|
Post by tfly on Jun 2, 2013 11:24:01 GMT 12
This is an extract from the Augusta Westland website ref the A109LUH which I thought made interesting reading. If this is the 'standard specification' does anyone know if the RNZAF intend to arm ours?
The AW109 Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) has established itself as a best-selling military light-twin helicopter able to satisfy a wide range of military requirements. This ability to fulfil a wide range of missions makes the aircraft a true force multiplier, providing military commanders with excellent operational flexibility. The AW109 LUH is a rugged helicopter with excellent ballistic tolerance, redundancy of systems and crashworthiness for maximum safety and survivability. Avionics include an advanced digital cockpit, based on 3 AMLCDs and a digital 4-axis AFCS. A vast array of advanced equipment including sophisticated sensors are available. The integrated Mission Equipment Package (MEP) includes day/night and IFR avionics for single or dual pilot operations with a four-axis digital Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS). The availability of a wide range of mission equipment makes the LUH a real multi-role helicopter, able to perform all light helicopter roles including training, troop transport, medical evacuation, search and rescue, maritime patrol, observation, armed escort and anti-armour. In addition, the AW109 LUH can also be armed with rocket pods, machine gun pods, pintled mounted machine guns, anti-tank and air-to-air missiles.[/i]
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 2, 2013 12:20:42 GMT 12
At present they have the pintle mounted 7.62mm MAG58 MG on one side. As far as I am aware the only discussion about further arming the Makos or acquiring armed Makos has only been on this forum and another I lurk on. I would also presume it may have been discussed on similar forums as well.
|
|
jamo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 43
|
Post by jamo on Jun 2, 2013 12:55:49 GMT 12
|
|
thax
Warrant Officer
Posts: 31
|
Post by thax on Jun 2, 2013 13:57:20 GMT 12
There were several items of role equipment that were considered desirable during the T/LUH (Training/Light Utility Helicopter)capability definition stage of the project, but which were unaffordable at the time. This included fixed external weapons (gun/rocket pods). The RNZAF A109LUH are fitted 'for but not with' such weapons - I believe the wiring and hard points are in place to support any future fitting of weapons. Any such development will depend on a proposal from either the NZ Army or one of the border protection agencies, since the RNZAF has no specific (mandated) requirement for such a capability. It's hard to see this happening in the near future. More likely, in my opinion, would be the addition of an electro-optic system to provide a useful ISR capability for a wide range of roles.
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Jun 3, 2013 17:21:15 GMT 12
If I'm not mistaken aren't those photos of the NH90? If so how does that relate to the A109?
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 3, 2013 17:22:20 GMT 12
Same weapon.
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jun 3, 2013 18:26:40 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 3, 2013 19:01:17 GMT 12
Same end result.
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 3, 2013 19:17:59 GMT 12
I think they should use .50 cals on the NH90s instead of the 7.62s. The .50 cal is a good problem resolution device.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 3, 2013 22:35:06 GMT 12
Most of the A10 Warthogs are now at AMARC. Grab some of their 30mm rotary cannons and mount a pair of them. That should wake up a few quiet towns early in the mornings.
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jun 3, 2013 22:52:28 GMT 12
Most of the A10 Warthogs are now at AMARC. Grab some of their 30mm rotary cannons and mount a pair of them. That should wake up a few quiet towns early in the mornings. Might incur slight issues when the helicopter starts flying in the directino of the recoil whenever they fire it
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 3, 2013 23:00:16 GMT 12
Fit JATO bottles as well and fire at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 4, 2013 0:22:35 GMT 12
Thank god you were not an Armourer beags!
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jun 4, 2013 8:37:59 GMT 12
I think the GAU-8 is quite a lot larger than the A-109.
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Jun 4, 2013 9:52:27 GMT 12
So supposing that the A109LUH has all the necessary wiring in place would it not be sensible to arm these helicopters in order to provide air cover the army plus tank busting capability? I mean if the RNZAF A109 was only to be used for training and light helicopter duties then why choose the LUH model over the 'Power' in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 4, 2013 11:20:38 GMT 12
Did you not read Thax's post above? I thought it was pretty explanitory.
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 4, 2013 14:49:23 GMT 12
Fit JATO bottles as well and fire at the same time. Be impressive to watch. Does you bags to be the gunner Beags?
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 4, 2013 14:55:25 GMT 12
There were several items of role equipment that were considered desirable during the T/LUH (Training/Light Utility Helicopter)capability definition stage of the project, but which were unaffordable at the time. This included fixed external weapons (gun/rocket pods). The RNZAF A109LUH are fitted 'for but not with' such weapons - I believe the wiring and hard points are in place to support any future fitting of weapons. Any such development will depend on a proposal from either the NZ Army or one of the border protection agencies, since the RNZAF has no specific (mandated) requirement for such a capability. It's hard to see this happening in the near future. More likely, in my opinion, would be the addition of an electro-optic system to provide a useful ISR capability for a wide range of roles. I can't understand why the Army hasn't asked for that cpapability but then I did hear rumours the Army was quite pleased with the ACF disbandment and proactively didn't discourage the process. I am aware they got uppity a bit over berths on the Canterbury when they were told by the RNZN that they couldn't have all the berths they wanted because the RNZAF need some for the helo support team.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 4, 2013 15:03:21 GMT 12
You're talking ancient history, it's 14 years since the ACF disbandment, most of the Army then will have retired by now.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 4, 2013 18:43:03 GMT 12
Thank god you were not an Armourer beags! me too. S&S is such a superior trade than them wee cracker stackers.
|
|