Matrix Games Forums

it the early 80s i was part of a troop of scimitar tanks which took trials in anti-helicopter trials, basically we where connected to a tape recorder plus other instruments and closed down, and had to try to engage helicopters, Lynx attack helicopters posing as Hind gunships and using their doctrine.

Well we had a field day, im not sure are 30mm cannons would have inflicted damage enough to shoot them down, but when the russians where on their attack runs, we had clear targets. their doctrine is not the same as Natos, they do not use so much nap of earth but rely more on mass firepower, now im sure any russian pilot worth his salt in battle would have thought stuff the rules, and done it nato style, though funnily enough they seemed to stick to that doctrine in afghanistan and chechyna?

Hi there Scarletto!

I was just reading a book on Soviet attack helicopter tactics last night (fluffy bedtime reading) and the author mentioned a couple of times that the Hind was really not designed to stay in a hover without the benefit of ground effect. It has those largish looking stubs directly under the rotor wash that make this extremely difficult. It may also be somewhat underpowered for it's size and weight. Consequently it has to be a bit more like a shark, always moving around. This forces a completely different style of tactics compared to NATO.

Of course, they had no worries about an anti-tank role given the relative balance of ground forces. Not much interest in being an artillery substitute either. Also no Army - Airforce interservice rivalry to fan the flames and give them a push. They were really more interested in flying in small recon and raiding / assault detachments than anything else, and for that the Hind looks pretty good.

My understanding is that WP doctrine was by far the tightest around. You do what the book says and that is it - absolutely no variations allowed no matter what the reality of the situation is unless you are a colonel or higher. This would apply to their helicopter pilots too.... FWIW, my guess is that their helos would have been shot out of the sky very quickly the instant they came up against any opposition. Being the aggressor, they would constantly have been flying over unsecured countryside. (This is before any consideration of friendly fire either.) The losses would have been truly horrible.

Cheers, Rob.

There is a video presentation done with a US Army Col on the Hind that they use for OPFOR. Some key bits that I remember are:

Hinds can "fly". This makes them a bit more like slow moving CAS. This filled a gap that was the A-10 in the US (Until SU25 came along?)

They are heavily armoured and will take considerable battle damage and keep fighting (this was bourne out in Afganistan when multiple stinger hits didn't always kill them).

From "Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army"

Soviet doctrine has them doing "popup" attacks, but they are not as manouvreable as US choppers.

They are used in pairs, but with two pairs operating together as a minimum. If you see 1 there are 3 more out there.

When they have air supperiority they can be used in diving attacks from 1000 ft using rockets, MG's and even bombs.

They are used in mass

They appear to be used as "flying tanks".


BTW US Trials in the late 70's showed that it is very hard for fast jest to shoot down choppers (especially when there is a lot of ground clutter, like in Europe). More moden missiles face more modern counter measures, so the helo is not a sitting duck (the Soviet doctrine has aircraft escorting the helo's to help keep the enemy off there back).


Cheers

Rob

interesting, was doing some looking up myself, we had a 30mm rarden cannon, firing clips of 3, the Hind could take the punishment from our cannon, unless we hit either of the rocket pods or the two rotors (mainly the nuts,not the blades) also the glass covering the pilots was believed to withstand them.

However as the 30mm was only able to really knock out brdms and possibly bmps, we always called them door knockers! bit like german a-t against the KV1s

the aim of a good gunner Ahum was to on a main tank to damage the viewing ports or drive wheels thus disabling the tank, it was either do that or use our speed to runaway very fast!!

but as recce we werent supposed to fight, so im sure we could have recced a route back to calais pretty well

How would helicopters change the battlefield?

This is one of those question's that make the period so fascinating. Plus it raises more questions. How flexible would the Soviets be in adapting to the battlefield? I think it is a safe assumption that U.S., British, and German forces were naturally more capable of conforming to a fluid battlefield.
Flying choppers would have been a dangerous mission in a war. SAMs, AAA, every grunt with a rifle, artillery shells, aircraft, bad weather, and don't forget freakin' power lines, all gunning for you. I remember playing a scenerio in TOAW, and my helicopter losses, as NATO, forced me to refine my tactics. Definatley a dangerous job.
What about it? I know there is at least one Cobra guy out there.

I seem to remember being told once that the South Africans had good success using VT-fuzed artillery against helicopter drop zones. I imagine this would have been a case of placing DFs on likely DZs and waiting for the helos to show up. VT would be useful as it would detonate 7-10m away from the ground, or the same distance from helicopters if they were in the way. Even if you missed the choppers you'd flay the troops they dropped as there would be no cover from VT on a DZ.T he tricky part would be getting the shells there in time, VT would help but only if the choppers were still under the flightpath of the shells.

FARPs would be an even better target for the same treatment if you could identify patterns in enemy helo movement. FARPs are also less of an instantaneous target.

Cheers
33

May I recommend contacting Captain Pat Proctor, of Brigade Combat Team/Armored Task Force fame. He's been incredibly helpful in my attemtps to model a Soviet defence I'm still plugging away at for our mod for Operation Flashpoint. He's an artillery officer, though he may have good "stuff" on U.S. Army helo doctrine, etc.