competition has belittled Westland's claim that a victory for Apache would guarantee lucrative multi-decade repair and upgrade contracts for the 160 Apaches flown by NATO in Europe. "I don't think that the U.S. Congress would be keen to see those jobs coming to Britain," said one Apache rival.

British Aerospace's claim that the Tiger has guaranteed export sales also gets rough treatment. Yes, concede Tiger's rivals, BAe would contribute not just 20 percent of the value of the 91 British helicopters, but the same percentage of the 427 units ordered by France and Germany. "But look at what they are making," a rival said, pointing out that BAe would contribute the rump third of Tiger's fuselage and its stubby wings.

Penny Studholme, a BAe spokeswoman, conceded that point. She added, however, that a victory for Tiger would also mean a victory for its Trigat anti-tank missile, the product of a joint British, French and German development effort into which Whitehall has already poured £210 million. Each Tiger would carry eight such missiles, the two other helicopters would have none [lol].

Not that it matters much, but the British Army has long made plain its preference for the Apache. It is the largest of the three entries, carries the biggest payload, and crucially, is the only off-the-shelf helicopter on offer.

Tiger, billed by its makers as the only "third-generation" entry, is not only untested in battle - only four prototypes exist - but would not be in service until the end of the decade at best.

Cobra's problem, until recently, was the opposite. It has been derided as a piece of ancient, Vietnam War-era technology. But that helicopter has recently changed its spots.

This spring its makers amended their bid to offer a new four-blade rotor model that increases Cobra's speed, maneuverability and payload. The only problem, its detractors say, is that in the process Cobra suddenly becomes untested.

The modification also significantly increases the cost of what had been by far the cheapest of the three options. "There is a lot more to it than simply unscrewing one two- blade rotor and screwing in a new four-bladed one," said Nick De Jongh, chief spokesman for Westland Helicopters.

As the clear favorite in the contest, the Apache has predictably flown into the heaviest opposition. Its detractors delight in pointing out that in its first major battlefield test - the Gulf War - Apache left much to be desired.

Not only did it frequently break down, but the computer systems designed to control its armaments failed several times to distinguish ally from enemy. "In the Gulf War, 17 percent of the casualties were the result of friendly fire," reads a recent advertisement from Westland. The ad goes on to say that Tiger's "positive target identification virtually eliminates the risk."

Mr. De Jongh of Westland conceded that there were some failures in the Gulf, but he stressed that subsequent modifications have eliminated the problems.

[Ends]

[mrclark303]

There are some fantastic snippets in this 1995 piece in the New York Times (£):

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/13/busi ... tched.html

Copters : Pitched Battle Near Done
By Erik Ipsen, International Herald Tribune
July 13, 1995

After a three-year lobbying battle that has cost tens of millions of pounds and has involved everyone from President Jacques Chirac of France to the most senior American military brass, the British cabinet is expected as soon as Thursday to name the winner of a £2.5 billion contract to supply the army with attack helicopters.

The fact that so much money and political clout could be spent on lobbying speaks volumes about the state of defense contractors and their government paymasters. "Given the lack of major contracts around, this one is clearly very important," said Chris Avery, aer ospace analyst at Paribas Capital Markets Ltd.

The contract promises fat profits for the winner of the field of two British-American and one European consortiums.

What began as a simple military procurement battle has taken on ponderous political dimensions. It is widely seen as the first major test of the European leanings of Prime Minister John Major's new cabinet.

Some say the cabinet shuffle has helped the fortunes of the Tiger helicopter, the so-called Eurocopter, to be made by British Aerospace PLC, Deutsche Aerospace AG and Aerospatiale of France. "Tiger seems to be coming up strongly along the rails now," said John Apple by, a senior researcher at the Royal United Ser vices Institute for Defense Studies in London.

The other two bidders insist that the cabinet moves have strengthened their chances. Backers of the Apache - to be built by Westland Helicopters Ltd. of Britain in conjunction with McDonnell Douglas Corp. - happily point out that the new defense minister is the Euroskeptic Michael Portillo. So do those who support the Cobra, made by GEC- Marconi Ltd., a unit of General Electric Co. of Britain, and Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. of the United States.

