Prospects for "Tiger": European attack helicopters will become much more dangerous

49

Challenges and priorities


The Eurocopter Tiger is a landmark car in every sense. This is the first pan-European attack helicopter. And one of the most ambitious military programs of a conditionally united Europe. Despite the formal success, it once again showed how tight the arms market really is, especially when it comes to expensive complexes such as attack helicopters. From 1991 to the present day, about 200 Eurocopter Tigers have been built. For comparison, helicopters AH-64 built over 1 during the entire production period. In addition to the Europeans themselves (France, Germany, Spain), the Tiger was bought only by the Australians.

Another problem is technical difficulties, which quite often made themselves felt. In 2018, it became known that of the seven Eurocopter Tiger that entered the German troops during that current period, only two were serviceable. At the same time, the program itself is voiced as "Tiger's Fury" - very ambitious.



Difficulties of a conceptual nature also raise questions. For all its advantages, the helicopter can no longer be fully considered modern. The German version - Tiger UHT (Unterstutzungshubschrauber Tiger) - does not have a built-in cannon. Versions for the French Armed Forces - Tiger HAP (Helicoptere d'Appuit et de Protection) and Tiger HAC (Helicoptere Anti-Char) - de facto cannot use anti-tank guided missiles that would meet the requirements of our time.


The American AGM-114K Hellfire II used by the French now were good by the standards of the 90s. However, now a missile with a semi-active laser guidance system can no longer be considered truly modern. Its effectiveness is traditionally influenced by the conditions of use. In addition (and this is perhaps even more important), after launch, the crew is forced to hold the mark on the target, which constrains the helicopter in a defensive maneuver. The more advanced AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire, following the “fire and forget” principle, can be used by the AH-64D / E, but not by the Eurocopter.

MAST-F program


France intends to eliminate the main drawback of its helicopters in the foreseeable future. On November 13, during a visit to the MBDA enterprise, the Minister of the French Armed Forces, Florence Parly, announced the issuance of an agreement to the union, which implies the development of a new complex for army helicopters. aviation... The program was named Future Tactical Air-to-Surface Missile (MAST-F).

The product concept is based on the MHT / MLP (Missile Haut de Trame / Missile Longue Portée) rocket project, which in turn is based on the MMP (Missile moyenne portée).

Florence Parley said on Twitter:

"With MHT, France is making a choice for sovereignty, support for our national industry and our freedom of action."


It is pertinent to recall that the MMP is the latest fifth-generation French anti-tank missile system, created to replace Milan and Javelin. The French adopted it in 2017. Missile moyenne portée has a combined guidance system that combines thermal and television homing heads, inertial navigation system, and fiber optic guidance. The complex implements the "fire and forget" principle. The missile's flight range exceeds 4 kilometers.


As for a promising rocket for helicopters, its range should be more than 8 kilometers when launched from a low altitude. The product has a mass of 20 percent less than that of a similar weapons of the same category, which allows to increase the combat radius of the helicopter. In total, the "Tiger" will be able to carry eight missiles of a new type.

Of course, the nominal range and even the weight of the product itself mean little now. Much more important is another question: the method of missile guidance and control. It is known that they want to equip the product with a two-channel (optical-television and thermal imaging type IIR) homing head. It will be complemented by a two-way information transmission system, which will give the operator the opportunity to re-target the missile at another object after its launch. It is also known that they want to equip the missile with a multipurpose warhead, which will effectively strike both Tanks, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, and unarmored targets.

The cost of the agreement covering research and development work and a series of half a thousand products is 700 million euros.

Already now we can say with full confidence that a miracle will not happen in this regard.

In general, a modern anti-tank guided missile is an expensive "pleasure". Suffice it to say that in June 2006 Germany ordered 680 state-of-the-art PARS 3 LR missiles worth 380 million euros. Deliveries began in 2012. As in the case of the promising French rocket, the principle of "fire and forget" is implemented here: the missile has a homing head, and its flight range exceeds seven kilometers.


It is also worth noting that the Spanish Eurocopter Tiger is armed with a rather "formidable" weapon: they have the latest Israeli Rafael Spike-LR complexes.

Against the background of analogues


Thus, equipping the French Eurocopter Tiger with a new missile will bring the helicopter closer to the capabilities of other "Tigers", and (with a high degree of probability), in terms of the amount of combat qualities, the vehicles of the French army will even surpass them.

It should be noted that experts assess the German PARS 3 LR ambiguously. This concerns not only the price, but its technical readiness. On the other hand, the French, who were once part of this project, only have a long way to go to fine-tune a new product.

This will happen against the background of the adoption by the Americans of the replacement for the Hellfire - the AGM-179 JAGM missile. It has a multi-mode homing head, the “fire and forget” principle and, in general, is conceptually close to the missile being created under the MAST-F program.


Simply put, the French were here in the role of catch-up (we are not talking about infantry Missile moyenne portée). However, this does not fundamentally change anything. Another thing is important: MBDA has long proved that it has technologies that allow the development and mass production of new generation anti-tank missile systems. As they say in France:

“To want is to be able” (Vouloir c'est pouvoir).

And it's good when ambitions do not diverge from the real capabilities of the military-industrial complex. It's bad when it's different.

As for the world market, the new MBDA product, provided that its price is not too high, will be able to impose competition on other "Europeans" and "Americans".

However, the absence of truly revolutionary technical solutions and the considerable cost of the complex will narrow the circle of potential buyers.
49 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    23 November 2020 18: 12
    The author, thank you, but it would be nice to have an article that would expertly compare the weapons and effectiveness of NATO and Russian combat attack helicopters
    1. +1
      23 November 2020 19: 39
      He was ahead of me .... Halfire lost its relevance back in the 90s .......
      They have a problem with attack helicopters - far-fetched. They do not fight and do not intend to.
      And all weapons are produced within Europe or in allied countries ...
      1. 0
        25 November 2020 13: 18
        They have a problem with attack helicopters - far-fetched. They do not fight and do not intend to.

        The French then? The most active participant in the democratization of the world, all the big NATO problems do not do without their participation, and they themselves, for example, in Mali, like how the world is being directed, but in such cases, they will have enough just an attack helicopter, a purely NAR and a gun, however, in this case, it is cheaper than a UAV ... But as for why they need a modern anti-tank helicopter, do not forget, they are one of the pillars of NATO and where is NATO aimed now? Right against us and China ... getting ready
        1. 0
          25 November 2020 14: 55
          I mean, there is no real threat to them as a country ..... so they don't buy a lot of helicopters. In Germany, there is generally a version of the Tiger without a cannon and a machine gun. And democratizers are so-so. They themselves did not collect ammunition for Libya. The Americans were asked.
          1. 0
            27 November 2020 12: 18
            I mean that there is no real threat to them as a country

            Why? In the event of a world war, they may not reach France, but the missiles will definitely fly. And even if you fight somewhere in Africa, you also need verts, although not as much as, for example, we do for defense.
            In Germany, there is generally a version of the Tiger without a cannon and a machine gun.

            Well, there is no machine gun on the tigers at all, but I don't remember about the cannon, most likely, if not, then only on the UHT tiger, but it is generally purely anti-tank ATGMs.
  2. +1
    23 November 2020 18: 32
    How many babosiks and talent of designers put in ..... the corresponding output and get.
  3. +5
    23 November 2020 18: 32
    Not a bad improvement however good
  4. -6
    23 November 2020 18: 56
    Well, the first time, so many poop will come out on it. Now put the file in hand and finish, finish and finish. Otherwise, nothing.
  5. +1
    23 November 2020 19: 03
    The article is of a review nature, it is interesting for me, but why is there no comparative analysis with the work on the domestic anti-tank missile system "Hermes-A", the possibility of using the principle of "fire and forget" on domestic helicopters?
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +11
      23 November 2020 19: 40
      And there is nothing to compare with ...... so far nothing flies with us.
      1. -6
        24 November 2020 08: 03
        Who cares about your Ukraine?
  6. +4
    23 November 2020 19: 33
    probably now they'll throw me down
    even stuffed attack helicopters look atavism against the background of attack drones and loitering ammunition
    1. +3
      23 November 2020 19: 41
      They don't look.
      1. +4
        23 November 2020 21: 49
        Why don't they look? what drones have proven their effectiveness in the fight against tanks and in general with everything that is on the ground! At the same time, it is several times cheaper and easier than a helicopter. Drones have vulnerabilities in the form of the inability to withstand electronic warfare systems and the lack of their own electronic warfare systems to suppress air defense radars, hence the drone's vulnerability to medium-range air defense systems. I think that the helicopter is just able to help the drones solve issues with their vulnerability, they can cover the drones with interference, they can reveal the enemy's electronic warfare forces and give target designation to defeat them or destroy them on their own. I believe that a 21st century helicopter is a machine for conquering air supremacy over the battlefield, allowing drones to do their job without hindrance, and as a bonus, an attack helicopter cannot be replaced when massed by NURS strikes, here drones fail. Therefore, the anti-tank helicopter is the last century! negative
        1. +4
          23 November 2020 22: 38
          Quote: Eroma
          Drones have vulnerabilities in the form of the inability to withstand electronic warfare systems and the lack of their own electronic warfare systems to suppress air defense radars, hence the drone's vulnerability to medium-range air defense systems.

