China's Attack Gyrocopter is Worse Than You Think
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 сен 2024
- Go to buyraycon.com/... for 15% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon.
China’s military has a brand new toy, and it’s literally straight out of a James Bond movie. It’s called the Hunting Eagle Strike Gyrocopter. Gyrocopters have been used by military and police forces in the past mostly in reconnaissance and surveillance missions, but in 2022, China released footage on a state run CCTV channel showing the Hunting Eagle equipped with 4 anti-tank guided missiles and a sensor system to guide these missiles. This is brand new, and it has a lot of military experts scratching their heads. Why is China seemingly using these gyrocopters in their otherwise modern People’s Liberation Army? What are the pros and cons of using gyrocopters on the battlefield? And finally, what is a gyrocopter and where did it come from?
Written by: Chris Cappy and Josh Simpson
Edited by: Savvy Studios
The Hunting Eagle Strike Gyrocopter is made by the Shaanxi BaoJi Special Vehicle Manufacturing Company. The company began work on the vehicle in 2014 and some photos of the aircraft came out as early as 2016, but the public didn’t get a look at the Hunting Eagle until 2019 when they were showcased in a military parade celebrating the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. What makes the Hunting Eagle a gyrocopter as opposed to a helicopter is that the rotor blades on top of the aircraft are not actually powered by an engine. The unpowered rotor uses air flowing upward across it to make it rotate.
The Hunting Eagle’s forward thrust comes from a propeller powered by a Rotax 914 four-cylinder, 115 horsepower engine fixed to the back of the aircraft in a “pusher configuration”. The Hunting Eagle’s max speed is around 99 miles per hour, and its average cruising speed is between 62-75 miles per hour. The aircraft comes in different configurations that can carry 1,2 or 3 passengers.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @taskandpurpose
Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.
Email capelluto@taskandpurpose.com for inquires.
#military #war #education
Gyrocopter your way over to buyraycon.com/taskandpurpose for 15% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon.
"Aaand I've been demonitised"😂😂 seems lots of RUclipsrs get demonitised/ age restricted for saying things which are unflattering to the CCP
I don't understand the measurements you can also add the metric system in addition to the imperial one I would like to understand the measurements
Holy Crap, that really is from the James Bond movie of: You Only Live Twice
Who needs suicide drones when you have 1.3 billion people.
You forgot that United States 🇺🇸 is going back to gyro copter again in the new helicopter 🚁 that are replacing the black hawk. They are both helicopters and gyrocopter. It called sb-1 defiant it’s basically all the benefits of gyro and helicopters 🚁 all in one package
I don’t know how viable the gyrocopter would be in combat, but they sure look like fun to ride.
It looks like a homemade experimental aircraft
Indeed, I have a friend who has flown one, they are wonderful to fly around in, the closest you can get to actually being able to fly.
And it's STOVL, _very_ STOVL
Not quite VTOL but close, you can use your garden as an aerodrome.
From my limited flight sim experience: negative G maneovers are a NO-NO-FUCKING-NO (your rotor loses rpm when diving down, earns rpm when pointing nose up or banking to the sides; lose too much, and the rotor stops working as a wing, earn too much and the centrifugal forces will rip your rotor). You can only hover if you point your nose into the wind and the wind is as fast as you can go or slower. There are only two safe ways to fly a gyro: slow and high altitude, or fast and low altitude. And even that fast is not faster than most motorbikes.
They are not practical. Maybe a drone version would be, if you can make a drone brain to understand how a gyrocopter flies. But a manned one? Police vehicle, or as a flying guerrilla vehicle that can take off and land from grass fields with little hint of airfield activity. Hell, the antitank missiles could be dropped some metters before blasting off into their target, so maybe the vehicle would not be damaged. Maybe a fast, low altitude gyro can be mistaken with waves long enough for a suicide squad to take an antiair position at a great cost. Maybe in a desperate situation, it may have some sense. But talk about thinking out of the box!
EDIT: one thing usefull, though: pull that stick hard, and the bird turns as much horizontal speed as you have into a steep climb, it rockets up like a homesick angel... for a small amount of time. So maybe a paratrooper squad could turn half a dozen of these into AA cannon/missile decoys by jumping while pressing a "jump up now" autopilot button, while some antiradar missiles fly into them, then land into the chaos? I don't know, they are chinese. Zerg rush is in the asian DNA...
When china brings back US mil vietnam ideas.
Well, the US has aircraft that can only operate in a low threat environment like Afghanistan. I imagine this fits into the same category, you better be careful how you use it.
I hope he makes a video on what’s going on in Africa right now.
Wagner, coups, uranium mines, France being kicked out, new alliances between African countries etc. The entire continent is just a massive tinder box at this point.
Since Rhodesia fell it's been in flames ever since.
Don't forget Malema calling for the Genocide of white people in South Africa.
French retained a lot of colonial influence, but they cannot keep it forever.
hot take but WW3 might largely be fought on the African continent
I'm working on the Niger episode right now, hoping to have it finished next week I dont want to rush it
You could buy almost 22 of these for the price of a single Stinger missile (around $120,000). In an attrition war scenario, that has to be something.
Equip 10 millions chineses with this and you got some cavalery indeed
Estimated cost is 40,000 for the gyro. So. Almost 3 ( not counting armament). Could be really useful at that cost though.
@@BadOompaloompa795.500 USD... only 40.000 Commie Money
Doesnt matter if you have 2 million cheep tanks.
If every time we blow up a tank its crew dies. Eventually you run out of crew and just have hunks of metal.
Crew Survivability is more important then cheeper cost.
You wouldn’t need a stinger for these. The US has plenty of rotary cannons that could easily defend against gyrocopters.
I can sure Hamas must have watched this video and took some notes. 🤣🤣🤣
I'm not a gyrocopter pilot, so I did a quick check for gyrocopter service ceiling. Seems like they top out at about 8,000 feet (2,438m). The mean altitude of the Himalayas is 6,000m, so their utility in the Himalayas would be limited.
With a turbo-charged engine, go as high as you like, but it'll be cold. The alt record is 30,000+.
@@karthik-tb5yt If you are making a weird design choices and making something cheap enough for single theater? Yes. Just you bolt bigger engine and bigger rotor.
You’re not going to fly than at more than 200 ft, they’re not designed for high service ceilings and that would make them far too vulnerable. You need to fly low in these. and landing is easier than any other aircraft out there including a helicopter.
@@EIGYRO turbo can help the engine. but what about the rotating blades? They are still cutting through thin air.
@AbhijeetKundu
Yes ... And that "new border" became a Chinese territory.
Honestly seems extremely useful. 600 lbs of payload, call it 400 with pilot, moving 100 mph in any terrain with 120 mile round trip range as the crow flies, all for less than the cost of a decent set of NVG... Seems like a very economical way to get around.
Ya the only way that it could be improved is having a LMG jerry rigid as a last resort weapon
See but China also has the same issue as Russia quality control isn’t the strong suite for either. It’s definitely not a bad idea but I see this far more useful on the back lines then on the front lines. Mostly just cause this thing is air defenses wet dream. At least with drones they are unmanned and even cheaper and a much tinier target. Now it is a very nice vehicle for getting personnel where they need to be but as a strike craft it just doesn’t seem to fit in this era of warfare. At least the US Little Bird has a metric crap ton of fire power. The Apache is far more survivable. The cost is very much a big upside though and it’s ability to be used in any terrain is also nice. We just don’t have the info needed to make a good judgment since China is known for giving very misleading and doctored info.
@@hbsavage0387 the main reason why quality control is an issue with the Russians and Chinese is the fact that centralized control over everything has makes numbers more important the high quality products. The difference between the T-34 tank and USA Sherman tank are a good example of this.
But for the silly gyro-copter I think it would be a good resource patrolling places like mountains or thick forests. Especially if it had a thermo-camera and night vision. But this would defeat the purpose of a cheap light aircraft.
@@dylanmulvaney9912 trust me I know why they have these issues and the history behind it and I agree with you that seems to be the best fit for this aircraft
And let’s not forget, china’s major advantage over the rest of the world is a numbers advantage, so an machine that would be easy to mass produce like this, could be a major game changer for them
I think cheap weapons systems like this could be more viable than most people think. If you could field 50 or 100 of these for every real attack helicopter that could mean your gyrocopters are more effective depending on missions and usage. I think the war in Ukraine is showing us that cheaper solutions can be very effective if deployed under the proper circumstances.
I doubt you'd be able to. I understand the logic of quantity over quality but I just cant imagine this being cheaper than the .50 cal that will shoot it down.
Easy machine gun target 😂
@@dmar4194 well it is very cheap since Chinese means of production enable it. Like it costs less then one full kit on US soldiers meaning that you can attach one of these to pretty much every squad to have at their disposal for various use. Even if it is not good in striking capability just having that utility and in those numbers make it very useful. Rough terrain and you need to do ammo run ? It is basically like a jeep and you know there is always place for a jeep in army.
@@dmar4194It can stay way out of range of any 50 cal and with the right missiles even shorad systems as we've seen in Ukraine with KA52s armed with long range anti tank missiles.
@@zinjanthropus322how it doesn't have the space for the radar that those missiles use. The only missiles that those things would use are fire and forget or short range missiles.
After watching Hamas using gliders I realized this is actually a good idea. If you fly it low and use it to pass fences, walls and even mined fields.
For only $5000 these would be amazing for any NATO country that's not the USA. Here in Norway they would be perfect for the National Guard, mostly for logistics and rapid troop movement.
@@Zyzyx442 true, and for small countries like Belgium or Switzerland where they dont always have enough depht to use fighter jets effectively. And it is also a good alternative to just sending drones in rescue missions
@@1individeo Good point, like MASH in Korean War just much more affordable as $5000 is like nothing, Norway developed some first gen survaillance drones black hornet and they cost $195,000 a piece and isn't much better than a commercial drone for it's intended use. China really made something work here, quantity is in itself a quality - Stalin
since they are cheap, imagine over 10000 of these things flying towards u
@@Ramxie35 And they launch their guided missiles!! The enemy would be devastated.
Please note that retired Wing Commander Ken Wallis actually flew his WA-116 autogyro, "Little Nelly", in all the flying sequences of James Bond's "You Only Live Twice" movie in 1967. He passed away in 2013 at the age of 97. R.I.P..
RIP to the Gentleman,
Looked sketchy AF lol all balls!!
That’s interesting but I’m not sure what your point is
@@enginepythe Chinese autogiros look exactly like the one from 1967 James Bond is the point.
Just laughing at the first part. 😂😂😂😂 Hahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha!
From the original Chinese videos mentioning the gyrocopter, I think considering this as a "motorcycle" that can fly over some very difficult terrains might be the best way to think about it.
*EXACTLY.*
I agree. It seems useful for infantry mobility and border patrols.
What I don’t understand is why they put missiles on it. My best guess is they’re intended for deterrence. Knowing that one of the gyros could return fire with a missile, might be a big enough threat that lightly armored vehicles would choose not to take pot shots at it with an LMG.
@@andrewmellor4239 I think the IJA using bicycle troops to defeat British army in Malaya during WWII is a good example of why having weapon mounts on the "aerial motorcycle," and 2-seated motorcycles mounted with heavy machine guns are also popular during that time as well.
So true! 'I have a really cheap and crap attack helicopter' seems ridiculous, 'I gave thousands of soldiers access to flying motorcycles that can also mount rockets' =O now that's useful! What can't you do with that!
@@andrewmellor4239 The missiles look too small to be real. I think the host is right, they were just having fun with it. All of the other gyros had no weapons at all.
As an Airborne Ranger, I often rode on the outside of a little bird, sitting on a little bench with my sling rope clipping me in. Definitely less protective than this, but the idea is to come in shooting with a fantastic situational awareness. Vulnerable, but deadly.
Power Rangers maybe 😂
Come in shooting, lol, this won't be used against haji's "ranger" this would be the next tool in our lineup against China and Russia, so you can go ahead and take that job for all of us yeah? Cause something tells me your not going to be doing much shooting from that thing... Not any meaningful shooting that is, you might make a great distraction though!
How do you. With your experince.
Think such a implement would stand up to quality marksmenship or missiles?
@@siamihari8717 They aren't armored, and literally couldn't be past very small arms, so at the moment they will always be susceptible to gunfire. I know I'm not the supposed ranger but that doesn't really give you insight into the ballistic capabilities of a gyro-copter anyways...
@@ThatOneGuyWhoLostHisHandle
Im simply looking at what can be suposed to be Battlefield Experince. Even if he doesnt get to play with one directly for a full diognostic, someone with his credentials should be capable of seeing somewhat the weaknesses that do exist
Hamas paragliding into Isreal on dozens of these things shows it isn't a dumb idea if it's effective.
@dootydooter4130 exactly, like Hamas Israel too are specialized at killing civilians the different is Israel has hypocitres western backing them up.
Remember how the germans and allies used gliders to great success during ww2. In my opinion every military should expend more on cheap options to pair with the big guns. One can never know, maybe some of those guns end up being extremely cost effective in the future.
maybe we will get that mega airships of the Advanced Warfare COD... (tho it looks more like a one time use in combat, at least drone swarm will be there to help...)
With today's wars, using soldiers as cannon fodder's gonna bankrupt a first world nation thanks to how high the pension/benefits are whenever they're killed in combat. That's also why Russians refuse to ID most of their dead. Using gliders would guarantee there will be casualties, especially if used in a contested area. This is why neither Russia or Ukraine is employing this strategy.
If it's cheap and can kill a tank, it's a viable weapon system.
A drone can do the same but w8thout risking the multiple trained operators
@@lukas081559 Well that matters if you care about your people...
@@lukas081559China has a LOT of drones as well. The gyrocopter is more for surveillance.
@@KyriSvk China isnt in a position to not care for its people, their demographic time bomb is ticking and they need the people
@@lukas081559 even a iranian shahed drone costs 4 times as much as the hunting eagle. If your country has 1.5 billion people...
When you need a cheap yet effective tool and your personnel are expendable and you want to leverage your 2 million strong army in a battle of attrition... makes sense to me.
Drones can do that now and much cheaper too. Stick to computer games little boy.
Umm if personnel was expendable they would just give them a gun and send them in as infantry
Giving each person a personal helicopter is going to be more expensive than just making them infantry
@@xblade11230 No, because they can do much more with a gyrocopter than they could on the ground.
@@remogatron1010 Dont be arrogant when you're wrong.
@@dmar4194 stick to computer games kid
In a new twist, Hamas surprised Israeli defence attacking with paragliders
Now we see how these things may work on the battlefield
As you said, a gyrocopter costs far less than normal heli ( especially a attack helicopter) and the crews can be trained much faster and the requirements for the crews are much lower. So you could build huge swarms of gyrocopter wings that could overwhelm AD through sheer numbers. And they are compact enough so they can be hidden in any barn or shed
Yeah I don't count anything out these days especially since special operations in America are adopting a crop duster.
*CRAM Enters the chat
With a 20mm or 30mm anti air battery, they would drop like flies.
You could literally take them out with infantry weapons and pintle mounted guns.
My thoughts exactly
I wouldn't underestimate it. If there's a scenario where each side is racing for control of the top of a hill or ridge, a flight of these things could just manage to deliver the small amount of troops needed to get the first grip on top of the hill.
Also if it is used as a universal transport in the rear (like Jeeps in WW2 and Vietnam), it definitely won't get stuck in mud or other bad terrain.
maybe if we were still doing WW2 style combat.... ? why would a modern combined arms military like the US need to race for control of hills or forts unless its dealing with like civilians or insurgents?
these are only really good for harassing and baiting.
This thing needs proper runway to take off and land.
This day and age, nothing will be taken down immediately. Shotgun with bird shot could probably knock it down.
I wonder what the fuel costs are like relative to a jeep as you said for something like this? Seems impractical from that angle to use this as a transport unless the carrying capacity is way better than these estimates put it at
A single Black hawk can haul 20 light equipped personnel while with that thing you need 20 of those as well as 20 pilots to do the same, with a much shorter range and need for runways.
I could see these being used to quickly flood an airspace forcing AA weapons/crews to make rapid decisions about target priorities. This could lead to mistakes, hesitancy, or just saturation beyond what AA assets are available.
Edit: Let me also add in that people are saying “just do it with a drone”. Drones capable of carrying that payload are far more expensive than a $5,500 gyro. Also I think far too many people are acting like the CCP expects even half of these gyro’s/operators to make it back. Take a bunch of hastily trained people, cram them into these vehicles, and get a small percentage through to unleash whatever payload they are carrying.
Edit 2: Missiles are by their very design, long distance weapons. Much longer range than .50 BMG, M240B’s, etc. If they flew them in range of said systems, they are asking to die.
have you seen moder AA guns? Reinmetals new Skyguard would be perfect for these things
Zerg rush strategy.
@@puddingsimon2626 But aa's like skyguard cant take out gyrocopters because they dont fly in predictable path meanehile drones do always fly in a predictable path. So they are useless in my opinion
@@puddingsimon2626 Skyguard also has a massive cost $$$, and like a tank or static Artillery once it fires its position is now revealed on the modern battlefield. you take out 1 or 2 of these and in exchange lose your skyguard that seems like a very good trade cost wise. Hell take out a whole squadron of these and the skyguard still losses in the cost for cost battle. If these gyros have radios with laser rangefinder and can gps send target data to arty or long other range weapons then just firing on it will be bait. Not to mention there is nothing stopping the gunner from controlling a drone as well to laser or GPS paint targets for his missiles similar to what a apatche can do. Price tag on a skyguard is HIGH and how many will most armies have?
@@u2beuser714Any modern aa can track a target that moves unpredictably. If not these systems would be useless against helicopters and jets. Which they aren't. Gun aa like the skyguard is limited by range, not by "unpredictability".
I mean we have now had it proven to us that Paragliders are a viable military strategy, so in many ways, these Gyrocopters are just more advanced versions of that
Yep. Imagine being able to disable up to 4 tanks with a $6,000 piece of equipment. And the equipment only required 20 hours of specialized training (10 hours X 2 guys), so there'd never be a shortage of "pilots" even if the enemy could bring down significant numbers of them.
Aren't they doing that for like 500 bucks with essentially mail order drones?
@@bibsp3556 Well, we've seen drones drop explosives onto tanks. I'm not convinced these little bombs are doing any significant damage, unless they can get it down an open hatch.
@jackuzi8252 they strap an RPG shaped charge to an fpv and take out t90s, for under a grand. They can carry em pinpoint and just ram. Super effective. I've seen ones that drop tank mines off RC car like things too.
A gyrocopter armed with a Hydra rocket pod would make for decent close air support. A whole fleet of them with rocket pods would make for one hell of a mobile MLRS system...
The first use of an autogyro on actual combat missions was, if I am not mistaken in 1934 in Asturias, Spain during the Revolution that took place there. The Spanish Navy had recently acquired two Cierva C.30 autogyros and once the revolution started both aircraft were deployed to the North of Spain. They were used on observation and liaison roles, and they were often subject of rifle fire. There are reports that they were hit a couple of times but nothing else than some fuselage holes.
yeah but those rifles weren't semi automatic. imagine what 3 guys with semi auto rifles could do to these things they aren't exactly fast.
@@SurveyTurtleGaming Rifles are rarely used in modern armies. Nato pretty much only uses Submachine guns like the M4.
they used pretty highpowered bolt action rifles in the spanish civil war...
A Tank hunting Gyro-copter is a fine sign of a Totalitarian Regime that has a procurement officer with a brother who owns a gyro-copter company.
And there we have it!
Remember that in WW2 an American Piper Cub reconnaissance pilot strapped a bazooka on his plane and successfully hunted German armor. Low and slow has its place...but maybe not on the modern battlefield.
In any case, forewarned is forearmed.
Considering what was just accomplished with paragliders, these don’t seem very comical at all.
It seems like a handy little logistics and surveillance aircraft for second line duties that would free up helicopters and more expensive drones for more important tasks.
Dropping off ammo, water, food, aid station cas-evac etc in rough terrain or to garrison positions seems like the most logical use for it.
Considering the price and the amount of service personnel China has it makes quite a lot of sense.
You must be living in WW2 era.
Even missiles could be detected miles away nowadays. This thing is just a floating targets for stingers and anti air defenses. hell snipers could have fun in taking them down lol.
Cheap vehicle for cheap fodder human lives. Chinese way
You must be living in COD era.
These things are great for logistics rather than shooty shooty kill parts of warfare.
If you can deliver hot food, water and ammo to you second line troops to pass on to the front line you have a major advantage for moral and supply stuff.
@@Tiananmen1989FreeTibetHK
War isn't all about fighting people. You've gotta look at supplies etc.
I'd have loved these in Iraq
*For money they are really worth it if you have surplus population like China has
@@Tiananmen1989FreeTibetHK You don't get the idea. First, not every region has a full fleged anti air defenses. Second, Chinese PLA has variable kinds of weapons to deal with different situations, if you have snipers in the field, then the droids will teach them what hell is like.
Resupply vehicle? Too small, evacuation vehicle? You got to be kidding. A sucking chest wounded person would never survive the bouncing on takeoff. Rough terrain? Think again. A gyro needs a runway. It's also not good in bad weather and is very slow in terms of military performance. You are probably right about the price however. and the surveillance angle may have merit, but you can hear them coming for quite some distance. I'm thinking that more than anything you're a genuine fan of gyrocopters. Me too.
@@Tiananmen1989FreeTibetHK how long, in a total war situation do you think it would take to resupply a stinger missle?
Also, if these work in small swarms, how many I'd a stinger missle going to take down?
In my opinion, most of China's "weird weapons and equipment" aren't supposed to be taken seriously. Just because China is showing something off, doesn't mean they intend to use it.
If it seems stupid, it's most likely just for show.
Or like their VN-20 its for export customers
It might have a use in the battlefield, where soldiers are not armed with rifles, or pistols, or machine guns, rpgs, atgms, stinger missiles or slingshots.
One thing also to consider is that human live is not that valuable in China, because they have a lot of humans and the CCP has in general not very high moral standards.
So attacking with cheap gyrocopters instead of using drones or more survivable but more expensive assets is maybe no big deal for the Chinese military.
Maybe ten cheap gyrocopters with anti tank weapons are more effective than one attack helicopter.
Dude at the end of the video he gave use cases for law enforcement, which is what is being used in China. This entire video is a clickbait
If it has the range to land on Taiwan, it would be the first wave of an invasion.
Cargo planes carrying paratroopers are easy to detect. But, a gyrocopter carrying saboteurs is not easy to detect, they’re as loud as a motorcycle!
With how cheap they are for a modern military($5500) there is no reason not to use them, especially with atgm(s).
I feel like these would be helpful patrolling littorial areas in a defensive role. The antitank rockets would be a deterent for fast boats that are trying to infil or exfil special operations. Lighter, cheaper to obtain and maintain than a helo, they could provide manned patrol options. I am thinking like blimps and small planes did in the US for WW2 and beyond.
Let us first win the Ukraine war via proxy, before giving advice too other countries.
We also, lost the Korean war.
@emillaularsen6255 Im Dutch and we have too admit it. Being pushed from the Chinese border and NK ends up with slightly more territory, even after we took the whole peninsula is a loss imo.
