China 1,000th military helo for Army Aviation, PLA reach a new milestone

[jhungary]

1. Z-9 is licence to mass produce in China, engine & system made in China not from Europe. Z-9 is the most number in PLA Army.
View attachment 324020 View attachment 324021


2. Home made helo numbers more than ur count.
View attachment 324023

Z-9 Helicopter is not from overseas Factory.
They all made in China Factory, from Engine to System. Made in China's Factory.

And Your Number for WZ-10 and WZ-19 Combat Helicopter is Wrong.



My Suggestion for you, Don't Read Wiki*edia too much



Nice Pictures, brother
Tell us many things.

Just because you make it does not make it a Chinese product.

Most IPhone are made in China, does that mean the IPhone is actually a Chinese Product?

And no, I read Chinese defence Blog too, my number is different than Wikipedia

I wonder the difference between China domestic engines and TurboMeca engines.
As I read Z-10 can't reach the max performance because less power engines ( adopted from WZ-9 engine)

To begin with, Z-10 is light/medium attack helicopter, and being light/medium helicopter, they are bounded to be underpowered.

If we class Z-10 under US designation, the type will be scout helicopter, which will put them in OH-58D class, but the only thing Z-10 different thanOH-58D is the reconnaissance package.

 

[cnleio]

To begin with, Z-10 is light/medium attack helicopter, and being light/medium helicopter, they are bounded to be underpowered.

If we class Z-10 under US designation, the type will be scout helicopter, which will put them in OH-58D class, but the only thing Z-10 different thanOH-58D is the reconnaissance package.

"Z-10 is light/medium attack helicopter ... If we class Z-10 under US designation ... which will put them in OH-58D class ... " I have no idea how u feel Z-10 looks like OH-58D ... the date looks huge different, here like u point out the pickup truck as same as a mini vehicle, i like ur humor ~!


Helo specifications from wiki ... OH-58D, AH-1, AH-64, WZ-10

OH-58D

AH-1

AH-64

WZ-10

 

[jhungary]

"Z-10 is light/medium attack helicopter ... If we class Z-10 under US designation ... which will put them in OH-58D class ... " I have no idea how u feel Z-10 looks like OH-58D ... the date looks huge different, here like u point out the pickup truck as same as a mini vehicle, i like ur humor ~!


Helo specifications from wiki ... OH-58D, AH-1, AH-64, WZ-10

OH-58D
View attachment 324065

AH-1
View attachment 324066

AH-64
View attachment 324067

WZ-10
View attachment 324068

View attachment 324071
View attachment 324072

Dude, READ ENGLISH PLEASE.

I said Z-10 is a light/medium attack helicopter like (FOR EXAMPLE) OH-58D. I did not say Z-10 is exactly look like or even ACT LIKE OH-58D. In fact, by saying Z-10 lacking sensing package, I am saying exactly OPPOSITE of what you said I claim.

Z-10 have a payload of 1460KGs.
OH-58D have a payload of 1342 KGs

Compare to the big guy

AH-1Z have a payload of 2890KGs
AH-64D have a payload of 2980KGs

In the US, we class the attack helicopter with payload, and Z-10 would have been class as the same as OH-58D simply because it got more payload than MD-500 and MH-6, but significant less payload than both AH-1Z and AH-64D. So, if US Army were using Z-10, they would simply slot them into Scout Helicopter. SAME CLASS AS IN OH-58D

I never even claim Z-10 and OH-58D looks alike. And if you don't know what other people say, maybe you should not say anything so you don't embarrasses yourself.

 

[cnleio]

Dude, READ ENGLISH PLEASE.

I said Z-10 is a light/medium attack helicopter like (FOR EXAMPLE) OH-58D. I did not say Z-10 is exactly look like or even ACT LIKE OH-58D. In fact, by saying Z-10 lacking sensing package, I am saying exactly OPPOSITE of what you said I claim.

Z-10 have a payload of 1460KGs.
OH-58D have a payload of 1342 KGs

Compare to the big guy

AH-1Z have a payload of 2890KGs
AH-64D have a payload of 2980KGs

In the US, we class the attack helicopter with payload, and Z-10 would have been class as the same as OH-58D simply because it got more payload than MD-500 and MH-6, but significant less payload than both AH-1Z and AH-64D. So, if US Army were using Z-10, they would simply slot them into Scout Helicopter. SAME CLASS AS IN OH-58D

I never even claim Z-10 and OH-58D looks alike. And if you don't know what other people say, maybe you should not say anything so you don't embarrasses yourself.

Payload ... just one parameter, if i following ur logic, Mi-171 carrying with rocket pods must belong to heavy-class armed helo, Mi-171 payload(4,000kg) more than AH-64D ....

U just give us a bad example, to compare the WZ-10 medium armed helo with OH-58D light armed scout helo ~!

WZ-10:SUV payload 4x crews

OH-58D: Mini payload 4x crews

Big-Foot payload 2x crews. U might think Big-Foot is lower class than Mini, isnt' it ?

 

[cnleio]

@jhungary I never see OH-58D carrying 8x ATGM photo, usually r 1~2x ATGM + 1x rocket pod ... if OH-58D can equip 8x ATGM together put the photo here, ths !

 

[yantong1980]

C'mon Leio, leave that troll, his specialities are badmouthing, undermine anything Chinese and his 'mission' to 'feeding' everyone for his logic. It waste time to debated bogus chinese that chinese haters. Please continue to this interesting Z-10 discussion.

 

[BoQ77]

@jhungary I never see OH-58D carrying 8x ATGM photo, usually r 1~2x ATGM + 1x rocket pod ... if OH-58D can equip 8x ATGM together put the photo here, ths !

Your logic isn't true.
Why they must put such a quantity of ATGM to a light scout helicopter while the mission belong to other armed helicopters those have more capability, available in their inventory?
Put a gun onto a Toyota pickup doesn't turn it to a Humvee.

 

[jhungary]

@jhungary I never see OH-58D carrying 8x ATGM photo, usually r 1~2x ATGM + 1x rocket pod ... if OH-58D can equip 8x ATGM together put the photo here, ths !


View attachment 324283
View attachment 324284
View attachment 324285
View attachment 324286
View attachment 324287

Dude, I never see Z-10 carry 4 troop beside the 2 pilot....

Again, PAYLOAD, means cargo, it can be missile, guns, bombs, fuel, it can also be soldiers.

I said, the Z-10 would have been the same class due to the same Payload, I never said Z-10 and OH-58D share the same duty, In fact, I said the opposite of what you claim I said.

Payload ... just one parameter, if i following ur logic, Mi-171 carrying with rocket pods must belong to heavy-class armed helo, Mi-171 payload(4,000kg) more than AH-64D ....
View attachment 324272
View attachment 324280



U just give us a bad example, to compare the WZ-10 medium armed helo with OH-58D light armed scout helo ~!

WZ-10:SUV payload 4x crews
View attachment 324273


OH-58D: Mini payload 4x crews
View attachment 324274


Big-Foot payload 2x crews. U might think Big-Foot is lower class than Mini, isnt' it ?
View attachment 324275

You do know UH-1H Huey can either be a transport or you can bunch 2x rocket pod and tuen it into a gunship itself, right?

So, how do you class UH-1H? A Gunship or a Utilities Helicopter? If we follow your rules, then it cannot be both, then either I have to use my UH-1H like a gun ship only and class them as Gunship, or I have to use UH-1H like a transport helicopter and class them as Utilities. And that does not make sense..

The same goes OH-58D (which can carry 4 soldiers and 2 hellfire), and UH-60 (Which can be unarmed, lightly armed or armed like a gunship)

In the US, we don't have what you called "Armed" helicopter, we have heavy class, scout class, and light class, they can all be armed to the teeth or not, they can also be a medivac helicopter.

In a sense.

UH-60 will be the same class with AH-64D, it does not matter when we are talking about a Medievac UH-60 (Which is unarmed) a Spec Op MH-60 (Which would be armed with 2 machine gun) or a Battlehawk (Which was armed with 8 hellfire and 2 rocket pod.)

