U.S. Army Prepares For Full-Rate AH-64E Production

[unhappycamper]

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_10_26_2012_p03-01-511015.xml




U.S. Army Prepares For Full-Rate AH-64E Production
By Amy Butler
October 26, 2012

The U.S. Army has officially designated the newest version of its Apache helicopter the E model, and service officials are planning to issue a contract to Boeing to begin full-rate production.

The full-rate production decision issued in August is “probably the single largest decision for this program since Block Is and Block IIs went into production,” says Col. Jeff Hager, the Army’s Apache project manager. The forthcoming contract will include 48 aircraft per year for the U.S. Army for two years as well as 48 foreign sales orders. The anticipated production rate will be four per month for the Army with three monthly for international customers during full-rate production. The Army plans to buy 690 total.

However, the specter of sequestration — mandated spending cuts set to take place Jan. 1 if the government does not strike a debt-reduction deal — has prompted Hager to begin examining various production rates as Apache would likely suffer a reduction along with other defense projects.

The first AH-64E was delivered to the Army last November, and production has ramped up since to about three deliveries per month in Boeing’s Mesa, Ariz., factory, says David Koopersmith, Boeing’s vice president of attack helicopters. The team briefed reporters on the status of the program at this week’s annual Association of the U.S. Army conference here.




unhappycamper comment: Let's talk dollars.

When I buy a new car, I like to know how much stuff costs: paint job, fog lights, bigger engine, leather interior, navigation system, sunroof, etc. etc.

When I try to find out the cost of military hardware, the price list just isn't available. "Trust me" is not acceptable from a car salesman, nor should it be for MIC salesmen. So we do the best we can.

Wikipedia is notoriously low on the price of military hardware. Since this thread is about the AH-64E let's focus on that. Wikipedia sez:
AH-64A: US$20 million (2007),
AH-64D (AH-64A upgrade): US$18 million (2007)[4]

OK, the AH-64D costs $20 million + $18 million = $38 million dollars. So how much does the AH-64E cost? However much it is, the US Army is planning on buying/upgrading 690 of them. Too bad we don't know what the AH-64E costs.

Here's just two examples of Wikipedia's cost numbers:

Wikipedia sez the F-22 is "US$150 million (flyaway cost for FY2009)". Time magazine (link:http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1912203_1913322,00.html) sez the F-22 costs $350 million dollars each.

Here's another example: Wikipedia sez "US$218 million (flyaway cost for FY2007)". Time magazine (link:http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1912203_1913322,00.html) sez the C-17 costs $318 million dollars each.

[xchrom]

1. i wanna lose my subjectivity when i read this stuff.

what would 38 million dollars mean to poor public schools in new orleans -- and that would be real national security.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. Cost details of the contract are public record

However, the nature of the business is such that a fixed price contract is not appropriate. When you tear down an airframe, it may have hidden problems and the Army will be making changes over the life of the program

As for the other numbers you cite, make sure you are looking at the same things. Total cost of a major project like an aircraft includes all development, and depending on the author, lifetime logistics. Others are citing the per unit manufacturing costs.

[GitRDun]

3. Hey PP do you know anything about technical capability differences

between the B-22 and the joint strike fighter? Seems we are building a lot of the JSF. I have read a couple articles that said the B-22 is the only one capable of surviving the newer anti aircraft defenses. Hard to find good info on the topic. You seem like you know something about this stuff, thought maybe you could explain...thx.

[PavePusher]

4. I assume you mean the F-22?

The F-22 is intended more for air superiority meaning it is faster, has longer range, higher altitude capability, larger weapons payload, and more maneuverable. The F-35 is more focused on shorter-range air defense and ground-attack roles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

[GitRDun]

5. Yes thanks

Is it true that the F-35 is not capable of penetrating the more modern air defense systems? I am a novice in this area. Take a look at this link:

http://www.ausairpower.net/raptor.html#Why_America_Needs_More_F-22s

[PavePusher]

6. Probably correct, because that's not what its purpose is...

or what it was designed for. Given a hefty electronics and weapons upgrade, it could probably do it... But the other limiting factor is that it was purposely designed to be less stealthy than the F-22, both because it didn't need it for its intended usage, and because it will be sold to many other nations. You don't put your best technology in a package you're going to sell to people who might not safeguard it as well as the inventor..

[Angleae]

7. F-22 vs F-35 same as F-15 vs F-16

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. The really good stuff is classified, but their different roles is more makes much of it clear

The JSF is multirole aircraft by design. Air to air, jamming air to ground, ground support... The Raptor is there for air dominance though it has some air to ground capabilities. Raptor is more capable against a high end Integrated Air Defense System, but the JSF is no slouch. However, making that the sole determinate is silly since neither aircraft will go up against a modern IADS unsupported.

The difference between US and international JSFs appears to be mostly software and some avionics. Some nations are doing their own add ons, to the point that the US will allow it.

The F-22 over its lifetime will be more expensive to operate and maintain, due in part to numbers and also the more leading edge technology it has on board.

Hope this helps

[GitRDun]

9. Yes thanks

Seemed from the article the F-22 had a huge technology edge. When you look at how many more JSF are being built, seemed a little out of whack. I'm sure folks a helluva lot smarter than me know why the ratios are correct from an inventory perspective. I would've thought we'd need more F-22's.