Where did you get the max payload figures for the JH-7 and J-16?
The H-6K/J/Ns can carry upwards of 12 (some claimed 15) tons at most.
Z-21/Z-X heavy attack helicopter
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
The H-6K/J/Ns can carry upwards of 12 (some claimed 15) tons at most.
Pray tell, how did the Russians utilise their vaunted ka-52s to kill Ukranian armour? By sitting far back and using long ranges ATGMs. They stopped using them in hunter killer roles not because the lines are static or that Ukraine has nothing left, but because the attrition associated with such tactics were deemed excessive. Now we see very few helicopter shoot downs, on both sides.
As another user rightly pointed out, the most probable tactics associated with attack helicopter is escort duties in a paratrooper assualt, why would you risk such a expensive asset in a direct assualt when the PLA has enough munitions and suicide drones to clear the beach 10 times over. Since it's not a coaxial helicopter like the ka series, even sharpnel damage to its tail rotor will quickly bring it down deep in enemy territory, there is nothing to hide behind in the ocean.
If they are used to take control of airfields and ports, sure. But using helicopter assualt as a first wave against a well fortified enemy, even if severely depleted by bombardment seems like a insane tactic, they do not have the endurance and firepower to stay until the naval infantry comes to relieve them, least of all on a open beach under pre-sighted artillery.
Taiwan is highly urbanised. I have already provided an example where attack helicopters do extremely poorly in urban environments.
Speculation here but I feel like his definition of ’payload’ may have been ’Max weight of fuel + munitions’? At least that’s the only way the numbers make any semblance of sense to me
I see some question questioning the necessity of Z-21. One such necessity is overlooked, the high altitude payload. Z-10 isn't really Z-10 on Tibetan Plateau, to do the same job as a Z-10 on the low land, a Z-21 sized is must. This is a unique demand of China and India and Pakistan.
To be the logistics alone would be sufficient to upgrade even without significant capability increases over the Z-10. In the case of this Z-21 you are likely getting both.
The question is what happens to the Z-10s and it Z-19s in the long term?
Do they try to sell off a fleet to a friendly country, do they keep all these fleets?
The question is what happens to the Z-10s and it Z-19s in the long term?
Do they try to sell off a fleet to a friendly country, do they keep all these fleets?
plawolf
Lieutenant General
There you go with your inconsistent scenarios again. One minute direct assault isn’t necessary because all the firepower that will be unleashed with clear the beaches 10 times over, and the next it’s insanity because of how well defended the beaches will be that no amount of firepower will be enough to clear it. If using attack helicopters for beach assault is a total no-go, maybe you need to send a memo to the USMC and the PLAN to let them know all the LHAs and attack helicopters are useless.
People are not wrong that a valid use of attack helicopters in general would be escorts for air Calvary assaults. But my point is what specifically does the Z21 bring to the table that the Z10 and Z19 can’t already do. How much of a difference would a Z21 performing escort duties be compared to a Z10 to warrant the cost of a whole new category of attack helicopter?
Direct beach assault will be difficult and costly, but it can be done and even higher attack helicopter attrition in such an op would be worthwhile if that means less losses amongst the assaulting marines and being able to take the beach easier and quicker.
While you are obsessed with western no-loss thinking, the Russians and Chinese have never forgotten that everything is a consumable in war, and loosing some attack helicopters is a worthwhile price to pay if that allows you to achieve the objective. The key is to balance the costs against the gains to minimise losses.
To that end, the main point of the Z21s is to give the PLA more tools so they have more options to try and negotiate a lower butchers bill.
The alternative is to not have options and have to use cobbled together Mad Max gear and slow grind to victory through pure attrition as we are seeing in Ukraine.
Not really sure what the issue with the Gun is @tankphobia What exactly are you sacrificing by including a gun? Slightly better flight characteristics? Seems like a good trade-off.
My argument wasn't in regards to having a gun, that's all well and good, its against using attack helicopter in aggressive direct beach assaults like @plawolf was envisioning. It's like he ignored all the lessons learnt by Russia/Ukraine and applied the logic that PLA should just human wave its enemies by throwing waves of helicopters into needless harm when there are currently unmanned platforms capable of doing CAS.
Z-21 will be more modern, heavier payload with a longer range/endurance, likely will have all the upgraded sensors and equipment from Z-10 in the base version well integrated into the aircraft fuselage instead of ad-hoc looking. It will likely have OTH strike capabilities via a mast mounted radar, but flying tank it is not and it shouldn't be.
No amount of composite armour usable for a helicopter will be enough to stop even a single manpad from ruining the helicopter's day and with a limit production run of a few hundred, you'll be out of helicopters after a few assualts.
Both yourself and plawolf are correct though.
One would ideally not choose to use their attack helicopters (or any other asset for that matter) in a manner that puts them at inordinate risk, however if there are specific situations where placing them at greater risk is necessary to achieve particular vital goals then that is the wager one must do (and even in such situations you would want to use combined arms competently to support all of the committed assets the best you can, including your attack helicopters).
Regardless what side of the risk/reward spectrum one chooses, the benefits of a heavier, more well armoured and more capable and more survivable attack helicopter are obvious.
I don't know if it's just me or I feel like we're sorta on a the wrong track for imagining what the new attack helo look like. I was looking at Huitong's enhanced contrast ver of the bottom up view and it kinda dawned on me. What if we're misguided by the first leaked image?
I feel like it's unlikely CAIC would abandon Z-10's design language. So what if instead of Apache like square "cheeks", its sth like Z-10's polygonal design so that the cross section looks more like a diamond? A "stealthy" cross section like Z-10 would also help with more internal space no?
I feel like it's unlikely CAIC would abandon Z-10's design language. So what if instead of Apache like square "cheeks", its sth like Z-10's polygonal design so that the cross section looks more like a diamond? A "stealthy" cross section like Z-10 would also help with more internal space no?