Attack Helicopters

**SRB** · 16 Apr 07, 23:08

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

1. Large triple-lobe air/exhaust fitted to the engine jetpipes to reduce the IR signature became obligatory in 1983.

2. Two pairs of ASO-2V chaff/flare dispensers were strapped on beneath the tailboom. These were replaced in 1987 by triple ASO-2V on the fuselage sides immediately aft of the wings, angled forward to obtain a wider coverage.

3. From 1984, an L-166V-1E Ispanka (SOEP-V1A Lipa) active IRCM jammer was fitted aft of the main rotor head on the Mi-24V Hind E.

Did that help in A-stan?
I read somewhere that USSR lost 300 Mi-24 in A-stan not all from Stingers but large portion. Ok some of those Mi-24 work as screen for transport planes and will get stinger instead An-24. What was A-stan efficient Stinger vs. Mi-24?

**Garry** · 24 Apr 07, 18:42

Originally Posted by SRB

Did that help in A-stan?
I read somewhere that USSR lost 300 Mi-24 in A-stan not all from Stingers but large portion. Ok some of those Mi-24 work as screen for transport planes and will get stinger instead An-24. What was A-stan efficient Stinger vs. Mi-24?

In total USSR lost 333 rotorcrafts and 104 fixed wing aircraft. Of these somewhat more than 1/3 were combat losses and 2/3 of helos crashed because of severe conditions, mulfuctions and crew errors.

Most of the those 130 helos were SHOT down by small arms fire - 12.7mm and 14.5mm + RPG during landing and take offs. Very rarelly 23mm.... and some with Stingers/Chinese Igla.

Initially Stingers did scored well.... but then pilots learned that it was quite a flare eater + it was very unrelaible. Most of the victims scored by Stinger were in the first two years of its apprearance in A-stan. Very few later.

However small arms fire remained quite a massive reason for shooting down even most armored Mi-24... even though it could hold a lot of hits on average.

So 12.7 and 14.5mm + RPG remain a MOST MASSIVE killer of helicopters of all times.

**omon** · 24 Apr 07, 18:47

Originally Posted by SRB

Did that help in A-stan?
I read somewhere that USSR lost 300 Mi-24 in A-stan not all from Stingers but large portion. Ok some of those Mi-24 work as screen for transport planes and will get stinger instead An-24. What was A-stan efficient Stinger vs. Mi-24?

soviets lost 333 helis in afgen alltogether, only 100+ were hinds.

**Shamus** · 25 Apr 07, 03:49

I voted for the AH-64D.All else being relatively equal between it and the KA-50,the Longbow radar seals the deal.The Apache was designed as a ground attack/support weapons platform not for dogfighting.The ability to pop up exposing only your radar mast to LOS to designate targets and then dropping back out of sight to fire Hellfires at them,needing only to pop up again for the last few seconds of the missles' flight is an awesome ability.The Army's attack helicopter program previous to the Apache proved that the ability to fly higher was not necessarily a good thing.That program's design was a chopper that could fly 200mph and used a high altitude,very steep angle of attack firing run.This just made it a better target for AAA gunners and SAMS.

**Shamus** · 25 Apr 07, 03:50

Sorry,almost forgot...Here's a link to a decent page about the Stinger

FIM-92A Stinger Weapons System: RMP & Basic

**GGTharos** · 25 Apr 07, 05:32

Originally Posted by Shamus

I voted for the AH-64D.All else being relatively equal between it and the KA-50,

Not at all, unless you're talking flat terrain, then you might claim -some- form of equality. But the AH-64 had night capability from the get-go, the Ka-50 didn't. The AH-64's guided weapons are better, period. So is the datalink (automation).
In terrain that's not anythign resembling flat, the -64 has a /definite/ advantage in weapons and systems. The Ka-50 has a maneuvering advantage, for all the good that'll do for it.

the Longbow radar seals the deal.

That's just the tip of the iceberg

The Apache was designed as a ground attack/support weapons platform not for dogfighting.

