 |
| An AH-64E Apache Guardian Attack Helicopter. Photo taken from Wikimedia Commons |
In May 2020, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on their website that the United States (US) State Department had approved the potential sale of AH-1Z Viper and AH-64E Apache Guardian Attack Helicopters to the Philippines.1 2
The AH-1Z package consisted of 6 units for Usd 450 million or Usd 75 million each while the AH-64E package consisted of also 6 units but for Usd 1.5 billion or Usd 250 million each.’The Helicopters’
Taking a close look at these two aircraft, first with the AH-1Z which is made by the American company Bell Textron Inc., it is the latest version of the AH-1 line of Attack Helicopters and was launched in 1996. It first flew in 2000 and first entered service in 2011 with the United States Marine Corps (USMC).3
The AH-64E on the other hand is made by another American company, Boeing Defense, Space and Security, it is the latest version of the AH-64 Apache line of Attack Helicopters and was first officially conceptualized in 2005 as the AH-64D Longbow Apache Block 3. It first flew in 2008 and was redesignated as the AH-64E in 2012.4
’Comparisons’
Below I am comparing the AH-1Z and the AH-64E not only with each other but also with one other Attack Helicopter being considered by the Philippines, the T129 ATAK made by the company Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI).5 6 7
EMPTY WEIGHT (EW): This means the weight with no Fuel and no Payload or Passengers, both the AH-1Z and AH-64E are much heavier with more than twice the EW of the T129. The AH-1Z though is a couple of hundred Kilograms heavier than the AH-64E in terms of EW.
MAXIMUM TAKE OFF WEIGHT (MTOW): This means the weight that the aircraft can Take Off with Fuel, Payload and Passengers, the AH-1Z is more than 50% heavier while the AH-64E is more than twice heavier than the T129.
CRUISING SPEED: This is the speed at which the aircraft can travel furthest at the given amount of fuel. The AH-1Z and AH-64E are slower in terms of Cruising Speed than the T129.
PAYLOAD: This means the maximum load the aircraft can carry with full Internal Fuel, the AH-64E has more than twice the Payload of the AH-1Z or the T129. The AH-1Z though has a lower Payload than the T129 by several hundred kilograms.
DISC LOADING: In terms of Disc Loading or the weight per square meter area that the Rotor carries, the AH-1Z and T129 has values near each other while the AH-64E has a significantly higher value than the AH-1Z or T129, over 20%, indicating that it is less maneuverable by approximately that amount.
’IFF and Range’
In terms of the Internal Fuel Fraction (IFF) or the Fraction of the Weight of the Internal Fuel an aircraft carries compared to its MTOW, both the AH-1Z and the T129 have the same value, indicating similar ranges at their MTOW carrying only weapons and no external fuel.
The AH-64E has a lower IFF than the AH-1Z or T129, but since it can carry a lot more Payload than either aircraft, it can make that up by carrying External Fuel and still end up carrying more payload.
’Weapons’
Both the T129 and the AH-1Z use the M197 three-barreled Gatling Gun which has a much higher rate of fire at 25 rounds per second (rps) than the single barreled M230 Chain Gun of the AH-64E which only has a rate of fire of 10 rps.
The M230 though is a much powerful weapon as it uses the 30 x 113 mm caliber ammunition while the M197 guns are chambered only for the 20 x 102 mm caliber ammo.
Incidentally, the M197 uses the same caliber ammunition as the A-50 Gun System (GS) of the FA-50PH Fighting Eagle Lead In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) aircraft of the Philippine Air Force (PAF).
The AH-1Z carries 50% or 250 more rounds of Gun ammunition than the T129, but the AH-64E carries at least twice more ammo than the AH-1Z or T129 at 1,200 rounds.
Both the AH-1Z and the AH-64E has 6 Pylons for Weapons and Fuel Tanks, 2 more than the T129 which only has 4.
’Radar Sensor’
All three aircraft have Electro-Optical (EO) Sensors that allow them to detect and track targets whether or night, but one sensor advantage that the AH-64E has over the AH-1Z or T129 is that it has a short range radar.
The AH-64E has the AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radar (FCR) that allows it to detect up to 256 moving or stationary Land, Air or Maritime targets out to a range of 16 km.8
Also called the Longbow Radar (LR) for short, it provides a full 360 degree coverage whereas the nose mounted EO Systems on the T129 or AH-1Z can only provide approximately around 180 degree or so of coverage.
The LR can also operate in all weather conditions whereas the EO systems don’t work under certain weather conditions. It also has a Terrain Profiling Mode which aids the AH-64E Crew in terms of Navigation at Night and/or Adverse Weather Conditions.
A similar radar is also being offered for the AH-1Z called the Cobra Radar System (CRS),9 but so far the US hasn’t used it on their Vipers, and it is Pod mounted meaning that one of the Pylons won’t be able to mount weapons instead.
