UH60FtRucker From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2906 posts, RR: 66 Posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11721 times:
Enough of the silly fixed wing threads! Helicopters are where the men are separated from the boys!
So what are the greatest military helicopters of all time?
Here's my list:
#10 - Mil Mi-24 Hind
I really didn't want to put this turkey on the list. Having actually had the chance to crawl all over this helicopter... and having seen it in action... I echo many of my colleagues disappointment. However, the fear factor cannot be denied. This helicopter was a bogeyman to Western militaries for many years. It's capabilities were thought to be far greater than they really were - and propelled western military forces to continue improving/advancing their own helicopter fleets. The Hind is by far one of the most overrated helicopters... but its effect on the helicopter community is undeniable.
It's where it all began. The Germans were way ahead of their time. When the rest of the world mocked the notion of helicopters... Germany saw the great potential in them. And when everyone else was still messing around with autogyros, Heinrich Focke was building the first controllable helicopter. No small feat.
*no photo in database*
#8 - Mil Mi-26 Halo
Perhaps never very practical - this helicopter still put everyone else to shame. CH-47? CH-53? Both look like toys compared to this monster. The Russians always had a knack for building mammoths - and the Halo is no exception. With the ability to carry over 100 people, travel roughly 1000nm, and take off at 123,500lbs! The Halo is in a class unto itself.
It's a real toss up between this and the CH-47 Chinook. Both aircraft gained fame in Vietnam as outstanding helicopters. Both are massive in size... and can haul an ungodly amount of cargo. But I think the CH-53 wins out simply because it frequently does what the CH-47 community tries to avoid - flying directly into combat. How many missions has the MH-53 performed, that the public is unaware of? Definite beast of a helicopter.
The sport car of helicopters. 249kts!? Flight maneuvers akin to a fixed wing aircraft? It's a fantastically designed aircraft that pushes the envelope.
Probably one of the best naval helicopters of all time. A true work horse, whether it was hunting subs, med-evacing wounded, search/rescue, hauling cargo... or hauling VIPs. And how many downed pilots have this helicopter to thank for being rescued?
Before this beautiful looking helicopter, gunships were only modified utility helicopters. The Cobra revolutionized the modern helicopter gunship. It brought military thinking and tactics into an entirely new direction. And increased the helicopter's lethality on the battlefield, exponentially. And it has served proudly in the militaries of many nations, and is still seeing combat with the USMC in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Alright... maybe I am a bit bias on this one! But I couldn't NOT put it in the top three! What an incredible helicopter. It took the best of the UH-1 and improved on it. The solid design has saved my life on a number of occasions. It's logging more flight hours than any other helicopter in Iraq, and it's vital to the daily operation of the US Army. It replaced the UH-1 with the US Army, it replaced the H-3s in both the US Navy and USCG, it has performed admirably as a SpecOp platform... and it serves as an outstanding VIP transport. FANTASTIC helicopter.
When you see this helicopter - you think of M*A*S*H, Korea and med-evacing thousands of wounded soldiers to safety. In the Korean War, how many soldiers were saved from injuries that would have killed men only a few years prior, in WWII? This is the helicopter that convinced the world that helicopters could serve a useful purpose. And it still flies commercially today - training many students how to become good pilots.
This is a no brainer. The Huey revolutionized helicopter tactics in the militaries of not only the US, but throughout the world. It is probably the most recognized helicopter, by both look and sound. The very image of a Huey symbolizes an entire war - the Vietnam War. And with over 70 nations operating the UH-1, it is unquestionably the most prolific helicopter of all time.
2 Arniepie: I would put the Jet ranger also on that list because it must be the most widely used helo all over the world for all possible tasks and also it must b
3 Ghostbase: Good to have a thread starter with such a keen sense of history! The Focke-Wulf Fw 61 was also a 'first' in being uniquely marketed to senior Nazis in
4 Egronenthal: What about the Robinson R22 and R44? At last count (Aviation Week March 5, 2007), Robinson had delivered 4,100 R22s and 3,400 R44s, with production ru
5 HeliflyerPDC: These are great helicopters, I know I fly on R22 for my training and later this year the R44. The reason that no one has mentioned these ,is because
6 HeliflyerPDC: the R22 startprice is at about $200.000 (usd), something I for one can't affort THis makes me wonder, How much do the other helicopters , mentioned i
7 Sovietjet: I don't understand why you would underestimate the Mi-24 so much. It was and still is quite a formidable attack helicopter. Also I think the Mi-8/17 d
8 KevinSmith: Building on that the UH-60 wouldn't be half the helo it is without lessons learned by the Huey's combat experience in Vietnam.
9 2H4: Man, how could we not include the Mil Mi-12? Open up the large version of the lower-right photo to get an idea of the scale.....those are men walking
10 Fridgmus: Great thread, "Rotorhead"!!! I've had a love affair with helicopters since I was a boy. Too bad I was born with lousy vision. Although a sympathetic H
11 L-188: I was wonder what was going to be next. My top ten list....sorry don't have time to provide photos-American Chopper is on I'll come back later and exp
12 Beta: UH60, I'd like to know why you left out the CH47, one of the most successful twin rotor helicopters, and a versatile platform. It has performed very w
13 UH60FtRucker: The Jet ranger is a decent helicopter - but I was think just in military terms. And the Jet ranger has had far more success in the civilian world, th
14 Sovietjet: I'll respect your opinion, but having talked to several Mi-24 pilots they have all told me they love it and think it is a great machine. It is outdat
15 CTR: UH60, I agree with the rest. Great Thread Starter! Many can argue the rankings of 2 through 10. But it is hard to argue that the Bell UH-1 Huey should
16 KevinSmith: He stole that from "When the last B-2 goes to DMAFB, the crew will be carried home by a B-52"
17 Par13del: I am somewhat confused by the UH-60, and the high regard it is given, I hope this is not a thread hijack. UH-60 are being used to death in the US curr
18 9MMAR: I watched a film, Blood Diamond recently, and there was a scene when Leonardo Dicaprio's Colonel (played by actor Arnold Vosloo), attacked the diamond
19 Wing: I have to say this thread is one of the most interesting all around the forums for a while.Although flying the big jets for a living I always remember
20 A342: The Mil Mi-26 isn't useful ??? LOL, do you know what you're talking about ? Without that thing, the exploitation of gas and oil fields in Siberia wou
Acheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 861 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11038 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): t makes a crappy troop transport. You can't do efficient fast rope or rappelling insertions. You cannot do SPIE or FRIE extractions. You can't use a bambi bucket or hoist. You cannot perform paradrops. And the troop doors are cumbersome and do not allow for quick exit, when such is needed in a hot LZ.
The role of troop transport in the Hind is secondary, almost tacked on, so you can't expect it to be a good transport ship when its main role has always been the attack one.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): As a former crew chief - I thought the Mi-24, SUCKED. When you were coming into a tight LZ/PZ you cannot stick your head out and monitor the tail. It is very easy for the pilots to stick that tail rotor into a
tree or building. Totally unacceptable.
Maybe I'm off here, but I don't think Apache pilots can "stick their heads out" and monitor the tail rotor, either.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): It's weapon systems were mediocre. Night systems were substandard. Laser designator was 10years behind US/NATO.
The cockpit was inefficient. Cluttered with hundreds of small buttons, pressure gauges, dials, etc...
Most of those issues are solved on the Mi-35M2, with improved weapons systems and cockpit. Two large, color MFD's replace that silly paper-map rotator of the old hinds and reduce the amount of "steam gauge" instruments by quite a lot; and the cockpit allow's NVG use(being black, etc.). The old rangefinder was replaced with a FLIR turret that uses sensors based on SAGEM's technology.
The old 12,7 gaitling was replaced with double-barreled GSh-23L 23mm gun, and the capacity to carry up to 16 Ataka-V(or Shturms) missiles instead of only 4 Spirals
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): And while the armored bathtub that you sit in, is very nice for protection, it totally obstructs your vision. And again... as a helicopter pilot, you need to know where EVERYTHING around you is.
New seat can have its height adjusted, although, admitedly, I still find the foward-view a bit too clutered with the HUD and the missile alert system. Still had a decent view of my surroundings when I sat in it.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): The pilot controls were horrible. With a helicopter of that size and power... you need better pilot assist systems. SOMETHING needs to relieve the pilot of constantly flying that helicopter! When you are coming in to a hot LZ in a high altitude environment, with high temperatures, and near max payload weight... you don't want the pilot straining to fly that helicopter!
The system has been replaced with new ones derived from the Mi-28, including main and tail rotors with composite blades, and the gear retracting system has been removed, reducing weight by a good 300kg, and the wings have been shortened, improving perfomance and finally giving the Hind the ability to hover on ground effect. And new engines of course, the VK-2500 with 2400hp(2700 in emergency mode) and includes FADEC systems.
I think the only thing it probably keeps from the original Hind, besides a few subsystems here and there, the remaining gauges and HUD, is the fuselage.
KevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11036 times:
Quoting A342 (Reply 20): Without that thing, the exploitation of gas and oil fields in Siberia would have been MUCH harder. In fact, it is so useful that it is also used in Canada now.
The thread is dealing with military application for helicopters. That's why it's posted in the military av forum. Exploration of oil and gas fields is not a military application.
Quoting A342 (Reply 20): LOL, do you know what you're talking about ?
Being that this thread deals with helicopters in military av yes, UH60 does know what he is talking about. Do you have any idea what he is currently doing? He is flying COMBAT missions in Iraq. Every second of everyday some one is trying to kill him whether it be with IEDs on the ground or RPGs in the air. If that doesn't qualify him to judge whether or not a helicopter is a good military machine than I don't what would.
On a different note, you weren't born on the old Soviet part of Germany were you?
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1895 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11021 times:
Quoting Wing (Reply 19): Although I 100% agree with your list, I wonder why you left AH64 Apache out of top 10?
The Apache eats money like a 5year old eats candy. Its had huge issues with requiring huge MX and not making the grade for being available for a mission at any given time.
Basicly it was sold as the second coming, and turned out it couldn't even replace the much older cobra for many missions. Or for the marines at all.
Pelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2451 posts, RR: 8 Reply 24, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11007 times:
Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 22):
The thread is dealing with military application for helicopters. That's why it's posted in the military av forum. Exploration of oil and gas fields is not a military application.
Sure it deals with miltitary apllication, nonetheless the Mi 26 was mentioned by UH60FtRucker in this thread. The Mi 26 was build with the huge solitude of Sibiria in mind.
BTW UH60FtRucker said
Boeing4ever From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4924 posts, RR: 49 Reply 25, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 10991 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 13): Because it is totally overrated. There is a thread somewhere here on Anet where I wrote an indepth evaluation of the Mi-24 Hind. And I really don't have the time to rewrite it all... but I will give you the quick version.
Speaking of which, how are those Polish Hinds coping with the Iraqi climate? IIRC, Soviet Hinds had a rough time in Afghanistan. The airframes are prorbably getting on in years too for that matter.
B4e-Forever New Frontiers
Eagles may soar, but weasels are never sucked into jet engines!
KevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 26, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 11134 times:
Quoting Pelican (Reply 24):
Sure it deals with miltitary apllication, nonetheless the Mi 26 was mentioned by UH60FtRucker in this thread. The Mi 26 was build with the huge solitude of Sibiria in mind.
BTW UH60FtRucker said
What I was trying to point out was that A342 was defending the usefulness of the MI 26 by citing it's service exploring gas and oil pipelines, a non-military role. UH60 was talking about it's military usefulness when he said. Henceforth A342s point is moot.
HeliflyerPDC From Belgium, joined Sep 2006, 128 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11099 times:
My #10 the MBB BO-105P recently celebrated it's 40th birthday. It's first flight was in February 1967.
This is something only a few airplanes of helicopters can say of them self.
grtz PDC
(ps: I know the Huey is the one no other helo can become, a real legend)
Keesje From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10190 posts, RR: 52 Reply 28, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11041 times:
Good list IMO UH60FtRucker
I think the "Huey from the other side" also deserves attention, thousands in use all over the world, first flight more then 45 yrs ago, still in production: the Mil Mi 8/17.
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 3952 posts, RR: 1 Reply 29, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11036 times:
Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 26): What I was trying to point out was that A342 was defending the usefulness of the MI 26 by citing it's service exploring gas and oil pipelines, a non-military role. UH60 was talking about it's military usefulness when he said. Henceforth A342s point is moot.
In fact, it is also useful for military applications. Sure, it is a bit large for a battlefield transporter, but nothing can beat it when operating in a more "strategic" role.
Sovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1931 posts, RR: 16 Reply 31, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 10987 times:
The Mi-26 is very useful in military applications....in fact it was used quite often in the Chechnya wars and is still used in several countries to great advantage. However, it's predecessor the Mi-6 has proven itself far more than the Mi-26.
UH60FtRucker From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2906 posts, RR: 66 Reply 32, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10882 times:
Quoting Par13del (Reply 17): UH-60 are being used to death in the US current conflicts, so much so that they are removing all that are in reserve positions to place them in frontline service - DEA and others are giving them up -, this displays the strength of the decision to equip the reserve and fronline units with the same equipment,
Well yes and no. Yes all of the Army's UH-60s are being removed from "home front" missions. They will no longer be used for domestic RAID, DEA, med-evac, search and rescue, etc... This is for a couple reasons. We need those COMBAT helicopters on the battlefield. They don't serve the Army's needs when they are flying in the US. So the Army is purchasing the UH-72 Lakota (a modified Eurocopter EC145). These helicopters will never see combat, and be used solely for domestic missions. They will "free up" all Army combat helicopters to move towards the battle lines.
Quoting Par13del (Reply 17): so why not buy more UH-60's, why replace them in the reserve units with a/c not capable of frontline service? If another conflict arises, there will either be no fall back or frontline units will have to fall back using less capable a/c.
We are replacing the fleet - the UH60M.
FANTASTIC helicopter that is already being initially fielded. Many advanced features and new systems to help make the UH-60 even more efficient. We're buying new ones, and also remod'ing older L-models. Sorta like how the Army switched over to the Apache D Longbows.
Quoting Wing (Reply 19): I wonder why you left AH64 Apache out of top 10?
Good question... I actually considered giving a single spot to all of the major attack helicopters, like the AH-64 / Eurocopter Tigre / Augusta A129 Mangusta / Mil Mi-28 Havoc / Denel AH-2 Rooivalk.
All of them provide essential close air support to the boots on the ground, and all of them can certainly ruin your day. But I decided against it because none of them really stand out. Even the Apache. Yes, the AH-64 is an incredible helicopter. Yes it packs an amazing punch. Yes its electronic wizardry is impressive. But lets face it... it has never accomplished the mission it was designed for: a massive tank battle on the plains of Europe. It's not optimized for urban combat - as proven in Iraq. And it's a very complex, and very expensive piece of equipment to be pitted against a $100 RPG.
Quoting A342 (Reply 20): The Mil Mi-26 isn't useful ??? LOL, do you know what you're talking about ?
No need to act like a jerk.
The fact that I gave the helicopter my #8 slot proves that I deeply respect it! But I stand by my comment when I said it has never been all that practical. (And yes, I was referring solely to the military aspect.) It's large. It's loud. It's expensive. It consumes a lot of fuel. It is not well protected against enemy mad-pads. It is NOT a particularly tactical helicopter. IE: It's not that practical on the battlefield. But nonetheless, it is an amazing helicopter and deserves a spot on the top 10 list.
You know, some people amaze me. It seems like they enjoy complaining, just for the sake of the complaining.
