Naval Apache ??
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
Naval Apache ??
I just spotted this on the RN website - first I had heard of it. Check out the last sentence. Me thinks they jest.
In July 1995, the Apache Longbow was selected to fulfil the UK Army Attack Helicopter requirement and the first Apache entered service in January 2001with the 1st Battalion of the 227th Aviation Regiment. A total of 67 are on order with Initial Operating Capability scheduled for late 2004. Powered by two Rolls Royce / Turbomeca RTM322 engines, the Apache is equipped with the latest in target acquisition sensors, electronic countermeasures and precision guided munitions. The Apache weapons payload can be fully tailored for a particular mission, for example when operating in the Close Air Support (CAS) role, it can carry a mixture of Hellfire missiles, air-air missiles and cannon rounds. The procurement of a navalised version of the AH-64 is currently being considered and would significantly increase the RN’s maritime strike capability.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
1. Think of it as a very fast patrol boat that can be uplifted as/where needed. The Soviets had 100's of OSAs that would have been very effective at coastal defence/attack.
2. Excellent at supporting amphibious forces.
3. Prevent (and destroy) USS Cole type attacks.
4. More effective than a Wessex V with twin fixed forward firing GPMGs - yes, Junglies did have such things.
2. Excellent at supporting amphibious forces.
3. Prevent (and destroy) USS Cole type attacks.
4. More effective than a Wessex V with twin fixed forward firing GPMGs - yes, Junglies did have such things.
Guest
Posts: n/a
1. Think of it as a very fast patrol boat that can be uplifted as/where needed. The Soviets had 100's of OSAs that would have been very effective at coastal defence/attack.
2. Excellent at supporting amphibious forces.
3. Prevent (and destroy) USS Cole type attacks.
4. More effective than a Wessex V with twin fixed forward firing GPMGs - yes, Junglies did have such things
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
I have to agree with hyd3failure, the Lynx is more than up to the job and better suited to flight deck ops, why on earth do we need the worlds most expensive anti-tank helo on a ship?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Thought the plan was that 3 Commando Brigade would take 8 Apaches from the existing order to replace the Lynx Mk 7s currently used by CHF ?
The type has already undertaken initial SHOL trials aboard Ocean, and is due to re-embark in September in support of Argonaut '05.
I/C
The type has already undertaken initial SHOL trials aboard Ocean, and is due to re-embark in September in support of Argonaut '05.
I/C
Either Geoff H has just found an unopened piggy-bank under his bed, or the RN website is having a brainf@rt and getting confused with the long standing marinisation requirement for Apache AH Mk.1
It's not just OCEAN that has been graced with the beast; SHOL trials on RFA ARGUS have also been successfully conducted.
It's not just OCEAN that has been graced with the beast; SHOL trials on RFA ARGUS have also been successfully conducted.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just because we have a lynx at the moment doesn't make it the prime contender as it's own replacement.
In an era when most time spent is on PCO/relief ops a shipborne aircraft with a larger cabin is needed.
In an ideal world this would be an NH90, a redundant Merlin capable of taking something like hellfire/ cabin mounted .50 cals (and use the 44 Mk1s we have unless we need a 1:22 advantage against the 2 Iranian kilos).
The plain fact is - If Wastelands can fit hellfire to a super-lynx they can fit it to a Merlin. Lets use what we have and use the budget elsewhere.
The days of Lynx have passed.
In an era when most time spent is on PCO/relief ops a shipborne aircraft with a larger cabin is needed.
In an ideal world this would be an NH90, a redundant Merlin capable of taking something like hellfire/ cabin mounted .50 cals (and use the 44 Mk1s we have unless we need a 1:22 advantage against the 2 Iranian kilos).
The plain fact is - If Wastelands can fit hellfire to a super-lynx they can fit it to a Merlin. Lets use what we have and use the budget elsewhere.
The days of Lynx have passed.
1. Is the idea of Apache at sea really a new one?
2. Are 847 NAS going to get them or will RN/RM pilots/others be posted to the AAC units?
3. Surely the cannon (can't remember calibre) could be very useful?
By the way, the USN are intended to use cannon carried by helicopters for disposing of mines on or near the surface, by using supercavitating (whatever that means) ammunition. Perhaps we could do the same, given the cuts to MCMV and Minehunter numbers?
