Spain chooses Euro

[Jordi Usó]

There has been some noise in the media about Spanish military finally
choosing Eurocopter as their attack helo of choice instead of Apache.

The reason the most quoted for this was that Tiger could easily operate
in Ceuta and Melilla while based in mainland Spain, which Apache couldn't

Is there really such a big difference in operating radius between those
two birds?

Regards to the group.


J.

[John Mullen]

"Jordi Usó" > wrote in message
om...
> There has been some noise in the media about Spanish military finally
> choosing Eurocopter as their attack helo of choice instead of Apache.
>
> The reason the most quoted for this was that Tiger could easily operate
> in Ceuta and Melilla while based in mainland Spain, which Apache couldn't
>
> Is there really such a big difference in operating radius between those
> two birds?
>
> Regards to the group.
>
>
> J.

'The combat radius of the AH-64 is approximately 150 kilometers. The combat
radius with one external 230-gallon fuel tank installed is approximately 300
kilometers'

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ah-64.htm

(Tiger) 'Range 800 km-432 n.m.'

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/tiger.htm

A surprisingly big difference!

HTH

John

[Guy Alcala]

John Mullen wrote:

> "Jordi Usó" > wrote in message
> om...
> > There has been some noise in the media about Spanish military finally
> > choosing Eurocopter as their attack helo of choice instead of Apache.
> >
> > The reason the most quoted for this was that Tiger could easily operate
> > in Ceuta and Melilla while based in mainland Spain, which Apache couldn't
> >
> > Is there really such a big difference in operating radius between those
> > two birds?
> >
> > Regards to the group.
> >
> >
> > J.
>
> 'The combat radius of the AH-64 is approximately 150 kilometers. The combat
> radius with one external 230-gallon fuel tank installed is approximately 300
> kilometers'
>
> http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ah-64.htm
>
> (Tiger) 'Range 800 km-432 n.m.'
>
> http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/tiger.htm
>
> A surprisingly big difference!

Without knowing the loads each a/c is carrying, or the profiles of the missions,
it's hard to say. The 800km/432nm range is probably ferry range, which will
result in a combat radius considerably less than 400km / 216nm. And different
sources give different numbers. Here's Flug Revue's, often more specific than
what you find on fas.org:

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRTiger.htm

You'll note that range on internal fuel is given as 670/725 km, depending on the
model. Here's the data on the AH-64D, same source:

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRAH-64D.htm

You'll note that it can carry twice the number of ATGMs as Tiger, and is
considerably larger and heavier. Also note that the 30mm cannon only comes on
some models of the Tiger, while it's standard on the AH-64. Basic range of the
AH-64 is less, but it can carry two tanks and the same number of missiles as the
Tiger, so the numbers get even more tenuous. all of this isn't to say that the
Tiger may not have a better range for what the Spanish intend to use it for,
equipped how they want it, but the answers tend to be a lot less straightforward
than the glossy brochures handed out to press types would have you believe.

Guy

[John Mullen]

"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> John Mullen wrote:
>
> > "Jordi Usó" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > There has been some noise in the media about Spanish military finally
> > > choosing Eurocopter as their attack helo of choice instead of Apache.
> > >
> > > The reason the most quoted for this was that Tiger could easily
operate
> > > in Ceuta and Melilla while based in mainland Spain, which Apache
couldn't
> > >
> > > Is there really such a big difference in operating radius between
those
> > > two birds?
> > >
> > > Regards to the group.
> > >
> > >
> > > J.
> >
> > 'The combat radius of the AH-64 is approximately 150 kilometers. The
combat
> > radius with one external 230-gallon fuel tank installed is approximately
300
> > kilometers'
> >
> > http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ah-64.htm
> >
> > (Tiger) 'Range 800 km-432 n.m.'
> >
> > http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/tiger.htm
> >
> > A surprisingly big difference!
>
> Without knowing the loads each a/c is carrying, or the profiles of the
missions,
> it's hard to say. The 800km/432nm range is probably ferry range, which
will
> result in a combat radius considerably less than 400km / 216nm. And
different
> sources give different numbers. Here's Flug Revue's, often more specific
than
> what you find on fas.org:
>
> http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRTiger.htm
>
> You'll note that range on internal fuel is given as 670/725 km, depending
on the
> model. Here's the data on the AH-64D, same source:
>
> http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRAH-64D.htm
>
> You'll note that it can carry twice the number of ATGMs as Tiger, and is
> considerably larger and heavier. Also note that the 30mm cannon only
comes on
> some models of the Tiger, while it's standard on the AH-64. Basic range
of the
> AH-64 is less, but it can carry two tanks and the same number of missiles
as the
> Tiger, so the numbers get even more tenuous. all of this isn't to say
that the
> Tiger may not have a better range for what the Spanish intend to use it
for,
> equipped how they want it, but the answers tend to be a lot less
straightforward
> than the glossy brochures handed out to press types would have you
believe.

Not to mention the political faqctors which may have informed the decision
as well.

John