ARTICLE

March 2004

Army Rushes to Deploy Defensive Gear on Aircraft

by Sandra I. Erwin

The Army is rushing to field anti-missile systems for rotary- and fixed-wing aircraft, seeking to make up for cutbacks that practically zeroed out funding for aircraft survivability equipment during the past five years.

Funding for helicopters’ defensive countermeasures had dwindled since 1999, when the Army launched a “transformation” effort to become a lighter and more mobile force. The so-called “legacy” aviation fleet of helicopters particularly took budget hits, as the Army shifted more funds to the next-generation Comanche scout helicopter and unmanned aircraft programs.

But the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cast a different light on Army aviation, turning aging choppers such as the Chinooks into the darlings of the airlift fleet. About 600 Army helicopters operate in Iraq, including Chinooks, Apaches, Black Hawks and Kiowa Warriors, in addition to fixed-wing transports.

Protecting those valued aircraft and crews now has become a top priority and a politically sensitive matter, prompting the Army to reallocate funds in a hurry. A spate of helicopter shoot-downs in Iraq in recent months exposed the vulnerability of Army aircraft to small-caliber weapons and shoulder-fired missiles.

It is yet to be seen, however, whether the Army can deploy the defensive systems fast enough to make a difference in the near term. The Army estimated it needs $228 million over the next two years to pay for the survivability equipment, but none of this money is in the Army’s budget request just submitted to Congress. It would have to come from supplemental appropriations or transferred from other Army accounts.

One of the Army’s most knowledgeable aviators, Lt. Gen. Richard A. Cody, said that the shortage of survivability equipment on today’s helicopters had been pointed out five years ago, in a report he wrote after the Kosovo air war, where the much-maligned Task Force Hawk of Apache helicopters was kept on the sidelines, out of concern that they would be shot down by Serbian surface-to-air missiles.

“Not much has changed since the report from Task Force Hawk,” Cody said at a conference of the Association of the U.S. Army.

“When we started the transformation in 1999, we thought we had a 10-year window of opportunity, no peer competitor,” said Cody. “Today, our current force is eating up all our money. We are in two big wars.”

Defensive equipment against heat-seeking missiles is needed for both helicopters and Army fixed-wing aircraft, he said. Other “unfunded” aviation projects include upgrades to the Apache attack helicopters and purchases of additional remanufactured Black Hawk choppers.

To pay for the more immediate needs, the Army most likely will be redirecting funds from other programs, possibly Comanche, for which the Army allocated $15 billion over the next five years.

The estimated cost to deploy new defensive systems for Army aircraft in Iraq is $228 million—$78 million would be needed in 2004 and $150 million in 2005. That will pay to accelerate the production of the ATIRCM (advanced threat infrared countermeasures system) and the SIRCM (suite of infrared countermeasures). A senior Army official briefing reporters last month said that, so far, the service “reprogrammed” $28 million to pay for those new systems, but that it would seek “help from the Office of the Defense Secretary” or supplemental congressional appropriations for the remaining $200 million. As a last resort, the Army would take the funds from other programs.

Deliveries of new ALE-47 chaff dispensers are planned for the Chinook fleet. The ALE-47 is intended to replace the antiquated ALQ-156 electronic warning system that is coupled with the M-130 dispenser. The first Chinook unit scheduled to receive the new dispenser is the Hawaii National Guard, said Cody. All C-23B Sherpa cargo aircraft and C-12 fixed-wing transports also will be getting the ALE-47. An improved countermeasure dispenser, called ICMD, is in low-rate production and is planned to be added to the ATIRCM suites.

The Army is speeding up the development of a common missile warning system, to enhance the performance of the ATIRCM, the SIRCM and the ALE-47. Cody said that, so far, the CMWS only has been funded for Special Operations Command aircraft, but that he expected the Army to allocate money for the conventional fleet later this year.

Most helicopters already have some sort of survivability system, but older technologies are hard to maintain in the desert. Many of the Apaches and Black Hawks in Iraq, for example, have the ALQ-144 omni-directional active infrared countermeasures suite, but its performance has been hampered by the dusty environment and sandstorms, Cody noted.

The new anti-missile equipment, however, only addresses the threat of heat-seeking shoulder-fired missiles. Electronic devices do nothing against unguided projectiles, such as rocket-propelled grenades.

