View Full Version : RAH-66 Comanche
Samurai Waki
10-02-2005, 09:29
So the US Army is supposedly going to release it's 1st Brigade in 2006, man I'd love to get my hands on one of these~D
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/comanche-030.jpg
I'd like to hear your opinions on this sweet piece of machinery. For more info
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/rah-66.htm
Wan't the entire project cancelled?
edyzmedieval
10-02-2005, 13:26
You can do that?! ~D
Kagemusha
10-02-2005, 15:30
Wan't the entire project cancelled?
I thought the same thing.
Uesugi Kenshin
10-02-2005, 17:53
I also read in the paper that it was cancelled, I remember it very well because I was suprised the local paper even gave it that tiny column.
Anyway it isn't really the right sort of weapon for fighting an insurgency, it is more the sort of thing we'd want for fighting Russia, and I doubt we'll be doing that anytime soon soooooooo......
Samurai Waki
10-02-2005, 18:26
I guess your right. man I need to start getting better information. Oh well, something better will come along in due time. I think the helicopter will be replaced by something else (dare I say anti-gravity) in my lifetime.
I guess your right. man I need to start getting better information. Oh well, something better will come along in due time. I think the helicopter will be replaced by something else (dare I say anti-gravity) in my lifetime.
Something along the lines of the Orca of C&C would be my bet.
Sjakihata
10-03-2005, 22:28
Unfortunately it was abandoned, yes. It was a good alternative as a recon 'copter - and could be fitted with a heavy loadout as well.
Was good that it got cancelled.
It was basically evolving into a big, heavy, late, expensive Apache replacement when an Apache replacement wasn't needed.
Early concepts were for interesting stuff like single-seat notar & tilt-rotor designs & it was only after the Pentagon (or whoever) announced that submissions had to be of 'conventional' helicopter design with tail rotor that it wound up looking like it did. (not sure where the whole 2 seat bit came in, but it was initially supposed to be singleseat)
Now they seem to be developing UAVs along similar concepts to those abandonned due to that ruling.
This has got to be one of the more famous weapons that never got to be anything. Just like the hundreds of German projects.
I mean this one has had numerous games about it (the first one I played was back in 94 I think) or with it included.
It is to some extent like the big cathedral in The Hichthiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It was big and famous but timetravel opened up the market for real estate sharks to travel back and buy the land befor the cathedral was built making it not exist. In return all the pictures of it went up in price as they now depicted something that had never existed.~D
Uesugi Kenshin
10-07-2005, 01:31
Commanche was a great game.....
And I think the Commanche could have been a very useful weapon if the Cold War went hot, but in today's war the subtelty of stealth is not really needed for helicopters, it is still good that we know how to do that sort of thing if ever we need it though.
What we could use (if anything, though the Apache may well be enough) is something well-armored, fast, dependable, and able to deal tremendous punishment. We don't really need a helicopter with stealth characteristics at the moment. Although it would be nice to see the army try a twin-main rotor design, I think the Apache and A-10 can so far fulfill all our close support needs, and then some.
What we could use (if anything, though the Apache may well be enough) is something well-armored, fast, dependable, and able to deal tremendous punishment.
Talking about this?
Well-armoured, fast, dependable and able to deal out tremendous punishment. (http://www.aircav.com/dodphoto/dod00/mi24-006.html)
Uesugi Kenshin
10-07-2005, 02:30
Yep, although a new design would be used the MI-24 does have the basic concept down. I think it had engine issues early on, but I'm sure that could be easily avoided, other than that it faired very well in combat from what I remember. It was used extensively in Afghanistan and iirc it did very well once the Russians established a good strategy for air to ground operations. Something like 4-5 of them flying in a diamond when attacking and a one circling overhead, memory is fuzzy.
I especially like its ability to carry some soldiers.
It was more of a taunt really, though you failed to act in a proper manner.~:cheers:
But yes, a big monster that acts more like a plane would likely be better, especially with a few soldiers in it. And the Hind does have the basics for that. Of course it is too old now, but a new design could be good I take it.
The Apache is very much specialized against tanks. Sure it can beat up buldings and so on, but it is too small no rugged enough for the type of fighting going on. It still does admirably but I just suspect a Hind could do better in this aspect. After all it was made for that.
Uesugi Kenshin
10-07-2005, 22:16
I don't see the taunt there.... Oh well, all in good fun.~:cheers:
Wonder if they've ever thought of taking a page from the Russian's book on this one, have a a mix of attack helicopters all designed for somewhat different pusrposes and then use them together for maximimum effectiveness. Only other attack chopper that the US has (that I can think of off the top of my head) is the Cobra, but that is basically a Cobra carrying TOW missiles instead of Hellfires and with the whole marine superiority attitude backing it. (Not a jab, just an observation)
The taunt is that the lobby for the Apache has been looking down on the Hind as a somewhat backwards aircraft (it can't hide, it has short range, i is not dedicated enough, too lumbering... it goes on). So it would be a kick in their nuts to present the Hind as being better than the Apache at a certain job (not counting transporting troops which it obviously does better).
