Attack Helicopter - in Action

In Action

The 1990s could be seen as the coming-of-age for the U.S. attack helicopter. The AH-64 Apache was used extensively during Operation Desert Storm with great success. Apaches fired the first shots of the war, destroying enemy early warning radar and SAM sites with their Hellfire missiles. They were later used successfully in both of their operational roles, to direct attack against enemy armor and as aerial artillery in support of ground troops. Hellfire missile and cannon attacks by Apache helicopters destroyed many enemy tanks and armored cars.

In 1999 during the Kargil War, the Indian Air Force and the Indian Army found that there was a need for helicopters that can operate at such high altitude conditions with ease. The limitations of attack helicopters from operating with high payloads and restricted maneuverability led India to the develop the Light Combat Helicopter that can operate in high altitudes. These helicopters will be used by the Indian Air Force and the Indian Army aviation wing.

The "deep attack" role of independently operating attack helicopters came into question after a failed mission, during the 2003 Gulf War attack on the Karbala Gap. A second mission in the same area, four days later, but coordinated with artillery and fixed-wing aircraft, was far more successful with minimal losses.

In 2011, France and Britain sent Eurocopter Tiger and AgustaWestland Apache attack helicopters to Libya. The primary objective of the 2011 military intervention was to protect civilians in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1973. Within days of the Apaches deployment, it had completed a variety of tasks such as destroying tanks, checkpoints held by pro-Gaddafi forces and vehicles carrying ammunitions loyal to Muammar Gaddafi. The attack helicopters were reported to be far more effective than the fighter jets which had previously been given the task of completing the aforementioned tasks.

Read more about this topic:  Attack Helicopter

Famous quotes containing the word action:

    Talk that does not end in any kind of action is better suppressed altogether.
    Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881)

    We call the intention good which is right in itself, but the action is good, not because it contains within it some good, but because it issues from a good intention. The same act may be done by the same man at different times. According to the diversity of his intention, however, this act may be at one time good, at another bad.
    Peter Abelard (1079–1142)