Cobra-Apache amplification:

1. Army gets single-engine Cobra [AH-1G] (1966).

2. USMC tries AH-1G, likes it, but wants (and gets) a twin-engine version [AH-1J Sea Cobra] (1969).

3. USMC orders “Improved Sea Cobra” [AH-1T] (1976) with uprated engines, larger rotor, a FLIR, and other improvements. In this same time-frame, Army begins a series of upgrades of their single-engined Cobras.

4. Army wants a “heavy” attack helo and, after a bunch of experimental programs, holds competition (won by AH-64 Apache 1976, but first delivery 1983). Army keeps single-engined Cobras as “light attack” helo, with further upgrades throughout the 1980s.

5. USMC evaluates possible “Sea Apache” (1981), but decides to upgrade Sea Cobra (1983) with the same engines as Apache and other improvements (including 2 AIM-9 Sidewinder A-A missiles). The AH-1W is now a “medium attack helo”, and is called “Super Cobra”. AH-1W is faster & more maneuverable than Apache, and requires significantly less maintenance.

6. Army tries to replace Cobras with Comanche [RAH-66] (started 1983), but the program is cancelled in 2002. Most Cobras are pulled from service through downsizing, not replacement.

7. Army upgrades Apache with anti-tank radar [AH-64D Longbow] and without radar [AH-64D] (1990) and is attempting to equip them with 4 air-launched versions of either Stinger or Starstreak Manpads. Most AH-64As are upgraded, but those that are not replace Army Cobras with National Guard units.

8. USMC upgrades AH-1W as AH-1Z in mid-late 2000s with 4-blade main rotor and a host of other improvements. “Viper” is still faster & more maneuverable than Apache, but now has the same weapons payload and equivilent electronics (USMC starts development of a pod for radar (to go on weapons station), but drop it, viewing radar on attack helos less useful than Army does).

http://www.vectorsite.net/avcobra_1.html

http://www.vectorsite.net/avcobra_2.html

http://www.vectorsite.net/avah64.html

But why are the Army and USMC behaving like they are from two completely different countries?

If the US government bought only Cobras (for example) then surely that would save the country millions in seperate purchase costs, logistics, spares, training etc?

Back to my original query about Jaguar/Tornado, I have to concede defeat on that one. Thank you Scorpian82 for reminding me that the Jags role was CAS and the Tornado Interdiction Strike (IDS)!

If a country can afford to replace only 50% of its fighter fleet with a new aircraft why replace any of it at all? The RAF started replacing F4 Phantoms with Jaguars in the strike roll in the late 70s, the interceptor Phantoms were replace by the Tornado F3 in the 80s yet it wasn’t until 1993 that the last Phantoms were retired from RAF service! Couldn’t the Phantom have continued in interceptor and strike roles until the 90s before being replaced then with a single type rather than 3 types over 20 years (Jaguar, Tornado IDS and Tornado ADV)? That would would seem to be much more cost effective!