New AH-64's for UK
Oh dear. They're already upset about being blacklisted by India and, I'm told, are very anxious about the possibility of Brexit (made worse by Marcus Fysh MP saying it will all be OK).
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Are we still doing the Rebuild of UK AH-64s to AH-64E or off the shelf from Boeing then? 
If off the shelf we could have two fleets!
If off the shelf we could have two fleets!
OOT,
I'd imagine this will be a scrapping of current Apache airframes, spares recovery of those components common to the both versions and new building the AH-64Es. Given that the -64E has new engines and avionics there's probably not an awful lot to be retained. There will, inevitably, be a period as the new aircraft enters service when the "old" aircraft is winding down alongside.
£8m is a ludicrous figure. it might cover the airframe and rotor blades but will not cover the engines, DAS, MTADS/MPNVS and other mission avionics and weapon systems.
Of more interest will be where they are assembled, and by who. Might this be the moment for "Boeing Yeovil"? Sounds better than "Leonardo Helicopters".....
I'd imagine this will be a scrapping of current Apache airframes, spares recovery of those components common to the both versions and new building the AH-64Es. Given that the -64E has new engines and avionics there's probably not an awful lot to be retained. There will, inevitably, be a period as the new aircraft enters service when the "old" aircraft is winding down alongside.
£8m is a ludicrous figure. it might cover the airframe and rotor blades but will not cover the engines, DAS, MTADS/MPNVS and other mission avionics and weapon systems.
Of more interest will be where they are assembled, and by who. Might this be the moment for "Boeing Yeovil"? Sounds better than "Leonardo Helicopters".....
Would these now ones be built to the current UK spec (Rolls-Royce Turbomeca engines) or the US-spec (General Electric engines)? If the latter then obviously the engines couldn't be RTP'd from the current fleet.
PDR
PDR
PDR1,
AH-64E does not have Rolls-Royce Turbomeca engines. An of the shelf buy would be just that. US Army spec E model.
AH-64E does not have Rolls-Royce Turbomeca engines. An of the shelf buy would be just that. US Army spec E model.
That's the way I read it too. So not only can they not RTP the current fleet's engines, but they now have an additional logistics (spares, training, facilities, tools, test equipment etc) burden through introducing an engine which is previously unknown to the UK forces.
That'll be cheap...
PDR
That'll be cheap...
PDR
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
I'd imagine this will be a scrapping of current Apache airframes, spares recovery of those components common to the both versions and new building the AH-64Es. Given that the -64E has new engines and avionics there's probably not an awful lot to be retained. There will, inevitably, be a period as the new aircraft enters service when the "old" aircraft is winding down alongside.
The expectation was, that it would be cheaper than buying straight of the shelf.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hopefully Inverted
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It strikes me that almost every time the C-17 lease/buy is discussed the MOD/RAF is applauded for saving money and buying off the shelf. (other than the fact buying initially and not leasing would have been cheaper (thanks A-400...))
And also every time the Airtanker, UK specific brand of A-330 MRT is talked about everyone wishes we'd just bought the Airbus product off the shelf and not messed around with it.
Why is it different here? A victory for common sense is it not?
And also every time the Airtanker, UK specific brand of A-330 MRT is talked about everyone wishes we'd just bought the Airbus product off the shelf and not messed around with it.
Why is it different here? A victory for common sense is it not?
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The current fleet is properly fooked, and very much in the legacy bracket. The RTM's were world class....once. We have to learn that just because someone has a mate at the DM and Yeovil churn out that tired crap about jobs in danger. Kick a dog enough times and funnily enough it bites back. The C17 example is a great one. I'm sure any AT mates will attest to its deserved rep as helping the British Forces out of a bad position.
OOT,
It was also the US Army's expectation with the CH-47D to CH-47F; however, by the time the old airframes were stripped, cleaned, assessed and repaired the gap was very small - hence why the US Army ended up with a lot more new builds than the original plan. The CH-47 also underwent a change in airframe construction (we currently have both types in the RAF) which means that a modification on a old aircraft needs amending (with cost implications) for new builds. Given the MoD wants to maximise through life savings it makes the most sense to have the same build standard airframes / engines as the US Army. As Nimrod also proves, rehashing an old airframe isn't always as cheap as it seems. Metal is cheap - man hours are expensive.
It was also the US Army's expectation with the CH-47D to CH-47F; however, by the time the old airframes were stripped, cleaned, assessed and repaired the gap was very small - hence why the US Army ended up with a lot more new builds than the original plan. The CH-47 also underwent a change in airframe construction (we currently have both types in the RAF) which means that a modification on a old aircraft needs amending (with cost implications) for new builds. Given the MoD wants to maximise through life savings it makes the most sense to have the same build standard airframes / engines as the US Army. As Nimrod also proves, rehashing an old airframe isn't always as cheap as it seems. Metal is cheap - man hours are expensive.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, the current fleet of Tornado (for example) are flown and maintained by miracle workers and a horrendous amount of blood, sweat and tears. 
Last edited by Rotate too late; 1st Jun 2016 at 20:09.
USN ended up in the same boat regarding the SH-60B/F remanufacture into SH-60R. All said and done, the "refurbish" didn't pan out, so new R's instead of the original remanufacture plan.
Build New VS. Rebuild
Originally posted by Lonewolf_50:
USN ended up in the same boat regarding the SH-60B/F remanufacture into SH-60R. All said and done, the "refurbish" didn't pan out, so new R's instead of the original remanufacture plan.
Otterotor:
US Marine Corps arrived at the same decision with their H-1 Upgrades. Rebuild Whiskeys & Novembers were not practical. They are all Newbuild Yankees and Zulus now.
USN ended up in the same boat regarding the SH-60B/F remanufacture into SH-60R. All said and done, the "refurbish" didn't pan out, so new R's instead of the original remanufacture plan.
Otterotor:
US Marine Corps arrived at the same decision with their H-1 Upgrades. Rebuild Whiskeys & Novembers were not practical. They are all Newbuild Yankees and Zulus now.