Military Review

Ka-52M: how the new helicopter will catch up with Apache

197

"Alligator" that did not become a "crocodile"



The Ka-52 helicopter, despite its original coaxial layout and the extremely unusual placement of crew members side by side, is by far not the most frequent subject for discussion among amateurs aviation. One of the reasons lies on the surface: back in the early 2000s. propaganda has eaten bald patches with often absurd statements about the “fantastic possibilities” of the long-dead Ka-50 (basic version of the Ka-52 Alligator), which, due to shortcomings, could never have become the main attack helicopter of the Russian Air Force.

The Ka-52 is deprived of a frankly extreme single-seat layout, in which the pilot would have to feel like Julius Caesar in combat conditions. In fact, there is only one claim to the concept of the Ka-52 helicopter, again related to the placement of the crew. With this arrangement, the commander and operator of the weapons systems are deprived of the side view that the Mi-28N or Apache pilots have. In the case of bombers, the choice of the scheme side by side is caused by problems and loads characteristic of long-term flights. Why such an “happiness” to the attack helicopter is a big question.

However, this is not what interests us more. Let's talk better about on-board electronics and weapons of the Ka-52. Everything here is rather ambiguous. At first glance, the helicopter has a very serious advantage over many other machines of this class, including the Mi-28N (but not the Mi-28NM). He received a millimeter-range front-view radar complex “Crossbow”, which makes it possible to detect obstacles and ground targets and hit the latter more effectively. And also to fly at extremely low altitudes, in the mode of terrain mapping.


The situation was spoiled by "childhood diseases." You can, of course, read the victorious reports of the Russian Ministry of Defense, but the assessment of other countries will be much more objective. In our case, there is only one such country - Egypt. In 2018, Defense Blog reported that the Arab military was unhappy with export Ka-52s and wanted to buy more Apaches. “The new Ka-52 has technical problems with the power plant, avionics, navigation systems and night vision systems. In hot climates, the Ka-52 engine significantly loses power in different flight modes, ”writes Defense Blog. There is an alternative assessment. So, according to the Egyptian general Tarek Saad Zaglyul, the Russian car is not inferior to the Apache.

However, you need to understand that rumors are rarely taken from nowhere, and a professional military man, most likely, will not openly criticize his department for fear of unnecessary difficulties.

New helicopter?


The need for modernization is recognized in Russia itself. One of the problems is clearly visible to everyone: it is archaic air-to-surface weapons. It is, in particular, an anti-tank missile of the Ataka complex with a maximum range of about six kilometers and a radio command guidance system. Such a complex cannot always ensure effective destruction of targets in difficult combat conditions. It can be said simply: it is outdated.

In 2017, a photo appeared on the network in which you can see the “Syrian” Ka-52, armed with the anti-tank guided missile “Whirlwind-1”. Such a complex, of course, is better than “Attack”, but it was good in the 80s, when it was developed. Now that the United States is switching to the AGM-179 JAGM ATGM with the implementation of the “shot-and-forget” principle, the missile that needs to be guided by the laser beam can hardly be called modern. In difficult combat conditions, this is not only a big load on the crew, but also a significant risk for the helicopter to be shot down, since until the moment the target is hit, the machine cannot perform sharp maneuvers without fear of disrupting the capture. By the way, this once again demonstrates how "strange" the Ka-50 concept was, using these same "Whirlwinds".

Ka-52M: how the new helicopter will catch up with Apache

By the way, it is appropriate to recall that this principle “shot-forgot” on their “turntables” was implemented not only by Americans, but also by Germans. The Bundeswehr Eurocopter Tiger has the ability to use PARS 3 LR missiles with a range of more than seven kilometers. In this example (Europe is often criticized for the "disregard" for defense), it is clearly seen how much domestic weapons systems for helicopters have lagged behind in recent decades.

Fortunately for the Air Force, the upgraded Ka-52 is likely to have a much more serious strike potential. In May of this year, TASS reported that the upgraded Ka-52M helicopter will have much greater capabilities to engage ground and air targets than the basic version. “Work is underway related to an even greater increase in the range of detection and recognition of targets and, accordingly, an increase in the possibility of using weapons to work both on the ground and in the air,” the Russian Helicopters press service said in a statement. It is also known that the Ka-52M weapons range is unified with Mi-brand helicopters. And the helicopter flight range will also be increased.

And here the fun begins. Recall that in the spring of this year it became known that Russia is conducting tests of the latest missile in Syria, which is intended for the promising Mi-28NM attack helicopter. She received the name "product 305". According to data from open sources, the missile is capable of hitting targets at a distance of more than 25 kilometers, using an inertial system in the first leg of the flight and a multispectral homing head in the last. Thus, we are talking about an analogue (however, rather conditional) of the AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missiles and the aforementioned AGM-179 JAGM, using the principle of "shot-and-forget." At the same time, the range of the Russian missile, according to sources, is almost twice as high.


As for the "product 305", its high characteristics are largely achieved through the use of the aerodynamic scheme "duck" with developed nasal aerodynamic rudders. In addition, according to experts, due to the large diving angles to the target (60-70 degrees), the rocket can easily break through to the target, and it is not so afraid of Western active defense systems, such as Trophy and Iron Fist. There is logic in this.

Finally, as for the Ka-52M helicopter itself. It must be assumed that soon we will be able to see the first of these machines.

“There is a new development work that we began to carry out this year on further modernization. We hope that next year we will be able to enter into contracting, for our part, we will make every effort so that we can do it by analogy with the Mi-28 - so that we enter into a long-term contract with the Ka-52 in a modernized form, "

said Andrey Boginsky, head of the holding, in December 2019.

Despite the somewhat vague terms, we can say for sure that such an increase will be beneficial for the Russian Aerospace Forces. Even regardless of the test course of the “305 product” or some other promising ATGM.
Author:
197 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tlauicol
    tlauicol 19 December 2019 05: 31
    +1
    someone can explain about the "canard" scheme for missiles - why is it good? what's wrong?
    1. Monar
      Monar 19 December 2019 05: 59
      +14
      The same as in airplanes. No balancing loss. Well, roughly speaking, the stabilizer does not work out of phase with the wing.
      1. Sergey_G_M
        Sergey_G_M 19 December 2019 07: 18
        +15
        Well, you explained cool, but it’s not very clear, and on airplanes this works a bit differently.
        The duck has pluses: the rocket can reach large angles of attack, unlike the normal scheme, the rudders are not obscured by the hull and perturbed flows from the stabilizer (wing) do not act on the rudders; therefore, at large angles of attack, the rudders do not lose effectiveness, because the overload in missiles is created mainly by the hull - the duck is maneuverable; plus easier to place steering gears. Cons: Larger Cx and slightly larger mass (larger stabilizers are needed).
        1. Pavel57
          Pavel57 19 December 2019 10: 37
          +4
          It's just that the duck scheme is no better or worse, but in terms of the layout for a rocket, it can save weight. The only question is how roll stabilization is ensured.
  2. Thrifty
    Thrifty 19 December 2019 05: 39
    -2
    What does he have with the radar? Why can’t you install a sub-radar radar on it?
    1. Monar
      Monar 19 December 2019 06: 04
      +8
      There is a Ka-52 radar. And over the phthule it poses a problem due to the coaxial scheme itself.
    2. Magic archer
      Magic archer 19 December 2019 06: 09
      +21
      Because of the coaxial design. It is she who does not allow to install the radar there. Thanks to the author for the article. I remember I was putting on a lot of cons here when I swore on a branch about the backwardness of our ATGMs. Very "smart" comrades talked about the advantage of laser illumination and about the optional analogue of Hellfire. Well, I hope you will read both the article and my comments, and remember that our battle hi
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 19 December 2019 06: 45
        +17
        He also believed that this was impossible, but the comrades enlightened:

        True, this radar, as they say, is only surveillance, without the possibility of guidance. Compare with Mi-28
        .
        1. Magic archer
          Magic archer 19 December 2019 07: 04
          +2
          In fact of the matter. Sense then from such a radar? If we put it fully, and the Kamov scheme, unfortunately, does not give such an opportunity
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 19 December 2019 07: 08
            +8
            There is an option to install an aiming radar and an over-the-beam surveillance radar and warning radar over the cockpit
            But in my opinion, this is an original chatter.
            1. Magic archer
              Magic archer 19 December 2019 07: 12
              +2
              I saw such an arrangement. But still, the location like Longbow is optimal. From an ambush, in the conditions of mountains, a city and hilly terrain, this is ideal. It hung, looked, pointed, shot, forgot, hid. What we are going to but cannot get
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 19 December 2019 07: 16
                0
                One could argue if not for the Mi-28N. )))
                1. Magic archer
                  Magic archer 19 December 2019 07: 20
                  +12
                  In general, I consider it wasteful to have two helicopters in the troops, for one task. It’s better to have one, doped, massive. And so do not understand what. There are three types of tanks in the army72,80,90, XNUMX, XNUMX. I won’t count Armata. BMP is also not much. Three attack helicopters. And this is just what immediately came to mind. And if you think about it, then there are so many different kinds of equipment, oooo recourse
                  1. Vladimir_2U
                    Vladimir_2U 19 December 2019 07: 22
                    +14
                    Kamov worked for the fleet, mainly, there compactness oh how demanded. And the Ka-50/52 attempted breakthrough into the army arena, in the end no one canceled the competitions.
                    1. EvilLion
                      EvilLion 19 December 2019 08: 34
                      +7
                      In the fleet, the helicopter needs to be planted on a very limited area, and the co-drivers shakes less, plus they are often busy hanging or unhurriedly towing anti-submarine equipment. In general, when the Mi-8 already appeared, nothing comparable to the coaxial design simply existed, the Ka-15 is probably the first attempt at the serious operation of such helicopters, and the Ka-27 is already the 70th.
                  2. V.I.P.
                    V.I.P. 19 December 2019 11: 21
                    +3
                    And we also have sauacation, carnation, revenge, coalition, hyacinth, peony. Towed artillery is no less diverse)). Motor transport is a lubricant. bases, KamAZ. Ural. gas, even kraz and zil. Such a variety is burdensome both in money and in logistics ....
                    1. Revolver
                      Revolver 20 December 2019 19: 47
                      +2
                      Quote: V.I.P.
                      Such a variety is burdensome both in money and in logistics ....

