The Griffon can be as much...or as little as the CF wants it to be, ranging from some "power and performance" mods to a major upgrade to a UH-1Y-like configuration.
A tac hel pilot now flying Sea Kings and I were the two guys who set up the "weaponization" configuration trial noted by Inch, above.
We begged, borrowed and in some cases....well anyway, we assembled a collection of various kits from our contacts throughout the US military-industrial complex and tacked it all onto one of the Griffons (CH146401) that was being used for initial CH146 pilot training down in Fort Worth, Tx. The "plank" was made by the same company that makes the SOA-kit used by the 160th SOAR "Nightstalkers", for their AH/MH-6, MH60K and MH-47E/G aircraft. Armament was: AGM-114K Hellfire, GDAS GAU-19(A) .50 3-barrelled gatling and a CFD low-recoile crew-served 30mm. To be clear about this, the aircraft didn't fly that way because the airworthiness would have not been worth the effort at the time...the picture was "worth a 1000 words" to let naysayers know it was at least possible.
A Griffon as is could fly with that eqpt seen above and retain about 1 1/2 hours on station. Add a "power and performance" mod to the engine/tranny (including FADEC fuel control for the engines) and we could lift a bit more for extended operating periods. If you go all the way up to a "Y" rebuild,
[see Bell site here for more Y info] you could do a fiar bit more....
I would like to make a point about many of the folks saying the Griffon is unarmoured and thus would have to hang back, etc... (this is NOT just regarding a_majoor's comment above, by any means) We would fly the aircraft where it's required to operate and try to minimize risk to crew with the appropriate measures, personal body armour, aircraft armour, etc... but you can not protect yourself from everything, there will always be risk out there and operating any "weapon system" comes with risks. That does not mean you "don't operate there"... Our LAV III's aren't equipped with a bird cage and don't have DAS, so an RPG could take them out in an instant...but you guys still operate them in theatre, right? Same goes for the Griffon...if it is physically able to fly in the AOR, then it's operation would come with associated risks that must be assessed to determine when and where operations would be undertaken.
On the armed helicopter side of things, the Army is finalizing its statement of required dedicated aviation support to the Air Force through its Capability Development Record process. Currently it is being reviewed by Gen Caron before he provides Gen Pennie with the consolidated and finalized statement of aviation capability the Army requires. I can tell you that it does include the requirement for an armed capability, to contribute to networked fires through the provision of precision direct and indirect fires. Several GOs were very supportive of an ARH capability for tactical aviation and that is what the Army's statement to the Air Force will most likely contain. More to follow as the papaerwork makes its way from one floor of 101 to another...
Cheers