Neither was the Ka-50, no matter what the media and games producers say

The ability to pop up exposing only your radar mast to LOS to designate targets and then dropping back out of sight to fire Hellfires at them,needing only to pop up again for the last few seconds of the missles' flight is an awesome ability.The Army's attack helicopter program previous to the Apache proved that the ability to fly higher was not necessarily a good thing.That program's design was a chopper that could fly 200mph and used a high altitude,very steep angle of attack firing run.This just made it a better target for AAA gunners and SAMS.

And there again it depends on what and who you're fighting. This is all well and good when enemy ADA is supressed, but a good active ADA will kill your helis no matter what.

On the other hand, when you're fighting mujahids? You better be flying high and popping flares over every ridge - because your chopper ain't designed with 'survivability features' when it's being fired on from the TOP. So you fly high - the Russians learned this the hard way in Afganistan.

**Tasman** · 25 Apr 07, 06:03

Originally Posted by Boertjie

The Tiger is a nother baby though. Its modern, fast and agile. It's got a lot going for it but why two versions? Because it's to expensive to do all in one and the airframe is to small. There's very little range in those tanks and she's been build for Europe's wet and cold temps with lots of support by a army of ground crew close by.

I've just checked out the Aussie Tiger (Australian built version of the Eurocopter Tigre) at the Avalon airshow near Melbourne and after talking with its crew and listening to the army PR people describing its features (yes I know they are probably biased

) I think it is able to be adapted for far different conditions to the ones you describe. In Australian service they will often operate in the dry, sandy conditions of central and northern Australia as well as hot tropical jungle areas in Queensland. The Australian army is light on manpower so they will need to be able to operate with minimal support.

The Australian army will operate the Tiger primarily as an armed recce helo with attack missions as a secondary though still important role.

I think all of these helos are pretty impressive. For a pure attack helo my choice would be the AH64D Apache 'Longbow'.

Cheers

**chankya** · 16 May 07, 02:52

Originally Posted by glyn

Are you expecting helicopter to helicopter battles (like aircraft to aircraft battles were in WW1) any time soon? Helos are used for many tasks such as Recce, Anti-Tank, communications, Casevac, troop lift, moving supplies and the like. Expecting Aces in the rotary wing world is a little far fetched!

Actually yes. Attack helicopters have been thought of as flying tanks. If you extend that forward and apply the "best counter to a tank is a tank" argument then the best counter to a attack helicopter is another attack helicopter.

**hello** · 16 May 07, 09:02

Originally Posted by chankya

If you extend that forward and apply the "best counter to a tank is a tank" argument then the best counter to a attack helicopter is another attack helicopter.

The best counter to a tank is an A-10. The best counter to a helicopter is any decent air-to-air capable fighter jet 2nd gen and up.

**Injecteer** · 16 May 07, 10:34

Originally Posted by hello

The best counter to a helicopter is any decent air-to-air capable fighter jet 2nd gen and up.

wouldn't really agree on that.

The majority of fighters bellow 4th gen did have a Doppler-radar, the later couldn't effectively track the slow-flying helos. So, the plane had pretty few chances to hit the helo, and that fact was proven in multiple tests.

**~~Shipwreck~~** · 16 May 07, 12:17

Originally Posted by SRB

Did that help in A-stan?
I read somewhere that USSR lost 300 Mi-24 in A-stan not all from Stingers but large portion.

DShK HMGs accounted for 42% of all Mi-24 Soviet losses in Afghanistan, AA guns accounting for another 25%.

FWIW, Mil OKB claims that the IRCM suite proved most effective against MANPADS, including Stingers.

Originally Posted by SRB

Ok some of those Mi-24 work as screen for transport planes and will get stinger instead An-24.

An-12BP/BK and Il-76M/MD were indeed escorted by 2 (or 3) pairs of Hinds which were fitted with twice the usual number of aSO-2V flare packs.

It is said that, having detected a MANPADS launch, the helicopter pilots were ordered to meet the missile head-on, firing a salvo of flares and, if all else failed, presenting themselves as the target to save the transport.

