Boeing AH-64E Apache Guardian (Republic of China)

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

Hello everyone! Today I would like to present to you the Boeing AH-64E Apache Guardian of the Republic of China's Army, the latest variant of the famous AH-64.

 

 

 

History:

The Boeing AH-64E Apache Guardian is the latest variant of the famous AH-64 Apache to enter service. Originally designated the AH-64D Block III Apache Longbow, it was redesignated AH-64E Apache Guardian in 2012 to better represent the increased capabilities of the type. The AH-64E received new composite rotor blades, more powerful General Electric T700-GE-701D turboshaft engines producing 1,994 SHP each, as well as a new transmission to accommodate the power. Due to these upgrades both speed, climb rate, and payload capacity increased on the AH-64E. Other upgrades include a revised landing gear design, Joint Tactical Information Distribution System data link, the ability to control UAV's, and full instrument flight rules flight capability. On June 2011, the Republic of China purchased 30 AH-64E Apache Guardians to complement its fleet of AH-1W Super Cobra's then in service. These AH-64E's were equipped with a variety of defensive measures including the AN/AVR-2 laser warning receiver, and AN/AAR-57 missile warning system. On the November 5th 2013, the first 6 AH-64E's arrived to Taiwan in its initial batch. On April 25th 2014, an AH-64E crashed into a building in poor weather, the crash left the pilot and gunner injured and was determined to be pilot error when the pilot descended rapidly through the clouds without checking their instruments. In response the Republic of China increased AH-64E simulator training. On October of the same year, the final AH-64E's were delivered to the Republic of China. On July 17th 2018, the AH-64E was declared to be fully operational, being deployed in two squadrons within the 601st Air Calvary Brigade in Longtan Air Base. 29 ROCA AH-64E's are currently operated as of 2020.

 

 

 

In-Game:

The ROCA AH-64E is the penultimate Republic of China helicopter option, being the counterpart to the CAIC Z-10. The AH-64E fielded by the ROCA has access to every advanced defensive equipment available for fielding with the exception of an IRCM curiously enough. The lack of an AN/ALQ-144 IRCM as well as the more limited selection of Hellfire variants would be the main difference between it and any potential US AH-64E Apache Guardian in the future.

 

 

Specifications:

 

General characteristics:

 

Crew: Two

Length: 58 ft 3 in (17.76 m)

Rotor diametre: 48 ft (14.63 m)

Height: 16 ft 3 in (4.95 m)

Empty weight: 11,800 lb (5,352 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 22,282 lb (10,107 kg)

Powerplant: 2 ×  General Electric T700-GE-701D turboshaft's, 1,994 SHP (1,487 kW) each

Rotor system: 4 x primary blades, 4 x tail blades

Fuselage length: 49 ft 5 in (15.06 m)

Stub wingspan: N/A

 

Performance:

 

Never exceed speed: 227 mph (365 km/h)

Maximum speed: 182 mph (293 km/h)

Range: 300 mi (483 km)

Service ceiling: 20,997 ft (6,400 m)

Rate of climb: 2,500 ft/min (12.7 m/s)

 

Armament:

 

1x M230A1 30mm cannon with 1200 rounds

16x AGM-114C Hellfire air-to-ground missiles

16x AGM-114K/M Hellfire II air-to-ground missiles

16x AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire air-to-ground missiles

76x 70mm Hydra rockets

4x AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles

 

Other:

 

Engine exhaust infrared suppression

AN/APG-78 Longbow Fire Control Radar (8 km (5 mi) max range)

AN/APR-39A radar warning receiver

AN/ALQ-136 radar jammer

AN/AVR-2 laser warning receiver

AN/AAR-57 missile warning system

Chaff/flare dispenser 

TADS/PNVS thermal targeting & camera system

Laser designator 

AN/AVS-6 helmet mounted night vision 

 

Sources:

Spoiler

 

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/AH-64阿帕契直升機

https://thediplomat.com/2018/07/taiwan-stands-up-1st-apache-ah-64e-attack-helicopter-brigade/

https://www.flightglobal.com/taiwan-receives-first-batch-of-ah-64e-apaches/111588.article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_AH-64_Apache

https://www.epochtimes.com.tw/n254529/耗資600億-阿帕契直升機歷時11年終於成軍.html

 

 

Edited September 19, 2020 by Miki_Hoshii

[leroyonly 4,310]

Open for discussion. 

[TerikG2014 1,389]

Good god no.... We don't need five Apaches flying about the place and China in particular does not need one not when it has domestic alteratives that can easily fill the role instead.

