Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Apache vs Tiger
YelliChink    12/3/2010 12:05:42 PM
Giving the current operating condition, i.e. High Altitude, longer range fire support, Apache >>> Tiger in many respect. Why didn't RAF choose Apache and favor tiger instead? Most US allies have Apache already, even the second class vassal state got many of them. Maybe it's time to rethink about attack helicopters.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
DropBear       12/4/2010 5:53:32 AM
Giving the current operating condition, i.e. High Altitude, longer range fire support, Apache >>> Tiger in many respect. Why didn't RAF choose Apache and favor tiger instead? Most US allies have Apache already, even the second class vassal state got many of them. Maybe it's time to rethink about attack helicopters.
 
I guess the RAF didn't choose Apache because their (British) Army chose Apache first. http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emwink.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
I think you meant why "did" they choose Apache over Tiger...
 
Probably best to ask this on the UK Forum Board. Maybe even the French Board if you want to discuss vassal states.
 
Curious.
 
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       12/4/2010 5:56:04 AM
 
Oh, by the way....if you meant Oz, then the RAAF doesn't operate whirly-birds, however, the Army does.
 
As to why we chose Tiger over Apache, I'm sure there are numerous threads devoted to this topic in archives.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       12/4/2010 3:09:07 PM

 

Oh, by the way....if you meant Oz, then the RAAF doesn't operate whirly-birds, however, the Army does.

 

As to why we chose Tiger over Apache, I'm sure there are numerous threads devoted to this topic in archives.

 

 


Thanks for correcting me. I keep typing one less A over confusion between RAAF and RAN.
Anyway, things have changed. The primary operation theater is in Afg today. I would argue that it is possible that AA can lease some Apache directly from the US Army like the way Abrams were transfered. After all, you are the only one who are operating Tiger in the region.
 
Quote    Reply

SteveJH       12/4/2010 10:16:21 PM

Thanks for correcting me. I keep typing one less A over confusion between RAAF and RAN.


Anyway, things have changed. The primary operation theater is in Afg today. I would argue that it is possible that AA can lease some Apache directly from the US Army like the way Abrams were transfered. After all, you are the only one who are operating Tiger in the region.

1) Who are the 2nd class vassal state?
2) We have Tigers in Afghanistan? Since when?
3) Doesnt Tiger have a larger power/weight ratio then the Apache?
4) Doesn't apache (except for the WAH-64) have massive problems with Hot and High anyway?
5) Since when were the Abrams leased? Personally i'd have preferred a tank with a diesel engine since it would probably be cheaper to maintain and require a smaller logistics footprint (fuel).

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       12/5/2010 12:07:36 AM

1) Who are the 2nd class vassal state?

2) We have Tigers in Afghanistan? Since when?

3) Doesnt Tiger have a larger power/weight ratio then the Apache?

4) Doesn't apache (except for the WAH-64) have massive problems with Hot and High anyway?

5) Since when were the Abrams leased? Personally i'd have preferred a tank with a diesel engine since it would probably be cheaper to maintain and require a smaller logistics footprint (fuel).





1) Not Australia.
 
2)  Since never. Tigers aren't suitable for that environment.
 
3) When no weapons and fuel tanks are attached.
 
4) All helicopters have massive problem with hot and high. Some have less than others.
 
5) Let's not to go to the specifics. AA can lease Apache on sites (both on theater and training facility in the US). In the end, it doesn't hurt buying new ones.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       12/5/2010 2:51:56 AM
The UK is Frances Vassel state as the have given up on defefending themselves and have asked France to be there protector.
 
France deploys Tigers in Afghanistan.
 
The issue we are having with the Tigers is we are insisting on the fitment of a low vis nav lighting system that wasn't originally contracted.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       12/5/2010 4:14:37 AM

The UK is Frances Vassel state as the have given up on defefending themselves and have asked France to be there protector.

 

France deploys Tigers in Afghanistan.

 

The issue we are having with the Tigers is we are insisting on the fitment of a low vis nav lighting system that wasn't originally contracted.


They sent only three Tigers for test and evaluation purposes. Until a few months ago, they accumulated only 1000 hours of flight time over Afghanistan. The whole purpose of the deployment is to get certification.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussie Diggermark 2       12/5/2010 9:50:25 PM
1. As confirmed by others, the Australian Army flies ADF's Tiger ARH's, not RAAF and not RAN.
 
2. Australian Army M1A1 Abrams MBT's were purchased outright by Australia. They were not leased.
 
3. We haven't deployed Tigers to Afghanistan for several reasons. 1. They aren't operationally ready. 2. Our Government is as weak as water and refuses to deploy capabilities our troops actually require in the field and instead is content to rely on less than perfect fire support arrangements provided by our Allies, (formerly the Dutch, now USA) mainly as a cost saving measure.
 
Cheers, 
 
AD
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/10/2010 3:15:02 PM
The issue we are having with the Tigers is we are insisting on the fitment of a low vis nav lighting system that wasn't originally contracted.

there's quite a bit more wrong with them than just the above.  lighting system issues are the least of the problems.  you won't see them flying off fatships in a hurry.
 
Quote    Reply

Arty Farty       12/12/2010 8:03:21 AM
The Tigers are replacing the Bell OH-58s. Tigers on paper was better suited than the Apaches. Most countries that went with the Apaches wanted it for an anti-armor role. Maybe the Cobra was the best option.

Best interim measure maybe the 'battle-hawk'. Fit the blackhawks with hellfires, cannons and gatling guns. 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics