FARA IS DEAD

https://www.twz.com/air/army-cancels-hight-speed-armed-reconnaissance-helicopter-program

ARMY HAS CANCELLED THE FUTURE ATTACK RECON AIRCRAFT
COMANCHE IS DEAD AGAIN

F

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"We are learning from the battlefield – especially in Ukraine – that aerial reconnaissance has fundamentally changed,"
    Let us await vatnik cope on the profound failure of Russian rotary aviation.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It honestly is a pretty sensible conclusion to come to.
      The utility of helicopters as a frontline asset has definitely dwindled. A large heavy helicopter with standoff weapons is going to accomplish infinitely more than even a low observable design.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >It honestly is a pretty sensible conclusion to come to. The utility of helicopters as a frontline asset has definitely dwindled.
        Yeah agreed. And ever improving drones have definitely killed the role of light frontline cas/attack even faster. They can do the job better, faster, more cheaply, and flip the air defense equation to some extent as a result since some of them can be flat out cheaper then a lot of the classic AA that'd be used to shoot them down (so that'll need to evolve too). They can be used more aggressively without worrying about losses as much.
        >A large heavy helicopter with standoff weapons is going to accomplish infinitely more than even a low observable design.
        Can see this too, there could still be a role for something that can deploy heavy standoff, have full VTOL, be much closer than fixed wing assets, but move around much faster than ground based launchers without terrain concerns and add the basic physics of advantage of weapons starting with altitude/speed. But that's totally different from a lot of what the army has focused on in the last few decades.

        I'm genuinely glad they're able to flat out kill at least some obsolete approaches despite no doubt plenty of lobbying.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A large low observable design would have done better though, it's a silly thing to say. Russia is just looking to cut costs at the moment... for no reason comrade things are fine.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This:
        Frankly, I was surprised they would even try again. I thought it was gross lobbying that brought them back.
        The RAH-66 comanche died because drones would achieve the same result more efficiently.
        And drones are only getting better.

        The only need you still have for manned helicopter is for transportation or deploying a variety of weapons that do not deserve a dedicated platform.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The utility of helicopters as a frontline asset has definitely dwindled.
        The utility was barely ever there to start with.
        If it was anything close to an air superiority asset then the chairforce would have gobbled it up.
        It will only ever be a VTOL truck and that’s what the army shall forever be stuck with.

        However, they could go all in on drones, then maybe they could sneak a little slice of air superiority when the chairforce isn’t looking.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's a secondary reason to the main one, which is freeing up funds for unmanned systems that are more cost effective. Ukraine's air picture is a unique situation. It wouldn't be the same if NATO was involved directly and leveraging its air assets.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >MUH AIRPOWER
        pure undistilled fricking /k/ope, NATO would do no better in a real war with a near peer opponent, all those Raptors and Lightnings and Typhoons would be reduced to scrap within the first week.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Proofs?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Proof.
            NATO bombs everyone who lacks a legitimate air defense system. We have 50 years of history on this. Ukraine is covered by 3 overlapping Russian air defense bubbles. NATO cannot conduct SEAD without shooting directly into Mother Russia. QED, we can conclude that NATO knows any bombing mission in Ukraine is a suicide mission.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The UKRAINIAN air force is still flying after 2 years of war, and you think Russia would have a shot at destroying NATO's?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                What bombing missions are they doing?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you being deliberately moronic?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Seriously. What aircraft flying what missions? If you're claiming the Ukrainian AF is operationally effective, then please cite some recent examples.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They've bombed Snake island littered with mighty puccian air defense.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Snake Island
                You mean like a year ago? Anything else?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Based conclusion. Imagine doing recon with a manned fricking helicopter in Ukraine instead of using drones. Actually, imagine being a non-transport helicopter at all in fricking Ukraine. The absolute state of heliCOPEters on the modern battlefield.

      >Function in a heavy EW environment.
      Explain this meme. Your mission is basically over if you lose comms - especially if your mission is recon.

      EW copers don't want you to know how highly directional low probability of intercept comms that are enabled by the active phased arrays make EW a total meme.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Cite a comms system like this. They need to build the C4 before they build the ISR. Going forward, ground forces will use organic drones as direct support. Drones will operate in the 1-5GHz range because that is harder to blanket with EW effects. Mesh networks are probably going to be the only viable comms. And don't forget many adversaries are engaged in GPS spoofing.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        cringe moron

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Rotary aircraft are finished period. The simply are too low and slow to survive a high threat environment no matter who is flying them.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_attack_on_Karbala

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I've seen this take a lot and personally I'm not fully convinced. Attack helos are glass cannons, high-risk but high-reward. Very much the wrong thing to use against shitters like iraq where you're guaranteed to win anyways but more valuable against peer adversaries.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Very much the wrong thing to use against shitters like iraq where you're guaranteed to win anyways but more valuable against peer adversaries.

          Drones don't require CSAR and one can afford a shitload of them for the cost of a force-loss multiplier helicopter with its expensive meatbag. Attack helos exist to shoot weapons so delivering those weapons in greater quantity for lower unit cost and more robust force structure is what to do.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Drones can afford a shitload of them for the cost of a force-loss multiplier helicopter

            Army's Raven was $250,000 for a 3 drone system far less capiable than a whirlybird.

            Army doesn't do cheap.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The thing that dronebros fail to understand that is if you want a drone with the capability of a fully kitted out recon helicopter, it's going to end up costing almost as much as one.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That would require a basic level of intelligence and the ability to comprehend logistics. You'll note that if you talk to these morons, none of them understand the concept of training (who gets trained HOW to use the drone, depending on complexity this becomes a pilot tier thing), basing (who OWNS the drones, how do they get allocated, where do they get sent when they're to be used), range both tactical and ferry alongside payload/flight planning (how much range does this have low altitude max speed, what payload can it carry), loiter time (how long can this stay around the area), sensors (is it a targeting pod? AESA? full ELINT kit? nothing?), maintenance (it's simpler than a helicopter but are you, the moron you are, proposing the procurement of effectively double the number of helicopters?) and a billion other things.

                They'll look at shit like a single use expendable drone being able to pop a T-80 with an EFP, then fail to realize that there's probably 100x the cost of that drone behind it targeting it, allowing it to communicate, etc. They also fail to realize that while your expendable drone is dead an actual attack helicopter could be killing another 10 tanks and murdering an infantry company.

                I hate dronegays so much.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Done training.
                If it's more complicated than an iPhone then it is too complicated. E-thots have DJI drones documenting their eat, pray, love holidays everyday. Zoomers are digital natives. There isn't going to be a huge learning curve.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There it fricking is. There it is. Every damn time.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Zoomers are digital natives.
                Zoomers are some of the most tech illiterate people around because modern interface design is simple enough for literal chimpanzees and babies.

                >L3 Harris
                If it's more complicated than an iPhone then it's too complicated. I am sure the august military scholars here are family with the Army's requirement to simplify the communications architecture?

                https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/2023/10/06/us-army-seeks-cheap-user-friendly-radios-amid-network-changes/

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >“If we have an easier radio to train, and an easier radio to maintain, now we can field faster. If I have to give three days of training and I can get it down to one hour, that’s another unit I can move to quicker as we field the Army,” Daiyaan added.
                Yeah, basic radios that you can hand to anyone that are guaranteed to be secure, power efficient and tiny are a great thing. This isn't saying that frontline troops are stupid or the radio NEEDS to be this simple, it's just saying that for some random cook out on a patrol one day, "here's a radio, press this to talk" is way easier than "sit down, here's how this radio works, remember this or you'll frick it up".

                One thing that comes to mind is when it was discovered that some P25 radios used by police had the encrypt switch poorly labeled, so whenever a keying mistake happened and a radio didn't "work" people learned to turn "that switch" off, forcing the radio into clear mode. Other people would have to turn off clear mode to be heard also. The very serious question of "why am I turning the encryption of my POLICE RADIO off?" didn't strike most people as being that serious in comparison to "why can't I talk to OTHER COPS?" so they'd just leave it off. Poor UI design lead to a secure encrypted radio becoming insecure.

                >I wouldn't say the transition away from desktop computing was what did it, I'd say it was the move away from flat, easily navigable file systems.
                These are one and the same. Mobile interface design and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

                Agreed.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Zoomers are digital natives.
                Zoomers are some of the most tech illiterate people around because modern interface design is simple enough for literal chimpanzees and babies.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I mean he's not wrong but you have to meet a zoomer who got thrown head first into computers when they were like 3.
                t. one of them

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                But that's not a zoomer exclusive trait. Dorks like you and I have existed since the 80s at least. We're not representative of the general population. I would argue that we're past peak computer literacy, it was over once we transitioned away from desktop computing.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh, for sure. I'm saying that that type of computer literacy isn't gone though, you get autists like us from all generations.

                And I wouldn't say the transition away from desktop computing was what did it, I'd say it was the move away from flat, easily navigable file systems. Phones keep shit away from you to the point that you are never allowed to learn how to do things manually, you always need tools/websites to help you do them. Degenerate website and app designers deliberately obsfucating shit to make things "more reliable/easier to bugfix" and just outright shaft the competition are also to blame.

                Think about the steps required to like, download a video from twitter or something on a phone. Basically your only real way to do it is to pay them money (which is bullshit and should be illegal) or use a sketchy website. Then you get an mp4 file or whatever, which you can barely use because your phone thinks you're a moron. Want a nicer/different video player? Nope, you're stuck with something that uses x library bundled with the phone because Apple or whoever thinks you're braindead. Want to share it? There's one way you can do it and go frick yourself if you want to idk send it over tor or something. Want to back it up? I hope you're OK with Apple and the FBI having it forever on their cloud backup service, because you're going to have a stroke getting it off the phone in a straightforward manner.

                It's garbage. People don't know how to use terminals or parse man pages because they were never put in a situation where doing so was both reasonable and straightforward. ffmpeg is super easy if you actually sit down for 5 minutes but people still use bullshit video converters (that just call ffmpeg).

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I wouldn't say the transition away from desktop computing was what did it, I'd say it was the move away from flat, easily navigable file systems.
                These are one and the same. Mobile interface design and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I hate dronegays so much.
                Me too, brother.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >comprehend logistic
                >defend old wunderwaffe logic
                Yeah right,

                >They'll look at shit like a single use expendable drone being able to pop a T-80 with an EFP, then fail to realize that there's probably 100x the cost of that drone behind it targeting it, allowing it to communicate, etc.
                Only endanger the cheap drone, the 100x cost infrastructure is safe, so is the invaluable pilot.
                Sound like a perfect deal.
                Better than risk costly chopper, require a infrastructure 1000x the cost, risk invaluable pilot.

                >They also fail to realize that while your expendable drone is dead an actual attack helicopter could be killing another 10 tanks and murdering an infantry company.
                Lose one drone, have 10 more for the cost of an attack copter. Kill 2 tank and half an infantry company per drone and they are far more cost efficient.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Drone swarms.
                No. You have a swarm of drones with multiple overlapping capabilities. It's a hive. Think any colony with soldier and worker ants.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Then this comes to the issue of what is the cost/benefit efficiency of replacing a few highly capable platforms with a huge number of lesser capable ones.

                Also keep in mind, even though smaller drones are more "expendable", it still incurs a cost when they are lost, especially in mass numbers. People don't realize the rate of drone attrition in Ukraine is crazy high, so neither side ever has enough to work with even though they're supposed to be cheap and widely available.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The thing that dronebros fail to understand that is if you want a drone with the capability of a fully kitted out recon helicopter, it's going to end up costing almost as much as one.
                The thing that recon heli gay fail to understand that is if you want recon heli with the cost-efficiency of drones, it's going to need to replace the pilot by a remote and make them as small as drones.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no it wont, and that doesnt even take into account the shitshow that goes down when a pilot gets downed over enemy territory.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I signed for a Raven system in 2006. I think it was listed on the property book for around $80k. The Raven is a 20 year old system. Drones have come a long way since then. Better and cheaper.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Having fast medivac and resupply to otherwise completely inaccessible locations is bad because... sometimes they get shot down when people mess up?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They are already working on drones that can MEDEVAC a single stretcher.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            MEDEVAC drones would be much more survivable. Remember MEDEVAC is primarily about MORALE because most heavily wounded are out of the fight and out of service. MEDEVAC drones could run relays carrying more wounded faster and dispersed so one MANPAD doesn't waste a (valuable) helicopter crew just one expendable grunt.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thumbnail made me think

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are cameras actually good enough now to fully replace eyes?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Are cameras actually good enough now to fully replace eyes?
      For airborne assets? Absolutely.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thank frick. Everyone with a little rationality and education knows ground-launched drones replace scout and attack helis. The only real use helicopters have today is behind the lines medevac and special raids.

      Attack helis are nice if you've already bought them but there's no reason to replace them when they age out.

      For aircraft yes. You still want infantry around.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They see what eyes cannot.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There's an obscure government office watching what you type right now through your roof

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. The better question is whether automatic target recognition and encrypted mesh networks are good enough to operate on a real battlefield against an enemy with top-tier EW.

      >The Army will also move to divest all of its remaining RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-11 Raven drones. In turn, the service will "increase investments in research and development to expand and accelerate the Army’s unmanned aerial reconnaissance capability including future tactical unmanned aerial systems and launched effects," according to an official release.
      Erm... they're going to replace the legacy drones with something better rather than killing them now with a loose plan to come up with something new in a few years... right? Right?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >an enemy with top-tier EW
        Such as?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          In theory, China. Also, Russia back in 2014, when they demonstrated some pretty nasty EW capabilities (what happened to them over the next 8 years is one of the bigger mysteries of the war). Also, EW denial (e.g., jamming) is somewhat easier than hacking/spoofing.

          On the other hand, the Army has been working on encrypted mesh networks for years and years, now, which *supposedly* will solve most of the EW issues. On the other other hand, the total failure of mesh networking systems was what got FCS canned after tens of billions of dollars had been spent, so I can't guarantee that the current effort will work out.

          One final issue to think about: in order to stop enemies from using drones on *us*, we might have to resort to a lot of jamming ourselves... which means that our systems have to be resistant to our own EW efforts.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Obviously this has its own issues but you can use laser links to communicate, and it would not be trivial to jam a mesh network that could uplink to a satellite constellation or “megaconstellation”

            Isn’t the loyal wingman program going to use laser links for stealth anyway?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I don't know of much work that's been done on using laser comms inside the atmosphere. Most of the effort has been in vacuum, where lasers are easier and more reliable in comparison.

              Meanwhile, the Army's efforts, at least judging by their powerpoints over the last couple decades, have been heavily focused on self-forming encrypted mesh networks. How exactly they work in a contested EW environment, or prevent hacking/spoofing the first time the enemy gets their hands on a working model in the field, I don't know.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Tbqh lasers are kind of immune to jamming but they have the obvious problems. But in a mesh network it might be nontrivial to always have a line of sight connection that can chain back “home” or form some sort of hardened link with a satellite network

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Decentralized formation
                Mesh networks have to be the way ahead. It's too easy to blanket EW everything except the 1-5GHz band. Russia say, could jam most of spectrum into Ukraine from stations inside Russia.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >What happened to them over the next 8 years is one of the bigger mysteries of the war

            No it isn't. Ukraine had 8 years to prepare their infrastructure for a repeat showing and US intelligence was heavily involved in identifying and parrying a lot of the Russian misdirection and provocation attempts that characterized the 72 hours before shooting started properly. They were unable to orchestrate chaos the same way they did in their takeover of eastern Ukraine because the NATO intelligence apparatus is able to completely disarm Russian EW capabilities.

            >We'll have to jam so much it'll affect our own drones
            Not how that works when your drone weapons aren't improvised from civilian market models, fortunately. Draw your own conclusions.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sadly, even combat helicopters will soon be obsolete.
    We will no longer see Kino camera footages of Apaches mogging browns.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      See

      It honestly is a pretty sensible conclusion to come to.
      The utility of helicopters as a frontline asset has definitely dwindled. A large heavy helicopter with standoff weapons is going to accomplish infinitely more than even a low observable design.

      Helicopters still have a role as being extremely fast while still being based in theatre. That hasn’t changed, it’s just frontline survivability has gotten a lot worse. It’s why pitch up attacks are so popular in Ukraine

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What problem does this thing solve? In the history of actually combat with helicopters, they usually just beat up on brown people who can't shoot back. They seem like very expensive slow moving targets against anyone with actual ADA.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >they usually just beat up on brown people who can't shoot back. They seem like very expensive slow moving targets against anyone with actual ADA.

          The US inaugurated the use of attack helicopters against asiatics who could very much shoot back and lost thousands of choppers to every kind of AA from rocks to SAMs.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >VN
            Serious question. Were there any ADA engagements in VN against the AH-1? As far as I know they shot down mostly lightly armed UH-1. Again, the helicopter is basically ADA food.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              AH-1s clocked over 1 million combat flight hours in vietnam, with about 300 lost out of 1100. Unlike the sluggish Hueys these things actually did shoot back and went to chase vietnamese around pretty well.

              AH-1s armed with TOWs were also tested around that time and later on all of the fleet would get upgraded to ATGM carriers along with a bigger engine to actually be able to carry them.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                My point is how many engaged elements with actual ADA? We used the AH-64 in CAS all of the time in Afghanistan. However, there was no opposition ADA.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Pretty much all of them. There was AAA all over vietnam and whenever aircraft had to go over enemy territory they would encounter it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Can you hit me a source?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                What, list every mission Cobras flew? Frick off, dipshit.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A Lonely Kind of War by Marshall Harrison.
                Give it a read, you'll learn so much more than just the volume of ground fire charlie could point at anything flying slower than 300kn.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Apaches were used to destroy one of the forward AA emplacements during the initial hours of Desert Storm.
          >inb4 turdie cope about Iraq

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I know. I was there. Seriously. Again, they were engaging some poor brown dood manning antique equipment that had already been subject to a month long bombing campaign. That one anomaly is not like dealing with a near peer using real ADA.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Again, they were engaging some poor brown dood manning antique equipment that had already been subject to a month long bombing campaign.
              No they weren't, and no you weren't there you brown turd.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Like I said, they did a great job taking out a degraded fixed target.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Like i said, you never served anything except donkey dicks, Black person. Apaches were used in Iraq against SAM emplacements on day one.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Cite the engagement. What ADA system was taken out?

                What, list every mission Cobras flew? Frick off, dipshit.

                A Lonely Kind of War by Marshall Harrison.
                Give it a read, you'll learn so much more than just the volume of ground fire charlie could point at anything flying slower than 300kn.

                My assertion is most attack helicopters were only effective in taking out people who lack any real ADA. The Russians were doing great in Afghanistan until the US introduced Stingers. As the Cobra in VN, the best I could find discussing actual combat action:

                https://www.vietnamwar50th.com/education/week_of_may_29_2022/#:~:text=Approximately%201%2C100%20Cobras%20flew%20in,with%20new%20aerial%20warfare%20tactics.

                1100 AH-1 deployed. 300 shot down. So about a third.

                [...]
                >Imagine being this confidently fake, gay, and moronic
                This is legitimately the most secondhand embarrassment I've had on /k/ in a very, very long time.

                Yes. Impressive air campaign using a force purpose built to take out the Soviets against a country lacking an integrated air defense system. However, against a near peer, attack helicopters (especially manned attack helicopters) are running out of reasons to exist.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >he's still going
                Shut the frick up, vatBlack person. Imagine lying through your face about your service and showing back to cope about desert storm.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Be /k/eyboard /k/commando.
                >Ackshuly...
                >May we see that Iraqi ADA?
                >You're a vatBlack person.
                Never change /k/.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its because no one actually thought you'd be so moronic as to believe Iraq just magically had no ad despite all evidence to the contrary
                https://balloonstodrones.com/2022/10/19/looking-back-at-iraqi-air-defences-during-operation-desert-storm/

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Ctrl F
                >AH-64
                >0 results
                The assertion was that Apaches can engaged Iraqi ADA.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no way you came back

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You're still here.
                >No U

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >asks for source
                >won't read it
                You're not even trying

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Can't read.
                If an AH-64 engaged an ADA system, please cite the battle and the system engaged. In general, especially today, attack helicopters are too vulnerable against anyone with even a modest ADA capability. The Iraqi ADA of Desert Storm was mostly optimized for use against fast movers and stationed around critical infrastructure. Yes, every Iraqi Bde had some flavor of 12.7 or 23mm anti-aircraft machine gun. That may or may not have been manned at the time of the engagement. Desert Storm was largely a CAPEX against lightly defended fixed targets in the open. This is hardly a testament to the effectiveness of attack helicopters on against any who has the ability to fight back.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They were used in the first night of the invasion to destroy early warning radar and sams ahead of the main air campaign.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Once in history.
                >SAMs
                What system? Name the system engaged.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No. You're wrong and you will never be right. No amount of goal post shifting or nit picking will ever make your father love you

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They engaged an early warning station. Do you know what aviation unit was involved? Do you know where it was located? Because I took a picture of the actual site. At best there was a rusty 23-2 defending it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Because I took a picture of the actual site.
                Post it or you'll have to kys now, you lying homosexual.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Post it
                You know cellphone cameras didn't exist in 1991.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So you're just a loser larping as a soldier to cope with obsolete russian shit getting rekt?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Stop engaging the tard

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Stop engaging the tard

                >Post pic.
                >Go to basement.
                >Find scrapbook.
                >Take pic of actual BDA.
                >Post on /k/.
                >Unimpressive photo of the remaining standing microwave relay antenna in the desert.
                >That doesn't prove anything.
                The burden of proof is to name the location and type of ADA engaged. Here, let me help you out. I will reference your own article. Just give me the 5W on this engagement.

                https://balloonstodrones.com/2022/10/19/looking-back-at-iraqi-air-defences-during-operation-desert-storm/

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                shut up and stream killing yoursel, lying scumbag

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >shut up and stream killing
                Are those places in Iraq or a type of ADA system?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, they're what your mother will see when she gets home from my place.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous
              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The future of Army Aviation.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They had the shit shot out of them, successfully completed the mission, and brought everyone back alive. Pretty goddamn impressive.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                How obstinate can you be?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Can you just name the location and type of ADA system engaged?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I agree it was an early warning radar. As I said before, the Iraqis had some antique 12.7 and 23mm AAA. They were unmanned. You will notice if you watch the video they Apaches fired at the radar and fuel sites first. At no time did the AAA fire. Not even the standard tactic of just blindly throwing flak in the air. They were unmanned. Again, the Apache has never operated in an environment with credible ADA. The Russian experience in Afghanistan and Ukraine has pretty much illustrated the effectiveness of attack helicopters against anyone who even makes a casual attempt to fight back.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >He still hasn't put together why no one is even engaging his moronation
                Do yourself a favor and stop trying to argue from half-remembered, copium-laced bullshit you were told about Desert Storm and simply google the sequence of events - and their details - regarding the Air War and the Ground War components.
                I've gone from secondhand embarrassment smoothly into pointing-and-laughing phase, so do please continue.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >a country lacking an integrated air defense system
                This is objectively false.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >tfw you will never get to fly NOE then ambush Russian armor in the bastard lovechild of an apache and a kiowa
                why live

                your mother did a great job taking out a fixed target, if you catch my meaning

                Like i said, you never served anything except donkey dicks, Black person. Apaches were used in Iraq against SAM emplacements on day one.

                >expecting basic military history knowledge on a LARPvest patch design forum
                I can't believe nobody even bothers studying one of the most devastatingly successful military operations in recent history before coming here to mouth off, I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists
                Great idea, actually.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists

                >I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists
                Great idea, actually.

                I'm now going to be wondering how this could work for hours.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists
                Great idea, actually.

                The likelihood of the devs implementing a specialized captcha system trained on military history entries on wikipedia when they're using some third-party software is low.
                Perhaps a more pertinent question is how do /k/ommandos create a shibboleth based on martial knowledge and military history trivia, since "post guns" doesn't really seem to do it anymore.
                We need to find a level of question complexity that can't be faked by a trip to wikipedia or ChatGPT, but also doesn't exclude never-serveds and weapons enthusiasts with comparatively little knowledge of history. Probably impossible, but a man can dream.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I like to list some calibers and ask which of them nominally has the highest BC.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                perfect example of a simple but deceptively complex question, i'll remember that

              • 3 weeks ago
                Fat-lipped Spade

                >I wish the captcha for /k/ was just military trivia so we could filter out /misc/ tourists
                I'm a /misc/tard(not a tourist though), why are you picking on us? Shoot me some military trivia starting from easiest and going up to hardest and I'll put on a temporary trip while I defend my (and /misc/'s) honor

                PS I wholeheartedly endorse the trivia captcha idea

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I was and posted my shot records etc a while back. Helicopter gays on PrepHole are gaymerbois ONLY concerned with what looks cool and feeds their wagiecagie dreams of not being them, not with actual war at all because they don't participate.

                Those targets could have been serviced by other systems and lest anyone forget Desert Storm was so long ago I had hair and could see my toes. That era is very fricking over and had the Iraqis modern MANPADS would have looked much different.

                Can act as a highly mobile FAC/Drone coordinator.

                So can meatless systems because the Mark 1 Eyeball only exists to read sensors and aircrew are lest we forget deeply busy flying to survive which limits their capacity for other tasks.

                Fixed wing FACs like Bronco were faster, held more comms and were more agile along with having ejection seats but those are only like helos useful in highly permissive environments which are rapidly vanishing. Drones and networking can do anything useful local meat can do and have far greater endurance. They can land and launch from very small areas to extend range if desired.

                Helicopters are just juicy targets. The nice thing about this war is Luddite butthurt. The US leadership enjoy flying too much to be rational on the subject. Love me aircrew and working on their birds but like observation balloon crew their time is fading.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Like I said, they did a great job taking out a degraded fixed target.

              >Imagine being this confidently fake, gay, and moronic
              This is legitimately the most secondhand embarrassment I've had on /k/ in a very, very long time.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >dood

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >I know. I was there. Seriously

              >Again, they were engaging some poor brown dood manning antique equipment that had already been subject to a month long bombing campaign.
              No they weren't, and no you weren't there you brown turd.

              >no you weren't there you brown turd

              Did you ever stop to consider that he may have been there...but on the Iraqi side?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I heard that photographers were literally scrambling over each other in Kabul to replicate the Saigon photo. Unimaginative frickwits.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, well, Humans are Unimaginative frickwits, it’s the consequence of pattern recooogizing
            I mean, people ate it up

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Farmer-type people are unimaginative. Hunter-types got plenty of brain juice.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the best part about the kabul photo is the helicopter is landing very, very far to the left, out of frame of the building, and is probably 200 meters behind the building. morons just jumped on the photo because muh symbolism

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You forget this one to add to the list

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Pull

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Baghdad 2022
          But the Iraqi government still stands.
          And we still have bases in Iraq.
          Getting really tired of this meme.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The currenr Iraqi government is not a friend of the USA but I will concede the American bases are there basically still as an occupying force to make sure the country doesn't fully become an Iranian ally

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The Iraqi government is not necessarily friendly, but they know they need American presence to maintain stability. They have ties to Iran but they don’t want to become an Iranian vassal state.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There's been some weird psyop in recent years about the US getting driven out of Iraq or leaving, like they're trying to conflate it with afghanistan and call it a package deal.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It was originally sold as a package deal.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The invasions I suppose, but there certainly was never talk of leaving Iraq along with Afghanistan. Factually, the war in Iraq seemed 'over' for some years before Afghanistan, even. And it wasn't like a loss or retreat, there was just stability.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I know I am going to derail this thread.
                What exactly was the reason we invaded Iraq? What was our stated End State?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Get rid of Saddam and his sons. That was pretty much it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh, why? What did they do wrong?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Being annoying c**ts for far too long, I guess.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What makes a helicopter preferable to that much money in fast disposable drones? Helos exist to launch weapons. Remove the meatbag burden and you remove CSAR, save enormous costs and can kill more enemy.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There will always be a time and place to mog thirdies that lack any form of air defence

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yeah but it's even more embarrassing when you clown on em in a crop duster

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Apaches mogged browns by popping up over mountain edges, we are returning more to the Cold War Days of Helicopters dying really easily so they have to be fast hit and run missile carriers

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why do fantasygays even care what is real when that reality or lack thereof is as alien to their actual lives as Warhammer40K?

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It was always DOA, Longbow Apaches make for better scout helicopters than some shit light airframe could ever possibly hope for

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That and sending human scouts telegraphs your interest while offering an expensive juicy MANPAD target.

      War would be more wise waged if no one cared about what looks cool and especially what looks cool to NPCs.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sorry, F-35 need mo munny fo dem programz

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The invictus is too ugly and mediocre to ever hope to honor the Comanche anyway

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I like the plane wings

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it was dead the moment they dropped the fenestron

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      y?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        because fenestrons are cool

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        All aircraft must achieve a minimum standard of coolness to be deemed flightworthy.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So Sikorsky has no contract now that the Defiant lost to the Valor

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The army is still buying new Black Hawks, they're fine.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Marines are buying 200 CH-53Ks and the Blackhawk will be around for decades in some capacity.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Drones do everything better cheaper more expendably with lower training costs and no CSAR or political issues from dead meatbags.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Midwit take

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What can a recon helicopter do that drones can't cheaper and safer.

    Note I said recon not attack helicopter.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      For one, it's easier for a recon helicopter to bait an enemy into engaging in order to get a better measure of the enemy strength. Drones being smaller and quieter is actually a negative.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >it's good because it's get shot at

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can act as a highly mobile FAC/Drone coordinator.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's kinda funny. Sikorsky has a good design but lost to a obiviously superior one. Now when the same design finally had a chance to edge out its competitor, the Army cancelled the program

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      PLANE'D

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >no fenestron
    good riddance

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    While it's probably for the best, I can't help but feel that drones have taken a lot of the coolness factor out of modern military aircraft. No more hotshot pilots kicking ass, just a guy in an air-conditioned base several hundred miles away looking at a screen and occasionally pulling a trigger.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We're quickly approaching the point it'll be someone playing an RTS while they control a swarm of drones, which sounds pretty cool to me.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        True. I have a feeling drones are getting to a point where they could feasibly replace all types of helicopters in service.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          US mil hasn't been okay with autonomous offensive weapon systems yet, preferring man in the loops systems at best for anything that has significant loiter time (things like BONUS rounds and such are arguably completely closed loop offensive autonomous weapons but they're much more targeted in their deployment), so it while you can mount the sensors to an expendable drone to go send it to peek over a hill, it makes sense to have the one that's carrying all the firepower to still be manned so that firing decisions are made with minimal latency and can't be fricked with nearly as much by EW, plus you can have the backseat guy directing the drones. The NGAD and it's loyal wingman concept is pretty broadly applicable given it strikes the right balance of automation and minimal risk while still ensuring that a human is in control to prevent things from going awry.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Good point, more drones means more opportunities for e-warfare to frick shit up.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Literally what can FARA do that this cannot?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      have a soul

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yet again Army aviation proves it is run by morons.

      Remain fully functional in an EW heavy environment. Carry a decent weapons load. Reach a cruising speed of over 180 knots. React faster.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Function in a heavy EW environment.
        Explain this meme. Your mission is basically over if you lose comms - especially if your mission is recon.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They probably could still manage local comms and data sharing with the AH-64s they're supposed to be working as a team with.

          do you think all drones are small converted hobby drones?

          Show me one as capable as a modern scout or attack helicopter. The larger MQ-8C Fire Scout is just an unmanned Bell 407. Not very impressive.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Show me one as capable as a modern scout or attack helicopter
            DJI Mavik 3. It can safely hover at your frontline at 300 feet and look 10km inside enemy territory, any manned helicopter in its place would be just shoot down by AA. And it costs only $2000, not $10000000.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Are you moronic? A drone with a 30km range, no ability to carry a weapon beyond jury rigging a grenade to it, sensors that definitely aren't the grade of whatever FARA would have carried, and probably a connection that can be easily jammed since it's a fricking $200 drone. If the Russians were half competent they could shoot it down.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You don't see trees behind forest. As we speak such drones and likes operate at multiply points along frontline, providing reconnaissance and enemy can't do anything to stop them. Replace these drones with manned helicopters and they would fail.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Hovering a helicopter 300 feet in the air above friendly positions wouldn't have worked well in the 1980s either. Helicopter pilots have to be smart.
                Now try reconnaissance that actually requires more than just hovering above some poor bastards in a trench.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Hovering a helicopter 300 feet in the air above friendly positions wouldn't have worked well in the 1980s either. Helicopter pilots have to be smart.
                "Not my problem" (c)
                See these drones can use very simple and primitive tactics requiring no support and it works because drones have overpowering survivability. Not only it has stealth RCS similar to the proposed Comanche helicopter, but they also have 1000 times smaller visual and IR signatures. Remember what was one of criticism of the RAH-66?
                >what if the enemy just spots helicopter with his eyeball mk 1 and shots it down with gun or MANPAD?
                >let's hope they don't!
                And now come drones that have minimal optical signature that counters notorious eyeball mk 1. That is wundervaffe everybody wanted. They are so survivable they can hover at comfortable height with good sightlines. Helicopters? They stuck bettwen choices of hugging ground and have sightlines blocked by terrain and fly higher and get spotted and shoot down. Lose lose game. When drones are win win game.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              > zero payload camera drone with a 4 mile range.

              Thank you for your interest in the job. We'll let you know.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          A manned platform can go radio silent, fly a pre-planned mission, and use the crew's brains and initiative to make autonomous decisions based upon training, doctrine, and commander's guidance that an unmanned platform would not really be capable of, even with today's best AI. When things don't go exactly to plan, whether it's a minor issue or a major one, the creativity, judgement, and problem-solving of humans is superior to that of software.

          Well, for the US and a few other nations, at least. For the Russians, who don't train their conscripts to use thinking or initiative, not so much.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >A manned platform can go radio silent, fly a pre-planned mission, and use the crew's brains and initiative to make autonomous decisions based upon.... ACK!

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Contrast with US helo operations in combat zones over the last 35 years. Other than the one big ambush in OIF1, casualties have been remarkably light, even against large numbers of MANPADs. The key is that US helos aren't supposed to fight alone (a key mistake in said ambush).

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              What hit thing thing. Hardly any noise from the hit. Also you're talking about an unmodernized Mi-24 in 2014. The thing doesn't even have thermals.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                MANPAD.
                Very strong sounds above threshold are just cut off by sound recording controller.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        do you think all drones are small converted hobby drones?

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ffs army the meme infantry support booker gets in but not something that can be another node to drones and launch long range shit?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They're not cancelling the attack helicopter project, they're canceling the recon version because there's no point in wasting pilot lives to get info a drone can while if you want a missile and drone platform, you don't need a light, stealthy, and fast platform with a puny payload instead of something that doesn't make nearly as many compromises and instead just slings a frick ton of missiles.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I guess the apache is getting replaced and its up to the v-280 for the attack role. Which looking at it has a frick load of range. Hopefully they give it the shit it needs for infantry.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nah Apache's still have a role in for Army Aviation as they fulfill the Army's need for organic CAS and can lay down a lot of hate for a rotary wing platform. Updating the Apache to support Loyal Wingman control is the most sensible choice; the gunner already controls the weapon systems, so why not let them also have access to real-time ISR from a drone in the area?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Fat-lipped Spade

            >Updating the Apache to support Loyal Wingman control is the most sensible choice; the gunner already controls the weapon systems, so why not let them also have access to real-time ISR from a drone in the area?
            that's unironically what the AH-64E Guardian update does

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Honestly, I think the only reason why a recon chopper was still on the Army's development wishlist is because the tech wasn't advanced enough back in the Comanche days to support having the Apache's do both CAS & recon work. Avionics and computing systems required for a FARA-like scout chopper in the 1990's and 2000's would've required more LRU's which necessitated a separate airframe for that mission. Now however, with the explosion in computing power for small, lightweight processors it's feasible now to cram all the avionics needed for a recon mission set from a scout chopper into existing airframes like Apache and let them network into the wider, and more modern battlespace.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you know you replied to a /misc/?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I guess the apache is getting replaced
          learn to read.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you can just get an apache to do it

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    so what's next for this guy? tech is far too good to be shelved

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          can the Raider still make it as a drone bros? i like this trash so much...

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/TcLtm7k.jpg

          https://i.imgur.com/Qdzhhmn.jpg

          so what's next for this guy? tech is far too good to be shelved

          It’s a hell of a lot nicer-looking than that UGLY WIDE troonyCOPTER they call the V-280.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Your helo has a huge troony.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you're mom is a troonycopter

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Damn, is this Sikorsky's competitive prototype for the FARA competition?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            yeah, she's a beauty. too bad it's over now.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/TcLtm7k.jpg

          https://i.imgur.com/Qdzhhmn.jpg

          so what's next for this guy? tech is far too good to be shelved

          Sikorsky should have learned from Airbus and do this type of design instead

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/TcLtm7k.jpg

      the tech doesn't seem to work that well given that FLRAA had to relax speed requirements to not turn into a single-entry competition too early

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >tech is far too good to be shelved
        Compound helicopters are a meme. They shelved the Sikorsky S-72 which wasn't as big a meme (and not a compound helicopter), they'll shelve this one.
        I think it's an absolute betrayal by the Army. Textron and Lockheed were told this program was of utmost importance and the Army's number 1 modernization priority, the participants had even come up with entire kill-chains and tactics for their helicopters thinking they would fundamentally change the battlefield. This is one of the few cases where the military, rather than private contractors, pushed for doctrinal innovation.
        t. Bellgay

        can't be that hard to make a coax rotor with a prop at the tail, i mean, the russian kinda make the coax work. what're the problems with the Raider and Defiant?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tech is far too good to be shelved
      Compound helicopters are a meme. They shelved the Sikorsky S-72 which wasn't as big a meme (and not a compound helicopter), they'll shelve this one.
      I think it's an absolute betrayal by the Army. Textron and Lockheed were told this program was of utmost importance and the Army's number 1 modernization priority, the participants had even come up with entire kill-chains and tactics for their helicopters thinking they would fundamentally change the battlefield. This is one of the few cases where the military, rather than private contractors, pushed for doctrinal innovation.
      t. Bellgay

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The FARA was obviously obsolete from the start, though. It was just an apache with a smaller payload.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So, a Viper?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Viper? I recall attack pilots saying it was faster than the apache but worse at killing things.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The AH-1Z has a purpose because the Marines still use UH-1Y. For the Same reason as ever, they get a lot out of parts commonality, especially on a ship where space for spares and personnel is at a premium.

            tl;dr the viper makes sense for the marines over a navalized apache.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              wonder if the v-280 can become the universal helicopter used by all 5 branches

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The USAF is definitely going to buy some for CSAR, but I don't really see a use for the USSF. It's adoption by the USN and USMC is also doubtful. That would totally hinge on a folding wing. That is something Textron has mocked up, but there isn't any real development work for that. Even if they could get a folding wing version, there is the question of wheter or not they'd be able to park enough of them inside the ships for the performance increase to make up for not having more SH-60 Seahawks. I don't think the juice will be worth the squeeze for the Navy and Marines when they have the MV-22 already.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                By the time FLRAA production is winding down in the '40s, it'll be time to replace the Ospreys.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The only issue holding back the Navy and Marines from adopting the Valor is that it can't fold its wings in like the Osprey to save space, though I'm sure they'll eventually come up with a navalized version once the Army Blackhawks start aging out and it gets less economical to maintain the AF and Navy ones.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >universal helicopter used by all 5 branches
                Technically the Blackhawk family, but I think the only Marine 60s are the Presidential ones.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Textron and Lockheed were told this program was of utmost importance and the Army's number 1 modernization priority
        Lol no, FLRAA will always be the the number 1 priority for the Army. FARA's mission set can easily be replaced by autonomous reconnaissance systems, but replacing the Blackhawk with something longer range for a Pacific theater type fight was always going to happen. Like it or not, the V-280 lets the Army field aircraft that can easily cross the long distances between islands in the Pacific and not leave the Army beholden to the USAF for that. Ideally, the Army would have the C-27 Spartan fulfill that mission but because the Army technically can't have large fixed wing aircraft; tiltrotors are the only loophole in the Key West Agreement that lets them field an aircraft that can do long range troop transport and land at austere environments like a regular helicopter.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    US Army: M1 Tanks and M2 Brownings -- Forever.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Well, at least the Army still has drones.

    > The Army will also move to divest all of its remaining RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-11 Raven drones.

    ... or not.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      lol wtf is the Army going to use to do this mission that they don't think a scout helicopter can do then?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        new drone duh

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Which ones?

          The same "UAVs will do the job" argument was used to justify cancelling the RAH-66 Comanche. Yet the Army found out UAVs weren't enough. I'm not convinced it will be any different this time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      theyre probably gonna be developing new drones

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    In a related story, the Army announced it's going to put wings on an M10 Booker and call it a drone.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Well, I guess that answers the question of whether Sikorsky ever fixed the rotor flex issue.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > FARA, which the Army once called its top aviation priority and its No. 3 acquisition priority overall...

    Army Acquisition everyone. Please clap.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They can't tell the difference between a man and a woman. How can you expect them to prioritize development projects?

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because without shells it was useless

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Mock tankgays that their role is increasingly very niche and limited, no fulda gap for them
    >Now my beloved helicopters are being niche'ified, reduced to just transportation roles
    >Me-in-a-helicopter-over-ukraine.png

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tfw there was only a brief window in human history where we could live our childhood military flightsim dreams and now we'll never get to hover menacingly over columns of burning tanks

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The 1980s will continue to be for future generations what classical antiquity or the biblical age was for the medieval/renaissance = just a cultural north star omnipresent in their reimagining. I'm sure you'll get military-chic of the GWOT (people already try to), but this'll be niche, akin to Boer War or 1860 Britain among British Empire affictionatos. Late Cold war will join the pantheon of WW2 and the Napoleonic Wars for grognard enthusiasm, even into the 22nd century.

        Helicopters aren't going to be just transportation, they're also going to be non-LOS missile boats that can be quickly relocated. Doesn't it sound fun to press fire once you're in range of a target someone else has found and marked while you get to stare at the back of a hill? :^)

        >Non-LOS missile boats
        I was promised macross missile hell

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I was promised macross missile hell
          This was always homosexual delusion. For examples of mecha conceptualization closer to practical application, see Blue Gender (intro) and FLAG.

          >t PrepHole

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >>Non-LOS missile boats
          >I was promised macross missile hell
          homie that's been Apache's role since the 80s. what do you think the ripple fire hellfires and longbow was for? sit behind a hill or a forest, lock targets with recon or your radar, fire and laugh as a tank column is turned into a human cookout.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Helicopters aren't going to be just transportation, they're also going to be non-LOS missile boats that can be quickly relocated. Doesn't it sound fun to press fire once you're in range of a target someone else has found and marked while you get to stare at the back of a hill? :^)

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You can play pretend instead or derive adult satisfaction in the case of actual combatants from "winning".

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    God, I hope they won't let the XM915 go to waste.
    20mm gatling guns are sex.

    ?si=iByLSqrFTnNgJjEG

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      20mm is useless. Too small.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    in the future attack helis will just act as a fast and mobile truck for tv missile-like drones

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Drones are the future. Drones and smart Manpads. Having large, multi million dollar aircraft and vehicles is now a liability.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Welp, I called it in one of the older threads about helicopters.
    Recon attack helicopters are doctrinally obsolescent. While there will always be a place of a missile boat with 16x long-range ATGMs, operational requirements have shifted away from manned light combat helicopters. Long range drones are cheaper and expendable, which is the winning combo as far as the military is concerned.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There's also some pressure from distributed-direct-thrust light VTOLs, which DARPA (among others) has been playing with. Basically, scaled-up quadcopters capable of carrying a person or a modest payload.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Those will be fun when they bear fruit.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > Long range drones are cheaper

      The US military can't build anything cheap.

      > and expendable

      Which is why Military Inc is pushing toward reusable drones. However many millions per unit that ends up being.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Tourist and discordgay

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        RQ-11 Raven says hi.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          > Raven says hi

          > The Army will also move to divest all of its remaining RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-11 Raven drones

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >> The Army will also move to divest all of its remaining RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-11 Raven drones
            Yeah because they're moving foward with the FTUAS program to replace those because they understand that drone ISR platforms are the future of aviation reconnaissance

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >FARA IS DEAD
    Good.
    Aren't attack rotorcraft an evolutionary dead end in the modern battle feld?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Standoff missile carriers aren't. Small manned chaff that requires close proximity to the enemy? Yeah, that one's no longer feasible.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A reminder that quadcopters and FPV drones literally are rotorcraft.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LMAOOOOO
    I work at Bell. We're already doing layoffs next week and now that FARA is dead they'll probably do even more
    So long engineers, go down the street and get a job at Lockheed instead

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      At-least Bell still has FLRAA with Valor.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I work on their commercial aircraft side so the military stuff doesn't affect me
        But I'm sure this will just lead to more layoffs

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Maybe they wouldn't need to fire the engineers if the engineers didn't demand such high salaries.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Textron underpays engineers (and everyone actually, all our salaries are under market) though.
        They underpay but say "out benefits are so good" which is true, and they have 4/10 work weeks which is infinitely better than working five days a week
        But you can easily make more anywhere else

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Being a contractor
      Lmao, feds keep winning

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Feds dont innovate shit sorry, enjoy suicide at 45 because you counted rocks for the last 10 years.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lmao were you also in that Teams All-Hands meeting with Leadership? We literally found out FARA was cancelled halfway through the meeting when somebody posted a link in the chat to the Breaking Defense article about the Army canning the program. Even our counterparts on the US Government side were blind-sided by the announcement. Feels weird knowing that we'll still have to work until Oct. 1 because of the budget that was given to us by the Army last year even though it's literally for nothing.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >though it's literally for nothing
        Maybe they will just rip out the wienerpit and seats, replace it with an additional fuel tank and turn the whole thing into a drone.

        >verification not required

        there you have it

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Sweet for re-employment scouting. What do you prefer to move on to?

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now we really know why Sikorsky didn't win FLRAA, the Sikorsky design basically played on the fact it would have parts commonality with their FARA entry as well, so it would make sense to adopt BOTH Sikorsky platforms to share maintenance training and parts commonality between the two platforms. But if FARA is being canned, it would've made no sense to pick them for FLRAA.

    Valor-chan is still coming

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >FARA is being canned, it would've made no sense to pick them for FLRAA
      but the Army cancelled FARA after Sikorsky already lost against Bell

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes and I have to imagine there were already rumblings in the army that FARA would be canned back when the FLRAA contract was awarded. So I think the fact FARA was looking at being canned and the ongoing war in ukraine at the time of the FLRAA contract award edged Bell ahead of Sikorsky.

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Germany going for the airbus h145m makes sence now. attack helicopters current and future dominance is diminishing. so a multi functional approach is a good road to take.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Krauts going for a glorified armed light transport is 100% due to the infamous kraut miserly penny-pinching. They don't want to spend money to turn the Tiger into a proper attack heli, they don't want to spend money to get a dedicated attack heli like the Phoenix, Viper, or Apache.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Dual use mil / civil support.
        Why should they get a complicated, purpose built attack helicopter with lots of training requirements? What role would it serve?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Oh, I don't know, maybe because it could actually do the job (attack helicopter) it's supposed to? Like being able to carry 16 Spike-NLOS/Akeron LP instead of just 4?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            NTA, transport helicopter can easily carry the weapon an "attack copter" carry.
            Attack copter lost every benefit from size with armor mass which in the end, was counter productive, so was trying to outmaneuver missiles or trying to hide behind trees.

            If you are going to launch guided-missiles from >8 kilometers away at targets you didn't detect yourself, it's pointless to pretend you are anything more than a transport helicopter only capable of carrying missiles.
            Ditch the pointless requirement, focus on what really matter: longer range, faster cruising speed, interoperability with other units including carrying stuff.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              No they can't. The moment you load them with any half decent weapon load they become slow and sluggish, unlike the attack helicopters which are specifically designed to move with those weapons, particularly the ones on external stores.
              >or trying to hide behind trees
              idiot
              >at targets you didn't detect yourself
              double Black person

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >moronic anons don't understand that the Apache has had a datalink longer than they've been alive and that hiding behind trees DOES work, UNLESS and ONLY UNLESS you're dealing with a peer adversary who can datalink E-3 tier airborne radar contacts to someone who can actually kill you (surprisingly hard at any real range when you're 50 cm off the ground and not emitting)
                Many such cases anon. I've given up attempting to educate these morons.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you're dealing with a peer adversary who can datalink E-3 tier airborne radar contacts
                Any more idiotic headcannon you've got to make up?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The frick are you talking about? You know terrain masking is 40% to protect the helicopter from ground based radar, right? E-3s can spot helicopters at significant ranges.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                My bad, i didn't read your post right

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh, no problem anon. Sorry for being mean in response.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >moronic anons don't understand that the Apache has had a datalink longer than they've been alive and that hiding behind trees DOES work, UNLESS and ONLY UNLESS you're dealing with a peer adversary who can datalink E-3 tier airborne radar contacts to someone who can actually kill you (surprisingly hard at any real range when you're 50 cm off the ground and not emitting)
                Many such cases anon. I've given up attempting to educate these morons.

                >Apache work!
                >only fought 1st tier country using left over soviet equipment
                >only good against target we know don't have proper air-defense
                >sensor improved enough decoy is pointless and stealth costlier
                Attack helicopter trying to get a direct shot will get shot down by Startreak like manpad
                Transport helicopter just stay safe out of sight and shoot modern missiles.

                >NTA, transport helicopter can easily carry the weapon an "attack copter" carry.
                Lolno. Some rinkydink 5-ton MTOW runabout (H145M) ain't carrying anywhere near as much as a 10-ton MTOW dedicated attack heli (AH-64E). Like I said, the H145M can barely carry 4x 25-something km range Spike-NCLOS (due to their larger size compared to the 10 km Spike-ER2), whereas the AH-64E can carry 16x. Larger heli means larger payload, and larger engines. The engines on the H145M put out 1000 hp each, the ones on the AH-64E put out around 2000 (and the upcoming AW249 is going to get some gigahomie 2500 hp ones). Also, speed-wise, the H145M tops out at around 275 km/h never-exceed speed. The AH-64E tops out at around 370. So the argument that a smaller helicopter is nimbler and faster than a larger one is false. It's less capable, and less useful than a larger dedicated platform. The only thing it does better, is cost less.

                >H145M
                You sure chose the lightest transport heli you could did you?
                The AH-64 already use engine we would put on a transport heli so you basically agreed all you need is to simplify the design, ditch useless doctrines, armor weighting down the AH-64 and make it more versatile
                >speed
                Literally what FLARAA will achieve better, except carrying more weapons with more versatility

                >So the argument that a smaller helicopter is nimbler and faster than a larger one is false. It's less capable, and less useful than a larger dedicated platform. The only thing it does better, is cost less.
                That's the point.
                Dedicated attack-copter need to be heavy because of the engine needed for its payload, plus armor, plus speed.
                A versatile transport-copter will have equivalent engine, greater speed, but ditch the armor and have more versatile weapon.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >trying to get a direct shot
                Good job outing yourself knowing nothing about Apache.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >NTA, transport helicopter can easily carry the weapon an "attack copter" carry.
              Lolno. Some rinkydink 5-ton MTOW runabout (H145M) ain't carrying anywhere near as much as a 10-ton MTOW dedicated attack heli (AH-64E). Like I said, the H145M can barely carry 4x 25-something km range Spike-NCLOS (due to their larger size compared to the 10 km Spike-ER2), whereas the AH-64E can carry 16x. Larger heli means larger payload, and larger engines. The engines on the H145M put out 1000 hp each, the ones on the AH-64E put out around 2000 (and the upcoming AW249 is going to get some gigahomie 2500 hp ones). Also, speed-wise, the H145M tops out at around 275 km/h never-exceed speed. The AH-64E tops out at around 370. So the argument that a smaller helicopter is nimbler and faster than a larger one is false. It's less capable, and less useful than a larger dedicated platform. The only thing it does better, is cost less.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            NTA, transport helicopter can easily carry the weapon an "attack copter" carry.
            Attack copter lost every benefit from size with armor mass which in the end, was counter productive, so was trying to outmaneuver missiles or trying to hide behind trees.

            If you are going to launch guided-missiles from >8 kilometers away at targets you didn't detect yourself, it's pointless to pretend you are anything more than a transport helicopter only capable of carrying missiles.
            Ditch the pointless requirement, focus on what really matter: longer range, faster cruising speed, interoperability with other units including carrying stuff.

            No they can't. The moment you load them with any half decent weapon load they become slow and sluggish, unlike the attack helicopters which are specifically designed to move with those weapons, particularly the ones on external stores.
            >or trying to hide behind trees
            idiot
            >at targets you didn't detect yourself
            double Black person

            >moronic anons don't understand that the Apache has had a datalink longer than they've been alive and that hiding behind trees DOES work, UNLESS and ONLY UNLESS you're dealing with a peer adversary who can datalink E-3 tier airborne radar contacts to someone who can actually kill you (surprisingly hard at any real range when you're 50 cm off the ground and not emitting)
            Many such cases anon. I've given up attempting to educate these morons.

            >NTA, transport helicopter can easily carry the weapon an "attack copter" carry.
            Lolno. Some rinkydink 5-ton MTOW runabout (H145M) ain't carrying anywhere near as much as a 10-ton MTOW dedicated attack heli (AH-64E). Like I said, the H145M can barely carry 4x 25-something km range Spike-NCLOS (due to their larger size compared to the 10 km Spike-ER2), whereas the AH-64E can carry 16x. Larger heli means larger payload, and larger engines. The engines on the H145M put out 1000 hp each, the ones on the AH-64E put out around 2000 (and the upcoming AW249 is going to get some gigahomie 2500 hp ones). Also, speed-wise, the H145M tops out at around 275 km/h never-exceed speed. The AH-64E tops out at around 370. So the argument that a smaller helicopter is nimbler and faster than a larger one is false. It's less capable, and less useful than a larger dedicated platform. The only thing it does better, is cost less.

            How are purpose built Russian attack helicopters doing in Ukraine right now?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Russian
              There's your problem.

              Russian helicopter doctrine did not evolve at all since the Cold War, and they were still trying to use them as frontline, close support assets, which left them highly vulnerable to MANPADS and SHORAD.

              They had FAR better success employing them how Western armies do now, which is using them as mobile, standoff missile platforms. The only problem is that Russian sensors are dogshit and the Vikhr is a beam rider which means the helicopter has to be in stationary hover to guide the missile to target, leaving it extremely vulnerable.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                When has the AH-64 ever had to deal with MANPADS? Maybe they survive a chance engagement or two. But I doubt things would be much different on a modern battlefield against an opponent with actual ADA.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The US just uses Apaches to bully sandmen because they don't have anything that can meaningfully shoot one down. However, per doctrine, the Apaches are supposed to be tank hunters that would intercept Soviet armored columns. They still retain this capability, given all of the advancements that have been made to the Hellfire, the addition of the Longbow radar, and the E variant's ability to network with its own organic drone recon.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Ka-52 actually did pretty well during the counteroffensive and it's fricked people up on other occasions too, even with poor optics, poor sensors, and kinda shitty missiles. The other ones are not attack helicopters in the modern sense and you're being dishonest if you try to pass them off as such. Calling a Mi-8 an attack helicopter is like calling a UH-60 one.

              When has the AH-64 ever had to deal with MANPADS? Maybe they survive a chance engagement or two. But I doubt things would be much different on a modern battlefield against an opponent with actual ADA.

              Are you one of those morons who can't comprehend that training against something gives an indication of how it'd go in practice, even if it hasn't been done before? US forces have been training against AAA threats since the Apache was a thing. It's why Longbow was introduced.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I am both of these morons. And AAA is a bit different than moron Ivans running around with the SA-23 everywhere.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >US forces have been training against AAA threats since the Apache was a thing
                The Apache was built at a time when no other weapon could do what it did.
                Like attacking armored column of tanks lacking or losing cohesive air defense
                They would only have been useful against the stupid line of tank of Putin when Slav thought they just had to roll in in conquered territories.

                If there's any niche left for attack copter will be attacking poorly defended installation, hopefully in range.
                And cheaper drones achieve that job with greater efficiency, even EW & jamming isn't enough to overcome that and without its own defense a jammer is just a juicy target or opportunity.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Where is this drone that can ripple fire up to 16 Longbow Hellfires and wipe out a few Russian tank platoons in a single sortie?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It is followed by all the other drones you can produce for the price of one AH-64, carrying more than 16 missiles total, destroying more tanks platoons in a singles sortie with less risk of mission failure if one is destroyed.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Your drone operation gets spotted and hit with artillery, because you can't have them fly into the AO from 100km away to do their job.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They also can't operate within heavy EW. A helichad pilot can go radio silent and just send it with only, theoretically, a heavy microwave/directed energy weapon or EMP fricking him up.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Muh single drone.
                You guys don't get it. There will be swarms of drones. A single Longbow costs $52mil. The Army will buy 2000 drones at the same price. Each will be capable of firing 1-4 Hellfire missiles.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > Why yes, I am insisting a long range high speed drone that can carry tons of sensors and weapons can be purchased for $26k per.copy. However, I can't provide any examples.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > Oh, it also has to be reusable and have a 30 year life for 1000s of missions.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Such a system would be a force-loss multiplier and limited to operating from its single location. No reason exists to want that when it is not robust.

                Its weapons should be dispersed and of sufficient range to self-deliver. Standoff and dispersion are key to survival, not being a large slow less agile target whose weight is mostly NOT payload.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The armed 145M is a Kiowa/AH-6 like helicopter, too easy to shoot down by any peer or near peer enemy and not equipped with good enough instruments and weapons to be a long range missile platform
      It's a cheap and quick way to fulfill the attack helo number promised to Nato, not much more

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Can't they just add weapons to a V-22 osprey and call it a day?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Army don't use Osprey

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's been 13 years and they still haven't acknowledged wtf this thing was

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Blackhawk with a bodykit

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What sort of chemical sludge is Army leadership eating to have become dumb enough to think this is a good idea?

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's over, Helibros this is the end of it all.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sucks that this will death of compound rotor helis. Such cool looking tech, even if it has fundamental flaws

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Too bad by the time they got back to it, tiltrotor tech was already matured.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Tiltrotor.
          >Mature.

          What are your thoughts on vortex ring state?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's something conventional helicopters are still susceptible to as well. Tiltrotors can at least minimize this issue by staying in flight mode for the majority of their time.

            Not to mention, the fact the V-22 has been operating for decades now and the V-280 being recently adopted means the DoD sees more of a future in tiltrotors rather than compound helicopters, especially since tiltrotors provide all of the benefits compound helicopters are supposed to but far better.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Marines for the Tiltrotor God.
              I am not an expert in V-22 Class A accidents, but I am pretty sure most of the serious accidents were caused by vortex ring state, and usually at slow speed while landing.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Less crashes per flight hour then Blackhawks. Turns out that things that fly by yelling at gravity to frick off are risky, who knew?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                And Blackhawks and other helos go down due to VRS as well. It is an issue endemic to all rotary aircraft due to a quirk in the physics that enables them to fly.

                https://i.imgur.com/8g0su3m.jpg

                Rotary aircraft are finished period. The simply are too low and slow to survive a high threat environment no matter who is flying them.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_attack_on_Karbala

                Karbala was a massive clusterfrick on all levels. The Army sent a bunch of Apaches over dense, occupied urban areas with no recon, no air support, and no ground support, which is not how you are supposed to use attack helicopters at all. It was the fault of terrible mission planning, not the Apache itself.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >was a massive clusterfrick on all levels. The Army sent a bunch of Apaches over dense, occupied urban areas with no recon, no air support, and no ground support, which is not how you are supposed to use attack helicopters at all. It was the fault of terrible mission planning, not the Apache itself.
                Here is is the deal. For example you can send ScanEagle drone over that area and it would provide recon over that area and same enemy can't do anything to stop it. Well they can't even detect that they under camera. So its helicopters fault theyr are not overpowered and imbalanced like drones.

                >P.S. air support, and no ground support
                Actually they launched something like 30 ATACMS in supposed locations of SHORAD prior to raid.

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >invictus
    >Sol Invictus
    Where are my legionaries Legate Bell???

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe Boeing finally pressed on someone from going any further, since their design wasn't even in the 2 selected

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not just drones, satelites in real time.
    You know all those amazing pictures from the space satelite telescopes seeing distant galaxies?
    Yeah they have lots of those pointed towards earth instead.
    Sending out a manned platform subject to AA is just not as important as it was.
    Also EW is not just for jamming, anything transmitting a signal can be located, and even the most classified ways around that will only be a step ahead of being figured out and ceasing to work.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      satellites have very constrained trajectories though, spy planes and drones are significantly more flexible

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They even have camera artillery. Just lob long range shells around the front lines to scout and follow up with explosive rounds on what you discover.
    So many options beyond sending multi million dollar manned choppers lucky to run a small number of recon ops before destruction.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Actual horsesh-
      >A black and white photograph taken from a prototype reconnaissance round shows a person standing in a sod farm near Atlanta in the testing range for the device.
      >2004

      Well shit.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Anon, did you think that the MIC that was able to get all the fancy electronics for a guided round, much less the even better stuff like BONUS, to survive being fired would be incapable of putting a camera and transmitter into a shell with a parachute?

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the death of a platform is something to be celebrated because it means that something greater has taken it's place

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      but it looks so cool 🙁

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I suspect the design will be sold to some minor US ally with a local manufacturing industry like Turkey, Brazil, Taiwan, Korea etc It was designed to be cheap and easily serviced under shitty field conditions.

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    if you are literally just hovering above your own forces, at tree top level on an attack chopper
    why not just add a scissor lift to an IFV

    Helicopters are obsolete due to the compromises needed to fly, too goddamn expensive

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because an attack chopper is 16+ ATGMs whenever and wherever you need since they're attached to a platform that moves 200 mph and doesn't care about terrain.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        an attack helicopter is a 100 million dollar flying piece of paper mache
        It was relevant in the 70's when it was designed, but horribly obsolete today

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >what is a networked shooter

  45. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >muh drones muh drones muh drones muh drones muh drones muh drones muh drones
    drone posters should be banned on sight whenever they enter a thread. there's nobody more stupid than them, not even zigger /misc/ posters, who are usually the same thing anyway.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *