From the perspective of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, more than 20 Ka-52s and Mi-28-NMs have been shot down so far. We must consider whether this expensive armed helicopter is needed with such a low survival rate. Would it be a better choice to use a lower-cost surveillance drone?
First of all, let’s look at the significance of the existence of armed helicopters.
Most of the time, the main task of armed helicopters is to use rockets to provide fire support to ground armed forces or to attack opponent tanks or armored vehicles through anti-tank missiles. Generally speaking, it is a kind of equipment responsible for suppressing enemy ground forces.
Advantages of Drones
Today’s integrated surveillance drones can also achieve this effect with lower cost and efficiency! A family of armed helicopters costs tens of millions, while a surveillance drone costs less than one million dollars.
Armed helicopters still spend a lot of time and money on training pilots. If they are shot down, the loss will undoubtedly be huge; while the UAV will not have this problem, the lower unit price can compensate for the ammunition load’s disadvantage with the advantage of quantity. There is no need to consider the problem of the loss of pilots.
Drones have another advantage.
Compared with armed helicopters, survivability is stronger! UAVs can attack the ground at an altitude of thousands of meters without getting close. From the perspective of the Russo-Ukrainian War, most of the losses of armed helicopters were caused by portable anti-aircraft missiles when rockets were used for short-range air support or shallow and deep interception.
Laser-beam-guided anti-tank missiles even hit some of the gunships that were shot down. And drones at an altitude of thousands of meters will not encounter this situation. To sum up, I think that in the future, armed helicopters will most likely be replaced by integrated drones for surveillance and attack!
