Air: The future face of the Tiger ARH | ADM February 2013

With the full fleet of 22 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters (ARH) now in the hands of the Army’s First Aviation Regiment thoughts are turning towards ensuring their combat effectiveness and sustainability throughout their life of type. Such thoughts should be turning also to the remediation of a particular deficiency in the ARH system.

According to AIR 87 Phase 3, now termed the ARH Capability Assurance Program (ARH CAP), the Tiger ARH features software and hardware systems and functionality that will require regular upgrades throughout the life of the aircraft. As a minimum the effectiveness, reliability and serviceability of the ARH system needs to be maintained through regular upgrades.

But the ARH CAP is by no means limited to the aircraft, bearing in mind that the ARH system includes a fully instrumented ARH, a full flight and mission simulator, two cockpit procedures trainers, and other ground crew training devices. Other supporting components include a software support capability, a ground mission management system which supports operational communications, an EW mission support system, and a maintenance management system.

Thus the scope of the ARH CAP covers the gamut of software and system reliability and maintainability, technology refresh, technology obsolescence, and new capability, to assure the combat effectiveness and sustainability of the ARH system in the land battle. And of course the ARH must be interoperable with other supporting ADF and coalition elements.

Aside from an effective doubling of project funding for the ARH CAP, which now stands at from $1 billion to $2 billion, indicative perhaps of the extent to which updated and new systems may be incorporated, rather than simple technology refreshes, this dry wording tells us little of the additional capabilities that might be expected of the ARH in the 2020 and beyond, timeframe.

With industry in the best position to answer some of these questions the RPDE Program was approached and accordingly a QuickLook (QL84) study has been commissioned and will inform Air 87

Phase 3 of the following:
a) the upgrade options available for ARH between 2020 and 2030;
b) the cost, capability, technical risk and integration risk associated with each upgrade option;
c) the appropriate estimated upgrade timeline and ROM cost associated with each upgrade option;
d) opportunities for any Australian Industry involvement in the identified upgrade options; and
e) potential commonalities with other rotary wing or ADF platforms for each upgrade option (e.g. MRH90).

One question that wasn’t asked of the RPDE’s industry representatives was their views on the type of operations the ARH would be called upon to perform in the beyond-2020 timeframe, answers to which must surely bear on whatever combat effectiveness is eventually sought.

Tiger ARH current capability

Described as the world’s most advanced armed reconnaissance helicopter, the Tiger ARH was ordered by the Australian Army to replace its OH-58 Kiowas and UH-1H Iroquois-based gunships.

Despite its seemingly rather benign designation, the ARH’s combat capability is significant. It is equipped to carry a dual feed 30mm GIAT DEFA M781 cannon in a chin mounted turret, used for engaging ground or air targets with a fire rate of 750 rounds per minute. It is also equipped with 70mm Belgian FZ unguided rockets in pods of seven and nineteen, and the Hellfire II laser-guided air to ground missile (AGM). The usual load of Hellfire is four, but eight can be carried at the expense of range and performance.

Upgrades underway or considered

Some ARH upgrades are already underway with the Thales TopOwl helmet mounted sight display (HMSD), which links the pilot directly with the helicopter’s trainable cannon, other armaments, night vision and navigation systems, are being improved to HMSD3 capability to enhance the ARH’s night vision capability and thus its fire support range. Thales will also provide Australian Aerospace which is responsible for through life support of the ARH, with technical, logistics and supply support services for a range of Thales equipment installed on the Tiger helicopters, particularly avionics, communications, electrical components and the rocket subsystem.

Under Task 28 ARH Data Links, the RPDE program had earlier been asked to define and demonstrate a suitable technology upgrade path for the ARH, to provide Digital Combat Identification, Digital Close Air Support missions and indirect fire support, to support a combined arms and coalition data link environment.

The report included recommendations for follow up activities to be undertaken by RPDE to address other identified capability gaps.

A Rockwell Collins datalink solution was fitted to test rigs in Brisbane as part of the data link upgrade demonstrator.

The same task developed Defence’s understanding of VMF technologies, techniques and architectures and influenced thinking on other activities such as AIR 87 ARH Upgrade in areas of software, system reliability, technology fresh, technology obsolescence, and new capability.

It also lifted the profile of the question of the interoperability of the ARH with ADF and coalition elements and highlighted the project integration links to JP 2089 Phase 3 in establishing system-of-systems data networks.

Keeping up with the Jones’s – or at least keeping an eye on how those other military operators of the Eurocopter Tiger, eg France, Germany and Spain through the formation of a users group, known as the Tiger Build-up Group – plays an important role in the development of the capability assurance program and in alerting the ADF to potential future upgrade risks.

If we are hoping to second guess some aspects of the RPDE program’s QL84, such as potential commonalities with other rotary wing upgrade options, it may be worth looking at the other shortlisted Air 87 contenders and see how they have fared in terms of improvements that may now set them apart from the Australian Tiger.

But this is not to dispute the selection of the Eurocopter Tiger vs the MOTS Apache as raised recently on ASPI’s Strategist blog, but to see where comparable combat/fire support helicopters are headed. In May 1998 a request for proposal was released to industry seeking detailed proposals for the ADF’s ARH capability requirement. Of the six respondents three were shortlisted the following year for further consideration. These were the Agusta A129, the Boeing AH-64D Apache and the Eurocopter Aussie Tiger.

