Does the UK need more attack helicopters?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

DragonReborn RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 7:27:54 AM

I think that the WAH-64 is a great Attack helo and I would like to see us buy more than the 67 at present, although from what I've read we still arent putting our current ones into service because 1. we did not get the accompanying training simultors etc in time and so we dont have the trained pilos yet & 2. There are still problems with the tail rotor and the possibility of shell casing from the cannon blowing back into its path. Does anyone know when the WAH-64 will actually be in UK service? Is it just to be attached to the 16th Air Assault? As great as the WAH-64 is I still wonder if the future is maybe UCAVS ie 'robotic attack helecopters' which can be made much nore survivable and remove the risk to human pilots. Does the 16th need/could use, more WAH-64 effectively? How would you see us deploying more WAH-64's?

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 8:03:11 AM

I've heard of the problems and they only add to the feeling that there could be more in the future. The 16th are the only ones getting them. I'm not sure what doctorine we've got for using them but I think they are just going to be used in a support role, closer to CAS than a strike role. While this is fine in theory I think the 16th would be better off with there own indirect fire support from artillery (though not always available to such a mobile brigade), mortors and there own anti armour weapons. The longbows would cause too much problems in a mobile unit like that since the ground crews would probably have a lot on there plate and aircraft on the ground could be vulnerable to attack while under going repairs and mainentance and could at worse hamper the mobility of the brigade. Added to this they can be vulnerable to ground fire (which would be ever present if they're used in a support role). Also the 16th, being a light mobile brigade, doesn't always go up against armour and the WAh-64s would probably either find itself going up against infantry more than armour or attached to an armoured brigade that does perform anti armour and recce operations more than 16th which would just cause more problems with everything from command to logistics. In my opinion they should be used along with dedicated recce and/or armoured units and should used in larger numbers to provide a better backup ability, better flexibility to be used (won't just be pinned to supporting one task) and so they give more punch on the battlefield. Don't know about any UCAV helos in the works but I have no doubts that someone will be thinking about it.

Quote Reply

DragonReborn RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 8:06:58 AM

link Obviously this is only a scout but the technology is there

Quote Reply

densoflex RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 8:13:07 AM

RM-Nod, any idea of how many combat helicopters comparable size European armies have (Germany, France, Italy) ?

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 8:35:34 AM

Germany and France are getting up to 212 Eurocopter Tigers each, though they are likley only going to get about 120. It's still confirming my belief that they need to be used in large numbers to have any real effect though.

Quote Reply

densoflex RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 8:46:29 AM

As you wrote in your opening post, mundane AK47 may be enough to down a combat helicopter. In larger number thus? Trust you remember an episode of GW2 when out of (say) 36 Apaches attacking an Iraqi stonghold perhaps 34 of them where hit by small arm fire and one downed... Really I don't know if the future is with larger numbers of such weapons. Shouldn't the British Army better keep its money to buy more efficient weaponry?

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 9:22:45 AM

Attack helos have there place just not as infantry support. Larger numbers would allow a damaged helo to be replaced quickly if they find themselves in a bad situation. The UK needs an anti armour capability and MBTs are hard to transport. Attack helos are easier to transport and provide the same anti armour capability. That is what they are for and large numbers would allow more tasks to be undertaken at once. There is no other attack helo more effecient than the WAH-64. It's over 400% more efficient than it's older brother the AH-64 Apache and even more efficient than the Tiger. However they must be used in large numbers to have a real affect no the battle field.

Quote Reply

AJ101 RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 9:59:31 AM

The UK doesn't really have the budget to equip all Brigades with an attack helicopter battalion, I agree with the MOD about giving the 16 AAB the WAH-64 first as they need a more powerful fist than just 105mm arty. I do think though that the UK could just about afford to double this number and have 64 or so available to either 1 or 3 UK divisions when they are deployed. We really can't afford any more than that though. Having said all this the Navy could also do with some attack helicopters to support the Royal Marines. Too many needs too little money...

Quote Reply

RM-Nod RE:Does the UK need more attack helicopters? 3/8/2004 10:18:00 AM

I think the problem stems from what they are used for. They are anti tank and armed recce platforms, not infantry support. I agree about 100 would be enough. But along with this they should go to a recce or armoured brigade. 16 air assault brigade would be better off with something like the harrier or A10, something that can provide good CAS but in a very surviveable frame, the AH-64D proved that this is not what the helo is good for. My worry is that we will end up only using about two thirds of that number in a future war and out of that number even more will be grounded due to problems leaving a pretty negligable force with little backup.

Quote Reply