"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (2 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

China will try to swoop down into post-war Ukraine with money and resources for the rebuilding, all as part of its Belt and Road Initiative, where China seeks to play a larger role in the Black Sea region. They've already got the 'Stans onside.
 
Whilst I don't disagree with you when you say that your preference would be to give Ukraine F16's, I do wonder if the losses are caused by the tactics.
Almost every Helicopter loss I have seen he chopper come barrelling in as if he is a WW2 Typhoon, P47 or equivalent. Certainly in the 70's and early 80's UK and I though NATO doctrine was to stay away as far as possible from the target and use terrain or nap of the earth to pop up, shoot and get out of Dodge ASAP
 
It's a good point. Like you said, I also thought that SOP for attack helicopters was to hover low, behind or below cover, pop up, shoot and drop again - hence the Apache's rotor-top targeting pod.



The Russians seem to be just flying their Kamovs around over Ukrainian-held territory at medium altitude, almost inviting destruction.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gCPDbYXAeoM&pp=ygUXa2Ftb3Ygc2hvdCBkb3duIHVrcmFpbmU%3D
 
Last edited:

While China may be able to get Putin to start negotiating, I doubt they'll be able to convince Ukraine to lay down arms after the last fourteen months. Unless and until China can deliver that, this probably won't go anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Certainly in the 70's and early 80's UK and I though NATO doctrine was to stay away as far as possible from the target and use terrain or nap of the earth to pop up, shoot and get out of Dodge ASAP

In the late 70s and early 80s, my dad worked as a missile tech at Ft Hunter-Liggett in Central California. The base had at that time a live-fire range where heloes practiced exactly these tactics.

Choppers are still going to be more vulnerable in this modern era of widespread MANPADS, but they definitely still have utility in CAS, with the appropriate tactics and doctrine. NoE flying and terrain-masking being two of them.
 
We've seen both Russian and Ukrainian helicopters in action and the difference between the two, is really striking.

Ukrainian helo pilots hug the earth, fly at tree-top or are jinking all over the place.

The Russian don't do much of the above and fly in a relatively predictable course and make themselves easy targets.
 
The Russians helicopter pilots probably share in the same lack of flying hours as their fixed wing colleagees. If they don't have the training, the Kamov and Hind attack copter pilots can't do the extreme low altitude work. Plus, I assume Apache crews on CAS missions work in concert with mechanized and infantry recon units, which requires solid communication and trust, plus a lot of training from everyone involved. That sounds more like NATO-trained Ukrainians than Russians.

Mind you, do the Ukrainians have any attack helicopters armed with ATGW or PGMs for the job I described? The UAF Hinds I've seen appear to be firing unguided rocket pods in the general direction of the enemy.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QqEaTU8GSTQ&pp=ygUcdWtyYWluaWFuIGF0dGFjayBoZWxpY29wdGVyIA%3D%3D
 

Remember too that the very first airstrike of Desert Storm was carried out by Apaches, knocking out radars to clear the path for F-117s to strike C³ targets in Baghdad -- again, using NoE and what little terrain masking they had there, in an intense AD environment.

Granted this was 3+ decades ago, but still.
 

The Apache Longbow has decent survivability because it does not have to expose itself for long. Unlike its Russian counterparts it is designed to remain low and hidden. It pops up, fires, and forgets.

Modern Helicopters have such as the Blackhawk and Apache have survived in MANPAD rich environments such as Iraq and Afghanistan for decades now because the way they are flown and utilized has changed.
 

That's what I mean. If you go flying around in plain sight you are going to get shot down. NATO helicopters and tactics have adapted and changed. We learned from our armed conflicts between Vietnam and the Iraq and Afghanistan. If we had operated as the Russians do, we would have lost a lot more helicopters in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
GTX

While I love to make Skynet jokes, the idea of developing A.I. at a breakneck rate of speed is quite troubling, particularly when you're dealing with weapon systems. Already 50% of A.I. researchers have estimated that there's a 10% probability of A.I. getting outside of our control and ending us.

While the odds sound low, the fact is that concerns that a nuclear bomb could trigger a runaway thermonuclear reaction and destroy the earth did actually prompt serious concerns and the matter was explored in detail before the detonation took place. The study concluded that it was highly unlikely (if I recall, the odds were estimated at 1 in 3000) and as a result of that, the test was allowed to occur.

Risking the whole planet on odds of 1/3000 is really cowboyish -- risking humanity on 1/10 or 1/20 (assuming the other 50% dismiss the matter entirely) is absolutely batshit insane.
 
I would think it's not an issue with the more modern designs but the Mi-24 Hind is too heavy to maintain the hover in the same way that NATO attack helicopters are designed to do. That may have stopped, or at least slowed, the development of a doctrine that utilizes that ability.

If Russian designs aren't built with that doctrine in mind then possibly they would struggle to carry out that mission, even if they are theoretically capable, especially if the pilots have never been trained in it. The lack of training hours is probably just the cherry on top, so to speak.
 
Day 438 of three.

Reminds me of the old saw "there we were, three against a thousand. Toughest three we ever fought"

 
I saw that too, but can you hit anything when rapidly twisting and turning as you launch unguided rockets in the general direction of an enemy position?
 

Users who are viewing this thread