@@azumishimizu1880 As the task was to preserve the South Korea from assimilation of the North Korea, I'd say the UN mission was a resounding success.
@emillaularsen6255 If wee keep seeing obvious failure as succes, we gonna lose in Ukraine.
@@BPo75 If wee keep seeing obvious failure as succes, we gonna lose in Ukraine.
Title says "is worse than you think", video goes on to list all the possible uses and advantages, and then finally fails to actually acknowledge any of them.
1) Can't be jammed
2) Low radar reflection
3) Useful in delivering orders that would keep an enemy from electronic intercepts
👍🏼
1 Nighthawk that carries 11 troops and 2600 pounds, costs approximately 15 million (more or less depending on order size). That is 2700 of these gyrocopters which carries 1-3 troops each and 600 lbs in payload. This isn't just a little more cost effective, its astronimically more cost effective under the right scenario.
Each could carry an anti tank crew, dismount near the front line (maybe at night if you give the infantry nvgs which the pla are trying to do) and hide in tree lines ambushing approaching armor. Imagine hundreds or thousands of them rapidly deploying overnight. The Ukraine war has proven that modern main battle tanks can be taken out by ambushing anti tank crews. Just the fact that these could exist on the battlefield will cause people to rethink their combined arms doctrine.
And not just ATGMs… you could theoretically kit one out to carry an LMG team with useful quantities of ammo or a Sapper team with gear specific to the mission with accompanying gyrocopter filling out the rest of the squad’s lineup.
Yes its the very low end of a attack/transport helicopter, and can be very effective, if its used within their limitation. Thinking of Ukraine, use 100 of them to fly over a river, and deploy 200 soldier, who attack the defender from behind, and create a bridgehead. Only the threat will force the enemy to hold a mech battalion in reserve for each front section.
These things can't land or take off the same way a helicopter does or hover,this application is not good for this platform
I was about to say, on paper this doesn't even look that bad to me. They look hella nimble too, sure small arms could be able to take it out compared to like a nighthawk or even a chinook but given they''re used for police work, why not? and like someone else pointed out; They look fun to ride!
The issue is that you just need one decent machine gun to wipe out an entire wing of these. You'd basically be assigning thousands of troops to a suicide mission.
i think people underestimate how usfull a cheap easy to use air vehicle can be. sometimes the thing that gives you the leg up is just having something your enemy doesn't. that being said its probably more helpful for logistics than combat
The problem is that quantity does not outclass quality. Any soldier with a decent gun can shoot down these things. It’s also going to be hard for them to aim while on that thing. Basically, the only advantage it has is in it not being intimidating enough to warrant someone just shooting it down out of provocation. In an actual war, you would just be sacrificing your troops since anyone that manages to survive a crash from that thing will probably be chopped in half by the propeller blade
@@insanittiez4860Quantity has a quality all it's own. If you send 10 to kill a tank, and only one makes it in range to fire, it's cheaper than losing a helo. PRC puts the dollar value of each soldier at $0.
@@shadowmancy9183 Quantity significantly increase your upkeep cost and complexity. You now need to maintain ten times as many vehicules. They have their uses that's true but if you base your army on cheap assets, you're going to lose pretty much every war.
How russia use ka52... Those who think they can shoot it with any thing other then anti air missiles are stupid... A machine gun or even AA guns don't give a range of 10-15 km...
What ka52 doing to ukrainian column images what these can do for same tectics.... And in 100s...
@@shadowmancy9183 The problem is that it doesn’t take a tank to shoot it down. All you need is one solder with a 50 caliber to make quick your 10 gyrocopters. That’s why quantity doesn’t matter in this case. The aircrafts are cheap by the people riding them aren’t. Assuming it’s 3 people per gyrocopter, you will basically be sending 30 people to die. The odds of them surviving the crash are already extremely low and they are properly more likely to get chopped in half after by the propeller
In WW2, the soviets were struggling to counter the german tiger tank so they started building a massive amount of cheap,quickly built tanks. The idea was just get as many guns out on the field as quickly as possible. The tactic worked. Although the tiger was far superior, they couldnt hold up to the swarm of cheap russian tanks. This seems to be a similar philosophy. They can build them in mass. One of these might be laughable but get a thousand of them firing rockets and they become an overwhelming force.
I think that the difference between a cheap soviet tank and a small cheap open air gyrocopter is that cheap soviet tanks arent suseptable to assualt rifles if lucky, if not an lmg
That's... not true. The Tigers also had Panzer 3's and 4's and StuG's and StuH's around them. The Soviets did build a lot of tanks, but they were shoddy and desperately made and barely eaked out a win. German tanks weren't magic though. And T-34's were not cheap if you made them according to design, which no factory actually achieved until after the war.
I think what your saying is "Quantity has a Quality all its own"
Having piloted gyroplanes in the past, I've often wondered why they don't get used more often in a military role. A cost/benefit would vote for them on that basis alone as well as the maneuverability and short field capability.
it's been tried many times, even way back in WW2. just no practical. best use I can think of is replacing Police camera helicopters, or news helicopters.
you can build cheaper drones to do the same thing, though. just about every pro/point about the gyrocopters is thrown out the window by the fact that making them unmanned would be cheaper, easier, better lol
I have always felt Gyroplanes should be used in search and rescue missions vs military missions. Though, as stated in the video they do have a very small radar image (without stealth technology built into it) and can travel very low. Could be well used for a surprise attack.
As for search and rescue, imagine a flood. Send up Gyros to find the people and send in the boats to get them out. Or to go in and get a downed pilot.
@@designsbyphilip510 They would be good for search, but not rescue. They are best for things like police work, replace news helicopters, etc. Roles in which hovering is not required, but slow flight is, as is flying over congested areas with few emergency landing spaces.
They are cheaper to own and operate than helicopters, and can be equipped with cameras and such for observation.
Might be good for some misc missions like science, where yo could touch down and let your science passenger collet samples, data, etc. But helicopters currently do those jobs. Makes me wonder what I'm missing about why gyrocopters aren't used in those roles.
Gyroplanes are easy to spot on radar due to their rotor blades. hard to mask them with stealth.
Soviet Union used gyrocopters in first year of WW2 (soviet part, you know, 1941) as a nice artillery spotter and recoinassance vehicle. Main advantages was: Cheap design, Very easy to pilot and low skills required, Easy to nearly hover above positions (Remember, these was times before helicopters), Very safe cuz even if you got injured or gyro's engine shot - it'll nearly automatically land itself like a glider (There were a pilot who was an artillery spotter and he was shot but not killed, he lost consciousness and his gyro self-landed near his arty battery so the pilot was saved). And nowadays gyros can just straight vertically land themselves.
So, i think, gyrocopter can be really cheap and easy-to-maintain solution in war on attrition. New ones are also very maneurable, much more maneurable than helicopters, so they, maybe, can even dodge some rockets, with good pilot skills, idk.
This actually kinda reminds me of cavalry. If used right I feel like they can transport a lot of troops with a swarm of these things through tough terrain
You're right. If they got the costs down enough it'd be a lot like Dragoons using their horses to get close enough then dismounting to engage.
Convert the back seat to take a horse or mule, and you've got literal air cavalry! You could discard the gyro on landing since it's cheap. Probably got room for a few nosebags of oats to keep horse motivated.
It really is giving me 21st century dragoon vibes.
In general, they just seem like a light transport heli that could be actually attached to the unit with the pilot being a fighter as well and with it being so cheap, you could potentially discard it upon landing if need be
Lmao, the two comments before me said literally what I did. It really is just that obvious of an idea!
I'd imagine they are more viable than you'd think. Given how cheap they are, you can probably move a significant number of troops into an area, undetected and very quickly. This would be especially valuable in the rocky terrain of tiawan.
