If it is written, then it's true. Toronto Star says new attack helicopters.

[observor 69]

Thanks for that G2G, nicely summed up.

 

[a_majoor]

The analogy of convoys is interesting. In WW II, Canada's Naval staff wanted cruisers, battleships and all the other heavyweight paraphenallia of a "modern" navy.

Limited resources (especially shipbuilding capability, but also skilled sailors and officers who knew how to use these things) drove Canada's navy in a very different direction; we ended up with a fleet of corvette's, frigates and small escort carrier's instead, which proved massively useful.

While there is no doubt that a modern attack helicopter is very useful and has capabilities we really want, like the big gun cruiser in 1939, we just don't have the wherewithall to get them. Armed UAV's like the Predator "B" with the ability to carry up to 6 Hellfire/BRIMESTONE or a few 70mm rocket pods might be our "corvettes", so we need to think about how to use them to our best advantage.

 

[Loachman]

I'd listen to what the actual Griffon drivers have to say, they are actually the one crowd that doesn't badmouth the machine like everyone else does

Ummm... Hi, there, G2G...

Although I have already admitted somewhere here that I don't despise it as much as I once did now that a few issues have been sorted out since I last flew it.

There's still a good reason why nobody else has bought it in quantity.

Not a bad battlefield VIP helicopter, though.

 

[Loachman]

I'm sorry Loachman, I don't mean to sound disrespectful, but you're throwing a series of strawmen arguments.

Sorry, I thought that was my experience talking.

Weapons load was addressed with an admission that follow-up munitions would likely require the intervention of other loitering fixed wing aircraft.

So an armed UAV alone is not sufficient. You need back-up fast air. And who would act as the FAC? While the UAV's watching the target at least until it's struck, who's continuing the escort mission?

Instead of this iffy mix, how about an AH team that can detect/shoot and direct fast air? It's a proven concept, too, rather than your unproven one.

If it were feasible and desireable, I'm certain that somebody with the right knowledge would be receiving a healthy salary to do it.

Rapid Maneuvre if at altitude shouldn't be necessary because if done right, the enemy would never know you were there.

Nor is it with AHs, until a reaction is required, and ditto.

To land and pick-up survivors is exactly why I suggested arming the Chinooks.

Which could well be loaded to the point where they couldn't. They're a big, fat, cumbersome, soft target too.

My point is that from altitude using thermal sensors you should be able to prove the route prior to overflight with the Chinooks better than a low level helicopter,

From altitude using thermal sensors in an AH you can do the same thing, with much quicker reaction time and greater flexibility. Nobody said that you had to be low-level. And how many Predators would it take to prove alternate routes? How quickly can one be moved over to the alternate?

There's no such thing as "proving" a route, either - which is why the call from the Kiowa was always "appears clear". No guarantee.

I continue to believe that the technology balance has shifted and with MANPADS, attack helicopters are at a distinct disadvantage in a one-on-one confrontation at low levels once you're already inside the enemy's effective range.

I don't believe any of that. Technology shifts back-and-forth. And there's no indication of a serious MANPADS threat - yet. They are not as simple and effective, under field conditions, as some think. Hellfire is effective at greater ranges than MANPADS, unless I've missed out on a recent development. And what's this one-on-one thing?

Call me skeptical - obviously - but you're trying to do a very complex and unpredictable mission with a piece of kit not designed for it and completely unsuitable.

Don't over-estimate UAVs.

Don't underestimate AHs.

Candidly, I think the following are evidence that thermal sensors from medium altitude looking directly down do provide a better angle of view than a low level helicopter and because of that altitude, you don't need peripheral vision.  All you need to see is what is below you.

Candidly, I think that my experience with IR systems (albeit not state-of-the-art, but close enough) mounted on helicopters trumps a couple of vids, but that may sound too arrogant. You can look down from a helicopter, too, and you still have peripheral vision. That's exactly what we were doing in the police helicopter business - no low-level at all.

The Chinook crew also have good peripheral vision, and there's a good chance that one of them might spot something suspicious as well. It'a a lot quicker and easier to get eyes-on from an AH in the neighbourhood than it would be from some controller hundreds of miles away, especially given the difference between what the Chinook guy would see (colour/naked eye) versus the Predator guy (temperature differences/IR). We had the same issues with the police helicopter and dispatchers. Height/weight/hair colour or make/model/licence number meant nothing to us. Educating them to give us really useful info was an ongoing process.

I've seen the same type of problem onboard an aircraft, too, between dissimilar sensors used by different operators - eyeball/IR and NVG/IR.