’MUMT-2 Datalink’10
Another advantage that the AH-64E has over the AH-1Z and T129 is that it already has a datalink system in operation called the Manned-Unmanned Teaming – 2 (MUMT-2).
The MUMT-2 system allows the AH-64E to receive and re-transmit video and data from or to any asset equipped with the same system, like Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for example, or Ground Units.
It also allows the AH-64E to transmit and share video and data from its own sensors, and in the case of UAS, it can fully control the Drone and its weapons if necessary. This means that the AH-64E Crew can fly the Drone itself and use its Sensors and Weapons to attack a target if need be.
The advantage of the MUMT-2 system is that the AH-64E won’t have to spend much of its own time and fuel to find the targets since the Drones can do that instead. Also the Drones are stealthier since they can fly at higher altitudes, so there are less chances of a target knowing that it is under surveillance.
Having an unmanned Drone doing most of the reconnaissance also puts the AH-64E more out of harm’s way, and it enables to AH-64E to get firsthand information about the targets and situation in the area even before it gets there.
’Link 16 Datalink’
The AH-64E also has Link 16 capability, again something which the AH-1Z and T129 do not have yet. Link 16 is a long range Military Tactical Datalink used by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) that allows the sharing of Combat Data, Voice Communications, Imagery and Navigation information.
This enables the AH-64E to coordinate better with NATO Aircraft, Ships and Vehicles that are also equipped with the Link 16 Terminals. Unlike the MUMT-2 though, Link 16 can’t transfer Video feeds.
’GFAS’11
The AH-64E also has a Ground Fire Acquisition System (GFAS) which the T129 and AH-1Z don’t have. It is a system that uses Cameras and Infra-Red (IR) Sensors to automatically detect Muzzle Flashes from Firearms on the ground, plot their locations and input these data into the AH-64E’s targeting system.
The system can’t distinguish the muzzle flashes of friendly or enemy units though, hence this is best use when there are no friendly units around, or if there are, their exact positions should be known to the AH-64E aircraft.
But in enemy territory where they are being fired at, the Apache Guardian has the means to immediately strike back if needed.
’Apache Acquisition Cost’
The prices of the AH-1Z and AH-64E posted on the DSCA website are much higher than the budget of Usd 254.9 million set for the Philippine Air Force's (PAF) for Attack Helicopters.12
But those prices are package prices which includes Spares, Training, Weapons and other equipment, and the cost could be lowered if the other items included are reduced or eliminated in terms of quantity.
If we look at the actual prices that Countries sign off with on the Contracts, it seems that it is much lower than what is posted on the DSCA website. For example, in 2012 the published price for the AH-64E Helicopter offer to South Korea was Usd 3.6 billion for 36 aircraft or Usd 100 million per aircraft.13
However, the actual price that South Korea paid for in the Contract in 2013 was only Usd 1.79 billion for 36 aircraft or Usd 48.8 million per Apache aircraft.14
Same with Indonesia who was quoted a price of Usd 1.42 billion for 8 AH-64E aircraft in 2012 or Usd 177.5 million per aircraft,15 but the actual Contract Price was only Usd 498 million for 8 aircraft of Usd 62.25 million per unit.
Using those prices as references and assuming that these prices could be offered to us as well, then we should be able to buy between 4 to 5 AH-64E aircraft using our budget of Usd 254.9 million. Again, this will all depend on what the manufacturers will offer to us, and what Spares, Weapons, etc. we want to be delivered along with the units.
’Contract and AH-1Z Prices’
Just a note though that there are conflicting reports on the Contract Prices being signed for these American Attack Helicopters in various reports which makes it a bit hard to determine exactly the prices the Countries actually paid for per aircraft during the Contract signing.
It makes me wonder a bit if this is somehow done intentionally by the manufacturers for some reason. At any rate, the report I used for the prices above for the AH-64E came from the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) whose figures are a bit on the conservative or more expensive side and which I think are more accurate.
For the AH-1Z, I couldn’t find any Contract Price for new-build aircraft exported to another Country from the US, but a US Department of the Navy Budget Estimate in 2011 puts the average unit cost for new build aircraft to be at around Usd 34 million.16
If Boeing can offer us at or near that price, then we may be able to buy at least seven aircraft for our budget of Usd 254.9 million.
’Operating Costs’
As for the Operating Cost of both aircraft, the latest data from 2019 by the US Department of Defense (DOD) showed that the AH-64E’s Cost Per Flight Hour (CPFH) averaged Usd 5.8k for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) users.
The AH-1Z on the other hand cost significantly lower CPFH at only Usd 4.3k.17 Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any CPFH data for the T129 that could be used for comparison.
’AH-64E Problems’
The AH-64E though has had several problems over the years, starting in 2014 when the US Army found a Planetary Nut that had become loose on the Transmission of one unit, causing the grounding of the entire fleet for about a month until the problem was fixed.18
Then in 2015, Taiwan grounded their entire AH-64E fleet after corrosion was found on its Tail Rotor Gearbox.19 Strangely though, after that initial report from Taiwan, I couldn’t find any other article in the internet saying what happened next or how the problem was solved.
