Has Apache Finished Its Deck Trials?

[MaroonMan4]

Rumour on the street was that the Army were rapidly puling back from sending AH to sea? Have the deck trials finished and what was the outcome? I am sure that the brown jobs are now going to join the enthused massess from the mud moving and wokka worlds who just love bobbing on the briney!

[vecvechookattack]

am sure that the brown jobs are now going to join the enthused massess from the mud moving and wokka worlds who just love bobbing on the briney!.........

and in English ? ???

[spinstallaeropfl]

vec

don't understand the banter... makes me wonder..!? Did you post that so the 'other' Professional Pilots might also understand..?

SSAP

[Widger]

I understood.


You need a copy of ISBN 0 9514305 05


:ok:

[Bismark]

Word on the street is that the trials were a huge success with all pilots deck qualified.

[SilsoeSid]

Word on the street is that the trials were a huge success with all pilots deck qualified. Was the aim of these trials to clear the Apache AH1 for ship operations and to establish some SHOALs, or was this just a training period to get the aircrew qualified?

Only one problem, on return to Wattasham from this trial, nobody could see the need to re-ground landing qualify the pilots! ;)



But on a more serious note, isn't Afghanistan a landlocked country? :ugh:

:=
SS

[SASless]

Bit more efficient to ship them as close as possible....then fly them off the deck....possibly? Or, knowing our dark blue brothers penchant for making the simple difficult (operating from ships)...it helps to get the muddy booted crowd acclimated to the Navy way of landing on a pinnacle.

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

"Bit more efficient to ship them as close as possible"......surely the Mighty C17 would be the best way to get them into theatre, and save the crews and support guys all those tiresome weeks of rum, bum and baccy:E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[vecvechookattack]

Good point. How many Apache can you get into the back of a C17?

[c-bert]

And where do you land your mighty C17?

One of the main benefits of carrier ops is that they allow you to launch aircraft without having to seek a host nation.

[spinstallaeropfl]

Where is the dinghy carried in an Apache...?

SSAP

[BossEyed]

to establish some SHOALs

What are 'SHOALS', SilsoeSid? Large numbers of Apaches descending as one onto the deck of OCEAN, in a piscatorial manner?

Perhaps you mean SHOLs (Ship Helicopter Operating Limitations)?
See here for HMS OCEAN trials. (http://www.navynews.co.uk/articles/2004/0404/0004041301.asp) I believe RFA ARGUS has also been visited.


SSAP: Back pack dinghys are available; perhaps they use those.

[Widger]

The other advantage of having the ship there is that it is somewhere to:

Maintain your aircraft or conduct things like engine changes in a relatively clean and dust free environment.

Somewhere to get a shower and a bed for a couple of nights without the fear of being mortared.

Somewhere to get a cold beer.

Somewhere to phone/email home.

Somewhere to get your syphalis/crabs/dhobey itch(delete as appropriate) sorted out.

Somewhere to get dental treatment.

A Spam free zone...not talking about the tinned ham here.

Somewhere to get all your stinking clothes laundered and pressed.

Somewhere for Jack to clean up your stinking mess when you have left.








:ok: :ok: :ok: :ok:

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Lots of really positive points however what scares me most is the propect of a turn in the barrel:E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[MaroonMan4]

Thanks for the PMs, apologies stand corrected and good to hear that the trials are over and the training is progressing to plan. Personally I don't give t@ss either way how they gain theatre entry, boat or Tac/Strat AT - obviously the dark blue just provide another option to those that make the decisions. And yes I can see the advantage of such a technical aircraft to have the option to go back to the boats hangar with all of the facilities.

As to 'muds' and 'wokkas' - its called the PPRUNE filter to ensure that the replies are from those that are genuinely in the know and not just sounding off or entering the usual inter service narrow minded pi$$ing contests that get us all nowwhere fast and degenerate a thread in seconds.

[VitaminGee]

'Barrel' is no way to refer to the Chief Wren!!;)

VG

[spinstallaeropfl]

So just where is the dinghy kept then..?

SSAP

[WE Branch Fanatic]

I thought the reason for the trials was that Apache could/will be used to provide support for forces conducting an amphibious landing, during the actual assault?

[SASless]

Maybe the Army does not require a dinghy for overwater flight....after all they do provide PFD's...and the cream rises to the top anyhow.

[vecvechookattack]

Exactly. You embark the aircraft when the ship is alongside and then when you get where your going you disembark them. No need for a liferaft. If there is a sea transit involved during then you weigh up the risk.

