UK maybe procuring AH-64E.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAC -its not a matter of upgrading the powertrain to take extra power. The airframe itself needs strengthening to take the extra power. The AH-64 is comparatively lightly built -its a fallacy to believe you can just keep increasing power without it having an effect .
As to performance -you obviously have no idea as to the effect of having ASPI on the U.S 'D' model .As it stands the U.K AH-64D will outperform a U.S
'E' model in terms of performance - the mod state and type of engine electronics doesn't come into it.
As to performance -you obviously have no idea as to the effect of having ASPI on the U.S 'D' model .As it stands the U.K AH-64D will outperform a U.S
'E' model in terms of performance - the mod state and type of engine electronics doesn't come into it.
Last edited by CAC Runaway; 26th Mar 2014 at 03:33. Reason: Because I saw you're an engineer living in Lincolnshire. Not sure why I wasted my time arguing against you.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAC - Have you flown the WAH-64D then ?? Maybe you should have a look sometime what is happening to the airframe. I should take a good close look at the vertical stabilizer and centre part of the rear fuselage. The machine was designed to be light -adding weight to her isn't improving whats happening to the airframe. As for your experince -mine is on the structures side so its not a matter of picking up a floppy leaflet on them - its a matter of seeing what was actually happening to them. As for relifeing -refurbishing yes -changing all the skins to beefier ones I bet no!
Last edited by RileyDove; 26th Mar 2014 at 11:18. Reason: Because I realised that being an engineer in Lincolnshire doesn't preclude you from having worked on AH-64D's !
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAC - Have you flown the WAH-64D then ?? Maybe you should have a look sometime what is happening to the airframe. I should take a good close look at the vertical stabilizer and centre part of the rear fuselage. The machine was designed to be light -adding weight to her isn't improving whats happening to the airframe. As for your experince -mine is on the structures side so its not a matter of picking up a floppy leaflet on them - its a matter of seeing what was actually happening to them. As for relifeing -refurbishing yes -changing all the skins to beefier ones I bet no!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't disagree that our airframes need modifying. However there is a distinct limit to what this airframe will take in terms of hp. The British engines are fit for purpose and I cannot forsee the Mod wishing to take on another engine type when the RTM is proven and has growth potential. The drivechain is where we specifically need to be able to handle more power -the 'E' modifications would
address this. In order for this to be carried out there is no reason why Boeing in the U.K could not carry out this work on site. There is no need for the airframes
to be shipped 5,000 miles plus. On top of this there is the potential for Boeing to tailor a U.K 'E' to our requirements. So in essence I don't forsee our Apaches going anywhere except into a modification program that will produce British 'E's .
address this. In order for this to be carried out there is no reason why Boeing in the U.K could not carry out this work on site. There is no need for the airframes
to be shipped 5,000 miles plus. On top of this there is the potential for Boeing to tailor a U.K 'E' to our requirements. So in essence I don't forsee our Apaches going anywhere except into a modification program that will produce British 'E's .
CAC it's like plaiting fog mate give up. I didn't know Boeing could do this work on site in the UK, silly me I thought they would need a factory somewhere to do that sort of work - or are we talking about another guise for Yeovil these days.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAC it's like plaiting fog mate give up. I didn't know Boeing could do this work on site in the UK, silly me I thought they would need a factory somewhere to do that sort of work - or are we talking about another guise for Yeovil these days.
RileyDove.... you live in your own little world and keep ignoring people that know better than you. I've looked through a lot of your posts and it's a common theme.
Anyway enough, I can't be bothered with this... I'm out of here!!
I'm still interested to know where this Boeing facility is in the UK? Is it anywhere near the Sikorsky one? Perhaps they could start producing 36 of the modern day Blackhawk equivalents as well instead of the planned farce.
Interestingly, I typed 'Westland history timeline' into google - it comes up on pge 5 but you can link to the other pages - riveting read that just totally confirmed exactly what I thought!
Interestingly, I typed 'Westland history timeline' into google - it comes up on pge 5 but you can link to the other pages - riveting read that just totally confirmed exactly what I thought!
Last edited by MOSTAFA; 27th Mar 2014 at 11:23.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mostafa -who do you think was co-ordinating the Chinnok debarcle? Do you think that was done at Boscombe by a team brought in with no experience or company support ?? It might even come as a suprise to you that the likes of Lockheed Martin and Boeing provide field techs outside of the U.S!
