- Joined
- Feb 29, 2004
- Messages
- 1,720
- Points
- 248
Other Post good info on helicopter
- Thread starter Drone_pilot
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 367
- Points
- 18
Frickin' Awe Inspiring!!
roc;WOW!!! Hell of a site. Even though some of the videos have been removed, there is still a lot of information on AIRMOBILE/AIR ASSAULT. I did that!!
war;;salute;
roc;WOW!!! Hell of a site. Even though some of the videos have been removed, there is still a lot of information on AIRMOBILE/AIR ASSAULT. I did that!!
war;;salute;
- Joined
- May 31, 2004
- Messages
- 356
- Points
- 53
I'm glad he added the stuff about the German helicopters, they were way ahead of everyone else.
The guy went a llittle overbaord cutting down the Marines, yeh they believe their own propaganda and their TO&E would be more efficient if they would cut the reporters and photogs down to one per squad, but I think that their aviation today makes more sense then what the Army is doing.
I think he had already established his conclusions before he started writing because he had to look far and wide for arguments to support him, most of those arguments having been discarded long ago. One such argument is the heavy lift theoriy that was discarded in favor of the utility aircraft option. I don't think the guy has any real experience with helicopters and just gets his information second hand from what he reads, which he carefully selects.
He stopped his analysis of helicopter use in Viet Nam at LZ X-Ray and then jumped to Lam Son 719 which he places in the wrong year. I don't think he has much experience with APC's either, his much vaunted M-113 could be punched up by a 12.7 just like a Huey and there was a reason why APC guys slept outside of their track. He makes much of smokeships, they were a great novelty but were only moderately effective. Most of his arguments involving gunships assume that we met the VC in platoon or larger size units and 12.7's were the order of the day, but most of the time we barely encountered a squad of a half a dozen guys. I can count on both hands (well, maybe one shoe off) the times we were involved in actions where Charlie could muster more then 20 guys. I cannot beleive he thinks we would have an advantage if our aircraft were painted a different color! How absurd!
His logic contradicts itself, he thinks that a reasonable alternative to a combat assault would be to deliver troops in pods carried under CH-54's and then criticizes the Marines for using CH-46's. He also states that Viet Nam is mostly flat so it would be suitable for armor, this is simply not so, the only place suitable for armor was the coastal plain. He also suggests that more airborne operations should have been used. Why? It takes a lot less planning to conduct a combat assault. He complained that we did not use pathfinders on CA's, heck no, we also didn't send Charlie an engraved invitation.
I really object to all the artwork he plugged in without acknowledging the artist, some of those guys I know because I have purchased thier work.
OK, I think this guy is a wannabe who probably develops computer war games where you do not have to deal with the real world. Rants over.
Rotorwash
The guy went a llittle overbaord cutting down the Marines, yeh they believe their own propaganda and their TO&E would be more efficient if they would cut the reporters and photogs down to one per squad, but I think that their aviation today makes more sense then what the Army is doing.
I think he had already established his conclusions before he started writing because he had to look far and wide for arguments to support him, most of those arguments having been discarded long ago. One such argument is the heavy lift theoriy that was discarded in favor of the utility aircraft option. I don't think the guy has any real experience with helicopters and just gets his information second hand from what he reads, which he carefully selects.
He stopped his analysis of helicopter use in Viet Nam at LZ X-Ray and then jumped to Lam Son 719 which he places in the wrong year. I don't think he has much experience with APC's either, his much vaunted M-113 could be punched up by a 12.7 just like a Huey and there was a reason why APC guys slept outside of their track. He makes much of smokeships, they were a great novelty but were only moderately effective. Most of his arguments involving gunships assume that we met the VC in platoon or larger size units and 12.7's were the order of the day, but most of the time we barely encountered a squad of a half a dozen guys. I can count on both hands (well, maybe one shoe off) the times we were involved in actions where Charlie could muster more then 20 guys. I cannot beleive he thinks we would have an advantage if our aircraft were painted a different color! How absurd!
His logic contradicts itself, he thinks that a reasonable alternative to a combat assault would be to deliver troops in pods carried under CH-54's and then criticizes the Marines for using CH-46's. He also states that Viet Nam is mostly flat so it would be suitable for armor, this is simply not so, the only place suitable for armor was the coastal plain. He also suggests that more airborne operations should have been used. Why? It takes a lot less planning to conduct a combat assault. He complained that we did not use pathfinders on CA's, heck no, we also didn't send Charlie an engraved invitation.
I really object to all the artwork he plugged in without acknowledging the artist, some of those guys I know because I have purchased thier work.
OK, I think this guy is a wannabe who probably develops computer war games where you do not have to deal with the real world. Rants over.
Rotorwash
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 367
- Points
- 18
oOPS
Sorry, bro. I didn't read the bullsh*t, I just looked at the pretty pictures!!!
gren;
Sorry, bro. I didn't read the bullsh*t, I just looked at the pretty pictures!!!
gren;
- Joined
- May 31, 2004
- Messages
- 356
- Points
- 53
GunBunny, as i re-read my last post I sounded pretty harsh and I don't want you to take offense. The post had very good info as far as German helicopters and events up until Viet Nam, then he started to go wrong.
I went on the site and they said the site was put together by "experts" yet I could not find the name or credentials of one of the experts.
Brings me back to an earlier time when one of my colleagues loftily explained that we were "experts." Our supervisor defined an expert for us: an "ex" is a has been, and a "spert" is a drip under pressure.
Regards,
Rotorwash
I went on the site and they said the site was put together by "experts" yet I could not find the name or credentials of one of the experts.
Brings me back to an earlier time when one of my colleagues loftily explained that we were "experts." Our supervisor defined an expert for us: an "ex" is a has been, and a "spert" is a drip under pressure.
Regards,
Rotorwash
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2009
- Messages
- 367
- Points
- 18
Not a problem, bro!
Similar threads
