Which Attack Helicopter is Best?
- Thread starter yasin_khan
- Start date
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #22
Germany's Tiger helicopter is also good looking.But the most battle tested helicopter is Apache. :smokingc:
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #24
PAF a120 MAangusta is an Italian helicopter.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #26
The A129 Mangusta,armed with anti-tank and area-suppression weapons systems, is intended primarily as an attack helicopter to be used against armored targets. The aircraft can operate during day, night, and all-weather conditions.It was succesfully employed in Somalia where it proved highly reliable and extremely flexible. Agusta developed the A129 Mangusta anti-tank helicopter, the first attack helicopter to be designed and produced wholly in Europe, which demonstrated Agusta's capacity to satisfy the most complex technical requirements. Italy is the only country with this helicopter in its inventory, with the Italian Army.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #28
ya u r right
Mike Powell
New Member
For me, the future battlefield is rely on Commanche for her futuristic design and efficiency.
For you, the future battlefield will not rely on Commanche for it has been cancelled.Mike Powell said:
::mrgreen Lol, out of all those choices only three have been battle proven (i believe correct me if wrong,if im wrong): AH 1W/AH 1Z Super Cobra- USA, AH-64 A/D Apache, and Mi24 Hind.
So we don't really know how the others are in a real battle enviroment.
Plus the Apache, Cobra, and Hind were all used agaisnt "obsolete" tanks and battle enviroment.
i say they should have a international attack heli. competition to see which is the best.
So we don't really know how the others are in a real battle enviroment.
Plus the Apache, Cobra, and Hind were all used agaisnt "obsolete" tanks and battle enviroment.
i say they should have a international attack heli. competition to see which is the best.
Mike Powell
New Member
Oh why?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I think Mangusta is a good helo too, but it has a couple of problems. 1. It's a technological orphan as Italy is the only one that operates it, and in relatively limited numbers too. Rooivalk also suffers from this problem, in South Africa.
2. The Mangusta is a very small "light" helicopter. Of the popular current attack helo's it is the smallest. This means it has a much smaller range and weapons load carrying ability than other attack helo's.
Other than those problems, I have no problem with the Mangusta and actually think it'd be a good choice for any operator, provided those 2 limitations are fully understood. On the plus side, Pakistan seems to have excellent relations with Italy (Grifen radars etc) so the logistical side of things might not be tood bad. I still think Cobra is the best option for Pakistan though. Cheers.
2. The Mangusta is a very small "light" helicopter. Of the popular current attack helo's it is the smallest. This means it has a much smaller range and weapons load carrying ability than other attack helo's.
Other than those problems, I have no problem with the Mangusta and actually think it'd be a good choice for any operator, provided those 2 limitations are fully understood. On the plus side, Pakistan seems to have excellent relations with Italy (Grifen radars etc) so the logistical side of things might not be tood bad. I still think Cobra is the best option for Pakistan though. Cheers.
"Lol, out of all those choices only three have been battle proven (i believe correct me if wrong,if im wrong): AH 1W/AH 1Z Super Cobra- USA, AH-64 A/D Apache, and Mi24 Hind."
Yes but you must remember the Mi24 has taken numerous casualties all around the world in various conflicts. The Apache and cobras have had alot better performances.
l think the mangustas would have done better than all of the above if they were used in the same conflict and in SIMILAR numbers.
Yes but you must remember the Mi24 has taken numerous casualties all around the world in various conflicts. The Apache and cobras have had alot better performances.
l think the mangustas would have done better than all of the above if they were used in the same conflict and in SIMILAR numbers.
Rumsfeld killed it off. It no longer fits into the future warfighting stance.Mike Powell said:
The Hind had its halcyon days during afghanistan. As a tactical weapon on a modern battlefield it would be of minimal use against even a semi modern airforce. They are awful to maintain and run. I've seen some up close, and whoever flies one nowadays really deserves a medal of courage.armage said:
They're big, brutal and effective against an enemy without any means of self defence - but as a contemporary weapon - nope. Stay well away unless you like seeing black bordered letters in the mailbox.
Without question AH-64 Longbow Apache is the "best" gunship in the world bar none. I would add however that like many weapons systems it may not be the best gunship for a given entity. If funding and infrastructure are not in place the "best" anything will not be the best. Apache's require an extraordinary amount of training, cash, and infrastructure to be utilized to their full potential. Take away "some" of the necessary training (I'm talking about mission training, not aircraft qualification training) and you've got problems. That's why countries that "could" own Apache's have opted for other models. It would likewise be a waste of money to own Apache's if your armed forces aren't fully integrated to fight the air land battle with a total and complete combined arms team, something the Longbow was designed to do from day one.
As for the Russian choppers, I've always LOVED the way the Mi-24's look, they are my favorite cosmetically. But I agree with GF, I've been around and in the Mi-24 D as well as the Mi-8 Hip and like most Russian hardware are very primitive by western standards. I'm thankful that's not what we are using in the US. Also, the Mi-24's troop compartment is barely functional, the interior is tiny and most suitable for Hobbits!
As for the Russian choppers, I've always LOVED the way the Mi-24's look, they are my favorite cosmetically. But I agree with GF, I've been around and in the Mi-24 D as well as the Mi-8 Hip and like most Russian hardware are very primitive by western standards. I'm thankful that's not what we are using in the US. Also, the Mi-24's troop compartment is barely functional, the interior is tiny and most suitable for Hobbits!
If we look away from the primitive avionics and weapon system on the Hind for a sec, its armour is the best amoung all attack helicopters. Some section could resist 20mm AA gun. It is nicknamed the "flying IFV"
The Hind is armored from just behind the pilots station forward and the armor is substantial but not of a sophisticated material. It looks for lack of a better description like it was put together by boiler makers! It's even got huge round head rivets all over it in that area!! The flat portion of each pilots windscreen is very very thick (around 4 inches thick) bullet proof glass as well. One things for sure, the Hind pilots don't have much to worry about as far as actually being physically hit by small arms fire. The gunners station is quite cramped, I'm 6' tall and it would be physically impossible for me to man that station. It's big and impressive but ungainly as well. I've had a few beers with the guy that flies the Hind and the Hip at the US Army Test Flight Center at Fort Rucker and he told me that it was somewhat cumbersome in anything but cruise flight. It's also got problems with Max Gross Weight in that it's not very powerful with a useful load.