I don't know, nor care how China classified their helicopter, my post to @BoQ77 is about how US would class Z-10, not how China would class Z-10, unless you are saying you know more than me about how US class their helicopter?

By the way, Mi8/Mi17 and CH-47 are a different class of helicopter, called "HEAVY LIFT"

Again, if you don't know the stuff people are talking about, don't chime in. or it will make you look bad

 

[yantong1980]

Aww, no more debate between two point of view. China has their own classification and US does, belong to two different armies with their own structures. Is that clear? Let make this way, this is Chinese thread about Z-10, so in this thread is about Chinese army and their views, so please don't mixed it up with other countries military classification. China is still seeking to evolve recent Z-10 to be one par with AH-64, Mi-28, Mi-35.

 

[Brainsucker]

It's weird to compare the WZ-10 and the OH-058D. It just like comparing apple and orange. Even if both fruits have the same weight, but they are still different.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

The ceremony

View attachment 323836 View attachment 323837 View attachment 323838 View attachment 323839

Hey, that was an interesting and unique salute; could you explain me more about it?

 

[jhungary]

It's weird to compare the WZ-10 and the OH-058D. It just like comparing apple and orange. Even if both fruits have the same weight, but they are still different.

Again, why is it weird? How about Comparing UH-60H Black Hawk (Which carries 10 troops and 2 machine gun) to UH-60M Battle Hawk (Which is a Full Blown Gun ship comparable to AH-64D?) Namely This

and this

While both are the same helicopter, they have different role, in the US Military, we don't class an Helicopter into its "Role" anymore, simply most of the platform are interchangeable, and if we simply designated these chopper by different role, then you are fixing one role to one type of chopper. We only classify by the payload, that way, we get a pretty good idea on how and what an Helicopter can be use in battle.

The Chinese do not have multi-purpose platform, that mean you have 1 single type to 1 single class of helicopter (like Z-10 = Attack Helicopter) or (Z-20 = Utilities Helicopter), but this would not be the case in the US Military, if we induct Z-10, they are classed as (Scout/Light Attack Class Helicopter), which would be the same class as OH-58D. The same as we will classify both UH-60H and UH-60M into a single category (Medium Lift Helicopter) even though one is a full blown gunship and one is a full blown transport.

Again, do bear in mind, I was answering a fellow member WHAT WOULD Z-10 BE CLASSIFIED HAD IT INDUCTED BY THE US MILITARY.

Aww, no more debate between two point of view. China has their own classification and US does, belong to two different armies with their own structures. Is that clear? Let make this way, this is Chinese thread about Z-10, so in this thread is about Chinese army and their views, so please don't mixed it up with other countries military classification. China is still seeking to evolve recent Z-10 to be one par with AH-64, Mi-28, Mi-35.

This cannot be done.

Z-10 is a light attack helicopter (like Eurocopter Tiger) in short, Z-10 cannot survive without either ground support (SAM/TANK and Troop) or Air Support, the weapon package and sensor package is too different than both AH-64, or Mi-28 (Both are heavy class and can have a large targeting and sensing package)

Z-10 is what we call a Low in the Hi-Low Mix, where a High (usually sensor chopper like a Longbow seek out target, and Z-10 use its missile like a gun truck.)

You need to make a large frame chopper that can put advance radar strong enough to penetrate ground terrain and tall enough to cover a larger area of terrain to work them like Apache or Hind.

 

[Deino]

Can we please that US-Army vs. PLA LH comparision ?? Both have a very different perception and definition of their helo-classes ... simply leave it that way.

Deino

 

[Ghazwa e Hind]

Chinese defense buildup is of defensive nature whereas US spends to attack and oppress the comparatively weaker nations. There is a difference of ideology between two so we cannot compare their weapons.
Roles are different.

 

[yantong1980]

There is nothing wrong with Chinese helos, the faulty part here was some guy with his logic. Deino was right, time to back to nice conversation.