Quoting Acheron (Reply 21): The role of troop transport in the Hind is secondary, almost tacked on, so you can't expect it to be a good transport ship when its main role has always been the attack one.
Nonetheless, even in that role, it has deep issues.
Quoting Acheron (Reply 21):
Maybe I'm off here, but I don't think Apache pilots can "stick their heads out" and monitor the tail rotor, either.
Apache pilots aren't coming into tight and confined LZs to unload troops. If the Mil-24 is to be thought of as a serious troop transporter, then the ability to unload a infantry squad in confined areas is essential. And when you're maneuvering within that space, you need a set of eyes watching that tail.
And you need a large and efficient exit, for the troops to quickly extract from. (The Mi-24 doesn't have one)
You need the ability to perform unconventional insertions/extractions. (The Mi-24 cannot do many of these)
And the list can continue. In all reality, a true debate on the abilities of the Mi-24 deserves a separate thread.
Quoting Acheron (Reply 21): Most of those issues are solved on the Mi-35M2, with improved weapons systems and cockpit. Two large, color MFD's replace that silly paper-map rotator of the old hinds and reduce the amount of "steam gauge" instruments by quite a lot; and the cockpit allow's NVG use(being black, etc.). The old rangefinder was replaced with a FLIR turret that uses sensors based on SAGEM's technology.
That sounds great. But as a percentage, how many Mi-24 Hinds flying around currently meet those specs? The vast majority do not have those modifications.
Perhaps the modified version is truly a flying marvel. I haven't seen one, so I cannot make a judgment. But the ones I have seen and flown on are not what their reputation makes them out to be. They are overrated. Two thumbs down.
Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 25): Speaking of which, how are those Polish Hinds coping with the Iraqi climate? IIRC, Soviet Hinds had a rough time in Afghanistan. The airframes are prorbably getting on in years too for that matter.
Someone really ought to simply start a new thread on the Mi-24. It would probably be a good thread with a strong debate.
But to answer the question: it suffers. Plain and simple - they have many flaws that are unbecoming of a helicopter of such fame.
Yes, another great helicopter(s). I considered them, just as I seriously considered adding a slot for all of the major attack helicopters.
I hesitated adding this helicopter because of the vulnerability to heat seeking missiles. But if I did the Top 15 - this helicopter would definitely be on that list. I dunno - it was a close call.
---------------------------------
Anyway, I am currently in the process of redeploying home. (I am in Kuwait at the moment) and I won't be home for another week, and I doubt I'll be online for a few weeks after I get back (the wife needs attention ) So I won't be able to contribute much more to this thread for sometime. Great debate though, hope it continues!
Like you said, its not tactical, but I think it fits the strategic role very well, being able to transport BMP/BTR's into areas where a C-130/An-12 wouldn't be suitable because of lack of space, for example.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 32): Apache pilots aren't coming into tight and confined LZs to unload troops. If the Mil-24 is to be thought of as a serious troop transporter, then the ability to unload a infantry squad in confined areas is essential. And when you're maneuvering within that space, you need a set of eyes watching that tail.
The only role I think the Transport "capability" of Hind would actually be usefull is the insertion of SpecOps in a pre-set point that's adecuate for the helo, other than I that, it would be sheer lunacy to use it a la "Huey", were any spot counts.
But if needed maybe the infantry on the back could stick their head out and see, but that would probably get them killed.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 32): And you need a large and efficient exit, for the troops to quickly extract from. (The Mi-24 doesn't have one)
You need the ability to perform unconventional insertions/extractions. (The Mi-24 cannot do many of these)
Like I said, the transport role of the Hind is almost tacked on, and it should be taken into consideration most of the time.
Mind you, the Mi-28N has a compartment for pax, but mostly for wounded troops/downed pilots, or maybe to support such task like the AH-64's of the Royal Marines had to perform by carrying troops on their wings.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 32): That sounds great. But as a percentage, how many Mi-24 Hinds flying around currently meet those specs? The vast majority do not have those modifications.
Perhaps the modified version is truly a flying marvel. I haven't seen one, so I cannot make a judgment. But the ones I have seen and flown on are not what their reputation makes them out to be. They are overrated. Two thumbs down.
Well, at the moment, there are probably only 11, counting the prototype, the rest serving in the Venezuelan Army and Brazil bought some, too, I believe, but they probably don't even make 2% of the total. There is a video of the M2 somewhere in youtube, I'll try to find it.
Fumanchewd From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 35, posted (2 years 11 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 10756 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 30): #2 Bo 105 If you ever saw this one at an airshow you will know why this is so high up on my list. First Heli that was able to fly a loop
Licensed aerobatic helicopter pilots are a tiny fraternity in Europe. Pilot Rainer Wilke, a former German military pilot and the Flying Bulls’ only licensed helicopter pilot so far, is now training two more pilots–one for the U.S. Red Bull team and one in Europe for the Flying Bulls. He conducts most of the training in the U.S., where the weather is better. “We fly helicopter aerobatics under experimental rules, which impose fewer restrictions,” Wilke told AIN. Separately, there are two other licensed aerobatic helicopter pilots in Europe (a former and current Eurocopter test pilot), but they do not fly for the Flying Bulls.
Wilke said the group chose the BO 105 because it is the only helicopter authorized for such operations. “Normally, you need a legally aerobatic-licensed helicopter, but none exist,” he said. The only solution is therefore to get a special authorization from the manufacturer, which is what the team did. The Flying Bulls petitioned Eurocopter for permission to use the twin turbine for aerobatics, and the company gave its blessing.
“MBB [which later merged into Eurocopter] engineers had aerobatics in mind when they designed the BO 105 in the 1970s,” Wilke said. As a result, it can perform some of the same maneuvers–rolls and loops, for example–as a fixed-wing aircraft.
A feature of the BO 105 is its rigid (hingeless) rotor. “As an early rigid-rotor design, it has a huge safety margin built in,” Wilke said. Perhaps the most important safety benefit is that it is impossible for the rotor to touch the tailboom.
Boeing4ever From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4924 posts, RR: 49 Reply 36, posted (2 years 11 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 10747 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 32): Someone really ought to simply start a new thread on the Mi-24. It would probably be a good thread with a strong debate.
I'm on it.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 32): But to answer the question: it suffers. Plain and simple - they have many flaws that are unbecoming of a helicopter of such fame.
Figured as much. Lucky the Poles don't operate them in some of the much 'hotter' zones in the country.
B4e-Forever New Frontiers
Eagles may soar, but weasels are never sucked into jet engines!
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 28645 posts, RR: 70 Reply 37, posted (2 years 11 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 10748 times:
Right up there with "This Harbor is too shallow for torpedos"
Quoting Acheron (Reply 34): but I think it fits the strategic role very well, being able to transport BMP/BTR's into areas where a C-130/An-12 wouldn't be suitable because of lack of space, for example
Agreed, it would be a rear area bird.
But compare that with the CH-47 which has an extensive front line role.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Fumanchewd From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 39, posted (2 years 11 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10728 times:
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 38): Sovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1174 posts, RR: 7
Quoting A342 (Reply 33): A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 2174 posts, RR: 0
He placed the MI-26 in the his top 10, what more can you want? Its just his opinion and you look a little silly complaining about someone's opinion of a helicopter. Do you actually think that the MI-26 should be placed in anyone's top 5? That's a little over the top.
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 3952 posts, RR: 1 Reply 40, posted (2 years 11 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 10682 times:
Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 39): He placed the MI-26 in the his top 10, what more can you want? Its just his opinion and you look a little silly complaining about someone's opinion of a helicopter.
I'm not complaining about anyone's opinion. After all, everybody has the right to have his own opinion, and everybody has to respect it.
I'm just contesting the arguments with whom he is explaining his opinion.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 11242 posts, RR: 82 Reply 41, posted (2 years 11 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 10573 times:
Great thread, though I find myself almost entirely agreeing with UH-60FtRucker's choices, I'd have put CH-47/CH-53 in joint position.
Glad to see the Lynx get a mention, the Naval version sold well, it's Sea Skua ASM's saw action in the Falklands, wrecked a good part of Saddam's fast attack craft force in 1991. IMHO, the best small ships naval chopper ever built.
The army version was provided light lift, from Northern Ireland to Afghanistan.
Never a gunship, though the TOW's fitted killed Iraqi armour in 1991, and just before replacement by Apaches, in 2003 too.
The basic soundness of the design is proved by the recent contract to renew the design, from improved airframe to new engines and all new avionics.
Where does the AH-64 Apache figure in all this? Certainly in a top 20 list, though I agree the AH-1 was the pioneering type here, so deserves the higher billing.
I'd put the Mi-8 in a top 20 list too. Almost a DC-3 of choppers, there are so many out there. (Of course, on a smaller size scale, UH-1 is a rotary wing DC-3 too).
Mi-12 was an impressive monster, but it never entered service, to me, this is telling.
Mi-6 was a very impressive machine, two could carry a load of the fixed wing AN-12 transport.
Mi-26 is another very impressive bird, we have a shortage in the UK forces of choppers, I'd like to see a batch, say 6-10, of Mi-26's procured, fit UK standard avionics, self defence systems, though not a close to the battlefield type, it would release CH-47's for other duties, take a lot of the strain off them, the airframes would be cheap to buy too.
(Of course what also should be done is stop screwing around, and buy a shitload of new Merlin Mk.3's to replace RN Sea King HC.4 and RAF Puma support choppers)
Merlin itself looks very impressive, the ultility versions have seen action in Bosnia and more paticulary, right now in Iraq, the Naval version provided surveillance (including overland) and C3 in Iraq in 2003, way beyond their basic ASW role. Another one for the top 20, list.
I agree with L-188 on the Super Puma, but I'd put the combined Puma/Super Puma (or whatever EADS calls the latter right now), in a top 20 list. The RAF have always liked the Puma, (even re-furbing some ex South African AF ones for RAF service recently).
Vzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 778 posts, RR: 0 Reply 42, posted (2 years 11 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10563 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 30): Bo 105 If you ever saw this one at an airshow you will know why this is so high up on my list. First Heli that was able to fly a loop
I'm not sure if the CH-53 was the first helicopter to loop and roll, but it predates the B0-105 by several years. Here's some great footage of it. (And that's not at all to take away from Zimmerman's amazing Bo-105 antics!)
"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
I agree with most of it but somehow I believe there should be a place on that list for another European helicopter, even if it is just to pay tribute to Eurocopter who has produced some really great military (and civilian) helicoptpers.
The Hokum was designed to be small, fast, and agile it can perform loops, rolls, and "the funnel".
Black Shark has a co-axial rotor system that enables it a higher top speed. Unfortunately it was built in small Numbers because of funding problems but is in service with Russian special forces.
# Maximum speed: 350 km/h (189 knots, 217 mph)
# Cruise speed: 270 km/h (146 knots, 168 mph)
# Range: 1,160 km (720 miles)
# Service ceiling: 5,500 m (18,000 ft)
# Rate of climb: 10 m/s (1,970 ft/min)
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 3191 posts, RR: 2 Reply 45, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10259 times:
Quoting Sonic67 (Reply 44): Unfortunately it was built in small Numbers because of funding problems but is in service with Russian special forces.
I would include the Kamov Ka-50 Hokum and Ka-52 Alligator in the "almost" category together with the Comanche in the sense that they were not built or fielded yet (for the RAH-66, maybe never) in significant numbers to earn their "wings". A pity.
But there's a newsbrief in the Mar 07 issue of Air Forces Monthly which says that up to 12 Ka-50 and Ka-52 will again be built until 2015 mainly for the Main Intelligence Directorate(?) for special operations use and intelligence.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2906 posts, 
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 861 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2451 posts, 
B4e-Forever New Frontiers 
From Belgium, joined Sep 2006, 128 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10190 posts, 
From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1931 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 11242 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 2436 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 3191 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