[霧 丹爪モ匕口丂 靄 466]

Well... I give +1  Cuz I can't see any reason for this not to be added on Chinese Tech Tree. There are some Tech Trees which are using some other Nations current Top Tier in game for so long time. So why not giving them their AH64E actively being used IRL? In my opinion PLAs Z-10 isn't that heavy when comparing it with AH-64s 

[chaffee90 234]

On 2/10/2020 at 5:55 AM, TerikG2014 said:

Good god no.... We don't need five Apaches flying about the place and China in particular does not need one not when it has domestic alteratives that can easily fill the role instead.

Remove ROC vehicle first or split the vehicles of the two regimes into two different tech trees (No one want to see PRC flag on ROC vehicles)

Edited February 13, 2020 by chaffee90

[TerikG2014 1,389]

On 13/02/2020 at 11:38, chaffee90 said:

Remove ROC vehicle first or split the vehicles of the two regimes into two different tech trees (No one want to see PRC flag on ROC vehicles)

That I can agree with.

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

On 13/02/2020 at 05:38, chaffee90 said:

Remove ROC vehicle first or split the vehicles of the two regimes into two different tech trees (No one want to see PRC flag on ROC vehicles)

I mean the same can be said about the Nazi Germany flag representing East & West Germany. If you're referring to individual stat card flags, the ROC vehicles have Republic Of China Army flags to represent them.

 

11 minutes ago, TerikG2014 said:

That I can agree with.

 

I mean if you're fine with losing 3/4ths of the tech trees aviation, and 1/3rd of its ground forces then sure.

 

 

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

On 14/02/2020 at 17:35, Miki_Hoshii said:

I mean the same can be said about the Nazi Germany flag representing East & West Germany. If you're referring to individual stat card flags, the ROC vehicles have Republic Of China Army flags to represent them.

 

 

I mean if you're fine with losing 3/4ths of the tech trees aviation, and 1/3rd of its ground forces then sure.

 

 

There is quite a difference between a world war loser, that been seperated afterwards (Germany, which is now reunited)

and,

2 nations, that are mixed up by some guy, to create a techtree that has no problems in term of grind/gameplay category, because vehicules are coming from all side provided to be good at any BR, due to the fact that each vehicule side are providing its best, and been completed by the other vehicule depending on the game needs. 

 

For me, i voted "no" because China is the Communist part of it (in easy terms, the bigger one in geographical context) following Mao's exemple. 

 

The pseudo-Republic of China is Taïwan it's an island, and was seperated from China by choosing another type of order, influenced by American democracy. 

 

Those 2 nations don't lile the other one, and had nothing to be in techtree despite the fact that they're coming from the same imperial nation, that revolted itself. 

 

I would have prefer to see 2 differents nations.

 

The argue about the techtree is non-sense, and shouldn't be considered: 

A game techtree isn't showing good for 2 completely different nation. 

 

It's no political thoughts, it's cultural ones.

 

In the same idea then, we should have an India-Pakistani techtree mix. 

Even if those to cultural type are way different. Mixing Russian, French, and US vehicule. 

But in the 1st hand, the UK empire did create 2 nations from 1, because of cultural differences. 

 

So,... Let Germany be a single exception, and put Taïwan aside. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by Cpt_Bel_V

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

4 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

There is quite a difference between a world war loser, that been seperated afterwards (Germany, which is now reunited)

and,

2 nations, that are mixed up by some guy, to create a techtree that has no problems in term of grind/gameplay category, because vehicules are coming from all side provided to be good at any BR, due to the fact that each vehicule side are providing its best, and been completed by the other vehicule depending on the game needs. 

 

How is that any different from a nation that had been split into two due to differing ideologies and civil war, the Peoples Republic of China, and the Republic of China aren't two random countries hamfisted into a single tech tree for the sake of it. They're both two different sides of China.

 

5 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

For me, i voted "no" because China is the Communist part of it (in easy terms, the bigger one in geographical context) following Mao's exemple. 

 

If you want to vote no due to personal reasons thats fine, but saying that one is larger than the other therefore more legitimate than the other is silly.

 

5 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

The pseudo-Republic of China is Taïwan it's an island, and was seperated from China by choosing another type of order, influenced by American democracy. 

 

Those 2 nations don't lile the other one, and had nothing to be in techtree despite the fact that they're coming from the same imperialism nation, that revolted itself. 

 

Theres nothing "pseudo" about the Republic of China. The Republic of China was the succeeding government after the collapse of the Qing Dynasty in 1912, the Communist Party of China didn't even exist until its founding in 1921 so how can they both revolt from the Qing dynasty?. In the 1930's China was enveloped in a civil war between the Republic of China, and the communists, but they banded together during the Sino-Japanese war under the Republic of China, the central government was far more legitimate than a band of communist rebels. The war resumed after WW2, and after a series of setbacks eventually the Republic of China's government and military fled to the island of Taiwan in '49, however small pockets of nationalist forces continued fighting until 1961 on the mainland. They didn't willing leave, they fled, and they also don't just hold the island of Taiwan, the govern over Penghu, Kinmen, as well as Matsu, some of these are right off the coast of mainland China. The Republic of China was also a single party authoritarian nationalist government, not an American democracy. It wasn't until the 1980's that the Republic of China began to democratize.  As for the PRC & ROC relations, yes they're bad but that's because they're technically still at war with one another as none of them have signed any peace treaties. Both nations claim all of China as their territory, and both nations claim to be the only China. Taiwan is officially called the Republic of China, not Taiwan, Taiwan is just the province/island. Another side note; the PRC has only existed since 1949, and wasn't recognized internationally until 1971, before that it was the Republic of China that was viewed as the official government of China. 

 

5 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

A game techtree isn't showing good for 2 completely different nation. 

 

They're not two completely different nations, they both claim to be China, are populated by Chinese, and literally have China in their names.

 

5 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

In the same idea then, we should have an India-Pakistani techtree mix. 

Even if those to cultural type are way different. Mixing Russian, French, and US vehicule. 

But in the 1st hand, the UK empire did create 2 nations from 1, because of cultural differences. 

 

Can't comment on this in detail, I don't know much about India and Pakistan other than that they were one territory as British India and have fought multiple times in the 20th century. But that's probably still not even the same situation as this, this is far more akin to the situation in the Korean peninsula. 

 

[tiger7742 260]

On 15/02/2020 at 01:43, Cpt_Bel_V said:

There is quite a difference between a world war loser, that been seperated afterwards (Germany, which is now reunited)

and,

2 nations, that are mixed up by some guy, to create a techtree that has no problems in term of grind/gameplay category, because vehicules are coming from all side provided to be good at any BR, due to the fact that each vehicule side are providing its best, and been completed by the other vehicule depending on the game needs. 

 

For me, i voted "no" because China is the Communist part of it (in easy terms, the bigger one in geographical context) following Mao's exemple. 

 

The pseudo-Republic of China is Taïwan it's an island, and was seperated from China by choosing another type of order, influenced by American democracy. 

 

Those 2 nations don't lile the other one, and had nothing to be in techtree despite the fact that they're coming from the same imperialism nation, that revolted itself. 

 

I would have prefer to see 2 differents nations.

 

The argue about the techtree is non-sense, and shouldn't be considered: 

A game techtree isn't showing good for 2 completely different nation. 

 

It's no political thoughs, it's cultural ones.

 

In the same idea then, we should have an India-Pakistani techtree mix. 

Even if those to cultural type are way different. Mixing Russian, French, and US vehicule. 

But in the 1st hand, the UK empire did create 2 nations from 1, because of cultural differences. 

 

So,... Let Germany be a single exception, and put Taïwan aside. 

 

On 15/02/2020 at 09:49, chaffee90 said:

In fact, we are two completely different countries, not like Germany but the situation on the Korean Peninsula today  ,we have completely different systems and laws and the military ,please don't confuse the two.

(And now only the PRC and some pro-Chinese people say that we belong to the same China

 

Firstly, +1, nice addition. and secondly: I don't want to start a fight or anything, but Taiwan and Mainland is one country and has been one country since the Song Dynasty (1127-1279). Based on the 1992 Consensus, there is only one China, and it is to the other countries which on they recognise, but as a whole, the chinese map will always include the taiwan island. So even if you recognise the ROC, it would still have to be the whole China map, including mainland. So in a nutshell, the situation in china is no more than two chinese parties with different ideologies, NOT different countries, and there is and only will be one China. So if you choose to recognise the ROC, I respect your choice, but saying taiwan island is a country just makes no sense. How many countries recognise taiwan as a country? Zero. How many countries recognise the ROC? A few small countries do.

Edited September 17, 2020 by tiger7742

[tiger7742 260]

On 13/02/2020 at 19:38, chaffee90 said:

No one want to see PRC flag on ROC vehicles

Please Don't Make Assumptions.

 

All jokes aside though, even though I don't agree with you guys, I will respect your perspective unless if it is about the Taiwan Island being a country. I suggest that to prevent this from going off topic, let's just put this political discussion down and leave it here, it is a game after all and it is not like that one of us is going to convince the other one. We both shared our perspectives and there is no point to continue the discussion, it will simply be a waste of everyone's time and ruin everyone's day (Which I hope won't happen)

Edited September 17, 2020 by tiger7742

[Silent_Witch 1,452]

I think political discussions should be in another place. For now, I think it is best to focus should this helicopter be place in China tech tree in game. If Taiwan use it I see no issue it being in China tech tree. As for splitting the current “China” tech tree, I think it does not have enough vehicle to warrant a split at the moment in pure gameplay perspective. However, a split MM would be welcome (should apply to East/West German vehicle as well) 

[John_JIANG 126]

 

It is very easy to separate "Taiwanese" vehicles from Chinese vehicles.

Vehicles captured/received/used before 1949 by ROC/KMT can remain in Chinese tech tree since ROC/KMT was the legal regime of that time. Vehicles used after 1949 by "KMT" reactionaries in Taiwan should be separated to premium/event vehicles (or delete them since logically they are American vehicles and many of them are already in US tech tree, but moving them to premiums line is preferable from me). This is more faithful to historical accuracy of China. 

 

On 15/02/2020 at 00:35, Miki_Hoshii said:

mean if you're fine with losing 3/4ths of the tech trees aviation, and 1/3rd of its ground forces then sure.

 

Therefore, there isn't a lot of Taiwanese vehicles. for planes, only F84, F86, F100, F104A and F104G (5 out of 51) are Taiwanese while others are Chinese. for tanks, only M18, M36, M42, M113, M48A1, M60A3, CM11, CM25 (8 out of 47) are Taiwanese. This is not a significant change. I don't know where did 3/4 and 1/3 come from. 

 

[leroyonly 4,310]

Alright guys, cut it out with the off topic political discussion. Giving your opinion in regards to its TT is fine and all but keep it out of full blown political discussions.

[tiger7742 260]

7 hours ago, leroyonly said:

Alright guys, cut it out with the off topic political discussion. Giving your opinion in regards to its TT is fine and all but keep it out of full blown political discussions.

At last, everyone can have a rest now.

 

Also, I was thinking, is this not the advanced model of the Ah 64 apache? If so, what B.r is suitable for it?

7 hours ago, John_JIANG said:

Therefore, there isn't a lot of Taiwanese vehicles. for planes, only F84, F86, F100, F104A and F104G (5 out of 51) are Taiwanese while others are Chinese. for tanks, only M18, M36, M42, M113, M48A1, M60A3, CM11, CM25 (8 out of 47) are Taiwanese. This is not a significant change. I don't know where did 3/4 and 1/3 come from. 

Just checking, I'm pretty sure the P47s and P51 are also used after 1949, but I'm not sure, is that so?

[Milocat 4,848]

+1 to this helicopter.

[PlanyKaanere 722]

2 hours ago, tiger7742 said:

Also, I was thinking, is this not the advanced model of the Ah 64 apache? If so, what B.r is suitable for it?

 

The same as the AH-64D (10.7). The only improvement relevant to the game is the increase in engine power, which is still less than on the Westland Apache.

[John_JIANG 126]

9 hours ago, tiger7742 said:

 

Just checking, I'm pretty sure the P47s and P51 are also used after 1949, but I'm not sure, is that so?

Yes but they were both used by PLA and ROCAF both before and after 1949 (PLA captured them from ROCA). P-47 was the main power of PLANAF in early 1950s.  

 

I think AH64 would be a great premium, but consider 10.7 is too high for a premium and we have domestic designed heli's I would wait.

[tiger7742 260]

13 hours ago, John_JIANG said:

Yes but they were both used by PLA and ROCAF both before and after 1949 (PLA captured them from ROCA). P-47 was the main power of PLANAF in early 1950s.  

 

I think AH64 would be a great premium, but consider 10.7 is too high for a premium and we have domestic designed heli's I would wait.

thanks

[ItalianHitman 1,289]

Please ... we don't need another apache in the game ...
especially considering china has their own helicopters, and they are very good ...

[Black_Woof 123]

13 hours ago, Persian__Warrior said:

Please ... we don't need another apache in the game ...
especially considering china has their own helicopters, and they are very good ...

indeed, but consider to what we got yet(not only for chinese tree) we can have a conclusion that Gaijin really love copy paste things.

after all AH64D is a good heli, makes me want to grind, and they have a same thing in US tress so they will not nerf it's load out like what they do to Q5

[MichaeL98 102]

sorry but no.

I understand and agree that the top chinese heli Z10 is not a heavy attack helicopter like the apache, but I see the Z10 a somehow equivalent counterpart of the Eurocopter Tiger.

So as for now I think the Z10 could be enough, but if it's proved to be not, I'm not against adding the Apache to make the chinese TT competetive.

[ACOMETS 977]

-1 idont want to see apache fighting apache with better hellfires (fixed would be ) .

Edited September 29, 2020 by ACOMETS

[Yontzee 1,673]

Yes! +1 

[CEO_OF_SUS 9]

*Aggressively dishes out Apaches to everyone