Development of helicopper warfare - I need some recomment

[hellheaven1987]

Recently I have been closely studying the development of mechanized warfare during post-WWI and WWII, which brings me the idea that helicopper is the next stage for mobility. Unfortunately, I have very little knowledge about the development of helicopper and how its warfare evolves, can anyone suggest a few books regarding the development of helicopper and its warfare?

[Adar]

I think Donald Rumsfeld had similar ideas...

But I think that anyone considering Helicopter warfare must be aware of the battle of Najaf, at best it shows the limitations of helicopter warfare. At worst it shows that anti air capability makes attack helicopters unable to replace other heavier units as strike craft.

I think your thesis should centre around the history of Hueys (Iroquis and Cobra), Hinds and the Apache. They are the front runners of helicopters used as strike craft.

Here is a good article regarding the Hind

[hellheaven1987]

My idea is to use helicoppers as mobile machine to transport infantry to critical points or chase enemy, not as a can opener. I reconize that current gun ship or assault helicopper are still too weak against anti-air weapons, hence should use more as long range support instead solo...

[Frederich Barbarossa]

Well helicopter warfare mainly evolved in the 60s. After the Korean war, helicopters were used as scouts, or to pick up wounded. It was in the 60s where mass production, and recognition of the helicopter was brought in with the Bell in Vietnam. Due to this, this mainly led to the design of the famous Apache, because the government wanted an assault helicopter, more then a transport one.

[Ramashan]

It really comes down to power. The power of the Helicopter to perform more complex and greater tasks on the battlefield.

When Helicopters were first introduced they were fairly small and couldn't carry very much. The first use in US warfare I believe was Korea where they were primarily used as medivac and recon work with a small degree of supply transportation. You could easily put two wounded soldiers on the skids, you could hover over an area to take detailed recon notes, and you could land in rugged areas for drop offs. That was the real beauty of it, it got where traditional vehicles and planes could not.

But it was limited in its weight carrying ability until around 1953 when the dual rotor version was built. But these were very cumbersome. And all Helicopters of the era were fairly easy targets.

By Vietnam the power of the machines had greatly increased making them capable of carrying heavier loads and many people. Due to the rugged nature of the land, they were perfect transport vehicles, but still maintained their medical and supply use. Because they needed to fly into a danger zone they were armed with machine guns and rockets to either soften up the landing zone or defend the zone during take off. But it seems they were used mostly to get the soldiers in and out of the AOE.

Through the late 70's and into the 80's Helicopters grew in power and because of greater armourment could be used on seek and destroy missions, which the soviets first capitalized on in Afghanistan. But the greater use in combat zones also aided in greater ability to fight them.

That's just a quick over view from my limited knowledge, but to me, the role of the Helicopter in war evolved as the power of the vehicle did. Unlike planes which started as recon vehicles and pretty quickly, with little additional power, became fighter planes in a single war.

[hellheaven1987]

Well...

Helicopper was first deployed on Korea War, as for rapid medicial evaluation and some transport missions; it was not impressive since the weather of Korea is not favor for helicopper, and the tech limit further restrict its use on Korea War.

It seems the first attend to mass use helicoppers was, irony, French. The close study of First Indochina War suggests that French had intention to rely on helicopper to provide rapid supply transport, medical evaluation and rapid deployment. Unfortunately, due to financial limit French never had more than dozen of helicoppers, and the heavy casualty helicopper suffered during Battle of Dien Bien Phu further retarded the helicopper warfare development among French military.

Fortunately, American resurrected the idea again, irony, because of Vietnam again; the idea to use helicoppers as tool for rapid transport was extremely important during Vietnam War. However, Vietcog and NVA soon adopted new anti-air tactic would cost heavy casualty on helicoppers. Nevertheless, the idea remains active and popular even today.

Now, it is up to this point that I don't know how helicopper warfare develops; it seems the idea of heavy gun ship was only developed after Vietnam and realistic in Afghanistan during Soviet Invasion, which I have little knowledge. The development of helicoppers also became more complex from this point, from assault helicopper to small, scout helicopper. It also seems that the anti-air ability for helicopper is still very poor, as some battles, such as the disasterous Battle of Mogadishu (I know, Farnan is going to argue it is not a disaster) where many helicoppers were heavily damaged. Nevertheless, it seems it is still an effective weapon even the heavy casualty it suffers...

[lawless_sage]

yes i have heard the helicopter be called the modern version of the chariot. i'll try my best to get you a good link

[removeduser_052420]

That's so ing awesome, that the Helicopters are named after Native American Tribes.

[Farnan]

Look at Operation Anaconda for a modern example of the use of helicopters for what you suggest. Also look into the Russian General Staff's review of the Soviet War in Afghanistan for Soviet use of helicopters.

A book to look at is "We Were Soldiers Once and Young." Describes the first major use of helicopter born soldiers by the US Army.

The helicopter is vital in current operations in Afghanistan.

[Bovril]

Helicopters are great when the user has complete arms superiority. However, if you look at the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, you can clearly see the limitations of the helicopter when the opponent has useful means of combatting them. Since so much warfare that we posters here care about is incredibly asimetric in terms of the resources of the combatants helicopters are still going to play a large part, but if there was a more complicated war they would not have the same virutal immunity they do in our (US and UK) invations of poor middle eastern states.

[hellheaven1987]

Well, my study suggests that (not focus on helicopper but from other unrelated study) the current state of helicopper is unsuitable to use as can opener; in fact, against an organized defence helicoppers would usually got slaughtered.

Hence, helicoppers would limit to supportive role and rapid deployment, which has quite similar role as airborne assault. Either way, it seems that besides infantry, there is no good can opener for current military operation.

By the way, I also notice that assault helicopper is more or less replacing CAS, which is an ill role for jet fighter.

[Angrychris]

Helicopters propel up from one spot and is slow. All critical reasons for fast and farther for being better.

[Ramashan]

Aren't the swing wing planes seeing more use in the Middle East Wars these days? (I'm completely blanking on their names at the moment.) Vertical take off and landing with greater speed and altitude.

[Remison]

What exactly is a "can opener"

[hellheaven1987]

What exactly is a "can opener"

"Can opener" refers those military units use to break through enemy line.