RAH66/F22

[Gman]

Why did these programs get cut so short, and in the Comanche's case get cancelled?  After spending 7 billion to design the Rah66, it gets cancelled when it would cost another 24 billion for all 1200 Helo's to be built?  That's only 3 times the development cost for the entire fleet of what would have been a critically important tool on the battlefield for instant recon information, as well as the ability to approach EAD and suppress and/or destroy them far more easily than using tactical fighters.  After giving the banks the 800 billion for the bailouts, you would think the government would have found a way to to move 10% of that money to critical defense systems like this AND the F22.  Ten percent would have bought ALL 1200 of the Comanche's and ALL 800 odd of the F22's originally ordered.  Instead, the Army has no Helo other than 30 year old Tech Blackhawk's, Huey variants, and AH64's.  The Air Force has twelve squadrons of F22 instead of nearly 100.  And that's if they are all operational at any given time, which is far fetched at best.  The Navy has no new A/C in the pipeline save the F35, and the F/A18e/f will do a better job at some jobs than the F35, and the F18 is a horrible replacement for outer fleet defense for the F14.  A slow, low fuel fraction F18F with AMRAAM missiles, that albeit seem to be a great missle, but not a lot of range compared to the threats out there to the fleet's ships, what with all the new FAST and small anti ship missiles.  WTH is going to happen when the USA is put out of the power projection business, and when CVN task forces' are sent to future hot zones and all the nations threatened merely shrug and carry on.  Scary times if you ask me.

Has the US government decided to throw in the towel against future threats or something?  Where was the wrong turn made?  In the 1990's the Chinese were begging for most favored nation trading status from the USA, and were begging to borrow from the USA and its Arab allies with $$.  How did this situation reverse itself to where the Chinese are lending/buying up the USA, and are coming out with new military systems hand over fist while the USA seems to be cancelling most of the new stuff, including the RAH66, F22, and F35(pos or not).

What I've always admired about America is that despite all of its problems the military has always been the world front runner, especially when it came to advancing warfighting systems.  Firepower and its overwhelming and accurate use after all was largely an American invention.  It's going to be all kinds of suck for all of us in the western world if this stops being the case.

[Tyrannis]

the apache is still a beast. the blackhawk is still the safest helicopter in the world. and the huey is a legend that will never die(isreal proves that) why waste millions of $$$ on building stuff that is better-than when we can spend much less $$$ upgrading whatever we have now so its good-enough?
the apache is scheduled to be in active u.s service till 2030 i believe. hopefully long enough for me to become an apache pilot. 

[Nilsen]

Its the international capitalist system at work.

Just count the number of "made in the rest of the world" stamps on products in chinese households vs "made in china" stamps on products in households on the rest of the planet and the answer is given.

Some of our hopes are:

We get less greedy or start buying domestic made goods.... ehm ooops... not gonna happen
The chinese gets tired of money and stops selling goods... not so sure about that either.
The chinese litterally drowns in money and has sold all their "made in china" lifejackets and has to set fire to their money... COULD happen.
Chinese standard of living reaches a level where they no longer can sell their goods that cheap. No... they would have to stop making babies and they wont.

ZOMBIE outbreak in China unless they have already bought Milla Jovovich

[Raptor]

Please give me one solid reason why we need a stealth helicopter with a smaller payload than the Apache?

[BrownBaron]

'cause, new automatically=better, obviously.

[/sarcasm]

[Tyrannis]

Please give me one solid reason why we need a stealth helicopter with a smaller payload than the Apache?

the C.I.A may need one, but thats all i can think of.

[Gman]

Please give me one solid reason why we need a stealth helicopter with a smaller payload than the Apache?

I can give you dozens, ie all the AH64's shot down in the Balkans and Iraq 2003 etc.  Granted not ALL of them would NOT have been shot down if they were Rah66's, but certainly some wouldn't have, and it isn't just about "stealth", the Comanche has far less of an IR and sound signature, probably the lowest of ANY helo yet devised, and the payload issue isn't as major of an issue as you think, few AH64's came close to coming home with all their ordnance expended, in fact they used their canon more frequently than anything else in many cases that I've read.  The Comanche could do SO much the AH64 can't, except perhaps absorb damage, but again, I point out the first stat, and plenty of AH64's got dropped by threats they were supposed to "survive" in the last 10 years.

[B3YT]

i'm sorry but "stealth " and helicopter don't mix . you have massive whirling blades at almost supersonic speeds attached to your craft that will make it a radars xmas . even if the blades were carbon fibre the running gear  would be metal and there fore negate any "stealth " it would have .  Having your weapons on bays also seems pointless for an attack copter  . TBH helos are never going to be stealthy  therefore just upgrade the AH-64 , UH-60 and UH-1 fleets.  Speed is a helos saviour . The RN and RAF Lynx helo's are great examples of fast manoeuvrable helos .  Speed and ability to change direction quickly will keep you alive more than "stealth" in a CAS role  on the modern battle field.

 Sound is a non issue as AH-64 attacks are from a few miles away so sound isn't going to give you away to much .  The idea is to knock out the AAA with your hell fire then hit the tank with the 30mm chain gun . Hell fires can be fire   without a line of sight  by using target designators from ground forces or a high flying  fix wing aircraft ; even a little bird scout can pick your target while you sit 3-5 miles away popping of your "STAND OFF MISSILE SYSTEM"  which is what the hellfire is. 

All the "problems" you state don't really exist .  Helicopter battle tactics aren't like in games  .  It's all team work with different branches of the military working together

[TOMCAT21]

The RAH-66 was cancelled by the Army and SECDEF Gates cancelled the F-22 in favor of " The Cheaper F-35/JSF". Growing up in a family that worked in the defense industry for over 60 years, you learn that it is not always about economics or ability of a weapons system. Usually politics and short sightedness are the bigger culprits. The RAH-66 problably would have been  best to have in Afghanistan. From what I remember, the Raptor was cancelled because at the time there was no 5th Generation threat around( I guess someone missed Russia and China- Epic failure of Intel) and the fact that the Raptor was designed to be a Air Superiority fighter and not a ground attack plane like the JSF and therefore, it no use in the current conflicts of Iraq/Afghanistan which was a major short sided decision.

[Tac]

Given today's inclusion of drone technology wouldn't you say that it is highly likely the new 'attack choppers' will be drones and that air dominance can be achieved better through numerical AND technological superiority of air-2-air drones (without risking a pilot)?

[Raptor]

the C.I.A may need one, but thats all i can think of.

I do not see why the CIA would use one... There is nothing a "stealth" helicopter could see that cannot already be seen by satellites or drones. CIA more likely to send operatives in on the ground to scout out locations... a low flying stealth helicopter would be easily seen/heard by enemy combatants.

I can give you dozens, ie all the AH64's shot down in the Balkans and Iraq 2003 etc.  Granted not ALL of them would NOT have been shot down if they were Rah66's, but certainly some wouldn't have, and it isn't just about "stealth", the Comanche has far less of an IR and sound signature, probably the lowest of ANY helo yet devised, and the payload issue isn't as major of an issue as you think, few AH64's came close to coming home with all their ordnance expended, in fact they used their canon more frequently than anything else in many cases that I've read.  The Comanche could do SO much the AH64 can't, except perhaps absorb damage, but again, I point out the first stat, and plenty of AH64's got dropped by threats they were supposed to "survive" in the last 10 years.

Considering that a total of 12 were lost in Iraq, I think that shows they have good survivability. If I Recall Correctly, all of them lost were able to land and several of the pilots were able to escape, some were captured. Most of these Apaches were destroyed later by our own missiles to prevent enemy use of them. A lot of helicopters are attacked by shoulder mounted RPGs, which a stealth helo has no advantage over. If anything the Comanche would be more susceptible to small arms fire.
My point is, at this point in US history, we do not need stealth helicopters. We are not engaged with a easily defined enemy with advanced technology.

[curry1]

Why did they cancel the Stargate program?

[Gman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation_shootdowns_and_accidents_during_the_Iraq_War

From 2003 to now there were 55 Helo's of the type that the Comanche was going to replace, Kiowas/AH64/Cobras, most of them being AH64's, but some Kiowas and Cobras too, but about 60% AH-64's.  There were a dozen lost in the Balkans, maybe that's what you meant when you say 12 were lost.

My point is, at this point in US history, we do not need stealth helicopters. We are not engaged with a easily defined enemy with advanced technology.

I thought about this a while...it makes a lot of sense to me the more I think aobut it.

As for the UCAV/UAV angle, I think about this a lot too.  I know the new LCA/LCS Class "Litoral" ships like the Freedom and Indepence are tied at the hip to the new FireScout UAV/UCAV helo's.  I guess we'll see how they work out.  I've always wondered about how tough it would be for an enemy to disrupt comms to the UAV/UCAV, and what would happen to the sattelite comm and GPS systems in the event of high altitude nuclear detonation.  An entire class of weapons would be made useless without the satellites, such as UAC/UCAV and JDAM GPS guided weapons, wouldn't they?  Then what?

[B3YT]

that the thing all losses were due to RPG that are UNGUIDED and so no matter how "stealthy" you are if they see you and hit your tail your down .    it's one reason the USSR started to prefer the KA family of helos after their experience in Afghanistan  . They use contra-rotating main blades that mean they don't need a easily hit tail rotor. 

[Gman]

and so no matter how "stealthy" you are if they see you and hit your tail your down

The Rah66 was also VERY quiet and very small...there is more to Stealth than just radar cross section.  It is much harder to hear and see than what it would have replaced.  It wasn't a NOTAR, but it was a shrouded tail rotor.

Also not ALL of the helo's shot down were by unguided systems.  Just because you saw a bunch of helo's get shot by RPG's in BlackHawk down doesn't mean every helo in Iraq and Afghanistan was shot down by the same thing.  In fact only SIX of the dozens of helo's listed were shot down by RPG fire and not even half of those were the helo's I've been talking about.

I have a picture that I took myself of an SA7/SA14 missle fired at a helo behind ours, so don't give me that.