Traveled aircraft perform helicopters with higher efficiency and lower cost

The use of helicopters in wars represented one of the most prominent symbols of battles in the late 20th century, as it was playing an ambitious role in landing the forces in the depth of the enemy areas, threatening leadership centers, cutting off supplies, and spreading panic in its ranks.

Despite the simplicity of this goal in theory, its implementation required huge capabilities, including dozens of aircraft, hundreds of soldiers, and neutralizing the enemy’s multi -layer air defenses, as well as coordination with carefully and carefully planned land attack, yet these operations were fraught with high risks, whether in terms of human losses or huge financial cost.

The deployment of a tactical battalion, approximately 600 packed soldiers, requires the use of between 20 and 40 helicopters such as “M-8S” or “UH-60S”, supported by offensive aircraft equipped with heavy weapons, such as “Ka-52”, “M-i 24”, or “AH-64”.

Before caring for any air attack in this way, it was necessary to destroy anti -air defenses in advance, using combat aircraft, artillery, and electronic warfare weapons.

High cost

Often the cost of these operations is high, which may reach between 20 and 40 million dollars, including fuel expenses, ammunition, maintenance, and equipment consumption, in addition to the personal equipment of the soldiers, and the percentage of risk is not less than the size of the cost, as modern air defense systems can be portable on the shoulder, or cannons equipped with radar guidance that cause fatal losses that may reach 30% of the fleet of helicopters in the case of not The air defenses are sufficiently devoted, and the loss of a few helicopters, with the soldiers they carry, can transform the attack from a lightning operation into a strategic disaster.

But this aerial combat method also carries outstanding strengths, as it allows sudden seizure of strategic facilities that cannot be neutralized remotely, such as bridges, railway centers, and driving headquarters, which require an actual presence of the forces to control, and upon success, such an attack can go beyond merely disrupting supply lines, but rather prepares the scene to besiege the enemy formations entirely.

Alternative

On the other hand, the drones emerged as a more economical and flexible alternative option, to perform similar tasks, especially with regard to disrupting the enemy’s background centers, and although these planes cannot control targets in the traditional way, there is a documentation of cases in which soldiers were captured by the enemy and were delivered to certain sites using only drones.

This technology allows the implementation of military operations using a small number of four -frenzy aircraft, equipped with improvised ammunition, capable of stopping supply convoys, and despite the simplicity of the means, the effect on the battlefield is adult, where logistical operations stop in the back lines, which deprives the front fronts of vital supplies such as fuel, ammunition, and medical support.

Mine

Even the small quadruple aircraft, whose load does not exceed one kilogram to three kilograms, can carry out anti-vehicle mine transplants, such as “BTM-1” or “BTM-3” at strategic points such as bridges, roads, and suffocation corridors 15 to 20 km behind enemy lines, while the larger drones, such as Ukrainian “Supercam” or Russian “witness”, It is able to carry out more depth operations by dropping mines or small bombs inside the background of the background.

This type of tactic depends on a cumulative effect: every explosion disrupts a single supply caravan, while the constant threat of the enemy is forced to re -allocate its engineers, and they are usually few, to work to remove mines, or restore roads, which constitutes an additional burden on his resources.

The loss rate

In the economic point of view, the difference in costs is large, as the Tlassim campaign via drones for a whole week costs between one and a million and a half million dollars, using between 10 and 15 heavy “drones” and 50 and 100 mines, and a team that does not exceed 25 individuals, which is a cost of about 30 times less than the cost of carrying out a similar attack using helicopters, while affecting supply chains may be close.

The rate of losses is relatively acceptable, as drones may be brought down by electronic warfare systems, but many of them succeed in his mission, while their operators remain in safe away from the fields of fighting.

Lonely

In spite of the high efficiency of the drones, and their superiority in terms of cost and effectiveness, the role of helicopters has not completely ended, the only way is to be able to control actual and direct on vital sites located in the depth of hostile lands, however, and in light of the growing air defense systems and the reducing military budgets, the drones have become the preferred option to cause logistical breakthroughs with a significant impact, and this change does not reflect mere technical development, Rather, it indicates a fundamental shift in the modern military doctrine. About National Interest

• The cost of the Tlassem campaign via drones for a week, 30 times less than the costs of helicopters.

• The helicopters are still the only way to control actual sites despite the efficiency of the “Drones”.