USMC have procured hundreds of AH-64 variants. Had the AH-1Z been superior, would they have bought the much more expensive AH-64 series at all? And my suspicion is strengthened even more because AH-64 series has been denied to Pakistan repeatedly......why do you think that is?
Please do at least a little bit of research before replying just to prove your incorrect point. USMC has procured and operate exactly "0" number of Apaches. They have always only operated AH-1 variants, starting with AH-1T MarineCobras, then onto AH-1W Super Cobras and now are transitioning to AH-1Z Zulu Cobra.
And stop posting baseless chatter about AH-64s being denied to Pakistan. It might have had been the case in the 80s perhaps but I don't think Pakistan even asked for the Apaches when we were just fine ordering new F-16s, Orions and AH-1Zs.
ignoring the rants. lets clarify something because there is confusion of apple and oranges.
tank's primary role is antitank and fire support for infantry so its not a deviation. what you are pointing at is called targets of opportunity which are not the primary mission of that machine.A-10 warthog also carries sidewinders but its Close air support plane brimming with anti armor arsenal. every anti air weapon on it will mean one less opportunity against its primary objective. yes a lucky blow from a tank can take out a gunship but that doesn't mean that tanks start qualifying themselves as gunship killers. your gunship is terrain hugging popping in and out of mountains and tree tops destroying enemy ground targets and returning to base, any areal threat to ground friendly forces and itself has to be mitigated by dedicated air defense units both air and ground based.
Looks like the argument we are having is due to lack of comprehension from your side to what I was really saying. I never said attack helicopters primary role is against other helicopters. I merely pointed out that in India-Pak scenario the possibility of two different choppers of the same origin will like come across each other and it would be interesting to see how that would play out.
A little off topic below here but figured Id share for some folk who might be interested and others who think A>B always.
As far as the machines go, both the Cobras and Apaches are very capable and versatile platforms, fully capable of their assigned mission. However, like every other weapon, their success and performance also depends on how they are utilized with both sides. As an example, it is well known that at the start of the Gulf war, poor tactics led to the Apaches being shot down and a majority of them received significant damage from small arms fire. US Army then changed their approach and kept the Apaches at standoff ranges for engagement.
Cobras on the other hand were always on hand to provide close support to the marines. They suffered 0 losses in the war as the marines employed them for slashing attacks, coming in hot and fast, thus making them much harder for the enemy to engage. Its smaller profile frontal also helps in that regard.
