Could the Germans have won WW1 if they had received one AH-64 Apache with unlimited ground service and resupply?
Could the Germans have won WW1 if they had received one AH-64 Apache with unlimited ground service and resupply?
Could the Germans have won WW1 if they had received one AH-64 Apache with unlimited ground service and resupply?
no
AH-64 vs (1) Spitfire
They deffo had Spitfires in ww1.
Your gay little spitfire isn't pulling 30Gs sorry kid
30? Are you sure you meant to type 30? 30G of force would push the whole damn pilot down through his own butthole.
Those missiles on the side in line with the wing are AIM-9Ms, they can pull 30G~
Since OPs pic is an AH-64E I think it'd be fair to assume the Apache would also get its most modern weaponry, including the AIM-9X which can pull 60G
The pilot can barely take 9g though. Moron.
He meant the opposing pilot and plane couldn't outmaneuver a missile that can withstand 30G turns.
Missiles aren't piloted, Black person.
>smartest /k/ user.
Would the holocaust have succeded in 1919 commited by Freikorps?
Actually yes. Because they would have just shot them.
No. Most of Europe's israeli population at that time lived in the regions of the former Russian Empire like Poland, Belarus, the Baltic States and Ukraine. The Freikorps would only have access to Germany's native israelites unless they decided to invade all of the above countries.
No, because a large number of Freikorps weren’t anti-Semitic.
They were local and regional soldier militias that were usually vaguely right wing but varied from monarchists, to early fascists, to generic democrats who wanted to protect the Weimar government from commie uprisings (democracy, not American democrats).
1919 made them anti-semitic because the two commie uprisings were led almost exclusively by israelites and those married to them.
Read “Outlaws” by Ernst Von Solomon.
Plenty of freikorps thought that the dudes who /only/ talked about israelites were moronic freaks.
>Read 1 book by 1 guy who got redpilled by the very event you talked about and assassinated a israeli foreign minister in 1922 to find out how the event didn't make people antisemitic
Anon, are you fricking moronic?
Have you read any of his works or accounts about the era?
There are a few specific passages that directly mention “yeah, those dudes are weird” when they’re trying to run guns and organize shit and dudes won’t stop talking about israelites.
It’s a left wing canard to equate all Freikorps with Wehrwolf and the much later clubs that were more fringe motivated and had less veteran participation.
Leftist hacks like Robert G. L. Waite want to tarnish the name of legitimate right wing community defense forces and Baltic invasion forces by doing the “freikorps were le ebic proto-Nazis”.
>Have you read any of his works or accounts about the era?
>There are a few specific passages that directly mention “yeah, those dudes are weird” when they’re trying to run guns and organize shit and dudes won’t stop talking about israelites
1. He changed his mind a lot.
2. He went from helping organize a (successful) assassination on a israeli politician to dating a israeliteess and his 180° change is one of the big things he's famous for.
However, he is not a reliable source in any era of his life, the guy was a habitual criminal and extremely violent with no regard for human life.
In moron anon's defense, Salomon (not Solomon) was an incel and once he found a gf with khazar milkers he simped so hard for her that he became part kf the resistance.
See above. He spent years writing for the NSDAP until he became a gigasimp for his israeli gf. He became known as a strasserist after the night of long knives and his brother was a KPD member.
All in all an interesting guy but you should really pick somebody else to make your point.
Probably considering the armor on it would probably necessitate a direct hit from AA which considering the era would be difficult with something as maneuverable as a helicopter.
Plus I'm sure it could easily put range anything that could pose a threat.
>railway gun the FARP
Only safe bet.
no even if the ground service was perfect and could replace any component, even if it could somehow safely ignore all enemy aircraft it couldnt fire faster enough to win the war
I think they could go around sniping major assets, like heavy artillery and trains, without much to worry about, since they can fly faster and higher than the fighter planes of that era.
>since they can fly faster and higher than the fighter planes of that era.
Black person the never exceed speed of an AH-64 is 227mph and its service ceiling is 20,000 feet. It couldn't run from a Fiat Cr.42
>Sopwith Camel service ceiling 19,000 feet
>Sopwith camel top speed 113 MPH
The Camel was hardly the fastest bus on the Entente side, but your point remains, even an SE5a or Spad XIII aren't going to get past 140mph in the cruise.
Why should a plane from the 1930s matter in this scenario?
Look at the retirement date
1948.
30 years after WW I ends in 1918 and only ten years after it first flew in 1938.
That really wasn't a long service life, tbh, and it has nothing to do with he topic.
An Apache taking off from Flander with four drop tanks and only chain gun ammo could make it to and from London.
Just strafe the Parliament every day.
An Apache taking off from Flander with four drop tanks and only chain gun ammo and a WW1 pilot would augur into the ground within seconds, burning the whole thing to cinders, because no ww1 pilot would be capable of figuring out how to fly the damned thing.
But how would you feel if you hadn't eaten breakfast this morning?
>leave the apache to me
That would probably be one hell of an interesting dogfight tbf
Hartmann mogs him
>Gets AUSSIED by a machine gunner in a trench
get AUSSIE'D stupid kraut
No.
But they could have won if they had a spy satellite, a squadron of F-16s, and a refueling plane. They could have destroyed key Soviet industry and leadership with no fear of retaliation.
>soviets
>in ww1
?
the Russian civil war did start in 1917 so he’s not entirely wrong
By that time the Russians were so disorganised that it would've been a waste to spend any energy on them.
YOU DUMBFRICKS, THIS IS WW1. IF I SEE ONE MORE WW2 RELATED COMMENT I SWEAR...
I'm starting to think this board is uneducated
Without a doubt. They would have easily been able to break the French lines which would have brought an end to the war. It's a weapon that simply had no counter in that era.
In all likelihood they'd probably crash it since there's no way to train on it besides flying the only one they have.
Yup
Destroy British dreadnoughts, end the blockade, starve the British via surface combatants
its not invulnerable to ww1 weaponry - they would loose it sooner or later.
>its not invulnerable to ww1 weaponry
It's pretty close to it. There wasn't really much in terms of air defense available, and the AH64 can engage before the enemy even knows they're there.
Nah fighter crafts exist and helis are too slow to reliably stay away from them. F-16 or F-15 is another matter.
>Nah fighter crafts exist
Anon, literally nothing from WW1 would ever get within range of the AH64 before eating a missile.
>literally nothing from WW1 would ever get within range of the AH64 before eating a missile.
Single aircraft. Dozen would make it run for its life.
>its gun has an effective range of 1500m
Not against aircrafts.
So how do you solve the problem of Apache being both the fastest and highest service ceiling aircraft in theatre, you can't saturate it if you cant reach it
the same as with me262 - hit its airfield
But the enemy completely lacks the ability to do that.
