Main difference between Tiger (EC) and Longbow

[uuname]

I'd be interested to hear if the Aussie's are experiencing problems with their Tigers, nothing heard thus far in the public domain?

They are quite late, and payments were suspended at one point. This was blamed on overseas problems, rather than the local systems.

The missiles do work, but the german version has different missiles (and a different gun, AFAIK) so it may not be much of a comparison.

I recall reading that the French were considering using the hellfire after the Australian success with it, which I found rather surprising.

Here's a link I found:
Australian Government, Department of Defence

 

[Waylander]

Jup, the German UHT Tiger is going to carry PARS 3 (Trigat LR) as it's main ATGM.
As this missile isn't in service yet HOT3 is also integrated.
I have been on the range when a UHT Tiger performed a test shooting.
At least with HOT3 they seemed to hit what they aimed for...

The UHT also doesn't has an integrated gun like other Tiger versions and so relies on a gun pod if one wants to use a gun.
There have been reports of problems with the gun pod (the mentioned bad accuracy) but I have no idea if they solved the problem.
It is the first time I hear of accuracy problems with the 7,5inch rockets but who knows. may very well be a media thing.

The French barely managed to get the handfull of Tigers operational for their A-stan deployment and they literally scratched the bottom for them.

One shouldn't blame the industry completely for the slow introduction. As with the EF the Bundeswehr tends to be not the fastes at introducing new kit.
Part of this "problem" is that the Bundeswehr likes to perform some sort of in-house introduction. Meaning that it wants to be able to do everything by themselfes in contrary to other countries which also use alot more help by the industry.
The EF again is an example for this with the UK being at one side of the scala and Germany on the other side.
One can argue that introduction is faster with the UK way but the Bundeswehr is more independent from industry which is also not always a bad thing.
Nevertheless I also would like to see them enter service faster.

The NH90 even more than the Tiger.
I assume the NH90 if deployed to Afghanistan could take some strain from our CH-53G fleet.

I bet Kato and others also have something to say about this topic.

 

[dragonfire]

Don't cheapen out on important things like EW and self protection systems, in order to give the appearance of a large and powerful force.

I'm not denigrating the Indians, but they were facing mostly an IR guided MANPAD threat. That level of threat hasn't stopped Western helos in Afghanistan or Iraq or Bosnia etc, because they invest heavily in force protection measures designed specifically to address this threat.

If you don't, don't expect to be able to face a credible air threat.

Simple as that.

A very valid point, even if one might add that the threat facing the Indian helicopters was markedly higher due to the specific circumstances - an headlong assault against fortified positions on peaks over 5000m manned by infantry with decent MANPADs.

The IAF's challenge was that there was no conventional structures for targeting, the biggest structure was a hangar which could take a single helo, apart from which it was just tents and fortified bunkers. The altitude was another major challenge the intruders were at above 2700 mts to above 5000 mts in most places, the only armed helo which could reach that altitude was the mil mi-17, of which one was taken down by three stingers resulting in loss of life of the crew, the downed craft was without protection systems too. Post this incident the IAF stopped using helos in an offensive role and shifted tactics to using LGB's from high altitudes from Mirage-2000s.

Some of the IAF's helos have flare dispensers, apart from which i am not aware of any other self-protection systems on them, would appreciate what kind of such measures are prevalent today, esp with new helos like the HAL Dhruv and 80 new Mi-17 being bought by the Indian Millitary, apart from which the HAL is also developing 3 more copters for Millitary use namely the Light Observation/Utility Helicopter, the 10 ton class Medium Lift Helo for the Navy and the HAL Light Combat Helicopter, also the purcahse of 20 Attack choppers (apache and tiger being frutrunners) is on the anvil, such systems of EW and self protection systems can be deployed on the new acquisitions rather than upgrading existing inventory

 

[dragonfire]

Depends what the requirements are.

If they are looking for a larger transport helo, MH-60 Blackhawk, NH-90, MH-47 Chinook and EC725 Cougar all have special operations features and variants which could fulfill the need well.

If a smaller COIN/CT insertion type helo is sought, the MH-6 "Little Bird" or the newer AH-6, still under development, might be suitable.

The "little birds" are used by the 160th "Special Operations Aviation Regiment" (Nightstalkers) and commonly fly "Delta" operators around.

Horses for courses really and unlike the USA, most Countries tend to have to make do with using their tactical transport helicopter fleet, sometimes modified with some "Special" operations features, as Australia has done with her CH-47D+ Chinooks.

Our Chinooks were "standard" D model Chinooks, that have been upgraded with some equipment from the "G" model Special Operations model CH-47 Chinook, for service in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Likewise, our soon to be ordered CH-47F Chinooks, will likely carry some or all of the same Special Operations, specific equipment

This tends to be the most common route taken, by those who can't afford such a mission specific fleet of aircraft.

