Will7813 Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 (edited) Hi All, I was just wondering what all you rotorheads think of these choppers. Will Edited April 3, 2007 by Will7813 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
madmike Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 Lots of teething problems currently Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted December 21, 2006 Author Share Posted December 21, 2006 Nearly all A/C do though?? What do you think the future holds?? Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted December 21, 2006 Share Posted December 21, 2006 Hey Will, Good to see you over here! As far as the Tiger goes, the French/Germans have been developing it for years and it still isn't fully fielded. The Australian Army just adopted it and they're having issues with it too from what I've heard. I'm sure that it will become a viable weapons system. Heck, look at the issues the Apache had its first five years of service (and that doesn't even include development time!). The Apache started getting fielded in 1984. It wasn't until Panama in 1989 where people actually believed it could do what it was intended to. Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted December 23, 2006 Author Share Posted December 23, 2006 Hey Cobra!, I Just wanted some other opinions 'cause there isn't much out there on the Aussie Tigers. None of the websites or Magazines have done anything significant on them. (If anyone has any links that would be great!) Thanks Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GMK Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Just thought I'd pipe up here. The ARH is having some issues, mainly due to the normal problems of operating European equipment (funnily enough, designed for Europe) in the Australian climate - it is hot and to operate at the specified performance levels, you need lots of power. New engines are currently being discussed. The other big problem is the flight manual, which hasn't yet been published, which means that certification is an issue. Both of these will be fixed in time as Jon mentioned, but the biggest issue (from an operational standpoint) is that the a/c lacks an APU, which means that it will require an external power cart to start up! This is a major tactical drawback that will limit its employment significantly. HTH Greg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
a4s4eva Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 Some articles Rotorhub.comHelipower 06 Day One According to Brigadier Nick Bartels, the Australian Army is pleased with the way the Tiger introduction is going, but they are working to solve a number of issues typical of a developmental aircraft. These include software stability, excessive alarms on start-up and shut-down, cracking of the engine cowling at the attachement point and noise at the back of the rear cockpit, which they think they have pinned down to intermittent airflow through or stalling of an oil cooler fan. Overall, they are very happy with the roof-mounted sight, but there are some sofware issues here too. The Hellfire integration has gone very well so far and the service is preparing for more firing trials in September 07 that will focus on engagement of moving targets and having several missiles in the air at once. The gun is proving very accurate, but the rockets are presenting debris problems. Testing of FZ90, Hydra 70 and CRV7 rockets is addressing the issue. They like the Thales Topowl helmet, but its low light performance is not up to that of ANVIS 6 NVG, which work fine in zero moonlight, whereas the Topowl needs about 25% moonlight to be flyable on its image intensifiers. Tiger is so much more complicated than the Kiowa and Huey that new crews are given Hawk and PC9 time for the tandem cockpit, multifunction display and weapons management experience, says Bartels. There’s no problem with recruiting people to fly the Tiger, but it is proving very hard to persuade civilian deep maintenance contractors to move up to the Tiger base in remote Darwin, despite spinning it as ‘the Riviera of the north.’ They also need test pilots. Peter Donaldson Army's Tiger helicopters two years lateNovember 1, 2006 - 5:59PM The Army's new reconnaissance and attack helicopters are running between 18 and 24 months behind schedule. A Senate estimates committee heard the holdup was caused by delays in training of pilots. Head of defence helicopter systems Major General Tony Fraser said technical problems with the Tiger helicopters were now mostly solved. "That training program is behind schedule primarily because of the Franco-German delays in their program and our inability therefore to train our initial cadre of instructors in France," he said. Under the project, the army is acquiring 22 Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters to replace the Vietnam-era Kiowas. An audit office investigation of the project earlier this found that early aircraft failed to meet 14 airworthiness requirements for weight, engine power, crash resistance, ability to fly over water and weapons system performance. Major General Fraser said the engine performance was estimated to be three per cent less than what was contracted. He said the contractor had undertaken to make some engine modifications to improve performance rectify that deficiency and that would be tested next year. He said the Hellfire missile had been successfully test-fired from the Tiger. So far eight had been fired at range of between six and eight kilometres by day and night with extreme lethal precision, he said. One issue still being worked on was that of getting rid of the cockpit canopies in event of an aircraft ditching into water. Major General Fraser said the army would prefer to be able to jettison both canopies before the aircraft actually hit the water. "If they end up in the water, it is not wise to jettison the electronic or ballistic jettison because the percussions might cause injury to the crew," he said. Major General Fraser said this was an issue for Australia as the army envisaged flying their aircraft over water more than other users. © 2006 AAP Lockheed Martin Announces Successful Firing of Hellfire II Missile During French Evaluation(Source: Lockheed Martin; issued Dec. 6, 2006) ORLANDO, FL. --- Lockheed Martin announced the successful firing of the combat-proven Hellfire II air-to-ground missile by France’s Délégation Générale pour l'Armement (DGA) in Australia. The successful launch, from Australia’s Tiger helicopter, took place at the Woomera Testing Range in South Australia. The first-time gunner, a French pilot, employing a lock-on-before-launch technique, scored a direct hit with the Hellfire II missile on a target six kilometers away. “This successful firing by a French gunner, on top of Hellfire’s seven-for-seven performance in earlier test flights from the ARH, reaffirms that Tiger and Hellfire together make a formidable weapon system,†said Andy Marshall, international program manager for Air-to-Ground Missile Systems at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. “The missile’s performance in engaging, launching and impacting targets offers the Tiger a capability it has not had before and that no other weapon system can offer.†“This firing and the successful target engagement demonstrated the ease of training a Hellfire gunner, and further demonstrated the reliability and mission success of the Hellfire missile and its M299 ‘smart’ launcher,†continued Marshall. Hellfire II is fielded to the U.S. Armed forces and those of 13 other countries by Hellfire Systems, Limited Liability Company (HSLLC). Lockheed Martin performs all of the work scope on behalf of HSLLC. The evaluation was accomplished under the auspices of Australia’s Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) and the Australian Army. The precision-strike Hellfire II family includes three warhead variations, each with a semi-active laser (SAL) seeker to home in on the target: (1) the high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) missile, which defeats all known and projected armored threats; (2) the blast fragmentation (blast frag) missile, which defeats “soft†targets such as boats, buildings, bunkers and light-armored vehicles; and (3) the metal augmented charge (MAC) missile, which defeats enclosures, caves and enemy personnel housed therein, with minimal collateral damage. In addition to the SAL Hellfire II, the Hellfire family includes Longbow Hellfire—with a millimeter wave (MMW) radar seeker for true fire-and-forget and adverse-weather capability. The Longbow Hellfire has the HEAT warhead. All members of the Hellfire II family are employed in several countries throughout the world. To date, more than 1,000 missiles have been successfully launched from a wide array of platforms, including the Apache, Cobra and Tiger attack helicopters; the Kiowa Warrior scout helicopter; and the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). With more than 21,000 rounds delivered, Hellfire II is approved for international sales, via government to government or direct commercial sales. Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin employs about 140,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The corporation reported 2005 sales of $37.2 billion. -ends- and of most interest Tiger Pic's Not Aussie though) ADF Tiger Project page AIR 87 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted December 27, 2006 Author Share Posted December 27, 2006 Just thought I'd pipe up here.Both of these will be fixed in time as Jon mentioned, but the biggest issue (from an operational standpoint) is that the a/c lacks an APU, which means that it will require an external power cart to start up! This is a major tactical drawback that will limit its employment significantly. I had no Idea that it couldn't start under its own power! A4s4eva - Thanks for the articles and links. Some of those problems don't seem 'Typical' to me!! Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Hello all, Just on the APU question, does anyone know if these helos are air start or electric start? If the starters are run by compressed air I can see a problem with tactical ability when detached away from the fixed base, but if they are actually electric start like the old Hueys where the starter acted as a starter on start, then as the engine spun up at a certain rpm it became a generator. If this is the case all the helo needs is a good battery, and even if it had an APU, something has to start the APU, either stored electrical energy (battery) or stored hydraulic energy (accumulator, as in the old C-141 Starlifter). Waiting for some thoguhts on these questions. , Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 (edited) Ross, The APU is going to be necessary to power up the avionics. Without that, they'd drain the battery dry in a matter of just a few minutes. I'm assuming (probably a bad idea) that you need full avionics power to monitor the engines on startup (much like we do). If the Tiger had standard gauges it wouldn't be an issue, but since it uses MPDs like the Longbow does, there wouldn't be any way to monitor your engines during start without electrical power. The APU power gets your generators running, which allows you to power up stuff after that as well as start your engines. The lack of an APU can severely limit the operational flexibility of the platform. A GPU (Ground Power Unit) would limit the Tiger to operating from facilities where GPUs were available. Not good for an attack helicopter designed to operate in a combat area. I'm glad to hear that the other aspects of bringing the Tiger online are going better. Sounds like weapons integration is coming along well. The Hellfire II is one heck of a weapon. I'm wondering if we'll see Tigers with Longbow radars on them at some point in the future... Jon Edited December 27, 2006 by Cobrahistorian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 Hi Jon, Thank you for the reply, as I know little about the Tiger. I know there have been issues ( I have a cousin who works for DOD in Canberra and she is on the finance side of the Tiger project. You state that the avionics would drain the battery in a few minutes while monitoring start up. I have another question now. Is the Apache equipped with a lead acid or alkaline battery? From my experience servicing aircraft batteries I know that would most definitely happen with a lead acid type, but alkalines (especially NiCads) like to work hard before recharging so I'm wondering if it would be an issue if alkaline batteries are fitted to the Tiger. Just curious. Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted December 27, 2006 Share Posted December 27, 2006 (edited) We're restricted to just a few minutes on battery power to avoid heat damage to the battery. SOP is to go to the APU as soon as we're both strapped in. Also there are issues since most systems run on AC power from the generators instead of DC from the battery. Jon Edited December 27, 2006 by Cobrahistorian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 :blink: Hello Jon, Thank you for the info. Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted December 29, 2006 Author Share Posted December 29, 2006 Ross, I'm wondering if we'll see Tigers with Longbow radars on them at some point in the future... Jon Interesting thought........ Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 :D Interesting thought indeed Will, pity I don't know how to use photoshop or I might be able to show us what it might look like. BTW the post you quoted seems to have been deleted. Is there anyone out there who can show us what this hybrid would look like? , Ross Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted January 1, 2007 Author Share Posted January 1, 2007 Hint hint, there has to be a chopper enthusiast thats good a photoshop out there!!.................. Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harvs73 Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 The Tiger is only supposed to be for recon and not realy for taking out tanks and other AFV. The weapons are supposed to be for self defence and limited attack capability. The pilots wanted the Apache so they could go hunting everything whilst the ADF only needed a recon platform hence the Tiger. SO on that theory we shouldn't be seeing the longbow radar on top of it. Besides which I doubt they could be able to make it fit/work considering the problems they are having so far with the acft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Dave, No offense, but the Hellfire is NOT a defensive weapon. Tiger's already been cleared to carry them. You don't carry eight Hellfires for "self defense and limited attack". Mounting the Longbow radar would not be much of an issue, especially since there are variants of the Tiger out there with mast mounted sensors already. The reason I suggested it was the discussion of Hellfire II missiles that happened earlier in this thread. The radar variant is the Hellfire III and could be employed if it had an APG-78 on board. I wasn't suggesting all of them carry it. Heck, 70% of our Longbows don't have the radar. But the capability enhancement is incredible. Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted January 5, 2007 Author Share Posted January 5, 2007 Dave, but the Hellfire is NOT a defensive weapon. Tiger's already been cleared to carry them. You don't carry eight Hellfires for "self defense and limited attack". Ditto!! They would not have gone to the lengths to incorporaet the Hellfire 11s and M299s if they hadn't wanted an 'offensive' capability. Also note that the army is using them to replace (i'm not sure to which extent) the Kiowas (recon) and ancient huey gunships Will Quote Link to post Share on other sites
harvs73 Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 (edited) True, the Hellfire is not a defensive weapon but the aircraft is not intended to be used as a tank hunter. I was with 1st Aviation Regiment for seven years (1994 - 1998 and 2001 - 2002) whilst the selection process was in progress and the CO stated that the weapons were more for self defence than for the pilots to go out tank hunting. Yes it will no doubt be used to escort the Blackhawks and the like but the aircraft is intended for Recon primarily. This no tank hunting criteria was the biggest complaint of the pilots who all wanted to be hero's and kill tanks instead of what the main job of 1 Avn Regt is - Reconaissance. The Kiowa is being totally replaced by the Tiger in 1 Avn Regt and I beleive that there will only be a few left in the Aviation Schools. The Iriquois is being replaced by the NH90 in the transport role. In the mean time they have the little problem of a power plant that doesn't work well in Australia and needs a total redesign of the drive train (reported a couple of months ago in the news). I was at Oakey in 1998 when the demo aircraft was there (before it spudded in at Townsville) and it was most impressive watching it do a 360 degree roll. A mate of mine was in fact in Townsville when the aircraft spudded in and he was one of the first few people on the scene. Edited January 6, 2007 by harvs73 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 Dave, We're actually going through a mission transition as well (as I'm sure you know). The deep attack/anti-armor mission has gone away in favor of close combat attack and counter Insurgency. During the initial invasion, Apaches were doing the out-front recon for the 3rd ID, well ahead of where the Kiowas could reach. It makes more sense to have the Tiger as an ARH, since that's where the attack mission is going anyhow. I'm interested to see how the Tiger develops for Australia. Hope the bugs get worked out quickly! Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Will7813 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Share Posted January 6, 2007 (edited) I'm interested to see how the Tiger develops for Australia. Hope the bugs get worked out quickly! mmmm, me too. I got tickets to Avalon Airshow 07 down in Melbourne for Xmas, so hopefully they will be good enough to fly by then. Will Edited April 3, 2007 by Will7813 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.