The value of the order far exceeds the £2.5 billion for Britain's 91 helicopters. All three consortiums have been quick to calculate huge export orders. Jerry Fisher, the GEC- Marconi senior vice president who is leading his company's bid, said some of his rivals have cited figures for their expected export sales that exceed the total projected value of the entire market for attack helicopters over the next decade. "Everyone is promising the moon," he said.

GEC-Marconi is no exception. It has projected that a victory for the Cobra would mean 14,000 British jobs. That pledge is based in large part on expected orders from the U.S. Marine Corps to upgrade its fleet of 220 Cobras using British-made cockpits and control systems. GEC says that order is in the bag, but its rivals insist that is not true. They said the desire of the U.S. Congress to save American jobs and a tight defense budget all but precludes such an option.

Similarly, the competition has belittled Westland's claim that a victory for Apache would guarantee lucrative multi-decade repair and upgrade contracts for the 160 Apaches flown by NATO in Europe. "I don't think that the U.S. Congress would be keen to see those jobs coming to Britain," said one Apache rival.

British Aerospace's claim that the Tiger has guaranteed export sales also gets rough treatment. Yes, concede Tiger's rivals, BAe would contribute not just 20 percent of the value of the 91 British helicopters, but the same percentage of the 427 units ordered by France and Germany. "But look at what they are making," a rival said, pointing out that BAe would contribute the rump third of Tiger's fuselage and its stubby wings.

Penny Studholme, a BAe spokeswoman, conceded that point. She added, however, that a victory for Tiger would also mean a victory for its Trigat anti-tank missile, the product of a joint British, French and German development effort into which Whitehall has already poured £210 million. Each Tiger would carry eight such missiles, the two other helicopters would have none [lol].

Not that it matters much, but the British Army has long made plain its preference for the Apache. It is the largest of the three entries, carries the biggest payload, and crucially, is the only off-the-shelf helicopter on offer.

Tiger, billed by its makers as the only "third-generation" entry, is not only untested in battle - only four prototypes exist - but would not be in service until the end of the decade at best.

Cobra's problem, until recently, was the opposite. It has been derided as a piece of ancient, Vietnam War-era technology. But that helicopter has recently changed its spots.

This spring its makers amended their bid to offer a new four-blade rotor model that increases Cobra's speed, maneuverability and payload. The only problem, its detractors say, is that in the process Cobra suddenly becomes untested.

The modification also significantly increases the cost of what had been by far the cheapest of the three options. "There is a lot more to it than simply unscrewing one two- blade rotor and screwing in a new four-bladed one," said Nick De Jongh, chief spokesman for Westland Helicopters.

As the clear favorite in the contest, the Apache has predictably flown into the heaviest opposition. Its detractors delight in pointing out that in its first major battlefield test - the Gulf War - Apache left much to be desired.

Not only did it frequently break down, but the computer systems designed to control its armaments failed several times to distinguish ally from enemy. "In the Gulf War, 17 percent of the casualties were the result of friendly fire," reads a recent advertisement from Westland. The ad goes on to say that Tiger's "positive target identification virtually eliminates the risk."

Mr. De Jongh of Westland conceded that there were some failures in the Gulf, but he stressed that subsequent modifications have eliminated the problems.

[Ends]

What an interesting article Jensey, thanks for posting.

It's funny how the headline number drops over the decades.

During the 1970's and 80's, at the height of the cold war, the requirement remained fairly constant at 180 Attack Helicopters.

Firstly, a tandem seat attack helicopter based on the Lynx platform, when French double dealing put paid to that option, it switched to the Cobra.

Then it was put on ice as the Lynx continued in the anti Armour role to save money, the full AH requirement simply too tempting low hanging fruit and cut

In the late 80's, early 90's, the AH requirement re-started, now switched to the gold standard Apache, but with numbers dropping to 120.

Mid 90's, numbers drop to 91, we thankfully dodged the Tiger and Roovalk (?) bullets and bought the Apache, but obviously a UK gold standard eye watering expensive Apache...

Meanwhile numbers drop to 67.....

