What is the future of attack helicopters? As much as I like them, I don't think they will have a place in the next peer conflict. >vulnerable to ground fire: insurgents have proven that you can shoot down attack helicopters with machinegun fire and RPGs, so they will get slaughtered by modern MANPADS>vulnerable on the ground: helicopters have a short combat radius, so their bases and facilities will be within range of various kamikaze drones>specialized in killing tanks: attack helicopter's no longer have a niche role because tanks are obsoleteFurthermore, whatever role they can still play can also be played by swarms of cheap FPV drones or jets flying high above the battlefield. Attack helicopters occupy a very suboptimal middle ground between drones and attack jets, therefore I predict that only a handful of the most advanced militaries, which are capable of true combined arms warfare- USA, China, Israel, Russia, Bharat, and MAYBE France- will continue to operate attack helicopters after 2030. Thoughts?
>>65497575>vulnerable to ground fire: insurgents have proven that you can shoot down attack helicopters with machinegun fire and RPGs, so they will get slaughtered by modern MANPADSOf the 375 helis lost in the entirety of gwot, over 300 were to mechanical failure rather than enemy action. We lost 80 M1s (ie, damaged to the point where they were written off), meaning that every chopper in US inventory are collectively less dangerous to be in than our only tank.>vulnerable on the ground: helicopters have a short combat radius, so their bases and facilities will be within range of various kamikaze drones300 miles? Thats wide than most ground assets. Plus choppers can establish an refuelling point anywhere with flat ground and access to fuelling trucks.>specialized in killing tanks: attack helicopter's no longer have a niche role because tanks are obsoleteThe impetus to adopt attack helis was Vietnam, where they were overwhelmingly used as fire support for infantry rather than tank hunting.Attack helicopters are a fire support platform that can be anywhere on short notice, an IFV or artillery asset whos transit time is measured in minutes rather than hours or days. That has obvious utility, that I expect you will pretend not to understand.
>>65497575>vulnerable to ground fire: insurgents have proven that you can shoot down attack helicopters with machinegun fire and RPGs, so they will get slaughtered by modern MANPADSVenezuela had that stuff as well as Chinese anti-helicopter radars, and we flew a dozen Chinooks right into the middle of the country to snatch their leader.
>>65497627With the assistance of local collaborators and a very good and mature Anti-AA systems doctrine, I understand.
They'll shoot drones and spikes for long range attack and apkws for shooting down drones and cruise missiles
>>65497633Clearly not that much collaboration since there's footage of Venezuelans firing on the helicopters in several instances and getting roasted every time. Mature SEAD doctrine is a requirement for effectively utilizing aircraft in hostile airspace, of course.
>>65497611Most of the M1 combat losses resulted in the entire crew surviving. I don't think there was a single total crew kill of an Abrams during all of GWOT by enemy action (Friendly fire sure). The worse I heard was a massive IED killing everyone in the turret and the driver assumed dead but actually alive getting cut out of the wrecked hull
>>65497673No shit, they didn't have to fall out of the sky
>>65497575They will have the same role they've always had: agile fire support that can rapidly respond to the needs of the infantry they are supporting, over a wider front than ground based fire support. They can destroy a hard point that is obstructing an advance, disrupt enemy movement to allow allied elements to reposition, or blunt an enemy armored attack that is threatening to break through. They are the Tank Destroyer and Assault Gun concept taken to its logical maximum.
>>65497575Simple. Put hellfires or rockets on this thing.
>>65497575>>vulnerable on the ground: helicopters have a short combat radius, so their bases and facilities will be within range of various kamikaze dronesFinal nail in the coffin would be fast jet powered medium range kamikaze drones https://youtube.com/watch?v=DPGDAZyQ44kWith sat link or flying repeater drone such thing can be guided over radar horizon, and helicopters previously hiding under radar horizon would be vulnerable 100-200 km away from frontlines. What are their use then?
It will be a full defensive weapon. The modern battlefield has way too many counters against attack helicopters
>>65497575Move their job to unarmored fast transport helicopters whose main job will be- carry stuff fast, sometime with extra fuel tank- carry truck load of long range missiles for a singular strike somewhere the enemy didn't expect you to have asset- intercept drones swam using stabilized turrets
>>65497627True, but the Americans also had air cover from fighter jets, extensive countermeasures etc. A less sophisticated military could not have pulled off the same operation, especially the helicopters flying into Caracas
>>65498291Sounds like a skill issue then.
>>65498291Yes, countries other than the USA won't be able to make effective offensive use of helicopters the same way they can't make effective offensive use of fixed wing aircraft. For any other country, look at the way planes and choppers are used in the Ukraine war: mostly backline drone popping and for rapid response against enemy ground assaults.
>>65497575They have a pretty good showing in Ukraine and are still one of the best ways to take on submarines, something that drones can't do well on their own. I see drones supplementing them, but also making them more effective by acting as an expansion to their sensory range.
The Any Sensor, Any Shooter program already answered this. Attack choppers won't need to expose themselves to enemy assets but instead can fly up behind a forest/hill/building, lob a LOAL missile using targeting data from the networked battlespace sensors, and then fuck off to rearm and refuel while providing immediate direct fire in a substantially more flexible and timely manner of shuffling around the battlefield then a ground asset without require the same level of SEAD that a fast jet does.
>Dronetard spam thread
>>65499218??? Do you have a substantive respinse to OPs points or you are just going to do ad hominems???
>>65497575The GWOT broken a lot of brains, in a peer conflict everything is attainable.Yes they will be lost in large numbers but so long as they destroy some armour before being lost that's still a good trade.
>>65499459But that's the thing, there won't be much armor on the battlefield. FPV drones obsoleted armor in the first year of the Ukraine war
>>65500504Russian corruption did more to stop armour than drones, especially during the first year, when anti-tank missiles were still available.
>>65497980>- intercept drones swam using stabilized turretsIt's often understated that helicopters are still better interceptors in the air than drones are. All else equal, a force of drones and gunships are going to out-muscle a force of drones alone.
>>65500542>helos playing commander with their wing of drones>air to air combat is a bunch of small doritos shooting each other out of the air with even tinier missilesIt's like playing supreme commander and watching a furball of t1 air units go at each other
>>65497575They're basically obsolete now and helicopter pilots know it; unlike tankers. We'll still keep transport helicopters around and they can lob loitering munitions but the attack heli has to face two equally destructive futures:-either we invent ground forces with such strong anti-air ability they can fight against drones normally-or-we invent a drone-centric force which makes helis irrelevant directly
>>65497575They'll probably evolve to hunt drones since their sensor power and speed gives them a standoff distance drones can't match. Not to mention the close range jamming.
>>65497575They'll still exist, but they will be half the size, a quarter the price, and unmanned. Look at what Anduril is doing
Currently they seem extremely useful as (relatively) cheap and mobile deployers of APKWS. Sort of like a flying SAM battery.
>>65497677But what if they did? This is why we need the A-10.
>>65497611If Apaches were still viable the US would be using them in Hormuz right now
>>65497575>What is the future of attack helicopters?Drooooonifying them.
>>65497611>Of the 375 helis lost in the entirety of gwot, over 300 were to mechanical failure rather than enemy action. We lost 80 M1s (ie, damaged to the point where they were written off), meaning that every chopper in US inventory are collectively less dangerous to be in than our only tank.This makes no sense and I refuse to read the rest of your dribble.
>>65502900The US is using them in Hormuz right now. They’re the first line of defense to screen sips from drone attack and also to spot and engage any Iranian attack boats.
>>65502900The US has been using them since that retardation started, retard. They even lost one to a drone back in June. It’s all classified shit but if it’s anything like Ukraine they’re shooting down more drones than anything else, probably.
>>65497627>Near peer discussion.>Brings up Venezuela.Anon did you understand the premise of the discussion.
>>65497575>"Bharat">capable of combined arms warfareSir!
>>65498607>drones can't do on their own>sea dronesYeah I'm thinking helicopters are obsolete at sea as well
>>65503019Machine guns and RPGs are things that even thirdies have, and clearly they aren't effective at stopping American helicopter assaults.
>>65497575Realistically? Same as it ever was, QRF against heavily armored ground assets. Maybe they might do anti-drone work but let me lay it out for you>Tanks evolve to become 100% immune to drones, festooned with EW and hard kill systems to specifically counter them>By extension this significantly reduces the ability of ATGMs to effectively engage tanks as well>They effectively become mobile signal dead zones, leaving arty, mines, and airpower to counter>Arty precision is significantly reduced without drones to give them accurate targeting info, plus potential countermeasures tanks may integrate in the future that may just flat out zap shells out of the sky>Mines have a limited scope of applicability, and depending on the fusing mechanism tanks may have a way to remotely disarm them>Helos are the only thing that can rain a fuck ton of hellfire on a given spot without needing guidance>Range is so short that counter battery radar (which very well may be integrated into future tank designs) can't respond in timeObviously this all hinges on the tank becoming the primary system tasked with EW and anti-drone operations. Otherwise attack helos will only exist to escort transport helos (because there will always be places where a helo can go that a plane can't) and intercept drones (since right now it seems like everything is being put on anti-drone duty)Mind you I say this after 2 bottles of wine, I'm definitely retarded now but I'm probably right because reality is fucking retarded and gay
>>65505592And you think randon sturdier have the doctrine to employ them correctly. The traning to do so? And you considder the raid that happened in Venezuela the same as the kinf drawn out slugfest a near peer conflict would be?
>>65497575attack choppers are really good at shooting down long range attack and ISR dronesthey aren't as fast as a fast jet, but the turreted gun means they can get close without having to worry about ingesting debrisAlso, they can still do all the other stuff attack helicopters do as well
>>65505592Today shooting RPGs is more expensive than tying RPGs warheads to FPV drones.
>>65497575>handful of the most advanced militaries, which are capable of true combined arms warfare- USA, China, Israel, Russia, Bharat, and MAYBE France>IsraelHhahahahahhahaha
>>65506447Israel seems pretty good at combining its intelligence assets with air strikes, actually.Back when the US was busy delivering wedding presents while Osama was hiding in an US-allied nation, the Israelis were actually tagging terrorist leaders left and right.
>>65506447It's more realistic to include Israel on that list than "Bharat"
>>65497627cmon man venezeula was a rare slam dunk and you know it.
>>65506317May we see this machine gun doctrine that makes helicopters obsolete?>>65509101Okay, Venezuela was an exception and American helicopters get shot down by machine guns and RPGs all the time. Can we have some examples, please? Bonus points if they don't involve hovering for an extended period of time over a hostile city in broad daylight.
>>65505628What if my drone become hardly armored, extremely fast, punching through your armor with sheer kinetic energy, launched from a tube shaped mobile-ramp from a (highly armored) vehicle?BTFO tank fag
