When it comes to military helicopters, which nation does it the best?

Easily Russia

The cobra is my favorite

Dont think there is one. Everyone has had their wins and failures.

>>34166699
Best helicopters in my opinion:
>Recon
OH-58
>Attack
AH-64
>Utility
KA-226
>Cargo
CH-47

Definitely the US. At one point it was Russia, but that ceased to be the case in the 80s.

>>34166699
Russians were cool up untill they tried to replace the Hind

>>34166738
Tell me real info not your shitty opinion.

File: pKK42uf_d.jpg (74KB, 640x480px)

74KB, 640x480px

Japan

>>34166764
>Tell me real info not your shitty opinion.
>4chan

Not gonna happen you retarded nigger faggot.

>>34166764
>Asks a question involving different criteria based on opinions of "best"
>Shows off newfag power lvl when opinion is given

>>34166764
theres alot of factors that come into play whats best for what when it comes to military vehicles. whats great for the soviet union isnt going to be the best for another country ex. sweeden

>>34166764
Die kiddo

File: RqM4Elp.jpg (5KB, 209x250px)

5KB, 209x250px

>>34166738
>Utility
>KA-226
>Bunch of bulky proprietary bullshit that has to be swapped out every time you want to carry something different
Your definition of "utility" clearly differs from mine.

Attack:
KA-50/KA-52
Recon:
KA-27
Utility:
MI-8
Cargo:
MI-26

The US.
>V-22
>all the H-60 variants including the stealth Blackhawk

The Ka-52 is probably better than the AH-64 but the generally inferior state of Russian air-superiority means that the Ka-52 is always at higher risk of getting shot down.

>>34166925
>V-22
That thing is a sarcophagus.

>>34166738
You mean Soviets. Russia didn't exist in the 1980s.

>>34166925

>X is probably superior to Y, but because of situation Z which has literally nothing to do with the X/Y comparison, Y is better.

kys

>>34166964
You might die of old age in it, yes.

It's the USMCs safest helicopter.

Congrats, you bought the meme.

>>34166968
>Russia didn't exist in the 1980s
Yes, yes it did.

ALL major arms developments for the Soviet Union came out of the Russian SFSR.

>>34166993
>ALL major arms developments for the Soviet Union came out of the Russian SFSR.

But that's where you are wrong, jimbo.

>>34166968
>Russia didn't exist in the 1980s.
ARE YOU RETARDED

File: AgustaWestland_AW-159_Lynx_Wildcat.jpg (344KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1280x853px

For a supporting craft on ships, anti-sub and general transport and fire support the Wildcat is nice.

>>34167013
Russia was still a thing dude, the Soviet Union is exactly as the name suggests a union.
It just added countries like Belarrusia and the Ukraine its still those countries combined

>>34167019
He is not. There was Soviet Union. There was Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic as a part of Soviet Union.

>>34166699
Nothing beats the Mi-8/17. NATO doesn't even have an equivalent to it

>>34167090
Moron, just because the official title of the country isn't simply "Russia", doesn't mean Russia didn't exist. All SFRs in the Soviet Union were called sovereign states. That's like saying there wasn't an East Germany, only a Soviet Union. It makes no fucking sense. Are you claiming that there's no Russia today because the country is officially titled the "Russian Federation"?

>>34167090
Holy God, nigger you ARE retarded.

File: Mi-24.webm (2MB, 630x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 630x360px

>>34166699

>>34167116
NH90 or CH53 would be comparable.

>>34166699

Russia did up until the point that they lost the ability to innovate, but the Hind is still the best at its job. For everything else as with all aircraft, pick American.

>>34167189
More expensive for little gain

>>34167065
>Russia was still a thing dude

That's all well and good, but the statement of "ALL major arms developments for the Soviet Union came out of the Russian SFSR" is wholly incorrect.

>>34167090

And the part of the Soviet Union that the Hind came out of was Russia, much like the part of the Soviet Union that made the T-72 was Ukraine, and that part of the Soviet Union that invaded Afghanistan was again Russia.

File: 12115989_888125024603107_1788591920099457674_n.jpgohe940341a704b52678cee5ac16ea0ff95oe56876ef2.jpg (30KB, 620x345px)

30KB, 620x345px

>>34166847
Ripporino
You were gone before your time and too good for us.

>>34167116
S61, which was ironically made by russian company

>>34167201
No, the hind is not the best.

At worst, it's a complete meme.

Reminder that the ancient UH-1 twin huey gunship pretty much does everything the hind does, complete with subsystems for nose turrets, weapon stations, while returning the ability to carry the same amount of troops and the same useful load.

>>34166738
RIP Kiowa

>>34167268
>ancient UH-1 twin huey gunship pretty much does everything the hind does
True, but it dies more easily. Hind was post-Vietnam war Huey. Soviets just couldn't afford to lose as much machines as Americans.

>>34167239
Sikorsky is an American company, retard.

Igor had emigrated here before he ever built a helicopter.

>>34167239
>doesn't have a ramp
Into the trash it goes

>>34167308
>True, but it dies more easily

Anything that can kill a huey will kill a hind. Nothing makes the hind a more harder target, does not have more armor, does not have harder to hit components.

I was being nice, BTW. Sans a nose gun, a Blackhawk with ESSS does a Hinds job better.

More range, more weapons options, more passengers, more payload, more everything.

A Blackhawk with ESSS is a better "hind" than the hind.

>Inb4 tards confuse the ESSS with the DAP.

>>34167268
>Reminder that the ancient UH-1 twin huey gunship pretty much does everything the hind does
Alright, I agree with you that the Hind isn't the best modern attack helicopter, but that assertion is ridiculous. The UH-1 doesn't lend itself well for a strict attack role because it is slow and less maneuverable. The payload isn't as substantial and the aircraft has a number of weak points in the hull (a side effect of troop carrying). The reason that the US threw so much into the development of the attack helicopter is the reputation of reliability and effectiveness that the Hind garnered in Afghanistan.

File: 1496627176864.jpg (51KB, 641x530px)

51KB, 641x530px

>>34167338
>does not have more armor

Am I the only person who likes the Kamov coaxials? Nice and compact because no tail rotor, easily adaptable for transport or ground attack, pusher conversion possible...

>>34167346
>The reason that the US threw so much into the development of the attack helicopter is the reputation of reliability and effectiveness that the Hind garnered in Afghanistan.

Apache flew years before Russia step foot in Afghanistan, not to mention the cobra.

Furthermore, while the hind is great in a straight line, they are not more maneuverable than the huey. Hueys turn faster, climb faster, etc.

>>34167338
>Anything that can kill a huey will kill a hind. Nothing makes the hind a more harder target, does not have more armor, does not have harder to hit components.
The cockpit is proofed against .50 and the hind has a max speed of nearly double that of a UH1, meaning less time in a killzone. That might not count for much nowadays with the advent of shoulder SAMs, but back when the main bane of helis was SPAAGs, it sure as shit made it less killable.

>>34167350
>muh 12.7mm """"""resistant"""""

>>34167338
>Anything that can kill a huey will kill a hind. Nothing makes the hind a more harder target, does not have more armor, does not have harder to hit components.
OК

>>34167387
The cockpit is resistant, not proofed.

The Hinds top speed that you are gathering is garnered from the "A-10" variant, which was completely stripped, and no where near representative of the actual hind variants.

The hind is faster, but not nearly twice as fast.

>>34167389
vs nothing resistant

>>34167384
>>34167384
>Apache flew years before Russia step foot in Afghanistan, not to mention the cobra
The Comanche bro, the Comanche. That was a program response to the Hind. While nothing came out of it, the government still saw fit to throw millions at the attack helicopter.

Also,
>step foot
It's set foot.

>>34167211
>Nizhny Tagil
>Ukraine

While I'd love to say the UK and Italy for the amazing helicopters they make together (and they are VERY good) it's impossible to not say the US.

Not only are the US ones very good, they also create a massive variety of them from large to small, and often times alternatives even in sizes. It's hard to get over the sheer catalogue of great aircraft the US makes.

File: 1024578.jpg (202KB, 1155x785px)

202KB, 1155x785px

>>34167323
hurr

>>34166770
Whats wrong with japan?

>>34167458
>it's impossible to not say the US.
>$60mln attack helicopter
>Crew can be hit by AK
Apache is great, but crew protection is meeeh.

>>34167447
>That was a program response to the Hind

WEW lady.

>>34167428
>twin hueys had/have no armor

Top jej

>>34167470
They haven't fought a war in 70 years. It's the same thing that happens to all countries that don't use their armies. They gather delusions about warfare.

>>34166770
>>34167470
That's just nose art, though.

