A really good point 7x7.
Utility, recce, gunship helos all need good visibility as aircrew must be able to see and hear ground-fire as they normally operate at the coal-face of operations. That is why the Huey, Kiowa, Sperm were so good for their roles. Conversely, any helo with an air-conditioned cabin, more vision impairing ironmongery surrounding cockpits - as in so-called stealth attack helo designs - and inboard mounted defensive weaponry will arguably be less suited for close-quarters battlefield support than the fore-mentioned types.
Review of the book APACHE by Ed Macy reveals some of the pluses and minuses of the Apache and those aspects mentioned above are discussed. FLIR is beaut technology for reconnaissance; but if 2 heads are more in cockpits peering at screens and/or through monocles or HUD, then visual observation capacity is arguably further diminished.
Project Air 87 acquired the Tiger '... to replace the capability currently represented by the Bell 206B-1 (Kiowa) and UH1-H (Iroquois) gunship helicopters with a new reconnaissance and fire support capability for the land force early in the next century.' But Tiger will be inadequate on both counts in my view.
Consider this extract from the very comprehensive US Army study of Vietnam War operations:
'...While many (US Army) gunship crews liked the speed, agility and hard-to-hit slender lines of the Cobra, there was another faction that preferred the old Huey gunships since the door gunners not only provided additional eyes and ears but could lay down suppressive fire to the rear of the helicopter…The debate between the two factions went on through the war.’
But sticking with armed recce for now; the Kiowa could have been very cost-effectively upgraded and appropriate certified weaponry mounted as required. That would have provided an adequate capability and the Kiowa is of course actively employed in Afghanistan.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 14th Jul 2010 at 04:16.