Z-10 thread

[Maikeru]

PS: I was just checking my sources / contacts too and as it seems, they will only be delivered in the final quarter of 2023.

So it's confirmed PA will be getting Z10ME? Do you know how many?

 

[Deino]

So it's confirmed PA will be getting Z10ME? Do you know how many?

Unfortunately not

 

[Hitomi]

PS: I was just checking my sources / contacts too and as it seems, they will only be delivered in the final quarter of 2023.

Anything from the grapevine about the engine used for this version? Is it still likely a WZ-9G?

 

[drowingfish]

So there's being recent talks of attack helicopters becoming increasingly obsolete as the role of loitering aerial missile platform is replaced by UAVs. It would appear that attack helicopters are way too expensive to risk in combat given its high vulnerability to missiles.

However, I want to remind everyone that there's one thing that helicopters can do that UAVs cannot, it can use terrain for cover. By lying in ambush behind a hill or treeline, helicopters can lay waste to entire armored column while only exposing itself for less than minute(assuming of course that it has ripple fire + fire and forget Atgms).
I'll also remind everyone that modern air launched Atgms actually outrange most ground based SHORADS, which means that a helicopter can engage ground targets at standoff ranges pretty much indefinitely.

I actually got this by reading ZhiHu, where I heard that during a single helicopter inflicted heavy losses and stopped the advance of an entire Brigade through the careful use of terrain during a PLA exercise. The main difficulty faced by ground troops being that :

-Helicopters can positions itself over steep, difficult terrain so that ground based AA have no hope of closing the distance even if the helicopter doesn't move at all.
-Again, using hills for cover, imagine a dot 3km away spontaneously appearing over a hill for less a minute. Chances are you are never going to see it before the helicopter fires all of its missiles.

Defensive ambush missions is what I believe attack helicopter will excel at in an evenly matched conventional war, aggressively using them in over unsecured or enemy held terrain(unless it's flat terrain devoid of vegetation cover) would quickly result in huge losses. I also imagine unguided rockets and auto cannons will see little use outside of clean up operations.

Again, terrain matters, we've all heard that the flat terrain of Ukraine is favorable to the tank heavy of armies of Russia, but in practice.....Ukraine has trees, lots of them and it heavily restricts engagement and observation distances.

this post aged well, helicopters were proven to be immensely useful in defense. the caveat here though was that ukraine's AD was garbage.

 

[gelgoog]

It is pretty obvious that you need to have the capability to strike with more range than opposing infantry and lightly armored units though. Preferably more than even most opposing armored columns. And IR stealth seems to be a pretty big issue.
I cannot say I am impressed with the levels of IR stealth and payload capacity of the initial Z-10 versions. But maybe this improved.

 

[by78]

Some high-resolution images of the 2nd generation HMD for Z-10 pilots.

 

[Breadbox]

this post aged well, helicopters were proven to be immensely useful in defense. the caveat here though was that ukraine's AD was garbage.

I say without a single shred of that I hope the military brass should play Commercial Wargames more.

Pretty much everything they do is managing an never ending conveyer belt of bureaucracy, regulations and babysitting, tactical consideration are just about the last thing on their mind.

Anyone who played Wargames would quickly realise that atgm helicopters are the quintessential defensive weapon, ground based AA are quite ineffective against them. Which are typically quite short ranged, usually being outranged by atgms, needing to advance ahead or along side front line forces to maybe protect against standoff helicopters, which is an impossible proposition due to their complete lack of armour and rarity.
The most reliable method would be to send an aircraft against it, fixed wing or helicopter

On a related tangent, I regularly see the US coping on why their 30 million reaper drone is actually completely ok and that it is better than having multiple cheaper drones. They will get fucking demolished in an actual drone war, drones are consumables, pure and simple, that 30million drone better be super sonic and Low Observability, but its not.

 

[drowingfish]

I say without a single shred of that I hope the military brass should play Commercial Wargames more.

Pretty much everything they do is managing an never ending conveyer belt of bureaucracy, regulations and babysitting, tactical consideration are just about the last thing on their mind.

Anyone who played Wargames would quickly realise that atgm helicopters are the quintessential defensive weapon, ground based AA are quite ineffective against them. Which are typically quite short ranged, usually being outranged by atgms, needing to advance ahead or along side front line forces to maybe protect against standoff helicopters, which is an impossible proposition due to their complete lack of armour and rarity.
The most reliable method would be to send an aircraft against it, fixed wing or helicopter

On a related tangent, I regularly see the US coping on why their 30 million reaper drone is actually completely ok and that it is better than having multiple cheaper drones. They will get fucking demolished in an actual drone war, drones are consumables, pure and simple, that 30million drone better be super sonic and Low Observability, but its not.

yes there is an actual term for it called bureaucratization of war. if you ever get to read a set of military orders nowadays it reads a lot like a business plan. very little "clever tactics" in there.

 

[by78]

Self-explanatory.

 

[pevade]

Self-explanatory.

Link to video?