What Attack Helicopter is better?

[Merik]

Ok ok. I know this sint the best type of post in the world but since there is a host of "who's better" crap floating around I may as well try my hand at it. Plus I'm on my dose of helicopter bug.

So, according to the recent wars in Iraq and Afganistan and others, what in everyone's(yes that includes the airsoft pukes :P ) view is better?

AH-64A/D Apache/Longbow
http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep1998/980902-A-2839B-002.jpg

AH-1W Cobra
http://www.dod.mil/photos/May1998/980402-N-8867B-003.jpg

Ka-50 Hokum
http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/image/foto/15-4-2002-10-45-kamov_ka-50_black_shark_-_hokum_flight_.jpg

PAH-1 Tiger
http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/image/foto/tigerinflight4.jpg

A-129 Mangusta
http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/image/foto/14-6-2002-8-56-agusta_a-129_mangusta_overhead.jpg

Mi-28 Havoc
http://www.nme.de/tmp/68.53.43.138.jpg

[USAF G]

Wow, that MI-28 looks a lot like a Chinook. :roll:

[rob]

any one would be equally scary in your rear view ;)

[Seiyuuki]

This thread is sort of similar to this topic...

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2832

Don't forget...RAH-66 Commanche

http://popularmechanics.com/science/military/2001/10/killer_choppers/images/lg_PIX2.jpg

The correct Havoc...

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/ru_helo_mi28_03.jpg

Also...CSH-2 Rooivalk

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rsa/images/roo04.jpg

[FallenAngel]

AH-1 Whiskey

may not have all the fancy bells and whistles, but it can fly anywhere, anytime and do anything.

oh...that and it's flown by Marines :D

[Merik]

Seiyuuki,

1. RAH-66 may have been designed as an attack helicopter but there are two things you didnt mention. The first is its primary mission specialty is recon now. Second is that it may not go into production phase.

2. I did post the correct Mi-28 Havoc. Its the last pic lol.

3. I thought about the CSH-2 Rooivalk but then thought to myself, well its South African and I dont think they are going to fight a conventional army anytime soon. Just my thoughts.


P.S. Who took the poll away from my topic? I actually had a poll going but someone made it go bye-bye.

[Splinter26]

Definitely Apaches are, my good friend flies those in the Army, I saw that helicopter few times during air shows, it's amazing.

[Scrim]

Ive only worked around Cobras, and dont know ****e about the other aircraft. So of course Im biased to the old Cobra! I can tell you this though, I remember reading a report About GW1 which said that the Cobras were opperational something like 92 percent of the time, wheras the Apache was opperational only 60 something percent of the time, and needed huge teams of civillian technicians to work on the complex machines. Dont remember the source so please post if you have this report. And by now the Army has probably worked the kinks out. Its just hard to beat the Cobra for reliability IMO.

[James]

Have all of these helos been in actual combat?

[California Joe]

I drew a really good looking chick naked once that is now in flight school to fly choppers for the US Army. Whatever she ends up flying is my favorite. What?

[USMarine3521]

im going to say the AH-1W Super Cobra, because their operated by US Marines and they are really good pilots

[usa320]

THe AH-64D is probably the most capable when it comes to weapons systems and combat environment. The RAH-66 wins hands down when it comes to technology, and the Russian stuff is some of the better built stuff as far as the airframe. The Hind and Hokum can take a hell of a beating. The AH-1W and AH-1Z also have the ability to be deployed by carrier, and they are slighly more maneuverable. Honestly, they all have their strong points and weak points, and they are all VERY capable fighting machines.

[Salty Dog]

i'm going with the cobra....

[Random Walker]

Gentlemen I am just and armchair general and an aviation enthusiast as such I can’t claim any experience many of you may have. In any case here is my amateur take at the matter.

Cobra is by now long in her tooth, originally designed as a coin platform only later evolved into a tank killer. Still its primary role is to support Marine landings and to cover/escort the rest of the choppers. It is not a dedicated pop-up and hide tank killer like the AH-64.

AH-64 was from the start designed to stop Soviet armored columns flooding West Germany in the Longbow configuration loaded with fire and forget Hellfire Lima it likely has no equal.

Soviet/Russian designs were put together with a slightly different purpose – they were supposed to support the very same tanks AH-64 was supposed to stop. They lack fire and forget ATGMs and especially the Kamov with its limited transverse gun seems more like today’s Sturmovik a hovering behind cover pop up and run tank killer. B/n the two Russian designs I’ll take Mil mostly b/c of the two man crew – I got my doubts about a single pilot being able to fully utilize all the systems of such a complicated machine. Also the gun transverse on the Mil seems to, at the margin, put it in an advantage (well there is also the fact that it will likely never fly with operational units, but then again Kamov’s future may not be much brighter).