Also in general the US military doesn't like to copy ideas or designs.
On point. I think a few squadrons of Hinds in US service would be a great assistance to the ground troops, not that the Apaches aren't. But since the Hind was designed for a swoop-attack it appears to me that it would be better at attacking buildings inside a city/town where it would have to get rather close before firing. There it's speed and armour (yes the Apache has greater armour but it is only around the cockpit), and size would a great boon.
Uesugi Kenshin
10-08-2005, 02:46
Ah, gotcha.
They need a kick in the nuts.... Just as the US needs a better close/"soft" attack copter.
Well if the US didn't copy the design, but took lessons learned and the basic purpose of the Hind I bet that we could design a far better helicopter, not necessarilly because the Hind is in any way badly designed, but there have been quite a few advances since it was made. It would seem to be handy to have a helicopter that could transport troops, had greater armor and armament than the Blackhwak and could carry a much wider array of munitions than the Apache, as to my knowledge it is fairly limited, not to mention it can carry a good deal fewer weapons than the Hind or a similar craft. I doubt it will happen though...
Also I believe the Apache's cockpit armor can be penetrated by small-arms. But don't quote me as this is merely what I remember from a History Channel episode on an Apache attack into Fallujah (or another Iraqi city, but I think Fallujah) where a round hit one of the pilots.
Another thought, we could even practice with the technique of such attacks and such already without any help from Russia or its ex-satellite nations as we already have a bunch of Hinds sitting around for use as Opposition Forces in war games.
It would be the birth of a new class of helicopters, the Assault Helicopters.
The Hind's main advantage over the Apache is obviously its armour across the entire body (instead of just the vitals) and its capacity for weapons. It can even carry bombs on underslung racks beneath the body (not that dissimilar to the one used in Rambo II). But I don't think it can carry a greater variety of weapons per se (not counting the bombs). But I think its rocketpods are bigger (so either the rockets are either bigger or more plentiful), though both aircrafts have room for four pods (for instance four Hellfire each).
The gun would normally go to the Apache, but when it is infantry holed up in the a building or even just running across a field I think a 23mm gatling is better than a 30mm autocannon.
One could think of the Assault Helicopters as the infanty of the air. While the Attack Helicopters are the tanks. Attack open a breach with the tanks while the Assault and infantry clean up the mess. Each are specialized to their tasks.
And yes, a new Hind-like helicopter would be nasty! Better armour, faster, better armaments and structuring. Given that the Hind is infamous for its capacity to take RPG hits (the Russian specific weapon) and still fly home, I would say the new one would be nearly impervious to infantry without shoulderlaunched missiles.
metatron
10-08-2005, 04:37
Would be useful against the PRC...
metatron
10-08-2005, 04:41
Actually, now that I think about it, they should've used to replace the Kiowa in at least the Armored/Cavalry units. I can't imagine a UAV would be as useful in a mobile campaign.
Uesugi Kenshin
10-08-2005, 15:46
Doesn't the Hind have six hardpoints for missiles and rockets, while the Apache has four? It is my memory from OpFlash that the Hind had something like twice as many rockets and the same number of anti-tank missiles. I might remember incorrectly though.
If the US made a Hind style helicopter it could replace the Blackhawk in the use of "hot" drops, I would feel a lot better trying to get dropped into a combat zone in a Hind than a Blackhawk, Mogadishu anyone?
Well I doubt we'll be seeing a new helicopter going into development, the military is tied up producing Cold War weapons for the most part at the moment and putting a new rifle into production, the XM-8 is tied down by red tape, no indication that it will be released any time soon and they might be forced to re-open the competition....
metatron
10-08-2005, 18:07
If the US made a Hind style helicopter it could replace the Blackhawk in the use of "hot" drops, I would feel a lot better trying to get dropped into a combat zone in a Hind than a Blackhawk, Mogadishu anyone?No, because they'd have to hover still for a minute to let people fast rope. It would be more effective to build a transport only helicopter (carry more people) and task a gunship escort.
Well I doubt we'll be seeing a new helicopter going into development, the military is tied up producing Cold War weapons for the most part at the moment and putting a new rifle into production, the XM-8 is tied down by red tape, no indication that it will be released any time soon and they might be forced to re-open the competition...."Cold War" weapons are what win battles. Granted, insurgents aren't exactly manuvering tanks that the like, but Russia, the PRC, and the PDRK are.
How likely are wars with them? Even North Korea is 'only' saberrattling. A war with Iran is far more likely, and guess what, that would be quite similar to what is going on in Iraq.
It is not that the Cold War weapons should be scrapped and phased out, but development in them should take a backseat for the moment. Infantry and Infantry support weapons should be priority right now. So I think the new rifle is a good initiative for instance.
A Hind-type helicopter would not likely be brought down by the relative primitive weapons of insurgents and warlords. Flukes can of course happen. And a Hind can carry 8 infantrymen, but if developed on to a more dedicated Assault Helicopter it could be expanded to 12-14 men, equal to a Blackhawk.
The Russians actually used Hinds to insert Spetznatz in Afghanistan, and that was quite successful. First the helicopter either set them down, then blew the target apart, or it blew the target apart then inserted the men directly. While it could of course do stand-off protection as well after setting down the men.
While it would still need escorts for the critical insertion it would be far less vulnerable and it could make do with fewer gunships in escort.
Uesugi Kenshin
10-09-2005, 03:51
Metatron even though a Hind type helicopter would still have to hover still while off-loading it would be able to take a good deal more punishment from RPG's and small arms fire than a thin-skinned Blackhawk. If it was expanded in either a variant or the standard version to fit more people it would be far superior to a Blackhawk with escorts as guerilla fighters are not likely to have easy to identify positions.
"Cold War" weapons are important, but only for field battles, not for fighting an insurgency. They should be retained and see some development, but infantry, infantry support and close-air support (mostly helicopters) should see a lot more development because they are in higher demand both at the moment and in the forseeable future. Besides any countries that we would forseeably enter a war against will not be able to stand up well against our ground forces until/unless a guerilla is initiated.
Mount Suribachi
10-09-2005, 10:26
Do you guys even realise that the US Army have 3 Hinds in service? I think they got one from the former East Germany, one from Africa via France and one from GW1 that was left behind by the Iraqis. They're used for training, developing tactics etc in an aggressor stlye role.
Samurai Waki
10-09-2005, 10:55
Most Governments always have some weapons they know the enemy is using~;) The US had a few Mirage 2000s that we bought off the French, that were put into training service during the early 80s, and were retired soon after. I know that the US Navy had a Skorpion Class Submarine (bought off the Russians after the Collapse of the Soviet Union), as proof you can visit pier 12 in Seattle
Yeah I know the Hinds in service, but as noted they are only used for playing 'enemy', rather than actual service. Imagine the loss of prestige for the American armsindustry if the Army went on to say that the Hind was better (that would be the wording in the media, even if the Army wasto say it was only better at certain aspects).
There were some plans for buying the Leopard II but it was considered a homedeveloped tank would be better. Fair enough since Germany and USA had cooperated with the MBT70 project. But the point is, how many weapons couldn't have been bought in other countries that were either better and/or cheaper? We don't know, but we do know that USA doesn't import arms in any important degree.
I think a good deal of economics have played in, but luckily for the American soldier the homegrown weapons are indeed very good.
Mount Suribachi
10-10-2005, 07:41
The US had a few Mirage 2000s that we bought off the French, that were put into training service during the early 80s, and were retired soon after.
I think you mean IAI Kfirs - an Israeli copy of the Mirage III powered by a J79 engine. The Mirage 2000 didn't enter service with the Armee de l'Air till the mid/late 80s.
Kagemusha
10-11-2005, 16:39
US bought licence of this baby.
https://img442.imageshack.us/img442/9190/asmaller1ib.jpg
AMOS
Advanced MOrtar System
AMOS is a twin barrelled, breech loaded mortar turret made for integration to medium sized wheeled or tracked armoured vehicles. It can also be mounted to a combat boat.
The main benefits of AMOS are:
* High rate of fire
* Direct fire capability
* Rapid deployment
* Ballistic and NBC-protection
* Low chassis loads due to recoil system
* Large amount of onboard ammo
* Suitability for all standard 120 mm smoothbore mortar ammo
* Full 360° traverse
One of the key properties of the AMOS is MRSI, Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact. It's a system, which makes it possible to fire up to 14 rounds landing at the target at the same time.
Technical data:
Weight (weapons and loading device)
1455 kg
Time to fire < 30 s
Time to scoot < 10 s
Max. rate of fire 12 rds/min
First 4 rounds < 8 s
Shooting range (direct) 150 - 1 000 m
Shooting range (indirect) > 10 km
Firing sector ± 360°
Elevation range -3° to +85°
Turret crew 2+1
Mortars 2*120 mm
Barrel length 3 000 mm
Loading system Semi-automatic
Recoiling systems
Hydro-pneumatic
Ammunition:
All smoothbore type ammo:
* HE
* Practice
* Illumination
* Smoke
* Cargo
* Guided
Wow... Does that one make you think of either a land-battleship or something out of Red Alert? What's next, an Orca?
Kagemusha
10-12-2005, 21:15
Just our new Mortar awesome support for infantry.~;)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.