LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteWhen I saw this old man, with a rifle of 19-th century, hit the Apache, I very long laughed. Certainly it cannot be the truth.Originally Posted by Garry
Guys, I doubt that Apache was shot down by a rifle... it was a propaganda move by Saddam. Yet it was shot down.... and by some AAA....
In my amateur view both Kamov and Mi-28N are much beter platforms for upgrades than Appache... However.... both need some radar guided missiles... and not beam guided. lazer beamed weapons is getting obsolete.
When I saw this old man, with a rifle of 19-th century, hit the Apache, I very long laughed. Certainly it cannot be the truth.
!["East-"Ukraine](http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/images/buttons/flags/"East-"Ukraine.GIF)
Doubting does not get us somewhere near truth.
I can doubt, you can doubt, we all can doubt.
That is something subjectif.
What we need are facts.That will lead us more to the truth than doubting or thinking (you don't have to think, you have to know!).
Facts are more plausible than subjective statements.
And it is a fact (everybody has to agree) that the Mi-28 is better defended by his armour.
We are speaking here of 50mm bulletproof resistant windows and titanium and ceramic armour panels, not some plastic.
However, MI-28N is bette armores, payloaded, uglier. Those are 3 main things about any chopper that are determining its power on the battlefield.
Наша жизнь как пианино: белая клавиша, черная клавиша и крышка
Sure, the Mi-28 is nicely armored. No one's disputing that. Is the armor more -useful- than what the apache has? ... I don't know. THAT is debeatable.
Out of 30-40 AH-64's that flew intot he AAA ambush, only 2-3 went down in the field, the rest made it back to base. I'd call that rather well armored and reliable.
In addition, the Mi-28 might be able to lift more *weight*, but the Apache's guided weapon (The Hellfire) is a much better weapon that Shturm /or/ Ataka.
Well I am sure that more apaches would be downed if we gave those rebels some stingers or grails in significant numbers.Sure, the Mi-28 is nicely armored. No one's disputing that. Is the armor more -useful- than what the apache has? ... I don't know. THAT is debeatable.
Out of 30-40 AH-64's that flew intot he AAA ambush, only 2-3 went down in the field, the rest made it back to base. I'd call that rather well armored and reliable.
In addition, the Mi-28 might be able to lift more *weight*, but the Apache's guided weapon (The Hellfire) is a much better weapon that Shturm /or/ Ataka.
Because you cannot say they really used any AA.
Maybe not even one.
You cannot say something is proven in his defence system if there was no impact on the defence.
(by this I don't mean that no Apache was beeing shooted at, but the Apache did not suffer much impacts of bullets or AA-systems.Something like a Apache being shot was rarely seen i Iraq)
And it was the Mi-24 who was called the devil's tank, not the apache.
I know the 24 suffered losses far more than apache, but that was due to the "good" american decision to support the Afghanis, alltough theAmericans self started a war agains them.(naturally they did not know that, but it is very ironic. First they supply them and afterwards they declared a war against them)
Do you think it would have been nice if the Iraqis would receive a large number of grails, supported by Russians.
Then there would have been a larger number of Apaches downed.
But since olmost no grail was used in Iraq, the armour of the Apache had "no purpose".
To summary my argument, the following simple question:
Do you need bulletproof jacket if no bullets wil be shot at you?
Sure you do. Chicks dig flak vests. Watch for them to appear in the new Victoria's catalog next year
Can anyone here talk more about the Apache, specifically reliability, and generally what kind of design needs to go into a helo to make it less vulnerable.
I remember back during Kosovo everyone was making a big deal saberrattling like "yall serbs better watch out now and strike a deal, we got apaches coming" but then two of em crashed and the rest just got grounded.
Does this point to a general fault of apache reliability or did it happen because of the particular situation.
What is the US doing to increase reliability and survivability of the system, is anything in the Longbow package targeted specifically for this? Obviously a more aware helicopter pilot means more suvivability, but I'm talking about it ability to take hits and keep flying rather than avoid hits altogether.
Thanks
So you're saying that the Russian 23mm AA guns used against them were not real? They were there.
And do you understand the meaning of ambush? ...
Because I'm pretty sure a Mi-28 would go down if it was hit by a Stinger
The apache has also participated in other campaigns. I have a picture of an apache rotor blade that had taken a 30mm round - and they didn't notice until the helicopter landed.(by this I don't mean that no Apache was beeing shooted at, but the Apache did not suffer much impacts of bullets or AA-systems.Something like a Apache being shot was rarely seen i Iraq)
Right, okay .. and? There's movies on YouTube of apaches being hit by SA-7/16And it was the Mi-24 who was called the devil's tank, not the apache.
I know the 24 suffered losses far more than apache, but that was due to the "good" american decision to support the Afghanis, alltough theAmericans self started a war agains them.(naturally they did not know that, but it is very ironic. First they supply them and afterwards they declared a war against them)
The iraqis have a LOT of those weapons. A LOT.Do you think it would have been nice if the Iraqis would receive a large number of grails, supported by Russians.
They were used. And the armor is not against the missile - once a missile is fired on you, all bets are off. Armor is against rifles and small AA guns.Then there would have been a larger number of Apaches downed.
But since olmost no grail was used in Iraq, the armour of the Apache had "no purpose".
Would you not wear all the protection you could if you went into a fight? Yes, you would. What kind of silly question is this?To summary my argument, the following simple question:
Do you need bulletproof jacket if no bullets wil be shot at you?
Can anyone answer my questions? Please...
They do nothing, they just building 2 more if one gets shot.
Наша жизнь как пианино: белая клавиша, черная клавиша и крышка
Just to piggyback on this...the SA-7 was so effective that they gave up and went to unguided RPGs to try to hit helos. Doesnt that tell you something?
Edit: I think I'm gonna play some Battlefield 2 now. I'll let you guys know what I find out.
Last edited by Jimmy; 30 Nov 06, at 03:30.
The 7 is a documented POS using an uncooled seeker - it got like 1 hit in 13 launches or something - its replacement it much more realiable in that respect
In any case, so if you're saying these things haven't been hitting a whole lot, I'll agree.
I've even seen videos of these things hitting Hinds though, so I really don't know what these guys are on about.
Which nickname do you have in the Battlefield 2?
Наша жизнь как пианино: белая клавиша, черная клавиша и крышка
Godholio
Edit:VVV I'll keep an eye out for ya.
Last edited by Jimmy; 05 Dec 06, at 05:58.
I'm playing that game too, sometimes, not often, nickname TroubleFromRUSSIA
Наша жизнь как пианино: белая клавиша, черная клавиша и крышка
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: