AH-64E Apache attack helicopter

[ace009]

You cannot use a heavy attack chopper against urban insurgents - that is asinine. Unless you are prepared to take enormous collateral damage and create more devastation than all the insurgents can do.
In most urban conflicts, light choppers are used with snipers in them. Even if an automatic weapon is used, it is a light machine gun to minimize collateral damage. A Cheetah will probably do for that. An LCH will be an overkill let alone an Apache.
On the other hand, Apaches are great for CAS, against Armor ambush and against infantry in the open. That is where they should be used.
IN may not be equipped to handle the Apache, and even if they are, they cannot have many in number since all they have is one carrier (INS Jalashwa) that can handle the Apaches.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You cannot use a heavy attack chopper against urban insurgents - that is asinine. Unless you are prepared to take enormous collateral damage and create more devastation than all the insurgents can do. In most urban conflicts, light choppers are used with snipers in them. Even if an automatic weapon is used, it is a light machine gun to minimize collateral damage. A Cheetah will probably do for that. An LCH will be an overkill let alone an Apache. On the other hand, Apaches are great for CAS, against Armor ambush and against infantry in the open.

The doctrine you are talking abt is Indian not Russian or US..

Though Apache or LCH or Rudra can be used against insurgents over mountain and hill or fields in J&k, In urban helo are used for mainly surveillance and EW..

 

[Armand2REP]

You cannot use a heavy attack chopper against urban insurgents - that is asinine.

US did it all the time in Iraq. France did it in Libya and Ivory Coast.

 

[ace009]

NOT IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY AGAINST YOUR OWN PEOPLE OF YOUR OWN CITIES!

This is Insurgents hiding in Indian cities we are talking about. I give two hoots about what India does against insurgents INSIDE Pakistan and during wartime.

But NO attack helo use against insurgents in an Indian urban area unless it is a sniper from a cheetah.

A light attack helo like the Rudra maybe used against Maoists in a jungle - but with LMG only for fire support - use it for insertion and extraction - but that's about it ...

 

[Armand2REP]

They aren't your own people, they are Paki terrorists. Just be careful where you aim. I am assuming we are past the point of SWAT being able to handle it.

 

[p2prada]

US did it all the time in Iraq. France did it in Libya and Ivory Coast.

No point using attack helos against insurgents in your own cities. They are not heavily equipped like a conventional army is. The collateral damage will be massive simply because of the wide area of damage helos can cause. It is not due to the weapons themselves, but has a lot to do with identifying targets. The pilot does not know the difference between a friendly soldier and an insurgent. The bellycrawler needs to tell the birdbrain that and the birdbrain can drop houses with just cannon fire. Even the bellycrawler won't know what else was killed apart from the target. The result cannot justify the cost of achieving it.

Whatever US did in Iraq or what France did in Libya and Ivory Coast remain in these countries. If the same happens in the US or France, expect a major political turmoil in either country. Don't worry IA or IAF will use attack helos in Iraq, Ivory Coast or Libya without second thoughts. IAF was using heavy attack helos in Congo. 4 Mi-35s have been in Congo since 2004 and in combat situations, been withdrawn only recently.

BTW, we also have homegrown insurgents like the Naxals. Can't pummel our own villages with high explosives without blowback.

 

[Adux]

They aren't your own people, they are Paki terrorists. Just be careful where you aim. I am assuming we are past the point of SWAT being able to handle it.

You are right, there are cases for employment of Apache's against terrorist in India, there are cases of it being used in Afghanistan and Iraq in that role of Urban as well as against terrorist in that area. On positive id, we can most definitly use them against terrorist and insurgents in the jungles of J&K, Maoist and other's in North east in India. We can also use them quite efficiently in areas where the insurgents have been surrounded in a building/hut/house in J&K, where the Indian Army has finally used Carl Gustav's to destroy the house completely, we would better off using the optics and cannon of the Apache. This kind of precision, optics and tactics is something, India has never used, know or employed. There is a video of insurgents being targeted by on Apache miles off, and commanding another Apache in a completely different sector to kill 4 terrorist walking along a village road using its 30 mm Cannons. Amazing. Russians are nowhere in that type of seamlessly networked warfare. Longbow Radar and Optics, will take us into a different level.

