T-129 Attack Helicopter

[Todjaeger]

I think that A-129 is a good choice for Turkey. But what do you think about South-African Ruivalk? Probably it would be a good idea for some rich countries, which don't have their own national helicopters, to buy its tecnologies? As I know, South Africa don't have enouph money to build this helicopters after "black" africans worn "white" people in politics.

As I understand it, the Rooivalk was dropped by Denel, after it failed to win the Turkish attack helicopter competition. Race had nothing to do with it being dropped.

I would also expect that part of the reason why it did not get chosen form the competition, was that at the time of the Turkish decision, there were only 11 Rooivalk aircraft, of which only half were operational with the rest requiring software upgrades.

While the programme is interesting, and in some respects could provide a very capable attack helicopter especially in harsh environments. The aircraft was designed to operate for sustained periods in rough conditions, with just fuel and basic replacement parts able to be flow in by transport helicopters, as opposed to having to operate from heliports/airfields. The fact that so few were ever ordered means that there could be significant costs to keep the helicopter operationally upgraded and relevant, as well as potential problems with maintaining the requisite spares.

-Cheers

 

[Gremlin29]

Out of curiousity, would something like the Longbow radar be useful in coastal or littoral ops? Naval helicopters themselves often have some form of chin mounted sea search radar (Telephonics APS-143 or APS-147, etc). Could a mast-mounted radar aboard an attack helicopter provide a similar search functionality, admitted a shorter-ranged one?

-Cheers

It could, the question is would such a system be of any use? What would be the purpose of the radar system? Is it being used as a sight, sensor or both? I don't think helicopters would make particularly great attack platforms against surface vessels unless the targets were very unsophisticated. Naval helicopters per your example are being used for ASW platforms and not surface threats. I would think a limited range radar for attack purposes against surface vessels would be rather optimistic against anything other than unsophisticated and virtually defenseless boats.

 

[Todjaeger]

It could, the question is would such a system be of any use? What would be the purpose of the radar system? Is it being used as a sight, sensor or both? I don't think helicopters would make particularly great attack platforms against surface vessels unless the targets were very unsophisticated. Naval helicopters per your example are being used for ASW platforms and not surface threats. I would think a limited range radar for attack purposes against surface vessels would be rather optimistic against anything other than unsophisticated and virtually defenseless boats.

What I was thinking of is in a manner similar to how the MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawks operate with AGM-114 Hellfires to eliminate FAC. While the surface search radar for something like the 'Romeo' is larger and I expect more powerful that a mast-mounted Longbow radar, I was wondering how viable that would be in a littoral environment, as a sensor and perhaps as a sight as well.

The targets would be smallcraft, engaged with missiles, rockets and guns.

-Cheers

 

[swerve]

As I understand it, the Rooivalk was dropped by Denel, after it failed to win the Turkish attack helicopter competition. Race had nothing to do with it being dropped.

I would also expect that part of the reason why it did not get chosen form the competition, was that at the time of the Turkish decision, there were only 11 Rooivalk aircraft, of which only half were operational with the rest requiring software upgrades.

While the programme is interesting, and in some respects could provide a very capable attack helicopter especially in harsh environments. The aircraft was designed to operate for sustained periods in rough conditions, with just fuel and basic replacement parts able to be flow in by transport helicopters, as opposed to having to operate from heliports/airfields. The fact that so few were ever ordered means that there could be significant costs to keep the helicopter operationally upgraded and relevant, as well as potential problems with maintaining the requisite spares.

-Cheers

Quite. I'm sure the Turks were concerned about the risks of being left with an orphan platform if they bought Rooivalk.

The T129 not only has much better export prospects (it's backed by Agusta Westland, which IIRC is the third biggest helicopter manufacturer in the world), but has enough commonality with the A129 for joint Turkish-Italian upgrade programmes to make sense.

 

[Gremlin29]

What I was thinking of is in a manner similar to how the MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawks operate with AGM-114 Hellfires to eliminate FAC. While the surface search radar for something like the 'Romeo' is larger and I expect more powerful that a mast-mounted Longbow radar, I was wondering how viable that would be in a littoral environment, as a sensor and perhaps as a sight as well.

The targets would be smallcraft, engaged with missiles, rockets and guns.

-Cheers

In low threat environments it could be done. That said, the Hellfire is not a long range weapon and rockets and guns are up close and personal. Seems it would be too easy to counter a gunship threat on the seas with MANPADS. Additonally such a helicopter is going to require substantial suport and with the short legs of a helicopter I don't know that it would make a great platform. Personally I wouldn't want to have to get to 5K from a surface vessel threat to launch a Hellfire, for rockets it's more like 3K and for guns it's going to be less than 2K, that's pretty close.

 

[Dropkick]

Quite. I'm sure the Turks were concerned about the risks of being left with an orphan platform if they bought Rooivalk.

The T129 not only has much better export prospects (it's backed by Agusta Westland, which IIRC is the third biggest helicopter manufacturer in the world), but has enough commonality with the A129 for joint Turkish-Italian upgrade programmes to make sense.

And any such Italian upgrade will be soon coming Turkey hopes.

After all, some Italian Mangustas have been in service near on 20 years. I remain surprised Turkey opted for T129 considering the Cobra option - yet the offset deal Agusta proposed was and remains second-to-none. For their aerospace industry, economy and thus politically, it was an offer too good to refuse.

From a military consideration however, was the T129 the right choice for Turkey, I'm still open to doubt.

 

[Heruamarth]

From a military consideration however, was the T129 the right choice for Turkey, I'm still open to doubt.

There were two main points considered important, technology transfer/freedom to make modifications and performance. AH1-Z was chosen in the ATAK program as it was considered the most suitable for mountainous landscape of Turkey and Turkish Army has already experience and infrastructure as it already operates AH-1P and AH-1W choppers. Later on, licensing and pricing problems and Turkey's insistence on using Turkish made avionics and electronics led to the cancelation of deal. A second program was launched, under name of ATAK II, and Agusta Westland made the most suitable offer. Though, AW-129 Mangusta way somewhat inferior compared to requirements of Turkey, AW was open for a upgrade program. Now Mangusta will be upgraded with a 5 blade composite rotor, LHTEC CTS800-4N engines, a whole new transmission and a complete new set of avionics. This configuration, called T-129, is somewhat comparable to AH-1W, maybe AH-1Z, and will definitely suit the TLF's needs.

It's actually quite early to make any comparisons, but in maiden flight, T-129 seemed quite agile and capable. Also, it will be using 70mm Cirit missiles, think of them like laser guided Hydras, so it will be more precise, I guess. No more spray and pray with 70mm missiles. Hydra, Hellfire and new UMTAS missiles are also will be carried, which makes it even more capable. As I said earlier, it's too early to make any comparisons, but on paper, T-129 looks promising enough.

 

[StobieWan]

They would be wise to avoid putting radar on this ship and learning some lessons from the the current Longbow users. The radar system is great if you're going to be fighting LARGE armor formations, otherwise it's just another piece of unused equipment that will performance limit the aircraft. So far the Dutch have been the smartest Longbow users, opting for their own RFI and eliminating the radar altogether. All these armament options make great literature for sales points but in reallity aircraft normally settle into a useful weapons loadout and most of the systems it "can" employ aren't ever used, or purchased for that matter.

I dunno - the UK has kept their FCR for use in Afghanistan - and it's apparently been very useful. You can track all sorts of surface contacts with it and it's very useful for keeping an eye on a convoy under escort for instance - I believe you can just mark off a set of targets as a no fire or a priority fire zone quite easily.

 

[Gremlin29]

I dunno - the UK has kept their FCR for use in Afghanistan - and it's apparently been very useful. You can track all sorts of surface contacts with it and it's very useful for keeping an eye on a convoy under escort for instance - I believe you can just mark off a set of targets as a no fire or a priority fire zone quite easily.

The targets that you can track are software dependent and I wont go into what it can actually do but as I said, it's made to take out massed armor/vehicle formations and anti aircraft systems. The only use I can see for the FCR in A-stan would be to utilize GPMR mode for terrain avoidance.

 

[Waylander]

I remember reading exactly this about the UK Apaches. They used their Radars in terrrain avoidance mode on night/bad weather marches while using concealed routes to the target area.

But maybe the Brits, with their stronger engines, weren't as much hindered in their performance by the Radar as the other Longbow users.

 

[Heruamarth]

I guess all the flight tests are completed. What about firing tests with indigenous umtas and cirit missiles Any info...?

First batch of early production units are to be delivered June - July 2012, with ASELSAN avionics and conventional Hellfire and Hydra capabilities. These will be possibly designated T-129A, and there is a possibility of being retrofitted with UMTAS/Cirit launchers later on. Second batch is expected to roll out of production line early in 2013, designated T-129B, with ASELSAN avionics and Cirit launcher implementation.

As far as weapon systems, Cirit is about to begin serial production within next months according to sources. Cirit have successfully tested on AH-1W platform, hitting a moving target at 60 kph, while being fired from a heli flying about 200 kph, destroying light armor as expected. Reports indicate chances are high for destroying a 3x3 m target 8 km away. But it needs further testing on T-129 platform before being fielded to Army Aviation Units.

About UMTAS, I suppose there is still a long road, maybe couple of years before we see it is actively used.

 

[Gremlin29]

I remember reading exactly this about the UK Apaches. They used their Radars in terrrain avoidance mode on night/bad weather marches while using concealed routes to the target area.

But maybe the Brits, with their stronger engines, weren't as much hindered in their performance by the Radar as the other Longbow users.

Yeah I can see the merit in this, the FCR does a pretty impressive job painting terrain. As far as the engines go, the Rolls Royce is more powerful than the GE 701 series but the real problem is the nose gearbox limits which prevent the airframe from using all of the available power (torque) hence the RR is governed down. The advantage then becomes one of engine temp limiting is less an issue on the Rolls.

 

[swerve]

The targets that you can track are software dependent and I wont go into what it can actually do but as I said, it's made to take out massed armor/vehicle formations and anti aircraft systems. The only use I can see for the FCR in A-stan would be to utilize GPMR mode for terrain avoidance.

The trackable targets are software dependent? Well, software can be changed. Depending on how it's written, that can be hard or easy, but if the people who did it knew what they were doing, target characteristics should be data, not hard coded, & therefore relatively easy to change. The UK wants to add additional target sets? Fine - generate a new set of target characteristics, & upload them. Would cost money, & take time (mostly in defining & testing the new data set), but not much compared to the immense value which would be gained. Once done, it would be usable in any & every other low-intensity conflict Apache is used in.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The trackable targets are software dependent? Well, software can be changed. Depending on how it's written, that can be hard or easy, but if the people who did it knew what they were doing, target characteristics should be data, not hard coded, & therefore relatively easy to change. The UK wants to add additional target sets? Fine - generate a new set of target characteristics, & upload them. Would cost money, & take time (mostly in defining & testing the new data set), but not much compared to the immense value which would be gained. Once done, it would be usable in any & every other low-intensity conflict Apache is used in.

the issue is that the track management software is built to use defined and shared metadata standards - eg atypically MIL-2525b or MIL-2525c if BFT is involved.

adding additional objects with "additional" metadata requirements then needs to conform if its going to be shared with partners and to avoid blue on blue issues etc..

eg GIS and INT already have multiple accepted metadata standards in use and accepted by coalition partners like 4 and 5 eyes, NATO etc, so one would question why any additional requirements were not raised in the approp international forums - in this case the last one was Feb in the UK.

the common metadata and endorsed requirement impacts on all assets, not just the GIS, INT, planners and shooters etc... and as there are more and more additions coming into track management (such as unstructured feeds from civilian agencies) I would imagine that the UK has run this past all "friends" at the moment. (and vice versa as we all have similar issues)

some of the reaons why we have huge headaches in colaition events at the moment is because some partners have COTS track management in place and can't easily talk and share material with others. eg their additional metadata tagged objects can conflict with the established and already in use sets and can invite "ugly" reactions from supporting/defensive carrying elements

 

[StobieWan]

well, I was referring more to the ability to select out an area as a no-fire area rather than particular target sets, like "this sort of a radar return is likely to be a Husky, this one is a Jackal" etc.

From the point of Afghanistan, I know the UK have kept their Longbow fitted, unlike the US - partly because they can (more power, etc) and partly because according to reports, it's useful.

Since the taleban tend to be either on foot or using transport that all the collateral damage magnets use, I can only guess at which ways the WAH pilot/CPG team are finding it useful - but I'm guessing drawing off a pie shaped wedge "north of the river bend" or whatever to mask out any shots on friendlies would be one such way forward. Terrain following and terrain mapping would be another.

 

[Waylander]

Well I also read that it made tracking allied convoys easy while searching the surroundings for hobbits (aka Rebels).

But aa Gremlin sais they are not that much concerned about the hot and high nature of the Afghan theater of operations.

 

[hopeful73]

As far as I know, Turkey plans to integrate MILDAR (Meteksan's MMW radar) radars to T-129 ATAK choppers. Is this new radar going to be capable like LONGBOW radar?

 

[Heruamarth]

Yes, MILDAR is a milimeter wave radar, so it's expected to be something comparable of Longbow.

 

[Gremlin29]

The FCR was setup for deep strike missions targeting vehicles. Threat sets are loaded into a user module, it's fairly simple to change the module but the load is theater specific and not just made up by the pilot, or the unit for that matter. As far as priority fire and no fire zones, we only use them as a graphic to fly around, or even to hold on a VOR during instrument flight. Put 8 D models (a couple would be Longbows) on a deep strike mission with 8 or more RF missiles and the PF and NF zones become a useful tool.

My point regarding the radar is that it sees everything it can see, but only classifies certain data as graphical targets. Keeping track of a convoy visually day or night is childs play, I can't imagine ever needing the FCR for this task and it would in fact be the most cicuitous possible method. No saying you didn't hear what you heard, I'm just trying to relay the reallity of it's use.

 

[Heruamarth]

Hopefully I'm not interrupting discussion on Apache, but shots been fired in Eskisehir, T-129P6 have fired its first 20 mm cannon for the first time, on 2nd December 2011.

Here is a near full length video of testing session.

T-129 ATAK P6 - İlk Atışlar - 02.12.2011 - YouTube