Helicopter armor

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I will expand upon this elsewhere but for where I'm at between two projects right now I believe this article fits this thread for now. Though this article covers a lot of ground it does address the concerns of the USMC about the HIND and it's overall assessment to defeat it and the Soviet helicopter threat overall on the battlefield and thus addresses by default most of the issues brought up in this thread to include at least on the Soviet side how the USMC perceived how their pilots would operate based on their combat performance to date of this paper. It is an honest evaluation of the CORPS ability to fight in this environment. Sorry but, yes this will require some reading.
The HIND has been around a few years now and the USMC was just getting their AH-1W COBRA gunships. Ground support would soon follow with the LAV-AD that was designed to be a close air support system and HIND killer. HIND protection level at this time was 12.7mm all angle protection on the fuselage, 35mm protection around the cockpit and bullet proof cockpit glass. This from 1988...
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...t/1988/ZMD.htm

Regards,
Pat

[paulo]

Its my understanding that helos are only supposed to be used at a distance beyond small arms fire and RPGs. Look up videos on youtube re American helos engaging insurgents- its always at a great distance. Helos buzzing and strafing ground troops at close range is Hollywood stuff

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I submit this with the utmost RESPECT. However...
I'll be sure to tell that to the guys that flew in Vietnam or currently in Afghanistan. Video provides but the smallest glimpse of reality. One thing dictates all, the terrain in which you find yourself operating in and that goes for helos as well. That applies to helos as well. In the books on the Indochina War-"Hell in a Very Small Place" , "Valley of Death" -Vietnam-"Black-Horse Riders", "We Were Young and Soldiers Once" -Somalia-"Blackhawk Down" -Afganistan- "The Outpost", if you have read any of these or a combination of them I feel most people would reverse themselves on the RTB issue somewhat have a better understanding of helicopter operations in general. In the "The Outpost" are numerous accounts from the soldiers who were on the ground on on the close in air support of APACHE helos and MEDEVAC helos in getting the dead and wounded out. The book covers OPS in the Kamdesh District (COP KEATING and surrounding area.) in the Hindu Kush region of NE Afgnanistan near the Pakistani border. This is not normal operating territory for the helo where the "rebels" many times have the "higher higher ground" giving them a "look down shoot down" advantage at times against helos and most of the time against the troops in this area.
I gained a deep respect for helicopter pilots to the point of emotion, concerning the French crews that were volunteering until the high command suspended helo ops (and Air crews that continued to fly supply, reinforcements and air support as well.) into Dien Bien Phu which had at that time the largest concentration of AA since WWII Germany. Back then helos as compared to their modern brethren might as well have painted the bullseye on them but, yet they kept flying and dying to get the wounded out of there. That's what you get from a good history book or living through it yourself and seeing it. All above provide many, many first hand accounts of both main helo ops yet that's not what the above books were about but, but what the soldiers recounted in the above books about them. Think about that for a few minutes.
And to be fair I haven't forgotten about the helo ops of the British in Maylasia and Falklands or the Russians in Afghanistan under combat situations, there are histories and stories there as well.
We don't generalize about how tanks operate in the game as we have a long history of operations and wars to draw from in making them work in the game. However I don't know as I can say that fully in how we treat helos in the game because quite frankly they are tougher now in machine, crew training and tactics all of which is for a later time.

I have a video too it's the "HIND Killer" but you would't know it by watching this video ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM82Vuq3PdM

Glad I was on subs at least we got to take showers once in a while!?!
And...
Perspective can be like a bad commercial...My Dad 28yrs. in the USA/Combat in 3 wars/Eldest son in the USN/SS/You fiqure out what was priceless to him.
I salute all you "ground pounders" as I saluted him for the last time, and all those associated with supporting them in the field both in the past and present.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by paulo

Its my understanding that helos are only supposed to be used at a distance beyond small arms fire and RPGs. Look up videos on youtube re American helos engaging insurgents- its always at a great distance. Helos buzzing and strafing ground troops at close range is Hollywood stuff

While it's 100% correct that helos "are suppose to be used at a distance beyond small arms fire and RPGs" unfortunately reality, and the extraordinary dedication of Medivac pilots often means this isn't the case.

The infamous helo attack from "Apocalypse Now" is an excellent example of what real helos in action looks like.
Some attacks are from range, some are in-your-face.

[DRG]

Well, that's what some people belive

[sabresandy]

I'd generally agree, up to a point. If my armored helis start coming under fire from Iglas and Shilkas (or Stingers and Vulcans), I'd expect them to die off; less so for rifle-caliber AAMGs.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Things not talked about...
1. Using helos like tanks you need to terrain mask them where you can. I'm willing to bet a 1/3 of the players go charging in. The assault aspect is more Cold War then anything where NATO had a distinct disadvantage in numbers. More finesse is needed in the modern battlefield.

2. Like on map arty, don't hover or stay in the same area more then a couple of turns. If you do you deserve what you get...shot down or damaged normally. And to follow through, your arty will come under fire normally by mortars first and the big guns next for the same reason. AI hates on map arty.

3. To the main topic as started...Lookdown TI/GSR is much more effective than "look at" TI/GSR. Height of eye is a huge advantage. In my world if I'm moving my helo in a "search mode" (Segments of say 6-10 hexes.) where I suspect enemy are, and it comes upon the enemy unit(s), especially if moving, the helo should have the advantage. It is after all actively seeking contact and the "finger is on the trigger". If you fly across the battlefield then as is in the game your both in that "ah poop" mode as is now.

4. Helos for about the last 20yrs. or so have more redundent systems on board, also more recently within the last maybe ten years your seeing these systems protected by armor as well. Mi-35is protected against 35mm or 37mm rounds the AH-1Z is protected against 23mm rounds. Transport helos have add on armor plating added when operating in combat zones (Belly area.) plus what I've already noted above.

5. Defensively...They are quieter, faster and more manuverable, have as much EW as a jet in many cases with full defensive suites to include chaff and flares such as "Angel Fire" this includes transports. Don't believe me, I'll provide all the pics you want upon request of course.

6. I'm not asking to see my helo going spinning around the screen, but crew survibility has always been an issue with me here. All helo pilots learn to auto-rotate their birds and generally can safely land them. In urban or mountianous terrian the odds go down significantly however, this is better then the zero chance they have now for crews and passengers, though not helos the point can still be made, a bridge in France comes to mind right now known as "Pegasus" if you'd read the history it would support my point here. This is to my mind a major issue, truth is many crews live to fly another day and troops survive to fight. The crew issue goes to exprience level of crews directly not unlike tank crews in general.

7. Attack Helos: Save slots and alot them as in real life. I can think of at least 10-15 countries this can be applied. You want them playing the "big boys" then you should pay for them as the real "big boys" use them-in pairs. Developed countries since Vietnam have flown attack helos in pairs to be mutual supporting for overwatch and targeting purposes. What's to be gained besides saving some slots? Well maybe the player will take better care of them if it costs more to use them. And for the player (And AI.) well after they pay for them they can still use them how ever they want. Not much downside if you think about it. But if you pay attention to the AI's general use of Attack Helos, it tends to keep them paired and mutually supporting each, based on my years of playing against th AI.

8. RTB part of the game. Some minor tweeking before they do it maybe. Just "freezing" and running due to suppression not so sure. I think from what I've read and just in general as a thought better to go home with empty (Or near empty.) weapons racks. As the game operates now though it seems more exprienced crews don't RTB as soon as less exprienced crews. Is this a faultly observation on my part?

9. Finally they are not invincible. A hit to the tail rotor that causes damage to it, you won't be in the air long, and it will be harder to auto-rotate down. It is for instance felt that the crew of "Super Six" could've survived the RPG hit they took but what killed them was the crash site in a narrow alley and wall they ended up hitting.

Autorotation can be accomplished at altitude ref. provided on techique and video shows a S-92 Mil. transport at max. payload wieght doing it.
http://helicopterflight.net/autorotation.htm
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...7400CD7C6DFA5E



My thoughts for what their worth.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

1 & 2) Just like SP-ATGs/SP-ATGMs helos are a "shoot-n-scoot" weapon system.
Myself I move at low altitude to a firing point and the following turn execute a pop-up and fire my missiles.
Of course the pop-up immediately attracts the fire of every AA weapon the opposition possesses. But you can get around this to an extent by having either scout helos or another attack helo (they usually come in pairs) skim along popping up and down (low to high altitude) at the extreme range of opposition AA capability to draw fire before your intended firing unit pokes it nose out.

3) For my part I've been rather disappointed at the "lookdown" capability of helos in general and TI/GSR equipped ones in specific. They very rarely spot opposition infantry until they move right next to it triggering an opportunity fire which very frequently damages the helo (even if its only small arms fire vs an armored helo).

[sabresandy]

Yeah, terrain masking is incredibly important; swarm of MANPADS are terrible, terrible things to see. 8 or 10 Strela-2Ms rising from the trees are a horrible if familiar sight before I learned the importance of ridges.

[shahadi]

While researching US Army Attack Helicopter doctrine, I found several interesting reads on the battle that seemingly has changed the role of attack helicopters from deep-strike missions to CAS. The article, "Renaissance of the Attack Helicopter in the Close Fight," gives several accounts of the battle that occurred on March 23, 2003 involving the 11th Attack Helicopter Regiment with a discussion of asymmetric warfare and the emerging role of attack helicopters.