Hughes Apches Vs Westland Apache?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: warwickshire
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes Apches Vs Westland Apache?
Wondering if there were any major differences in performance of the UK's Apaches compared to the Hughes version, mainly with the change of the General Electric T700s to the Rolls-Royce RTM322's.
I heard these are more powerful, but bearing in mind the Phantom k's had more powerful engines, was interested if they made a big difference (clearly hilicopters are a differnet kettle of fish), as well as the retractable blades on the apche (more weight?) etc.
Does the UK version have greater payload, range, speed etc?
Cheers
Edward
I heard these are more powerful, but bearing in mind the Phantom k's had more powerful engines, was interested if they made a big difference (clearly hilicopters are a differnet kettle of fish), as well as the retractable blades on the apche (more weight?) etc.
Does the UK version have greater payload, range, speed etc?
Cheers
Edward
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the heavier RR engines are causing some structural issues, not sure how serious though.
Who cares how good the UK Apache is, it secured some Britsh jobs and that is all that matters.
Who cares how good the UK Apache is, it secured some Britsh jobs and that is all that matters.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FF a little more thougt before you post me thinks
"Who cares how good the UK Apache is, it secured some Britsh jobs and that is all that matters"
I think you will find quite a few folks in Afghanistan "care" about how good it works and could'nt give a f@@k about British jobs if it's not up to scratch cos we fiddled with it...........you ar@e
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
"Who cares how good the UK Apache is, it secured some Britsh jobs and that is all that matters"
I think you will find quite a few folks in Afghanistan "care" about how good it works and could'nt give a f@@k about British jobs if it's not up to scratch cos we fiddled with it...........you ar@e
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Last edited by Always_broken_in_wilts; 11th Jul 2006 at 17:36.
Oh my yes....don't talk about anything here.....absolutely not. Don't want to tell the whole world anything that they should not know.
Try this article for a start.....
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_for...1013_1_n.shtml
Try this article for a start.....
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_for...1013_1_n.shtml
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
Oh my yes....don't talk about anything here.....absolutely not. Don't want to tell the whole world anything that they should not know.
Try this article for a start.....
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_for...1013_1_n.shtml
Try this article for a start.....
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_for...1013_1_n.shtml
Exactly. If he wants info, he should find what info is online and not expect to find snippets from users on here.
SASless, we still take OPSEC and equipment performance seriously. I'm sure you remember the ways int can be gathered from your former days?
In my days it would have been considered "disinformation" by the enemy.....they would not have believed it could be true how we "really" operated.
There is plenty of open source information out there if one has the time to look.
There is plenty of open source information out there if one has the time to look.
Last edited by SASless; 11th Jul 2006 at 17:53.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SmilingKnifed
FF, you don't work in procurement/government do you?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SW England
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raising head slightly above parapet!
I have had some dealings with procuring helicopters for the MOD, you ask the relevant service what they want, they pull out a copy of Janes and say "I want that one". A full tech spec is written and given to the DECships. They look at it as if it's just yacked on the carpet, throw it away and buy the next aircraft on Wastelands production line for 5 times the price of its rival and 3 times its original Wasteland estimate.
Interesting point about the AH the Israeli name is Pehen (Cobra). I wonder if some fella got confused with that and the AH-1 and just ordered the wrong aircraft.
The only reason for fitting an RR engine and Bitish avionics in the WAH was to placate the local lobbyists.
I have had some dealings with procuring helicopters for the MOD, you ask the relevant service what they want, they pull out a copy of Janes and say "I want that one". A full tech spec is written and given to the DECships. They look at it as if it's just yacked on the carpet, throw it away and buy the next aircraft on Wastelands production line for 5 times the price of its rival and 3 times its original Wasteland estimate.
Interesting point about the AH the Israeli name is Pehen (Cobra). I wonder if some fella got confused with that and the AH-1 and just ordered the wrong aircraft.
The only reason for fitting an RR engine and Bitish avionics in the WAH was to placate the local lobbyists.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
It's called Industrial Offset, been around a lot longer than the Apache:
"The importance of offset in the global defence trade has been growing over the last two decades. Today most developed and developing nations around the World have some sort of Offset programme, either to protect their own defence industries, or to assist in the further development and enhancement of burgeoning indigenous defence industrial capabilities. In the modern defence business world offset has become an essential part of any proposed defence equipment package, with many nations increasingly paying great attention to the offset proposals contained within proposed suppliers' packages."
"The importance of offset in the global defence trade has been growing over the last two decades. Today most developed and developing nations around the World have some sort of Offset programme, either to protect their own defence industries, or to assist in the further development and enhancement of burgeoning indigenous defence industrial capabilities. In the modern defence business world offset has become an essential part of any proposed defence equipment package, with many nations increasingly paying great attention to the offset proposals contained within proposed suppliers' packages."
Funky
"The only reason for fitting an RR engine and British avionics in the WAH was to placate the local lobbyists".
I beg to differ. While the RR bit may in part be true, there is no doubt they make bloody good engines. However, if you recall, the MoD(PE) AH team didn't have avionics specialists at first because the avionic fit was simply to be that offered by the US. That is, until another project team pointed out that much of it was obsolesecent, if not obsolete. Cue frantic search for funding. Followed by an inordinately large avionic contingent (compared to other more complex projects).
Also, to infer Westland charge 3 times the original quote for anything is ridiculous, and ignores the concept of post-costing whereby excess profit is clawed back. I have personally known them to always declare up front and offset the excessive profit against the next contract amendment. This does not mean they over-estimated up front. For example, on aircraft programmes they are allowed to quote for a TI and PI kit, but if they get the TI right first time, they don't need to make the PI. That alone can exceed the allowable profit margin. Any difference between the original estimate and final price is almost always down to the MoD, especially DEC and non-technical project managers, not specifying or quantifying properly.
"The only reason for fitting an RR engine and British avionics in the WAH was to placate the local lobbyists".
I beg to differ. While the RR bit may in part be true, there is no doubt they make bloody good engines. However, if you recall, the MoD(PE) AH team didn't have avionics specialists at first because the avionic fit was simply to be that offered by the US. That is, until another project team pointed out that much of it was obsolesecent, if not obsolete. Cue frantic search for funding. Followed by an inordinately large avionic contingent (compared to other more complex projects).
Also, to infer Westland charge 3 times the original quote for anything is ridiculous, and ignores the concept of post-costing whereby excess profit is clawed back. I have personally known them to always declare up front and offset the excessive profit against the next contract amendment. This does not mean they over-estimated up front. For example, on aircraft programmes they are allowed to quote for a TI and PI kit, but if they get the TI right first time, they don't need to make the PI. That alone can exceed the allowable profit margin. Any difference between the original estimate and final price is almost always down to the MoD, especially DEC and non-technical project managers, not specifying or quantifying properly.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by giblets
HI thanks for the link, however it did not have much onthe RR powered Apache and performance, anything else appreciated.
Edward
Edward
Theres probably a reason why there isn't much info in the public domain on them. If you really want to know, phone Yeovil, Rolls Royce or Middle Wallop.
I'm sure if they want you to know, they will tell you.
I refer you to the previous;
We should always tell the press freely and frankly anything they could easily find out any other way.