Mangusta is a very nice light helicopter and if not exceptional she nevertheless remains the only Euro build fully operational attack helo so far. There is still lots of room for upgrades and the proposed International version may well find export customers.

Tiger was supposed to be a Euro answer to US and Russian choppers but like so many join Euro programs the co-operation required to put it together is at best characterized as an oxymoron (with an emphasis on moron) – same applies to its primary anti-tank weapon development. While the Trigat LR may see the light of day, the MR version have by now been put to rest - the longer ranged LR will be supplemented by a rather old (even if still quite potent) HOT-3 and the unit cost of the Trigat LR will of course go up causing further reductions in planned procurement (how many times have seen this story repeating itself?). Further the “amazing and ground breaking” Trigat LR still remains shorter ranged then Hellfire Lima. In short had and non-dumbed down Tiger appeared few years earlier and carried the full originally planned weapon suit she would be among the best, by now regardless of the version she is just another less expensive alternative to AH-64. Rumors of a mast-mounted sight being cancelled make it seem even less appealing.

Rooivalk is a bit of a wild card here and I certainly would not underestimate it. It carries possible the most punch of them all – the Mokopa ATGM is really a marvel - possibly the most advanced long range tank killer on this planet. It travels very fast, is capable of switching b/n semi-automatic and fire and forget guidance modes while in flight, supposedly can reach distances in excess of 10km and all that while being able to melt through 13.5cm of RHA wrapped in ERA – if it is all true then it indeed is a threat deserving a lot of respect.

Regards
Random

[FallenAngel]

you're right, the Cobra is long in the tooth (thank you US Gov. for the lousy budget. Half the size of the active Army and still working with a fifth of the funds...) but it gets the job done.

Also...so what if it isn't a top-notch tank killer? Unless we go to war with Germany or the Ukraine (who, IMHO, both have the best tanks in the world), our own tanks (M1A1/A2) are the best thing we have in anti-armor. Again...the Cobra gets the job done.

And Scrim is right. The Cobras are far more reliable than the Apache (and Cammanche I would think) in harsh (read: sandy) conditions. Seeing as how we're pulling out of Europe and focusing on the middle-east, I would think that this fact more than anything shoves the Cobra over the Apache

[Random Walker]

you're right, the Cobra is long in the tooth (thank you US Gov. for the lousy budget. Half the size of the active Army and still working with a fifth of the funds...) but it gets the job done.
Sure it does, what I was trying to say that their job is a bit different and if we think of attack helos - the tank killing ability seems often to be a priority. As such Cobra ranks behind Apache. But I agree as far as ops like Iraq are concerned the theoretical added benefit of Apache may be minimal and offset by lower reliability. Still F/A-22 would add very little to that conflict – would you then rank it behind anything else as a fighter?

Also...so what if it isn't a top-notch tank killer?
Well if it isn't a top-notch tank killer it is not a top notch tank killer. :P

Unless we go to war with Germany or the Ukraine (who, IMHO, both have the best tanks in the world), our own tanks (M1A1/A2) are the best thing we have in anti-armor.
I know it is besides the point but why Germany and not Sweden (whose Leo2A6 is often considered better then the German A5) and why Ukraine at all?

Regards
Random

[FallenAngel]

Yeah, the major difference between the Leo2A5 and A6 is the 120mm barrel is something like 45% longer...at least that's all I know of.

The Ukraine produces the best Russian tanks I think. I hear they are pretty tough. :)

[Random Walker]

Yeah, the major difference between the Leo2A5 and A6 is the 120mm barrel is something like 45% longer...at least that's all I know of.
From: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leopard/index.html

The Leopard 2A6 includes longer L55 gun, an auxiliary engine, improved mine protection and an air-conditioning system. The German Army is upgrading 225 2A5 tanks to 2A6 configuration, the first of which was delivered in March 2001. The Royal Netherlands Army has ordered the upgrade of 180 of its 2A5 tanks to 2A6 configuration, the first of which entered service in February 2003. Spain has ordered 219 Leopard 2A6. The first 30 are being built by KMW, the rest will be license-built in Spain by General Dynamics, Santa Barbara Sistemas (GDSBS). Deliveries of the first batch are expected by the end of 2003. In March 2003, the Hellenic Army of Greece ordered 170 Leopard 2 HEL (a version of the 2A6EX) for delivery between 2006 and 2009.

Another variant is the Leopard 2(S), which has a new command and control system and new passive armour system. 120 Leopard 2(S) have been delivered to the Swedish Army. Deliveries concluded in March 2002.

The Ukraine produces the best Russian tanks I think. I hear they are pretty tough.
Unless I missed something they are only designing the best Russian tanks, both the firing 120mm NATO rounds version and the 140mm Israeli spin-off have ended up at prototype stages, same faith was met by a 125mmtank/IFV that was supposed to carry six dismounts in addition to the gun (I am not sure how useful this idea is).

Regards
Random

[seventy6er]

[quote]
I know it is besides the point but why Germany and not Sweden (whose Leo2A6 is often considered better then the German A5) and why Ukraine at all?

Regards
Random

the swedes don't use the Leo in the A6-configuration. the swedes use their stridsvagen-122 in a configuration between the german A5 and the german A6. A6-config will only be used (so far) by the bundeswehr.

[koster]

Soviet/Russian designs were put together with a slightly different purpose – they were supposed to support the very same tanks AH-64 was supposed to stop. They lack fire and forget ATGMs and especially the Kamov with its limited transverse gun seems more like today’s Sturmovik a hovering behind cover pop up and run tank killer. B/n the two Russian designs I’ll take Mil mostly b/c of the two man crew – I got my doubts about a single pilot being able to fully utilize all the systems of such a complicated machine. Also the gun transverse on the Mil seems to, at the margin, put it in an advantage (well there is also the fact that it will likely never fly with operational units, but then again Kamov’s future may not be much brighter).


KA-50 Has been flying combat missions in Chechnya for about 3 years already.
Btw, theres also a two seat version of it, called KA-50-2 (don't confuse it with KA-52)

[martinexsquaddie]

The hokum has an ejector seat System so its the only one you can get out of in a hurry.
Plus they'd probably sell to an individual(being a bit cash strapped :o )
Time to give the local police helicopter crew nightmares Bwwhahhaha:0

[GI_Rutger]

I ever saw a pic of an heli called the Ka-55 'Tigershark'.
Is this an little brother of the Ka-50?

[Random Walker]

the swedes don't use the Leo in the A6-configuration. the swedes use their stridsvagen-122 in a configuration between the german A5 and the german A6. A6-config will only be used (so far) by the bundeswehr.
You are right, the Swedish tank is a bit different then A6, however not only the Germans but also the Dutch, Spanish and Greeks will be using the A6 (albeit there may be further small differences b/n the German tank and the rest)

Regards
Random

[Random Walker]

KA-50 Has been flying combat missions in Chechnya for about 3 years already.
There were a few of those being tested, unless I missed something KA-50 was not issued to regular formations.

Btw, theres also a two seat version of it, called KA-50-2 (don't confuse it with KA-52)
Again a prototype only – just like Mi-28.

Regards
Random

[koster]

no man, It was accepted by the RFAF, and they plan to make more of them each year. so they are fully operational.

[richardben23]

http://www.tribulation.com/images/mi24hind.jpg

Flying tank

[Random Walker]

no man, It was accepted by the RFAF, and they plan to make more of them each year. so they are fully operational
I presume you are talking about KA-50 here. Air force tech, which is a manufacturer sponsored site claims that only eight have been delivered so far and that further orders are only expected.

Regards
Random

[ESCOBAR]

HIND D

[gaboki]

you forgot the HIND

[GazB]

The Hokum was chosen many years ago (So far the only photos posted here are of prototypes of the Mi-28 and Ka-50... both of which flew in the mid 80s.)

At least 12 were delivered and are in service, but due to the limit nature of their numbers they are used for evaulating and creating tactics rather than as normal service kit. The limiting factor has been money and not performance.
Since the army accepted it as the new helo to replace the Hind they have reevaluated their needs and have made Night and all weather capability a major requirement. This has shifted the focus to the Mi-28, which was highly rated by the Swedish during testing. The Helos likely to get into service are the Mi-28N, Ka-50N and/or Ka-52. All of which are night capable. Tests in chechnia showed the Ka-50 performs well, though flying at night is a full time job and requires a second crew member. The targetting system in the Ka-50 is quite sophisticated and is automatic once the missile has been launched. (e the systems maintains lock on the target and after an autopilot phase lases the target with a low power laser. The missile looks back at the helo, not at the target so countermeasures like smoke or flares don't effect it. The missile looks back and finds its position in the laser beam and alters its flight path to centre itself in the beam. This means that the laser can be 4 orders of magnitude less powerful than on that reflects of the target. Also it doesn't matter how reflective the target is (white targets and black targets effect the reflectivity of the laser for laser Hellfire missiles and effect the range of targetting.)
As it is automatic the pilot can manouver over a wide range of angles after missile launch till impact.

