Talk:Westland WAH-64 Apache

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Rotorcraft task force

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

The picture is not accurated, it doesn't display the FCR.

I've added one that does. --Bob the Pirate 21:11, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

So.., the British Army buys a 'copter with the designation "Longbow", and the first thing it fires on is French? We should have seen that coming...

- Astatine 10:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Firing on French targets is our speciality! :D David 15:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 better 2 Kamov 3 Apache AH1? 4 Famous Rescue 5 brimstone? 6 Tail Rotor Problems

[edit] better

This Helicopter is a cut above the American counterpart; Its speed is quicker, has more arnament and its power output is higher due to its superior Rolls-Royce built engines.

That may be true, but you can't just claim that. You have to have reputable sources, otherwise it is considered original research, and that is not allowed on Wikipedia. -- BillCJ 00:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kamov

I seem to recall reading in either AirForces Monthly or Air International that Kamov actually proposed - although perhaps not with a 100% degree of officialness? - the Kamov Ka-50 to the British Army as an Apache alternative. Anyone else remember anything about this? - Aerobird 19:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apache AH1?

The article mentions an AH1 here In British Army service the Apache AH1 will replace the Westland Lynx Anti-tank helicopters ... Is this the MoD's designation for the 'copter or something? If not that should be AH-64 or WAH-64. Thanks. -Fnlayson 20:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It is indeed the MoD's designation. The "Apache AH Mk. 1" or "AH1". WAH-64 is just the type name. For example with the Hercules, while its "name" (actually the US designation) is C-130, it is designated Hercules C1/C3/C4/C5 in RAF service (depending on variant). Mark83 21:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. I didn't see that explained in the article. Would adding a sentence like this: WAH-64 is designiated "Apache AH Mk. 1" or "AH1" by the UK's Ministry of Defence. to the lead be a good idea? -Fnlayson 21:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added it to the intro. I wasn't really sure where to add it, if you would prefer something else feel free to change it. Mark83 21:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• I put that in its own sentence at the end of the lead. Edit that if I messed up something. -Fnlayson 22:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

No, looks better to me. Much better in fact! Mark83 22:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Rescue

This is believed to be the first time the Apache has been used in such a manner.

I've taken the liberty to remove this claim as there might be a precedent. Seems to be an error on the part of the original source and the hoopla that surrounded that event. A good dicussion on that event can be found here:[1] Htra0497 14:00, 7th July 2007 (AET)

[edit] brimstone?

maybe we could add Brimstone to the Armament section? Main text seems to say its capable of firing it. 87.194.223.183 —Preceding comment was added at 02:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Brimstone is an autonomous anti armour missile based on Hellfire but actually having very little commonality and designed for launch from high speed aircraft. The Apache cannot fire this weaponSamsungjohnny (talk) 23:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tail Rotor Problems

When the Apache was first being tested in British service they found issues when firing missiles using solid rocket fuel as they would on occasion throw debris into the tail rotor which had potentially catostrophic results. I don't know the exact details and I don't have a source (nor can I find one on google) but I think if anyone recalls information about this and the specifics. Ooh actually:

In early 2001 the Apache community was operating under a shortage of M299 launchers and a Hellfire missile restriction. The M299 launchers, under contract to Boeing St. Charles, suffered a failure in recent testing and had been deemed unsafe. The power supply card must be redesigned, which was estimated to take 7-8 months to complete and qualify. Reverting to the old design was not an option; required components are no longer in production. DCSOPS had published a distribution plan. The PM-ARM is responsible for the development and fielding of the launchers and is working to correct the problems. The Hellfire restriction was driven by the new spacer in the motor impacting and damaging the stabilator and potentially the tail rotor. Damage to 19 of 43 Apache Helicopters was detected following Hellfire missile firing during the USAREUR training exercise VICTORY STRIKE in Poland 06-18 October 2000. Damage to AH-64A Helicopter horizontal stabilators was initially attributed to ground debris then later to the Hellfire missile.

From http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ah-64.htm

I don't know where to add this in though, so many an editor could do it for me? (144.32.155.5 (talk) 15:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC))

• That doesn't look like a new problem. Chances are that's been cleared up by now in some manner. Unless it was a long running problem, I don't think it is notable/significant and should not be added. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Fair enough, if I recall correctly it was fixed, and although not very long running (a few months) did cause a loss of a few craft. It was in the UK media for some time. (144.32.155.5 (talk) 03:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC))