It seems that a battalion of Apache attack helicopters based in Korea may be going to Afghanistan.
The United States is considering pulling a battalion of Apache attack helicopters out of the Korean Peninsula to deploy it to Afghanistan on an anti-terror mission, a senior diplomat said Wednesday.
The plan could create a possible security vacuum in South Korea as the high-tech U.S. attack helicopters are key assets of U.S. forces in Korea (USFK) against North Korea.
It also runs counter to pledges made by U.S. President George W. Bush during a summit with President Lee Myung-bak last month that the United States will halt the agreed reduction of troops and weapons systems to help strengthen the combined defense posture on the peninsula.
“There has been informal, periodic discussions on the Apache issue,” the official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said on condition of anonymity. “But it will not affect the U.S. troop level in South Korea.”
The USFK is refusing to confirm the above report.
The USFK rejected requests by Korean journalists to confirm the Apache pullout plan, only saying the U.S. Department of Defense would issue a statement on the measure.
However, it is interesting to note that it isn’t denying it either.
The Defense Ministry is only saying that they have not been informed.
The South Korean Ministry of National Defense said it has not received any formal request from the United States on the matter.
But an anonymous source says that the move might go through.
But a military source confirmed that the deployment of Apache helicopters had been discussed between the two governments ahead of the Lee-Bush summit talks at Camp David and was a separate issue from the pause in the U.S. troop cuts.
“As a matter of fact, the U.S. agreed on the pause of the troop reductions during the summit, not the pause of military equipment,” the source said, asking not to be named. “In my understanding, the U.S. position is that as long as the USFK maintains slots for 28,500 troops, there is no problem in flexibly rotating its military equipment from Korea to other regions.”
The ROK Army wanted to buy 36 Longbow Apaches during the past administration, but it is rumored that the past administration shot down the request, instead favoring an indigenious attack helicopter, over an off-the-shelf US-built attack chopper. Well, I guess it’s time for the Defense Ministry to dust off those plans.
Sphere: Related Content
27 Comments
I say save money. Buy a bunch of A-10s that are slated for the bone yard and load them up with digital avionics and modern night vision gear.
Even modern attack helos are too vulnerable to ground fire.
The A-10? Yes it’s ugly as fuck, but it’s the Timex of close ground support aircraft. Takes a lick’in and keeps on tick’in.
The A-10? Yes it’s ugly as fuck
What are you talking about? The A-10 is a fine looking warplane.
Yes… it’s so pretty that the Air Force is dying to keep them!
the A-10 is ugly?
It looks cool as hell.
It’s a flying gatling gun, with missiles, and armor !
Using Apaches to fight terrorism? It never ceases to amaze my how Washington can put a spin on these things.
“Even modern attack helos are too vulnerable to ground fire.”
I heard that’s why they weren’t used in Kosovo. Also, didn’t an Iraqi farmer take down an Apache with his AK-47? If one isn’t taking out tanks or other armored vehicles - the likes of which the Taliban have little - why risk having them shot down?
#5: Don’t confuse what a KT journalist writes with what someone in Washington said.
And if Korea’s going to bitch and moan about losing helos, they could bitch to the Euros who aren’t doing enough in Afghanistan. Or, they could look in the mirror and blame themselves for having a 36 ea. AH-X attack program on the books since at least 1992 (someone can tell me if that started earlier) which keeps getting pushed back. Uncle Sugar is finally getting tired.
“As a matter of fact, the U.S. agreed on the pause of the troop reductions during the summit, not the pause of military equipment,” the source said, asking not to be named. “In my understanding, the U.S. position is that as long as the USFK maintains slots for 28,500 troops, there is no problem in flexibly rotating its military equipment from Korea to other regions.”
In another post a while back in response to the US agreement to “suspend” the troop drawdown, I stated that the US might be playing a numbers game between “authorized” versus “assigned.”
This statement confirms just that. “Slots” refers to “authorized slots” that do not necessarily equate to the positions being filled.
How is saying the Apaches are going to Afghanistan to support operations against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda putting a spin on something???
This news release also seems to indicate that the “informal discussions” at the last bi-monthly PSI not only included the F-16 squadron removal but also the Apache.
Without the Apache Longbow, there is a BIG HOLE in the ROK defense plans for their new Oplan 5029 that they are trying to reinvent. As far as I know the Eurochopper (correctly Eurocopter)designs are still not off the drawing boards and years from even testing and construction. What alternatives does the ROK have?
Is this a plan to force the ROK to reopen purchasing the AH-64D variants again?
#9,
Saying that they are going on an anti-terror mission when they are participating in a civil war is putting a spin on things.
I was suprised to see that the AH-64 had a lot of the same vulnerabilities to ground fire as the Mi-24 Hind. When the Soviets were in Afghanistan, the mujahideen used elephant guns to down them. In Gulf War II an Apache was downed by an Iraqi farmer who had a bolt action WWI era Czech rife. It’s not to say that attack helos are vulnerable all the time to this kind of fire, but given how many moving parts it has, a well placed small arms hit can cause a series of events that will mission kill it.
It makes little sense to me to deploy AH-64Ds to Afghanistan. The Longbows have this radar dome on top that doesn’t help you in the least bit against personnel. It’s designed for locating and targeting vehicles.
In modern warfare, attack helos prove their worth when you have air superiority. If you don’t attack helos will be made into mince meat by patrolling jets. AH-64Ds are designed to lift their radar dome above a hill, target every enemy vehicle in the valley below, relay that information to AH-64Bs and Cs and fire their Hellfire missiles into the valley below while still being hidden by the hill. This type of tactical tool can be great for a hilly place like Korea (and the U.S.’s area of NATO responsibility in central and northern Germany during the Cold War which is the tactical environment for which the Apache was FIRST designed for).
In Afghanistan, the Apache will be mostly used for infantry support. It has the advantages of loitering over a tactical area much longer then an A-10 and needing a less sophisticated base (i.e. no runway needed) of operation. The only problem is if a heavy caliber gun of some kind, be it a 50 cal, a DShK or a 23mm is in its flight path then it could be in a world of hurt.
Between the Apache and the Eurocopter Tiger, Korea will pick the one that is willing to give it the most technology transfer. F-16 tech transfer by Lockheed allowed Korea to develop the T-50. Korea will want some tech transfer so it can keep the hopes of a native Korean AH-X afloat.
@#13
Learn new things everyday.
So, the Wolverines taking down a Hind helicopter with an AK-47 in Red Dawn isn’t too far-fetched?
“they could bitch to the Euros who aren’t doing enough in Afghanistan”
Why should they bitch to the Euros who,
1) are doing more than the Koreans
2) shouldn’t be there at all, let alone do more
Hummm…. thinking thinking thinking… man that movie is over 20 years old! I think they mission killed a Hind with an RPG, not AK fire.
It’s unlikely anyways. An AK-47 round is a fat 7.62mm short. It’s made as a man stopper, not an armor penetrator.
ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) contributors as at April 2008
Euros - just less than 24,000
US - 19,000
Korean 210, Oh sorry pulled out after the missionary hostage crisis
I just saw/heard an A-10 fly over my university. The whistling noise that plane makes as it flies is probably cooler - and scarier if you happen to be in its sights - than its appearance.
Oh, you’re right. It was that crazy kid who shot at Hind with his AK-47 before he got maimed by machine gun fire.
#11 so now Afghanistan is a civil war to?
#17: Yes, the Euros have a fairly large number of troops on the ground, but only the Dutch and Brits (of the Euros) are doing any fighting (although there are probably a few other Euro countries with relatively small numbers of special ops guys in the thick of things).
Also, there’s a shortage of European helos, only partially mitigated by the Brits with their Apaches. Thus you have American Apaches escorting the convoys of numerous nations, and the need to send 36 more from Korea.
And the more people who think their AK-47 can take down an Apache, the better. Keep the myth alive.
Actually, the Apache was selected by the ROK Army as part of the AH-X program. The government just didn’t give the go ahead to sign the contract and release the funds.
There is an indigenious attack helo project called the KAH. It will use technology from the KUH utility helo which in turn uses technology from the Eurocopter Puma. (However, Eurocopter is offering the Tiger as the basis for the KAH, but the ROK hasn’t made a decision.)The only thing I don’t understand about the KAH is where the ROK will find the dough to build 275 of them.
mins,
I got the AH-X and KAH projects confused. Althought ultimately, the two projects are in fact linked as I believe that the KAH project will be the AH-X.
Using the powerplant of a utility helo for an attack helo is a bad idea. The South Africans tried to do it for their Rooivalk and it’s never worked as expected.
The Koreans will try (not sure if they will be sucessful) to get Eurocopter to share technology to a point where they can call it the KAH-20 or something of that nature. Something like how the Chinese got the Italians to share Agusta technology to come up with the Z-10. The Koreans will then figure out how to make it 20% cheaper and then sell it to Turkey and South Asia. Thus, once 3rd party countries essentially pay for the R&D and initial production costs, they can then use the savings to by those vaunted 200+ helos as planned.
Those two programs are seperate.
That’s an interesting concept, assuming that it works as planned. You also forgot to factor in the licensing fees that Korea will have to pay to Eurocopter or some other manufacturer for the technology that will go into the domestic attack helo. BTW Turkey has already signed up for an attack helo called the T129, which is an A129 customized to meet Turkish requirements.
Yes, I realize the two programs are seperate. I just did a poor job of trying to say that although the two programs are currently seperate, the objectives of the two programs may merge, over time, into a single product.
I didn’t forget to factor in the licensing fees. I was just thinking that Korea would try to minimize fees as much as possible while negotiating technology transfer. Korea did this for the T-50 by making Lockheed an 11% partner. Then again, Korea may not be able to get this kind of agreement from Eurocopter (likely) or Boeing (most certainly). However, I believe it is their preferred strategy.
#20,
It’s been a civil war since 1978. The US getting involved doesn’t change that.
Ah…another case of the Kyopo not having the humility to admit to his mistakes.