                      What do you suggest? How did they adopt the new model, so immediately the entire fleet of old equipment for remelting?
                      Or is the opposite extreme option not to accept anything new while the old equipment is still operational? Well, they would go to the GAZ-51 to this day, but why, the car is repaired under any conditions with two keys and a sledgehammer, and uses 66th gasoline.
                      The truth, as always, is somewhere in between, and where specifically, I personally do not presume to poke.
                  3. Serg4545
                    Serg4545 21 December 2019 06: 23
                    0
                    Quote: Magic Archer
                    In general, I consider it wasteful to have two helicopters in the troops, for one task. It’s better to have one, doped, massive. And so do not understand what. There are three types of tanks in the army72,80,90, XNUMX, XNUMX. I won’t count Armata. BMP is also not much. Three attack helicopters. And this is just what immediately came to mind. And if you think about it, then there’s going to be so many different kinds of equipment


                    On the one hand, you are right.
                    But on the other:
                    All this went back to the time of the Warsaw Pact.
                    NATO also produced a huge number of types of different, seemingly the same type of technology. Different countries produced their equipment.
                    In the Warsaw Pact, the production of modern weapons was concentrated, almost entirely in the Soviet Union. And what was produced in other countries was often a licensed copy.
                    And so far, there is diversity in both NATO and Russia.
                    Perhaps there is a practical sense in this, since this diversity exists.
                    1. LastPS
                      LastPS 3 January 2020 09: 54
                      +2
                      The military-industrial complex is a very technological industry, it is a bunch of jobs, it is a huge market. All ATS countries had their own truck production, for example. The Czechs also made their own armored personnel carriers and a rifle with a machine gun and the TCB. Even adopting Soviet models, everyone tried to localize production at home, of what is possible.
                  4. 3danimal
                    3danimal 21 December 2019 14: 20
                    -1
                    So the country is rich ... And the choice of leadership is obvious: as wasteful as possible. And for the treatment of children we will continue to collect money via SMS.
              2. Monar
                Monar 19 December 2019 07: 28
                +5
                Yeah. And if the locator is put up 10 meters up the bar, it will turn out gorgeous (irony).
                On Apache, the radar antenna simply has nowhere else to put. From the word at all.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 19 December 2019 08: 38
                  +11
                  Interesting opinion, but controversial. Ka-31 as if
                  smiles in response: Joke!
                  1. Monar
                    Monar 19 December 2019 09: 24
                    +5
                    Different cars, for different purposes. Well and accordingly the implementation is different.
                    I smile back. )))
              3. 5-9
                5-9 19 December 2019 12: 16
                +13
                Forgot about it, after Karbala this is only for computer toys left. Americans in Iraq abandoned such tactics.
                It turned out that the hanging helicopter can be seen and heard for many kilometers, under Karbala slippers reached the turntables in jeeps or ran on foot and watered them from 7,62 and (a little) 12,7, so 33 out of 32 turntables were only damaged, not knocked down. The conclusions of the amers are that in a maneuvering war and without a clear front line, something from 14,5-20-23-30-35-40 mm can go from side to back and make a colander ....
              4. Ka-52
                Ka-52 20 December 2019 14: 22
                +3
                From ambushes, in the conditions of mountains, the city and hilly terrain it is an ideal. It hung, looked, pointed, shot, forgot, hid.

                let's write in detail HOW you will hide. I will not even cling to the nuances of piloting. I’m interested in HOW do you determine the flight altitude above / behind the obstacle that will allow you to remain in the shade for the optical and radar control authorities. Or type squeaked l150 - it means noticed - down, no - up. So what? lol
            2. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 19 December 2019 11: 25
              +2
              There were restrictions on the height of the structure and the size of the ball ... and, accordingly, on the power of the radar. And with this topic and left.
            3. Gray brother
              Gray brother 19 December 2019 11: 36
              +1
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              But in my opinion, this is an original chatter.

              I have a suspicion that it will be unhealthy.
            4. Potato
              Potato 20 December 2019 09: 01
              +2
              This is not a radar over the cockpit. This is a French-made OLS.
          2. URAL72
            URAL72 19 December 2019 14: 16
            0
            In theory, the separation of radar detection and guidance increases the possibility of detecting stealth targets. But here, of course, the main thing is a constructive scheme.
        2. Monar
          Monar 19 December 2019 07: 21
          0
          It is not a matter of fundamental impossibility. The thing is that heap of problems, what a lot of problems such an implementation drags at the current level of development of helicopter radars.
          1. Monar
            Monar 19 December 2019 07: 44
            0
            Can you find out the reason? If it's not hard for you?
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 19 December 2019 08: 29
        -2
        What nafig difference for the radar, what will be the scheme? Lay the cable through the shaft of the screw and that's it. Do not write nonsense. But the capabilities of such a radar due to its size are somewhat doubtful.
        1. Monar
          Monar 19 December 2019 09: 22
          +3
          You are joking?
          Quote: EvilLion
          Lay the cable through the shaft of the screw and that's it.
          And those cables that are now going to do?
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 19 December 2019 12: 07
            +1
            But what, does the Mi-28 fail there?
            1. Monar
              Monar 19 December 2019 14: 46
              +6
              Mi-28 inside the rotor shaft does not pass the shaft of the second rotor. And the main gearbox of helicopters of the coaxial circuit differs from the single-rotor quite strongly.
              I will modestly keep silent about "laid the cable and that's it." There, besides the wires, there is still a lot of things needed. )
              1. EvilLion
                EvilLion 19 December 2019 14: 49
                0
                Does this shaft take up the entire volume?
                1. Monar
                  Monar 19 December 2019 16: 04
                  +4
                  No. Not all. So what? Do you really think that to install a radar on the hub of a screw it is enough just to forward a couple of dozen wires?
                  1. EvilLion
                    EvilLion 19 December 2019 16: 51
                    -1
                    No, I just don’t think that the inner shaft of the second screw can be a nuisance.
                    1. Monar
                      Monar 19 December 2019 17: 07
                      +7
                      Well, if the "wires" can still be drawn, then a tremendous bunch of problems begin further. And the most "primitive" how to fix the radar.
                      Well, see for yourself the Ka-52 swashplate. There, at the very top, is the part that "skews" during flight.
                      1. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 19 December 2019 21: 51
                        +4
                        Quote: Monar
                        swash plate

                      2. Grits
                        Grits 20 December 2019 03: 59
                        +2
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        swash plate

                        Well this must be invented. I just can’t understand how this complex mechanism works.
                      3. Monar
                        Monar 20 December 2019 05: 39
                        +5
                        I just can’t understand the principle

                        Look here. In my opinion it is well described enough.
                        http://avia-simply.ru/avtomat-perekosa-vertoleta/
                      4. Grits
                        Grits 20 December 2019 08: 54
                        +1
                        Quote: Monar
                        Look here. In my opinion it is well described enough.

                        Very informative, thanks for the reference.
      3. Alien From
        Alien From 19 December 2019 12: 56
        +6
        The same story was with me, as soon as the Hellfire recalled, I immediately found myself in minus abysses .....
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 21 December 2019 14: 26
          +2
          To talk about Hellfire in a non-derogatory way is “not a jingoistic patriotic”, therefore the minuses of a “jingoistic patriotic public”.
      4. Incvizitor
        Incvizitor 20 December 2019 16: 37
        +1
        I also wrote in due time that to accompany yesterday, if not the day before yesterday, before the defeat. There were also cons.
    3. 5-9
      5-9 19 December 2019 12: 11
      +4
      Why (just don’t need nonsense about some advantage from raising it by 2 meters) and how (with the coaxial scheme)?
    4. venik
      venik 19 December 2019 17: 42
      +9
      Quote: Thrifty
      What does he have with the radar? Why can’t you install a sub-radar radar on it?

      =======
      Lord Well, HOW am I tired of human STupidity !!!!
      And THIS (above the screw) - WHAT ???

      The question is different: Does it NEED him ??? fool Especially in the presence of the POWERFUL "bow" radar "Crossbow" ??? request
      1. Grits
        Grits 20 December 2019 04: 01
        +4
        Quote: venik
        The question is different: Does it NEED him ???

        I don’t understand either - what is the point of making such a garden in order for the radar to be one and a half meters higher?
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 21 December 2019 14: 29
        +1
        Powerful radar is low, and the upper one is weak and performs only a survey function. As a result, it will not be possible to direct missiles “without protruding”, in contrast to the Apache layout.
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 06
          +1
          Quote: 3danimal
          it will not work to direct missiles "not protruding", in contrast to the Apache layout

          At Apache it turns out only in the cinema.
      3. aiden
        aiden 24 December 2019 21: 05
        +1
        Now they will zamusutut, but I will say something. The sub-muzzle radar appeared on the Mi-28 back in Soviet times in the 80s. And she appeared much earlier than on the Apaches. And they most likely refused it because there were no weapons under it, as many here write shot and forgot, or realized that it was not needed. As many here write about the principle of hiding under the hills after launch, these are ideal conditions. There are different hills, they even know how to shoot. You just need to look at the tactics of using helicopters, and it will be clear whether they need this sub-radar radar or not. And she did not help the Saudis in Yemen. Shot down and all.
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 28
          +1
          Quote: aiden
          Now they will zamusutut, but I will say something. The sub-muzzle radar appeared on the Mi-28 back in Soviet times in the 80s.

          No, you're wrong. In the 80s, the "snub-nosed" radar was not planned. At that time, the experience of using attack helicopters in Afghanistan showed that an optical location station was enough. Therefore, it was not planned to install a radar on the Mi-28. Rather, as "not planned". The story was this: when the layout of the helicopter was formed, and the swivel gun was supposed to be initially, this was required by the experience of Afghanistan, the developers of the sighting and navigation complex suggested that Fazotron develop a radar for the vehicle. But "Phazotron" zass ... was overwhelmed, saying that it is impossible to put a radar next to the gun, and there is no place, and it is too difficult to make a radar above the bushing. And he took up the radar for the Ka-50.

          Quote: aiden
          they refused it most likely due to the fact that there are no weapons under it, as many here write shot and forgot, or realized that it was not needed.


          Nope, the reason is higher. Fazotron's management simply decided that from the Ka-50 to the state prize and Hero of Socialist. labor is closer than with the Mi-28. "Kamov" had that hoo! And what about Mil? So, "thinner crocodile".

          Quote: aiden
          You just need to look at the tactics of using helicopters, and it will be clear whether they need this sub-radar radar or not.

          I need it. First, the radar sharply increases the range of the weapon. Anyone, even "shoot-forget", even "shoot-hit". In the "optics" it is difficult to see what is on the ground, even with an IR channel. The "attack" flies for 7-8 kilometers, but the helicopter cannot "see" something at such a distance. The radar pushes the "horizon" 20 kilometers.
          Secondly, the radar makes it possible to carry out automatic target recognition and tracking it with greater accuracy and stability.
    5. abc_alex
      abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 03
      +1
      Quote: Thrifty
      What does he have with the radar? Why can’t you install a sub-radar radar on it?

      It is possible, but it is not necessary. The empty "nose" of the car is great for placing a radar in it. The Mi-28 has a reversible cannon in its nose, so there is no way to place a radar station there.
  3. Strashila
    Strashila 19 December 2019 06: 26
    +2
    The car began to fly, problems climbed. This is normal, it is important to quickly identify and eliminate them.
    It is important that all of its four hemispheres moved allies, the same radar and REV, weapons.
    Then it will be good.
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 19 December 2019 07: 03
    +7
    Unfortunately, losses in "hard times" and the general insufficient level of development of domestic electronics, the electronic industry in general, will delay development, as a result, the demand for our technology EVERYWHERE!
    What to do, what to do ??? Work, do not just run FOR, do what you need!
  5. Nehist
    Nehist 19 December 2019 07: 19
    -2
    And now we laugh together! The combatant Ka52 and Mi28NM do not have a supra-muzzle radar. And the author’s claim that (It’s also known that the Ka-52M weapons nomenclature is unified with Mi helicopters.) Complete nonsense. All with accuracy on the turn ...
    1. Flooding
      Flooding 19 December 2019 07: 48
      +3
      Quote: Nehist
      The combatant Ka52 and Mi28NM do not have an over-the-body radar

      Ka-52 never had them.
      Like the Mi-28N.
      But as for the Mi-28NM, then here is https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3698614.html
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 19 December 2019 07: 56
        0
        Experienced copy. Watch the same air shows and parades. There is not a single 28NM front-end combat radar. Failed
        1. Flooding
          Flooding 19 December 2019 08: 01
          +1
          Quote: Nehist
          Experienced copy. Watch the same air shows and parades. There is not a single 28NM front-end combat radar. Failed

          You did not master the article?
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 19 December 2019 08: 07
            -5
            Gg, I mastered it, but apparently you do not. Over 28 sub-muzzle radars, exactly so much laughter has been going on for about 5 years already, as well as over its refinement to the mind. For 40 years, does this know much for a helicopter. You can take the last 15 and everything that they try to do with it. Thank God that all the same gash double control ...
            1. Flooding
              Flooding 19 December 2019 08: 12
              +2
              Quote: Nehist
              Experienced copy. Watch the same air shows and parades. There is not a single 28NM front-end combat radar. Failed

              Quote: Nehist
              Gg, I mastered it, but apparently you do not.


              Quote: from the same article on bmpd
              Recall that on June 23, 2019, on the air of the Zvezda TV channel, Andrei Boginsky, Director General of the Russian Helicopters holding company, said that the Aerospace Forces of the Russian Federation received the first two serial combat helicopters Mi-28NM (installation party) and "soon" these helicopters will be connected to state tests. In 2020, the Russian Ministry of Defense will receive six more Mi-28NM helicopters.
            2. EvilLion
              EvilLion 19 December 2019 08: 30
              +7
              In a separate UB model? Yes, this is funny against the backdrop of the Ka-52.
            3. abc_alex
              abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 44
              0
              Quote: Nehist
              Over 28 sub-muzzle radars, exactly so much laughter has been going on for about 5 years already, as well as over its refinement to the mind.

              I don’t know what the laughter attacks of the past 5 years have personally caused in you, but the factory tests of the over-the-barrel radar for the Mi-28 ended only in 2017. All exhibits in the past were shown either with prototypes or with radars of a foreign manufacturer. The development of the radar began in 2007. What 40 years are you talking about?
              The Mi-28N was put into service in 2008, and tests began in 2007. So, formally, it has been formally a little over 10 years old. In reality, the Moscow Region accepted it in 2013.
              Even if you start the countdown with the Mi-28A, then it was prepared for 1993. That is a little over 25 years ago. Or did you count off the decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR of December 16, 1976?

              Quote: Nehist
              Thank God that all the same gash double control ...

              Did someone demand such exotic things before? I remind you that the helicopter was made according to the military specifications, and was not designed to be drunk. When the military demanded pair control, they made pair control.
        2. karelia molot
          karelia molot 19 December 2019 09: 58
          +9
          Yes, there is simply not a single Mi-28NM combatant. Not in the troops yet. Good clever here, lover ... Laugh ...
        3. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 11: 27
          +1
          the NM version is only now being tested ... in the H version, at first they put a "ball" without a radar. Then, it seems, the radar itself has matured.
          1. abc_alex
            abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 45
            -1
            Quote: Zaurbek
            in version H, at first they put a "ball" without a radar. Then, it seems, the radar itself has matured.

            I won’t say for sure which one, but they put some kind of import ...
  6. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 19 December 2019 07: 32
    -1
    Thank. I read it with pleasure and learned something new.
  7. Amateur
    Amateur 19 December 2019 08: 10
    +14
    1.
    single layout, in which the pilot would have to feel like Julius Caesar in combat conditions

    Probably the pilots of single Su35 / F-35 feel like Julius Legat
    2.
    ... loses power in different flight modes, ”writes Defense Blog. There is an alternative assessment. So, according to the Egyptian general Tarek Saad Zaglyul ...

    The journalist from the Defense Blog is "honest, honest," and the general is "stupid but incompetent." Naturally, the Defense Blog will advertise Apache.
    3.
    In 2017, a photo appeared on the network in which you can see the “Syrian” Ka-52, armed with the anti-tank guided missile “Whirlwind-1”. Such a complex, of course, is better than “Attack”, but it was good in the 80s, when it was developed.

    Russia is testing in Syria the latest missile, which is intended for perspective Mi-28NM attack helicopter. She received the name "product 305"

    And what prevents it from being used on the Ka-52?
    1. Monar
      Monar 19 December 2019 09: 35
      +2
      Quote: Amateur
      And what prevents it from being used on the Ka-52?

      The electronics must be changed. And it is not so simple and not so fast. Given the requirements of the military.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 19 December 2019 11: 29
      -4
      Do not confuse a single fighter with a single helicopter ..... strike aircraft are always double .... the target must be sought and aim weapons at it. The first serial single drummer - F-35.
      1. Amateur
        Amateur 19 December 2019 13: 50
        +9
        attack aircraft are always double.

        Especially: IL-2, Su-7B (BM, BKL), Su-17 (M, M2, M3, M4), Su-25. Import to list laziness.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 14: 18
          -4
          These are pretty primitive systems. Which are unlikely to be able to search for goals themselves .... Tornadoes, Su24, F16, F15 in shock versions are all two local. A helicopter low flies a lot of information for one pilot.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 19 December 2019 14: 40
            +7
            Su-17 and MiG-27 are anything but primitive.
          2. Amateur
            Amateur 19 December 2019 14: 42
            +4
            These are pretty primitive systems. Which are unlikely to be able to search for goals themselves .... Tornadoes, Su24, F16, F15 in shock versions are all two local.

            The crew of the AC-130U Spooky aircraft includes 13 people: 2 pilots, a navigator, 2 observers, 4 radio electronic equipment operators, a fire control officer and 3 gunners.

            For a change, a strike aircraft with a crew of 13 people!
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 19 December 2019 16: 46
              +3
              To each his own goals ..... to fly with a nuclear weapon is one goal .... to go along a difficult route and with a wide choice of weapons is another goal.
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 19 December 2019 22: 50
                +4
                At one time I read that the Ka-50 and Ka-52 were supposed to be armed at the same time. Several Ka-50s and Ka-52 coordinating them. I do not know how this corresponds to the truth.

                In general, it is not clear when they talk about robotization in the army and at the same time scold the helicopter where a step was made in this direction (the crew was reduced from two to one). And now the MiG "hunter" is flying, where there is no pilot at all and this is considered an advantage. A fully automatic tank was tested (based on the T-72), which itself found targets and destroyed (the most dangerous in the first place). That is, when there is no one in the cabin, it is normal, but when there is one instead of two, this is not enough.
                1. Petrix
                  Petrix 31 December 2019 19: 11
                  0
                  Quote: Bad_gr
                  That is, when there is no one in the cabin, it’s normal, but when there is one instead of two, then this is not enough.