WWI, morono.
why?
specops and infiltration teams existed during ww1?
>specops and infiltration teams existed during ww1?
Yes. They weren't called "special operations" at that point, but yes they existed and did infiltration missions.
The AH-64 can ferry to any location on this map within one day, it has a 400 mile longer one-way trip radius than the premier long range strategic bomber of WW1 (Handley Page Type 0), it can re-base at any location in Germany within two hours, while it would take the Handley Page 4 hours to cross Germany starting at the French-German border. Caveats needed for this to work at all
>They entire bomber fleet doesn't get shot down on its way
>You know where the AH-64 is based at
>The AH-64 itself does not intercept your bomber fleet
>Nobody on the ground can see your bomber fleet flying at its very low 3,400M service ceiling
>The very modest 2,000 pound max bombload for this plane is enough to saturate the airfield and kill the AH-64
Yeah but ultimately all the Apache has is some unguided rockets, Hellfire missiles, and that 30mm canon. Keep in mind that after like 1 flight its finished because they can't maintain or replace anything on that entire machine. So, it would only be useful for one engagement against an important target from maximum 15km, and that ability alone is impervious against WW1 troops and weapons that have no ability to even determine how far away or how high the Apache is. The Apache could really provide nice cover for friendly troops and take on a very strategic target. Basically, it could win a battle.
>Keep in mind that after like 1 flight its finished because they can't maintain or replace anything on that entire machine.
Read OPs post moron. That is not the scenario.
>AH-64 apache with unlimited ground service and resupply
Pretty important part of the OP
>Impervious against WW1 troops and weapons
>Basically, it could win a battle
I think if we extrapolate knowledge under the idea that this Ah-64 is never going to get shot down on its own and can re-arm and resupply, it would win the war
>Single aircraft. Dozen would make it run for its life.
Doubt.
>Not against aircrafts.
Not against MODERN aircraft. It could down anything from WW1 with ease.
>Not against MODERN aircraft. It could down anything from WW1 with ease.
Dude watch Apache gun cam videos. At 1500m it tens rounds to get single hit on standing truck. Its not the weapon that can keep 10 bi planes away from you.
AH-64 speed advantage is too small to reliably stay from away multiply fighters that can come from several directions.
>50% faster is not fast enough
Yes it is, Zeros were almost completely hopeless against the F4U Corsair in WW2, the speed difference between them in 30%
>several directions
They can never come from up, and they can't never come from below because the AH-64 has a service ceiling 800 meters higher than the absolute pinnacle of WW1 fighter technology
Dude watch WW2 gun cam videos. At 500m it takes hundreds of rounds to get a single hit on a slow moving bomber. That's a better plane, sight, gun, everything.
Any complaint you have against the AH64, the planes of the era experience 2000x more. At 1500m, the pilot cannot even engage the AH64. Meanwhile the AH64 has already used all of its air to air missiles and destroyed numerous aircraft. You have 20 aircraft? No you don't. Half of them got blown up instantly. And why does Germany have no planes suddenly? You're being swarmed by 20 planes yourself.
Or, even worse, last night the AH64 blew up your entire airforce because it has no problem operating at night. Meanwhile radar, thermals, night vision, you have none of those.
Eat shit moron.
>Dude watch WW2 gun cam videos. At 500m it takes hundreds of rounds to get a single hit on a slow moving bomber
If you would actually bothered to do that and not just pull statements out of your ass you would found that on average it took 26 rounds to score single hit.
>Dozen would make it run for its life.
No lol moron
a dozen biplanes converging from every direction with .30 caliber machine guns would 100% destroy a single apache. even if it could get a lock on a flying motorcycle to fire missiles, it doesn't have enough and can't turn and lock and fire fast enough to prevent biplanes from getting in MG range, and a biplane firing from 200 yards flying straight at it would absolutely destroy/crash the chopper.
even if by some miracle tom cruise was in the apache and he took out a squadron, they'd just send six squadrons.
>a dozen biplanes converging from every direction
Literally impossible.
Just fly up.
Everything you say has,been addressed already.
It would spot the planes early, outrage them massively and it flies faster backwards than they do forwards.
A dozen wouldn't even be close to enough you dumb c**t. How we you so arrogant and clueless at once?
Look up how many it can target how fast and at what range.
it can't stay up there forever. and it has to get up there. and then it has to come down. and it has limited ammo.
also, it's not going to be able to target a flying motorcycle. there's not enough of a signature. and, a .30 cal mg will 100% destroy an apache.
and, biplanes are cheap. there were over 145,000 planes in the european theatre of WW1. and, the apache helicopter has a shorter flight time than a sopwith camel. the biplanes will outfly the helicopter by simple fuel consumption.
an apache could frick a lot of shit up but it doesn't stand a chance against a typical bomber escort amount of biplanes.
The Apache can do what it needs to do and head home long before the scrambled enemy fighters can get anywhere close.
biplane runways were literally dirt roads and hangers were literally tents. they can take off and climb to 5000 feet before an apache has completed pre-flight checks. they are LITERALLY flying motorcycles. a biplane can be scrambled, and in the air at top speed, in under 4 minutes. an apache would not have oil pressure and temp up to ready for takeoff in 4 minutes.
biplanes were all over the god damn place. they could land in a decent grass field. they can take off from a gravel road.
The biplanes are only going to take off once the Apache makes its presence known by attacking some enemy asset and it takes the biplanes a loooooooong time to climb to a reasonable altitude.
Not that they can ever actually reach the altitudes the Apache can.
it doesn't really matter, because the apache will still be vulnerable over and over in an environment with literally thousands of biplanes and flak cannons. the apache can either do random shit or nothing, in which case it doesn't matter and just coin flips until it gets caught, or it can take deliberate action, which is predictable, and it can now be targeted and destroyed by cannons and planes.
The AA guns of that era couldn't even deal with biplanes and the biplanes simply cannot reach the Apache if it stays high up.
the apache has to get up there, and it has to come down to do anything. there's no avoiding its eventual destruction if it actually gets used
A hellfire missile can target things 11 km away.
and it can carry what, 4 of them?
in other words, nothing.
16, actually
so, in the event it is able to use them to any good effect as far as its own self preservation goes, it can hold out for half a mission.
the normal operating height of an apache is 1000 to 8000 feet. above that it's not going to be doing much of anything. and biplanes can operate easily at those altitudes.
>Flies faster backwards than they do forwards
It was obvious already that you don't know anything about helicopters and aviation other than what video games told you but this takes the cake.
>and aviation other than what video games
Actually if he played some videogame like WT he wouldn't be writing such.
Or pretend helicopters are safe from biplanes. Because biplanes are unironically humiliation counter to top tier helicopters in WT...
Those interwar biplanes that WT depts are worlds apart from WW1 shite in terms of performance.
>AH-64 is 50% faster than the fastest WW1 fighter
>Too slow to reliably stay away from them
Also doesn't matter because they're getting hit with a Stinger the second they come within 5 KM
How about the 20th ww1 fighter? "unlimited resupply" doesn't mean "instant hit the reload button to rearm mid-air"
>The helicopter than can fly backwards faster than the enemy plane can fly fowards won't be able to reach friend the friendly air space because they sent 20 planes after it
????
>they're getting hit with a Stinger the second they come within 5 KM
This. Literally nothing would ever even see the AH-64 before being blown up. Engagement ranges in WWII were a couple hundred meters for aircraft, and that's with vastly superior aircraft and guns to WWI.
The AH-64 is able to lock on to 128 targets at a time and track and fire on 16 at once. Even after it has burned through its missiles, its gun has an effective range of 1500m, and again, tracking at that distance.
A WW1 aircraft would never even fire a single round before being shot down.
WWI front was saturated with artillery of all sizes - and there were120mm anti aircraft guns - as well as anti armor guns that would be effective against it
Yes, if they can hit it. Spoiler alert: the AH-64 can blow up the entire battery before anyone even sees it.
What about the other 200 batteries within range? Do you have any hint of an idea how much artillery was present along the front in WW1?
>thinks radar can lock onto canvas and wood
goddamn but you're moronic.
>If we saturate every inch of the sky with shrapnel the AH-64 will die
Ok I guess you got me there in this hypothetical scenario where air itself is replaced with metal
>thinks radar can lock onto canvas and wood
It can
>But we live in an alternative reality where it actually cannot!
Hellfires come in laser guided varieties and ATAS is All-Aspect IR guided
Go into DCS and try shooting down a flight of P-51s before they get you. moron. The Apache has no air-to-air capability and it's a sitting duck for WW2 fighters.
>The Apache has no air-to-air capability
Except for the gun that is superior to everything fielded at the time?
What's the ATAS?
and wood
>lock onto canvas and wood
ah the yes the famous canvas and wood rotary engines of our forefathers
Do you think that only steel will give a radar return?
Radar sets have advanced beyond 1930 anon
good luck hitting an apache with a timed fuze 120mm that can fire once every 60 seconds while the Apache is at 6km high 8km away from the frontline and moving
All these weapons were available in WW2 on both sides:
>heavy caliber rifles
>anti air guns
>rocket propelled grenades
>anti-tank shaped charges
>recoilless guns
>planes with heavy caliber weapons (some had dual 40mm cannons)
>planes with air-to-air unguided rockets
All of those things can take out a modern Apache with ease. So, the question isn't about firepower. The Apache would really shine if it effectively used its optical and infrared sensors to engage targets from long distances with precision missiles and its 20mm canon. The distances are so long that in WW2 there is really no way for the enemy to even be aware of what's hitting them and where exactly it's coming from. An aerial machine sitting in the air hitting them with rounds and missiles was unheard of. It wouldn't last long, though. The hardware, materials, and even the fuel is not something that can be replicated with WW2 tech. The Apache is a maintenance beast so it would probably only be good for maximum 3 non-intensive flights.
Okay so in WW1 it would be insanely lethal. Most of the weapons I mentioned here
were not invented yet and of the few that did exist, they were only issued in extremely small quantities. WW1 was characterized by men literally charging trenches and enemy fortifications in a line and getting gunned down by machine guns and artillery. They didn't have any king of heavy caliber weaponry issued to infantry save for a few special units towing around early mortars and light guns. The only kind of weapons that could engage an Apache with any kind of effectiveness in WW1 would be artillery and heavy caliber rounds. But the artillery couldn't really be aimed at an attack helicopter and the Apache is armored to protect itself against dshk rounds. So, everyone on the ground is totally screwed unless you get a lucky hit (an AK47 took down an Apache once kek) or the Apache simply runs out of fuel or reaches its hardware limits.
Keep in mind that the only reason why the apache is a lethal weapon on the battlefield is because of its ability to:
>drop below the radar horizon in hot zones, eliminating the ability for enemy missiles to lock on
>use flares to fool infrared guided missiles
>and most importantly, engage targets from a long distance with extreme accuracy. This is the most lethal aspect of any attack helicopter. Without this, they're useless.
They were fielding WW2 weapons in WW1?
I imagine there would have been a big leap in intelligence operations as the Entente tried to sabotage or destroy this single piece of equipment that was fricking them up. Probably a lot more effective than “fire 1000 artillery at it and hope for the best”
If used correctly it would probably delay major movements of supplies and troops which could have a huge impact until it either gets disabled out of combat or some dipshit pilot flies it into a mountain
>WW2
An insane number of posters here are such contrarian homosexuals they literally can't read.
Typing "Germany" and "WWX" is all it takes to trigger them.
Fricking hell
lets see, you can
1. blow up artillery depots
2. raid assault staging areas
3. destroy HQs
4. destroy factories
5. harass and destroy royal navy ships
the recipe is all there for a win. i don't take seriously the risk of this thing getting shot down. you can do all of this while still being cautious.
There's no way anyone could shoot down an Apache in WW1. Not a chance unless they scored a VERY lucky shot like some fighters did in Iraq with an AK rifle.
>Some fighters did in Iraq with an AK rifle
Also this Apache accidentally flew over squad at low range because Iraq didn't have a clear front line with trenches like WW1 would have - It had no way of knowing where the enemy was
It could just operate at night and nobody would be able to do a damn thing about it. Even the "what if we have a infinite planes that suicidally rush the helicopter knowing where it is at all times and all German planes are deleted and and and" can't really deal with that reality.
if its real ah64 and not some deusexmachina it would need to R&R - it would have pilots etc - even if it utouchable on battlefield it will be parked somewhere to replace worn out parts and such - Ukraine has dozens of untouchable himars launchers - did they win yet? no?
If you have a literal God machine available to you, you would find the manpower to train enough pilots to have on constant rotation I think
OP didn't say "came with trained pilots". That thing is going to be shredded tinfoil within an hour, helicopters are unintuitive at best to fly, and an instant and utter deathtrap if you give one to an experienced fixed wing pilot with no rotary experience or knowledge.
>OP didn't say the atmosphere had breathable levels of oxygen in this scenario so the ground repair and replenishment team is going to suffocate, checkmate
>muh imaginary argument
I accept your concession.
I concede nothing
>announcing your opponent's concession
anon, is there something you'd like to concede to the class?
>We have an maintenance crew with unlimited ground service that knows every detail of this helicopter
>We can't find 1(ONE) guy who knows how to fly it
The original helicopter with no fly by wire, pilot safety features, and flew backwards easier than it flew forwards flew for 3 years without crashing btw
Maintenance still takes time. AH 64 literally takes over 10 hours of ground maintenance per flight hour, and that's in a legit stateside hanger. It will be in the shop way longer than it could ever fly. That's where it would get destroyed.
>That's where it would get destroyed.
By?
Some dude disguised as a janitor. The amount of hands you need constantly maintaining it and the logistics train supplying it means it would be pretty susceptible to sabotage.
>it would be pretty susceptible to sabotage.
Janitors don't get near your nations God weapon for no reason, Black person.
Cool now every step of maintenance and resupply associated with this vehicle is burdened by heavy security restrictions and red tape, while you've also significantly reduced the amount of people that can be staffed to maintain and crew it so now you can complete one, maybe two sorties per day.
>Ukraine has dozens of untouchable himars launchers - did they win yet? no?
Are you fricking moronic? As much as we joke, HIMARS isn't space age technology. It's better than what Russia has, but it's not an overwhelming crushing advantage. The AH-64 is. Further, every single argument you have put forward seems to be hinged on the entirety of the Central Powers' militaries no longer existing at all. That's fricking moronic.
AH-64 not only can lock on to and shoot down prop planes, it has done so.
>goddamn but you're moronic.
You're only so confident because you have no idea what you're talking about.
>What about the other 200 batteries within range?
Look up the range of a hellfire missile. Now how are any of those batteries going to locate and engage the AH-64 at that range? I'm confident it could literally fly stationary there, and never get hit, but it doesn't have to do that. It can blow up all your shit and leave, and you would never even know it was there.
>prop planes
Thanks for confirming your utter fricking stupidity.
do Apaches have bunker busters or ordnance that can destroy factory sized targets?
they wouldn't need them
Yoo, could Julius Caesar conquer the world if his legionnaires had Kalashnikovs with unlimited ammo and spare parts??!!
Yes.
Bruh they had fighter planes and AAA in ww2
>Could the Germans have won WW1 if they had received one AH-64 Apache
Absolutely.
Anybody saying no can't read and most of them are the kinds of Black folk who deliberately seek out WWII threads to seethe.
lol the children here really don't know about the maintenance hours to flight hours ratio. One Apache will be deadlined in the shop for weeks after flying a couple days of constant sorties.
>a couple days of constant sorties.
The war would be won by then.
Sounds more like you don't know about WWI.
Constant sorties for one aircraft is like 5 per day and that's pushing it. You could probably squeeze out ten with constant rotation of pilots and ground crew but there's still a limit of fluid life, bearings, drive parts, belts, and the airframe itself. Even with a full payload every single time that isn't close to war winning. I don't think you actually understand the scale of WWI or the huge effort it takes to keep modern military aircraft flying.
There are certain key railway links that you can attack to cause huge supply problems for the Entente even with limited sorties.
So you send the complex war winning aircraft you only have one of deep behind enemy lines repeatedly while also stretching it to the limits of its sortie rate and maintenance cycle? Nothing could go wrong.
Well, it's not going to do anything war winning if it never goes behind enemy lines.
I don't think you get it, one airframe isn't gonna do anything war winning period. The only hope would be to go for max shock and awe with one huge marathon of sorties and hope that you can bluff em into believing you have more ready to go and force a surrender through fear. The problem with that plan is the fact that Britain is such a shithole that the average British soldier would gladly just die than have to go back to a life of disgusting food and women.
That's more than enough to win WWI.
No. You're desperately trying to invent problems and went from
>muh smuggled in janitor can do it EZPZ
Which the most basic security could prevent
To
>hurr durr if the janitor can't do it everything is more than twice as slow
What the frick is with the butthurt morons trying to be negative nancies in every thread with 0 knowledge about the subject?
>don't actually have a response other than "nuh uh! You're a big negative meanie!" and melts down
lol OP can't handle getting BTFO
On any given day, the damage it can do is minor in the grand scheme of things.
But being effectively invulnerable, it can do this damage every single day.
Blow up a locomotive and sixteen artillery pieces every single day. Shred four machinegun nests and 64 soldiers per day.
Over the course of a year, this adds up.
Hell. Assuming use from day one on, it's probably enough to win in 1914. 150 days. 150 locomotives. 2400 artillery pieces. 600 heavy machineguns, 9600 riflemen.
The attrition adds up and ultimately opens gaps that can be exploited.
The riflemen being shredded don't really matter much, admittedly. They're just to entertain the pilot.
But the locomotives and artillery? Game fricking over.
It literally can't fly but so many sorties before maintenance grounds it for a significant amount of time. You couldn't run this thing all day every day for a week let alone hundreds of days.
The Apache needs about 35 manhours maintenance per flight hour, and has achieved about 70 flight hours per month. At a sortie duration of two hours, that's 35 sorties per month. An average of one sortie per day is evidently manageable.
>one sortie per day
Ok so it's useless
but it's beautiful like a giant locust with missiles
30 sorties per month behind enemy lines destroying HQ and ammo depots.
I bet that would have not had a devastating effect on the guys in the trenches.
8 hellfires, 1200 rounds of 30mm, and 28 hydras a day is not enough to do much. Especially when you have to operate at the limits of your weapons range to stay out of harms way. The enemy would also be able to adapt since there'd be plenty of downtime between sorties.
it wouldn't have much targets over the trenches, certainly none worth risking the ONE OF A KIND asset
it would propably wreck the high seas fleet though
*or the british fleet lmao, i didn't read the whole post
Anon asks about WW I (1914-1918)
Spergs begin discussing shit that didn't exist until WW II (1938-1945).
You guys are dumber than OP.
By the way, OP, no.
That helicopter would be swarmed by fighters, and even if the pilot had the talent to fend off some of them, he'd either get taken out by sheer numbers or blown out of the sky by AA sooner or later and the Kaiser would not have the assets he'd need to replace it.
>In before reverse engineering.
No, it's not that simple, especially when they don't have the machines to build the machine.
>You guys are dumber than OP.
>By the way, OP, no.
>That helicopter would be swarmed by fighters
You don't know what you're talking about and are nearly as bad as the othe c**ts.
>unlimited ground service and resupply
Easily. It has night fighting capability from beyond (at the time) visual range. You could force an entire trench line into retreat with the chaingun alone. And when we're talking missiles, they could cripple an entire navy before they even knew they were in danger. Good luck supplying your troops when all the transport ships and rail lines are buttfricked.
The only chance they'd have would to be sending literally every air asset they have on a one-way suicide mission and hit it when it's on the ground for fuel and maintenance.
flak cannons would destroy the apache almost immediately. an 8.8cm air burst shell would turn it into scrap instantly.
People out here thinking the damn thing needs to single handedly win the war.
As the other anon said, it can average a single 2 hour mission per day. All it needs to do is make that single two hour mission a fire support for a major offensive every other day with the days in between being high altitude hunting of strategic targets like railway junctions, bridges, ect.
Its combat radius puts its airfield outside artillery and enemy air threat, it's speed and altitude keeps it safe from enemy aircraft, it can night fight.
76 CCIP rockets to hit 38 machine gun nests along whatever point is chosen for assault with the 30mm suppressing will easily get the assault across no man's land, and let them consolidate on the new trench lines
It has a range of 300 miles, the same as a sopwith camel, figure out where it operates outta and send a bunch of planes to wait for it. Also good luck using unguided rockets at 20000 feet with any sorta accuracy.
it won't take two weeks to figure out how to kill it.
the question is basically, 'can a WW1 military manage to down an apache' and since they have cannons and planes, the answer is, yeah, absolutely.
would the apache do some damage? yep. but it'd get destroyed pretty quick.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there wasn't anything in the world at that time that could've done anything to a night flying Apache.
>if i make up numbers with no sources, ignore the posts that btfo me and say nuh uh the Apache is invincible
Begone brainlet
Mong.
>WW1 flak cannons could hit targets at 26,000 fricking feet.
Lmao. You're smoking absolute crack if you think they had any chance to hit something at that range.
that's the neat part. they don't have to.
btw, flak was basically unchanged between ww1 and ww2. and flak has killed thousands of B-52 bombers, which, are still in fricking service today.
>here he goes with the "nuh uh!" argument
actual child, go sit in the corner
>AH-64 ceiling has gone from 20000 to 26000 feet in a mere dozen posts
lol you're a joke.
ever heard of a fricking searchlight?
WW1 flak cannons could hit targets at 26,000 fricking feet.
a .30 cal machine gun can destroy an apache.
a single apache wouldn't last a week.
people aren't stupid and a chopper is a fragile machine.
>b-b-but it was hard for aa to shoot down planes in WWI so it would be impossible for the enemy to group a shit ton of flack cannons to take down a less maneuverable aircraft!
Do you think it's easy to find a small high flying helicopter with a searchlight? Lol.
It's not about the service ceiling, you moron, but the fact that your flak mongoloids had to spend thousands of rounds to down one bomber on average and that was when they had the luxury of firing at dense bomber formations that were flying in a very predictable way.
The tech is clumsy as shit.
>no argument other than "IT WOULD BE HARD"
you've been btfo, let it go.
Hard = improbable to the point of not even being worth considering, in this case, as long as the Apache pilot doesn't do anything moronic.
it's not hard for a flak battalion to hit a noisy target with a max speed of 200 miles per hour. b-52s can go 500mph and fly at 50,000 feet. many were destroyed.
You're once more ignoring the fact that the helicopter can blow up an entire emplacement and leave before anyone knows it is there.
no, it fricking can't. it could do that once or twice before it became the primary focus of the entire army to take it down.
it would do some damage, but a single helicopters defeat is completely inevitable. i would be surprised if it lasted a week.
>no, it fricking can't.
Yes it fricking can.
>it became the primary focus of the entire army to take it down
The problem being it can engage from miles away at night, and "the entire army" has another entire army to deal with. Every single post you morons make conveniently ignores that fact.
>The helicopter can blow up every emplacement ever while operating with a limited payload
holy smoothbrain
>You guys are ignoring my strawman and presenting logical counterarguments I have no response to!
lol
>nooo the helicopter will get shot down because everyone will know where it is with no radar, no NV, no thermal! They also will be able to commit all of their forces to engaging this one single aircraft while ignoring Germany's entire army and airforce!
This is the only scenario in which you almost have a point that the helicopter may be engaged, at all.
In reality, it would blow up an entire emplacement, leave, and the Germans would be victorious 🙂
It's mission is to destroy ammo and hq positions behind enemy lines, which are heavily guarded by hundreds of AA emplacements that are fully capable of sending flak to it's location. On the way to these locations it will also have to fly over AA emplacements fully capable of detecting and engaging it. Spotlights were a thing, It's not silent even at 20000 feet. Also at that range and altitude the only thing it can carry that will effectively hit targets is 16 hellfires which means it can kill 16 emplacements before it has to dip. After performing 20 of these sorties in a row and still not destroying enough emplacements to reach the desired target, the helicopter is so far behind on basic maintenance that it needs a complete overhaul and has to spend a month in the shop.
>Verification not required.
>brooo you have to fight this way and not create breakthrough at the front also yet again the enemy will always know your pinpoint location despite not having radar, night vision, or thermals
lol
>show up
>ignore the guns and fire your missiles at the target
>mission complete
>leave
Why the frick do you think it has to first destroy some shitty AA guns before smashing the depot itself?
Anon, that's not possible. It's impossible for an aircraft to do anything if the enemy has flak guns, that's why nobody in warfare used aircraft. Duh. They'd all instantly be shot down.
>we routinely send a single airframe into dense combat zones bristling with weapons fully capable of destroying it with the expectation of using it to win a war.
>single airframe
>ignoring Germany has an entire army and airforce still
back to square one
>hellfires could not target biplanes
Hellfires can be used air to air anon. They are not capable of being used against jets but are 100% capable of shooting down a biplane or other helicopter.
AH64s can and have shot down prop planes with the main gun as well. They can do so at a far greater range than the biplanes can fight back.
>people back then weren't trash.
They did have trash equipment however.
>I can move the goalpost to include the entire german airforce!
cool the other sectors realize the enemy has no air defence and ravage their undefended cities and defences with bombs.
>moving goalpost
What goalpost has been moved? OP never said the entire German military was deleted.
>cool the other sectors realize the enemy has no air defence
wtf but I thought flak guns were all powerful? How are they getting through those?
>As soon as you fire the first hellfire the AA emplacements see your rocket exhaust and send several thousand rounds of airburst flak to your general location
>you become swiss cheese and die after crashing into the ground in a huge fireball.
> the Kaiser is disappointed and you die a sad virgin
They won't notice shit before the target has already exploded and it would take them a while to figure out where the frick you are and to come up with a reasonable guess about where to even aim their guns to have a theoretical chance of hitting you.
Remember, no computers.
>there aren't hundreds of other defensive AA emplacements manned by trained soldiers that immediately begin searching after one is blown up by some rocket from the sky.
By the third hellfire that thing is spotted
>hang on let me move the goalpost for one last hail mary
It can't do anything effective enough to open a front for anyone because it has to return to reload after destroying 16 AA guns when there were hundreds. And it's still in range of those guns, which would be even more effective since you'd have to do a big combined arms push in the day because no one else has NV
>it has to blow things up during day, because it's impossible to blow things up at night and push at dawn
uhuh, I see. Very smart, except that's wrong and stupid.
>16 AA guns
You're forgetting it has more than 16 missiles, hellfires of course not the only armaments it has, and 30mm is of course no joke and fully suitable for anti-materiel use.
Destroying even just 16 guns in one single attack would be absolutely devastating. And it could do that multiple times, every night.
It can carry 16 hellfires on 4 pylons. Those are the only weapons effective at 20000 ft which it would be operating at in order to supposedly stay out of range of AA that it would still be in range of. Also it could maybe run 2 sorties a night if you want to keep using it for more than a weekend since it's a literal maintenance prostitute.
>Very smart, except that's wrong and stupid
a very succinct expression of your post since you didn't bother to read the thread and every point you made has already been shot down.
>Those are the only weapons effective at 20000 ft
Nah
>in order to supposedly stay out of range of AA
Probably pointless, WWI AA was very ineffective considering it couldn't reliably down far slower less nimble aircraft. Maybe if we had to worry about radar this would be a concern, but that doesn't exist yet of course.
>Also it could maybe run 2 sorties a night
two sorties a night blowing up pretty much a guaranteed 32 emplacements, likely far more. That's fricked. Wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that shit.
Motherfricker, flak air denial fields weren't back then and the Apache just needs to turn the FLIR on at night and btfo the guns before they can even turn the spotlights on.
Or better yet. Uses the gun to destroy the spotlights in a couple seconds. What now?
>Motherfricker, flak air denial fields weren't back then
A good question for OP would be what year the Germans even get the thing. IF it's at the start of the war, Allies stand literally no chance. Air forces were tiny and air defense was very poorly understood and implemented.
Exactly this. In 1914 the Apache just opens a breach at the Marne and lets the normal German infantry regiments break through or just hellfires the French Army HQ or presidential palace.
AND don't forget people if the Apache is being used by the Kaiserliche Marine. Imagine the recon data and use the Apache could have at Jutland by scouting the location of Bong ships and being able to correct the shots.
>there aren't hundreds of other defensive AA emplacements manned by trained soldiers that immediately begin searching after one is blown up by some rocket from the sky.
Well, no. If you actually look at the number of guns built, there weren't very many of them at all
Did you know that in WW2 they had radars and gunnery computers to help them find and hit those planes?
Do you really still think B-52s were in World War Two, and nobody on this board has corrected you yet?
ww1 guns shot down ww2 planes every single day. and, ww1 guns have shot down apaches. irl.
>ww1 guns have shot down apaches. irl.
NTA but optics matter more than guns and so does ammo.
what they had in ww1 was perfectly sufficient.
>nonexistant optics and timed fuzes
uhhh no not really man, considering it had a hard enough time downing biplanes
they shot down tons of fricking biplanes.
they might even accidentally shoot down the apache and never know it was even there.
you see, your entire argument is
>Apache fighting alone
>Enemy isn't being pressured by the German Army or Air Force
>Apache approaches enemy during daylight head on and sub 50 meters altitude and at sub 50 kmh/h speeds
>magic flak guns and crews are EVERYWHERE from Switerland's border to the Channel ready to down the Apache at a moment's notice.
you're argument is that somehow an army with perfectly sufficient tools is not capable of destroying a helicopter.
guns built in 1914 shot down B-52's in 1942, yes. flak cannons didn't change in that time.
NTA but B-52s did not exist in WWII.
Can we see those guns that shot down high level bombers in 1942? Last time I checked, all the high level AA guns were post 1930 designs.
>guns built in 1914 shot down B-52's in 1942, yes
No they didn't
>flak cannons didn't change in that time.
Yes they did. Holy shit you're a total moron.
In every thread vaguely related to Germany you'll have one guy just boldly making shit up and arguing.
I don't know how many there are of them or if it's just one guy with no life, but it's a definite pattern.
No idea what the goal is either, maybe he just likes arguing and doesn't like Germany, but it's weird how he continuously gets things wrong he could just google.
Might unironically be shitty AI.
>Might unironically be shitty AI.
Bots don't need to sleep, the guy is persistent in his pattern of
>talk shit
>get corrected
>call everybody an idiot and make things up to "prove" your initial point
But he sticks the yuro timezone.
The tools are far more sufficient and you're just totally ignoring all the problems with targeting
Okay, thousands of B-52s (adopted in 1952) shot down in WWII.
the apache is pretty frickin loud. and there was a lot of fricking searchlights. and the flak gunners were pretty good and there was a fricking lot of them. the b-52 can hit 50,000 feet, btw.
Searchlights work both ways, bro
This, and they're worse for the crew than the target.
Not so sure about that, given the Apache can already see them
No, the Time Defense Corps would have sent 1980s Rodney Mullen back in time to do a freestyle display at the Christmas Truce that is so rad it unites the nations in everlasting peace.
https://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/24/sprj.irq.apache.attack/index.html
On 24 March 2003, 31 Apaches were damaged; one was shot down in an unsuccessful attack on an Iraqi Republican Guard armored brigade near Karbala.[116] Iraqi tank crews had set up a "flak trap" among terrain and effectively employed their guns.[117][118] Iraqi officials claimed a farmer with a Brno rifle shot down the Apache,[119] but the farmer denied involvement.[120] The AH-64 came down intact and the crew were captured;
so yeah, ancient flak guns are not only capable of swatting an apache like a bug, but, fricking arabs have blasted nearly THREE DOZEN apaches AT ONCE with thoughtfully deployed flak guns.
um no sweaty that would be hard to do so you can't do it.
The question isn’t “Can an Apache solo ww1 winner royale style” it’s “can it tip the scales enough for the central powers to win”. The Apache only needs to appear and break crucial stalemates and leave before anyone knows what happened. So yes, it can pave the way for major land assaults with accurate hit and runs, and thoroughly impede progress against the ottomans in the med by eating up shipping uncontested. Ideally it will have to rebase every other day to avoid desperate suicide Sopwith rushes to hit its field as mentioned. It’s unironically a vvondervvaffle, as long as it has competent 20th century aircrew and not two guys that think they’re sky knights jousting for a good time.
>not two guys that think they’re sky knights jousting for a good time
kino
No, in the infinite wisdom of their genetic autism they would dissasemble it to figure out how it works and there is no way in hell they could put it back together in working order or replicate it with the manufacturing standards of the time.
everyone here forgetting that the Apache would be doing the raids at night when no enemy planes where flaying around or when enemy AA would be effective?
no dude, that's not fair. Also you have to ignore that Germany has an entire army and airforce still and isn't just using this singular helicopter. Also the allies have to always know exactly where the Apache is, because like otherwise it's not balanced. Like sure they can't see it but they will magically spotlight it instantly.
>if I pretend like no one has mentioned spotlights, noise from the aircraft, and exhaust flames from rockets/muzzle flash from the chaingun then I can still salvage this argument
>spotlights, noise
If those were enough to reliable down an aircraft, aircraft would never have been used in warfare in the first place.
>notice exhaust
>you are already not at that location by the time they have impacted
wew
Now instead of ignoring that Germany has an entire army and airforce and the Apache can operate at night, you're pretending AA and spotlights are not only all knowing, but all powerful. In reality, they are not very effective at all.
Biplanes can't see the apache at night, the apache can see them however. That's even dumber than "muh flak guns tho"
>if I ignore the fact that there are hundreds if not thousands of the positions in the operation area manned by tens of thousands of trained soldiers and act like no one has ever taken watch before in their life then my smoothbrain fanfic can hold up.
You really don't get the scale of WWI do you? Also why do you keep bringing up points that have already been shown false by previous posts like its some kinda gotcha? The helicopter cant operate effectively at the altitude you describe, it can't do it for any extended amount of time, it can't carry enough munitions to make a difference, It will get spotted even at night, and it will still have to operate at a range that puts in danger of enemy AA. At this point i'm guessing you're going for deliberate contrarianism or you're really just that dumb.
>bro the helicopter is literally the only thing they have
still back on square one. The helicopter absolutely can create an opening for other forces. It can do this reliably and repeatedly. It can and will win the war.
send it to Paris at night in 1914 and btfo the French president in whatever palace he is holed in and it's over.
The Apache would be extremly useful for decapitation strikes. That also goes for division headquarters and shit.
https://www.quora.com/Did-pilots-in-World-War-I-fly-at-night-If-so-how
biplanes would shoot the apache down in the night.
hellfires could not target biplanes. the apache pilot could not see biplanes or engage them effectively with guns. once it was spotted by searchlights, the biplanes would shoot it down.
the apache wouldn't last 1 week doing night raids. people back then weren't trash.
not against 1914 planes. The Apache just needs to create a SINGLE opening at the Marne for it to be over for France.
And why does it have to fight the planes at all?
Why do you assume that the Apache is fighting the war all on its own and without a few hundred friendly planes being present in the area?
>Why do you assume that the Apache is fighting the war all on its own
Because that's the only way he isn't wrong, and his instant reaction was that the apache would be shot down. He is now honor bound to defend this point to the death.
Absolutely
>ITT
>nerds seething because anons have found yet another way to save the world once they finish their time travelling device
Get fricked, allied scum.
hellfire missiles are laser guided, or optionally radar guided... they're not going to lock onto anything and chase it. they have to be controlled through to the target. which makes them borderline useless against biplanes. which would shoot the apache to shit with machine guns. at night.
>which makes them borderline useless against biplanes.
You can 100% shoot down slow moving aircraft with them. The laser guidance, radar guidance, or optical guidance from the Apache can accomplish this.
The Apache also has a gun that is vastly more effective and has greater range, not to mention targeting capability that is simply impossible to overcome with WW1 aircraft. The Apache could sit stationary and shoot down biplanes until it ran out of ammo without receiving a scratch.
>The Apache could sit stationary and
get shredded by flak
there's no scenario that an apache survives alone against an entire army with planes and anti-air batteries. it has advantages but it's just a fricking piece of metal, there's nothing that's going to stop an army from destroying one fragile tin can in the sky.
There's the imaginary flak again and the solo Apache against the world scenario.
it's an imaginary scenario where imperial germany got an apache. 'realistically' they'd never be able to operate it.
but no, flak wasn't imaginary. it was omnipresent in a form that shot down B-52 bombers on a regular basis, and which has literally in the modern day against combined arms first world militaries, shot down DOZENS of AH-64 apaches, IRL. they were not stupid in WW1 and were very capable of finding and shooting down aircraft at night. it was something they did every single day.
it would not be surprising if a single apache on WW1 was immediately destroyed before they even knew wtf it was.
>it was omnipresent in a form that shot down B-52 bombers on a regular basis
SAM aren't flak, also take some meds. late 20th century AA gunnery vastly differs from early 20th century AA. Especially the sights and optics.
no, FLAK cannons. as in 3 to 6 inch guns firing fused air burst shells. these guns basically did not evolve from 1918 to 1993. these guns, which they had tons of, have shot down DOZENS of apaches, IRL. and DOZENS of b-52's. etc etc. nobody said SAM's. they fire a shell that explodes after a set length of time sending shrapnel in all directions and can take down a plane or chopper within 100-200 yards from the burst. and you'd just pump 10 shells a minute into the area of aircraft.
this technology is more than sufficient to destroy an apache. it has done in it situations far more favorable to the apache than we're discussing.
>these guns basically did not evolve from 1918 to 1993
Lmao
That's not true but even if it were, which it isn't, the guns aren't the issue, ammunition and targeting are and both evolved massively.
moron.
>the tech remained the same up to 1993
So are we ignoring that timed fuzes are SHIT compared to proximity fuzes that started being used during WW2?
Or that the TARGETING, which itself is the most important part used in later dates COMPUTERS to calculate stuff and that in pre 1918 it would all have been done by hand and when a firing solution had been calculated the Apache would have shredded the cannon?
Are those DOZENS of b-52 downed by flak in the room with you?
sure, stuff got better. they strapped radars to the flak cannons. better munitions were invented. but that stuff isn't necessary to shoot a fricking helicopter.
machine guns and ammo have improved too, but if you aim a vickers MG at an apache and shoot it up, it's going down in flames.
>but if you aim a vickers MG at an apache and shoot it up, it's going down in flames.
You see, in an environment where there are not manpads, a helo won't even fly near rifle range. Stop coping. The "10000000 men AA" units you claim that are hunting the Apache are also being attacked by regular infantry and planes and arty.
>get shredded by flak
>WWI flak
>at night
>against a modern heli
Yeah, no.
that's literally what would happen. do you literally think that just nobody would do anything about the wonder aircraft blowing stuff up? do you not think they would wait and listen for it? do you not think everyone wouldn't have been informed of the new aircraft they have to shoot down? or what it sounds like? or to look for it at night with the lights?
it's delusional to believe that armies with the means to destroy an apache (machine guns, lights, flak cannons) wouldn't make a plan to do it.
the apache would quickly be found and shot. it's not magic.
"Literally" see
And the apache would
<<< end the war in a matter of weeks in any phase of the war.
Literally literally.
There's an army attached to it, you know?
you are completely fricking delusional if you think that an apache would survive more than a week in an environment where an army has thousands of planes armed with machine guns and cannons with flak shells and lights to find the chopper.
also, a chopper with 12 missiles and 300 bullets isn't going to make a dent against 42 fricking million soldiers worth of army. even flying three sorties a day. even being really careful.
people probably wouldn't even know the apache was shooting at them. artillery barrages in WW1 occurred at a rate where infantry could not distinguish one explosion from another.
>where an army has thousands of planes armed with machine guuns
Fighter numbers were relatively low, not concentrated and the helicopter has a superior gun that could take the slow flying WWI planes out multiple times their maximum range easily.
And WWII AA fire sucked.
the chopper can't track a flying motorcycle. it'd be spending 30-50 bullets per plane. it can't hit them with rockets. hellfires are not heat seekers, even if they did have enough of a signature to lock - they're laser guided, meaning, a person has to steer them onto a target. not happening with a plane.
yes, ww1 biplanes DID operate at night, and COULD find and kill a chopper. the chopper would not be able to defend itself against a squadron of biplanes. much less multiple squadrons converging from different angles which it has to have in visual range to detect. even at full speed trying to run past them, dozens of planes would each be firing tracers into it as it went by. only one of them has to land a hit for it to go down in flames.
300 rounds is what US apaches are equipped with an they wouldn't have the means to retrofit it with different packages.
you are genuinely delusional if you think there's any way a helicopter in ww1 avoids getting hit. flying at night does not protect it. it can not do a significant amount of damage, certainly not a war winning amount. it's doubtful that a single apache could even turn the tide of a single fricking battle.
>the chopper would not be able to defend itself against a squadron of biplanes.
yes it would. It would be able to annihilate them before they got into range.
Why would the germans be unable to deploy their own planes btw?
>night
worst time to try your stupid bullshit since they won't be able to even locate the apache before being shot down.
>they're laser guided
They are also radar guided OR guided by the Apache's optics lmao moron
>300 rounds is what US apaches are equipped
Wrong.
laser and optic guided are the same thing, practically, and they can't get a fricking radar lock on a biplane.
an apache doesn't carry enough ammunition to make a scratch. it's not enough to destroy one trench. the only way it makes a difference is being used to like, assassinate the president or something, which is not the point we're discussing.
oh that's right, i'm talking to uneducated children who think that it would be a battlefield 4 scenario.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_I
it's a little faster. it's not fast enough to avoid being gunned by planes going 120mph.
>oh that's right, i'm talking to uneducated children who think that it would be a battlefield 4 scenario.
WWI bombing was completely ineffective. Targeted strikes with an aircraft with fricking thermals is nowhere near in the same ballpark and you are a clown.
>laser and optic guided are the same thing
No they're not.
>they can't get a fricking radar lock on a biplane.
Source? Apaches can and have shot down prop planes.
>it's a little faster
It's nearly twice as fast, significantly more maneuverable, and can engage from far beyond any WWI aircraft's maximum range.
You are a moron. Even if every single thing you said is true-not one has been yet-every argument you make is predicated on Germany having no army and no air force at all with which to support the Apache. You are a moron.
it's about 25% faster. it doesn't have enough ammunition to protect itself against a squadron of biplanes. it can not hide from flak. it could even be destroyed by small arms on the ground. it's happened before IRL.
an apache doesn't have enough firepower to make a difference in the war at large, anyways. 12 missles and 300 bullets? cool. that's 0.0001% of the destruction they were raining on each other for 296 hours at a time.
even assuming that the germans NEVER MADE AN OOPSIE with the magical helicopter from the future, it wouldn't survive long. literally nothing survived long.
>12 missiles
16
>300
Over a thousand.
Also two rocket pods.
>25% faster
Nearly twice as fast.
>it doesn't have enough ammunition to protect itself against a squadron of biplanes.
yet again your entire argument is predicated on Germany having zero planes of flak guns of their own.
>it's about 25% faster
NTA but that's a lot.
>12 missles and 300 bullets? cool. that's 0.0001% of the destruction they were raining on each other for 296 hours at a time.
None of those numbers are true abd you wouldn't usr use to kill infantry.
You're just butthurt about Germany, aren't you?
>oh that's right, i'm talking to uneducated children who think that it would be a battlefield 4 scenario.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_I
>cntrl+f "train"
>1 result
>trainstation
We're you trying to prove something with that?
How many trains did bombers take out in WWI?
Again, the Apache can operate a night unlike the enemy planes.
>a chopper with 12 missiles and 300 bullets
>people probably wouldn't even know the apache was shooting at them. artillery barrages in WW1 occurred at a rate where infantry could not distinguish one explosion from another.
The Apache doesn't NEED to go up and down cleaning trenches. It can fly over it at night, go to whatever divisional HQ or army HQ there are out there and do quick decapitation strikes on key personel.
>also, a chopper with 12 missiles and 300 bullets isn't going to make a dent against 42 fricking million soldiers worth of army. even flying three sorties a day. even being really careful.
>Anon thinks they'd just attack infantry
Dumb child.
>300 rounds
At least fricking Google first.
>also, a chopper with 12 missiles and 300 bullets
Those numbers are ridiculousy wrong.
Aside from that, even if we go by them, that's not 12 empty trenches but 12 destroyed trains per flight.
the same trains being targeted by bombers already? and being regularly blown up and replaced?
you really must have no idea how an army works. it would take two night raids by the apache for a plan to be developed to just catch it on the way back.
it's a fricking metal box that will be readily annihilated by flak and machine guns
>''They fly low, they fly slow, and people shoot at them,'' said Christopher Hellman, a senior analyst at the Center for Defense Information, a group in Washington that researches global security.
>The combat speed for the Apache, introduced in 1984, is 167 miles an hour, making it an easy target for antiaircraft fire and small arms.
>the same trains being targeted by bombers already?
Are you mistaking ww1 with ww2? What fricking bombers lmao
>The combat speed for the Apache, introduced in 1984, is 167 miles an hour
That is faster than any WWI aircraft and slower than the Apaches top speed.
>the same trains being targeted by bombers already? and being regularly blown up and replaced?
Bombing did frick all against trains in WWI, moron.
Could germany have won ww2 if they had one F-35 with unlimited ground service, resupply, pilots, etc.
yes, unironically.
Absolutely yeah, I don't even know why some of you nigs think otherwise.