It all speculative from my part , but I think too much resources are put into this Z-21 , it kinda feels like the J-16 program for me.
Like the idea of producing 4th generation aircraft when you have a 5th gen ,it just bit too late to the party ,and kinda feels like a half measure , if the Z-21 showed up with the Z-20 that would be a different story , but almost a decade later kinda make it awkward.
You mean like how the USAF is buying F15s again in 2024?
Numbers matter, having something operational in the field matters because no amount of paper drawings will win wars for you.
The Z21, like most contemporary Chinese designs, are evolutionary, not revolutionary in approach, and I think for the next decade or so, this ruthless focus on practicality and deliverable outcomes will be redoubled as China enters its period of greatest danger of being sucked into a major powers direct war before its comprehensive power becomes too overwhelming for the west to have any chance in a direct war.
China will seek to play it safe for the most part to ensure a baseline product can be delivered on time and on budget and in sufficient quantities. They can then roll out upgraded variants later to fully realise the platforms full potential. Just look at the J10 and J20 develop journeys as great examples.
So while the Z21 might not be as ‘sexy’ as US next gen attack helicopter concepts, that very fact is a strength, not a drawback. Because the Z21 is drawing on a mature technology (Z20) to design something along a well trodden and proven conceptual path of a heavy conventional attack helicopter. This should ensure smooth and quick development and delivery of a platform with a ready made playbook for operational employment.
The risks of going out of the box with next gen designs is that you may spend a lot of time and money and end up with nothing, just the latest example.
I think the idea that attack helis should be used in a opposed landing against a peer opponent is a dangerous idea. Even at Hostomel where the Russians pretty much caught the Ukranians completely off guard, 2 helicopters were lost just crossing the Dnieper towards the airport from manpads.
Once the war heated up the frontlines were no longer safe for helicopter usage, with severe attrition of CAS aircraft on both side, now both sides limit helicopters to NLOS weapons or angled rocket launches.
An older example of this is the 2003 attack on Karbala in Iraq by a huge force of 31 Apaches. The use of urban environment as cover and dispersed weapon teams allows the Iraqi army to cripple almost the entire force of Apaches, almost purely through machine gun fire.
A heavy attack heli armed to the teeth with NLOS weapons lobbing them at obstructed targets guided by its mast mounted radar, 5 km behind the front seems like a more reasonable use case. CAS can be done by squad level suicide drones, there is no need to risk an expensive helicopter.
Your argument and counter examples makes little sense because you are getting caught up in getting trying to achieve a zero loss scenario where losses cannot be avoided. So in your effort to achieve zero loss, you write-off entire strategies as non-viable and make your assets who’s greatest strength is speed into little more than long range missile trucks.
Attack helicopters, like all assets, need to be used in conjunction with other assets to achieve specific goals and objectives.
The primary purpose of attack helicopters are to hunt and kill enemy armour formations.
Even in the total mess that is the Ukraine war, we can see attack helicopters shine when given the opportunity to fight to its strengths, as evidenced by the all the kills racked up by the Russians during the Ukrainian ‘great’ counter offensive.
Attack helicopters have been less effective in Ukraine in most other times simply because of how static the front lines are and how few tanks and armoured vehicles the Ukrainians have left.
When Ukrainian armour does make an appearance on the offence, they are usually spammed by artillery, ATGMs, Lancets and FPVs etc before Russian attack helicopters can get within range.
In a Taiwan scenario, the purpose of attack helicopters like the Z21 will be to be the tip of the spear to first hit the beaches in the wake of overwhelming full spectrum comprehensive bombardment to draw out what survivors there are and engage them to either destroy them directly, or allow other friendly assets to engage them after baiting them out of cover.
For this mission, the biggest advantages the Z21 will have over the Z10 and Z19 will be armour and endurance.
Whereas the Z10 is designed as a medium attack helicopter that relies on speed, agility, sensors and jammers to avoid being hit, the Z21 will be a flying tank that is designed to take a beating and still be able to return home.
The rationale is simple, it’s better to draw the enemies remaining firepower onto the Z21s than have them go after Z20s full of troops.
After the beachhead is secured, maybe even as it is being secured, I would expect Z10s and Z19s to play to their strengths and range deep behind the lines to hunt and engage enemy reinforcements heading towards the coast to delay, degrade and maybe even destroy them to minimise pressure on the landings.
