To: Rich Lee
First of all I should never have even referenced RPGs. Just forget about that part. The same for Nick Lappos. My comments about the design for invulnerability are based on my participation on the Apache program when Hughes was bidding on the contract. I set up the design for maintainability program and I had to work hand in glove with the vulnerability group so whatever comments I made about ballistic vulnerability are based on that background. We suggested the application of removable armor plating much like that used on the Douglas B-26. By using this type of armor they could save hundreds of thousands of dollars in fuel costs since the armor could be removed making the helicopter lighter by several hundred pounds during peacetime operations. The ballistic armor design chosen was several ballistic panels mounted on springs. If the ballistic armor were compromised it would be displaced on the springs impacting on electrical components as well as the engine condition levers (left side) and on the right side the panels could cause major problems with electrical components.
You are privy to a hell of a lot more of information than me relative to combat damage and the result of that damage. Like a lot of guys on these forums I have to rely on CNN or some of the other channels. They say that ground fire downed the Apaches as well as the Blackhawks and OH-58s. I have to go with that information and compare that with what I already know and any comments I make are based on what I know and what I am told.
That is why I stated that the Army paid for a high level of invulnerability and the downing of the Apaches by ground fire (CNNs words) indicates that the Army did not get what they paid for.
Hopefully this does not result in a pissing contest.
If you are interested in what the program was like at the beginning please feel free to PM me.
