What is your preferred combat helicopter and why??

[Aries]

Uf... evilnate... thanks for digging this one up... here goes another one of the awesome "Blue Thunder"...

[Rotorhead]

No, they developed it because no one wants a single-seat attack helo.

 

Uhh... I always thougt that Ka-52 is two-seater just because it has much more avionics and stuff than Ka-50 and one pilot can't handle it all. Am I wrong?

[SNAFU]

Would be intersting to get hands on the study, which outlines a 2 seat attack helicopter is more effective than than 2 single seat attack helicopters. I guess such a study was carried out, just like "how many bullets does the average soldier fire, before he is killed, so why give him more?"...

 

Considering that it takes only a few month to assembly a Ka-50 but at least 18 years to "assembly" a pilot, it might be of advantage to have twice as much potential attack helicopters available, if they are single seaters. At least in a major conflict.

Edited November 2, 2012 by SNAFU

[Isegrim]

1. KA-52

2. EC665

3. Super Hind

4. Rooivalk

 

5. MI 28

[GGTharos]

With the way you phrased it yes, you are wrong. It's not that the Ka-50 has fewer avionics - even in the -52 all these things are very automated.

 

The problem is that the workload in any attack heli is very high, the single pilot just can't do it all. There's no room for distractions while flying close to the ground, and if you're too busy piloting, you're not going the other part of the job. This is why attack helis are two-man crews.

 

Uhh... I always thougt that Ka-52 is two-seater just because it has much more avionics and stuff than Ka-50 and one pilot can't handle it all. Am I wrong?

[GGTharos]

What good is having twice the helicopters if they can't do their job?

 

Considering that it takes only a few month to assembly a Ka-50 but at least 18 years to "assembly" a pilot, it might be of advantage to have twice as much potential attack helicopters available, if they are single seaters. At least in a major conflict.

[Rotorhead]

With the way you phrased it yes, you are wrong. It's not that the Ka-50 has fewer avionics - even in the -52 all these things are very automated.

 

The problem is that the workload in any attack heli is very high, the single pilot just can't do it all. There's no room for distractions while flying close to the ground, and if you're too busy piloting, you're not going the other part of the job. This is why attack helis are two-man crews.

 

Yes, I know that the high pilot workload is the Ka-50's main drawback. But I thought that aditional systems of Ka-52 (thus even greater workload) were the main reasons for adding another crewmember.

 

OK then, thank you for correcting me! I feel smarter now:smartass::thumbup:

[marcos]

RAH-66.

[Erforce]

I don't think you send helos for SEAD strikes. They're just hovering and picking targets of opportunity.

I'm sure 20 KA 50 would beat 10 KA52 if they have good intel...

 

Plus, being the pilot, you know exactly when you must press the trigger, a nanosecond before your evasive manoever. ;)

[Sundowner.pl]

I don't think you send helos for SEAD strikes.

Task Force Normandy, January 17, 1991 :thumbup:

[JaseGill]

None of the above.

The Puma, then Sea King then finally the Merlin.

Though I'm probably biased having crewed all 3, 1 of them in combat.

 

As far as Normandy 1991, that was kind of a one off. SEAD in helicopters is as good as dead. That's what standoff air and ground launched missiles are for now, less flesh in harms way. Norm Schwartzkopf wanted to show the strength of his new, shiny AH64's and found himself the perfect target to do so and be able to use the MFD footage to show the press how effective they were too. Win Win in his mind.

 

Now if only Colin Powell hadn't seen the same footage on "The Highway of Death" and wimped out of letting us finish the job in 91 (cant have voters see how brutal war really is on CNN now can we) maybe I wouldn't have buried so many friends in the last 10 years. That though is another topic altogether!

[ALDEGA]

It's not that the Ka-50 has fewer avionics - even in the -52 all these things are very automated.

It doesn't help that the Ka-50's avionics are not well designed (e.g. no HOTAS integration of ABRIS, ABRIS being a separate system, not integrated with PVI-800, PVI-800 can store only six waypoints, etc.). Compare the A-10A's avionics with the A-10C's avionics. Avionics can make a big difference.

[Jona33]

Chinook. Easily.

[AlphaOneSix]

Task Force Normandy, January 17, 1991 :thumbup:

 

That wasn't a SEAD strike, the targets were two radar sites...they had virtually no air defenses. It certainly had that effect on the overall integrated air defense network, but it does not really fit the traditional definition.