USA have lost 4 helicopters since the begining of the Iraqis guerilla war. Actually, helicopters are an easy target for the terrorists. Slow and weak at low altitude, helicopters are more and more chosen as a target for the guerillas, who are more and more well armed and trained. A rumour say that in the Iraqi guerilla, the "price" for an helicopter damaged is 1000$ (800$ for a tank). So, the DoD and strategy are now forced to re-think the role and rule of engagement of helicopter on the battle ground. And you, what do you think will be the XXI century helicopter role ?

I would be curious to read what intelgurl go to say...

i think that no matter what happens in any war, if the helicopter is a target, the helicopter will still be used because the helicopter is the only air based craft able to land troops at close range and give support fire for troops at close range, meaning that the helicopters will be used since they can be launched from a base and in the battle field in a small amount of time which makes it an essential weapon on any battlefield, except air to air and air to space(if there will be any this generation).

Igor Sikorsky and Larry Bell were two of the most prominent men in the history of the helicopter.They both adcvocated the best use of the helicopter would be for search and rescue.Helicopters do have good uses for combat but lately we are realizing how much more vulnerable they are under fire.

The helicopter, in any combat situation, is a sitting duck. I hardly think there is a replacement for it, nor can improvements really be made. If it's close to the ground, it's a good target.

uraban warfare should be a combination of well skilled and outfitted ground troops, expedient scouts and lots of undercovers. Combined with eyes in the sky and increasingly UAVs. Choppers should be used for patrols and missions where as much preparation before hand as possible has been done.

This type of warfare is primarily ground based by its nature, the only advantage that the enemy has. What is often ignorned by many is the strong aspect that economics plays in these kinds of conflicts.

I think the helicopter may evolve tactically into a fast hit-and-run weapon. Helicopers have faced treats from ground based attack by sholder fired weapons such as the Stinger or stinger type missiles since Vietnam. Remember: all military technology evolves over time.

Originally posted by ghost
I think the helicopter may evolve tactically into a fast hit-and-run weapon. Helicopers have faced treats from ground based attack by sholder fired weapons such as the Stinger or stinger type missiles since Vietnam. Remember: all military technology evolves over time.

true, very true the chopper will eventually evolve into a a fighter/helicopter such as the whisler craft in the movie the 6TH day with arnold swarchoneggur(or how you spell his last name) and that is a formabile vehicle

Yeah and they cost $100,000 or $1,000,000 of $$$. You shoot a couple down and your destroying the US Government.

I dont think US soldiers are worth that much?

Actually if you think about it, helicopters will develop into hovering, quick moving crafts a.k.a UFOs!!! I was watching something on discovery wings about copters and how they are trying to make them more manuverable and quietter. Helicopters have the most in common with UFOs. They can hover, some change direction rather quickly. It would be nice to see that our technology can advance to have our own flying discs!!

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
The helicopter, in any combat situation, is a sitting duck. I hardly think there is a replacement for it, nor can improvements really be made. If it's close to the ground, it's a good target.

And if it flys higher.. makes it very good target for MADPADS..

And if it flys high and get hit by a MANPAD..

All aboard will surely die..



Flying low makes it easy to hit by rifles, MGs and RPGs..

Maybe they should only be used at night in operations..

As no army / alike has the money to provide too many people with NVGs/night sights..

The most effective approach to winning a war of attrition is not technology, it is training.
If simple military training were actually recognized for the valuable tool it is there would be a lot less money wasted on useless technology and the conflict in Iraq would be over already.
Gee..if they actually monitored everything in Iraq the way they are appearing to want to monitor everything in america the insurgents would have a hell of a time doing anything that would surprise american forces there.
Helicopters are overkill, a big slow flying target prone to mechanical failure, well trained troops with effective body armor would work,but we all know too well where the military-industrial complex like to spend our money, technology........wasted money.