Both Lynx and Seaking (not sure about Merlin) crews fly over the water without Liferafts all the time. Just manage the risk.

[Tourist]

And what the **** would a jungly, particularly a jungly AEO know about operating at Sea?

[Oggin Aviator]

Tourist:

He's probably spent more than a dog watch on Ocean I would presume, therefore would actually know quite a lot about operating at sea.

J-AEO - if vec vec was a pinger surely he'd know whether Merlin carried a liferaft or not.

p.s. The SK6 used to carry an MS10.

[engineer(retard)]

I suspect that the advantage of Lynx and Sea King is that if they land in the wet stuff that they are likely to stay upright afterwards. AH might be better getting an STF to paint "HELP" on the bottom if it has to operate at sea.

Regards
Retard

[BossEyed]

p.s. The SK6 used to carry an MS10.

Along, of course, with one-man dinghy packs in the crew seats. Like Lynx (RN), Merlin (RN) etc.

It's enlightening who appears not to know this. :E

[right chopper]

What about Flot gear? I imagine it's quite top heavy with the radar?

[Bismark]

VVC etc,

When I was flying all maritime rotary a/c carried personal liferafts and everyone did their 6 monthly dinghy drills, dunker etc. I presume they do the same now and also the Army do the dunker etc? Anyway its a question of risk vs likelihood of ditching.

With almost 80% of countries either bordering an ocean or within 105-200 nm of a maritime launch point it seems pretty sensible to be able to operate from a sea base. How many attacks were launched against Afghanistan came from shore bases - answer only the B-52s, B1s and B2s all the rest came from USN Carriers.

Fly Navy - Air Power from the Sea!

[ORAC]

How many attacks were launched against Afghanistan came from shore bases - answer only the B-52s, B1s and B2s all the rest came from USN Carriers.

Really? What about bases such as Bishkek (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/manas.htm) in Kyrgyzstan and Khanabad (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/khanabad.htm) in Uzbekistan. There were others in Turkmenistan etc, but you get the point. :hmm:

[Tourist]

Oggin, I said OPERATE , not just take off and land:rolleyes:

[MaroonMan4]

Here we go - I knew it would end up in an inter service tussle. Host Nation Support is great, C-17s are superb and the option to do it from the sea even better.....increase the options, keep the enemy guessing blah blah.

So what is the score with the Amphib AH - are they permenantly seconded to the Royal Marines or do they go on loan for a particular operation. Will all AH and crews be able just to pop off on grey funnel lines or will it be a more specialised aspect to AH operations for a dedicated Sqn?

[spinstallaeropfl]

So you can fly the Apache off a ship - can it be armed and re-armed on the boat as well..? I guess that'll be a laugh what with all the rules and regs...?! Would also suggest a dinghy might be a useful idea for littoral or riverine bun fights.

SSAP

[Bismark]

Maroonman,

I agree with your point about inter-Service rivalry. I am hugely supportive of the RAF and what it can offer. However, I too would welcome the recognition that operating from a sea-base can be just as effective in the right circumstances - this is what the RAF seem so unwilling to accept.

Re arming and re-arming I am not aware of any specific issues with this. Re dedicatd Sqns - if Defence is not willing to buy enough then all will have to share - as the guys have to do with SH.

[SASless]

Lots of flap about a very small issue....you only have three Amphib ships, three aircraft carriers is it....and one Commando Brigade for amphib ops?

[Front Seater]

SASless,

Go on mate, you pi$$ on that fire, feel good. May not be a big deal compared to Uncle Sam, but for UK PLc is pretty significant, especially when everyone (including me!) thought that AH would never go to sea.

All the accounts from the lads that completed Deck Landings were all positive. By all accounts it went very well with no show stoppers at all. Naturally the Army would love to bathe in their own sunshine, but the word on the street is that the RN put on a superb show of professionalism and friendliness to our crews that resulted in many of them begrudging having to go back to the underfunded/under resourced home base. It looks as though we got a view of how to do it properly (and yes I am not proud when I say that - infact it hurts when people come from another Service/location saying how well geared they are for Aviation and why can't we be more like that').

