The Wall Street Journal July 23, 2003
The Future Of Choppers In Battle Looks Choppy
Deaths in Iraq Have Pentagon Leaning Toward More Drones
By Nicholas Kulish and Anne Marie Squeo, Staff Reporters Of The Wall Street Journal
Helicopters are arguably the most dangerous pieces of hardware in the Pentagon's arsenal. During the conflict with Iraq this year, six were shot down by enemy fire and several were totaled in other incidents, killing 23 Americans and 14 British soldiers.
The toll is prompting military experts inside and outside the government to pose a provocative question with huge ramifications for future wars and the defense industry: Are helicopters' fighting days numbered?
The Army has more than 3,000 helicopters and the Marine Corps has about 700. Most of the 37 helicopter-related deaths in the Iraqi conflict occurred on transport missions, and experts say there are no viable short-term alternatives for getting troops and supplies into and out of hostile territory quickly.
But just as tanks replaced horses on the battlefield early in the 20th century, a similar moment may be arriving for attack and reconnaissance helicopters. No one is predicting the imminent elimination of attack helicopters. But there already is noteworthy movement away from these aircraft as technological advances and closer cooperation between military branches undercuts their role.
"We need to think about really laying out a long-range plan and decide what we need from helicopters," said Edward Aldridge, who recently stepped down as Pentagon acquisitions chief and now is a consultant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "There could be another way," he added, to perform some helicopter tasks as 21st century innovations improve other weapons systems and aircraft, including unmanned drones.
Computer processors, ever smaller and quicker, have made unmanned drones increasingly capable -- so much so that the Air Force armed some with precision bombs in Iraq. The Pentagon had planned to use unmanned Predator drones to back up ground troops if serious urban warfare had materialized in Baghdad, Iraq. During helicopter-grounding sandstorms, the Global Hawk and other drones used infrared radar and other sensors to peer through the maelstrom for enemy positions. On the drawing board is a new family of drones specifically for bombing runs, and unmanned reconnaissance helicopters.
Fixed-wing aircraft such as fighter jets and bombers are doing more missions in support of ground troops. These aircraft can stay above the danger zone, firing increasingly accurate missiles guided by satellites to specific target locations. In Iraq, more than half the 30,542 combat missions flown by Air Force, Navy and Marine fighter jets and bombers between March 19 and April 18 provided what is known as close-air support of ground troops -- attack helicopters' traditional forte. Pentagon officials say that is a big increase from fights in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and that it will accelerate.
For Americans, one of war's most jarring images from Iraq came on March 24. The Army sent 34 Apaches to attack Republican Guard troops on the approach to Baghdad. The helicopters came under a torrent of small-arms fire, forcing a retreat. Every helicopter was hit and 27 returned to base too damaged to fly. One was forced down, and television footage showed joyous Iraqis surrounding the aircraft and its two pilots in captivity. (They later were rescued.)
The Apache "is the most capable attack helicopter ever built, so if it can't operate safely in a place like Iraq, that has to raise questions about the whole concept of attack helicopters," says Loren Thompson, director of the Lexington Institute, a defense think tank in Washington.
In retrospect, Army commanders concede they shouldn't have sent Apaches into a densely populated area without additional air or artillery support. "We learned from our mistakes ... and we still used the Apache helicopter in a significant role during the course of the fight," Lt. Gen. William Scott Wallace said.
Certainly, helicopters have been crucial to some big victories. The first shot of the 1991 Gulf War came from an Army Apache during an attack on Iraqi radar stations that cleared the way for the air campaign. And "during the 100-hour ground war ... attack helicopters played their most decisive role ever in combat," according to GlobalSecurity.org, an authority on military matters.
Such successes, however, aren't enough to ease all doubts about choppers. Overall, their performance in recent fights "certainly puts attack helicopters in question," said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a close adviser to Secretary Rumsfeld who sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board.
During the past decade, the military-helicopter industry has shrunk. Just Boeing Co., United Technologies Corp.'s Sikorsky and Textron Inc.'s Bell Helicopter are in the industry -- and often in partnering roles, as Sikorsky and Boeing are on the Comanche helicopter, now in development.
Before post-Cold War downsizing, the Army had 1.2 million troops and 8,338 helicopters in 1990; today, it has 905,000 troops and 3,773 helicopters -- a 25% drop in soldiers and a 55% reduction in helicopters. Last fall, the Pentagon cut the Army's long-term plans to buy more than 1,200 Comanche helicopters -- which is intended to gather intelligence for Apache pilots -- to 650, at a cost of $38 billion.
Pentagon leaders have little sympathy. "The helicopter industry is in the toilet, and probably it ought to be," because it hasn't improved technology, says Art Cebrowski, director of the Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation.
Further movement away from attack helicopters, however, won't come easily. Neither the Army nor the Marine Corps will part with them without a fight; current plans call for both to employ helicopters in attack roles for decades. Service officials contend that calling in heat-of-battle help from Air Force fighter jets takes too long when they aren't nearby. Choppers are more versatile, capable of maneuvering in tight spaces and low enough for an up-close view of the battlefield.
"I won't accept the premise [that] you can do without attack helicopters," says Lt. Gen. John Riggs, who is overseeing the Army's transformation efforts.
Adds retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Fred McCorkle: "I think that they're more important now than ever. Tactical jets and tactical helicopters complement each other. No one airplane is ever all things to all people."
© Copyright 2003, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
