The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - December 4, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Marines Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?
interrested 2    5/5/2004 3:52:17 PM
Can somebody please tell me why the marines have chosen to get these big upgrades?

It seems to me that the 412 EP 4 bladed rotor could have been used/mounted on the existing AH-1W without any problems.

Yes, ofcourse onther things needed to be corrected to,
(glass pit, gps, radio's, sensors) but my guess is that the current Ah-1w is still pretty capable and and simpler upgrade could yield 90% of the capabilities at far lower costs.

-For example, a cots palmtop + gps can be used as moving map display.
-Commercial programmable radio's are available to:
1. Get a datalink capability, it's more or less a question of the right protocol's
2. Secure radio transmissions can be easiliy created, think scramble data transmissions.
- Cots digital sensors, a 15 Mpixel camera will get you beautifull pictures.
- Cots CPU, yes I know they are not hardend. But the current mil spec 286 (f22) cpu's have about 0.0025 of the procerros power of the current pentiums. So you degrade the procerros to about 300mhz instead of 3000. You're still going to be dozens to times faster and cheaper. Current memmory/HD size, video compression capability, USB , etc etc...all cots goodies the militairy can only dream of.

I heard some daft thing that they use a cartridge to upload date into the F15E. 2 MB. Gee my current usb stick has 512 MB at only 100 euro....see what I mean?

Anyways, I just wanted to know what you guys think of the AH-1Z/y upgrade.

PS, another idea could have been a navalised AH-64. They now have blade folding available. So u only need to move the rear tailwheel to the front and you're done. just like the UH60 seahawk.

the common platform (woth army) would be very bennificial. I really wonder if the development program+purchase of the AH-1Z isn't costing more than just the purchase of the AH-64D + minor upgrades.
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
fullamongo    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/5/2004 3:54:50 PM
The rule is: you spend all your budget or they'll cut it next year.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/5/2004 6:30:12 PM
Alot of the reasongs for the upgrades insteadojust buying an Apache have to do more with more than just unit cost. As I undserstand it itstill is going to cost less and require less maintenance effort per flight hour for a AH-1Z than a AH-64D. While a lot of off the shelf commercial electronicsare OK for grunt use. The military gets a littl more picky when they start sticking stuff in Aircraft so they have to go with what has gone through the lengthy testing and evaluation process. That is why your newswest miltary aircraft generally uses technology that is about 5 to 10 years old.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/6/2004 5:04:08 AM
As far as I understand the situation: The marines had a lot of AH-1 getting pretty worn and with so cluttered a c@ckpit, the pilots lost situational awareness just strapping in! The obvious choice was a variant of the Apache, but that is a beast that needs pampering and a brain surgeon to get the compass working. So the practical marines decided to tear the AH-1 apart and see if there wasn't a bolt or two, that might be usefull. All helicopters are maintenance-heavy, but the Apache should be in a class all by itself, as far as I've heard.
 
Quote    Reply

interrested 2    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/6/2004 8:18:28 AM
So why the new main rotor and tail? They 412 rotor could have been used and just strapped on. The new ones are probably more efficient. but is it worth the cost?
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/18/2004 5:10:14 AM
another fact to consider: when any aircraft in US service gets a considerable amount of upgrades and improvements (NOT Service Life Extension Programs and refurbishing), it receives a change in its designation. Many of you are right in assuming an upgraded ("maxed out"?) Cobra to be more cost effective than re-equipping the entire USMC logistics system to handle Apaches. And there is the limitied parts commonality between Hueys and Cobras. Although the Cobra is covered in "paper thin" sheet metal, it has been discusses that there is sufficient power in the newer engines to "at a future date" have sufficient Kevlar-type armor sheets installed to give the pilots some small-arms protection. Since they are running out of designation letters, any such modifications would be designated as AH-1Z Block XX(?), kind of like how F-16's are done: one nation's F-16C is not always identical in options to another nation's F-16C. Cobras and Hueys are the same way. I wonder if it would be cost effective for The Corps to have an upgrade that borrows much of the Comanche technology shoehorned into the Cobra, instead of new-build Apaches.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   5/25/2004 5:49:27 PM
One of the benefits of the AH-1Z/UH-1Y program is th eincreased commonality of parts between the two. I do not know if you would have that same commonality with the 412.
 
Quote    Reply

Cobratester    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   6/15/2005 10:41:41 AM
Why a whole new rotor system? In a military environment the 412 rotor system is far too lightweight. The civilian rotor system was not designed to take small arms fire let alone middle weight rounds. The Marines insists on the rotor system being able to survive a large shot from a weapon, hence the need for a new rotor system. Also the new rotor system used newer technology than the 412 rotor. And if that isn't enough to convince you...the 412 rotor system is designed to carry around a roughly 12,000 pound aircraft, the new cobra is going to be more like 18,000. at some point too much weight would make a 412 rotor just break off.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Why Ah-1Z and Uh-1y?   7/30/2005 11:29:44 PM
Heard from somebody that the Corpsis going for new UH-1Y instead of just rebuilds of older airframes.
 
Quote    Reply

jae    War industry   12/5/2006 9:39:16 AM
The US has to maintain a viable defense industry.  In the 60s and 70s Bell dominated the US Army aviation (UH-1, AH-1).  Recently, Sikorsky (UH60, CH53) and Boeing (AH46, CH47) rule.  Bell Textron's domination is dying away.  Therefore, the US government has to maintain a balance so that competition is kept alive.  This is why the Marines get the upgrades UH-1Y and AH-1Z.
 
We even keep the anti trust allegations away by selecting the EC-145 as the new LUH-145, a German helicopter which fuses the old MBB BK-117 with French Aerospatielle glass canopy under EADS.
 
Quote    Reply

jae    Tail roto   12/5/2006 9:54:57 AM
Does anyone know why the early UH-1B to UH-1H had the tail rotor on the port side then for the UH-1N switched to the starboard then now UH-1Y has it back on the port side?  The Bell 412 has it on the starboard side.
 
Don't tell me its tractor pull something or rather about the Japanese licensed built models which doesn't explain a thing.  Does it have something to do with counter torque and bigger engines/
 
Quote    Reply

samiam       10/22/2008 9:48:09 PM
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy