Are there studies/data on which areas are helicopters hit by enemy fire? Much like that famous WW2 study on bombers
Helicopter hit statistics?
Are there studies/data on which areas are helicopters hit by enemy fire? Much like that famous WW2 study on bombers
the study wasn't about what's being hit but which parts are critical to survivability, I haven't seen anything like that for helicopters but look what parts of the apache are armored or fault tolerant and you'll know
pdf link?
it's only Kopp, nothing serious https://www.ausairpower.net/PDF-A/TE-Helo-Mar-05-P.pdf
I believe there was a bit of work done in Vietnam to uparmor Hueys, but nothing like the old bomber up armor. Main reason being helis have way less space for extra weight and their systems are inherently unstable and not easy to protect its most crucial components (blades). Also worth pointing out that in planes if your engine dies you still in theory have glide capabilities, not so much for helicopters. Which is exactly why there is a lot of hope around the new Bell tilt rotor as it is designed with principles similar to a plane and has glide capabilities
Autorotation dumbfrick
I love when people talk about autorotation when talking about military choppers, you have to be high or fast for autorotation to work, if you are high you are going to be shot down and you can't be fast while taking advantage of VTOL, the whole point of choppers.
The only time when autorotation is viable during combat is ingress / egress because you can have enough airspeed to trade for altitude uying you time to setup for an autorotation.
>he doubles down on his moronation with strawman bullshit
The same problems you cry about affect fixed wing as well.
I'm not
I just love rotorcraft and get sick of "just autorotate bro" as if you are in the envelope during combat.
For civilian choppers it's great and they happen all the time, that's the advantage of being at 5,000ft instead of 100ft.
You would have the same issue with a fixed wing moron. Can't glide well when you're low or slow
>i love rotorcraft
Stop being a poorgay and go fly one so you can actually reply with experience instead of pulling bullshit out of your ass
>Can't glide well when you're low or slow
Such as? The only time fixed wing is close to stall is on final. Any cruise speed will be flaps up giving you options to stay in the sky longer.
>go fly one
I fricking wish but I did get to ride them a lot working in remote mines, became good mates with a pilot that left to fly tourists on Hamilton Island.
He had to autorotate on his second day there, engine shat the bed, good thing is his first 5 flights were training so no passangers ended up in the ocean with him.
>The only time when autorotation is viable during combat is ingress / egress because you can have enough airspeed to trade for altitude uying you time to setup for an autorotation.
>you have enough speed during ingress/egress
You’re literally slower during those phases of flight you absolute buffoon. If you understand your height-velocity chart it’s incredibly simple to not put yourself in a moronic situation.
I would much rather lose my engine in a single engine helicopter than a single engine fixed-wing
t. Flies both
>t. Flies both
Ok, so you would rather lose a chopper engine at 100ft?
>You’re literally slower during those phases of flight you absolute buffoon
I should clarify, during cruise to and from the target.
lol you keep changing the terms of the argument, I thought we were talking about short final? I would absolutely rather lose an engine at 100ft in a helicopter. 100ft leaves me nowhere to even glide unless i'm going mach fricking 1 are you an idiot? I'd still rather be in a chopper losing an engine in the pattern but both aircraft should be fine because that's literally what you train for.
What you don't seem to get is we are talking military aviation, if the plane loses an engine it's likely over 20,000ft and over 300kn.
If the choppers loses it's engine it's going to be ~100ft at ~100kn during cruise and near stationary for landing / takeoff.
I know you'll claim "you changed it again" but the thread literaly started comparing choppers to bombers taking combat damage.
AUTOROTATION
JUST AUTOROTATE
AUTOROTATION IDIOT
YOU CAN JUST AUTOROTATE
JUST AUTOROTATE DUDE
JUST NEED ALTITUDE FOR AUTOROTATION
>B-but my official helicopter book says...
It doesn't fricking matter if you hit the ground at 90mph instead of 100mph. Just shut the frick up already.
>haha your plane can't glide if the wing falls off, what now planegays?
Weren't we talking about small arms damage leading to powertrain failure? That's not going to shatter the rotor system. All of those manpad hits would instantly destroy a fixed wing aircraft as well.
>moron doesn't know what autorotation is.
It's obvious you don't understand the physics of flight so you should just shut the frick up and stop posting walls of midwit brain barf
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA547531.pdf
Why not just put the rotor on the bottom so it chops up the bullets? Or at least fly upside down when being shot at?
>stupid idea
>literally been done before
They just needed to make it bigger so it could have long retractable landing gear that could be pulled behind the blade. I guess you’d have to armor up the rotor hub too because it’s not spinning as fast.