General says U.S. Army has lost 130 helicopters in Iraq and Afghanistan

[Roland99]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/23/america/NA-GEN-US-Army-Helicopters.php

The U.S. Army has lost 130 helicopters in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, about a third to shoot-downs, its aviation director said Friday. He complained that industry is not replacing them fast enough.

"While the military may be on a war footing, our nation's industry is not on a war footing," said Brig. Gen. Stephen Mundt.

He said it takes 24 months to get replacement aircraft built and delivered and that replacements for the early losses are just now arriving.

...

Officials say militants are increasingly targeting choppers with an assortment of weapons, including machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. Asked if missiles were involved in any of the downings, he said officials would rather not reveal that.

War of attrition. This admin keeps repeating history over and over and over and they keep expecting a different result. I think we all know what that's the definition of.

[htuttle]

1. The Soviets lost just over 300 in the Afghan occupation

But that took about 9 years (though most of the losses were in just a few years).

[RL3AO]

2. But our helicopters are supposed to be so much more advanced.

[htuttle]

3. Well, they're certainly much more expensive.

[shadowknows69]

4. When you fly a chinook near a mountain hideout

and there are RPGs waiting. Advanced aint worth shit.

[Babsbrain]

5. Enough is enough

My wonderful son-in-law is an Army helo pilot in Iraq. He sees the idiocy of this 'war'. Yes, he volunteered to join, but he never volunteered to be a sitting duck.