PDA

View Full Version : Copters Quickly Becoming A Target of Choice in Iraq


rotornut
15th Jan 2004, 18:43
Copters Quickly Becoming A Target of Choice in Iraq
14.01.2004 [20:15]


Fallujah, Iraq - For Spc. Stephen Sadeo, a gunner on a Black Hawk troop transport helicopter, 6 o'clock means danger.
Not the hour, but the angle of approach of a shoulder-launched missile fired from the ground directly behind his aircraft.
"You scan and scan the landscape, but it is hard to see one bad guy pop up maybe a mile away. We travel in twos. He shoots when we are past. It's the trailing chopper that is really risky," said Sadeo, working on Black Hawks at Base Ridgway, the dusty home of Task Force Wolfpack, a helicopter team attached to the 82nd Airborne Division.
For guerrillas in this volatile region west of Baghdad, Army helicopters have become a target of choice. In two weeks, three choppers have been hit, killing 10 people. In one of those incidents yesterday, ground fire crippled an AH-64 Apache attack helicopter. The two crew members escaped from an emergency landing just north of Habaniyah.
Troops said that, for them, a turning point came Nov. 2, when 15 soldiers were killed when a CH-47 Chi- nook transport helicopter was shot down near here.
"Until November, things were pretty relaxed. Then we had to be more careful," said Maj. Thomas Von Eschenbach, executive officer for Task Force Wolfpack.
"Yeah, it got more serious after November," Sadeo said.
"If one of our helicopters goes down, it helps the enemy cause, partly because it makes news. It's always been like that," said Capt. Scott Jackman.
With increasing frequency, guerrillas are targeting U.S. helicopters with shoulder-fired, Soviet-designed missiles known as SAM-7s. Compared with rocket-propelled grenades, another weapon commonly used against helicopters in Iraq, using the heat-seeking SAM-7 requires careful maintenance and more skill.
"SAMs are expensive and harder to get," Von Eschenbach said. "These are things the locals don't have."
Base Ridgway is near Fallujah, arguably one of the most hostile towns for American forces in Iraq. Hardly a day goes by without some sort of attack on Americans either in Fallujah or to its west.
Yesterday insurgents fired rockets on U.S. troops in downtown Fallujah. The Americans shot back, killing at least two people. Blood stained the main commercial road through town.
It is in this hellish atmosphere that Task Force Wolfpack operates. Its low-flying helicopters provide cover for ground troops as they raid towns looking for guerrillas. If snipers take to rooftops or try to sneak up on the troops, the helicopters are ready with machine guns and rockets. From just 150 feet off the ground, they inspect roads for suspicious items that might be bombs. They escort convoys through treacherous territory.
"The satisfaction is to hear from the guys on the ground that things go better when we're in the air. We're kind of proud of that," said Warrant Officer Douglas Dolson, a pilot with Task Force Wolfpack.



The Washington Post, January 14

DynamicallyUnstable
19th Jan 2004, 02:27
Thought this might be a good spot for this. It is the audio only of an attack mission in Iraq with an apache. Like I said, it's audio only but it is still pretty harsh.

http://www.10thsfg.net/10thsfgftp/apache_mission_in_iraq.avi

Aser
19th Jan 2004, 02:39
If snipers take to rooftops or try to sneak up on the troops, the helicopters are ready with machine guns and rockets

Look at this...
http://www.jblong.com/files/apache.mpeg
Hard to see but shows the Apache's machine gun precision

rotornut
19th Jan 2004, 07:18
Study Says Iraq Insurgents Use Advanced Weapons -NYT
18.01.2004 [09:58]


Sat Jan 17

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Iraqi guerrillas are using increasingly sophisticated weapons and tactics to attack U.S. aircraft, according to a classified Army study on the downing of helicopters in Iraq, The New York Times reported in Sunday editions.
Citing senior Army officials in Iraq and the Gulf who were familiar with the study, the newspaper reported that at least one advanced missile was used by insurgents.

Rebels have used rocket-propelled grenades and heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles, the latter which require a degree of skill, in the attacks. Scores of U.S. servicemen have died in recent months in a rash of helicopter downings in Iraq.

The study found that no type of helicopter is more protected against, or more vulnerable to attacks.

But it recommended changes to help pilots evade ground fire, which the officials did not elaborate on. In the past, the Times said, changes have included flying more missions at night, with lights turned off to avoid detection.

According to Army officials, it was concern about the recent helicopter downings that prompted Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the senior commander in Iraq, to move beyond a standard review after such crashes and order in December a comprehensive study of all downings.

Army officials told the paper that one troubling finding is that on at least one occasion insurgents used an SA-16 shoulder-fired missile, which is harder to thwart than the SA-7 missiles and rocket-propelled grenades used in other attacks.

Officials did not specify which incident or incidents might have involved an SA-16.

The team that conducted the review was headed by Col. Stephen Dwyer, a brigade commander at the Army Aviation Center at Ft. Rucker, Alabama, the Times said. It included about a dozen forensic and weapons experts, crash analysts and helicopter specialists, and spent about four weeks in Iraq visiting the crash sites, taking soil samples and talking to aviators.

"This is a case of our Army coming through quickly with the right expertise at the right place," the Times quoted Maj.-Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the 101st Airborne Division as saying.

Reuters

Aser
20th Jan 2004, 02:20
First of all , excuse me.
Wasn't my intention to start a political or "war yes, war no" thread.
I'm not going to comment something without information, I've said that the video it's hard to see but I linked it just to show a "machine precision" , please don't go further without information.

Best regards.
Aser.

PedalStop
20th Jan 2004, 02:56
Heliport said it clearly in another thread - This Is Not A Political Forum. I have taken a heavy hand to cut the political discourse. Please help us keep the temperature to a low boil.

PedalStop

Dave_Jackson
20th Jan 2004, 03:37
The video was shown on TV a couple of days ago, but I can't recall whether it was a US or a Canadian station. The viewing audience was warned about its content beforehand.

RDRickster
20th Jan 2004, 23:32
I apologize to the rest of the forum members for taking this thread way outside normal boundries in my previous post. Normally, I avoid political discussions... I honestly respect a difference of opinion (when it is presented in the proper manner).

That said, it was a little more than I could personally bare when ............

Moving on...

Old Man Rotor
21st Jan 2004, 17:57
Your far to selective in editing this post......

Take out the offending Video Post, or leave the entire post untouched .

You are taking sides otherwise.

The point I was making, and making quiet strongly is why the locals were targeting helicopters. That reason Pedal Stop, is obvoius in Asers Video post.

Heliport
22nd Jan 2004, 00:58
There’s no bias or taking sides.
I don’t know because I haven’t discussed it with him, but PedalStop and I may well hold different views on the invasion and occupation of Iraq. However, what I know we do share is a determination to avoid bad feeling which frequently arises out of political disagreements. The risk of that happening is particularly high in this instance because the military action against Iraq is unarguably highly controversial and generates strong feelings for and against. We’ve already seen differences of opinion leading very quickly to personal attacks in just a few posts on this and a similar thread.
Opinions are divided world-wide about whether Bush’s motives for wishing to invade Iraq were honourable or dishonourable, whether he and Blair were honest or dishonest in the various different reasons they gave, whether there should have been an invasion, whether it was legal in international law, whether it should have occurred without the explicit approval of the UN etc etc etc.
These are political and legal issues far removed from helicopters and, in our view, far better suited to a political discussion forum which Rotorheads is not.

I understand the point you make about why military helicopters are attacked, and suspect you can rest assured people can work it out for themselves. Most of us tend to be more concerned about casualties/loss of life amongst our own forces, that’s human nature, but I'm sure most of us also wish to see an end of loss of life on both sides and the politicians bringing our forces home as soon as possible.
There's nothing wrong with posting video clips of helicopter action (news reports carry similar) but any accompanying comments of a political nature will be removed.

If anyone wishes to discuss the political issues, they can try starting a thread in the Jetblast forum. I can’t guarantee it will be allowed - the issues were argued exhaustively in the current affairs forum last year.

SASless
22nd Jan 2004, 08:25
Jet Blast is a waste of time Heliport....there is a Tea Server over there that gets his knickers in a twist anytime someone suggests standing erect for a belief is preferable to humming choruses of Koombahya....anyone that posts there is in direct fire of that person....and he will trod harshly upon anyone that knocks his table cloth askew. There is no free give and take in that forum despite the advertised ground rules. Anyone that posts there does so at his peril....particularly if you are known to sit up front of the bus...must be a case of Cyclic Envy or something.:mad:

Dave_Jackson
25th Jan 2004, 13:55
by Heliport ~ There’s no bias or taking sides. ` ` . ` OK. Just the facts (http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html)

RDRickster
25th Jan 2004, 21:37
Sorry, Dave... but many of your "facts" are completely WRONG. Some are accurate, but I'm not sure how this relates to targets of opportunity.

Red Wine
26th Jan 2004, 08:13
Post removed by Red Wine.

SASless
27th Jan 2004, 09:46
War is a dirty nasty business...always was...always will be. I understand the "full" video complete with audio was much more explanatory as to the lengths the helicopter crew and their superiors went in making the final decision to engage the target.

It was described to me that the Rules of Engagement were assessed definitively prior to command ordering the attack to begin.

One can make up his own mind about the "rightness" of that decision.

I see this as being a discussion about gun control...and supports my view that means rounds on target.:ok:

There was a Predator/AC-130 Gunship Flir Video several months back that barely got mentioned and was much more explicit than the video under discussion now. That video showed the coordination between the UAV observer and the Gunship crew. They hunted down specific individuals during an attack on a Terrorist base in Afghanistan.