                  This is a threat to the pilot. In a two-seater helicopter, the threat is less due to a decrease in the information load and an increase in the speed of reaction. There is no threat at all in unmanned aerial vehicles.
                  Ka-50 is the helicopter of the future. Upon reaching the level of automation until the moment allowing you to easily exclude the second crew member, all helicopters will become single. Ka-50 is also a big reserve in the direction of unmanned.
                  In this case, the "hardware" is already ready, it is waiting for the "brains". With this development, everyone will begin to design new helicopters or, as a temporary option, to adapt two-seat structures. In Russia, the helicopter is already ready.
            2. Revolver
              Revolver 20 December 2019 19: 59
              0
              Quote: Amateur
              For a change, a strike aircraft with a crew of 13 people!

              Watering from above in the complete absence of enemy aircraft and air defense is a very specific task. And at the first hint of the possibility of counteraction, they won’t even fly into the air, because this attack aircraft is a large, slow, non-maneuverable target without the slightest armor protection.
    3. abc_alex
      abc_alex 26 December 2019 22: 55
      -1
      Quote: Amateur
      Probably the pilots of single Su-35 / F-35 feel like Julius Legat

      I can enumerate in detail how the tactics of using an attack helicopter differ from that for information security, but it takes a long time. Let me put it simply: the helicopter is blind. He "sees" very badly. Plus, he's nearsighted. It is very difficult to get a complete picture of the battlefield from him, especially if he is busy with something else.

      Quote: Amateur
      And what prevents it from being used on the Ka-52?

      Ah, this is a separate song. :)
      You see, the Ka-52 was made at a time when the concept of an "open system" was absent and it was made for a completely different weapons complex. But with "Whirlwind" there was a mess, I had to screw the "Shturm" onto the car, and they screwed it up badly. So now, I believe, it is necessary to redo the entire URO complex.
      Mi-28M also actually do with another complex URO.
  8. EvilLion
    EvilLion 19 December 2019 08: 26
    +22
    Some kind of nonsense, not an article. The Ka-50 was created for the very specific conditions of mass raids, when the helicopter pilot differs little from the Su-25 or A-10 pilot. Well, there are no more scandals and hysterics around him than around anything else. The claim to the "vortex" at the time of its creation sounds absolutely ridiculous. In addition, the "fire-and-forget" principle presupposes the presence of its own sighting systems on the missile, which, in the case of, for example, infrared heads of air-to-air missiles, is solved automatically, but very non-trivial for an anti-tank missile. For example, such a rocket should itself be able to select a target in the picture, or should be guided in automatic mode from the carrier, which, after capturing the target and launching, will solve this problem without the participation of the pilot, adjusting to the carrier's maneuvers.

    But what does this have to do with a helicopter?
    1. max702
      max702 19 December 2019 10: 07
      +27
      Quote: EvilLion
      But what does this have to do with a helicopter?
      Reply

      The article looks like a stone in the Kamovtsev gardens after another lethal incident with MI-28 .. That’s time to rename it as a widowmaker as it was with one American plane .. All the problems with the Ka-50 are far-fetched and the ardent initiator of the MI KB .. a clear advantage, but the MI factories cannot leave without orders from here, and bloody torment with MI-28, Missile equipment does not depend on the brand of the helicopter, this is a question for the missilemen, on the over-hub radar, the answer is very simple for MI-28 due to high vibrations due to constructive miscalculations in the gearbox, on the navigation radar spacecraft, the reception of the hang behind the wall is not particularly necessary and I see everyone used only in the cinema "fire birds" in reality this mode is not in demand, just like the shot I forgot the effectiveness of the missiles is too low ... on the KA-52, you can install the most powerful AFAR radar nose position, this allows .. For KA-50 there is one concrete argument ONE pilot is ONE coffin, not TWO .. The second pilot is at least400 + kg to the weight of the helicopter, for example, the rate of climb of the KA-50 is 30m / s for the KA-52 15m / s, and this is the most important characteristic for a helicopter, and the booking clearly does not improve, as does the price. By the way, about the price, not everyone remembers how the Milevtsy ached like KA are very expensive and complicated, in contrast to the workers' peasant MI-28, and now years have passed, then more years, and what do we see? Milevtsy keep quiet about the price because this is another myth from the same that it is impossible to fly a helicopter alone, the price myth is over. \ 50 .. A frankly unsuccessful car in terms of characteristics is worse than that of competitors but with a similar price .. True, there is production and design bureaus with very correct surnames for the management ..
      1. Potato
        Potato 19 December 2019 10: 55
        -2
        Well, 2 crew members is a helicopter specificity precisely because the attack aircraft and the helicopter have different targets on the battlefield. I mean the goal as what he needs to detect and hit on the battlefield. For a helicopter, this is all the way down to individual enemy soldiers.

        The main device for monitoring the battlefield and targeting the helicopter's weapons is a powerful remote video camera (with variable magnification, infrared or other channels, stabilized, combined with sighting systems of onboard weapons). While this is so, a separate additional crew member is needed - an operator and a "gunner". By analogy with armored vehicles, this is a gunner. And piloting, monitoring the air situation, using homing weapons, and so on - this, and one pilot can perform. Like stormtroopers.

        At ka50, all this could not be effectively combined in the duties of one pilot, as far as I know. It is impossible to pilot and simultaneously effectively monitor the battlefield. In the future, it may be possible to automate the task of piloting a helicopter, monitoring the battlefield, detecting targets and aiming weapons with artificial intelligence systems, and leave one crew member who will be helped by the machine to make decisions. But not in the time of ka50, decades ago, in the past.
        1. max702
          max702 19 December 2019 11: 12
          +11
          Quote: Potato
          At ka50, all this could not be effectively combined in the duties of one pilot,

          Everything worked out and the military worked out, the problems in those days were with orienting on the ground and going to the specified area, the co-pilot was engaged in precisely the navigational work, today in the era of Glonas and GPS this is not a problem at all, as well as transmitting target designation from reconnaissance means, why is the pilot of the SU -25 sees goals, but not on KA-50? And this despite the fact that the speed of use of the helicopter is radically less? And if there were any problems in the 80s, today they don’t exist, the only reason you need a co-pilot today is to control the drones included in the arsenal of a helicopter. But this is a matter of such a distant future that by then even tomorrow produced helicopters will have developed their resources .. I will repeat which time, alas, in the army, it’s often not military expediency that decides, but an admin resource .. Failure to take the Ka-50 to mass production is a crime and sabotage .. For which people pay with their lives and not only pilots, but especially infantry which received fire support because of the small number of equipment and its low efficiency ..
          1. Potato
            Potato 19 December 2019 11: 32
            -5
            I can not agree with you. Even in theory, there was nobody and nothing to monitor the battlefield. He had an aiming complex flurry - the same as that of the Su50t attack aircraft.

            On the Su25T, it is not used for observation, but for pointing some types of guided weapons. You wondered how the Su25 detects and searches for targets. What is visible in his sight. Where does the location of the enemy come from? From external sources. Su25 flies to the target area, the pilot knows its approximate location in advance, visually searches for the target! in the area of ​​its possible location, and even then it turns on the sight, searches for the target in a narrow field of view on the monitor, takes the photo-contrast target into the capture for automatic tracking and launches.

            And all this is not suitable for a helicopter. The attack aircraft are blind, with even more advanced sights. They never look for individual enemy soldiers and do not fire at them from a cannon. They need external target designation. And the helicopter hangs over the battlefield and searches for opponents itself. It’s not good for him!
            1. max702
              max702 19 December 2019 12: 03
              +6
              The reality speaks differently, just as the helicopter receives the control gear and works the same way, 99% is NAR and the pilot uses them when it sees the target, that is, the second pilot rides as a passenger occasionally using SDs mainly subsonic solving the problem of coordination with the pilot’s actions so that the rocket I didn’t get out of the guidance beam that I find the goals myself I will repeat until the pilot saw nothing, it is clear that the second pair of eyes is better than one, but how much higher is the efficiency? 100% or 150%, or maybe 20-30%? Hanging over the battlefield doesn’t work! Only the work by approaches Ukraine confirmed this as the Afghan earlier, in the same Syria there are no funnels and sideways flights because it is fraught, if the possibility of reaching the target is repeated, there is no need to hang and search for goals. Dali TsU worked the rest as lucky ..
              1. EvilLion
                EvilLion 19 December 2019 12: 18
                +5
                Well, in general, he still twists his head and can steer a pilot in battle. Dr. the point is that all this is from the 60s, and the Ka-50 was created, realizing that a helicopter can only attack well-reconnoitered targets, otherwise it will be like the amers with a raid on the Medina division, when something went wrong and in fact the regiment became incapable of combat, having lost and written off 5 vehicles upon its return. That is, the reconnaissance was removed from the drummer, and the head-turning was assigned to the commander-passenger in the training-commander Ka-52, which were still needed at least as a spark.
              2. Potato
                Potato 19 December 2019 12: 18
                -2
                This is the case with our helicopters ... Precisely because the electron-optical systems for reconnaissance and weapon guidance are of poor quality — low-resolution cameras, poor optics, poor thermal imagers, and so on. Therefore, they work almost like blind attack aircraft. But how are they ...
              3. Potato
                Potato 19 December 2019 13: 09
                -5
                And finally. Here's the cab 50. How to search for goals? Here on the screen of this tiny TV with 700-800 lines from a flurry? We just look here and understand that even for the 90s this was not good at all.


                Below is generally a screenshot from the game. In life, the image is worse there
                1. EvilLion
                  EvilLion 19 December 2019 14: 43
                  +4
                  There the camera itself was not very, but it’s like the 80s. But just while you are looking for goals, their air defense of the helicopters themselves clicks. Now it’s strange to talk about bad thermal imagers somehow.
                  1. Potato
                    Potato 20 December 2019 08: 57
                    +2
                    This is not the 80s, this is the early 2000s! The CRT in the sighting complex is here because all the electronics from the whirlwind rocket to this very "Shkval" sight with a laser rangefinder are from the 80s without changes, digital-to-analog. Here is the flight navigation device on the right with an LCD screen, purely digital, from foreign components and created in their likeness. But whirlwinds, assaults and attacks completely on digital electronics did not work out in those days, and they had to take the old ones as they are. And the equipment turned out to be almost an analogue of the su25t, but rotary-winged. Only he turned out to be of no use to anyone in this form. What would a pilot look for a target on the battlefield? With binoculars!