          They have their own electronic warfare systems and radars (sea, land). The vulnerability of UAVs to electronic warfare systems is a myth that is refuted by practice.
          1. +5
            23 November 2020 22: 51
            I am not a specialist and am not familiar with practice. But it seems logical that a radio-controlled device is vulnerable to electronic warfare in any way, in contrast to the controlled one from the cockpit. And according to the descriptions of the events in Syria, Buki were able to close the sky for the UAV. As for radars and electronic warfare on drones, their presence greatly increases the size and cost of such machines, and in order to have decent characteristics of radio equipment, the size must also be decent! And this is the apparatuses that are a pity! These are not suitable for the battlefield, they need cheap devices, the number of which is easy to restore. And so, to cover them and to deal with similar UAVs, the rest of the equipped helicopters can be used accordingly. good
            1. -1
              24 November 2020 08: 39
              The drone has many processes that run autonomously ... and it does not need control. Takeoff, landing, reach the target area .... target search. In UAVs of different sizes, different minds and different protection. But they are vulnerable to the appearance of aircraft in the air. They begin to fight and identify PU.
          2. -1
            24 November 2020 08: 04
            Has Khmeinim already been bombed, or are they still going to?
            1. +3
              24 November 2020 08: 41
              Khmeimim - Base, there the saturation of air defense, radar surveillance, AWACS, the fighters themselves is very high. This is not a war with movement, collapse and deployment and change of landscape.
              1. -2
                24 November 2020 08: 47
                This is what self-propelled air defense systems exist for. And the same drone drivers on Khmeinim under the protection of air defense, and the drone drivers in an open field? They sit for themselves with equipment for transportation, yelling drone commands on the air. The bomber is already licking its lips.
                1. +2
                  24 November 2020 08: 50
                  Self-propelled MANPADS by themselves do not always come out the winner ... you need a radar survey. On the basis of all this in abundance. With displacement, this is much more complicated.
              2. +1
                24 November 2020 17: 44
                Likewise, drone attacks a la babay, suggest a massive raid by the same Harop, with or without overloading the target channels. The results can be sad.
    2. -2
      23 November 2020 20: 42
      even stuffed attack helicopters look atavism against the background of attack drones and loitering ammunition

      So far, the drone is most effective as a target designation tool. Because there are cheaper carriers as a delivery vehicle.
      1. +1
        23 November 2020 20: 53
        I will not insist, we will wait and see, or God forbid we will not see them in combat anywhere, but for now all indirect and non-indirect signs indicate that attack helicopters are losing in all respects to drones.
    3. +8
      23 November 2020 21: 41
      Quite right. Attack helicopters are being supplanted by attack drones.
      Israel is not going to order new Apaches, although they are working well. They are used less and less. Drones, kamikaze drones and long-range ground ATGMs (Spike LR) do their job.
      1. 0
        23 November 2020 21: 59
        Yes, this is a big buzz of the United States, their expensive weapons are not bought on such a scale
        1. +2
          23 November 2020 22: 04
          Wars change, weapons change.
      2. +2
        24 November 2020 06: 25
        One does not exclude the other. Moreover, the United States is developing systems in which a helicopter interacts and controls a UAV.
        https://aftershock.news/?q=node/641894&full
        Ours are also developing something similar
        https://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2020/06/16/642093.html
      3. -1
        24 November 2020 08: 05
        A kamikaze drone is a guided missile.
        Your cap.
        1. +2
          24 November 2020 08: 43
          yes, but there are differences BB - Brains - optics. In different proportions.
          1. -1
            24 November 2020 08: 48
            The rocket has much less of this, and therefore it is cheaper.
            1. +2
              24 November 2020 08: 50
              Not a fact ..... it can be more expensive
        2. Aag
          +1
          24 November 2020 14: 28
          Quote: EvilLion
          A kamikaze drone is a guided missile.
          Your cap.

          Not really. In a number of tasks it loses (in the speed of the strike, the price, the security, it depends on the enemy's air defense), but in some, perhaps most, - (IMHO) is preferable (the choice of the priority target, the time of the strike during the task, parallel reconnaissance ...)
    4. Kuz
      +5
      23 November 2020 23: 05
      Quote: Spike Javelin Touvich
      attack helicopters, look atavism against the background of attack drones and loitering ammunition

      I agree. And with the reduction in the cost of such ammunition, the difference in favor of the UAV will grow
      1. Aag
        0
        24 November 2020 14: 45
        Quote: Kuz
        Quote: Spike Javelin Touvich
        attack helicopters, look atavism against the background of attack drones and loitering ammunition

        I agree. And with the reduction in the cost of such ammunition, the difference in favor of the UAV will grow

        Yes, but here one cannot do without taking into account scientific developments (in the end, the success of intelligence and industrial espionage), the state of the orientations of production, - from this the cost of the product dances.
        If it's really quite rude: somewhere the problem can be solved with a ton of cast iron (for some it is expensive), somewhere, by the presence of a modern element base, circuitry. source, everything is sad ...
        Either intelligence does not work, or they teach the wrong thing in kindergartens.)).
    5. 0
      25 November 2020 13: 23
      Not really, if it is necessary to blow up a tank in a difficult combat situation, then a shock disposable UAV is good, but if the air defense is suppressed, then the helicopter is more effective, due to the significantly greater combat load, the ability to install the best sighting and navigation REO. It is banal that the helicopter is more effective against the infantry - it took a bunch of NAR and circles over the square, slowly picking out. In general, yes, a helicopter in the 21st century will become like a tank - it is expensive and easy to lose.
  7. 0
    23 November 2020 20: 58
    Difficulties of a conceptual nature also raise questions. With all its advantages, the helicopter can no longer be fully considered modern ©
    Ilya Legalt, thank you with a smile for your analytics, life-giving, like fabulous water rejuvenating for an old patriot who uses KIA and Range Rover carts in France, not French production. If yes, as if ya were a helicopter pilot, then, too, I would not have bought a French helicopter, for sure! It's sarcasm!
    By the way :! Maybe someone did not know - spare parts for Rangerover are made by France, not China.
    1. +3
      23 November 2020 21: 29
      Maybe someone did not know - spare parts for Rangerover are made by France, not China
      I sympathize, I barely got rid of this misunderstanding, spare parts from BMW, dealers ordered spare parts from the Emirates, but in my opinion they were produced in China, but there were no complaints about them, replace one in a day another part fails.
      1. +8
        23 November 2020 21: 45
        There is a joke.
        Why don't Land Rover / Ranch Rover owners say hello to each other when they are standing next to each other at traffic lights?
        Answer: because we already said hello in the morning in the repair garage. laughing
        1. +2
          23 November 2020 22: 13
          There anecdote. ©
          Actually yes !, but a little no. It's just like there is a club of shy conservatives. Wiping an old tear with his beard: it would be better if ya was for Toyota, like my children. Smile.
          1. +1
            23 November 2020 23: 16
            I understand that ... I once stuck to Subaru, and I still can't peel off.
            1. +1
              23 November 2020 23: 47
              my time stuck to Subaru, and I still can't peel off. ©
              With a smile: !, the same crazy sympathy. Subaru is a super good cart until it starts to "rattle, just in case."
              So "there are two of us" are conservatively stubborn in their spending of money on the principled operation of the chosen brand.
              I apologize for the familiarity in the dialogue.
              1. +2
                24 November 2020 08: 45
                I solved this problem in favor of diesel - Sorrento 3 UM aka Prime.
                1. 0
                  24 November 2020 22: 35
                  K! And this is the most useful cart.
        2. 0
          24 November 2020 15: 11
          laughing laughing relevant to this day
      2. 0
        23 November 2020 22: 07
        I sympathize, I barely got rid of this misunderstanding, spare parts from BMW, dealers ordered spare parts from the Emirates, but in my opinion they were produced in China, but there were no complaints about them, replace one in a day another part fails ©
        Well, I just suggest you take my word for it. The most amazing thing is that here you can wait for a trolley or in a supposedly office or wander through huge workshops and talk with cheerful staff. It's a good thing that these carts of mine (of course the second hand - you’re not an oligarch) often ask for a thayer, somewhere in 2002 I spoke very, very briefly in this situation with Kofi Anand (UN chief black man) then the phones were still without photos. But there is a witness similar to Pierre Richard of the artist.
      3. 0
        24 November 2020 08: 44
        There are different generations - in different ways. First owned by BMW, Ford and then aggregates were fordovskie. Now TATA.
        1. Aag
          +1
          24 November 2020 14: 54
          Quote: Zaurbek
          There are different generations - in different ways. First owned by BMW, Ford and then aggregates were fordovskie. Now TATA.

          I have not heard anything about such attack helicopters ... am
          "Moskvich-408IE", Opel-Kadett Estett, Nissan Prerija, Toyota Probox ... drinks
  8. +1
    29 January 2021 12: 58
    Quote: TatarinSSSR
    the effectiveness of NATO and Russian combat attack helicopters

    it is not necessary to compare helicopters, but their capabilities with their goals
    For example, Longbowapach now has the ability to fire at armored vehicles, avoiding the response of all our Tungusoks, Shiloks, Pantsiri, etc.
    And the European does not have the same working range.
    But the Apache is absolutely miserable as a means of fighting the infantry, especially in the mountains, because does not have adequate protection.
    And from comparing helicopters without considering what they work with, you get little