| Tango01 | 06 Oct 2016 9:35 p.m. PST |
"The Army will no longer buy future versions of the Apache helicopter, according to FlightGlobal. Instead, it will pour funding into developing the armed version of the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program, the mission to make a new helo that will fly in 2030. The AH-64 Apache entered service in 1984 as the first purpose-built attack helicopter for the U.S. Army. The Apache pioneered advanced technologies including the TADS target acquisition system, thermal imaging night vision, helmet-steerable 30-millimeter chain gun, and the Hellfire laser-guided missile…"
More here
link Amicalement
Armand |
| Mako11 | 06 Oct 2016 9:50 p.m. PST |
2030? Geez, they've got rather long lead times, don't they. Heck, we could discover anti-grav tech before then. The Apache is getting rather long in the tooth, and seems a lot more vulnerable than it should be. Perhaps they can give it better sensors, and longer-range standoff weaponry between now and then, to keep it relevant, and keep their crews safe. |
| emckinney | 06 Oct 2016 11:44 p.m. PST |
First purpose-built attack helicopter? They're disqualifying the AH-1 Cobra because it used the UH-1's mechanicals? |
| Mardaddy | 07 Oct 2016 6:00 a.m. PST |
developing the armed version of the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program Which is code for "one-vehicle fits all applications" with modules to separate missions, and the massive contract that would entail with all that the potential for a massive contract will entail. |
| StarCruiser | 07 Oct 2016 7:47 a.m. PST |
I.E. A program that will cost a fortune and yield NOTHING in return (except profit for defense contractors). |
 Legion 4   | 07 Oct 2016 7:53 a.m. PST |
Find it hard to believe that the AH-64 would be replaced at this point. Especially considering the cost … as point out. The AH-64 is still one of the best gunships on the battlefield … |
| nvdoyle | 07 Oct 2016 9:00 a.m. PST |
Probably cheaper, and easier, to upgrade avionics, engines, weapons, and maybe give it some stealth cladding (like that UH-60 variant revealed in Operation Neptune). Which is why it won't happen, of course. (Or, have an unmanned version flown from back at the FOB…) |
 McKinstry  | 07 Oct 2016 9:17 a.m. PST |
Most Apaches are AH64D's still but all are slated to be retrofitted (or replaced)to E models and further down the line get the improved turbine engines (upping power by 50%) long before any future vertical lift airframe deploys. The ITEP was just funded as a competitive project between GE and Pratt last month and is a multi-billion dollar project as the same engine will also go into all the existing Blackhawks starting, as I recall, in 2021. When my son deployed to Afghanistan in December their D's got improved avionics and rotors making their aircraft essentially 64D+ and now that they are back they are slated to convert to E's within the year. The army will be keeping, upgrading and buying Apaches for years to come. |
| Mako11 | 07 Oct 2016 11:46 a.m. PST |
The Cobra will always be the first one for me, and a lovely gunship it is. |
| Lion in the Stars | 07 Oct 2016 12:39 p.m. PST |
Once the FVL helos start into service, I doubt the Apaches will be able to keep up with them. FVL is a lot faster than even a Zulu Cobra. So I'm expecting a FVL gunship about like the Apache is to the Blackhawk. Shares engines and transmission, maybe a couple other parts. Also sharing rotors and tail boom (like the UH1Y/AH1Z) would be better still. Will probably have a rack for a couple small drones (which replaced the OH58s), whatever the follow-on to Hellfire is, rockets, and a 30x173mm gun. |
| Striker | 07 Oct 2016 1:50 p.m. PST |
So Mardaddy could it be the LCS of the air? |
| Charlie 12 | 07 Oct 2016 2:16 p.m. PST |
The FVL program is a effort to replace the rapidly wearing out helicopter fleet with 5 different designs with the same common hardware such as sensors, avionics, engines, and countermeasures. (Somewhat like the Army's latest M113 replacement and latest M109 upgrade that both use the drivetrain of the M2). Makes sense from a logistical standpoint to have some commonality across the types. And Lion is right, the FVL proposals so far push the speed and range to whole new level (should, they're based on current proven designs, not 1980's designs), making even the AH-64 look like a slowpoke. And it looks like they're taking their time to try and get it right (non-sexy programs tend to be that way; look at the M113 replacement, under budget and on time). |
| McKinstry | 07 Oct 2016 2:33 p.m. PST |
In 2030 the FVL will be a year or two behind schedule and about 30-40% over budget but by 2033-35 the first operational companies will have one heck of a machine. F-14-16, M1-2, LCS,DDG1000, CVN Ford, F-35. Defense procurement is an expensive painful process involving Congress demanding to be lied to about cost and schedule and DOD complying since bleeding edge tech always costs more and takes longer. 1,000,000,000 Quatloos says the Apache is soldiering on in 2031. |
| Lion in the Stars | 07 Oct 2016 8:59 p.m. PST |
FVL being over-budget and late kinda depends on whether some idiots demand things that are aerodynamically improbable. Like what happened to the RAH66 (and the MH60 stealth-hawk). Stealthing a helo is possible, but it sure as hell isn't cheap and even when designed into the structure is apparently murder on your performance numbers. But if the Army is sane about the design (about like the Marines were with the UH1Y/AH1Z), should be some scary things flying in 15 years. |