[Random Walker]

The Hokum was chosen many years ago (So far the only photos posted here are of prototypes of the Mi-28 and Ka-50... both of which flew in the mid 80s.)

At least 12 were delivered and are in service, but due to the limit nature of their numbers they are used for evaulating and creating tactics rather than as normal service kit. The limiting factor has been money and not performance. Since the army accepted it as the new helo to replace the Hind they have reevaluated their needs and have made Night and all weather capability a major requirement. This has shifted the focus to the Mi-28, which was highly rated by the Swedish during testing. The Helos likely to get into service are the Mi-28N, Ka-50N and/or Ka-52. All of which are night capable. Tests in chechnia showed the Ka-50 performs well, though flying at night is a full time job and requires a second crew member.
Agreed, but the prognosis seems optimistic at best. Their forces are strapped for cash severally and I would expect only one type (if any) to finally enter service in anything resembling large numbers.

The targetting system in the Ka-50 is quite sophisticated and is automatic once the missile has been launched. (e the systems maintains lock on the target and after an autopilot phase lases the target with a low power laser. The missile looks back at the helo, not at the target so countermeasures like smoke or flares don't effect it. The missile looks back and finds its position in the laser beam and alters its flight path to centre itself in the beam. This means that the laser can be 4 orders of magnitude less powerful than on that reflects of the target. Also it doesn't matter how reflective the target is (white targets and black targets effect the reflectivity of the laser for laser Hellfire missiles and effect the range of targetting.)
As it is automatic the pilot can manouver over a wide range of angles after missile launch till impact.
Still, while it is an improvement over the standard second generation semi-automatic guidance mode, the moment the avoiding counter fire chopper needs to take cover the chances of the missile reaching the target are zero. Coincidently, just so we are on the same page you are referring to another modification/development of Vikhr not to the awesome Hrizantema that to my knowledge has so far not been tested from flying platforms, right?

Regards
Random

[GazB]

"Agreed, but the prognosis seems optimistic at best. Their forces are strapped for cash severally and I would expect only one type (if any) to finally enter service in anything resembling large numbers. "

Well the amount of money available has been increasing and budgets have certainly increased. The most important factor however is that the money allocated actually seems to be the amount the armed forces get, unlike in past years where a smal percentage of what was promised is given.
Certainly initially large numbers of new airframes are not likely and money will be spend on overhauls and upgrades (performed at the same time) of existing aircraft like Hinds and Hips to give night and all weather capability.

Which ever helo gets the final go ahead to be put in production will be made in relatively large numbers as such aircraft will be used in theatres like the Caucasus etc.

"Still, while it is an improvement over the standard second generation semi-automatic guidance mode, the moment the avoiding counter fire chopper needs to take cover the chances of the missile reaching the target are zero."

If the target is being engaged from near max range as it is supposed to the helo should have several options for manouver to avoid incoming fire. (Max range for the Vikhr which is currently available is 10km... later models will extend this range to 15km...).
Work is continuing on hypersonic missiles which will travel at speeds of up to 2.5km/s, which at 10km range equates to a 4 second flight... not exactly fire and forget but close. The Problems of seeing the laser through the considerable rocket plume are expected to be solved by using MMW radar guidance like Krisanthema ground to ground missile does.

"Coincidently, just so we are on the same page you are referring to another modification/development of Vikhr not to the awesome Hrizantema that to my knowledge has so far not been tested from flying platforms, right? "

All versions that I know of of the Vikhr use autopilot followed by terminal laser beam riding. A later model merely extends range, while another new model has extended range and a warhead more suitable for dual air to air or air to ground use.

(Note Vikhr-M is a designation I have seen in print in many western sources as being the name of the extended range (ie 15km) version. In my Russian sources the Vikhr SYSTEM is called the Vikhr-M.)

"not to the awesome Hrizantema that to my knowledge has so far not been tested from flying platforms, right? "

As far as I know the Krizantema-S is ground based and is intended for use against ground and air targets at ranges of 6kms in all weather day night conditions. (including in duststorms and whiteouts).

