Jokes aside, you don't have any real evidence that the WS-18 or whatever could not be used on the Z-10, just your own opinion. Incidentally, there are also reports of an upgraded WZ-16 in the works for the Z-10. Right now, all we have are opinions, so I'm not sure where you are getting your confidence from.
Z-10 thread
- Thread starter Red Guard
- Start date
- Status
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Conversely speaking, there is no evidence that the WZ-10 is compatible with the Z-10. I don't know the mechanics of turboshaft configurations too intimately, but I would expect size restrictions to be a major contributing factor. That being noted, the WZ-10 is still in early stages of flight testing aboard the Z-20, so perhaps the plot would change a few years down the line.
I don't know if an upgraded WZ-16 is in the pipeline (there hasn't been much news in this regard), but whether the French will allow it to be adopted for military purposes is a whole new question. The Canadian contractor that provided the turboshafts for the initial Z-10 batch was heavily condemned by the US State Dept. for its deeds.
superdog
Junior Member
Do we have a reliable number of Z-10's typical loaded weight, or MTOW? If one just look at the widely circulated wikipedia numbers, the Z-10 is similarly sized to the EuroTiger (perhaps slightly beefier), but it is somehow 80% heavier structurally, which is even heavier than the Apache. I doubt the numbers warrant a reliable calculation of power-to-mass ratio and to determine if it is currently underpowered. The fact that Z-10 has been put into service in the Sichuan-Tibet plateau means it can't really be underpowered at the current state.
It is underpowered in the sense that it can't carry a heavier load (e.g. 16 AT-missiles) or more armor while maintaining the performance PLA required. In other words it may not have reached the development goal for maximum load-out until a better engine is used.
It is underpowered in the sense that it can't carry a heavier load (e.g. 16 AT-missiles) or more armor while maintaining the performance PLA required. In other words it may not have reached the development goal for maximum load-out until a better engine is used.
Right, we just don't know. At all. But you have been saying that this engine is unlikely to be compatible with the Z-10 even though you don't know whether or not this is actually the case.
The difference here is that P&W Canada is actually a subsidiary of an American company with American technology in the turboshaft which was bought by China as a completely foreign-designed and foreign-made engine, while the joint development of the WZ-16 by AVIC and Turbomeca is a 50/50 venture presumably with the technology wholly owned by both companies. The US could hardly accuse France of transferring technology if France could simply say that it was new technology developed jointly by both companies.
superdog
Junior Member
Not to mention Turbomeca has had a long history of selling its turboshaft engine tech to China, and it has been used extensively on Chinese military helicopters. I don't see how this would suddenly become a problem.
Black Shark
Junior Member
The AH-64E is the only of the current Attack Helicopters even among future prototypes that outclasses the WZ-10 in that regard. All other Attack Helicopters are outclassing AH-64E with its upgraded engines of ca. 2100 shp. That does not make it look good for the Apache either under no take of weight LTOW,NTOW and certainly not under MTOW.
The always wrong interpreted MMW radar. Radars main purpose and biggest advantage are not some weapon guidance of less than 4km range like the Hellfire Missile can be fired on static targets. It's main advantage is awarness and not some gimmick that will barely any help in real life against any peer-to-peer or near peer army.
The Apache has never recieved any weapons integration program in the recent years, it is also not expected to recieve any new weapons in this decade and unknowingly in next decade. Several programs have been already closed and new opened for missiles that are the same as Hellfire or are directly based on Hellfire without any new classification or capability to enhance its spectrum of Targets it can engage. The Z-10 is still mainly secret and is going forward. To say Apache wins this is simply wrong.
Well, you have made it clear that it is to your interpretation.
But it is not the interpretation of others.
Right now, at this moment, I know which one of the helicopters I would rather outfit my military with.
Who knows what that will be in ten years?
In addition, the Apache has indeed been upgraded many times, and continually improved upon. The latest AH-64E shows this.
Remember, it's first flight was in 1975...over 40 years ago. It says a lot about it, and the ingenuity of its designers that it is still as highly considered as it is.
15 Nation use the Apahe unships.
But now, it will ultimately be replaced by the newer breed of Future Vertical Lift (FVL) machines like some versions of Bell's V-280, Sirkorskys Defiant, and others, which will include attack platforms.
In the mean time, it is one of the, if not the, absolute best attack helicopters available at this time.
Last edited:
Black Shark
Junior Member
Non of the upgrades included new weapon systems. It had for decades TOW's and Hellfires, that has not changed. Several programs have been never finished or mid-way have been canceled no HARM weapons, no ASM's (AGM-65) and many unknown derivates of Hellfires have been proposed and failed or have been cut from budget while other similiar projects have been opened again and that is already 2 decade long process. Certainly no weapons integration have appeared for the Apache so far.
How many nations use a system does not matter. There are weapon plattforms that are only used in origin country that is based on many factors. How many countries use something does not make it best nor the worst it is just economical and political condtions countries are in. NATO countries seek for STANAG plattforms which binds them to one pool of equipment and among Attack Helicopters they can have a Tiger, Mangusta or Cobra/Viper and Apache. The russian and chinese AH's are out of the equation and they are the only Attack Helicopters that play even in the same weight class let alone their usefullness due to Weapons integration and capacity.
T-64 best of its time never was exported intentionally, Ka-52 same thing, the marketing and logistics behind it is burden for almost every country.
Apache being replaced by V-280? Well good luck with that if that is even considered it will end exactly like the several decade old bullshit replacement nonsense of the A-10... want to replace it with F-18, F-35 and F-16 and what not and in the end they have to addmit the sad reality these plattforms can't handle the job of the A-10. Same for Apaches. They are nothing else but fillers, certainly will never be capable to do the job in such a dedication based on their flawed design to do a dedicated job.
Note, my comment did not say that it would be specifically replaced by V-280.
Jeff Head said:
I stated that it would be replaced by the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Program.
I simply used V-280 as an example, along with Defiant and then made sure to state that the options would include attack platforms.
I believe the plan is for the replacement tro be in the late 2030s or even 2040s.
So it is a ways out there.
Note, my comment did not say that it would be specifically replaced by V-280.
Jeff Head said:
I stated that it would be replaced by the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Program.
I simply used V-280 as an example, along with Defiant and then made sure to state that the options would include attack platforms.
I believe the plan is for the replacement tro be in the late 2030s or even 2040s.
So it is a ways out there.
- Status