PLA Army's transport helicopters
- Thread starter Su-27 Pilot
- Start date
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
contrary to some belive, the pla's helicopter transdport force is not weak by any means. sure, it cna get more powerful lifts, but it seems to only use its copters for tibet missions currently
thanks to sinodfence updates
the mi-17, workhorse of the pla. i really like the v-5 and v-7 verients, probably almost as good as the s-70
notice the new dolphin nose on the v-5
some mi-17s have been armed
the well known black hawk. unfortunately, china only has 24. since they are still operating, it china be assumed china somehow managed to obtain spares
a good french helicopter. probably not as good as a mi-17v5, but still a good design.
primarily used for naval applications
so, anyone have information regardign chinas new 6000 and 10000 kg transport helicopters in development? should china buy more mi-17s until these new copters enter service?
thanks to sinodfence updates
the mi-17, workhorse of the pla. i really like the v-5 and v-7 verients, probably almost as good as the s-70
notice the new dolphin nose on the v-5
some mi-17s have been armed
the well known black hawk. unfortunately, china only has 24. since they are still operating, it china be assumed china somehow managed to obtain spares
a good french helicopter. probably not as good as a mi-17v5, but still a good design.
primarily used for naval applications
so, anyone have information regardign chinas new 6000 and 10000 kg transport helicopters in development? should china buy more mi-17s until these new copters enter service?
MIGleader, I think when someone says that the PLA helicopter force is "weak" They mean they don't have enough. The helo's they do have have are very rugged and servicable. By no means are they "weak"
The PLA should continue to purchase more mi-17 until a larger better lifting helo is avaliable.
In my 20 years in the USN I was in 2 helo squadrons. HSL-31 with the SH-2 Seasprite and HC-11 with the old reliable CH-46. The USN retired it's Seasprites some years ago and the the CH-46 fleet is being replaced with SH-60 variants.
You had a pic of a Chinese Blackhawk. I wonder how the PLA is maintaining these birds? Black market spare parts? Or some back engineering? Anybody know?
The PLA should continue to purchase more mi-17 until a larger better lifting helo is avaliable.
In my 20 years in the USN I was in 2 helo squadrons. HSL-31 with the SH-2 Seasprite and HC-11 with the old reliable CH-46. The USN retired it's Seasprites some years ago and the the CH-46 fleet is being replaced with SH-60 variants.
You had a pic of a Chinese Blackhawk. I wonder how the PLA is maintaining these birds? Black market spare parts? Or some back engineering? Anybody know?
MIGleader , according to sinodefence.com ..""The ground forces along total some 2 million troops and support personnel, or 80% of the PLA’s total manpower""... That's a lot of troops. The largest army in the world in fact. I don't know how many are actually combatants but I do know that 250 transport helos is not enough for suppourt. As an example the US Army a force of 500,000 active and 700,000 reservist and National Guardsmen has 425 CH-47 Chnooks and over 980(A & L) Blackhawks. (I searched several sites to get these figures)
So does the PLA does need more airlift capacity? I think so. More air transport capacity will help them be more mobile, flexible & create better logistics with the addition of more airlift capacity.
If I were the PLA I would continue procurement of mi-17's until a better airlift/logistics helo comes in service.
So does the PLA does need more airlift capacity? I think so. More air transport capacity will help them be more mobile, flexible & create better logistics with the addition of more airlift capacity.
If I were the PLA I would continue procurement of mi-17's until a better airlift/logistics helo comes in service.
Last edited:
the blackhawks are in pretty bad shape. But China was able to obtain very need spares a few years ago by going through the foreign humanitarian equipment loophole in the US export policies. But really, the blackhawks are almost used exclusively in Tibet for SAR missions.
250 is not enough..........
And the max that China can muster at all is 700.
The mainstay of China's chopper-transport force is the Z-9 and Mi-17.
The Z-9's long range makes it a good MP chopper, especially for SAR and SOF action where you don't need to lift too many people. But its payload is meager.
And it doesn't exactly fit the AH role......
The Mi-17 also serves a very robust chopper for PLA, able to perform and lift most missions/materials. It is in my eyes the perfect MP chopper in an army.
And since China learned to put rockets and MG on it. I think it is very convinent to perform amphibious/surprise missions, where you shoot your rockets off at forces in the field and then drop off your troops immediately. (But can they carry both together?) I don't think it is a very useful concept to put bombs on choppers on most scenarios (Not very common to dump bombs into foxholes or cave that are going down vertically.) They could use some ATGMs though in case some enemy tanks were around.
But as for the structure where they put the rockets and bombs, maybe they can put sheets over it to form lifting wings? (There were reports back in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there that Hips crashed while the Mi-6s did not because the wings allowed for safer, faster, and more reliable means of lift.) No armor? I guess that's OK, but they could use some chaff or ECM.....
Wonder why the Mi-17s had clamshell doors......
As for the S-70s, there can't be 24 flying. Some crashed.
A pretty chopper, but its sleek profile does not allow it to carry much internally.