2. Are 847 NAS going to get them or will RN/RM pilots/others be posted to the AAC units?
3. Surely the cannon (can't remember calibre) could be very useful?
By the way, the USN are intended to use cannon carried by helicopters for disposing of mines on or near the surface, by using supercavitating (whatever that means) ammunition. Perhaps we could do the same, given the cuts to MCMV and Minehunter numbers?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thankfully the days of the Lynx are not yet over. Howabout a Lynx 3/8 with hellfire... Outrageous...? maybe not so.
I'm not sur ehwre this thread has gone but we seem to have found a rabbit hole.... I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting we replace Lynx with the Apache... thats a daft idea.
Nope, Lynx will be replaced by Lynx. No doubt abuot that one.
I'm not sur ehwre this thread has gone but we seem to have found a rabbit hole.... I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting we replace Lynx with the Apache... thats a daft idea.
Nope, Lynx will be replaced by Lynx. No doubt abuot that one.
Gentleman Aviator
long standing marinisation requirement for Apache AH Mk.1
....the Spams never seriously bothered, using the Cobra instead for such ops, so much original (=expensive) work would be required...
Guest
Posts: n/a
yup....I concur the note about WEBF failing to bring the SHAR into the thread...however, his comment ref
No need for that....The RN do it already. Thats an old tactic that has been around for many years.... IIRC that the Wasp used it and it has been passed down to the present day.
By the way, the USN are intended to use cannon carried by helicopters for disposing of mines on or near the surface, by using supercavitating (whatever that means) ammunition. Perhaps we could do the same, given the cuts to MCMV and Minehunter numbers
No need for that....The RN do it already. Thats an old tactic that has been around for many years.... IIRC that the Wasp used it and it has been passed down to the present day.
..which will be neither cheap nor easy - if indeed sensibly achievable...
We're not talking about turning Apache into a small ship's flight replacement, here. 'Marinisation' for that platform is to allow it to operate from the likes of OCEAN in support of ops ashore etc, and hence to ensure it doesn't get throughly trashed by the environment whilst doing so.
It already has been achieved; you don't think the trials detachments, over a significant period of time and with a significant number of DLs to the ships, were undertaken with an unmarinised airframe, do you? Just one example: the UK Apaches, uniquely, are designed, and were delivered from the outset, with manual blade fold.
For all that these forums slag off Contractors and DPA, the work done to modify the aircraft and to come up with protective and preventative procedures for the airframe and systems has been undertaken well and effectively. Yes, the ops to the deck are inevitably constrained in some ways in order to respect the capabilities of the aircraft/ship combination, but that's true of your Dark Blue aircraft as well (of whatever Nation).
As for Cobra: Are we the USA? (No) Have we more than one air arm with similar equipment? (No) Could we afford Cobra as well as Apache? (No) So, your point is...?
Crossbow
No need for that....The RN do it already. Thats an old tactic that has been around for many years.... IIRC that the Wasp used it and it has been passed down to the present day
How? What? With a GPMG?
No need for that....The RN do it already. Thats an old tactic that has been around for many years.... IIRC that the Wasp used it and it has been passed down to the present day
How? What? With a GPMG?
WEBF,
or Navaleye, whatever........................................
You ask;
How? What? With a GPMG?
Wasp did it with AS12, Lynx does it with Sea Skua.
The AAC is to comit 4 Apache to marinised operations, from one of the existing squadrons, available as needed.
or Navaleye, whatever........................................
You ask;
How? What? With a GPMG?
Wasp did it with AS12, Lynx does it with Sea Skua.
The AAC is to comit 4 Apache to marinised operations, from one of the existing squadrons, available as needed.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Thread Starter
Pr00ne, Sea Skua is not all that effective against very small as was discovered in GW1 due to its flight profile. It has a habit of flying straight over them. Its also too big and expensive for that job. What is needed is something like a Hellfire which engages its target from above.
Sea Skua can be used against mines (ie underwater)? Are you sure? Perhaps M'learned friend needs to read the question more carefully.....
I was talking about something like this.
I was talking about something like this.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pr00ne, Sea Skua is not all that effective against very small as was discovered in GW1 due to its flight profile. It has a habit of flying straight over them. Its also too big and expensive for that job. What is needed is something like a Hellfire which engages its target from above.
Rubbish - The reason ther isn't an Iraqi Navy is because of Sea Skua. If it hadn't been for Seaskua GW2 would have been very different.