Lastly, if they are any bit effective against tanks, 1 6,000$ gyrocopter can take out a 10 million $ tank. This would be enough to win a war.
then can be shot with powerful guns before reaching target , few bullets enough to take it down
I don't think so. This gyrocopter is a silly idea and a waste of money. It wouldn't survive even in WW1 era, let alone modern warfare (that's why the Germans gave up on it, they could have used something like this in WW 1 and 2). A cheap infantry rifle can take out a $6000 gyrocopter, because they fly slowly and low, they are vulnerable to infantry gunfire. A rifle bullet hitting those missiles the gyrocopter carries, KABOOM!
Imagine getting swarmed with 50 of those. Sure, they'd have heavy losses, but that's only a problem if you happen to care or have a very limited personnel pool. Both not neccessarily problems the PLA has.
An regular mofo can shoot at a slow motorcycle in the air lol
@@nhatvu8800 True, few bullets , if far then smallest drones which cost 100's of $ with few grenade's good enough to take out lives count
Soviet Union used gyrocopters in first year of WW2 as a nice artillery spotter and recoinassance vehicle. Main advantages was: Cheap design, Very easy to pilot and low skills required, Easy to nearly hover above positions (Remember, these was times before helicopters), Very safe cuz even if you got injured or gyro's engine shot - it'll nearly automatically land itself like a glider (There were a pilot who was an artillery spotter and he was shot but not killed, he lost consciousness and his gyro self-landed near his arty battery so the pilot was saved). And nowadays gyros can just straight vertically land themselves.
So, i think, gyrocopter can be really cheap and easy-to-maintain solution in war on attrition. New ones are also very maneurable, much more maneurable than helicopters, so they, maybe, can even dodge some rockets, with good pilot skills, idk.
I could see these being used by infantry like modern day dragoons. They are cheap and don't have a big radar signature, so long as you aren't flying over enemy territory it seems like a good option for a highly mobile unit.
Kids with bricks > modern dragoons.
This. They are better than paratroopers in almost every way. And they look like they could carry a 120 mm mortar
No thanks. Lol 😂
RCS has nothing to do with size. I assure you these things will look like a flying whale on any radar.
@@JohnJohnson-hu3um A child with a brick could also give a soldier brain damage by throwing the brick at his head.
It's basically a flying anti-tank infantry crew without the jetpacks. Very, very useful.
It's a flying dumpster that will spin out of control and crash the instant it fires a missle
@@Chuckvsfrank1232
A) missile will light it's propellant once it's no longer attached to the Choppa
B) you can dismount before firing your rpg
@@fish3977 Ukraine would have a field day shooting these down. You would need like 50 of these all at once to make a big difference which is the point of them being cheap to mass produce with all the disadvantages that brings. So if these were ever to be used in a real conflict then I doubt China would see favorable results and discontinue the project
@@Chuckvsfrank1232 you're thinking of them as assault crafts instead of troop transports in still held territory or as an alternative for parachutes that can also take off for limited situations.
Also big question is, again, who are you fighting against?
E: these seem like way simpler things to fly than proper helicopters so you could also just train people over few weekends to be pilots instead of the far more extensive requirements for actual pilots.
Y'all are right about small arms fire being an issue with these but using Ukraine as an example, it's already clear that even proper helicopters can't get near frontlines without being easy picking for ground troops
@@Chuckvsfrank1232 Imho, you want to load it with loitering munitions like switchblades, not with homing rockets.
They could build 4,500 of these for the price of a single Black Hawk. Very handy little utility aircraft. Looks like loads of fun too!
LooL I think today HAMAS with its attack in Israel shows us that paragliders like this are quiet useful for infiltration giving airborn troops to militants groups
Literally a cheaper version of paratroopers
@@Fauzanarief-n7i when you can’t afford an aircraft to drop your paratroopers
I kept hearing 'Ride of the Valkyries' played on a kazoo orchestra.
But on a serious note you are probably right Cappy, its more likely to be used in domestic suppression.
Nothing better that the smell of my sweaty palms in the morning
@@HubertofLiegeDon't worry, the aerial police will soon arrest you. Living in the mountains won't protect you!
I have a feeling that this could be very cost efficient if used correctly. This could be used in low-threat areas where it can accomplish task that a helicopter would be to large or just overkill. And deploying a drone might either take to long (for a large drone) or not be up to the task (for a small drone). All in all this is either not significant news (they don't provide any special capabilities to China) or it is significant bad news for China (they plan on using them in a role they are not suited for).
Gyrocopters are a lot cheaper to operate than a helicopter, and unlike most drones, it can't be jammed or brought down with EW-warfare.
So, there is a another tool in the box that can be used in specific scenarios.
They are, however, quite susceptible to small arms fire and environmental conditions, way more so than modern helicopters or drones.
Nope its utter rubbish.
CCP would just send them swarming an AA battery
Lol, deploying a drone takes too long but not the gyrocopter?
Don't underestimate how versatile and what potential the gyrocopter actually has...... Full potential has never been developed or tried
Well...this aged well.
It's kind of terrifying. It'd be like being issued a motorcycle as an outrider in a conflict. We used to do that, so I can see the use for these. It was a dangerous job, but it was a lot more dangerous to not have them in some environments.
There's also all the brush wars, especially in Africa, where something like this could be useful. And at $5500 each, they're almost a disposable resource.
(If I ever get drafted, I am going to see if Australia can buy me one of these)
Aus should have these in madmax fashion.
Don't worry, Australia will just have Daddy China equip you colonials 😂
Also, it's hard to hack something that has barely any electronics on it. If that becomes an even bigger thing, then at least it's got that on its side. Killing biologicals? Easy. Hacking bio-pilots? That's pretty hard. So you can put guns on these, somewhat safely (ok, as safely as these things are to fly, so not that safely). But there is a pilot in the, or a, loop/ crash/ instant kaboom/ whatever.
Just an idea, but if they are cheap and easy to train on they could be a tool to overwhelm local air defense. Basically you accept that most of them won't reach the target but enough will. That might be usefull in a landing operation where losses allways are horrendous. Tanks and bunkers opposing a landing are prime targets in such operations.
Looks great for a Taiwan Landing Operation, along with thousands of little boats.
Why spend billions on a big boat to target when one can spend millions on thousands of helicopters & boats, to achieve the same goal?
So back to the towed glider concept of WW2 Europe. I can see a small widow where they could prove very useful. Light attack quick reaction force. The gyrocopters will be abandoned at the target area. Better yet, I see a tofu dregs boondoggle for pols to get rich with their friends in manufacturing. Pity the soldiers that have to fly them.
I was thinking the same thing. They have plenty of people to sacrifice for such a strategy.
Even if half the population dies in the war, theres still plenty lol
You could also use them in a recon in force type deal. Send them into a specific area then have more capable platforms take out the aa that reveals themselves. Kind of like the wild weasels but a bit more suicidal.
I mean, those vs having to cross difficult terrain and possibly mine fields, sounds like a improvement.
Building enough of those for the troops to play around with, is the best way to figure out what uses there are for them.
I imagine some border outpost can use one to get to some poor lost tourist and arrest him.
It definitely gives more autonomy to units that would normally not have any air support.
It can also boost morale in down times. And help to train anti air crews.
I also imagine it would help officers to get a nice overview of their own defences and weak points.
Also finding drunk soldiers who wandered off base.
Or delivering ammo and food to some poor conscripts at some checkpoint.
I can absolutely think of lots of uses for these things, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to fly on one into an assault on an enemy position.
@@DJSockmonkeyMusic well that's not what they're for.
Armies use motorcycles, but they don't ride them into combat.
@@gasdive The usa has special forces that claim to use motorcycles for operations behind enemy lines. So for roles where the moment of surprise helps, these things might work. Like crossing unguarded terrain, that nobody expects to be crossed. Then deal with some civilian factory guards, place charges and escape. Also China is fighting the urigurs some times. And they don't have sophisticated air defence. So instead of sending troops through some choke point, these things could make life easier for soldiers, while still being cheaper than the use of proper helicopters. But I agree, those would suck in combat with a proper enemy that waits for them. Before and after combat sounds like the best time for those things.
I would say the Gyrocopter is the modern parachute trooper. If you have a swarm of hundreds of these, combined with drones and regular jets and helicopters, this can very effectively in invading a site.
These machines are seen as a cost-effective addition to a regular helicopter fleet. They are excellent for simple tasks behind the lines.
These machines are cost-effective, but the pilot are not, it going to take 18 year to grow a human to fighting age and take another 2 to 5 year to train a pilot.
@@khanhnguyen-tt3ff dont think theyll be flown anywhere close to the front plus china got more then enough people
Areo jeep.
You lead them like a duck.
You can use a man-pod for the same task
Making an anti-tank chopper for much less than the price of MANPADS is genius. Every loss harms your enemy. Every kill harms your enemy more.
Unless the enemy busts out the Bofors 40mm from WW2……or you know, some of the ungodly amount of ZU-23s out there these days….
And every kiss begins with Kay
Well, its still firing guided missiles, so those cant be that cheap.
@nobodyherepal3292 Even an M2 Browning would be effective as the crew doesn't seem to have any protection.
@@country_flyboy ya that too
I actually don't hate the idea. If you have tons of infantry who could be taught to use the thing and you're fighting in mountainous terrain, it could be pretty handy. We saw how useful infantry squads with Javelins can be, so think of this as a cross between a Javelin crew and a super-light Apache.
😂
it has a 9000 foot service ceiling equip it with automatic grenade launchers keep your distance and it will cause many problems for infantry meanwhile its so small you can tow it behind a car and thus they can pop up basically anywhere as light air support.
@@micaheiber1419 You also have to take into account cost effectiveness and wartime production though.
Example for the cost of 1 FIM-92 Stinger the Chinese can field over 20 of these aircraft.
a "cheap" loitering munition the Switchblade 300 is over 6,000 USD still like 1000 USD more expensive and potentially less effective than this platform.
It also needs specialized electronics manufacturing. Meanwhile the gyrocopter is so simple it can be produced out of car factories if need be.
@@happyjohn354 A drone doesn't need a *guy* in it though, if manned aircraft are going down at the same rate as drones it's going to take a hell of a lot of patriotism for guys to continue getting in them (+you lost the cost of his/their training, gear, labor, and the invested logistical cost of transporting both people and vehicles around while keeping them safe from precision strikes).
@@micaheiber1419 bruh they stated that it takes roughly 10 hours of training to effectively fly also they would still have a higher survival rate than infantry.
Hamas enters the chat.
So we watched this video and said yeah we will have some of that.
But let's simplyfy it and just use parasails.
Too soon?..
I think the main point here is the cost and simplicity. This thing costs less than a single 155mm round, and you can train a civilian to operate it in less than a day. I am surprised Ukraine is not buying these to hunt down Shaheds and FPV drones.
Why not just make drones then, unless the cost of human being is even cheaper than a chip
cheap military drones are still more expensive then 7 of these things.
those drones can not carry people, transport anything heavy or deliver troops.
these things can be used in so many different ways, whereas drones just shine in very specific jobs (dropping a bomb or gathering intel).
@@Propapanda0213 Drones are vulnerable to EW, as war in Ukraine shows. Human lives matter of course, but during wartime some soldiers are sacrificed to accomplish a mission and to (hopefully) save more lives as a result.
I'd imagine if you integrated these in Recon groups and in conveys (including a basic Humvee/MRAP patrols), equipped them with thermal systems and smoke/chaff abilities it would make spotting ambushes and mine fields very easy. I kind of wonder if IED would have been less effective in the Afghanistan war if the patrol groups had some integrated. it is almost like the airborne equivalent of the FC470 CRRC
Giant shark nets dropped on a swarm from c130s will fix them I think the Chinese mite use them for short coastline attack, s if you know what I'm mean 😮
Hahaha 😂😂😂
Or they could use them in human wave strategy to get the enemy to waste their missiles and rockets on them. Kind of like using boats to attack ships.
exactly when you start thinking of it as a sky atv or motorcycle instead of a combat aircraft it makes alot of sense.
You could fit a whole bunch of them on an assault ship. You can shut the engine off and glide into the LZ in the dark. Insulate for reduced thermal signature. They also seem perfect for strafing trenches with dribbling bomblets.
For the costs this is underrated in numbers. Moving troops in mointain dense terrain can be a game changer
Insertion of sniper teams and forward observers is where these would shine, and let's be honest $4500 and an expendable Chinese soldier may be why they would equip these for ground attack.
the only thing i wonder is if these crafts have enough lift in mountains
@@delfinenteddyson9865 the video said they can go up to 4,5km... Not perfect to reach the top of every hymalayan mountain but good enough to bring them close
@@mugnuz good point!
If i imagine that even rocky terrain motorcycles or buggies cant go full speed on many terrains its even more valuable. But i guess you need to have that 65 meter runway to lift of again. But i guess thats easily doable with the first few landings.
I think Hamas just showed that this could work under certain circumstances.
It would be useful against lower tech enemies. Considering China has been making a lot of inroads across Africa, I can see a few countries wanting something like these to fight rebels and neighboring countries.
Yes, I believe China is developing two different sets of military equipment. The expensive anti-USA set, and the cheap anti-everybody else set.
@@caseyb1346 pvp gear vs pve gear LMAO
@@solarflare3382 pretty much LOL
It would have to be very low tech enemy since you won’t even need Manpads to shot them down
@@aaaaaaaard9586 Manpads would have a hard time locking on to it. MGs and Autocannons don't have the range, assuming its optical system is good for a few KM of range. Would need to bust out a WWII style flak cannon.
It's quite possible this could be used as some sort of jeep - just for getting soldiers around places that are not necessarily at or near the front lines.
Although it would definitely help get troops on tops of hills, ridges, and cliffs where a regular jeep would get stuck. Sometimes all you need is to win the race to the top while the other country has to march up.
They don't have to use the gyros in places where they can be shot down by the enemy, but they do make it easier to quickly transport a contingent of soldiers to a forward position where they can stop, counterattack or encircle the enemy.
We can laugh at these, but I wouldn't be laughing if they were loaded with light machine guns over a crowd of protesters.
@@scottlidstone1902Machineguns run out of bullets, but the engine affixed to this vehicle could be attached to a generator with aversive sound cannons. That would kill people's will to demonstrate themselves faster than a machine gun burst would
A gyrocopter is STOL not VTOL like a conventional helicopter. This means it's not as versatile and requires some sort of flat runway to pick/drop troops.
You're not going to be landing (and be able to take off / reuse the aircraft again) on any old unimproved section of ground...
I just LOVE the fact they are open toped ! The Enclave will make short work of these ... Just imagine a 20mm smacking one of these lol
Yep.. Dad built one. Main components were a £10 front disc wheel hub of a car (Rotor hub)..
£25 Aluminium scaffolding for the chassis, a free plastic school chair for sitting on, £100 for 2 x 11 foot wooden rotors and a £3000 brand new A registered Skoda Estelle II as a tether weight and transport device. It flew on a windy day with a 30 mph head wind.
Weaponry included laughability at the senseless central tether point dad used and bits of wooden rotor blades shattering after hitting a ploughed field at 300 mph from an altitude of 1 inch.
:) Memories.
The problem with gyro is that it is less likely to survive first shot due to minimal defense.
Guided missiles have a lot more range than a tank, plus it can traverse over obstacles making fire and retreat tactics very viable.
They do tend to land safely though through auto rotation though
This is actually a really interesting idea - considering the prevalence of mobile buggies/cars + ATGM teams on the fields in Ukraine, I imagine that this is almost an evolution of that...
Buggy makes sense, but gyrocopter? AAA and MANPADS is literally drooling at a perfect target.
Also in a war with the US it's extremely likely that drones would be inoperable due to significant EM warfare / Jamming capability. I view this as a human piloted Bayraktar to a degree from the cost and the armament
@@zulualpha3551 Would MANPADS lock onto a small autogyro? How difficult would it be to make it even more difficult using radar absorbing material or shrouding the engine or using an electric motor instead?
Im thinking they could drop an atgm team on top of a remote mountain somewhere easily.
@@jakeaurod MANPADS can even lock into a Limbach L-550 50HP engine copy, let alone Rotax-914 100HP that powered the autogryo in the video.
Imagine a hundred of these little things fly in like a horde of locusts, and land and disembark two troops per landing. If they fly five feet off the ground on approach, using terrain, they would be a nightmare to shoot down.
Here's the other thing: Gyros have extremely low maintenance needs, and Helicopters have extremely high maintenance needs. The hub of a gyro has one moving part for each blade in a simple blade. and a blade-plane angling plate. Build it strongly and it needs only a bit of oil pre-flight. Almost no maintenance except for the engine and control cables. Cheap, 10 hours training tops, No need to hire techs. Oh, one other thing: Landing a gyro is nearly always done with the engine at idle. If you lose your engine, you won't panic, they can land almost without any roll. You will live.
But all the rest is true.
They are easily mocked but I can for sure see it being effective when used correctly.
The listed stats for this contraption are max altitude of 15000ft and max speed of 112mph, with imaging capabilities including night vision sensors. At a price tag of 5500USD, almost every western anti-air system is going to be more expensive on a per-unit-of-ammunition basis, and if it's flying above 2500ft most small arms won't be able to reach it. Also, with the current supply chain issues of the NATO nations (Javelins are going to take years to replenish, and if I remember correctly Stingers are costing about 400k a piece because...Raytheon), one could imagine swarm tactics/high volumes of these being used to degrade Western AA capacity before sending in more valuable units, or being used for reconnaissance, artillery sighting, and even coordinating night attacks (small, relatively hard to detect aircraft with the lights off moving above the battlefield with night vision and updating ground troops on opposition disposition), especially if it's capacity is networked with ground commanders. I wouldn't underestimate a large force with a high degree of mobility and "disposable" troops using a combination of combined arms warfare and saturation attacks to deal some serious damage against a force using more expensive, more complex, lower-production-number hardware, and even if their equipment is cheap, China's got an edge on force generation capacity with a very large population and manufacturing base.
But why put a pilot in them? Just use them as drones, even cheaper. China has a big pop but its 2023 and they need their troops with recruitment going down.
@@keithw4920 I'd think they'd use them in combinations with drone swarms as highly flexible airmobile infantry. Drones to soak up AA, small units able to land and hold positions (since drones can't hold territory like infantry can), with the ability to penetrate far behind enemy lines. One could imagine that, in a scenario like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, such a capability could have allowed RusMOD forces to wreak havoc in rear areas, especially before the air defense systems were up and running fully...possibly engaging in the SEAD/DEAD roles with a higher degree of efficacy if these little gyrocopters have a small enough radar footprint to approach undetected. Also, remember that the 2M+ headcount of the PLA doesn't include the 4.3M+ "private security contractors" who are former PLA working for private and semi-private outfits who could be recalled to serve if the CCP feels like it.
Ground resonance is not an issue in normal teetering rotor gyros, only in the rare few with fully articulated rotors. Also, not really short takeoff, but VERY short landing. And while takeoffs are optional, landings are compulsory.
As long as you have a clutch where you can pre-spin the rotor to 60% RPM before starting to roll (which all that I have looked at do) they can take off in
After seeing what's just happened in Israel with the paragliders I think we should take these more seriously.
Yes completely agreed. what we're looking at here is China vs. the United States and gyrocopters used in a conventional war where one nation has a population of 1 billion and the other 330 million. Not terrorist attacks with Hamas and Israel with a combined population under 20 million.
I'd wager this thing is likely gonna be used as a rapid dispersment vehicle, with it being so cheap and quiet you can effectively depoly hundreds of troops in cheap transport into an area without much risk from enemy anti-air radar.
We've got a couple of gyrocopters (known as autogyro's where I am) that we see flying occasionally.
One thing they are NOT is quiet.
@@kieranh2005You know, that the noise is being compared to heli…? Do you…?
I could see this used in mass quantities as a method to suppress tanks or to rapidly deploy infantry
At 5000 dollars each (compared to 13 million for an attack helicopter) that's 2600 gyros of 1 attack helicopter.
And get shredded by AA guns straight out of WW2….
thats also 5200 pilots, missles, fuel for each, refueling, and then loss costs because they are unarmored.
you know what's cheaper? not dying.
@@ItsJoKeZ It really depends on how much value you place on the lives of your own troops.
If twelve of their soldiers die killing one of ours, the CCP sees that as thirteen dead men that were otherwise potentially dangerous to the party.
@@nobodyherepal3292 If you have enough AA guns to shred 2600 gyrocopters then no helicopter is getting through.
@@MrTreacletime true, which is why Taiwan has so many.
As shown in several of your video clips, some gyrocopters can spin up their rotor on the ground, allowing a jump takeoff from standstill.
You mean like a helicopter lol
@@nightwingaven69 Cheapest helicopter I could find (5 second search) was Composite-FX XE 290 at around $50k for one seat.
The Phoenix A600 Turbo will set you back $100k for two seats, and a Robinson R22 a whopping $300k.
If the gyro is around $5k for three seats (and 4 Hellfire'ish missiles?) - think sniper team delivery - pretty good bang for the buck.
A reduced take off, they still need a rolling start.
Lol 😂! 👍🤣🤣🤣
this footage looks so familiar...
it's like I've seen it on the news or something😆
I think this is genious, just look at Operation Varsity, where the allies used more than 1000 gliders to deploy troops behind the front.
A gyrocopter is much cheaper to fly than a helicopter, and much more compact than an aircraft. It can also land at very short runways (while granted not take of)
One advantage with Gyrcopters are that they are very compact in stored position, so they are easy to transport on trucks.
If you just need a dude in the sky, and there is no need to fly fast, or hover, a gyrocopter is probobly the cheapest solution. Yes, both a helicopter and a aircraft does have advantages, but they are more expensive.
Gyro copters can take off on very short runways almost vtol for some of them especially if there's a headwind or better yet jump takeoff. The problem I see with them is the same reason they are not super common for recreational and that's they are the most dangerous small aircraft and it's very easy to get them into a death spiral, I'd imagine if they're being shot at they will be much more likely to do the kinds of maneuvers that will lead to said spiral as well but, something tells me China has plenty of people to load these up with and couldn't care less if most of them don't make it back and this is seen as a cheap alternative to a cheap helicopter with better range/speed and less runway and storage space needed than a plane.
I think you may have missed another angle: Export sales. Even if these remain a niche piece of equipment for the PLA, there are plenty of other countries that would have use for something like this, especially at the kind of price point the Chinese are talking about.
now it make sense after attack on israel using glider
My theory is this might be "win through attrition" strategy. If you can make your enemies bankrupt themselves when your gear costs less, then you win by default.
These gyrocopters do not require microprocessors that would be subject to sanctions. This gives them a huge strategic advantage.
This is exactly how I see China looking at war they've got billions of people and would send cheap expendable waves to weaken defenses.
China can already make 14 and 22nm chips, and those are used in missiles and EVs.
The limited service ceiling is a critical issue if you want to use this thing in Tibet or the disputed areas of the Chinese-Indian border. The spec shown at 9:44 claims it is 4,500 metres or a bit under 15,000 feet. This coincidentally is the average altitude of the Tibetan plateau!
The most recent lethal fighting between Chinese and Indian troops in Ladakh, in the very north of Indian-admininistered Kashmir, was triggered by India building a road up to an airfield located at 5,000 metres. This is reachable by helicopters and conventional fixed-wing planes, but would apparently be beyond the reach of these Chinese gyrocopters.
They have already got one of the most powerful gyrocopter engines available. Apart from more power, apparently about the only other way of getting a gyrocopter higher is to increase the length of the rotor blades, but this has limits if you're operating from rough ground in mountainous territory.
As a side point, India still operates a fleet of Antonov AN-32 fixed wing twin engined turboprops. These are military transport aircraft specifically designed for rough mountain airstrips.
The Galwan Valley which is one of the flashpoints, has an average elevation of 18,000. No way that a gyrocopter will be useful at that altitude, even one designed for a higher altitude like the one Donatella Ricci used for her world record
@@driesvdc2 which could mean this is to be used elsewhere to alleviate more capable airframes. which instead of buying a new one buy hundreds -thousands (dependent of frame cost) of these. replace 1 current capable system with 30 of these to go there. freeing up 10 or so more for the price of one.
In addition to a regular helicopter fleet these can move people around fairly quickly and pretty cheap specially good for surveillance in rough terrain.
Hey Cappy: what do you think of this machine given that Hamas just used hang gliders to attack Israel? Not to mention the size of an attack might mean these vehicles are low priority targets for air defense. Just spit balling, but I wondered if real world examples might change opinions. Love the channel keep it up
I have a suspicion it's a numbers busting item. 5000 of those things would be reflected as + 5000 helicopters on the books. It's easily distinguishable when looked in, but when news media reports statistics and comparison of army's strengths, it's usually just basic numbers.
China has plenty of utility and attack helicopters, they have a domestic industry fyi.
More clever and viable than it seems at first. On a battlefield where combat drones can be electronically disabled and combat helos are high-value sitting ducks, the chinese gyro can be a really efficient asset. Well it's my own pov, for what it's worth.
Point-of-View, or Personally Owned Vehicle? Because I can definitely see using one of these to beat traffic to work.
@@davidgoodnow269 me too !
It's great for teaching hordes of servicemen the basics of vertibird flight. AKA when you're constrained on helicopter airframes, not on men, but have plans to produce tons of helicopters and want their crews familiar with something similar asap.
This actually sounds somewhat likely. Its a cheap frame and low operation costs mean it is pretty much perfect for early training of aircrew.
This strikes me as an ideal vehicle for the zombie apocalypse. Lightweight, easy to operate and maintain, and completely keeps the operator out of the hot zone.
There's one in Mad Max 2.
For the whole 6 months of fuel you'd get. Unless you can refine your own!
@@TheInfamousMrFox You can get a lot done with 6 months of effectively unlimited fuel.
The zombie apocalypse? What are you. Twelve
@@MrJimheeren You replied - what are you, thirteen?
This feels like an OP unit for a RTS game if you want to do a rushdown. It'll only be hampered by the long buildup time of an airfield where you will produce it.
If these things are small enough to send with paratroopers, that's a real game changer. You could absolutely wreak havoc with a couple of these behind enemy lines.
Battle proven
@@cal5566 By Hamas.
A couple years ago my local PD got a little gyrocopter like this sans the rocket launchers. Spent way too much money on it and then crashed it on it's maiden flights.
L
Considering how Hamas used paragliders for infiltration successfully, I would not write off these as a real threat in war.
I once helped building one.
The man that had it couldn't get permission to use it, for some arbitrary reason (just because!!!) but he didn't care and used it for years.
He was inspired by the German gyrocopters used on submarines.
A couple of drones will quickly ground those Chinese gyrocopters.
And I would like to have on.
Just after the Jetpack!
They've probably thought of something to do with drone defense. They aren't going to use equipment which they know has weaknesses.
Do it!
Build it!
Fly it!
Put it on RUclips!
When china brings back US mil vietnam ideas.
That German u boat gyrocopter is cool.
This thing is designed to give every infantryman high mobility and a small range of air supremacy, which almost elevates the ordinary army to the ranger-like mobility, as well as smaller RCS. Their enemies will know the benefits of low costs.
For $5500 search & rescue, troop transport, as decoys from a safe distance, I can see a lot of use for these.
This is not an ATTACK gyrocopter, more like cost-effective / nimble flying transportation vehicles in battlefield.
I've read how during the Korean War, American forces were awed by the waves of Chinese troops coming at them. There was carnage but they kept coming.
This is what these remind me of.
Same during the Sino-Vietnam War. The Vietnamese were shocked by how the Chinese were still using wave attacks.
Just at a glance this seems like a very interesting and quite honestly a good idea. I can see this being quite useful if built right and used in the right ways.
theyre very cheap so in long term attrition warfare and possibly failing economies theyd be easy to make quickly
The problem is you are extremely prone to ground fire and I’m sure the enemy will enjoy shooting you even if you get close enough to a tank
@@Roof_Korean. Not a problem for China, they have a shit ton of people. Imagine 100 of these swarming a tank at once.
@@dddd-zj7sy All the ground need to do is dust off the ol bofors 40mm
@@dddd-zj7sydude. This is nonsense. Just use a cheap drone. Why send your pilots to their inevitable deaths.
Interesting, and your reaction, Chris, is pretty much my initial reaction, but consider the situation in Ukraine at this time. The enemy has air dominance, so the use of large transport helicopters to insert special operations teams is highly risky, while advancing over heavily mined terrain is slow and bloody.
Imagine a small team, say 10 men inserted behind the enemy lines with their equipment. They could lay up until the following evening, strike hard and self extract. All that for a small fraction of the cost of one modem chopper.
How would you defend against such a strategy? Would it be an example of asymmetric warfare at its best?
My thoughts, exactly…
… or just send a hundred soldiers over the trenches, ammo delivered by drones, and just leave the Russians stuck in their trenches, without resupply, and let them clear the mine fields by walking to UA forces for giving themselves up.
@@DavidHalko What?
Consumer drones fitted with grenades and camera,
Train the some custom image recognition on pictures of these,
Send 20 £250 drones per gyrocopter in a swarm, fit each with a frag grenade
@chrissmith3587 - There are still occasions when "only a human" will do, but yes definitely drones where appropriate.
That's a good point. It's almost silly to contextualize the gyrocopter in traditional warfare. A flying ATGM on a small craft is already worth it alone. Sure, you could use drones of the same size, but drones can be jammed.
Confusion with autogyros is due to the constant comparison with helicopters due to there being a main lift rotor. It has always been the problem with auto gyro adaption. Seeing them as a wingless fixed wing aircraft or even parachutes and hang gliders their advantages seem easier to see. For military purposes, i can see advantages in covert special forces operation for its short take off, vertical landing ability (although, the latter takes some wicked skill and timing to pull off), ability to “glide” without power for the final mile and they’re cheap allowing them to be ditched. We all remember how radical idea the airborne infantry was with their parachutes and gliders back in the 40s and this seems like a more modern version of that without the need for a transport/tow plane and also allow for the soldiers to evacuate themselves.
I mean, these look like a fast way to transport quick strike squads flying at very low altitude and overcome difficult terrain, if these prove to be useful in combat they can easily be manufactured in the thousands.
Considering what they cost and the amount of manpower China has. I wouldn't be shocked if they floated 1 million of these things.
It is a flying motorcycle. Cheap and useful.
I could see a huge formation like you shown storm a tank column or a small base, the main advantage of having soldiers on board would be to be able to land after having wrecked havok and attack by surprise, but this seems a very sketchy plan as well.
I think this Chinese gyrocopter has a prerotator - the rotor is actually powered through a flexible drive shaft before take-off, and the rotor's momentum keeps it spinning until the air flowing up takes on the job. That's how it can take off in 60ft. The 1920s or 30s Cierva had a prerotator and had a close to zero ft run - they used to fly onto and off of skyscrapers to pick up mail.