RPGs, which dogged U.S. military aircraft in Vietnam and Somalia, are the classic asymmetric threat. In Afghanistan, a $50 RPG brought down a $43 million special operations Chinook, noted Col. Andrew N. Milani, commander of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, in Fort Campbell, Ky, also known as the Night Stalkers.

Even though special operations aircraft have much more advanced survivability equipment than the conventional fleet, SOAR aviators would like to see improvements, he said.

“The number one threat to Army aviation is small arms,” said Milani. “That was in Vietnam and continues today.”

When helicopters are flying low, at about 200 meters or less, they are most vulnerable to RPGs. The only way to counter them is by avoiding them with flight maneuvers or by building more ballistic protection into helicopters.

Special operators master what is known as “running fire” techniques, designed to dodge enemy fire. Conventional Army pilots now will see more training focused on running fire, said Cody. “Anyone who hovers is going to die.”

The Night Stalkers employ sophisticated flying tactics to circumvent small arms fire, taking advantage of their advanced night-vision equipment, Milani said.

As an active countermeasure, they employ suppressive fire, such as the M134 Gatling machine gun, a 7.62mm, six-barrel weapon.

SOAR aircraft—Chinooks, Black Hawks and Little Birds—are designed with “redundant” systems, and critical components are “isolated,” making them more likely to survive a missile or RPG hit, or at least ensuring the pilot can land the aircraft after being hit.

Other protective features typically found in SOF aircraft include damage tolerant gearboxes, and blast resistant self-sealing fuel tanks.

“We have in the 160th aircraft the most capable ASE (aircraft survivability equipment) in the Army inventory today,” Milani said. “I’m not saying they are the best systems available, because we are looking at follow-on systems.”

He said it is unfortunate that the conventional Army units have not benefited from the investment that SOAR has made in ASE technology. “What is a travesty is that we haven’t proliferated these systems to the rest of the Army. We need to do that,” he said. “We talk about skipping a generation, so we can field the next system. But we never really fielded a generation of good ASE for our Army aircraft.”

Among the items on the SOAR’s wish list is an acoustic detection system to alert aircrews when small arms are fired in the area, Milani said. “Knowing is everything. Sometimes, we don’t know we are being engaged by small arms.”

The 160th soon plans to deploy “covert flares” that don’t illuminate the sky when fired. These non-pyrotechnic flares already are in development for other military programs.

Other sought-after technologies are lightweight ballistic protection and high-performance aircraft hardening for critical systems that add no extra weight. Better cockpit protection and Plexiglas multifunction displays also are needed, Milani said. “Some of our helmets don’t adequately protect our pilots, crews and systems.”

At the top of the list are technologies that can make helicopters run quieter. One scenario would be to deploy an unmanned aircraft above a target to perform “noise cancellation,” giving SOAR aviators a few extra seconds of cover, before the enemy knows they are there.

Although it is not considered survivability equipment in the traditional sense, the multimode radar that SOAR units used in combat for the first time in Afghanistan can help pilots avoid threats altogether. The terrain-following, terrain-avoidance radar—installed on MH-60K Black Hawks and MH-47E Chinooks—lets them fly close to the ground in zero visibility and bad weather. “I think the MMR ought to rank up there with the other ASE pieces,” said Milani.

Only veteran pilots can operate the MMR, he explained. When a few selected warrant officers of the 160th flew that system 100 feet and 300 feet off the ground, in the clouds, for the first time, it was considered a feat comparable to when Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier.

The increased tempo of operations since 9/11 has turned the 160th into a seasoned organization, where every crew now has some combat experience. “Back in the earlier days of the 160th, real world operations did not come up that often. When they did, they were very quick,” said Milani. “There was a certain amount of youthful exuberance associated with going to combat. Since 9/11, that youthful exuberance is gone.”

By 2011, the 160th is expected to double in size. Between fiscal year 2004 and 2006, Congress approved the addition of 833 people and one or two Chinook battalions. Between 2006 and 2011, SOAR will compete for Army funding for an additional 763 spaces—effectively doubling the size of the current regiment of 1,604, to more than 3,200 people and 215 aircraft. The expansion was funded with cutbacks in conventional aviation units, said Cody.

Back To Top