The Z-11s are pretty useless in my opinion. Other than training and observation, there are basically nothing else it sould do. (Though I think if China got more Gazelles by any means, and put more fuel onboard, it would've been a better observer.) I am not too sure of the WZ-11s though. I would not get a lot of them, maybe for forward-recon and observation? Maybe it will be fitted with Kiowa-D style optics, weapons for support, and carry some FAC crew to a designated area?
The Z-8s could've replaced the Hips, but I think the land variant Z-8A failed its tests. And unlike the Hip, it has 3 engines.......
China could use some new heavy lifters.
The Mi-26s or Chinooks would work.
Maybe China could research in 20T heavy-lifters Chinook style? (Forgot name of rotor config., not penny farthing.)
China produces only 40 choppers per year though even with 1 dedicated lab and 2 factories....
And the max that China can muster at all is 700.
The mainstay of China's chopper-transport force is the Z-9 and Mi-17.
The Z-9's long range makes it a good MP chopper, especially for SAR and SOF action where you don't need to lift too many people. But its payload is meager.
And it doesn't exactly fit the AH role......
The Mi-17 also serves a very robust chopper for PLA, able to perform and lift most missions/materials. It is in my eyes the perfect MP chopper in an army.
And since China learned to put rockets and MG on it. I think it is very convinent to perform amphibious/surprise missions, where you shoot your rockets off at forces in the field and then drop off your troops immediately. (But can they carry both together?) I don't think it is a very useful concept to put bombs on choppers on most scenarios (Not very common to dump bombs into foxholes or cave that are going down vertically.) They could use some ATGMs though in case some enemy tanks were around.
But as for the structure where they put the rockets and bombs, maybe they can put sheets over it to form lifting wings? (There were reports back in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there that Hips crashed while the Mi-6s did not because the wings allowed for safer, faster, and more reliable means of lift.) No armor? I guess that's OK, but they could use some chaff or ECM.....
Wonder why the Mi-17s had clamshell doors......
As for the S-70s, there can't be 24 flying. Some crashed.
A pretty chopper, but its sleek profile does not allow it to carry much internally.
The Z-11s are pretty useless in my opinion. Other than training and observation, there are basically nothing else it sould do. (Though I think if China got more Gazelles by any means, and put more fuel onboard, it would've been a better observer.) I am not too sure of the WZ-11s though. I would not get a lot of them, maybe for forward-recon and observation? Maybe it will be fitted with Kiowa-D style optics, weapons for support, and carry some FAC crew to a designated area?
The Z-8s could've replaced the Hips, but I think the land variant Z-8A failed its tests. And unlike the Hip, it has 3 engines.......
China could use some new heavy lifters.
The Mi-26s or Chinooks would work.
Maybe China could research in 20T heavy-lifters Chinook style? (Forgot name of rotor config., not penny farthing.)
China produces only 40 choppers per year though even with 1 dedicated lab and 2 factories....
transport helicopter is definitely a working progress. I guess EC-175 and CMH will all probably be used as military transports in the future. With the help from Eurocopter, it will probably mean faster production rates. Mi-26 is still an interesting proposition. A Chinese military magazine claimed that China got the production line for Mi-26, but I haven't read any news on it since then.
Current Chinese copters:
Z-11: very light utility, doesn't have much usage
Z-8: very heavy, very archaic.
Z-9: probably China's biggest copter success story
Current Chinese copters:
Z-11: very light utility, doesn't have much usage
Z-8: very heavy, very archaic.
Z-9: probably China's biggest copter success story
Helicopter is definitely a weak point for the PLA and China as a whole. the situation is even worse than three decades ago. Before at least China can build Z-5 (Mi-4 copy) in significant numbers, but now there is no helicopter programme of large scale.
Z-8: only two dozens have been built so far. I don't know what's wrong with Jingdezhen/Changhe. They had the super frelon technology back in the 1970s but all they can achieve now is to build single-digit number Z-8 every year.
Z-9: Several hundred have been built but this type has too small payload.
Mi-17/171-17V5/V7: Good choice for the PLA army, but its technology is so outdated that China is not even bother to seek licensed production. Again, the number is limited compared to the size of the PLA ground forces.
I hope that China would make some progress in the 6t class medium helicopter programme. It is still too light for army transport role but at least its rotor and transmission design (the most difficult and complex part of a helicopter) can be used to develop a heavier transport helicopter.
There is also rumor that China is interested in buying some Mi-26 from Russia. Even if this is true, its number and use will be limited somply because the helicopter has very rigid requirements for take-off/landing site.
Z-8: only two dozens have been built so far. I don't know what's wrong with Jingdezhen/Changhe. They had the super frelon technology back in the 1970s but all they can achieve now is to build single-digit number Z-8 every year.
Z-9: Several hundred have been built but this type has too small payload.
Mi-17/171-17V5/V7: Good choice for the PLA army, but its technology is so outdated that China is not even bother to seek licensed production. Again, the number is limited compared to the size of the PLA ground forces.
I hope that China would make some progress in the 6t class medium helicopter programme. It is still too light for army transport role but at least its rotor and transmission design (the most difficult and complex part of a helicopter) can be used to develop a heavier transport helicopter.
There is also rumor that China is interested in buying some Mi-26 from Russia. Even if this is true, its number and use will be limited somply because the helicopter has very rigid requirements for take-off/landing site.