[GazB]

This is a link to a picture of one of the proposed Ka-50N versions (ie night/all weather single seat attack helo).

http://www.airwar.ru/photo/ka50-3/28_ka50.html

This is a link to a picture of the Mi-28N night/allweather prototype with combined CM and MM wave radar (for air and ground targets respectively).

http://www.airwar.ru/photo/mi28/mi28_02.html

This is a link to a picture of the Ka-52 side by side two seat night all weather attack helo... designed to find targets and hand off target data to single seat Ka-50Ns, though well armed itself. Note the final version will have a mast mounted MMW radar.

http://www.airwar.ru/photo/ka50-2/ka52-1.html

[andrew45c]

APACHE ROCKS

[Random Walker]

Thanks for the interesting pictures Gaz, can you identify the large white missiles of at least two different types on the third photo? These look like the well known air to ground/air to air weapons previously carried only by fixed wing a/c. What are they doing on the Hokum?

Regards
Random

[GazB]

"Thanks for the interesting pictures Gaz, can you identify the large white missiles of at least two different types on the third photo?"


From left to right in the photo the left missile is the R-73 (Nato codename Archer, or AA-11) which is an advanced air to air missile which is better than the Lima and Mike versions of Sidewinder in several respects (though the X-ray model Sidewinder has advantages through the use of a better seeker).
The next two missiles both on the inner wing pylons on each side of the aircraft is the Kh-25 (Nato Codename Karen, or AS-10). They are quite comparable to Maverick with a range of about 10-12km in most models and a 50kg HE warhead.
(The remaining green missiles are of course Vikhrs mounted 6 to the pylon.)


BTW I agree that the Apache rocks... despite its cost and intensive maintainence costs it is certainly the attack helo to compare with for all weather capability. (For sheer looks I prefer the Hind, plus mulitrole capability with its cabin for troops and/or reloads).

"These look like the well known air to ground/air to air weapons previously carried only by fixed wing a/c. What are they doing on the Hokum?"

They are standard Russian strike weapons. Just like the Apache most heavy Russian helos can carry such weapons depending upon their mission. Obviously the more common air to air missile would be the Igla-S (Russian equivelent of the stinger) mounted four to a pylon, while when targets are bunkers or large relatively hard structures that anti tank missiles are not up to taking out then heavy rockets (like the S-13 or S-25) with SAL guidance kits or Kh-25s will likely be used.
Most often anti tank missiles, gunpods, rocket launchers, light bombs including cluster bombs, and mine dispensors would be most common armament.

[JTFazz]

Depends on the mission... The current iteration of the Apache, the AH64D is a very capable multi-role attack platform. The venerable Cobra is reliable and solid, but lacks some of the defensive capabilities of the Apache line, including perhaps most importantly a mast-mounted radar. The Apache can carry a heavier loadout of wider array of munitions.

However, the Apache series does not seem to be as mechanically reliable as the Cobra. Also, it seems to have more Achilles' heels than the Cobra series. Apache is hard to beat for speed, maneuverability and is not as loud as the twin-rotar Cobra.

Apache's deep strike capability, especially against high-value targets is particularly impressive. Also, it is perhaps more versatile in terms of operating at a higher level at night and in bad climate. Additionally, although the Cobra has come a long way in being retrofitted, the Apache's advanced system integrated avionics also give it a bit of a leg up.

Overall, the Apache is probably the best NATO has to offer. Perhaps some of the Marines can answer this question... why does it seem that Marines are always using older equipment? This is not a knock on the Marines or the gear, it just seems that the other services get the new stuff first.

I am not as familiar with what used to referred to as the Warsaw pact rota-winged platforms. So, I can't really speak as well to those.

[Royal]

Perhaps some of the Marines can answer this question... why does it seem that Marines are always using older equipment? This is not a knock on the Marines or the gear, it just seems that the other services get the new stuff first.

This is an observation from the UK on older helo's - just something that occured to me and may be relevant with the USMC Cobra's.

In Brunei the UK still uses Bell 212's, one of the reasons is that the steel rotor blades act as a 'strimmer' in the jungle canopy (the crews just wipe them down after a mission), whereas more modern composite blades are damaged or written off after a similar flight.

I'm also a great fan of KISS. The buzz in the UK on Apache Longbow is that it's just too bloody complicated (to fly, operate, maintain or fight).

[GazB]

The only real difference between the Apache and the Cobra is price and sophistication. The D model apache is a formidible attack aircraft, but if you want to take out snipers in an urban environment by putting a hellfire through the window a Cobra can do that... and cheaper too. If the bad guys have manportable SAMs then both will be forced to manouver like hell but if the bad guys just have RPGs then a Cobra is certainly a smaller target and probably cost 50% less to buy and to operate. I wouldn't be too upset which was supporting me... they are both good machines. (But neither... and nothing is perfect...)