apache VS cobra - why dont marines use?

[SOG]

i never thought about this having seeing tons of cobras flying around locally, why dont the marines use the apache? i never questioned why the marines didnt have them, i just liked watching the cobras fly. is the apache too much to maintain, not rugged enough, cant take small arms fire as well, too advanced for whats needed or was it some internal hagling politics as usual? ive never heard anything about this debate or even info or opinions on it and i read a snippet from tains post about the marines not adapting the apache and that got the gears whirling in the hamster cage.

also for future development is the commanche a extremely costly apache replacement or is it for something else? will the marines adopt it?

http://www.redknightentertainment.com/rkewerks/sitphiles/apache.jpghttp://www.redknightentertainment.com/rkewerks/sitphiles/cobra.jpg

snippets

U.S. Marines AH-1Z
Patuxent River, Maryland, USA, 14 June 2001 — Lt. Gen. Fred McCorkle, deputy commandant for Marine Aviation, prepares for his first flight aboard the new AH-1Z Super Cobra attack helicopter at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. From the front cockpit, the veteran CH-46 pilot manned the controls and familiarized himself with some of the aircraft's capabilities during a 45-minute orientation flight. The Marine Corps' current fleet of AH-1W Cobras and UH-1N Huey utility helicopters are currently being upgraded by manufacturer Bell Helicopter Textron. The AH-1Z will feature triple the range and twice the ordnance payload capacity of the existing Cobra, making it the most advanced attack helicopter in the world. Both aircraft will be more than 85 percent identical, sharing a new four-bladed rotor system, fuselage, engine, and cockpit displays. The commonality will save billions of dollars in engineering, operating and support costs over the lifetime of the helicopters.


VARIANTS
Most older Cobra variants still in operation have been upgraded to the AH-1F standard. Also produced in Romania and Japan under license from Bell Textron in the U.S.
AH-1G: Initial production model in 1966
AH-1S: Upgraded 1960s produced aircraft in late 1980s to the standard TOW carry-ing version.
AH-1P: A set of AH-1S aircraft fitted with composite rotors, flat plate glass cockpits, and NVG capabilities.
AH-1E: A set of AH-1S aircraft upgraded with the Enhanced Cobra Armament System incorporating the universal turret, 20-mm gun, automatic compensation for off-axis gun firing, and weapon management system.
AH-1F: Current standard Cobra. Also referred to as the “Modernized Cobra”. Incorporated all past upgrades


The Marine Corps deployed 4 of 6 active force squadrons (48 AH-1Ws) to Southwest Asia during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. These helicopters destroyed 97 tanks, 104 armored personnel carriers and vehicles, 16 bunkers and 2 antiaircraft artillery sites without the loss of any aircraft. The deployment required no additional augmentation to squadron support personnel and only one Bell Helicopter technical representative.

[USMarine3521]

my guess would be that it has something to do with being carrier-based??
and also the Marines have a lower budget than the army so...

[Ratamacue]

The AH-1 is a reliable and proven design well up to the job. The AH-1Z only furthers its power. There's no need to purchase Apaches when you already have Cobras.

[GazB]

The Apache was more capable, but the difference has been blurred with newer model Cobras. The Cobra was much cheaper, though less sophisticated and takes up much less room on the deck of a ship.

The Current Longbow apache has an all weather long range detection and attack suite that the cobra can't match. (ie MMW radar plus 2nd gen TI).

The Commanche comes in two models a gunship and a scout. It is most use as a scout and will be used with AH-64Ds rather than replacing them.

Having said that from what I have heard of Israeli pilots they prefer the Cobra to the Apache. The Cobra is a much smaller target and can carry similar weapons and engage targets with comparable ability. (ie from 3km both can put a ATGM through a window or hit a moving car at night... the Cobra does it much more cheaply.)