Agusta A129

The first dedicated attack helicopter to be designed and deployed by a European country, the Agusta A129, widely known as the Mangusta, was conceived in response to an Italian Army requirement of the mid-1970s. Built around an advanced MIL-STD 1553B digital databus, the first A 129 prototype made its official maiden flight on 15 September 1983. The original requirement had been for 100 Mangustas in separate anti-tank and scout versions, but the final order was cut back to 60 A 129s. In the event, a total of 45 A129s was delivered to the Italian Army by 1992, when production was stopped.

Funding problems, and changing operational needs, forced the Italian army to re-evaluate its requirement for dedicated anti-tank helicopters. The need for a more multi-role helicopter was reinforced when Mangustas were deployed on UN peacekeeping duties to Somalia between 1992 and 1994.

The Mangusta’s primary TOW missile armament left it inflexible where combat against tanks was not a priority mission. Hence, Agusta has developed the Mangusta International, which features an undernose 20-mm cannon, uprated engines and a five-bladed main rotor system. This aircraft also retains the HeliTOW target acquisition system, making it a versatile combat helicopter.

The A129 can be used in the antiarmour, armed reconnaissance, ground attack, escort, fire support and anti-aircraft roles. In the anti-armour role, the helicopter can carry either Hellfire, TOW-2A or Spike-ER missiles, or a mix of them. It can also be equipped with unguided rockets and has a M197 three-barrel 20 mm cannon in a turret mounted under its nose. For the anti-aircraft role, Stinger or Mistral missiles can be carried. The A129 is equipped with autonomous navigation and night vision systems in order to provide both day/night and all-weather combat capabilities.

Boeing AH-64D Apache

The Boeing AH-64 Apache is a four-blade, twin-engine attack helicopter with a tailwheel-type landing gear arrangement, and a tandem cockpit for a two-man crew.

The AH-64 features a nose-mounted sensor suite for target acquisition and night vision systems. It is armed with a 30-millimeter M230 chain gun carried between the main landing gear, under the forward fuselage. It has four hardpoints mounted on stub-wing pylons, typically carrying a mixture of AGM-114 Hellfire missiles and Hydra 70 rocket pods. The first production AH-64D Apache Longbow, an upgraded version of the original Apache, was delivered in March 1997 with production continued by Boeing Defense.

The AH-64D Longbow Apache, is equipped with an advanced sensor suite and the main improvement over the previous variant is the dome installed over the main rotor, housing the AN/APG-78 Longbow millimeter-wave fire control radar target acquisition system and the radar frequency interferometer. The raised position of the radome enables the detection of targets and launching of missiles while the helicopter is behind obstacles (e.g. terrain, trees or buildings).

A radio modem integrated with the sensor suite allows data to be shared with other D-models, allowing them to fire on targets detected by a single helicopter. Only recently (October 2012) the variant formerly known as the AH-64D Block III was redesignated the AH-64E for which full rate production was approved the same month. It is understood that the new designation was warranted due to the significantly increased capability that the new upgrades represent.

These include: improved digital connectivity, the joint tactical radio system, more powerful engines, enhanced transmission, the capability to control UAVs, new composite rotor blades, full IFR capability, and improved landing gear. It is reported that the US Army planned to field the first AH-64E equipped unit in November 2012.

The future face of the Tiger ARH

From the foregoing descriptions of those other shortlisted Air 87 contenders, our uninformed eye suggests that the AgustaWestland AW129, the latest development of the series offered for Air 87, does not include particular technologies or upgraded or new systems that might be relevant to the future Tiger ARH other than the anti-air capability. This is not to discount the many and varied capabilities of this successful combat support helicopter but whose export sales have been no match for the AH-64D Apache, also built under licence by Agusta Westland.

For the Tiger ARH’s immediate timeframe the Block III Apache offers some interesting capabilities, some of which would already have occurred to Eurocopter such as improved tactical communications, doubtless already anticipated in the Tiger’s drive to be part of joint operations in the network centric battlefield.

Beersheba and amphibious operations

But surely the most likely drivers for future upgrades and improvements to ARH capabilities will derive from their operations as part of the new multirole combat brigades under Plan Beersheba, flying reconnaissance, escort and close combat attack missions including amphibious operations with the new Canberra Class LHDs as part of their embarked battle groups.

New capabilities for the ARH that may be required for amphibious operations are presumably already under consideration. If so, are we likely to see the ARH fleet divided between those equipped for amphibious operations and those that are not?

And herein lies the rub. The Tiger ARH is not marinised, particularly against the effects of salt spray. Reports indicate its undercarriage and tie down points are reportedly unsuitable for deck operations. The rotor blades do not fold and while it has been tested at sea with the LPA HMAS Kanimbla it is not known whether this has led to careful evaluation of its limitations in operating from the LHDs.

Surely the Tiger ARH will be expected to participate in joint amphibious operations in the close air support and close combat roles as part of the assault team, especially in regions remote from RAAF air support. The ARH could also provide armed airmobile escort to the troop carrying MRH-90s.

It would appear then that marinising some or part of the Army’s fleet of Tiger ARHs will be a crucial element of the ARH Capability Assurance Program if the Army’s commitment to the development of a world class amphibious capability is to be fully realised.

While the standing-up of a marines-style infantry battalion, dedicated to providing ‘tip of the spear’ amphibious capability, may well be an affirmation of Army’s commitment to a truly joint amphibious capability, one would like to think that when ‘in contact’ these forces can call on close air support, operating from the LHD, if need be.