And SASless - might be a lot of 'flap' in your neck of the woods - but these boys apprear to have got onboard with the minimum of fuss and maximum of integration. Now I remember the upheaval of the GR7 initial embarkation (and the video of the aircraft hitting the drink) and also the first arrival of the Chinooks (one wheel on my wagon ring any bells?). You never know SASless - you (or your coalition) just might benefit from the political statement of AH on board even if the capability is far inferior to your Cobras (quantity has a certain quality of its own!).

I agree wholeheartedly with MM4, who cares where this beast comes from - C17, HNS or the RN. AH on a deck just poised off the coast is enough to make any potential aggressor think, let alone the firepower if heaven forbid it was actually unleashed.

So, credit where it is due - well done Navy (dodgy rugby this year, but obviously professionally capable). Well done to 56 who just got on and did it.

:ok:

[ORAC]

As I remember, the argument about whether we should buy Cobra or Apache concerned the suitability of the airframe for operaring off a moving platform in a salt corrosive environment. One recalls the modifications required to the GR5 for avionics etc. The point being, therefore, not the ability of the crew, but the long term suitability of the airframe and avionics for operating off a carrier.

[diginagain]

Well done to ALL involved, from whichever Service you represent, and take all of the willy-waving in good humour. It's only banter, after all.:ok:

[Nimbus265]

The SHOL will support the users aspiration to mount embarked Ops. The fully capability will be supported by changes to the aircraft core processor software to provide things like True/Mag headings, moving waypoints and visual display of flyaway/reject heights....but don't expect this to be before Dec 07.

Currently the aircraft only operates in Mag North, and embarked OPs/shipborne Ops tend to be all carried out in true.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

From Hansard (http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm050615/text/50615w17.htm)

Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans (a) to marinise the fleet of Apache helicopters against salt corrosion and (b) to allow the aircraft to operate from Royal Navy vessels. [2328]

Mr. Ingram: A range of maritime modifications will be applied to the Apache AH Mk 1 fleet to enable it to operate from Royal Navy ships and Royal Fleet Auxiliary support vessels, including an enhanced corrosion protection scheme.

[spinstallaeropfl]

Sound's like you chaps could do with an in-service software development team to sort out all those 'software improvements' that are required. DAAVN should maybe take a trip across to Boscombe and look at the Tornado GR4 set-up, you might find it all a bit of an eye opener... developing and then testing software is complicated... the boys and girls on the sharp end will be everso frustrated when the staffo's can't deliver what they want..! Enjoy..!

SSAP

[Paracab]

Apologies for a civvy butting in here and even more apologies for the thread creep, but, would anyone happen to know what the two Apaches that routed across Southend airport at 1415 BST today were up to ?

Of course, one would like to avoid having black Omegas arriving on the drive and I understand completely that this may be a little too sensitive a quesiton.

[Sloppy Link]

Training. It is what we do.

[Safeware]

SSAP,

Sound's like you chaps could do with an in-service software development team

Won't work when the software is COTS - not the UK's to modify.

sw

[spinstallaeropfl]

Safeware

That's my point - the COTS stuff (and that includes software supplied to the Tornado world by BWOS) is generally way behind in delivering the required capability desired by the operators. Go on, get yourself over to Boscombe and talk to TISMIT, you'll then get the full (sorry) story on company delivered software versus actual requirements... sounds like the AH world is going to re-learn this all over again... oh dear...

SSAP

[Nimbus265]

Don't worry too much about the software, and there's no chance of an in-service software development team.

The software is not COTS anyway; it's codified by Boeing, managed by WHL according to a prioritised list of user (DAAvn) requirements, and paid for by the IPT. QQ Boscombe are the ISA (them nice blokes on the far side of the runway :mad: ) . It's just a shame that financial constraints, have impacted the current build . :(

Believe me, the user has a wish list of requirements, as well as the need to implement changes to support new hardware (M-TADS for instance) - just a shame theres no cash about.

[Front Seater]

Spinstall,

Thanks for your offer to vist Boscombe - I am sure that as all IPTs are integrated (as their name suggests!) that there is a freee and open flow of information between not only Tornado, but all the other software driven capabilities. At the lower level I would also hope that the Rotary Wing Test boys that are responsible for the AH are closely monitoring anything that goes on in the Fixed Wing TP world.

However, I must agree with Nimbus - there are bigger crocodiles to kill prior to having a run away up on software. There are other issues that require Staff focus and money prior to August if the capability is truly to be developed in the Autumn.

[Ian Corrigible]

Latest JDW states that IOC (Maritime) is now scheduled for this month, with FOC (Maritime) expected in late 2006/early 2007.

I/C