Eurocopter tiger not living up to expectations in Oz

[fleabyte]

From Air International article

problems with
- their radar navigation and altimeters
- 30mm (1.2 inch) main guns
- 70mm rockets
- and aircraft mission management
- electronic warfare mission support systems

After the dismal results of the Apaches in Iraq, it makes you wonder if the Attack Helicopter is a dinasaur and an expensive dinasaur.

[ElcoB]

Some of this (problems) goes back to Australia's predilection for equipment that fits our so-called unique defence requirements – equipment that often ends up late, over budget and in need of costly modifications. Often, where there is an off-the-shelf solution, Australia opts for a niche capability. Like the Tiger, the NH90 is a relatively new, developmental aircraft, essentially unproven on the battlefield.

Problems were anounced last year in Jane's reports, and the above quote is from a commentator in the Australian parliament in March.

[fleabyte]

That the biggest problem is possibility that the engines will have to be replaced.

What an enormous fiasco. and the Aussies are buying like 12 units? What effect will those have on a battle field.

In Iraq, the US Army sent 36 Apaches ona strike mission, losing several airframes to ground fire damage, several birds were declared a loss, and this was against a bunch of farmers with AK47's

The money is much better invested in UAV's in my opinion

[earthman]

That was more a badly planned mission than something fundamentally wrong with the helicopter though.

[AirSmetten]

when you take a lot of AK-47 and shoot them al at one you can even shoot down a 747.
Doens't make sence...
A single man with a AK can't down a high-tech attack helicopter.

[ElcoB]

when you take a lot of AK-47 and shoot them al at one you can even shoot down a 747.
Doens't make sence...
A single man with a AK can't down a high-tech attack helicopter.

Well, who knows: here a report from only 24 mars 2003 in Iraq.

- AH-64D 99-5135, 11th Aviation Brigade (C Company, “Vampires”, 1-227 Attack Helicopter Battalion, 1st Cav Division), US Army; damaged by RPG-7 and landed in the field near Karbala, Iraq; crew captured;

- AH-64D, 11th Aviation Brigade, US Army; damaged by RPG-7 and SMAF; RTB, but probably w/o;

- AH-64, 11th Aviation Brigade, US Army, damaged by RPG-7 and SMAF; RTB;

SMAF= small arms fire
RTB= returned to base
w/o = written off

Somewhere I have pictures of some Apaches and Kiowa's hit by AK-47 bullets in that disastrous week; I post them when I find them back. Several where damaged beyond repair.

Note also : a rpg-7 is a shoulder launched anti-personnel, or anti-tank weapon (different warheads), not designed to shoot at flying aircraft.

And note also, this is from a military report, not from an official investigatian team. Propaganda is not far away: its hard to admit that their high-tec toys are vulnerable to ordinary AK-47 bullets.

[fleabyte]

http://www.afa.org/magazine/Oct2003/1003najaf.asp

good article

[regi]

Interesting tactics article indeed.
It all stands or falls with the availability of modern surface to air missiles. We didn't see the helicopters in similar combat roles in Kosovo because the Serbs had better equipment. The NATO attacks happened from above the "holy" 15000 ft range. Except of some low level B1 intrusions and unmanned aircraft.
If the Iraqis had their 800 Roland systems working , those helicopter attacks wouldn't have happened. But the general responsable for the Rolands had assembled them after he was bribed by the americans.
Not 1 of those systems fell in insurgents hands.
The helicopters can do that urban combat (support) role only because there is no efficient SAM system. They learned it from the Israelis.

[fleabyte]

Yes, and with the likelihood of a modern armoured frontal engagement waning, and the vulnerability for the attack helicopter for deep strike, and urban combat in a shoulder fired sam environment, it makes me scratch my head why these countries are buying mini fleets of these expensive birds.

The US Army and marines, with some 1000 attack helicopters are finding limited use for them, except in combined arms attacks, so what will Australia, Holland, UK, Singapore do with a handful?

I read about a concept that seems far more effective, it is called swarming. The idea is to send a battalion, 500 men in small, and very low cost 2 or 4 position helicopter, gyrocopters, ultralights, all at once, and overwelm the defense with numbers, they are supported on the way in by MLRS, long rane artillery, attack jets like A10 and F16, as well as B1's with 80 precision guided small diameter bombs. Much more lethal. They establish the landing zones to bring in the heavy ground troops with V22 ospreys, blackhawks and chinooks.

In urban asault, you increase the number and tactical response rate between the ground troops and UAV's, armed and un armed, some UAV's being no more than a 30 lb precision guided TV bombs that have 2 hour loiter capability, while others like global hawk monitor areas for 2 days at a time. I think the key in urban warfare is to keep as many eyes in the sky as you can 24/7, and record everything, so you can go backwards after an attack and watch how it was staged and from where and by whom for intelligence.

[AirSmetten]

Well, who knows: here a report from only 24 mars 2003 in Iraq.
Quote:

- AH-64D 99-5135, 11th Aviation Brigade (C Company, “Vampires”, 1-227 Attack Helicopter Battalion, 1st Cav Division), US Army; damaged by RPG-7 and landed in the field near Karbala, Iraq; crew captured;

- AH-64D, 11th Aviation Brigade, US Army; damaged by RPG-7 and SMAF; RTB, but probably w/o;

- AH-64, 11th Aviation Brigade, US Army, damaged by RPG-7 and SMAF; RTB;


SMAF= small arms fire
RTB= returned to base
w/o = written off

note that none of these AH-64's are downed by AK-47 fire. I didn't say an RPG couldn't down one. When Murphy comes along and lucky to hit something with those RPG of course they won't keep flying.

[Ozzie1969]

Some people on this forum seem to believe that helicopters are magical machines, impervious to bullets and RPG's. These people have obviously never seen a helicopter from up close, nor have they any idea of what keeps a helicopter in the air, otherwise they wouldn't talk such nonsense. Also some people seem to believe that helicopters are the decisive factor on the battlefield, instead of the supporting units they really are. I suggest these people stop making fools of themselves and read chapter 2 of this book :

[pietn]

I really couldn't find a better way to say

greetings, Pietn

[n5528p]

That the biggest problem is possibility that the engines will have to be replaced.

What an enormous fiasco. and the Aussies are buying like 12 units? What effect will those have on a battle field.

In Iraq, the US Army sent 36 Apaches ona strike mission, losing several airframes to ground fire damage, several birds were declared a loss, and this was against a bunch of farmers with AK47's

The money is much better invested in UAV's in my opinion

There is no such thing as the best investment - it is important to have every part up to speed. Having only UAVs ist as useless as having only AHs. The Apache was initally built as an attack helicopter against heavy armoured attacks by tanks and armoured personnell carriers supported by infantry. This is not the mission they face in Iraq, consequently the Apache is not the best choice.

Bernhard

[earthman]

They should just attach the Abrams M1A2 semi-upside-down (gun turret down) under the engines and rotors of a Mi-12. Good luck shooting that down.

[regi]

The expression "urban warfare" means that the occupation armies cannot do what they want to do: carpet bombing with B-52's (as in Afghanistan, see the marks on Google Earth nearby and above Baghram air base)

[fleabyte]

I do not have acces to this book from South America, but am interested what it says about helicopters limited role in combined arms environments.