It might be an amazing revelation to you but maybe the work could be done at the existing Pulse facility for the type in the U.K . It doesnt have to go to a 'factory' to be worked on difficult as that might seem . You seem to be under some impresssion that these reworked machines are desolved and reappear new ! They are reworked -that doesn't mean replacing every single part . Hence why there are 'A's that have become 'D's and there will be 'D's that become 'E's -you really need to give up on the Yeovil fixation!
It might be an amazing revelation to you but maybe the work could be done at the existing Pulse facility for the type in the U.K . It doesnt have to go to a 'factory' to be worked on difficult as that might seem . You seem to be under some impresssion that these reworked machines are desolved and reappear new ! They are reworked -that doesn't mean replacing every single part . Hence why there are 'A's that have become 'D's and there will be 'D's that become 'E's -you really need to give up on the Yeovil fixation!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Downsizer -nope . My experience is on structural / mechanical repair of 'D's abroad .
My feeling is that Boeing UK - UK Rotorcraft Support
Will be contracted to carry out the work in the U.K with the factory supplying modification kits for whatever is required from the U.S . It would be a good opportunity to get these machines apart and wet assembled !
My feeling is that Boeing UK - UK Rotorcraft Support
Will be contracted to carry out the work in the U.K with the factory supplying modification kits for whatever is required from the U.S . It would be a good opportunity to get these machines apart and wet assembled !
Well that's wound him up again. I could not give a flying fart about Chinooks as for your link read it carefully and tell me Yeovil is not involved. I wish I hadn't bothered.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if the UK cut Westlands out of the mix and dealt directly with Boeing, on the face of it, it would make far more sense. Or wouid that break too many Rice Bowls?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mostafa - leave your Westland obsession for a second ! Aircraft maintaince and repair does happen in the U.K without them being involved.
Bob - dealing direct with Boeing makes perfect sense . The work can be farmed out in the U.K and U.S as required. The U.K cannot afford to go out and buy new machines and ditching the existing spares support for the RTM332 makes no sense. The U.S is reworking vast numbers of Apaches -doing this work in the U.K under a Boeing contract means that your employing U.K citizens and that gives employment and offset. Thats what makes a deal work.
Bob - dealing direct with Boeing makes perfect sense . The work can be farmed out in the U.K and U.S as required. The U.K cannot afford to go out and buy new machines and ditching the existing spares support for the RTM332 makes no sense. The U.S is reworking vast numbers of Apaches -doing this work in the U.K under a Boeing contract means that your employing U.K citizens and that gives employment and offset. Thats what makes a deal work.
RD
It's so easy when you read isn't it. I see you consider yourself an expert in psychology now as well as structures! It's deals and votes thats got us in such a mess, we have flogged the dead horse for too long.
I'll say it again just in case you missed the other times I've said it - Buy the 18 straight of the shelf - completely cut out the middle man and get the contract fundamentally right first time.
It's so easy when you read isn't it. I see you consider yourself an expert in psychology now as well as structures! It's deals and votes thats got us in such a mess, we have flogged the dead horse for too long.
I'll say it again just in case you missed the other times I've said it - Buy the 18 straight of the shelf - completely cut out the middle man and get the contract fundamentally right first time.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know that isn't going to happen ! There is always going to be an angle -the taxpayer is always going to want to feel good about the deal and thats where some kind of offset will come into play. The Daily Mail would be all over the Mod 'scrapping' British Apaches to buy the 'same' from the U.S. Whether its right or wrong 'jobs for the boys' will be involved
So yes perfect sense for the taxpayer would see a straighforward buy -the political constraints of cash strapped UK however is going to dilute that in some shape. That shape will be in the form of rebuild British machines using the engines we already have . So yes a fudge but one that can be fought for by the Army without trying to justify new airframes and a new engine type.
So yes perfect sense for the taxpayer would see a straighforward buy -the political constraints of cash strapped UK however is going to dilute that in some shape. That shape will be in the form of rebuild British machines using the engines we already have . So yes a fudge but one that can be fought for by the Army without trying to justify new airframes and a new engine type.
RD
You are doing it again read first then answer. If the tax payer knew the facts the tax payer would agree wholeheartedly. Incidentally, you forget you are talking with the operators who couldn't give a flying ***k what the daily nazi says.
No deals - buy them off the shelf get whatever you can for the others to at least offset some cost.
You are doing it again read first then answer. If the tax payer knew the facts the tax payer would agree wholeheartedly. Incidentally, you forget you are talking with the operators who couldn't give a flying ***k what the daily nazi says.
No deals - buy them off the shelf get whatever you can for the others to at least offset some cost.