The Apache has a reputation of being a bit of a hanger Queen... a bit maintainence heavy and expensive to run and buy. It is certainly the more capable of the two though the difference has closed with the new model of the cobra. The Main advantage of the Apache is MMW Radar, and a relatively powerful gun optimised for air to ground work, plus more and better avionics and night flying aides. The Cobra is almost as capable and cheaper to buy and use and is ship ready.

[SOG]

thx gaz, i was getting some of those feelings about maintenance when people mentioned the apaches repairs and performance in one of the desert ops either gulf 1 or 2. i really dig the look of the apaches but i figured theres gotta be a reason the corps keeps cobras around. good to know the cobras rock solid, they are fun to watch.

about the commanche is it a replacement for the kiowa or whatever those birds are with the huge "eye"? forward scouting and observation target mapping thingies? was it doing its job okay or did the army just want a more stealth scout type chopper? or is the kiowa type more of a back end controller?

it just seems very expensive compared to using a UAV or airplane possibly equipped to do the same thing? or is this part of the armys morphing into a different force ala stryker so this suits them better? i think its nagging me in the back of my mind that the commanche seems like a huge project for what is a high risk small begining role, and it seems like we'd be unwilling to use it like we'd be afraid to break our new toy in something intense. kinda like the carefull use of the f117 and then its scaled use over the years or the seering eye watching the strykers performance and every move.

[Tane Angle]

Gaz hit the nail on the head there. All in all, the Cobra is simply a better aircraft, especially for the buck. Have a good one, just some thoughts...

[MolliG]

Plus, it just looks a whole lot more rock 'ard than a poncy Apache... :D

Sorry... I just couldn't help myself...

[MarineDEP4]

oorah!

[oldsoak]

I understand that the Brits had the option of buying the cobra but choose apache possibly because it was a bit more cutting edge - or so it seemed. Nowadays you have add on gizmos and long range fire and forget ATM that can I thought that it would have made more sense to get cobra since was already cleared for operations in a marine environment ( hence able to base it on helicopter carriers and the like ) and it was cheaper. I dont know about the ability of either to take battle damage but I suspect its a case of apaches better protection vs cobras easier repair. Any info gratefully recieved on this. :)

[Operation Ivy]

Bout the comanche does this thing even have weapons on it?? all the pics ive seen theres no weapons on it :| as u can tell i know jack **** bout Helos

http://www.tbe.com/images/comanche.jpg

[Haiw]

It's got internal weapons bays, so thats why you can't see them. It's also supposed to be able to hang extra 'wings' on it for weapon mounting (called EFAMs right?).

[USMarine3521]

here are pics of the newest model: AH-1Z Super Cobra

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/supcobra/images/cobra10.jpg

http://www.bluejacket.com/ah1z_super-cobra.jpg

http://www.aircav.com/cobra/ahgal15/ah1z-013rsc.jpg

[Ratamacue]

As far as I know, the AH-1Z has better systems than the Longbow Apache. Also, deep strike capability isn't really needed for the Marines. I'm pretty sure its purpose 99% of the time is close air support. I don't really think that helicopters are suited to deep strikes in any case.

[Operation Ivy]

It's got internal weapons bays, so thats why you can't see them. It's also supposed to be able to hang extra 'wings' on it for weapon mounting (called EFAMs right?).

Ahhhh i see thank you :D

[Nizark]

The apache's did have that deep strike as the first shots fired in Gulf War 1 when they flew something like 200 miles in to take out the radar sites so we could roll in with the ground forces.

Also, anyone hear about some experiment getting UAV's to be used with helicopters?...most likely the apaches? I wasn't sure if it was the armed predators or simply to use as a long range recon system

[SOG]

Bout the comanche does this thing even have weapons on it?? all the pics ive seen theres no weapons on it :| as u can tell i know jack **** bout Helos

here yah go

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/rah-66--mission-image17.jpg

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/rah-66.htm

[Operation Ivy]

Thats sweet! woot

[MolliG]

The apache's did have that deep strike as the first shots fired in Gulf War 1 when they flew something like 200 miles in to take out the radar sites so we could roll in with the ground forces.

