WZ-10

it appears that the PLA's 1st true indigenous attack helicopter(the WZ-10) may soon be close to operational status

6 WZ-10 prototypes have been said to have been built since 04

the WZ-10 is currently going through phases of extensive flight testing, before it's design can be finalized the PLA for production approval

not much is still known about the WZ-10 program, the project is believed to have been underdevelopment since the 90's but kept under tight guard

based on recent photo's the WZ-10 looks very similar to the ROOIVALK in appearance and is comparable in size and performance to the TIGER

the WZ-10 features a two tandem seat cockpit, 5 blade main rotor, 4 bladed tail rotor, slim fuselage and 2 stub wings

the CHINA and a EUROPEAN partner(FRENCH EUROCOPTER) are working together to develop its avionics systems, while it's mission systems are to be done strictly in-house by the CHANGHE group

weapons
the WZ-10 is said to have a chin mounted 30mm cannon(front fuselage) and will carry the new HJ-10 ATGM(similar to the AGM-114) but unconfirmed

once service the WZ-10 will only increase and upgrade the PLA role capabilities

Here is the 30mm cannon at a chinese weapons expo




Firing flares


Heres a picture detailing the helicopter better
larger picture

Anyone played 'Revolution X'?, There are these Hind type choppers in it, It also looks like the WZ-10



Did anyone discuss about the AH-56 Cheyenne? I have recently bought a book about it and it said there was even a Naval SAR Variant that may have led to a combined attack and transport chopper like the Hind!

[edit on 26-7-2006 by Browno]

Just goes to show quick to reverse engineer the Chinese are isn't it? Just like the Russians during the cold war copying any and every thing they could. Via using it first from the companies that actually did the work....

Home grown and self developed??? Yeah and the plans just happened to drop off the back of a lorry!!



-----------------------

edited to remove and replace offensive statement

[edit on 27-7-2006 by masqua]

Originally posted by GSA
Just goes to show what a race of thieving little gits the chinese are isn't it? Just like the Russians during the cold war copying any and every thing they could.

I think thats a bit unwarranted, rude and offensive. Do you realise this is an international forum?

LAWNMOWERMAN,

Looks like a cross between the Mangusta and Tigre to me.

Which is of course a 'good thang' because the world is a far better place when the Chinese fulfill their own stereotype label in reverseengineering /junk/ than when they actually do something Outside The Box which forces U.S. and the Euros to respond to /their/ lead.

More power to'ya PRC! You just keep right on tossing those RMBs into the fire as fast as you can chuck'em.


KPl.

[edit on 26-7-2006 by ch1466]

Just a note to say to drop the anti-chinese talk. Play nice or don't play at all.

I have spoken...

GSA,

So the WZ-10 was copied from a cartoon helicopter which only has a passing resemblance to it??????.

It doesn't look like any other helicopter. Unless your going to debate whether a A129, tiger, Rooivalk or cobra are copies because they "look" the same.

Interesting, where have you found your pics?

Really!

Have any of you China bashers even bothered to look up specs or somethin before proclaiming it to be a copy. Just because it is from China does not necessarily make it one does it?

People should be a bit more careful and not just shoot their mouths off

Originally posted by GSA
Just goes to show quick to reverse engineer the Chinese are isn't it? Just like the Russians during the cold war copying any and every thing they could.

What do you expect from a pig but a grunt?



What do you want them to produce? The laws of aerodynamics and physics are the same in China, Russia, the US, Europe... everywhere on the planet.


If you are gonna have a 2-man crew, they should be in tandem to reduce frontal area. Your blade number and size is dictated by aerodynamics, engine thrust and agility requirements [Last time I looked the Apache was a 4-blade rotor]. The same decisions on compromises are made in China and Russia in exactly the same manner as those in Europe or the states. You could go with a shrouded tail rotor, but it makes maintenance harder.


Go learn something about how aircraft are designed and built before coming out with such stupid statements

Originally posted by chinawhite
GSA,

So the WZ-10 was copied from a cartoon helicopter which only has a passing resemblance to it??????.

It doesn't look like any other helicopter. Unless your going to debate whether a A129, tiger, Rooivalk or cobra are copies because they "look" the same.

First, the Cobra no more looks like a Rooivalk or a Mangusta than it does a Tiger.

Skids, two blade main rotor in most versions, much more primitive nose sights without a separate PNVS capability, smooth vs. stepped canopies, vastly different power pack and exhaust cooling arrangements. Do you see ANY of those on the competition?

No. Reason why? The Cobra is a first generation attack helicopter and a cheap-and-dirty solution to the problem of designing an _escort to UH-1s with the same drive train_ besides.

i.e. If the Rooivalk and all the other _APACHE CLONES_ are not of the 'same configuration' as the Cobra progenitor why thee /hell/ is that yours of a like apperance??

A wise man would look at dates and threat weapons developments /since/ those dates. And realize that the day of the attack helicopter is _done_. Because all of the systems which drive it from the sky were available at the end of Vietnam and ITS COST has risen compared to theirs 100:1. So that while a MANPADS may run 50-70 grande. An AH-64D is probably closer to 35 MILLION.

Since you are not facing any threat greater than an unarmed civillian standing in front of a tank in your own Capital, whereas we needed every ATGW we could muster to pretend to throw back the Russian Hordes until a politician could press the nuclear incinerator button.

WHY WASTE THE MONEY!? Do you think that you will have a better chance selling advanced weapons systems 'on the cheap' to other countries than Europe has with the Tiger and A-129 or SA has with their Rooivalk?

Bwuahahahahahahahhah!

Sell what does a job that no one else does, better/faster/cheaper than anything they can adapt to the mission. With the rise of A-UAVs and UCAVs, helicopters will never be that.

Just like they never were that in Vietnam. Where we threw away some 5,056 of them losing to a threat that quickly figured out just how vulnerable they are.

And here I thought the Chinese were smart, forcing the U.S. to spend it's financial life's blood like a hemorrhaging hemophiliac while doing the inscrutable game of 'the dragons watches the tigers fight lower down the mountain'.


KPl.

Originally posted by kilcoo316

>>
If you are gonna have a 2-man crew...
>>

Why such a 'stupid' assumption?

If you can't afford to expose a vulnerable airframe too slow to leave a targeted weapons solution and with too little altitude capability to fly above it. Why not use drones as a hunter uses hounds to flush a cougar? They can have civillian camcorder technology on them and at the range and relative LOS speed they fly at _still_ have orders of magnitude superior imaging to the best AAQ-30 Hawkeye available to an AH-1Z.

Certainly you shouldn't need two crew on EVERY chopper because why pay for the sensorization when you can LINK it?

>>
They should be in tandem to reduce frontal area.
>>

Why not put a single man out front so he doesn't have to look through the freakin' /head/ of his CPG while maintaining a shorter throwlength on the CG and thus overall size/weapons placement on the helo as a whole? Heck, let's pull the sensor installation too and double if not triple the thickness of his clear aluminum viewing panels in trade. No, better yet, lets make his vision _synthetic_ so the that laser and radar penetration of the cockpit goes away as well.

Then lets switch to a sidelooking radar with FOPEN capabilities so that we don't have to point the bloody chopper at the threat that is likely to shoot it. And can indeed MASSIVELY increase the array size as a whole.

The bloody Hezbollans are using Hollywood 'fake rocks' to hide Katyushas. Why aren't attack helos /all over/ that? Ans1: They can't find them. Ans2: they can't manually search likely areas without overflying threats. How much good is a CPG playing tourist with a tiny-ass FLIR nose aperture then?

If you MUST have a sensor operator, by all damn means PUT HIM IN THE CABIN WHERE HE BELONGS. Next to the bigbore telescopes or RTIP radar arrays he's using. And not first in line to take a bloody bullet.

>>
Your blade number and size is dictated by aerodynamics, engine thrust and agility requirements [Last time I looked the Apache was a 4-blade rotor].
>>

Dump weight. Power loading goes up.

Fly faster and put a pair of wings on or sculpt the body to serve as a LID type device in hover and a rotor offload in forward flight.

Dump gas because once you are in-cruise, you have better range:rates.

Dump drag because you put your weapons INSIDE the fuselage where they bloody well belong for reasons of environmental safety, signature and rapid pallet-reload.

Dump agility requirements because you never fly over a city or 'dodge' projectiles fired from a close-in threat and need only enough anti-torque to land 'into the wind' in VTOL. All other tail thrust being forward-propulsive.

NOTHING STAYS THE SAME ONCE YOU APPLY LOGIC TO WHY THE HELICOPTER IS A **FAILED** MILITARY SYSTEM!!

>>
The same decisions on compromises are made in China and Russia in exactly the same manner as those in Europe or the states. You could go with a shrouded tail rotor, but it makes maintenance harder.
>>

Crap. They are the same decisions because they are the _same mission_. You copy the way someone fights and it's a no-brainer that you get the 'same equipment solution' excuse for free.

That doesn't mean that you have a superior military, only a mirror image of somebody else' mistakes. What, the land that gave birth to Sun Tzu never /heard/ of "Never fight the way your enemy fights best?".

If the U.S. Army could ditch Key West, everything about it's rotary wing:fixed wing ratio'd fleet 'solutions' would change as fast as their 'CAS vs. Deepstrike' doctrinal _mission_ plans did.

Only the CMICs of other nations think that our military is 'above' internal parochialism and power struggles than to allow the security of our nation to be put at risk for personal pride. They are wrong. Our military is completely corrupt. So is Congress and the USAF is the fair haired boy getting the best budgetary steak because of it.

>>
Go learn something about how aircraft are designed and built before coming out with such stupid statements.
>>

Stupidity is like two pigs in a mud puddle. They love to get icky while squealing at each other. The mistake lies in getting down to their level to 'better understand them'.

Since war is nothing if not one giant opportunity for man to degrade himself to the level of animals, the real question becomes one of learning to avoid the mistakes of those who hostage their nations futures to a militarism that should not exist in a 'post cold' environment.

And certainly should not exist just to play a one-upmanship contest of having every killing toy your enemy does, no matter how inefficient or wasteful it may be.


KPl.

ch1466,


You might notice I wrote "If your gonna have a two man crew".

Everything else stems from that decision, I'm not arguing for, or against that decision, I'm pointing out the design avenue resulting from the decision. Since that is the decision the Chinese have made, their path from that point onwards is relatively fixed.



But in answer to the general point you raise, I'd agree, the attack helicopter is obsolete in the face of an anyway modern enemy. They are:


- too slow
- too clumsy
- too light a payload
- too easy to kill [very little in the way of effective countermeasures]


Better to use a smart munition from a fast mover with remote guidance than expose an expensive platform to guide and fire a similarly expensive munition.


[edit on 28-7-2006 by kilcoo316]

Originally posted by ch1466
LAWNMOWERMAN,

Looks like a cross between the Mangusta and Tigre to me.

i can see your point

the only reason i thought of ROOIVALK was because the ROOIVALK had a chin mounted gun and the earlier version of the A129 did not until much later

but in a since you can say the WZ-10 is similar to all 3 in appearance and features

Anyone know if they plan to use a top mounted radar like the Longbow? I've always liked that design for popup attacks and scouting..

Originally posted by Clownface
Anyone know if they plan to use a top mounted radar like the Longbow? I've always liked that design for popup attacks and scouting..

that's a good question

now it has been rumored that a mast mounted radar/sight system would be fitted onto the WZ-10 eventually

but currently

WZ-10 would operate in conjunction with the new improved night attack version of the WZ-9 and a MMR/S fitted Z-9(as shown below)

when will this be in full production?


also ch1466 do you know how to use the quote thing?

Originally posted by bodrul
when will this be in full production?

honesty at this moment can not really say but

from what i have heard full scale production for WZ-10 could start around 2007-08(still unconfirmed) at the earliest to 2010-11 at the latest

the new WZ-9G night attack version has been in full scale production since 05





[edit on 7-8-2006 by LAWNMOWERMAN]

Wow, the chinese are so original, i wonder where they ever got such an idea to build an attack helo like this one, jk, the chinese military desighners and planners are like xerox machines, they copy everything real cheap