However, it took Taiwan three years later in 2018 before they could declare their AH-64E fleet as fully operational.20
In 2018, the US Army stopped the delivery of the AH-64E when they found severe corrosion and wear on the Strap Pack Nut which holds the Bolts that keep the Rotor Blades attached to the Helicopter. The problem was eventually resolved and the deliveries resumed after around four months.21
’Operators and Numbers’
While the AH-64E has had a number of problems, the AH-1Z seems to have been generally problem free so far, I couldn’t find any similar big issues with it over the years.
In terms of the number of aircraft in operation and the number of Operators, according to the World Air Forces 2019 article by the FlightGlobal website,22 the AH-1Z has been operated only by the USMC with their 84 aircraft so far.
The AH-64E on the other hand has around 908 aircraft in operation, most of which are by the US and the rest by 5 other Countries.
’Maritime Operations’
The AH-1Z is designed to perform Maritime Operations right from the start, hence it can operate easily near the Shore and on Ships. In fact Bell has been marketing the AH-1Z as being marinized at the point of manufacture compared to other aircraft like the AH-64E.
Despite its history of corrosion problems, the AH-64E has been conducting Maritime Operations recently, with the US Army operating theirs from US Navy Ships in the Persian Gulf23 while Egypt has been operating their AH-64E from their Mistral class Ships.24
Both the AH-1Z and the AH-64E can be used against Naval Vessels, but they only have short range Sensors and Weapons, making them ideal only against light defended targets or those with only short range weapons.
The AGM-114 Hellfire missiles for example that both aircraft use only has a range of 8 km. Another role that the two aircraft can do in terms of maritime operations is provide Close Air Support (CAS) just like they do on land, but for Amphibious operations.
'Restrictions?'
The US has been notorious lately after several revelations in news reports about the restrictions they put on their Fighter Aircraft like the F-16C Fighting Falcon to Pakistan and F/A-18 Hornet to Malaysia.
But as far as I can tell, these restrictions does not seem to have been extended to their Rotary Wing aircraft or Helicopters. Still it would be worthwhile for the Philippines to clarify if the US will impose restrictions on these Attack Helicopters, and if so what will they be.
’Parting Shot’
Despite being a much heavier aircraft, in terms of performance and features the AH-1Z is actually pretty close to the T129. It has more Pylons, more ammunition for its 20 mm gun and is fully marinized, but slower and carries slightly less Payload at full internal fuel than the T129.
The AH-64E on the other hand is way ahead of the AH-1Z or the T129 in terms of capability and features. It has a more powerful gun, carries a lot more ammunition for that gun, it has its own radar, it has two datalink systems already in operation, it can automatically locate enemy ground fire positions and it carries a much heavier payload.
However, the AH-64E has proven to be problematic over the years and has a higher Operating Cost whereas the AH-1Z has been pretty reliable and durable so far with a lower Cost of Operations.
Despite that though, in my opinion if the Philippines do decide to get either helicopter, I think the AH-64E is the better option since it has gone beyond just a weapons platform and has incorporated features not found on other Attack Helicopters.
 |
| An AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopter. Photo taken from Wikimedia Commons |
SOURCES:
- Philippines – AH-1Z Attack Helicopters and Related Equipment and Support
- Philippines – Apache AH-64E Attack Helicopters and Related Equipment and Support
- Second-Generation Cobras
- The Boeing AH-64 Apache
- Boeing AH-64 Apache
- Bell AH-1Z Viper
- T129 ATAK Multirole Combat Helicopter Aselsan Brochure
- AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radar
- Longbow International teams with Bell Helicopter to provide Radar System for AH-1Z Cobra
- Apache Manned-Unmanned Teaming Capability
- Apache to field Ground Fire-Detection System
- Philippines says US Attack Helicopters too expensive, seeks other Supplier
- Republic of Korea (ROK) – AH-64D Apache Attack Helicopters
- Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) - AH-64E Apache New Build
- Indonesia – AH-64D Apache Block III Longbow Attack Helicopters
- Department of the Navy, Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Estimates, Aircraft Procurement, Navy Vol. I: Budget Activities 1-4
- Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Department of Defense (DoD) Fixed Wing and Helicopter Reimbursement Rates
- Army, Boeing Team solves AH-64E Transmission Issue
- Boeing Task Force probes Apache Choppers’ Corrosion
- Taiwan's Apache Choppers to be commissioned July 11: Defense Ministry
- US State Dept. approves $4.25 billion Apache Helo sale to Morocco
- FlightGlobal 2019 World Air Forces
- Why Army Helicopters are launching from a Navy Ship
- During Naval Exercise in Egypt Ka-52 and AH-64 Helicopters take off from Amphibious Assault Ship ENS Gamal Abdel Nasser
No comments:
Post a Comment