No exactly right, the radars they took out were in support of Coalition Air Power, not Ground Forces :).

(World Air Power Journal) Gulf Air War Debrief
The first coalition aircraft to take off specifically for the intial attack on Iraq (soon after dark on the evening of 16 January) belonged to Task Force 'Normandy', a force of eight AH-64 Apache helicopters belonging to the US Army's 101st Airborne Division with a CH-53 mother ship to assist with navigation. In addition to its load of Hellfire laser-guided missiles and 70-mm rockets, each attack helicopter carried a 230-gal external fuel tank. The task force's mission was to destroy two Iraqi air-defense radars to the west of Baghdad and some 380 nm (700km) inside Iraqi territory, to open a corridor through which attack forces of high-speed jets could pass unseen...

:D

[Miles Teg]

I've read a conclusion about Apache casualties in Iraki Freedom.
I have not the source on my knees, bnut I will give more precision on date and geography next days.

With the lake of use of Kiowa the first operation of tank destruction by big group of Apache miss near the disaster.
Maybe the Apache team was spotted in tehir last Farp pit-stop and so they were awaited by Iraki forces.

The Apache team have to engage large amount of iraki tanks with long range attack, take benefits of the Hellfire range to make kill with cover.

But where the Apache take immobil position (considering they were not discovered) to aim and engage tanks.

But some iraki forces were waiting in an outpost manner, delivering a wall of rpg and light weapons shoot.

I will give more precision about the casualties but 1 apache was shot down behind ennemy lines, 2 takes heavy damage, 80% of the group was "touched" with more or less casualties, 20-30% need maintenance.
This is due of the weak of the apache for close (very close) combat.
Low visibility for short range in opposition of kiowa.
This situation would be easily avoided by Kiowa recon, but it wasn't. I think this is one of the greatest lesson that the US forces take care.
Some operations was started later with consideration of the fault make, and were great success.

So this first part explain the weak of apache for close combat (don't believe I think it is a **** for close combat... :) )

But for marines Cobra are much valuable. Because marines is an infantery corp and all thing around in the marines are to support infantery (plane, tanks, helos...)
So the main missions are CAS, close air support of infantery. And for this the cobra is much more suitable.
The marines pilot prefer the cobra because of its armament and use.
In opposition of Apache the Cobra must be use with speed, make fast approach of target, shoot close and avoid ennemy ripost with speed.

And I've read something about the lake of enrolement for apache pilot, maybe cause by the amount of night training needed and annoying the family life.

[MARK.TIGGER]

The British still don't have apache in service.

[Midav]

First of all, I'd like to introduce myself. Hello!

Been reading the board for probably a year and a half and enjoy the knowledge that many here have on military related issues. Learned a lot of things and maybe getting involved there's even more I could learn :)

I personally don't think it has to do that the Apache (A model) is inferior in close combat.

The Longbow is another story, however. It is heavier, with no added protection and was designed to take out large tank formations from a distance.

To the raid of April 2003: Any helicopter that undertook the raid against the Republican guards near Baghdad would have had a hard time.

The person(s) in charge of approving the raid should have been fired, imo. No ifs, ors, buts.

Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but you have helicopters flying over the edge of a city, vulnerable to AAA, SAM's and small arms fire. Intel also was sketchty.

It's akin to the Russian armored attack into Grozny during the first Chechen war. It wasn't supported by infantry and the armor was decimated.

The people in charge should have been fired as well.

It's just good that only one aircraft was downed and could have been much worse. The aircraft is not designed to take a beating like the Hind, but it's an attest to pilot quality that some of those birds even made it back to base.

To the main topic itself.... The Marines don't have the budget as the Army does. So, they make do with what they have and make it better. The Cobra is still a good aircraft and personally wish the Army would have kept their Cobras, at least until the Comanche makes it into service.

[GazB]

"it just seems very expensive compared to using a UAV or airplane possibly equipped to do the same thing?"

Well you start putting the expensive TI cameras and MMW radars and other bits and pieces but without RHAWs or any defencive systems (without a pilot they won't even try to dodge small arms fire or light SAMs) they will be shot down in great numbers and still cost a significant fraction of a manned aircraft.

Regarding comments about the Apaches performance recently the mission planners should have been fired (or shot). The target area was not softened beforehand, and the Iraqis were using cellphones and comms so they knew what was coming and where it was going.
The Apache is an impressive aircraft, but there is no such thing and invulnerable except when playing computer games. No matter how well armoured few helos in the world will absorb much more than HMG fire. The Apache has much more system redundancy and backup systems and system protection than the Cobra, and in a heavy fire fight I'd want to be in an Apache over a cobra... expecially in a WWIII type scenario where distance from target is life. However in COIN combat where you are taking out MG posts from 3km or supporting a troop attack then the Cobra can do pretty much anything an Apache can do and it is smaller... and I think it is faster too. It would certainly be cheaper so you could have numbers, and it would probably be cheaper to keep on the front line too.

Both are excellent aircraft and no airforce would be ashamed to say they had them.

[DE6]

I read somewhere that the Super Cobra will have a MMW radar capability. The sensor will be contained in a pod mounted on one of the stubwing hardpoints. I'll try to find the article.

----

Ah! There it is:

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/supcobra/

[NcDeuce]

Hell no! The Apache kicks the Cobra's ass! My friend's dad flies Longbows and he's in either Afghanistan or Iraq and the manuvers this thing can do are incredible. The Longbow ain't a small bird either. Packs tons of Hell Fires to make the enemy miserable.

The Super Cobra can fly up to 195 mph.
Longbows weigh 6,000 lbs more and it can travel up to 169 mph. Longbows have about 4x the maximum rate of climb.
Longbows can carry 2x the amount of Hell Fires.

Just think about it...Cobra pilots many times move on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds.

Also, it is much easier to bring down a Cobra than it is to bring down an Apache. They are great helicopters and I cannot wait for the Commanche.

[Ratamacue]

Just remember that the Cobra is based on the Huey, one of the most reliable and longest-serving helos in history. The system/avionics advantage on the Apache doesn't exist anymore now that the AH-1Z is going into production relatively soon (some info at http://www.bellhelicopter.com/aircraft/military/bell_ah-1z.html)

The Apache is a great aircraft as well, but the only real advantage it has over the current AH-1W is the ability for deep strikes, and that job will probably be taken over by the Comanche when it comes into service.

[Helly]

Hell no! The Apache kicks the Cobra's ass! My friend's dad flies Longbows and he's in either Afghanistan or Iraq and the manuvers this thing can do are incredible. The Longbow ain't a small bird either. Packs tons of Hell Fires to make the enemy miserable.

The Super Cobra can fly up to 195 mph.
Longbows weigh 6,000 lbs more and it can travel up to 169 mph. Longbows have about 4x the maximum rate of climb.
Longbows can carry 2x the amount of Hell Fires.

The upcoming AH-1Z Super Cobra compares favorably with the AH-64D. The AH-1Z actually has better performance in some areas:

*Max cruise speed: 155 knots (~178 mph) vs. 149 knots (~171 mph) for the AH-64D
*Vertical rate of climb: 1,907 ft/min. vs. 1,775 ft/min. for the AH-64D
*Max rate of climb: 2,790 ft/min. vs. 2,635 ft/min. for the AH-64D

The numbers are for AH-1Z Super Cobras equipped with the less powerful T700-GE-401 engines (2 per heli). AH-1Zs can also be equipped with the same engine (the more powerful T700-GE-701C) used by current Apaches. The -701C is not qualified for shipboard operations though which may account for the fact that the USMC chose to stick with the -401 engines. And do note that the numbers for an AH-64D fitted with the Longbow MMW radar are even lower than those for the vanilla AH-64D.

The AH-1Z Super Cobra can also carry 16 Hellfires at a time, same as the Apache. Its FLIR targeting system is also better. It uses the Lockheed Hawkeye XR (aka TSS: Target Sight System) which is a newer 3rd gen system (vs. 2nd gen for the latest Lockheed TADS/PNVS used in Apaches). And AH-1Zs can also be fitted with MMW radars in the form of Longbow International's CRS (Cobra Radar System) which is compatible with the AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire. The TSS even compares favorably with the Lockheed Arrowhead system that will make its way to Apaches starting next year.

I guess the statement "Apache kicks the Cobra's ass!" doesn't hold water after all. ;)


Just think about it...Cobra pilots many times move on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds.

Umm, USMC Cobra pilots moving on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds used by the US Army's 160th SOAR???


Also, it is much easier to bring down a Cobra than it is to bring down an Apache. They are great helicopters and I cannot wait for the Commanche.

I don't know about "much easier". Granted, Apaches seem to be better-armored, but they're also slower and are bigger targets. Not to mention Cobras are inherently more manueverable, which is always a plus in hostile areas.

As far as Comanches are concerned, they're really meant to supplement Apaches, not replace them. They're supposed to scout ahead (stealth comes into play here) and designate targets for Apaches. Comanches stealthy and very maneuverable but they carry less armament since the standard weapons payload is carried internally. It can carry more weapons externally at the expense of stealth but that defeats its envisioned purpose of being a stealthy scout chopper.


~Helly

[NcDeuce]

Umm, USMC Cobra pilots moving on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds used by the US Army's 160th SOAR???


That's what the Flight School revealed to me and my PMS is a former Cobra pilot/160th SOAR.

I guess the statement "Apache kicks the Cobra's ass!" doesn't hold water after all.

I was comparing the Longbow and Super Cobra (W).

We can compare the Comanche and Super Cobra (Z) later on. ;)

[Helly]

Umm, USMC Cobra pilots moving on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds used by the US Army's 160th SOAR???


That's what the Flight School revealed to me and my PMS is a former Cobra pilot/160th SOAR.

He must be a former AH-1F Cobra pilot then. That's the last Cobra variant the US Army fielded, and it's inferior to the AH-1W Super Cobra used by the USMC. The AH-1F didn't even have the capability to fire Hellfires.


I guess the statement "Apache kicks the Cobra's ass!" doesn't hold water after all.

I was comparing the Longbow and Super Cobra (W).

Your statement still doesn't apply to the Longbow vs. AH-1W comparison. Combat has proven that the AH-1W Super Cobra is more reliable than the Apache variants. Mission readiness rate is also better. The Corps' Super Cobras flew more than half the total attack force flight hours during Desert Storm eventhough Super Cobras only comprised less than 20% of all deployed attack choppers. They also flew 3x more flight hours per month than any other attack helicopter force during the campaign.

The Apaches are technically superior but their superiority don't mean jack in the hangar. If they can't fly, they might as well be JetRangers or something. ;)


We can compare the Commanche and Super Cobra (Z) later on. ;)

The Comanche is shaping up to be a really good helicopter. It's really fast, really maneuverable, it's stealthy, and it's targeting system will be among the most advanced available in any attack helicopter today and in the future. That being said, it can't match the AH-1Z (or the Longbow) in terms of sheer firepower. Sure it can carry more Hellfires in external pylons, but then it's bye bye stealth. Like I said before, the Comanche will supplement the Apache. It's even envisioned to designate targets for Apaches. It's not an out-and-out attack helicopter 'coz it's main role is armed recon and the chopper it will replace is the Kiowa Warrior. Full production run won't even start until 2010 and it's still an unproven design combat-wise.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is that Apaches don't kick Cobra asses. :-)


~Helly

[USMarine3521]

Umm, USMC Cobra pilots moving on to AH-6/MH-6 Little Birds used by the US Army's 160th SOAR???


That's what the Flight School revealed to me and my PMS is a former Cobra pilot/160th SOAR.

He must be a former AH-1F Cobra pilot then. That's the last Cobra variant the US Army fielded, and it's inferior to the AH-1W Super Cobra used by the USMC. The AH-1F didn't even have the capability to fire Hellfires.


I guess the statement "Apache kicks the Cobra's ass!" doesn't hold water after all.

I was comparing the Longbow and Super Cobra (W).

Your statement still doesn't apply to the Longbow vs. AH-1W comparison. Combat has proven that the AH-1W Super Cobra is more reliable than the Apache variants. Mission readiness rate is also better. The Corps' Super Cobras flew more than half the total attack force flight hours during Desert Storm eventhough Super Cobras only comprised less than 20% of all deployed attack choppers. They also flew 3x more flight hours per month than any other attack helicopter force during the campaign.

The Apaches are technically superior but their superiority don't mean jack in the hangar. If they can't fly, they might as well be JetRangers or something. ;)


We can compare the Commanche and Super Cobra (Z) later on. ;)

The Comanche is shaping up to be a really good helicopter. It's really fast, really maneuverable, it's stealthy, and it's targeting system will be among the most advanced available in any attack helicopter today and in the future. That being said, it can't match the AH-1Z (or the Longbow) in terms of sheer firepower. Sure it can carry more Hellfires in external pylons, but then it's bye bye stealth. Like I said before, the Comanche will supplement the Apache. It's even envisioned to designate targets for Apaches. It's not an out-and-out attack helicopter 'coz it's main role is armed recon and the chopper it will replace is the Kiowa Warrior. Full production run won't even start until 2010 and it's still an unproven design combat-wise.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is that Apaches don't kick Cobra asses. :-)


~Helly

woot woot makes me glad those super cobras will be backing me up someday :lol:

[GazB]

"The Apaches are technically superior but their superiority don't mean jack in the hangar. If they can't fly, they might as well be JetRangers or something."

Except they don't suddenly get cheaper just because they spend time in the hanger... though they do use less fuel... :-}

As far as i know the Marines don't want the expense and weight of the MMW radar system... it uses up a weapon pylon and doesn't offer full 360 degree coverage that the Apaches MMW radar can be used for close range detection of aerial targets. (note the Russian systems have milimetre wave and centimetre wave radar for ground and air targets respectively).

The advantage of the Mast mounted MMW radar system vs one mounted under a pylon is kinda obvious too... unless it is particularly low slung or sticks out well forward then it will have problems seeing through the nose of the aircraft too for targets on the other side of the aircraft.

To be honest I think the Cobras advantages lie in its abilty to do 75% of the jobs an Apache can do at much less the cost. There is nothing wrong with that.

[Ratamacue]

The AH-1Z's the Marines are receiving will have MMW. I'm not sure I've seen a picture of it but they're throwing one up there similar to the Longbow radar.

[Helly]

As far as i know the Marines don't want the expense and weight of the MMW radar system... it uses up a weapon pylon and doesn't offer full 360 degree coverage that the Apaches MMW radar can be used for close range detection of aerial targets. (note the Russian systems have milimetre wave and centimetre wave radar for ground and air targets respectively).

The advantage of the Mast mounted MMW radar system vs one mounted under a pylon is kinda obvious too... unless it is particularly low slung or sticks out well forward then it will have problems seeing through the nose of the aircraft too for targets on the other side of the aircraft.

The Longbow CRS is mounted in one of the two wingtip stations of the AH-1Z so the four underwing pylons for Hellfires/Hydras/etc. are not compromised. http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.com/our_news/factsheets/factsheet-COBRA_RADAR.pdf

You're right about the coverage issue though. A mast-mounted MMW radar system is definitely more effective. The USMC will have to develop the appropriate tactics to overcome the fuselage obstruction issue.


To be honest I think the Cobras advantages lie in its abilty to do 75% of the jobs an Apache can do at much less the cost. There is nothing wrong with that.

I personally think it's more than 75% but your point is well taken. :)

The US Army and the USMC do use their respective attack helicopter forces differently, with more emphasis on CAS for the Super Cobras. Ultimately, both the Apache and the Super Cobra are really good attack helicopters and can accomplish their respective missions well. ;)


^Helly

[Ratamacue]

That's really the main reason why the Marines don't spend the money on the Apache. The USMC doesn't need deep strike capability, but rather a reliable & rugged aircraft capable of close air support. And the Super Cobra is certainly all of those things. With that said, the AH-1Z will probably be able to outperform the Apache in almost all areas when it comes into service. Plus, it has some 84% commonality with the UH-1Y which the Marines will be adopting as well. :)

[Hav218]

I dont know if anyone else answered this yet, but the Marines (A Recruiter told me this) have the smallest budget. Meaning they can't have everything with the latest technology. So they resort to what the other branches dont use any more. Also, the AH1 is thin, and can fit on the Amphibious Assault Ships better. Unlike bulkier helos.

[NcDeuce]

http://defence-data.com/storypic/ah64dsky6.jpg

http://lmalc.external.lmco.com/lmalc/images/apache-longbow_lg.jpg

http://www.g2mil.com/scarface1.gif

http://www.history.navy.mil/planes/ah-1w.jpg

http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Feb1998/980113-N-4319P-007.jpg

Ay, the Apache is much more bulky. But the crew chiefs do an excellent job taking the rotors down and covering the bird in the protective wrap on the aircraft carriers.

[AIC "Powder"]

my guess would be that it has something to do with being carrier-based??
and also the Marines have a lower budget than the army so...


He is exactly right. I'm stationed on an LHD, an amphibious assult ship (a Marine Taxi). Since we have limited deck space and hanger-bay room, the Cobra is a smart choice since you can fit two of them in the space it takes for one Apache

[USMarine3521]

my guess would be that it has something to do with being carrier-based??
and also the Marines have a lower budget than the army so...


He is exactly right. I'm stationed on an LHD, an amphibious assult ship (a Marine Taxi). Since we have limited deck space and hanger-bay room, the Cobra is a smart choice since you can fit two of them in the space it takes for one Apache

hehe I'm pro at guessing just watch me take a test. :lol:

[crazyman]

to sum it all up: different helos, different missions, different advantages. the apache was pretty much designed to kick ass on armor. thats its role. the cobra came from the ol' huey (aka UH-1 Iroquis) gunships of vietnam legend. just a wild guess, but i'd wager that the apache (or longbow, whichever name you prefer) is a bit better against armor, while the cobra is a bit better in the sort of CAS missions that the marines use them for. but heck, take it for what it's worth, im just a damn redleg

[HMMcrewchief]

OKAY, This has gone on way too long. Here is the answer.

The USMC COBRA and USArmy Apache and longbow are like apples and oranges. They are not the same, Apache is along range heavy tank killer pure and simple and a good one at that. USMC uses the cobra for close air support totally different ball game, the number ONE mission of Marine Air, also used to escort slower and more vulnerable CH-53's and CH-46's. Marines stayed with the cobra for several main reasons cost, maintenance, size, and design. The cobra is cheap compared to the Apache, although not too sure about the Zulu though. It is easy to maintain from forward positions it follows the K.I.S.S method. Plus it has parts and crew and maintenance commonality with the UH-1 reducing parts inventory cost and space needed to store parts on board a cramped ship. Also reducing the size of your maintenance personnel detachment on board. All this results in more storage room for bombs and bullets and Infantry.

Now about the comanche in the Corps. nope ain't gonna happen. It is too mission specific for the corps to replace the UH-1N with a Comanche. The UH-1N fulfills the role of scout and airborne command n' Control, troopship and cargo helicopter all in one platform. And a reliable one at that.

P.s. KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid

[Ratamacue]

HMMcrewchief - judging by your avatar and handle, I'm guessing you were a crew chief on a CH-46? Just curious. I had wanted to be a helo pilot (Cobras specifically) in the Marines for quite awhile, but unfortunately my eyesight might as well leave me blind.

[HMMcrewchief]

Hey Ratamacue, Yup been A/C since 94' mostly 46 ad 53's. Originally went to the recruiters with the intent to be Marine Fixed wing pilot. But alas I did not have 20/20. So I went the next best thing AirCrew. Although, I am now a NCO instead of an officer. But at least I get to fly.

[Ratamacue]

Good stuff. Right now I'm looking into infantry (my vision is somewhere in the range of 20/150+). Fortunately, I don't graduate high school until 2006, so luck may say that the military starts to accept operations like lasik/PRK more, so I'll have to see how things work out.

My brother's aiming for Naval aviation, hoping for fighters. The lucky bastard has 20/15 vision, and is the only one in my immediate family without vision impairment.

[2RHPZ]

I´m gonna continue in the old thread ...

A DEVIL'S UPGRADE: Marine Corps' AH-1 Cobra Undergoes Some Hardcore Changes

Living in the 80's? Not anymore! Improved radar, a helmet-mounted display system, increased payload and performance: Welcome the newest chapter in the AH-1 Cobra-USMC story. The AH-1Z Super Cobra era is about to begin.

The two most significant upgrades to the AH-1 are also the two most obvious. Gone are the teetering, semi-ridged two-bladed rotors. Instead, the AH-1Z will have a four-bladed, hinge-less, bearing-less rotor system. Coupled to a pair of General Electric T700-GE-401 turbo shaft engines producing a total of 3,380 shaft horsepower, the four-bladed Zulu will have nearly double the Whiskey's payload as well as improved performance and endurance.

Full article (http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_AH1Cobra,,00.html?ESRC=soldiertech.nl)

[Ratamacue]

AH-1Z Super Cobra
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/ah-1z-cobra2.jpg
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~steven/images/AH-1Z-pic.jpg
http://www.aircav.com/cobra/ahgal15/ah1z-013rsc.jpg
http://www.aircav.com/cobra/ahgal14/ah1z-006rs.jpg
http://www.aircav.com/cobra/ahgal14/ah1z-008rs.jpg
http://www.aircav.com/cobra/ahgal14/ah1z-012rs.jpg

[rob]

i cant believe no one said this before atleast i dont rmeember reading it but the marines and the army will not get the commanche.

the commanche was cancealed earilier this year.

[DLodge]

i cant believe no one said this before atleast i dont rmeember reading it but the marines and the army will not get the commanche.

the commanche was cancealed earilier this year.
The Commanche was never a Marine program.

[abncougar]

wasn't the comanche program canceled??

[abncougar]

wasn't the comanche program canceled??

[WoodChipper]

Didn't the U.S. cancel the Comanche project due to the over cost? That was on the news 3 months ago.

[Ratamacue]

Didn't rob just say that a few posts back?

[Uncle Sam]

The Marines use the KISS method. Just reiterating.

[szr]

Wow. Every single Cobra I've ever seen in my lifetime, had 2 blades. To see it with 4, is weird.

http://www.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_AH-1a.jpg
Is that the MMW radar on the top of both wings? If not, what are those?
Edit: Actually, looking at that TSS, I think that's a W, not a Z.

[kutter]

Is that the MMW radar on the top of both wings? If not, what are those?
Edit: Actually, looking at that TSS, I think that's a W, not a Z.

Those boxes on the wings are actually chaff dispensers.

And your right about it being an AH-1W, the wings on the Z model are noticeably longer to accomodate 16 Hellfire missiles.

[Merik]

Just to let all you jarheads know that it was actually the Army that developed the four-bladed rotor system for the Cobra.

[rob]

Just to let all you jarheads know that it was actually the Army that developed the four-bladed rotor system for the Cobra.

and im sure they are greatfull. but the army has messed with the marine cores plans on more then one ocation.