I don't know how apocryphal these *Matrosovs by order* stories really are.

**~~Shipwreck~~** · 16 May 07, 12:20

Originally Posted by Garry

In total USSR lost 333 rotorcrafts and 104 fixed wing aircraft. Of these somewhat more than 1/3 were combat losses and 2/3 of helos crashed because of severe conditions, mulfuctions and crew errors.

Most of the those 130 helos were SHOT down by small arms fire - 12.7mm and 14.5mm + RPG during landing and take offs. Very rarelly 23mm.... and some with Stingers/Chinese Igla.

Originally Posted by omon

soviets lost 333 helis in afgen alltogether, only 100+ were hinds.

Would you guys know of Russian sources (preferrably on-line) that would provide detailed stats on Soviet air losses (by type / by date / by cause) during the Afghan campaign ? (Russian language not a problem for me)

**~~Shipwreck~~** · 16 May 07, 12:25

Originally Posted by glyn

Are you expecting helicopter to helicopter battles (like aircraft to aircraft battles were in WW1) any time soon? Helos are used for many tasks such as Recce, Anti-Tank, communications, Casevac, troop lift, moving supplies and the like. Expecting Aces in the rotary wing world is a little far fetched!

Glyn,

During the Iran/iraq war of 1980-88, there were (presumably) 56 helicopter vs helicopter engagements, of which (presumably) 10 between Iraqi Hinds and Iranian Cobras.

**glyn** · 16 May 07, 15:21

Originally Posted by chankya

Actually yes. Attack helicopters have been thought of as flying tanks. If you extend that forward and apply the "best counter to a tank is a tank" argument then the best counter to a attack helicopter is another attack helicopter.

I'm not so sure that you can draw that conclusion. Most helicopters today are not armoured at all and when sent to trouble spots armour plate is added to the crew seats and anti-IR devices fitted. If the trouble spot is hot, high and humid you will see a quite serious drop in the helicopters efficiency. It can not attain the same ceiling, the rate of climb will be impaired, the payload will be less and the range reduced. Added to that it won't handle as well, and the pilot has to adjust his flying skills to the clunker he is now handling. As I'm sure you know, weight is the choppers enemy. Most helicopters are general purpose machines that can be used to fulfil many roles. Armoured Attack Helos are really only optimised for the one task. They are not used for cargo or personnel movement (I know the Hind can carry a squad, but western ones can't). If an anti-helicopter class of rotary wing aircraft were to be created it would only be because of a perceived operational requirement by the general staff. It would then have to get agreement from the Treasury. I feel this to be most unlikely (especially in the UK!) unless and until some other country introduces such a craft. Even then other countries would wait to see how valid the concept was before embarking on an Anti-Helicopter programme of their own. If it were to happen, the designers would face unique challenges. I mean, what weight and size would be necessary to ensure the requisite lethality? How much would they cost? How many countries could afford to buy and operate them? Are they really necessary? I have no doubt the conventional helicopters will encounter enemy helicopters on occasion. I would imagine that only a few rounds of machine gun fire will be exchanged before they get out of each others way. (Just my feelings on the subject).

**glyn** · 16 May 07, 15:29

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Glyn,

During the Iran/iraq war of 1980-88, there were (presumably) 56 helicopter vs helicopter engagements, of which (presumably) 10 between Iraqi Hinds and Iranian Cobras.

I was unaware of that dear heart. These might well have been surprise meetings between armed (and armoured) helicopters. In which case which pilot ever born could resist shooting at his enemy? I'm sure we would all welcome the chance to engage a target of opportunity. Do you know the results of those engagements?

View Poll Results: Best Attack Helecopter

Thread: Attack Helicopters

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

@ Garry / Omon

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

How China Loses The Coming Space War

Liberals Blame America for Nick Berg's Death

2003 Navy Global Conops

Golden age for mercenaries

A Preemptive Attack on Iran's Nuclear Facilities: Possible Consequences

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions