Army aviators from the British and Australian forces are strengthening their collaborative efforts by sharing operational experiences of the new Apache AH-64E attack helicopter.

According to a press release, eight soldiers from the Australian Army Aviation Command are currently embedded at Wattisham Flying Station in Suffolk, learning from their British counterparts.

The Australian contingent, which includes engineering officers, aircraft and avionics technicians, and ground crew, is working closely with the 3 Regiment Army Air Corps (3 Regt AAC), which has been operating the AH-64E since 2022.

This exchange is part of the growing military ties between the UK and Australia following the signing of the AUKUS defence and security agreement in 2021, which also includes the United States.

Major K, leading the Australian team, highlighted the benefits of this collaboration. “We recognised that, by already operating the same aircraft as we’re getting, the British could provide a great source of learning for us,” she said. “Everyone has been incredibly welcoming, and we’ve been able to do courses, go through all the documentation and just get our hands on the aircraft. From what I’ve seen of AH-64E, and talking to the British engineers and aircrew, I’m really excited about it coming into Australian service.”

The Australian Army has procured 29 AH-64E helicopters to replace its Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters. Major K spoke of the strategic advantage of all three AUKUS allies operating the same helicopter. “As allies operating together, we will understand the aircraft’s capabilities, be able to interchange personnel and supplies, and pool knowledge to tackle any technical issues,” she added.

Corporal C, an avionics technician, shared his positive experience during the placement. “I’ve been treated just like another soldier in the unit. I’ve worked in the hangars at Wattisham and got out in the field on exercises across the UK and overseas,” he said.

“Between all of us who’ve come over to Wattisham, we’re going to have years of experience of working on the AH-64E before we get our own aircraft, and that’s going to set us up for success.”

Staff Sergeant Paul Holland, who manages the engineering workforce for 3 Regt AAC’s 662 Squadron, praised the collaboration. “We’re having a very positive experience with the Australians. They work with the same professionalism as we do and bring something a little bit different, in their experiences and personalities,” he noted.

“It’s good to think that we’re giving the Australians a head start with the AH-64E, and they’ve helped us to rethink and refine some of our working practices in return.”

The British Army has acquired 50 AH-64Es, which offer enhanced flying performance and advanced sensors and communications systems, significantly improving battlefield performance over the previous Apache Mk1.


At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

16 COMMENTS

  1. Does the Ah-64E have the same navalised folding rotor blades as the AgustaWestland Apache had? I read that was one of the bug advantages our apaches had over the Americans. The same with the engines as the AgustaWestland Apache had more powerful engines than the stand Apache D.

    • Hi NorthernAlly,

      I’m pretty sure that they do not have folding blades. My understanding is that they are standard E variants. As such they have more powerful engines than the RR powered WAH-64D the British Army previously flew.

      You are right that they WAH-64D’s had more powerful engines than other Apaches when they entered service and performed well in Afghanistan I believe.

      Cheers CR

    • Always a danger. Staff working alongside each other socialise and talk. Pay and conditions get compared. With the Military it happens between the various arms. Brits have long been poached by Aus / NZ . It’s a no brainer both ways. The poachers get a ready made product at no cost. If you make the move better pay and conditions in your adopted country.
      The same thing happens when the MOD give assistance to civil powers. Be it strike cover or something like Covid.
      In this case it could be costly if say 20 aircrew plus 20 maintenance staff jump ship. Pretty sure the AUS officer will have been well briefed on discretion.

  2. And another 50 for the UK AAC would help cover the lack of Tanks and would be a great add on to making the Army a harder hitting outfit but much more mobile too, all pluses that are needed. A true Cavalry concept that is how our small Army should be looking at. Fast and hard hitting and able to move from area to area quickly. More transport Helo’s too to help them be supported. Ah well maybe one day someone will wake up.

    • Can’t agree I’m afraid. This is where we are massively behind in thinking.

      In 2015 when working at Army HQ I was an observer of a US simulated war game, designed to test future operating concepts. They were testing the ability of the 101st Airborne (in reality airmobile) to conduct Divisional manoeuvre in a contested environment.

      1st run through the Division didn’t make the LZ .
      2nd run through they reduced the enemy Air Defence capability by 75%. That time the Div didn’t make it off the LZ. They were destroyed by fires.

      The conclusion the Americans made was that helicopter born troops are now too vulnerable in general warfare. That’s why they are moving away from traditional rotor wing and more into tilt-rotor of faster craft. Ukraine also demonstrated the vulnerability of rotary wing manoeuvre in a modern AD environment.

      Now your concept of fast moving, disperse and concentrate is probably right. By doing it in a helicopter is probably not the right thing.

      • Interesting.
        Where does that leave our 16AA then, Bob? As you know, only a small part is para delivery.

        • Well, several things to take from it.
          First, anything short of a highly contested airspace could allow for heli-borne manoeuvre- so it’s not technically dead.
          Second, look at the US replacement competition for Blackhawk. Hybrid vertical lift options being looked at because they are more survivable (directly because of the lessons they drove from simulation)
          Finally, if we view 16AA as a highly mobile, self sufficient all-arms bde, with elite infantry (as painful to admit as that is as a former Rifles officer) then there is huge utility.
          BUT – in a highly contested peer war, probably relegated to screening the flanks until you have total air superiority over the battle space (but still very vulnerable to an opponent with good SHORAD, a capable FIND function and massed FIRES)

          • Thanks Bob.
            Yes, one of our few brigades that are all arms and with a full set of CS CSS.
            I don’t think a lot has changed since the Cold War. I recall the then 5 Airborne Bde / 5 Infantry Brigade was also assigned to the flanks.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here