>>34167486
>twin hueys had/have no armor
>Chickenplate in the seat as non-standard upgrade
>Still non-standard, even on brand new venom models
Well shit doc, I feel safer already!

Great thing about Mi-17 is how cheap they are (about 8 mil for a basic version), but after sales support is pretty nonexistent.

Some countries would abuse these helicopter before selling it off when everything fell down. D-check? The fuck is D-check

Some intrepid companies like Denel would buy these worn down helos, overhaul the entire parts before selling it to other african countries/transport companies. You could see that sometimes there's Mi-8/M-17 with some parts from Puma (cowl plugs, wheels, pitot cover,etc) that were adapted to these overhauled Mi-8

>>34166699
Russia hands down.

>>34167484
I mean that's why it has a 300 nmi combat radius compared to 100 nmi of the Mi-28. Where a Mi-28 may have 10 minutes on station to support ground troops the Apache would have 30 min.

>>34167694
Mi-28 is in it's own class of "super-heavy attack helicopters". And he's alone there. Ka-52 is a closest thing to Apache and it has better armor and ejection system for crew. K mod. is going to get an extremely powerful radar which may be better in some ways (key word - some, not all) that american and President-S IR jamming system which is much more advanced than ALQ-144 from 80th.

File: 1372358412894.jpg (371KB, 1800x1200px)

371KB, 1800x1200px

IS TIME

File: Z-10's on runway.jpg (309KB, 1280x860px)

309KB, 1280x860px

FOR CHINA

File: z-8-1262579290_81652.jpg (215KB, 1600x1125px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1600x1125px

>>34167808

File: 1385259208025.jpg (643KB, 1423x947px)

643KB, 1423x947px

It's gonna be sad when we finally get around to replacing these old Blackhawks

>>34167773
>President-S IR jamming system which is much more advanced than ALQ-144 from 80th.

Not more advanced the AAQ-24 nemesis.

Let's not forget there are a grand total of 80 ka-52s

File: UH-1Y Venom.jpg (84KB, 1152x768px)

84KB, 1152x768px

>>34167852

There's a reason the Marines use the Huey instead

>>34167870
>Not more advanced the AAQ-24 nemesis.
Do they even install it on Apache?

>Let's not forget there are a grand total of 80 ka-52s
104. Ka-52K are going to Egypt. As usual - foreigners get better stuff than RuMoD.

>>34167942
Marines don't use the Huey as a utility or transport heli. It's a completely different class.

>>34167773
Even the Ka-52 is not comparable because it really only excels at being a tank hunter. That's why the Russians did not send any to Syria.

>>34168034
never mind I guess they were used in Syria but not to the same extent as more suited COIN aircraft like the Havoc and Hind

>>34168034
>That's why the Russians did not send any to Syria.
That's just not true.
Ka-52 (unlike Mi-28) is fully suited for night operations and what about "only excels at being a tank hunter" anyway? What else they suppose to do? Search and rescue?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUwp9dp-A0w&t=130s

File: Kamov Z-10_1.jpg (67KB, 618x492px)

67KB, 618x492px

>>34167780
>>34167786
>>34167801
>>34167808

"Chinese"

>>34166699
Rhodesian Security Forces

File: Comanche.jpg (372KB, 1280x1421px)

372KB, 1280x1421px

>>34166847

File: mi-26.jpg (27KB, 546x474px)

27KB, 546x474px

Someone said Chinook.
There is only one famous Chinook and it isn't this one.

>>34166865
Slavaboo

>>34167116
Puma and its derivatives, Caracal beign the newest.

>>34170586
Pumas like to fall over and have a nice kip.
Tall and skinny with the mass up high.
I think my country have removed them from the inventory.
BTW I like the INVENT in INVENTory. Reasons.

File: armed Chinese Z-10 Attack Helicopter gunship PLA Peoples Liberation Army Air Force abcdefexport pakitan missile hj10 atgm rocket wz-10 radaraam WZ-9 turboshaft engine firing 4th 5 6 7 8 9akd-10 navy (3).jpg (397KB, 1600x1079px)

397KB, 1600x1079px

I know its chinese, but the WZ-10 looks pretty bad ass

>>34170687
Are Pumas really that dangerous? Do you know how it is with Caracals?
I personally like Caracals, they have high payload compared to both Mi-17 and AW-101 and supposedly good electronics.

File: f904060404fdb8e758bca00426077a92.jpg (194KB, 2048x1462px)

194KB, 2048x1462px

>>34166770
Subtle art also has it's magic.

