Should Police helicopters be armed?
Thinking that the item was at my fingertips I have just turned out all my Air Beats to find that it was not there! This suggests that I read the words and saw the pictures in Rotor.&.Wing and my back issues of that are not comprehensive.
Off the top of my head then … I am pretty sure it was San Bernardino County Sheriff CA, they carry and use H&K MP5s as well as their sidearms and a while back made a big thing about how they ran courses in firing from their [then] MD500s.
What I do not know of course is whether the publicity led to the unit being told to quietly drop the practice!
The dangers of posting with a transparent 'handle' methinks!
Off the top of my head then … I am pretty sure it was San Bernardino County Sheriff CA, they carry and use H&K MP5s as well as their sidearms and a while back made a big thing about how they ran courses in firing from their [then] MD500s.
What I do not know of course is whether the publicity led to the unit being told to quietly drop the practice!
The dangers of posting with a transparent 'handle' methinks!
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PANews
You are correct in that "San Berdoo" as we know them, do practice from aircraft. Its all as a result of a Helicopter chasing some Bank Robbers some years back. Quite an aerial display of firepower if Im correct. They now train for the next one..
I also get Air Beat. Name is on the rolls somewhere.....
You are correct in that "San Berdoo" as we know them, do practice from aircraft. Its all as a result of a Helicopter chasing some Bank Robbers some years back. Quite an aerial display of firepower if Im correct. They now train for the next one..
I also get Air Beat. Name is on the rolls somewhere.....
Arming UK Police helis
The only time I wish my police heli had a couple of pods of 2.75" is when I'm flying south along the M5 and I see yet another white caravan heading toward Devon. Often find myself reaching for a non-existent MASS...
I am aware of a mission exactly like the one PANews describes. It is no longer operational, as far as I'm aware, but was tasked to patrol a very large and potentially sensitive federal reservation (non-military). They did not leave the area they protected.
The helicopter was heavily armed and armoured. It was a commercial, civil registered helicopter, operated by civilians under Part 91. It's most distinguishable external feature was it's roll-up doors, which were unique, to my knowledge, for that model!
The operator told me there were other similar operations in existence. None of this was a big secret, simply why tell anyone about it, when unless they are ignoring that razor wire and those signs that say "Trespassers will be shot" you need never fear it?
The helicopter was heavily armed and armoured. It was a commercial, civil registered helicopter, operated by civilians under Part 91. It's most distinguishable external feature was it's roll-up doors, which were unique, to my knowledge, for that model!
The operator told me there were other similar operations in existence. None of this was a big secret, simply why tell anyone about it, when unless they are ignoring that razor wire and those signs that say "Trespassers will be shot" you need never fear it?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm strikes a chord,
where have i seen this before, ah yes, it was the early 80's
anyone remember blue thunder?!
modified gazelles all round then!
in all seriousness, in that fictional show the pilot often went into aerial combat with the 'baddies' etc, what is to say chaingun failures apart (jamming on and straifing the houses of parliment?) , that in the heat of the moment your average 355 or 135 pilot wouldnt do the same?
where have i seen this before, ah yes, it was the early 80's
anyone remember blue thunder?!
modified gazelles all round then!
in all seriousness, in that fictional show the pilot often went into aerial combat with the 'baddies' etc, what is to say chaingun failures apart (jamming on and straifing the houses of parliment?) , that in the heat of the moment your average 355 or 135 pilot wouldnt do the same?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SE England
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Body armour, cuffs etc.
I have to reply to some comments relating to the recent death of DC Oake.
As a police officer who has been teaching his colleagues how to use handcuffs, batons, CS, strikes etc for some seven years, I, too, asked why on earth a raid on suspected terrorists was not carried out with armed support and the use of restraints. This sort of op can never, ever be considered a "breeze" and I sincerely hope the head of whoever did so, rolls. The difficulty is the cowardice of senior officers in acting in such a way that affords their cannon-fodder some little protection, lest somebody shouts, "human rights (of the terrorist)!" It makes my blood boil that, yet again, a PC has been sacrificed before some people wise up to the reality of dealing with desperate men.
Sadly, I agree only too vociferously with the comment that only when British police officers are, "dropping like flies," will anything change.
In the meantime, as a heli-flying plod, it heartens me to read that so many of you professional rotorheads are on our side - it restores my faith in the public!
As a police officer who has been teaching his colleagues how to use handcuffs, batons, CS, strikes etc for some seven years, I, too, asked why on earth a raid on suspected terrorists was not carried out with armed support and the use of restraints. This sort of op can never, ever be considered a "breeze" and I sincerely hope the head of whoever did so, rolls. The difficulty is the cowardice of senior officers in acting in such a way that affords their cannon-fodder some little protection, lest somebody shouts, "human rights (of the terrorist)!" It makes my blood boil that, yet again, a PC has been sacrificed before some people wise up to the reality of dealing with desperate men.