My motivation behind asking for inputs is this image which has stuck in my mind of this huge IAF helo from which NSG operators were fast ropping down during the Mumbai terrorist attack on 26/11. The helo was huge (probably Mi-17/8) and it was on top this Jewish Chabad house which was on contrast looking smaller than the helo

However i guess the HAL Dhruv which has been inducted into the Army can be used for the same purpose not the same load but atleast it should be less noisy. I think India is trying to indegeniously develop it's own Heli capabilities except for the most advanced combat helos. I did some comparison and I realized this for eg.. The black hawk can carry 14 ppl - the Dhruv can do 12, NH-90 - 20 - the Mi-17 can do upto 32 and am sure the MLH when it's up and running will be able to do 20 because it's in the same weight category, Eurocopter 725 Cougar can do 29 the Mi-17 32, The only copter which i didnt see matched was the MH-6/AH-6, but probably if the LUH will be armed it might be able to so the same role

A comparison like this should sure invite a lot a criticism over a over simplified point of view - but pls hold on ppl

 

[kato]

I assume the NH90 if deployed to Afghanistan could take some strain from our CH-53G fleet.

Quite some time to go. LTHRgt 10 was supposed to get the first operational NH-90s last month - postponed, without fixed delivery date (but it's measured in months, not weeks). And the BMVg expects the first NH-90s in Afghanistan in 2011.

2011 is also the year the BMVg expects the Tiger to be operational with the Bundeswehr.

 

[A.Mookerjee]

In the scenario which I see the Apache Longbow, I feel that the gunship is not as manoeuvrable as it should be. In Afghanistan, if some tanks are accompanied by foot soldiers with stinger missiles, the Apache is a sitting duck. The Apache is generally a cold war weapon, which is supposed to be used against massed tank formations. The 'Hellfire Missile' is synonymous with the Apache Longbow. The helicopter gunship must have advancements in aeronautics, and must not hinder the natural aeronautical capabilities of the helicopter. What is the ideal helicopter gunship? One which has high speed, is very manoeuvrable, (which is the prerequisite for a helicopter), and has a long range cannon, which is very accurate, apart from being armed with heavy machine guns, and quite a few of them. The anti- tank capabilities should also be considerable, and the gunship should also have some anti gunship missiles, for combat with other gunships. I do not believe, that the aeronautical capabilities of the gunship has been advanced, as it should be.

 

[riksavage]

In the scenario which I see the Apache Longbow, I feel that the gunship is not as manoeuvrable as it should be. In Afghanistan, if some tanks are accompanied by foot soldiers with stinger missiles, the Apache is a sitting duck. The Apache is generally a cold war weapon, which is supposed to be used against massed tank formations. The 'Hellfire Missile' is synonymous with the Apache Longbow. The helicopter gunship must have advancements in aeronautics, and must not hinder the natural aeronautical capabilities of the helicopter. What is the ideal helicopter gunship? One which has high speed, is very manoeuvrable, (which is the prerequisite for a helicopter), and has a long range cannon, which is very accurate, apart from being armed with heavy machine guns, and quite a few of them. The anti- tank capabilities should also be considerable, and the gunship should also have some anti gunship missiles, for combat with other gunships. I do not believe, that the aeronautical capabilities of the gunship has been advanced, as it should be.

The Apache is far from being a sitting duck! You need to take a serious look at the technical specifications of the Longbow model. The latest version is designed to operate above the ceiling range of existing MAN-PADS, this coupled with the standard ECM fit further reduces the threat posed by the current generation of hand-held missile systems such as Strela and Stinger. Unless I'm wrong not a single Apache has been shot down by a MAN-PAD in A-stan, compare that to the casualty rates of the Hinds during the Russian occupation, which where driven from the skies by Stinger armed insurgents.

With the planned introduction of smaller munitions and semi-active laser seeker hydra (70mm) missiles the Apache will continue to remain the predominant attack helicopter in service today. Experience has shown that the heavy weapons load of the Apache and ability to turn on its own axis at speed coupled with its all weather surveillance capability means it's still remains the weapon of choice to fulfill the close support role by ground troops.

Helo's with increased speed and maneuverability will not deter a MAN-PAD which is designed to shoot down fast jets, you need to ensure you fly outside the weapons range or be confident with the ECM package. The pilots biggest concern in A-Stan is heavy calibre anti-aircraft guns. Even these have a finite life-span because as soon as they engage an Apache, the wingman flying picket invariably destroys the gun and crew in double quick time.

Until we see laser beam riding hypersonic MAN-PAD's such as Starstreak, which are impervious to ECM the Apache has nothing to worry about. And even if these arrive in theatre the Apache's current MO is to operate at a height, which makes use of such systems redundant.

 

[redsunlee]

Thanks for the suggestion, I wish it had worked.


property internet management software project document asset This internet management software is perfect for your document and web company property internet management software project document asset