File: 1200px-A_Royal_Air_Force_Puma_helicopter_over_the_English_countryside.jpg (173KB, 1200x742px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1200x742px

>>34170737
Your toys are several worlds, and countries, apart from ours.

File: H160_2014_49_57 (1).jpg (39KB, 630x342px)

39KB, 630x342px

Airbus and the other Euro companies make some pretty aesthetic stuff. H160

>>34170794
Lel, I am not French, but Merlins don't seem like a good helicopters, maybe beside working at sea. In terms of load they are slightly better to Caracals, with greater price tags and fuel consumption. I think it would be better for RAF to use only Chinooks.

>>34166865
>Attack:
>KA-50/KA-52
>Recon:
>KA-27
>Utility:
>MI-8
>Cargo:
>MI-26
all of these are objectively inferior to their American counterparts.

>>34166925
>The Ka-52 is probably better than the AH-64
How? It doesn't have half the sensors of the American vehicle?

File: russian mi-26 and jet ranger.png (583KB, 800x501px)

583KB, 800x501px

>>34171136
Small. Far away.

>>34166847
>>34167289
F

>>34166738
>At one point it was Russia, but that ceased to be the case in the 80s.
When was this Russia. They didn't have a comparable attack platform during the era of the Kobra, nor a comparable transport platform during the age of the Huey. The MI-8 is just all kinds of wrong, an aircraft that attempts to do both while succeeding at neither. I don't think the Russians ever held an edge over the US with helicopters.

>>34171192
I meant MI-24 fuck me.

File: andarealhelo.jpg (78KB, 700x551px)

78KB, 700x551px

>>34171174
You're not taking those anywhere near the front.

>>34167942
>There's a reason the Marines use the Huey instead

It's smaller and fits their existing ships.

>>34171225
Anything Russian is a combat aircraft. Reasons.
Russians did it with one of the big boy and got it really, really, wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Khankala_Mi-26_crash
Sad day.

Name one Russian attack helicopter which is better than Longbow Apache.
>protip : you can't.

>>34167239
>S61, which was ironically made by russian company
Saying Sikorsky is a Russian company is dumber that the anon claiming Russia did not exist.

>>34167447
>The Comanche bro, the Comanche. That was a program response to the Hind. While nothing came out of it, the government still saw fit to throw millions at the attack helicopter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_AH-1_Cobra

>>34171265
Mostly they have zero funding and can't upgrade.

>>34171269
>Anything Russian is a combat aircraft. Reasons. Russians did it with one of the big boy and got it really, really, wrong.
I'm tempted to say I told you so but let's be honest here, the Chinook and the MI-26 are totally different beasts. The Americans wouldn't build, nor would they ever want to build something like the MI-26 because they will never need to build something like the MI-26. The US will never use a chopper to do the things the MI-26 does, they are strictly meant for front-line transportation.

>>34166699
e

File: wallhaven-254045.jpg (659KB, 2048x1378px)

659KB, 2048x1378px

nothing will ever be this aesthetic imo

File: wallhaven-154097.jpg (248KB, 1920x1080px)

248KB, 1920x1080px

>>34171786

>>34166738
H-60(UH/SH) is better and more functional than the Kamov.

File: USMC%20Photo%20CH-53E%20041105-M-6237R-015.jpg (389KB, 3072x2048px)

389KB, 3072x2048px

CH-53E

>>34172047
PAVE LOW

>>34172163
Nah Sea Stallion

File: hulk.jpg (240KB, 1465x857px)

240KB, 1465x857px

>>34166847
>>34167216

What was so special about the Comanche besides its cool looks?

File: 1492850383424.jpg (870KB, 2000x1344px)

870KB, 2000x1344px

>>34171381
The Yankee Model was introduced in 2001 almost all that are flying now are new and not rebuilds of Novembers. also original Huey is best Huey

>>34171166

There was a lot of shit-tier """defense journalism""" websites talking up how the Ka-52 was better than the Apache so it seems to have stuck. Never mind that they were pointing to the aging AH-64D, which are all being fully upgraded to AH-64E standard

>>34171192
>The MI-8 is just all kinds of wrong
>world best selling helo
>wrong
ok

>>34166738
>OH-58
Kiowa pilots are a special breed. They're fucking insane.

>proof
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beq2T9kKLBw

>there will never be a helicopter as sexy as Hind
it's mediocre but it looks so goood