And here's another factor that shouldn't be discounted: Chances are that the Chinook and AH guys fly from the same airfield, have flown together, are part of the same team, and know each other reasonably well even if they don't hang out all of the time. Chances are the Predator guy doesn't have a clue who any of them are. On whom would you rather rely?

How about taking this one step further? The lift aircraft has the simpler job. Why not do that with a rotary-wing UAV? Think about that from the point-of-view of an Infantryman going into battle by air, and you may better understand my objection to attempting to protect a manned helicopter with a UAV.

isn't it true that the Chinook is actually faster than either AH-64 or AH-1 and as such the Chinook would have to slow down to allow the escort to keep up?

VNE (Velocity Never Exceed) is a number that one just doesn't break, and cruise speeds are a guideline. Aircraft configuration, weight, and tactics employed are more significant, and they will all vary. Protection does not necessarily mean playing wingman.

I really don't like to discourage creative thinking, but this is far from being a good idea - yet, and for many years to come.

 

[Loachman]

While there is no doubt that a modern attack helicopter is very useful and has capabilities we really want, like the big gun cruiser in 1939, we just don't have the wherewithall to get them. Armed UAV's like the Predator "B" with the ability to carry up to 6 Hellfire/BRIMESTONE or a few 70mm rocket pods might be our "corvettes", so we need to think about how to use them to our best advantage.

If we had the "wherewithall" to get a Predator "killing machine" with a nasty-sounding name (from the NDP-supporter point-of-view) and healthy price-tag, we certainly have the wherewithall to get a reasonably effective armed helicopter (doesn't even have to be an AH) with a decent sensor and weapons suite - which has much greater flexibility of employment as well. And I'll take the proven over the airy-fairy anyday.

 

[a_majoor]

While I fully agree with you Loachman, wherewithall includes intangibles like political will. The Leopard tank replacement saga should be warning enough. I am also aware that UAV's are not even "second best", but a different tool altogether which may provide some of the capabilities that we are looking for in this mission (http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/main.asp?view=more&issueID=13, "The Return of the Canadian Mounted Rifles". You can PM the author if you like  )

Predator B provides a capability that we want and need already (battlefield recce), so its ability to act as an armed platform allows up to add that capability quickly and easily, assuming we get Predator or a similar UAV in the near future. Predator also has lots of other uses, we might interest other government departments to go in with us on a bigger buy on a price or cost sharing agreement. The Coast Guard, RCMP, Canadian Border Security Agency and Provincial forestry departments should be interested, and we get a surge fleet if we work out the arrangements carefully. In a coalition environment, we would also have a very nice capability to compliment what our allies can bring to the table, a package led and escorted by armed UAV's along with allied attack helicopters would be a very potent and flexible force indeed.

So "if" we had to choose between armed UAV's and nothing, then armed UAV's give us some of the capabilities we need. If the choice is armed UAV's or AH; then AH by all means. In the best of all possible worlds, we should have both.

 

[Loachman]

A utility helicopter with sensor package and weapons still gives better capability for a wider variety of battlefield tasks than a UAV.

 

[RCR Grunt]

From a soldier on the ground point of view....

We always cheered and hooted and hollered whenever Apache's came to the rescue in a TIC, as long as it was American.  Thats no slight against the Dutch, they have rules to follow, but you cant see whats shooting at us from way up in the clouds, and there were incidents overseas where this was proven.  An AH doing gun runs for the ground troops gives them a warm and fuzzy you cant get from a UAV, even if you arm it with a huge miraid of mixed weapons.  When we call for AH, and you get that southern drawl back over the radio telling you he's rollin in hot, its like mom telling you everything is ok.  You dont get that from a UAV.  I only flew in choppers twice over there, one chinook and one blackhawk, and both were escorted by Apache's, and it makes you feel good.  I don't have any other technical experience or knowledge other than that which I have experienced, but thats my 2 cents.

Pro Patria!

 

[mover1]

Human factor goes a long way for morale and motivation.

A little off topic. anyone considering a UAV to deliver SKAD's or doing SAR?

 

[RetiredRoyal]

i remember on FTX in many a place when the A10's, cobras or other such machine would come in....not only heart warming, but fun as all heck to watch.

 

[Mud]

Hey RCR Grunt,

I can only hope people in charge of any purchase ask you guys what you think - politically I can't help but think  that a version of the American ARH will be favoured seeing as the Bell 407 airframe is built in Quebec.....and was'nt that really the main reason the Griffons were bought without tender?

 

[Slim]

There seems to be quite the misconception that helicopters are armoured. They are not, no, not even the Apache, armour is heavy and really not worth the weight if you take a shot in the tail rotor. They're not designed to be APC's. I don't know the Griffon's set up, but anything more than kevlar seat cushions is a waste of torque. You should be using the terrain to your advantage, not going head to head with AA.

hey Inch

Isn't the Hind D an armoured attack helo?

 

[Inch]

hey Inch

Isn't the Hind D an armoured attack helo?

Depends on your definition of armoured. If you mean the cockpit, probably (I can't say for sure), but if you're talking the whole helo a la AFV's, then no, it's far too heavy. For every pound you add in weight, you need to create the same offset in lift. In a helicopter, that translates to more power from the tranny, the more power you need, the bigger the helo needs to be just to support it's own weight. The bigger the power demands, the bigger the fuel load that's required and at ~7 lbs per gallon, fuel gets to be quite heavy, especially if you're burning 20+ pounds per minute (Sea King burn rate which has an AUW of 20500, less than a LAV3 and slightly more than an Apache).

So while Cobras, Apaches, Hind D's, Havocs, etc, do have some titanium or kevlar to protect the pilots from small arms fire, even up to 23mm in some cases, anything over a .50 cal will do a whole lot of damage to the rest of the helo. The Apache claims to be able to withstand a 23mm round in critical areas, an inexpensive, well-placed (read lucky) RPG will down the most lethally armed helo, just ask the Russians about when they were in Afghanistan. Of course the Stingers the Americans were supplying didn't hurt either!

A lot of the newer helos are coming out with Titanium rotor hubs, Cyclone being one of them, these are supposed to be able to take direct hits from 20mm rounds with no ill effects.

So while I was mistaken about the AH's being "armoured", I don't know of a helo out there can sustain a hit from a MANPAD and keep on fighting.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Depends on your definition of armoured. If you mean the cockpit, probably (I can't say for sure), but if you're talking the whole helo a la AFV's, then no, it's far too heavy.

I've actually been inside a Hind-D (No- I won't say where...).  While the skin around the cockpit and crew compartment are not armoured like an AFV, I was surprised by just how much metal was there to protect the crew and passengers. Judging by what I saw, I would say that it has earned it's reputation as a well armoured helo.

 

[volition]

I saw something the other week about a Eurocopter being made by all composite, the blades, everything!!

 

[Inch]

I saw something the other week about a Eurocopter being made by all composite, the blades, everything!!

A lot of rotor blades are composite these days.

 

[Spencer100]

I saw something the other week about a Eurocopter being made by all composite, the blades, everything!!

That is very interesting.  I will have to "google"  I have not heard of a complete "plastic" helo.

 

[volition]

Saw on it on discovery a few weeks back. The french military is testing it out.

 

[GAP]

Canada Considers Armed Escort Choppers
By DAVID ********, OTTAWA
Article Link

The Canadian Air Force may buy an armed escort helicopter or outfit its existing Griffon utility helicopters with sensors and weapons to protect the new Chinooks the service will soon acquire.
The Interim Battlefield Reconnaissance Utility Helicopter (IBRUH) would be designed to escort the Chinooks, which the Air Force sees as a critical asset.
The IBRUH project is “really in the development stage right now,” said Air Force Maj. Martin Leblanc, who as a tactical helicopter specialist has worked on the IBRUH concept.
Air Force leaders support the concept. The service’s former commander, Lt. Gen. Steve Lucas, in the last few months has spoken in favor of what he called an armed reconnaissance helicopter. Lucas retired at the end of July, but the IBRUH concept continues to be developed.
Leblanc said no funding has been assigned to IBRUH and acquisition of such a capability would be tied to the delivery of the Chinooks. The cost of IBRUH would be based on what option — either a new aircraft or modernized existing helicopter — is decided upon.
Canada is spending 4.7 billion Canadian dollars ($4.4 billion) to acquire 16 Chinook troop-transport helicopters from Boeing. Negotiations are ongoing. Military officials hope the first Chinooks will arrive in 2011, although the Defence Department is trying to arrange for a faster delivery.
Work on the Chinook acquisition, known in the Air Force as the Medium-to-Heavy Lift Helicopter, is more advanced than IBRUH, a situation that could limit some options for an armed escort helicopter, Leblanc said.
More on link

 

[Mike Baker]

If we do go and get new choppers, what would be the best to get for the Canadian Forces? They would have to work in the Arctic as well. Any thoughts?