 

[Adux]

No point using attack helos against insurgents in your own cities. They are not heavily equipped like a conventional army is. The collateral damage will be massive simply because of the wide area of damage helos can cause. It is not due to the weapons themselves, but has a lot to do with identifying targets. The pilot does not know the difference between a friendly soldier and an insurgent. The bellycrawler needs to tell the birdbrain that and the birdbrain can drop houses with just cannon fire. Even the bellycrawler won't know what else was killed apart from the target. The result cannot justify the cost of achieving it.

Whatever US did in Iraq or what France did in Libya and Ivory Coast remain in these countries. If the same happens in the US or France, expect a major political turmoil in either country. Don't worry IA or IAF will use attack helos in Iraq, Ivory Coast or Libya without second thoughts. IAF was using heavy attack helos in Congo. 4 Mi-35s have been in Congo since 2004 and in combat situations, been withdrawn only recently.

BTW, we also have homegrown insurgents like the Naxals. Can't pummel our own villages with high explosives without blowback.

He is talking about its cannons. Not some raining of Hellfire missiles. There are couple of videos on Youtube on it. They are extremely effective and efficient at long ranges, and does less damage than the Indian Army using the Carl Gustav.

India will have to learn how to employ this beast. India can easily identify friend or foe using various tactics. Usually in an insurgent scenario whether it is a ambush based on intelligence, or surrounding of a insurgents hideout etc, friend or foe is established quite easily, as it we who hold how the battle is managed and spaced. Only on such cases should we employ the Helos.

 

[Adux]

There is a lot of difference to what Mi-24 gunships did in the movie Rambo, to what Apache's and new optics work. Nobody in India is going to pummel villages, we are not Pakistan nor Soviet Union nor USA in Vietnam. This is a qualitative and game changing equipment for the Indian Army and Airforce.

I wonder how we are going to bring about training of Forward Air Controllers, This is extremely important for the employment of Apache's, Sukhoi's and all the other precision attack aircrafts? Are they going to be from the Army or Airforce Gaurds? or is it going to be a combination of both.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

what about CISMOA , can we use com equipment and gps with out that ?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

There is a lot of difference to what Mi-24 gunships did in the movie Rambo, to what Apache's and new optics work.

There is a lot of difference to what Mi-24 gunships did in the movie Rambo, compared to what real Mi-24 gunships ever did anywhere in the real world.
The weapons load in Rambo gunships were many times what they could actually carry. That's Hollywood.

Oh, and my favorite Rambo scene was when he was in a downed chopper as pilot with rescued POWs in the rear. The Russian chopper drops down to get a closer look, and Rambo whips out a LAW and fires through the windshield. The POWs would have been scorched.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089880/goofs

http://www.moviemistakes.com/film1045

 

[pmaitra]

There is a lot of difference to what Mi-24 gunships did in the movie Rambo, compared to what real Mi-24 gunships ever did anywhere in the real world.
The weapons load in Rambo gunships were many times what they could actually carry. That's Hollywood.

Oh, and my favorite Rambo scene was when he was in a downed chopper as pilot with rescued POWs in the rear. The Russian chopper drops down to get a closer look, and Rambo whips out a LAW and fires through the windshield. The POWs would have been scorched.

You are right. There is a world of difference between that a real Mil-24/35 can do and what they have shown. However, I will give credit for the level of accuracy achieved in designing that Mil-24/35 in Rambo III.

The helicopter in the movie is this:

Now, one might argue it looks rather different from the real Mil-24/35:

However, the pre-tandem-cockpit Mil-24/35 was like this:

So, given the secrecy about Soviet weapons and the Soviet-DRA-Army campaign against the Mujahideen during the Cold War, and the subsequent lack of information, it was a pretty accurate depiction of the venerable Mil-24/35.

 

[Adux]

Russia » Economics

India prefers USA's Apache to Russia's 'Night Hunter'
26.10.2011

Russia lost another arms tender in India. In the beginning of 2011, Russia failed to win the ten-billion-dollar tender for the delivery of 126 all-purpose fighter jets for Indian Air Force. The Russian MiG-35 lost the tender to Eurofighter and Rafale.

This time, Russia lost the tender for the delivery of 22 attack helicopters. The Mi-28H "Night Hunter" lost to USA's Apache AH-64D Longbow.

This is a very embarrassing defeat for Russia, taking into consideration the fact that India was planning to considerably increase the purchase of attack helicopters.

A source at the Defense Ministry of India said that such actions were not political. The decision was made on the base of the specifications of the aircraft. "The Mi-28H did not meet the requirements of the tender on 20 counts, unlike the Apache helicopter, which showed best results, Indian officials said.

Did the Russian side take that into consideration when it was going to take part in the tender? Does it mean that Russia knew in advance that its product was weak? Can it be possible at all?


Share
Print version
Font Size
Send to friend
A group of Swedish experts, who compared the previous modifications of the Mi-28H and AH64 Apache, said that the US chopper was inferior to the Russian aircraft. The experts came to such a conclusion after the exercise that took place in Sweden in 1995. Three Mi-28A choppers, piloted by Swedish and Russian pilots, produced quite an impression on foreign military men. The helicopters were not detected by the Swedish air defense system and remained unnoticed in the air space of the country for 30 kilometers.

According to experts' estimates, the Russian and the American helicopters are quite comparable, despite the statement from the Indian side. Moreover, foreign experts believe that the Mi-28H was just as good as the AH-64D Apache Longbow. The experts particularly noted the performance of the radar station on board the Russian chopper.

As for the weak points of the Russian helicopter, independent experts said the ammunition of the Russian helicopter is smaller. The US chopper is better than the Russian aircraft from the point of view of the shooting accuracy, they said.

In general, independent experts concluded that the Mi-28H goes ahead its foreign competitors in terms of flight performance, arms specifications, combat survivability and operating convenience. The MI-28H was Russia's response to the appearance of the AH-64D Apache Longbow, the experts also said.

However, India preferred not to purchase the Russian aircraft. Some believe that the nation prefers to diversify its arms procurement against the background of tough competition on the arms market. It is not ruled out that India simply does not want to depend on only one supplier.

This formulation can be true only partially. India has not been satisfied with Russia's execution of its obligations within the scope of defense cooperation. Indian officials particularly said that Russia does not meet the requirements of delivery dates, modernization and repairs.

Optimists say that Russia still control the Indian arms market even though it has lost the tender for attack helicopters. What made the Indian side choose the American helicopter? Pravda.Ru asked expert opinion from Alexander Mordovin and Nikolai Novichkov.

Nikolai Novichkov, editor-in-chief of ARMS-TASS news agency:

"I would not say that the Mi-28H is inferior to the Amercian competitor. It seems that the reason is different. The Indians have been concerned about the way Russia executes the obligations connected with repairs and servicing of the delivered hardware. We also delay the execution of previously concluded contracts."

Alexander Mordovin, an expert for combat aviation:

"We have a serious problem with avionics. Unlike the US competitor, there was no serial production for the Mi-28H for a very long time. It is an open secret that the flaws, which were not noticed during the testing period, are found and removed during the process of serial production. Russia had only 16 Mi-28H helicopters before 2008. In 2011, the Russian armed forces were supposed to receive 28 Mi-28H choppers, although the serial production of this aircraft could be launched more than ten years ago. Of course, India could choose the Apache just because the helicopter demonstrated its excellent performance during the recent conflicts. Therefore, the advantages of the Russian aircraft are only theoretical."

Sergei Balmasov

Pravda.Ru

India prefers USA's Apache to Russia's 'Night Hunter' - English pravda.ru

 

[ace009]

"I would not say that the Mi-28H is inferior to the Amercian competitor. It seems that the reason is different. The Indians have been concerned about the way Russia executes the obligations connected with repairs and servicing of the delivered hardware. We also delay the execution of previously concluded contracts."

That was revealing coming from a Russian defense expert.

Also note that this Russian news agency was writing about a comparison done by Sweden as far back as 1995 between the Apache and the Mi-28H - but back then the Apache was the Ah-64B version and the Mi-28H was indeed a formidable foe. Since then Apache has undergone 3 generations of upgrades, while the Mi-28 production was stopped in Russia for over 10 years, as the report mentions.
No wonder that for the current generation of the two choppers, the Apache AH-64D is more reliable, has more advanced avionics and certainly more battle tested.

 

[Ray]

Defence Analysts use actual and demonstrable negativity to spur the Govt into action by creating a 'negative panic'.

 

[pmaitra]

I fail to understand one thing. Why would Russia be dying to take up this contract when they are already struggling or overloaded with existing projects for India? Let them finish off the work they have at hand. Did we not already buy a bunch of Mil-17s from the Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant? Why wasn't that dubbed as a political move as well?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

There is a video of insurgents being targeted by on Apache miles off, and commanding another Apache in a completely different sector to kill 4 terrorist walking along a village road using its 30 mm Cannons. Amazing. Russians are nowhere in that type of seamlessly networked warfare. Longbow Radar and Optics, will take us into a different level.

Very impressive vids, But as per Indian code Gunship in form of Airpower is a strict no in CT operation in Urban or near civilian infrastructure..

He is talking about its cannons. Not some raining of Hellfire missiles. There are couple of videos on Youtube on it. They are extremely effective and efficient at long ranges, and does less damage than the Indian Army using the Carl Gustav.

@Adux,
U dont know how Indian army work in CT operation in J&K, do you?, Even if we have gunship that is strictly NO, we will be using Carl Gustaf, and Infantry flame throwers..

There is a lot of difference to what Mi-24 gunships did in the movie Rambo,

It was not a MI-24 or a MI on first place..

 

[Adux]

Very impressive vids, But as per Indian code Gunship in form of Airpower is a strict no in CT operation in Urban or near civilian infrastructure..

Time to rethink that Kunal, new technologies new options, saves more IA men.

@Adux,
U dont know how Indian army work in CT operation in J&K, do you?, Even if we have gunship that is strictly NO, we will be using Carl Gustaf, and Infantry flame throwers..

I do Kunal, I also know, the only people we have used air power is the Manipuri's. If I didnt, I wouldnt have mentioned Carl Gustav, would I? If it means it willl minimize collateral damage, save lives of IA men, then we should use it. We never had such tech before.

It was not a MI-24 or a MI on first place..

You do know that, it was just an example of how Gunship's are seen by people. Dont read too much into it.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Time to rethink that Kunal, new technologies new options, saves more IA men.
You do know that, it was just an example of how Gunship's are seen by people.( may bad ) .

Use of Gunship only will make more problems in Urban CT ops..

Listen to this man, A Professional:
http://defenceforumindia.com/internal-security/26267-straight-talk-e-n-rammohan.html

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I fail to understand one thing. Why would Russia be dying to take up this contract when they are already struggling or overloaded with existing projects for India? Let them finish off the work they have at hand. Did we not already buy a bunch of Mil-17s from the Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant? Why wasn't that dubbed as a political move as well?

They dont want to see project die, They need more money and PR for the Product..

Their are other countires looking for Gunship, Indian purchase would have act like catalyst, Just Like MIG-29K, After IN, Russian navy scraped SU-33 upgrade, And Go for MIG-29K..