Attack Helicopters

[Tempest]

As far as the Rooivalk goes, when I was working as a journalist in South Africa, there were mumblings about the software integration on the machine. Apparently some of it wasnt working and this was proving to be a real problem. Also it's very heavy, dry weight is heavier than the Apache.

The software problems are not suprising... as the Rooivalk's targetting system is still something of a mystery, it appeared at a time when south Africa was still under international arms sanctions. But it's thought to be a hybrid of Israeli and French technology, possibly using commercial police IR tracking systems for example.

They still don't talk about.

Having said all this, I really like the Rooivalk, very impressive on air displays.

I'm suprised countries like India, Cuba and so havnt brought it. China was considering it at one stage as well.

[GarryB]

"I always thought those koaxial helos were louder. "

Umm, yes, If you compare a 10 ton helo with 4,000shp of engine power with a huey of course it is going to sound louder. A better comparison would be to compare it with another helo with a 5 ton lifting capacity.

The tail rotor actually makes a lot of noise on a conventional helo and this noise is removed when it is removed.


"- Rotorhead construction is much more complex.
- You aso loose effeceny because of counter rotating rotors ad the resulting disturbances
- no mast mounted sights
- higher machine
- louder"

The rotorhead is more complex. But the loss of the tail rotor system saves space and reduces vulnerability.
The Ka-52 has a Mast mounted radar.

Height is a factor.

It is quieter when compared with similarly powered aircraft.

The main limit is maximum speed.

The two sets of rotors reduces vibration.

[seahawk]

Ka-27 and a Cougar should compare well and the Ka-27 was without question much louder.

[mike currill]

Originally posted by EWR303
Wasn't Turkey interested in the Kamov? I thought that was why it was redesign into a tandem layout verses the side by side layout for the two seater.



Was this a major decideing factor (maybe pressure from US) or was there more such as the Roovialk lacking in capabilities when compared to the Apache? Did Britain get the Longbow? I could see this limiting the Roovialk. Have there been any attempts to mount a mast radar on the South African design?

Not sure why it didn't make it but a point that was made was that they were also considering the Eurocopter Tigre but dropped that too. Mind you I do know the reason for that is that it was not fitted with a gun, Eurocopter said it was manoueverable enough not to need one forgetting that the reason for a gun on this type of helicopter is to give you another choice of weapon without having to call in another aircraft

[Steve Touchdown]

Mike, the HAP & HAD variants of the Tigre both have 30mm chin-mounted GIAT guns.

It's only the HAC/UHT anti-tank version that doesn't have a gun fitted...and I'm not sure anybody will end-up getting this version anyway. I haven't seen a formal statement but I have heard that the French ALAT are going to opt for the HAD version (as Spain and Australia have) and the only confirmed order from the Germans so far is for what they designate as the HCP which also has the 30mm gun fitted.

Best regards


Steve ~ Touchdown-News

[seahawk]

The germans have ordered the UHT variant. This has no gun and the Bundeswehr will get exactly that variant.

It will be armed with :

- up to 4 Stinger AAM
- up to 8 HOT3

or

- up to 8 PARS 3LR

or

- up to 32 unguide rockets

or

- 12,7mm gunpod with 400 rounds

[Steve Touchdown]

Thanks, Seahawk

I'm just reading a Eurcopter PR release and you're right: the Germans have stuck with their original choice of the UHT (ie the one without a gun turret). What I can't seem to confirm from various releases is if/what the next order will be. It reads that the "first 80" for Germany will all be UHT: is that how you understand it too?

The French order now seems very confused: they also ordered an initial 80 examples but of the OTHER variant (HAP fitted with a gun) but I've now just read on the French DGA site that the first 43 will be the HAD version! Eurocopter communiques dated as recently as June/July 2003 still mention both HAC & HAP variants...but the French ALAT definitely seem to want to go the way of a single version ie the HAD!

So could we end up with a situation where NONE of the German HEER Tigres have a gun fitted...but ALL of the French ALAT ones do!?

Best regards and thanks for the correction


Steve ~ Touchdown-News

[Tony Williams]

Germany may be waiting for the Mauser RMK30 recoilless 30mm cannon to be ready. This has been specifically designed for helo and similar applications, and the rounds carry considerably more punch than the GIAT 30mm gun.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum

[seahawk]

Tony is right. That is exactly what I have heard inoffically.

But given german weapon procurement style I bet they buy the second batch as UHTs and retrofit the gun to the whole fleet later on.

I really hope they will go for that gun with the second batch. But the main question will be : Is there a second batch ??

[ink]

Just thought I'd get in on this very well balanced (flame free) thread by saying that I love the Mi-28N (if that remains its designation).

I think that its easily the best Russian attack helo out there. I love the wide varriety of warheads available for its AT amarment and the fact that it can be effectively used day or night. I don't like the Ka-50s inability to fly night missions - its way too limiting for a squadron to only be available during the day. I don't really see why the Havoc wasn't Turkey's choice for their attack helicopter - I'm sure that if suitably fitted with Israeli avionics and addapted to be able to use western weapons only the Longbow Apache could seriously contend against it (while the Z varriant of the Cobra could probably give it a reasonable run for its money too I think the Havoc would win out).

I realise that its drawbacks (weight and price) are something which customers take into account but they are easily out weighed by its advantages. Basically Ataka missiles have such a wide varriety of available warheads that no target exists which is a problem for it.

Question: Why is it that the Ka-50 and Mi-28 are always displayed with differing AT ammarment? I suspect it has to do with bureau allegiance to different missile producers but even so, wouldn't it be possible to modify either or both helicopters to be able to fire both the Ataka and the Vikhr?

[EWR303]

Between the Ka50 amd the Mi28, I too chose the Mi28. Although I must admit that the Ka50 is a very intimidating machine. I read somewhere that the Mi28 has a "space" that can accomodate two or three people. This could be used to pick up downed crew members or may insert commandos. I wanted to verify that this is true. I am attaching an image (drawing) of the Mi28. I drew an arrow to what I assume is the hatch to the compartment. I tried to find a photo, but could not located one that showed this are clearly.

[Steve Touchdown]

HAD Tiger - The Future Combat Helicopter of the French Army

France shifts its choice to a multi-role helicopter

The role of the combat helicopter is being dramatically reshaped by the new geostrategic situation in the world, and by its military consequences: the disappearance of the tank threat due to the collapse of the eastern bloc, and the increasing number of regional conflicts. This radical mutation has prompted France to completely re-evaluate the configuration of the Tiger helicopter for the French Army Air Corps (ALAT). The HAP and HAC versions could give birth to a single and unique version: the HAD Tiger as confirmed by General Marescaux, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the French Army in his interview.

The HAD, or support suppressor version of the Tiger, is a multi-role platform, which is a synthesis of two helicopters designed for distinct roles: the combat support helicopter (HAP) and the anti-tank helicopter (HAC). The French Army has reframed its choice for the future combat helicopter, and its technical and operational characteristics, by selecting the HAP as the basic version. The HAP will then be transformed to give it a greater multi-role capability, initially by two major modifications, and by a third modification the army would like to have, but in a more distant timeframe.

The objectives of the first two modifications are to make the HAP roof-mounted sight capable of firing all types of armaments, including the anti-tank weapon, and to integrate the TRIGAT and HOT anti-tank firing function. The basic HAD configuration will have a very complete and efficient panoply of weapons. In addition to the 30 mm gun – considered to be the best in the world – the Mistral Air-To-Air Missiles (ATAM) and the rocket pods, the HAD will be able to carry the anti-tank weapons that were previously for the HAC only. The third modification is to add a system that can detect, acquire, automatically classify and process ground and aerial objects. According to the French Army Headquarters in Paris, this system will give the HAD a new capability. General Marescaux, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the French Army, explains, “Based on exploratory development studies, this system would combine the advantages for the crew of a panoramic 360° view of the battlefield, and of a very high kill capability against ground and aerial targets.”

The anti-tank armament issue has raised a number of other questions. In fact, the HOT and TRIGAT missiles are not completely comparable but complementary. The HOT missile is wire-guided with an operational range of no more than 4 kilometers. The TRIGAT is a fire-and-forget missile but the ‘lock-on before launch’ safety system of its target seeker means that the risk of collateral damage can be avoided. Colonel Epitalon, the Head of the Weapons Systems Bureau at Army Headquarters, comments: “The HOT missiles will form the HAD anti-tank system for ten years. But the possibility of mixing HOT and TRIGAT clearly merits consideration because the two systems are different. However, the use of the TRIGAT missiles cannot be justified against all types of targets. If they are less than 4 kilometers away and not highly protected, the HOT could very well do the job.”

One of the consequences of the far-reaching decision to acquire one new helicopter, instead of the two planned previously, would be to bring the question of the future anti-tank system back into the limelight. The TRIGAT missile, whose development funding is coming to an end, was conceptualized and designed as the anti-tank weapon system for both the French HAC and German UHT versions. Deriving the HAD from the HAP will naturally mean reworking and integrating the TRIGAT weapons system on the new multi-role version of the Tiger, and on the HCE export version being proposed to Spain. The task of integrating the TRIGAT firing capability in the roof-mounted sight is already underway.

The HAD will have the same characteristics as the HAP with regard to evasive maneuvers, attacks, and longitudinal and lateral acceleration in engagements within or bordering urban areas, or over difficult terrain. What’s more, the HAD will satisfy the same maneuverability requirements for air-to-air combat as the HAP.

Incidentally, the HAD is in step with the new American concepts that consider heavy armor to be obsolete, and that favor ‘rapid deployment type’ mobile units sized for light armored vehicles.

The delivery schedule calls for the first Tigers to arrive in 2003 at the Franco-German College in Le Luc (South East of France). Though they will be in the HAP (and not the HAD) configuration, pilot, commander and mechanic trainees alike will be able to get first-hand knowledge of their future combat helicopter.

Budget allocations will decide whether the first regimental squadron will be equipped or not from 2005 on with the HAD. The HAD will perform a full range of air-toground strike missions and possess an offensive air-to-air capacity, which will make it the only authentic multi-role combat helicopter existing in the world.

HAD: A STORY OF COMMONALITY

After a long series of discussions to compare their points of view and exchange ideas, the French and Spanish Defense Headquarters concluded that both countries have very close requirements for a combat helicopter. In the event the Tiger wins the competitive bid against the Apache, the same helicopter would be selected by Paris and by Madrid.

But this is not all, as the local industry would become a third and full-fledged partner in the Tiger program. A final assembly line would be located in Spain. The country would also act as leader for certain major items of equipment, such as powerplant improvement.

With this in mind, the two future partner countries have conducted negotiations on the powerplant of the common Tiger. It has been decided to equip it with a more powerful engine than that of the current Tiger. This power increase will keep its performance compatible with the broader spectrum of missions: for instance, maintaining the same performance as the HAP but at the higher weight or having a ‘built-in power reserve’ for future needs.

The Spanish Army also wants that a passive automatic target acquisition system (PATAS) be installed.



Interview with General Marescaux, Deputy Chief of Staff of the French Army

The Tiger program is currently in the midst of a far-reaching transformation, in which France, along with other countries such as Spain, has given priority to the multi-role combat helicopter. It therefore appeared appropriate to ask the French Army for its views on this subject. General Marescaux, the Deputy Chief of Staff of the French Army, kindly agreed to answer our questions. Here is what he had to say:

Rotor Journal: What were the reasons that led the French Army to prefer one multi-role helicopter – the HAD Tiger – to two dedicated-role helicopters – the HAP and HAC?

General Marescaux: We have chosen the HAD Tiger because three new factors have arisen. First of all, there is no longer any major threat from armor in Europe. Consequently we see no real justification for bringing two specialized helicopters into service, one of which is dedicated to tank suppression.

Secondly, France’s new plan to ‘professionalize’ its armed forces entails drastic cuts both in personnel and in the materiel in service. It is therefore appropriate to restrict the number of the aircraft in the budget allocation - which is possible with a multi-role aircraft that can be easily reconfigured for different missions.

May I also point out that, with today’s technology, it is feasible to construct a multi-role helicopter without any major problems, which was certainly not the case when the Tiger program was launched in the 1980s. The advances in miniaturization, system integration and computing power have all made possible today what was impossible twenty years ago.

Rotor Journal: Do you agree with the view that two recent historical events have sounded the death-knell of the anti-tank mission as such. In other words, the collapse of the Warsaw Pact threat, and the Pentagon’s new doctrine to give preference to light armor units instead of large-scale attacks with combat tanks?

General Marescaux: This evolution has, in general, been integrated in the Army’s reorganization plan since 1996. The forces were organized into variable size, quick reaction units capable of undertaking a wide range of missions, running from coercion to controlling violence. This option has only recently been adopted by the United States.

Rotor Journal: Another European country, Spain, has also switched to the multi-role concept. How much do the French and Spanish requirements for this helicopter have in common?

General Marescaux: Both defense headquarters have had numerous discussions together. Spain is interested in the HAD Tiger – the export version is designated HCE – which meets the majority of the country’s operational requirements. The shared features of the Spanish and French versions would be over 90%.

Rotor Journal: For what types of weapon systems will the HAD Tiger be developed? And what adaptations will have to be made to the current HAP model?

General Marescaux: The HAD will be derived from the HAP version, whose 30 mm gun, rockets and air-to-air missiles will be kept. The main changes involve the adaptation of a killer missile, of the roof-mounted sight to integrate this missile’s fire control system, and subsequently of a radar for the detection and processing of ground and aerial objects.

Rotor Journal: The issue of a command helicopter for the Tiger has still not been settled. In your view, should the command of airmobile operations be exercised from a lead Tiger or from a better ‘vantage point’ higher up in the chain of coordination?

General Marescaux: We prefer the second solution. The workload in a weapons platform helicopter engaged in combat is such that it is not possible to command the maneuvers of other aircraft.

The defense staff is currently studying the HC2, a command and control aircraft that would interface between the chain of command and the chain of coordination in the air/ground dimension. This aircraft would command the weapons platform of engaged helicopters.
--

Steve ~ Touchdown-News

[xanadu]

How good will the Commanche be? How much of an advantage is stealth in a chopper? Will any other Helicopter be able to match it?

[EWR303]

What is in the "briefcase" that this Mi28 is carrying?

[EWR303]

Sorry, the picture didn't go through. Here it is.

[joe_dempsey_UK]

Originally posted by EWR303
What is in the "briefcase" that this Mi28 is carrying?

Its an electronic warfare pod, the Mi-28N is often seen with it and I've seen it fitted to a KA-50.



Your suitcase sir?

[EWR303]

Why does the picture load? Does anybody know why I can't load a picture? I was able to a few mintues ago.

[joe_dempsey_UK]

Originally posted by EWR303
Between the Ka50 amd the Mi28, I too chose the Mi28. Although I must admit that the Ka50 is a very intimidating machine. I read somewhere that the Mi28 has a "space" that can accomodate two or three people. This could be used to pick up downed crew members or may insert commandos. I wanted to verify that this is true. I am attaching an image (drawing) of the Mi28. I drew an arrow to what I assume is the hatch to the compartment. I tried to find a photo, but could not located one that showed this are clearly.

Certainly on the early prototype aircraft this space existed. However from what I've read it is only suitable for extraction of crew as its reportable a very small and uncomfortable place.
I don't know if this 'baggage bay' exists in later models especially the N, bothing has really been reported.

[google]

Good job guys, a nice flameless lasting thread.

Who do the Dutch expect to be fighting soon? Why do they need an upgrade? Or does Dutch only refer to people who live in Holland? I'm confused...


Here's the latest from JDW:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JANE'S DEFENCE WEEKLY - OCTOBER 01, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Netherlands requests Apache upgrade
Craig Hoyle JDW Aviation Editor
London

The Royal Netherlands Air Force's (RNLAF's) fleet of AH-64D Apache attack helicopters appears set to receive a targeting upgrade worth up to $298 million, under a possible Foreign Military Sale announced by the US Defense Security and Co-operation Agency (DSCA) last month.

Key equipment to be supplied under the capability upgrade includes Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control's Arrowhead Modernised Target Acquisition and Designation Sight/Pilot Night Vision Sensor targeting and navigation system, and Honeywell Sensor and Guidance Products' Integrated Helmet and Display Sighting System (IHADSS).

The enhancements will address "performance, maintainability, obsolescence and support cost issues related to the existing [RNLAF] fleet", according to a news release issued by the DSCA.

Also a key component of a programme to upgrade 501 Apaches for the US Army by 2006, the Arrowhead system's forward-looking infra-red sensor and the IHADSS combine to provide an all-weather targeting and night-vision capability. In addition to boosting aircraft lethality, this also improves the Apache's ability to conduct nap-of-the-earth operations, according to Lockheed Martin.

The overall value of the possible deal appears set to fall, however, as the Netherlands government is expected to approve a plan to reduce to 24 the strength of the air force's Apache force. If it does, the remaining six aircraft will be removed from service and offered for sale during 2004 (Jane's Defence Weekly 26 September). Boeing delivered its 30th and last RNLAF Apache in June 2002.

Two of the service's aircraft participated in the European Air Group-organised combat search-and-rescue exercise 'VOLCANEX '03' in Belgium last month. The aircraft operated in the rescue escort role in support of the seven-nation exercise, which amassed more than 90 multi-phased sorties between 1-12 September.

Further enhancements to the RNLAF's retained Apache fleet are expected to include the acquisition of self-protection equipment (JDW 9 July).

[Vympel]

Originally posted by joe_dempsey_UK
Its an electronic warfare pod, the Mi-28N is often seen with it and I've seen it fitted to a KA-50.



Your suitcase sir?

You've got to be joking. It is most certainly NOT an EW pod, whatever it is.

It's test equipment of some sort, or an equipment pod with the tools required for maintenance from austere bases- note the hinges at the top. It's a container. There's no way you could carry that into battle- it takes up an entire hardpoint dedicated to carrying 8 Atakas. The EW suite of both aircraft is dispersed at several locations around the airframe- the most important parts being the pods at the end of the wing stubs of both designs.

[Vympel]

Originally posted by ink
Just thought I'd get in on this very well balanced (flame free) thread by saying that I love the Mi-28N (if that remains its designation).

I think that its easily the best Russian attack helo out there. I love the wide varriety of warheads available for its AT amarment and the fact that it can be effectively used day or night. I don't like the Ka-50s inability to fly night missions - its way too limiting for a squadron to only be available during the day. I don't really see why the Havoc wasn't Turkey's choice for their attack helicopter - I'm sure that if suitably fitted with Israeli avionics and addapted to be able to use western weapons only the Longbow Apache could seriously contend against it (while the Z varriant of the Cobra could probably give it a reasonable run for its money too I think the Havoc would win out).

I realise that its drawbacks (weight and price) are something which customers take into account but they are easily out weighed by its advantages. Basically Ataka missiles have such a wide varriety of available warheads that no target exists which is a problem for it.

Question: Why is it that the Ka-50 and Mi-28 are always displayed with differing AT ammarment? I suspect it has to do with bureau allegiance to different missile producers but even so, wouldn't it be possible to modify either or both helicopters to be able to fire both the Ataka and the Vikhr?

The Ka-50Sh can perform night missions- however it's contended that a two-seater would be better for the job, hence Ka-50. I have my doubts though- Kamov's Black Shark fought hard to beat out the Mi-28, and won, despite Mil's greater political clout, and widespread naysaying (by Mil) against the coaxial design, the Skhval system, and the single cockpit- things that Kamov had perfected (the Ka-50 is highly automated to reduce pilot workload. However, the Russian Army was so impressed that Kamov won, despite all the naysaying. So it's possible that this talk of night-flying requiring a two-seat design is again, Mil nay-saying.

It would be a simple matter for the Mi-28N to be able to fire the Vikhr-M; all that's needed is a laser guidance channel in the existing optronics. The Ka-50/Ka-52, however, can't use Ataka without the radio command guidance radome that exists on both the Mi-24 and Mi-28. However, the Ka-52 should be able to use Ataka-M, which is millimetre-wave radar guided (by the mast-mounted radar on the Mi-28N).

[EWR303]

This looks mean. Also it looks as if the cockpit area is really armored.

[joe_dempsey_UK]

Originally posted by Vympel
You've got to be joking. It is most certainly NOT an EW pod, whatever it is.

It's test equipment of some sort, or an equipment pod with the tools required for maintenance from austere bases- note the hinges at the top. It's a container. There's no way you could carry that into battle- it takes up an entire hardpoint dedicated to carrying 8 Atakas. The EW suite of both aircraft is dispersed at several locations around the airframe- the most important parts being the pods at the end of the wing stubs of both designs.

Well im just going but what AFM said!

The article also contained a picture with the top set of access panels to the pod open. Although its not clear what it contains it looks like various avoinic/computer equipment, quite sparsely layed out. If it is indeed not and EW package I would think that it was some kind of equipment used for testing etc (recording various performance readouts)
However it would seem very strange that such a evaluation pod would be seen mounted when the aircraft makes public appearances.

[matt]

Originally posted by Vympel
which is millimetre-wave radar guided (by the mast-mounted radar on the Mi-28N).

hi Vympel just a question for you, what is an millimetre-wave radar? why is it of any significance, i have heard about it elsewhere and i am curious.

You seem to know a bit about hardware so heres my chance to ask about it.


i still dont know about the above, i edited this because i found a great issue of AFM, 2002 july.. its got a large amount on helicopters.
side note, also a nice pics of the Rafale on the Charles De gaul

[EWR303]

what is an millimetre-wave radar? why is it of any significance, i have heard about it elsewhere and i am curious.

Is this the same as the Longbow on the Apache?

[EWR303]

Does anyone know what missle is on the this Rooivalk? Also, right behind the missle is a camoflaged box with a silver rod-like item, any ideas as to what this is?

Picture from:
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/bigball/rooivalk.html

[google]

The camouflaged box looks like a box launcher for ATGMs, and the silver thing looks like an ATGM that has been removed from the box launcher and placed on top for exhibition.

[google]

I was about to say that it might be a ZT-6 Mokopa, but on second thought, the Mokopa looks nothing like that. Looks more like the improved TOW with the standoff warhead spike.

[GarryB]

" I suspect it has to do with bureau allegiance to different missile producers but even so, wouldn't it be possible to modify either or both helicopters to be able to fire both the Ataka and the Vikhr?"

Right on both counts. Had heard that the Hind upgrades for the Russian armed forces will include the ability to launch Vikhr missiles (in addition to Ataka and Shturm).

"This could be used to pick up downed crew members or may insert commandos. I wanted to verify that this is true."

Yes, though it is possible that that space might have been used for electronics in the N model... anybody know if this capability has been retained?
(Picture is right too... had a photo with the door open somewhere... though it had someone leaning in and was from the wrong side so you can't see inside...)

"How good will the Commanche be? How much of an advantage is stealth in a chopper? Will any other Helicopter be able to match it?"

Well most surface to air missiles for use against helos are IR guided due to the problems radar has with low level so the IR stealth will be important for its safety, but the radar stealth is to keep it hidden at night. I would expect a few bullet holes or fragmentation damage would render its radar stealth useless if used improperly, but it should be an excellent scout helo.

"What is in the "briefcase" that this Mi28 is carrying?"

It carries maintainence equipment for ground crew at forward airbases. During testing it might also carry test equipment as well I suppose.

"However, the Russian Army was so impressed that Kamov won, despite all the naysaying. So it's possible that this talk of night-flying requiring a two-seat design is again, Mil nay-saying."

The Hokum won because its missiles have 2km more reach than the Havocs (8km vs 6km) and that its acceleration and manouverability, hover out of ground effect and several other features were better. The safety of no tail rotor for ground crew, and the lack of the vulnerable drive train to the tail rotor and the lack of a tail rotor itself which if hit renders the helo unflyable is also an advantage for an aircraft expecting to be shot at.

Regarding the night flying they were looking at F-16 experience with Litening pods for all weather attack from a single seat aircraft, but the F-16 wasn't designed to fly nap of earth...

"hi Vympel just a question for you, what is an millimetre-wave radar? why is it of any significance, i have heard about it elsewhere and i am curious."

Millimetre wave radar is a radar that operates in the mm wave range. ie the radar beams it sends out are measured in mms. It is around the 35GHz range. This is a relatively high frequency compared to some radar frequencies. Some radar frequencies have signals m or kms long. As such they don't generated very good "pictures" of the target, though because they are not high enough resolution to see shape they can detect the presence of an object. At such frequencies an aircraft with a "Stealthy" shape is perfectly visible... the only problem is the accuracy of such radars is not great... and certainly not accurate enough for targetting... though certainly good enough to vector fighters to the area.
MMW radar is used because it provides a very good "Picture" of the ground. Metal objects like tanks or cars or tractors all show up very well... as they do on aircraft radar. The MMW radar however has the resolution to detect shape and determine if the vehicle is wheeled or tracked... if it has a turret or not. It can even count the wheels. It can do this through smoke, rain, snow, sleet, moonless cloudy nights, mist, fog, and even some light cover. It has very low sidelobes (ie there is not much radiation escaping sideways) and it provides accurate info on range and bearing.
The idea is that the aircraft pops up and does a quick scan... remember with a range of about 8-12km and the radar beams travelling at the speed of light (300 million metres per second approx) and with an electronically scanned emitter it would take less than half a second, then the helo pops down and the scan is analysed... targets identified and the information can be datalinked back to HQ, to the other units in your airwing, and even to local tank commanders if they have such capability.
MMW radar guided missiles with their own seekers are basically fire and forget. Popup, lock, fire, and leave.
The Apache longbow, the Commanche, the Mi-28N, the Ka-52, and the Ka-60 variant that will be used as a scout will all be using MMW radar.
On the ground only the Russian Krisantema uses MMW radar guidance to my knowledge and it uses the MMW radar to guide the missiles... there is no radar in the missiles to make them cheaper presumably. This has the disadvantage that the launcher must maintain line of sight till impact, but it does mean that it can also use laser beam riding as well for targets that are not MMW radar targettable... like perhaps the window of a building, or perhaps a log bunker or something.

EWR303... do you mean the white missile... it is an AAM... I think it is probably the South African IR AAM... Darter or something isn't it?

[matt]

Hi GARY

Thanks mate. just read it now. very informative.