Sadly, I agree only too vociferously with the comment that only when British police officers are, "dropping like flies," will anything change.
In the meantime, as a heli-flying plod, it heartens me to read that so many of you professional rotorheads are on our side - it restores my faith in the public!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arming police helicopters
It would now appear that this was not such a wild scheme as most of you thought and serious thoughts by experienced and well trained anti-terrorist agencies are in the works.
I can remember it being said that 'British police officers will never carry arms like their contempories in the USA'. Never say never!
If police officers can carry guns, with the intent to use them, then why is it unacceptable to some of you that helicopters cannot be armed for the same purpose, and be more effective.
If a situation exists where an armed helicopter would be effective then it should be used.
The MH68A Sting Ray is already heading that way or so I'm led to believe.
I can remember it being said that 'British police officers will never carry arms like their contempories in the USA'. Never say never!
If police officers can carry guns, with the intent to use them, then why is it unacceptable to some of you that helicopters cannot be armed for the same purpose, and be more effective.
If a situation exists where an armed helicopter would be effective then it should be used.
The MH68A Sting Ray is already heading that way or so I'm led to believe.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: near where aanok and aaly live.
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This would be a good way to stop the joy riders, take a few out then hell, the crime rate would go down very rapidly
Cant see the do gooders liking it though
Cant see the do gooders liking it though
Lots of issues here!
For a start ... if we are talking UK alone there would be hysterics in the CAA and the aircraft would probably have to go to Public Aircraft status [ie off the G- register] and then it depends what you think is actually happening elsewhere.
The USCG operations are 'just' offering a sharpshooter with the ability to knock out one or two outboard engines... although the politicians are talking about getting 'machine guns' up there to spray everyting liberally in fact there is very little of it about outside of the MGM studios. One of two US forces practice spraying gunfire out of the side doors ... but it is not really an efficient way of going on.
Most US officers carry sidearms and other weaponds for potential use once on the ground. Hand guns, cyclic and collective tend to mean you run out of hands somewhere in the plan....
Others may disagree.
For a start ... if we are talking UK alone there would be hysterics in the CAA and the aircraft would probably have to go to Public Aircraft status [ie off the G- register] and then it depends what you think is actually happening elsewhere.
The USCG operations are 'just' offering a sharpshooter with the ability to knock out one or two outboard engines... although the politicians are talking about getting 'machine guns' up there to spray everyting liberally in fact there is very little of it about outside of the MGM studios. One of two US forces practice spraying gunfire out of the side doors ... but it is not really an efficient way of going on.
Most US officers carry sidearms and other weaponds for potential use once on the ground. Hand guns, cyclic and collective tend to mean you run out of hands somewhere in the plan....
Others may disagree.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
Nice idea but from personal experience, I think this unfortunately NOT a practical proposition.
Some years ago I was involved in the inception of procedures and in-flight training in an anti-terrorist role for a para-military organisation (I can't disclose where this was, please don't ask).
The regulatory body would only allow single aimed shots to be fired, mainly for reasons of aircraft safety.
For an airborne sniper (or call him what you will) to be effective, he needs a clear shot and a steady platform from which to fire, which of course means exposing the aircraft to return fire.
However, a slow flying helicopter presents a very easy and soft target, both the occupants and aircraft itself are highly vulnerable to small arms fire. A terrorist/s on the ground is likely to be behind cover and would possibly be using semi or fully automatic weapons. He would, therefore, most likely have the upper hand in respect of firepower, aim and vulnerability.
If a contact were made, resulting in a fire-fight, the pilot may need to manoeuvre the aircraft quite violently. If this occurred whilst firing from the aircraft was in progress, it is impossible to aim and there is a great danger of a self hit, especially of the rotors. For this reason, military aircraft have fixed or gimbal mounted weapons with gun gimbal movement "stops" to prevent an over-enthusiastic gunner shooting his own aircraft. Free hand held weapons such as pistols are especially hazardous in aircraft because a small wrist movement markedly changes the direction of fire.
Basically, then, the concept involves strongly conflicting requirements within the aircraft. Can't see it ever being practical, sorry.
Some years ago I was involved in the inception of procedures and in-flight training in an anti-terrorist role for a para-military organisation (I can't disclose where this was, please don't ask).
The regulatory body would only allow single aimed shots to be fired, mainly for reasons of aircraft safety.
For an airborne sniper (or call him what you will) to be effective, he needs a clear shot and a steady platform from which to fire, which of course means exposing the aircraft to return fire.
However, a slow flying helicopter presents a very easy and soft target, both the occupants and aircraft itself are highly vulnerable to small arms fire. A terrorist/s on the ground is likely to be behind cover and would possibly be using semi or fully automatic weapons. He would, therefore, most likely have the upper hand in respect of firepower, aim and vulnerability.
