Comments on: Why Helicopter Missions in Afghanistan are Unusually Dangerous

By: Blacktail

Blacktail — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:34:47 +0000

I’m surprised nobody else so far has mentioned that rotorcraft perform poorly at high altitudes, and that ALL of Afghanistan is at a very high altitude.

It’s obvious that helicopters would be dangerous to fly in A-stan — does ANYBODY bother to study the flying conditions in the places we have to fight?

By: Firehand

Firehand — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:35:17 +0000

I think it was a special ops guy who once said “A helicopter is not an aircraft; it’s a bunch of parts that happen to be flying in close proximity.

At least for the moment.”

By: GeekLethal

GeekLethal — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:35:29 +0000

Hey to be fair everything’s delicate to some degree. Look even at tanks. It’s not so terrifically hard to throw a track, and then where are you.

Walking that’s where.

By: Phelps

Phelps — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:51:04 +0000

Fixed wing pilots sail through the air. Helicopter pilots beat the air into submission. Sometimes the air wins the fight, and that’s just the way it is. The more fights helicopters start with the air, the more the air will win.

By: Vstress

Vstress — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:47:55 +0000

Flying in by a fixed wing aircraft that has rough airfield capability on a true rough field is even more dangerous. It’s an inevitable cost we need to pay – we have to fly helicopters – there really is no other choice.

A tad of a silly article from popular mechanics to be fair – normally they suggest solutions. This is not a solution, just finger pointing for no reason.