I may be wrong on this, but I thought that even up to the end the IJN wasn't really interested in ASW. It never seemed to get any sort of systematic attention, despite it's importance.
Nazi Germany has plenty of helicopters and sooner
- Thread starter Anthony Appleyard
- Start date
I may be wrong on this, but I thought that even up to the end the IJN wasn't really interested in ASW. It never seemed to get any sort of systematic attention, despite it's importance.
... which is odd, given that (at least in the '80s when my knowledge was more up to date) the JSDF had arguably (one of) the best ASW navy in the world.
First, as already mentioned, that would be subject to having air superiority, if not supremacy, in the area.
Second, yes, they could replace gliders, which the Germans did use in OTL, with the added bonus of being able to get away too - whence the use for medevac.
But, third, you'd need a veritable fleet of helicopters to make a meaningful contribution of shock troops - paratroopers, more likely, not SS - to "hot spots". It is more likely that the Germans would use them for the missions like the attack on Eben-Emael or the retrieval of Mussolini: very small operations.
Range also would be a problem. A glider depends on the range of the bomber towing it.
For the fans of Seelöwe, however, I can propose not the Kolibri but the Drachen, Fa 223, which did actually and historically make a test flight across the Channel in 1946 (or in 1945 but after the war anyway).
The Drachen could carry, IIRC, a 10-man squad in addition to its crew (with some of the men sitting on flimsy external seats attached to the outriggers!!!), or alternatively a Kubelwagen or a leFH, which, again, puts it in the same class as some of the actually used gliders and would make for something more than mere commando operations - again, if a veritable fleet is available and if the range is reasonable.
If you mate an air asset and a self-propelled ATG, you still need to expose both the air asset and the ground vehicle to the enemy's direct-fire reaction. That's because the self-propelled ATG needs line of sight.
The US doctrine did prescribe that tank destroyer units would come with integral recon - ground - assets. But the intention was that these assets (jeeps, armored cars, and dismounted patrols from them) would remain mostly unnoticed to the enemy tanks - the targets of the tank destroyers.
On the contrary, a helicopter is unlikely to remain unnoticed. So you'd have a mutual sighting first - which would warn the enemy - then the possibility of a mutual direct-fire engagement.
Not much of an advantage.
And, indeed, the Germans experimented with the helicopters serving as "eyes", but of indirect-firing weapons: artillery. Just like the Western Allies used light aircraft as artillery observers.
The enemy may well see the helicopter, but depending on visibility conditions, this might remain out of range for them. Then they are engaged by artillery they cannot immediately fire back at, because it's out of their LOS. They need to carry out counter-battery fire against it, provided they have adequate arty of their own, but first they have to spot the enemy battery.
105s are not as sexy as 88s, but overall they caused much more damage.
What was the actual cost of the colibri, and how hard was to train the pilot? If it was way cheaper than the Storch and training of the pilot was not realyl harder, well, german close recon could surpass everything aviable. If a large number of Kolibris would have been aviable, maybe the recon level of mechanized forces may have been improved a lot.
As for the Drache, again, large enough numbers may have seriously improved the pilot rescue efforts, some comamndo raids and medevac.
The Japanese had a plan for using Auto-gyros on cargo ships converted into small carriers for ASW but the army took over the ships before they were completed.
Really? Remember that this is the era before rotor-blades were foldable, so you're stuck with the machine as-is, which is going to make storage an issue.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Achgelis_Fa_330
Some ingenious storage solutions could, apparently, be devised.
Well Japanese had some autogyros.
As well as Soviets. Actually Soviets used one squadron in combat role in 1941 carrying some light bombs.
As did US and Britain, they are sometimes seen in the background in airfield pics. US Marines used them for supply and wound evac in some of the banana wars. In hindsight it would seem they would have been useful flying from cargo ships in the u-boat struggle, but there must have been a fatal fault since the war folks apparently didn't use them.
US doctrine was probably to deploy the Recce elements well forward of the TD to provide "early warning" and informations allowing the TD elements to set up ambush positions in kill zones. Back in the 70s we had a similar arrangement with the Recce and AT platoons in the fire support company of Infantry Battalions.
Using Helis as spotters has the problem, as you pointed out, that it signals to incoming tanks the general area where the ATG are, giving them time to call in either air or artillery support. Experienced forward observers only need a map and a quick look at a area to estimate probable locations for ATG.