Then we order AH64E, but drop to 50.

So, 180, 120, 91 ... Then order 67, then finally 50.

Of the 50, how many will be frontline, 30?

[SW1]

Should of stuck with lynx in the role

[mrclark303]

Should of stuck with lynx in the role

An attack helicopter based on Lynx was supposed to be part of the Lynx family of utility/Naval/ attack platforms.

The helicopter would have used the tail, transmission and engines of the Lynx with a new forward fuselage.

It would have been a superb Attack helicopter without a doubt, it's twin engines and rigid rotor hub making it an outstanding machine.

It was cancelled after Puma, Gazelle and Lynx were ordered, thanks to typical French back stabbing of the era.

[Little J]

Should of stuck with lynx in the role

As an Aside, the AH.7 had a cool look to it

[SW1]

Should of stuck with lynx in the role

As an Aside, the AH.7 had a cool look to it

The last few Super Lynx for export were built concurrent with Wildcat. Suspect had the appetite been there we could have delivered something suitable for the Apache role.

[SW1]

Should of stuck with lynx in the role

As an Aside, the AH.7 had a cool look to it

The last few Super Lynx for export were built concurrent with Wildcat. Suspect had the appetite been there we could have delivered something suitable for the Apache role.

If the navy were to integrate the brimstone/spear triple launcher onto the wildcat wing much like the South Koreans have done with spike on their wildcat, they would make the army look really stupid.

[SD67]

If the navy were to integrate the brimstone/spear triple launcher onto the wildcat wing much like the South Koreans have done with spike on their wildcat, they would make the army look really stupid.

Something they don't seem to require much assistance with in recent decades.

When you think that Lynx first flew only three years before Blackhawk, and the amount invested in Wildcat, I can't help feel we've failed to get the most value out of it.

[SW1]

If the navy were to integrate the brimstone/spear triple launcher onto the wildcat wing much like the South Koreans have done with spike on their wildcat, they would make the army look really stupid.

Something they don't seem to require much assistance with in recent decades.

When you think that Lynx first flew only three years before Blackhawk, and the amount invested in Wildcat, I can't help feel we've failed to get the most value out of it.

That is true.

We do that with a lot of equipment, the iteration and development with new builds always seems to become start from scratch no one else who spends as much as we do on development of new things does it so much.

I am told that the sensor integration and information display on the navy wildcat is excellent and as gd as anything out there. I feel it a shame they all aren’t at that standard.

[mrclark303]

If the navy were to integrate the brimstone/spear triple launcher onto the wildcat wing much like the South Koreans have done with spike on their wildcat, they would make the army look really stupid.

Something they don't seem to require much assistance with in recent decades.

When you think that Lynx first flew only three years before Blackhawk, and the amount invested in Wildcat, I can't help feel we've failed to get the most value out of it.

That is true.

We do that with a lot of equipment, the iteration and development with new builds always seems to become start from scratch no one else who spends as much as we do on development of new things does it so much.

I am told that the sensor integration and information display on the navy wildcat is excellent and as gd as anything out there. I feel it a shame they all aren’t at that standard.

Absolutely, it's an excellent Naval helicopter, it would be nice to fit the compact dipping sonar.

Army Wildcat is a stripped out battlefield taxi for 4...

They need to up-arm the Army Wildcat, give it teeth and some dedicated scouting avionics.

Without it, it's pretty useless to be honest.

If they won't do that, transfer 20 to the RN for upgrade to full naval spec and sell the rest. The army could replace them with a simple proven light utility type that can carry 8 fully equipped men.

[Jackstar]

Apache & Wildcat. The capabilities, the facts.

Designed to find and destroy air defence units, tanks and armoured vehicles, the Apache attack helicopter has utility beyond its primary role, capable of a wide range of battlefield tasks that include Intelligence, Surveillance Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR), Escort/Force Protection and Command and Control (C2). The Apache can operate in all weathers, day or night and has significantly enhanced the Army's Air Manoeuvre capability.

Using the distinctive Longbow radar located above the main rotor blades, the Apache can detect and classify up to 256 potential targets, display 128 of these to the crew and prioritise the top 16 threats, all in a matter of seconds. It carries a mix of weapons that include a 30mm chain gun, 70mm rockets and Hellfire missiles to provide choice for the commander and flexibility during the mission.

In addition to the Longbow radar, the aircraft is equipped with optical and thermal imaging sights that are used to visually identify potential targets and pilot the aircraft at night and in low visibility conditions. Range and endurance can be increased using wing-mounted fuel tanks to provide a more persistent presence across a wider area. To increase its survivability, the Apache is fitted with a state of the art, fully integrated Defensive Aid Suite to protect the aircraft and crew.

The Army Wildcat Mk1 helicopter will perform a range of tasks on the battlefield including reconnaissance, command and control, transportation of troops and material, and the provision of force protection.

It is fitted with new Light Helicopter Turbine Engine Company (LHTEC) CTS800-4N engines, which are significantly more powerful than those in its predecessor, the Lynx, enabling it to operate in extreme conditions and at high altitudes.

The Wildcat is fitted with a nose mounted MX-15 Wescam Electro Optical Device (EOD) enabling it to detect targets by day and night at significant range.

https://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/aircraft/

[mrclark303]

Apache & Wildcat. The capabilities, the facts.

Designed to find and destroy air defence units, tanks and armoured vehicles, the Apache attack helicopter has utility beyond its primary role, capable of a wide range of battlefield tasks that include Intelligence, Surveillance Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR), Escort/Force Protection and Command and Control (C2). The Apache can operate in all weathers, day or night and has significantly enhanced the Army's Air Manoeuvre capability.

Using the distinctive Longbow radar located above the main rotor blades, the Apache can detect and classify up to 256 potential targets, display 128 of these to the crew and prioritise the top 16 threats, all in a matter of seconds. It carries a mix of weapons that include a 30mm chain gun, 70mm rockets and Hellfire missiles to provide choice for the commander and flexibility during the mission.

In addition to the Longbow radar, the aircraft is equipped with optical and thermal imaging sights that are used to visually identify potential targets and pilot the aircraft at night and in low visibility conditions. Range and endurance can be increased using wing-mounted fuel tanks to provide a more persistent presence across a wider area. To increase its survivability, the Apache is fitted with a state of the art, fully integrated Defensive Aid Suite to protect the aircraft and crew.

The Army Wildcat Mk1 helicopter will perform a range of tasks on the battlefield including reconnaissance, command and control, transportation of troops and material, and the provision of force protection.

It is fitted with new Light Helicopter Turbine Engine Company (LHTEC) CTS800-4N engines, which are significantly more powerful than those in its predecessor, the Lynx, enabling it to operate in extreme conditions and at high altitudes.

The Wildcat is fitted with a nose mounted MX-15 Wescam Electro Optical Device (EOD) enabling it to detect targets by day and night at significant range.

https://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/aircraft/

"The Army Wildcat Mk1 helicopter will perform a range of tasks on the battlefield including reconnaissance, command and control, transportation of troops and material, and the provision of force protection.

It is fitted with new Light Helicopter Turbine Engine Company (LHTEC) CTS800-4N engines, which are significantly more powerful than those in its predecessor, the Lynx, enabling it to operate in extreme conditions and at high altitudes.

The Wildcat is fitted with a nose mounted MX-15 Wescam Electro Optical Device (EOD) enabling it to detect targets by day and night at significant range."

Sounds like a used car salesman...

Carries no dedicated recon/ scout gear apart from a single flir, what capabilities does it have to act as a dedicated command and control platform??

Don't say a radio! I've hands free in my old Land Rover and it isn't a command and control platform!

It literally carries half the men a Lynx AH9 could....

[Tempest414]

Well Wildcat AH-1 must be quite quick to turn around add weapons wings and hang 1 x GAU-19 and 15 LMM off them anything that is not a MBT would be in a world of hurt

[SW1]

[quote=mrclark303 post_id=159276
It literally carries half the men a Lynx AH9 could....
[/quote]

I would think if they used the same seating in the wildcat as they’d used in the ah9 it would carry the same amount of people. Maybe a gd thing it doesn’t.

[Jackstar]