If a contact were made, resulting in a fire-fight, the pilot may need to manoeuvre the aircraft quite violently. If this occurred whilst firing from the aircraft was in progress, it is impossible to aim and there is a great danger of a self hit, especially of the rotors. For this reason, military aircraft have fixed or gimbal mounted weapons with gun gimbal movement "stops" to prevent an over-enthusiastic gunner shooting his own aircraft. Free hand held weapons such as pistols are especially hazardous in aircraft because a small wrist movement markedly changes the direction of fire.
Basically, then, the concept involves strongly conflicting requirements within the aircraft. Can't see it ever being practical, sorry.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Just over there....no there.
Age: 61
Posts: 364
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To hit home the vulnarability question of helicopters to small arms fire just have a look at the "Black Hawk Down" incident.
If you fly low and slow over a mob armed with AK 47's you are asking for trouble.
I like the idea of stopping joy riders, hellfires maybe or just forward firing 12.7mm? I don't think wire guided missiles would work very well in built up areas though would they?
Would the car owners insurance cover missile strikes?
If you fly low and slow over a mob armed with AK 47's you are asking for trouble.
I like the idea of stopping joy riders, hellfires maybe or just forward firing 12.7mm? I don't think wire guided missiles would work very well in built up areas though would they?
Would the car owners insurance cover missile strikes?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont tell the cheif constable of n wales about arming his chopper he will want to use it to stop the speeders i bullet for 5% over the limit
short burst for 20%
and a rocket for 100%
lol
ps dont tell s biggee either
short burst for 20%
and a rocket for 100%
lol
ps dont tell s biggee either
Sorry Folks....differing view here...just did our Aerial Door Gunnery Quals...day and night. Issue revolves around being able to select your target and avoid harming innocents. It can be done if care is taken. Night time is especially efficient unless the other side has night vision devices too. Done right, the Good Guys have the advantage...done wrong...you are in deep dog doo. We also must remember all the legal issues as well...military engagements make it simple...law enforcement confuses things.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shooting Back
Police air wings that have an anti terror capability are at a distinct disadvantage compared to thier miltary cousins in that they fly unarmed aircraft. Fast rope insertions from an unarmed aircraft place both aircrew and ropers in a sitting duck if they are fired upon from the surface. For this role in particular armament for self defence/fire support would seem ideal. As for permanently arming police helo's, that would seem unnecessary in a day to day sense. Maybe in some parts of the world.....
Wouldn't that make police helicopters attractive targets to the bad guys, forcing you down to tactical levels, or up out of small arms and accurate observation levels?
I think you were on the right track HT when you said:
If a situation exists where an armed helicopter would be effective then it should be used.
If we are talking counter terrorism, then I am assuming the terrorists are no where near the hostages, are standing unprotected from the sky, are readily identifiable as terrorists, are situated in such a tightly controlled tactical environment that would not allow fratricide, and have not prepared well enough to bring a weapon to counter the air threat. Then the helicopter is armed with a sufficently accurate point weapon capable of standoff ranges, stabilised sighting systems, and a crew sufficiently practiced in the firing of live ordnance on a range filled with multiple other users, all co-ordinated by a practiced fire control centre...etc, etc, etc...
Pretty unlikely dont you think?
Love Monkey I think you have made your own answer: a police helicopter should not be fast roping into counter terrorist situations, armed, armoured, or what ever. Helicopters should avoid such a scenario at all costs, and if ever it is required, why not let the military (who train day in day out for this worst case) take the hits?
Especially given that the level of training to complete this operation is extreme, and the likelyhood of it being tactically viable is incredibly small.
Which sort of brings us back to where we started.
Nothing is set in stone... but ... most police aircraft are fairly small and therefore less capable than some to be inserting arms teams. If the certification authorities allow it perhaps dropping four skid mounted armed officers on a roof is reasonable but a Huey or the like would do it better.
Who is it serving if the only available aircraft is lost to damage because it flew too low and took the flak on a mission that could be undertaken in only a few extra minutes by stairs or lift [elevator]?
Certainly not the officers on the ground to whom air support is their [only] eye in the sky.
Just what is air support for?
The aircrew to have 'fun' or the safety of officers on the ground?
Nothing is set in stone... but ... most police aircraft are fairly small and therefore less capable than some to be inserting arms teams. If the certification authorities allow it perhaps dropping four skid mounted armed officers on a roof is reasonable but a Huey or the like would do it better.
Who is it serving if the only available aircraft is lost to damage because it flew too low and took the flak on a mission that could be undertaken in only a few extra minutes by stairs or lift [elevator]?
Certainly not the officers on the ground to whom air support is their [only] eye in the sky.
Just what is air support for?
The aircrew to have 'fun' or the safety of officers on the ground?
