Apache to lose Deep Strike Role
-
The article itself is "subscribers only", but here's an extract:
Because battlefield experience in Iraq has shown the AH-64 Apache is highly vulnerable to small-arms fire, it no longer will play a prominent role in the serviceÂ’s deep-attack mission, said the ArmyÂ’s head of doctrine.
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=0-ARMYPAPER-1665859.php
Gen. William Wallace, who commanded ground forces in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and now heads the ArmyÂ’s Training and Doctrine Command, said he would shake up the way the Army conducts deep-attack operations.
“Less integration of Apache helicopters,” more Air Force ground-attack aircraft and “more use of Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, perhaps even with unitary rounds that are long-range precision,” Wallace told reporters at the Association of the United States Army’s winter symposium in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., in February -
Maybe our defence industry can try to upgrade the armour of the Apaches.
-
Too heavy can't fly also. Best to leave deep strike roles to UCAVs lar.
-
how upgrade the rotor and the vulnerable "tail" and "tail-rotor".Originally posted by tankee1981:Maybe our defence industry can try to upgrade the armour of the Apaches. -
Perhaps they can learn from the Russians. Their equipment tend to be more robust and rugged like their Hinds. During the Soviet involvement in the Afghanistan war, none of their armoured front windscreen panels have been penetrated even though they frequent on head on attacks.
-
all the funny suggestions again
-
I think hit fast n then disappear fast is better then any amount of armour u can mount on an aircraft
-
I supposed we have to rethink our plans for Apaches assuming that we follow the US model of using Apaches for deep strike roles. I think deep strike role should be best done by fixed wing aircraft as they can strike fast and hard and leave fast too. Helicopters will be too slow to leave the scene and less agile to out manevour SAMs.
Another replacement can be with UCAVs such as the Predator B which is armed with Hellfire missiles. They are smaller and thus less detectable, both by radar and visually. Should they be shot down they will be no need to conduct dangerous rescue missions as they are unmanned. -
i wouldn't think singapore uses the apache in the same way as the USA.
-
What kind of small arms fire did the Apaches faced in Iraq? And what roles were they playing there? Since the insurgent forces don't have tanks or APCs, I am guessing the OpFor is using the usual mixture of AK-47s and RPG-7s that is so rampant there.
Also, I have a hunch that Apaches are used for loitering fire support, so it explains why they are vulnerable. Apaches are not designed for that kind of role; they are meant to be specialized tank hunters; to be proactive rather than reactive. The Americans have the AC130 Spectre gunships which can patrol at higher altitudes and hence are less vulnerable to small arms fire.