                    And now thermal imagers are worse. In general, everything related to on-board electronic systems and devices. Especially those that should be mass produced. This is not and when it appears is unknown. And we were forbidden to buy foreign. All hope for Chinese components ...
                    1. EvilLion
                      EvilLion 20 December 2019 09: 26
                      -1
                      Once again, where does the camera come from the 80s? It’s important for a rocket not to be digital, but to find the goal. And at my place the first LCD monitor appeared in the 2006th year, around this time they reached any sane quality at least in the mass consumer segment. Black-and-white LCD indicators in the USA, for example, were introduced for the first time in the early 90s on the F / A-18, and then the pilots complained that they were lit. So do not write nonsense about uncontested at the beginning of the 2000s CRT.

                      As for the target search, ask how attack pilots are looking. The correct answer is no way, the pilot sees only the course, so the goal should in any case be explored. At the same time, the helicopter has such a disaster that the pilot sees the target on the course somewhat earlier than the weapons operator. For the slow-witted, I repeat once again, in a helicopter, the pilot and weapons operator, he needs to shoot, he can look around only before the battle.

                      But the Milians do not thank God for the competitor, and the blades collide (about the fact that in the classical scheme the screws hit the cockpit and chop the tail booms, this does not take into account accidents due to wind, collisions of the tail boom with obstacles, etc. ), and the pilot cannot find anything, although he should not look for anything, he is in battle for seconds, then either shooting down or leaving. And ... yes, they will always have these "i's", but those 10-15 years of leadership, which were due to the greater study of the classical scheme in Soviet times, are leaving.
                      1. Potato
                        Potato 20 December 2019 09: 48
                        +1
                        It’s clear ... Well, what can I say, LCD monitors have been used massively in everyday life since the mid 90s. Second - on this picture tube you cannot distinguish a tank from a BMP or a zsu. Thirdly, it is needed only for aiming (and this is possible only if the target is sufficiently photocontrast).

                        And there is a video above, which clearly shows that observation of the enemy at night is carried out at a great distance precisely through the Apache camera, and this is the technology of the mid 90s. But, in your opinion, the pilot must examine it all with his own eyes from a distance of a kilometer or even more. Or through binoculars. In order to just see the target - a group of enemy soldiers or armored vehicles, or something else. And at night, and at dusk, and so on ...

                        Are you trying to justify the wretchedness of ka50? Are you trying to prove that with one pilot and this wretched TV, instead of a sight, he was an effective attack helicopter?

                        The weapon operator looks around all the time until he sees the target. On old helicopters, the operator looked through binoculars! Or a telescopic sight! And the ptury was guiding the sight manually. So it was on cobras and mi24 and similar old cars! And on the "newest ka50", in which all this was offered to the pilot.
                      2. Biodred
                        Biodred 26 January 2020 21: 39
                        0
                        Have you seen these mid-90s LCD monitors? Shit is fierce. Much worse then the CRT.
              4. surok1
                surok1 15 January 2020 12: 40
                0
                Hanging is arrogance. And the possibility of lateral maneuver is excellent. You just need to practice it in advance.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 19 December 2019 12: 14
        +3
        According to KA-50, there is one reinforced concrete argument. ONE pilot is ONE coffin, not TWO .. The second pilot is at least 400 + kg to the mass of the helicopter


        And this was the main argument, and in the big air forces in the big war it’s an account for hundreds of lives and resources spent on training pilots. Well, in the civilian world they also fight. The second crew member, as far as I know, adds at least a ton. Or, as with the same Su-30, to squeeze the supply of fuel, which is distributed everywhere in airplanes.

        With reliability, the Ka-52, it seems, while in the lead, they had 3 cars crashed, the Mi-28UB, EMNIP became the 4th, if not the 5th.
      3. panzerfaust
        panzerfaust 19 December 2019 19: 51
        0
        If you remember, a two-seater export KA-50 was originally created. They wanted to sell it to the Turks. But the Turks still preferred (not without a go-ahead from overseas) "Apache".
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 21 December 2019 14: 47
          +1
          Convenient position: are you buying a foreign car instead of Lada by the wave from the ocean? )
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. frolov andrey
        frolov andrey 19 December 2019 21: 37
        +2
        Write your opinion why not put the radar on the tail. Can it even be carried out more and rotated if necessary?
      6. abc_alex
        abc_alex 26 December 2019 23: 56
        -2
        Quote: max702
        It’s time to rename it into a widow, as was the case with one American plane

        90 boards 6 years of operation. 6 recorded accidents. 3 disasters with victims.
        During the same time, 118 Ka-52 - 3 disasters with casualties.
        Do not slander.

        Quote: max702
        In all army contests, Kashki win a clear advantage, but MI plants cannot leave without orders bloody torment with MI-28,


        Not true. Quite the opposite. When the Mi-28 successfully flew and shot, Kamovsky did not even know how to aim. When Milevsky was ready for serial production, Kamovsky just learned to get into the shield at the training ground. If it were not for the endless playing along in the competition, the Mi-28 would go into series in 1988-1989, when the Kamovites had no rocket or sight. Summing up the results specially for them was postponed for 2-3 years, and then everything happened ...
        This data is first hand. The Milians did not have any "bloody" torments, the helicopter was made exactly according to the schedule. But the Kamovites in their creative vybryk reached the point that they offered to accompany their helicopter with a second helicopter, for reconnaissance and target designation, since they could not create a normal sighting system at all.
        Why are you distorting real events?


        Quote: max702
        Missile equipment does not depend on the brand of the helicopter is a question for the missile

        Depends and very much. Each missile system needs its own sighting system. Or adaptive universal is required. If there is neither one nor the other, nobody will screw the rocket to the helicopter.

        Quote: max702
        on the supra-muzzle radar the answer is very simple on MI-28 they cannot because of high vibrations due to design miscalculations in the gearbox


        Not true. The Mi-28 radar was made in 2007 as a serial plant in Ryazan due to the fact that the Research Institute Fazotron refused to develop an overhead module. Having no experience in the development of such products at all, and taking into account that such radars were never developed in the USSR and Russia, 10 years for development and development is a perfectly normal period. Could and works.

        Quote: max702
        on the spacecraft navigation radar, the reception of the hang behind the wall is not particularly necessary and I see everyone used only in the cinema "fire birds" in reality this mode is not in demand, just like the shot and forgot the effectiveness of the missiles is too low.


        Here I agree.

        Quote: max702
        Moreover, on the KA-52 you can install a powerful AFAR nasal radar arrangement that allows


        In theory, yes. In practice, no one is talking about this yet. Yes, and why?

        Quote: max702
        According to KA-50, there is one reinforced concrete argument. ONE pilot is ONE coffin, not TWO.

        He cannot fight. In an unknown target environment, the Ka-50 showed zero combat effectiveness even at the training ground. This is first-hand information. Where two Mi-28 pilots will be able to take at least a tank with them, the Ka-52 will simply go idle.

        Quote: max702
        Milevtsi are silent about the price because this is another myth from the same that it is impossible to control a helicopter alone

        I repeat: why are you misinterpreting everything?
        Milevtsi never said that you can’t use a helicopter to govern by oneself. Milevtsy on the basis of the experience of using shock versions of the Mi-24 in Afghanistan justifiably argued that a single-seat car cannot fight. In order to fly back and forth there will be no problems and no one has denied this. But the Ka-50 pilot could not cope with the search for targets in an unknown environment, and it was not the Milevts who claimed that the military saw this during the tests. It was they, the customers, and not Milevians, who made the Kamovites make a two-seater.

        And by the way, what’s wrong with the price? The exact prices, of course, are not known, but judging by open data, the Mi-28N is cheaper, at least by an amount equivalent to $ 2 million.

        Quote: max702
        The frankly unsuccessful car on char-kam is worse than that of competitors but with the same price.

        Well, again, not true. The MiG-35 is cheaper than the Su-35 by at least 20% and at the same time has the LTX comparable to its size and differs only in that it cannot carry the heaviest weapon systems.

        Why did you mix all this mess with distorted facts?
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 19 December 2019 11: 30
      0
      The helicopter flies lower .. there are more targets, there is no such external control center and all this is done by the navigator-operator.
      1. Potato
        Potato 19 December 2019 11: 48
        0
        Well, in general - yes. Therefore, a "navigator-operator" is needed. For a long time to observe the battlefield, look for and select targets, direct the cannon and missiles. One pilot cannot do everything at once.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 14: 20
          0
          And very often, helicopters operate autonomously.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 19 December 2019 14: 45
        0
        External target designation for the Americans gives a separate helicopter, like OH-58.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 16: 44
          0
          Nevertheless, there are 2 people on Apache ..... but we don’t have Iowa ...
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 19 December 2019 16: 56
            0
            Well, why build our Iowa, or at least the dedicated Ka-52 reconnaissance planes, when it is possible to make the Mi-24 again, only now without the troop compartment. The second person on the Apache is called the "weapons operator", just like on the Mi-24. No observation is assigned to him, unlike him, the Ka-52 is the co-pilot, without whom the use of the entire spectrum of weapons is possible. Moreover, I am sure that even in the Airplane Flight Manual, the use of weapons is completely entrusted to the pilot who is currently operating the vehicle.
            1. Potato
              Potato 19 December 2019 22: 09
              +1
              In vain you are so sure. Elementary - turret with a gun the first pilot how and with what will be guided?
  9. Potato
    Potato 19 December 2019 08: 44
    0
    My humble opinion is not expert, but this: an attack helicopter is needed to directly destroy armored vehicles and enemy manpower in actions directly at the front line. Attack aircraft wait longer than helicopters, they need an airfield. And the advantage of helicopters in the possibility of basing in the immediate vicinity of the enemy forces and without any airfields.
    Therefore:
    1. An attack helicopter must be massive and cheaper than an attack aircraft with appropriate weapons.
    2. Whirlwinds, attacks, assaults, cannon and rocket suspensions at the helicopter should be. There should be many and different.
    3. The helicopter must also have a "long arm" for the possibility of hitting enemy air defense and air defense systems and short-range, directly covering the main targets of the helicopters - armored vehicles and manpower of the enemy. In order not to lose senseless technique from their fire.
    4. The helicopter must have air-to-air missiles to combat similar combat and transport helicopters and the enemy.

    Both mi28 and ka52 are modern helicopters. They correspond on all points, except for two - there is no "long arm" and no "mass character".
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 19 December 2019 11: 37
      +3
      "an attack helicopter is needed to directly destroy armored vehicles and" ////
      -----
      The difference from the attack aircraft is different:
      An attack helicopter can attack from an ambush. Hang over the hill, jump up and shoot and hide again. And if a rocket, like Spike on an optical cable, then there is no need to jump. Shooting from a closed position (in the air) without exposing the helicopter to any danger.
      1. Potato
        Potato 19 December 2019 11: 44
        +1
        No. The difference from the attack aircraft is the omnivorous helicopter right up to individual enemy soldiers, it searches for targets and watches the battlefield itself, acts near the front line without airfields.

        The attack aircraft can make a slide, launch a rocket and dive back over the horizon or elevation beyond the radio. And some modern ones can do the same without any hills, without diving due to shelters and radio horizons. The missile will fly itself enveloping the terrain using a satellite or inertial guidance system, and at the end of the flight until it hits the target - optical or infrared seeker. There are a lot of guidance methods.
      2. abc_alex
        abc_alex 27 December 2019 00: 06
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        An attack helicopter can attack from an ambush. Hang over the hill, jump up and shoot and hide again. And if a rocket, like Spike on an optical cable, then there is no need to jump. Shooting from a closed position (in the air) without exposing the helicopter to any danger.


        Again you brought these movie nonsense? A helicopter cannot fight like that. He will not see anything from behind the hill or from behind the house. Moreover, at low altitudes, all helicopters have control problems. Hanging a meter above the obstacle, the helicopter will see what you see from the meter pedestal, that is, nothing. He thus beats an observer in a jeep by looking from above, and not along the hill. You will have to "bounce" for a time comparable to a full cycle of reconnaissance, target designation and launch.

        With Spike - I agree. I really can’t imagine how this thing will fly through the vegetation, provided that the carrier is below the top of the hill ...
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 27 December 2019 01: 34
          +2
          "I really can't imagine how this thing will fly through the vegetation," ////
          ----
          These "cinematic nonsense" - the most something is not reality. This is how Apaches work.
          A thing (rocket) does not fly through the vegetation, but high above the vegetation.
          What is a slide, imagine?
          The rocket has a video camera. The operator launches a rocket over the hill, not seeing the target.
          And only then, moving the rocket through the hill, begins its decline and capture of the target,
          This is not the usual launch for you in Russia with a volley of NURs from a low altitude during an attack.
          So no longer fight.
          1. abc_alex
            abc_alex 27 December 2019 10: 20
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            These "cinematic nonsense" - the most something is not reality. This is how Apaches work.

            First, not all Appaches are Longbow. Secondly, where and when is such a fight documented?

            Quote: voyaka uh
            A thing (rocket) does not fly through the vegetation, but high above the vegetation.

            Yes? And how? A helicopter hangs a meter above the ground, at the level of trees, so you get it? Does a rocket fly above the earth? Does he let her up or something? The screw does not interfere?
            Or is the cable first stretched parallel to the ground, then turned up and already high there above the ground?

            Quote: voyaka uh
            The operator launches a rocket over the hill, not seeing the target.
            And only then, moving the rocket through the hill, begins its decline and capture of the target,

            Okay, weird. Where does the operator launch the rocket if he does not see it? Or is it the same "fire-forget"? And is it there at all, the goal is?
            And where is the helicopter at that time? Over the hill? And what, on the top of the hill there are no trees and buildings?
            Warrior, I respect extremely Spike co-creators. And the system itself. But Chesslovo, features and shortcomings of cable management of SD in the USSR have studied better than Israel. There is a theater like yours, where such systems are good. But not everywhere in the desert world. There are, you know, forests and urban areas.



            Quote: voyaka uh
            This is not the usual launch for you in Russia with a volley of NURs from a low altitude during an attack.
            So no longer fight.

            Yes, you see, not in all countries the insane media are ready for any house that was blown up during a blind launch to immediately proclaim a terrorist base. And the United States, not all countries contain and dance. Some have to think and produce head systems suitable for wars with the regular armies of technologically advanced countries. And not only against the bearded in sneakers, like yours. Therefore, on our helicopters there are also packs of NURSs, both SAMs and ATGMs. It, you know, in a real war, it happens differently, where you need to hit a point target, and where are areal. Your state owners, too, have not yet given up on the NURS units on the Appaches. Apparently lagging behind your advanced military-technical thought.
            wink
    2. garri-lin
      garri-lin 19 December 2019 14: 32
      -1
      Hitting and anti-tank are not these different species?
  10. Dmitry Zverev
    Dmitry Zverev 19 December 2019 09: 08
    0
    What is wrong with the engines?
    1. Corn
      Corn 19 December 2019 10: 38
      0
      Probably, this is the traditional problem of the VK2500 power drop in conditions of high ambient temperatures. In southern countries, the same claims are presented to all cars where these engines are.
  11. Bar2
    Bar2 19 December 2019 09: 14
    -1
    what are the attacks?
    After all, a long time ago, there are already Hermes and the Whirlwind, and the Storm, and Chrysanthemum adapt.
    All these complexes have been developed for a long time. What do they constantly tell us about this attack?
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 21 December 2019 15: 26
      +1
      Hermes is experiencing, for a long time there is an old Sturm, from the end of the 80s-beginning of the 90s Whirlwind and Attack.
    2. Timx
      Timx 30 December 2019 13: 08
      0
      They were developed for a long time, but they are not brought to mind for working on aircraft and are not produced in series ...
  12. karelia molot
    karelia molot 19 December 2019 10: 00
    +4
    Gods ... If such articles are a new level of VO, then everything is sad ...
  13. alexmach
    alexmach 19 December 2019 10: 21
    +2
    deprived of a frankly extreme single-seat layout, in which the pilot would have to feel like Julius Caesar in combat conditions

    Apache pilots have already been flying for 30 years, probably XNUMX years.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 21 December 2019 15: 26
      +2
      Apache originally double
  14. Corn
    Corn 19 December 2019 10: 39
    +11
    The author tried to pull an owl on the globe, in the end, he came to the conclusion that the only clear problem ka52 is the lack of normal anti-tank missiles in Russia. And it would seem, where does the “Kamov” and their helicopters?
  15. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 19 December 2019 11: 23
    +4
    In general, nonsense - on Ka one electronic, on Mi - another .... on one one ATGM, on the other another ... Then they begin to compare.
    It is clear to the horse that there should be a separate competition for avionics and armament and separately for the aircraft. The same situation as on the T-64/72/80/90 tanks. How else have you managed with BMP and armored personnel carriers not to duplicate ?!
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 21 December 2019 15: 27
      +2
      So try to spawn
  16. Yrec
    Yrec 19 December 2019 11: 40
    +3
    Do not forget that the Apache was created as a specialized anti-tank helicopter. And everything in him is built around that. And ours are like universal attack vehicles with the main armament NURS and a cannon. It's like comparing a professional grenade launcher with a submachine gun with a conventional "Fly". In theory, the possibilities are equal, but there are nuances. To compare with the "Apache" in terms of anti-tank capabilities, you need not just to screw on a new rocket, but to completely rebuild the car with new avionics, radar and other things. Again the comparison of a whale with an elephant, as in the history of the T-90 / "Abrams".
  17. exo
    exo 19 December 2019 11: 47
    +1
    A country that lost its production of microelectronics in the 90s is unlikely to be able to produce modern weapons that are superior to those of leaders (primarily the United States). Whether China will supply us with advanced developments is a question. Yes, and such a dependence is no better than dependence on the Yankees and Europe.
  18. 5-9
    5-9 19 December 2019 12: 10
    +6
    What does the lack of missiles have to do with it (there are problems with the serial production of Vortex-1, and Hermes is not ready yet) and the helicopter itself? What is the brain juice of anonymous people about "losing power in hot climates"? Everyone loses it. And why bother with expensive homing missiles (the US still uses laser missiles, while the Germans have them only on paper)? They are needed in exceptional cases, plus the question arises - how to find a target at these distances in general .. The helicopter itself is good, good protection, it flies well. Avionics, weapons - this is changing.
    But Apache is a bad helicopter (with excellent avionics and good missiles), it flies poorly and is poorly protected and can’t really change that. The tactics of hovering over an obstacle and pi-piu missiles paraffin under Karbala and the Americans abandoned it, we must again fly fast and low (like Soviet / Russian helicopters or SuperCobra) and often go over the target, and it flies poorly and the defense is cardboard.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 21 December 2019 15: 31
      +1
      Where did you get that Apache flies badly? The power density of the engines, the ability to maneuver - at the level.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. kupitman
    kupitman 19 December 2019 14: 25
    +2
    I shot about missiles - I forgot. Against tanks it is certainly good, but it is against tanks. In Syria, these helicopters mainly encounter carts with cliffs on board. The cost of these carts is up to $ 20000, what’s the point of using a rocket that is 5 times more expensive than a cart?
    And the lack of "smart" missiles, I agree, must be filled.
    And in general, I personally have little idea of ​​what place a modern helicopter has in battle. Here AH-64 fought in Iraq against Iraqi tanks - it made sense to use expensive missiles. But we, in Afghanistan, in Syria, are working against carts and machine-gun emplacements. And the main job of the helicopter pilots is to support their units directly on the battlefield against the "Mujahideen" and other lovers of Alla's husbands to go to a bar.
    Something like this ...
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 19 December 2019 17: 18
      +1
      They use both TOU and controlled "Hydra" 70mm. And the main targets of expensive missiles are Tanks, and they cost from $ 2 million and they are guarded by the Tunguzki for $ 10 million.
      1. kupitman
        kupitman 19 December 2019 17: 20
        0
        so what I’m talking about, the problem is that the same IS does not have tanks, and those that are (depressed T55, 62) - they are not the fact that $ 2k cost
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 17: 22
          0
          Here for them there are the first two options that are more expensive ..... and pilots are training to destroy targets. This is also important. Why should they let us in our bandits?
          1. kupitman
            kupitman 19 December 2019 17: 26
            0
            The KR are being shot at the "headquarters" of management (or as they can call it), and this is difficult to assess in terms of money, but it complicates the management of IS units. Just as I understand, they shot at large warehouses. But I don’t remember the Chob with the caliber of a bullet at the Toyota pickup.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 19 December 2019 17: 33
              +1
              So you can hit a pig iron or a corr with a bomb. KR needed to overcome air defense ..
              1. kupitman
                kupitman 19 December 2019 17: 35
                -2
                I mean, the expenses are quite justified, I understand. what more did to experience this thing.
    2. storm
      storm 11 January 2020 02: 18
      0
      For Syria, the Mi-35M remains the optimal helicopter:
      - not very expensive
      - the landing can drop out, pick up the wounded, deliver ammunition, mortars, etc. mobile weapons;
      - the entire range of weapons from the Mi-24 is suitable,
      - guided weapons (Sturm-VM, Attack-B) can be used at a distance of 6-8 km.
    3. surok1
      surok1 15 January 2020 12: 25
      0
      Nurses are cheap. He shot at speed over the area and forgot. A spacecraft can fly sideways.
  21. Fraracol_2
    Fraracol_2 19 December 2019 18: 03
    -1
    A strange picture, it still has the F-35 and SU-57 are not enough.
  22. Ramzaj99
    Ramzaj99 19 December 2019 18: 10
    +2
    I have not seen a more illiterate article for a long time. All in a heap that is not related to each other, and a comparison of warm with sticky .........
    1. Aibolit
      Aibolit 19 December 2019 19: 43
      -3
      Shawat people
  23. Aibolit
    Aibolit 19 December 2019 18: 24
    -2
    And also to fly at extremely low altitudes, in the mode of terrain mapping.


    What kind of beast is such a “flight in the MAP mode”?
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 19 December 2019 19: 38
      0
      Maybe the radar maps the terrain in front and the car goes around the relief itself.
      1. Aibolit
        Aibolit 19 December 2019 19: 42
        -2
        Mapping is a completely different mode, and requires hardware with SAR.
        It’s just a mode around the terrain
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 19 December 2019 20: 07
          0
          All mixed ..... but about mapping on Mi28N and Ka52 read somewhere.
          1. Aibolit
            Aibolit 19 December 2019 23: 25
            -3
            Stir, chew!
            Oh please.
            About this and I ask
  24. fiberboard
    fiberboard 19 December 2019 19: 45
    -1
    Recently, the Mi-28 crashed again, both pilots died. Why can’t you place the crew on the Kamovs as on the Miles, one by one? For some reason, it seems to me that the Ka-50 would be underestimated, not completed.
  25. frolov andrey
    frolov andrey 19 December 2019 21: 19
    +1
    Why can not increase the height of the tail and put the radar on the tail?
    1. agond
      agond 5 January 2020 19: 11
      0
      Quote: frolov andrey
      Why can not increase the height of the tail and put the radar on the tail?

      Really why?
      There are more questions, as well as answers, for example, if there is a danger of screw overlap in coaxial helicopters, it may be necessary to reduce the number of blades to one per screw, then they can be made more rigid and the screws can be pulled together, which will drastically reduce the height of the helicopter, and there will be no need to put extra ones in the parking lot the blades.
      1. surok1
        surok1 15 January 2020 12: 19
        0
        And weights for balance.
        1. frolov andrey
          frolov andrey 3 February 2020 18: 07
          0
          Yes, two eggs.
  26. 123456789
    123456789 19 December 2019 22: 33
    +3
    Attack drones will supplant both helicopters and attack aircraft
    1. Inspector
      Inspector 20 December 2019 00: 37
      +3
      Already crowded out. But not with us.
      The meadows are again ahead of the rest.
  27. Robert Korsunsky
    Robert Korsunsky 19 December 2019 23: 19
    +1
    It is necessary to combine all the best practices from Kamov and Mily in one machine, including a full-fledged over-the-barrel radar, and a catapult, which is not available on Milya helicopters, to install turbojet engines with a variable thrust vector, to make folding rotors, a case made of composites on a titanium frame, with dynamic protection like a tank, and we get a car of a completely different level.
    1. Inspector
      Inspector 20 December 2019 00: 35
      -3
      why bears to combine with this misunderstanding ??? They (NM) have it all.
    2. Grits
      Grits 20 December 2019 08: 04
      +6
      Quote: Robert Korsunsky
      to install turbojet engines with a variable thrust vector, to make folding rotors, a case made of composites on a titanium frame, with dynamic protection like a tank, and we get a car of a completely different level.

      You have forgotten that it would not hurt to screw the AFAR 125 mm. a cannon, a machine gunner in the tail, a bomb bay for 5 tons and a "stealth" uniform
  28. Inspector
    Inspector 20 December 2019 00: 34
    -2
    Is it true that Qashqi is 4 times more expensive than Bears? And several times noisier ???
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 20 December 2019 11: 50
      +4
      But you can write easier - I like the Mi-28 and I do not like the Ka-52
    2. Alex_You
      Alex_You 20 December 2019 21: 29
      0
      It seemed to me, but the Ka-52 was quieter by a turn. But the sound is specific, it burns quickly.
  29. av58
    av58 20 December 2019 11: 40
    +3
    For the author, under the name "Ilya Legat", to begin with, figure out what he writes about: about the carrier of the Ka-52 weapons, or about the weapons. "Whirlwind", "Attack" problems, etc. this is not for the designers of the helicopter, this is for the designers of missiles, guidance systems ... Otherwise, it turns out according to the saying "in the garden of an elder, but in Kiev uncle".
    About Ka-50 Ilya Legat is better not to intellectualize. The helicopter turned out great, and the whole problem is in the heads of the air command. Fighter and attack aviation pilots fly all their lives alone, at much higher speeds, at altitudes up to the smallest, while simultaneously controlling the machine, monitoring the air and the enemy, and using a variety of weapons, from guns to rockets, and nothing, it is considered in the order of things. Helicopter pilots than worse?
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex 27 December 2019 00: 21
      0
      Quote: av58
      Whirlwind, Attack, etc. problems. this is not for helicopter designers, this is for designers of missiles and guidance systems.


      Maybe you didn’t know, but the aiming and navigation complex is an integral part of the helicopter and is created by the cooperation of the helicopter developers, and not by the rocket men. True, the PNK for the Mi-28 was developed by the manufacturer of the Sturm.

      Quote: av58
      About Ka-50 Ilya Legat is better not to intellectualize. The helicopter turned out great, and the whole problem is in the heads of the air command.


      Not in their heads! IN EYES! Field tests have shown that the Ka-50 cannot fight. Polygon, a dozen targets located in a manner unknown to the pilot. And test time for destruction. AND DOESN'T WORK. The pilot of the Ka-50 does not find a one-face target. And the military can see all this. And they decide - stop wasting money and make the helicopter two-seater.

      Quote: av58
      Fighter and attack aviation pilots fly all their lives alone, at much higher speeds, at altitudes up to the smallest, while simultaneously controlling the machine, monitoring the air and the enemy,


      Aircraft radars and OLS are much better at searching for targets, it is easier for them - the sky is around, and not trees, folds of terrain and buildings. And "friend or foe" identifiers simplify the identification of the enemy. Now, if the horizon is removed, the "clearing" is leveled and all enemies are equipped with identifiers, then a helicopter with one pilot will be able to fight.
      1. surok1
        surok1 15 January 2020 12: 15
        0
        Something tells me that the navigation system is a slightly different thing, with respect to aiming. And together they do not compensate for the lack of a homing missile. The resolution may not be enough at a great distance and the capture really fetters. Aircraft designers and aircraft manufacturers have nothing to do with it. The helicopter is great.
        There is no need to hide behind the hill, at a certain height the car merges with the landscape.
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex 17 January 2020 01: 13
          0
          Quote: surok1
          And together they do not compensate for the lack of a homing missile.

          How do you think the helicopter holds the line of sight? During the time that the operator is driving the rocket, the pilot can move the car hundreds of meters, and the operator's "picture" will not move a centimeter. Moreover, piloting in the dark is carried out via the same IR channel as aiming.
          So you are mistaken.
          Quote: surok1
          And together they do not compensate for the lack of a homing missile.


          First you need to fix it: the presence of the GOS is not a feature that needs to be compensated for by something. The combat effectiveness of missiles with GOS when working on the ground is lower than that of missiles with remote guidance. In any case, not higher.
          And again you are wrong: the automatic target tracking and the automatic targeting machine may well compensate for the lack of a seeker in the rocket. The first keeps the aiming complex deployed towards the target, and the second accompanies the "point" without human intervention. The Mi-28N can do that. True, the identification algorithm is imperfect, and does not provide reliable retention.
          1. surok1
            surok1 24 January 2020 18: 48
            0
            It is not difficult for me to imagine how piloting is carried out using the aiming system. It is difficult to imagine how this is done simultaneously with aiming. And again, I did not mention the consumption of missiles to destroy the target, which may mean "combat effectiveness", here we are talking about the consumption of helicopters.
            1. abc_alex
              abc_alex 24 January 2020 20: 05
              0
              Quote: surok1
              It is hard to imagine how this is done simultaneously with aiming.

              Not just you. In fact, it was only the Ka-50 developers who could imagine it. And then, as the field tests showed, they imagined it very conditionally. At the same time, the main problem was not so much the retention of the aiming line, the machine can cope with it after all, and in principle when the pilot drives the car along the monitor, it is not particularly difficult. The main problem was that the pilot cannot reconnoiter the target, he does not see it. The specificity of thermal imaging aiming is that the range of the aiming mode is higher than the range of the search mode.

              Quote: surok1
              And again, I did not say about the consumption of missiles to destroy the target, which may mean "combat effectiveness", here we are talking about the consumption of helicopters.

              Well, where did you get that? Understand that if a helicopter falls into the area of ​​operation of military air defense, it will be shot down. And it doesn’t matter if he has missiles with GOS or not. They knock it wrong, like that. And missiles with GOS here do not give any advantage. We do not sit in the design bureau. I repeat: during the flight of the rocket, the carrier helicopter can shift from the launch point to hundreds of meters or even kilometers. And time is extremely short, 15-20 seconds.
              1. surok1
                surok1 7 February 2020 16: 56
                0
                Yes, I recently read how many things are featured in a combat helicopter. ))) Dofiga of what. I think the target is highlighted by a laser, and the rocket flies to flare.
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 7 February 2020 19: 04
                  +1
                  Quote: surok1
                  Yes, I recently read how many things are featured in a combat helicopter. ))) Dofiga of what. I think the target is highlighted by a laser, and the rocket flies to flare.


                  And so too. And there is a radio command system, when the operator holds the screen "mark" on the target, and the computer generates commands to guide the missile to the target.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                  2. surok1
                    surok1 9 February 2020 19: 18
                    0
                    For this, the computer must see not only the target, but also the rocket. Consequently, the rocket will repeat the evolution of the helicopter, flying along a curve. However, just to hit.
                    And as for the air defense, indeed, flying up unnoticed at a strike distance will not work. Or you have to fly around not only the terrain, but also the trees.))) Thor, as you know, shoots rockets up and does not need to turn around. God forbid, the NATO will have Tor-like complexes.
                    1. abc_alex
                      abc_alex 10 February 2020 19: 44
                      0
                      Quote: surok1
                      For this, the computer must see not only the target, but also the rocket. Consequently, the rocket will repeat the evolution of the helicopter, flying along a curve. However, just to hit.

                      :) Not necessary. There is an automatic target tracking device - a device that keeps the target in the "focus" of the sight, regardless of the evolution of the machine. The Mi-28N, after acquiring a target, can continue flying with virtually no restrictions on maneuvering.
                      1. surok1
                        surok1 15 February 2020 11: 00
                        0
                        :)) "There is a black box, it will do everything that needs to be done, no matter how. If it works, don't touch it."
                        In the meantime, the chassis blocked the view of the guidance machine, the missile was lost. Such free maneuvers.
                      2. abc_alex
                        abc_alex 20 February 2020 23: 01
                        0
                        Quote: surok1
                        In the meantime, the chassis blocked the view of the guidance machine, the missile was lost. Such free maneuvers.

                        This does not happen. The aiming complex was made by people no more stupid than you and much more experienced.
                      3. surok1
                        surok1 21 February 2020 12: 47
                        0
                        There are limits for everything.))
  30. VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 21 December 2019 07: 22
    0
    An article commissioned by the Pentagon. Apache is a hundred times worse. Praise the American, can only Americans and their vassals. Yes, and havit everything Russian.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 21 December 2019 15: 38
      +1
      Following your logic, 70% of car owners in Russia are American vassals. )
      1. VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
        VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 26 December 2019 14: 47
        -2
        Confidently true. VASSALS. Who was the first to introduce an automatic transmission in the auto industry. MAZ factory. Let the Americans create an analogue of MI-26. Mind is not enough.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 26 December 2019 15: 23
          +1
          Of course, because there is only one higher nation, the rest (according to Zadornov) are orphaned and wretched)))
          Do you happen to relate to GCD?
        2. 3danimal
          3danimal 21 February 2020 19: 49
          0
          Nonsense about vassals (you can go into "enemy" dealerships and go loudly call buyers with this word - you will learn a lot about yourself laughing ).
          Ufimtsev first made calculations to create a stealth aircraft. But in the existing swamp, the dominance of officials and the lack of private initiative, many ideas are buried.
          There are many talented people, not everywhere there are conditions for the development of projects.
          You can counter: let the Milanese create (from scratch) an analog of the V-22 Osprey. Not an objective argument.
      2. Pajamas
        Pajamas 21 February 2020 01: 01
        +1
        There are hardly more than 15% of American cars in Russia, the entire Far East is in the Japanese and Koreans, central Russia and the South are more in Koreans, large cities are only a little bit of Germans, Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese.
    2. 75 Sergey
      75 Sergey 29 December 2019 00: 48
      0
      It’s better to groan and do better than underestimate the enemy ...
      And again, it’s possible to get financing for this business, which is what the enemies use and enjoy, and we only die when they praise us.
  31. Pariv
    Pariv 23 December 2019 12: 24
    +1
    There are some very knowledgeable individuals commenting on articles on this site. This must be good for Russia!
    What I don't get is that some sees no good regardless of what your government does. Of course objective criticism is helpful, but attacking your country for the fun of it or habitually - especially at these times when your leadership are fighting for national respect, integrity and survival is in my view unpatriotic.
    1. Minato2020
      Minato2020 24 December 2019 14: 23
      +1
      Quote: PariV
      ... especially at these times when your leadership are fighting for national respect, integrity and survival ...


      It’s hard for ordinary people to understand who the fight is.
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 26 December 2019 15: 52
      +2
      Our leadership is fighting for growing their wealth, in common.
    3. 3danimal
      3danimal 26 December 2019 15: 53
      +2
      And they still do not accept the UN anti-corruption convention.
      Now they put country and people in useless confrontation with advanced states, which were source of investment and technology's. Their aging mind not able to understand a consequences of growing technological and financial isolation. Also, the probability of war increases.
      There were some people in the 20th century, who wanted to redefine borders and prove the superiority of their nation by military means. And we know, how did it end.
  32. DMB-2020
    DMB-2020 25 December 2019 01: 47
    0
    Well, another thing! It's nice to read about the fact that we defeated everyone again!
  33. Diviz
    Diviz 25 December 2019 12: 36
    0
    It’s interesting how they upgrade the su34.
  34. 75 Sergey
    75 Sergey 29 December 2019 00: 46
    0
    The new helicopter will catch up with the old Apache, which is strange.
  35. Radikal
    Radikal 29 December 2019 19: 27
    +1
    And what the author of the article will answer here is -

    Aurus shareholder will buy 50% of the design bureau of Russian Helicopters
    Close the deal is planned in the first quarter of 2020

    DUBAI, November 18. / TASS /. The Emirates holding Tawazun, a shareholder of Aurus, will acquire a 50% stake in BP-Technologies (part of the Russian Helicopters holding), which is developing promising helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles. The financial parameters of the agreement have not been disclosed, the deal is planned to be closed in the first quarter of 2020, according to a statement by Russian Helicopters.

    Joint investments in the development of the company will amount to about € 400 million.

    "The agreement defines the main parameters of the future transaction, including the share that will be acquired by an investor from the UAE - Tawazun will become the owner of half of the shares of BP-Technologies, which develops promising helicopter and unmanned vehicles. The deal is scheduled to be completed in the first quarter of 2020. ", - the message says. The document was signed on November 18 at the Dubai Airshow by Russian Helicopters CEO Andrey Boginsky and Tawazun CEO Tarek Abdul Rahim Al-Hosani.

    "The agreement also provides for joint investments in the development of the company, they will amount to about € 400 million. The discussion will be continued, because we are interested in having a firm order for our products in the Middle East. In addition, we do not exclude the involvement of a third party in the project. , we will discuss this together with Tawazun ", - said Andrey Boginsky, General Director of the Russian Helicopters holding. He also added that not only Tawazun was interested in the project.

    "Now we have come to the first concrete step, we have signed an agreement on agreeing the main terms of the deal - this is a rough assessment of the business, this is the procedure for interaction. It was also determined that our share in the company will be parity, and the board of directors will be formed accordingly," said the CEO "Russian Helicopters".

    “The main condition of this agreement is the financial participation of Tawazun in the amount of € 150 million. This is an entry into the capital of the VRT company, - said the head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov. - € 40 million is payment of its share directly by Russian Helicopters. And € 20 mln - a concessional loan was provided at 3,5% for the duration of this project. "

    According to the minister, the UAE considers the use of equipment, primarily as a Uber taxi from Dubai Airport to different points for tourists who will be interested in fast movement.

    According to the general director of the Rostec state corporation Sergei Chemezov, Middle Eastern investors "will accelerate the implementation of VRT300 and VRT500 projects and give impetus to new developments in advanced helicopter and unmanned systems." "Our agreements also provide for assistance in promoting these products in the markets of the Middle East and, in particular, the Persian Gulf. Both machines have good prospects in the region where solutions for the development of urban airmobility are becoming more and more in demand," he said.

    This is not the first experience of cooperation of the emirate holding in Russia. At the moment, Tawazun already owns 36% in the Russian automobile project Aurus.

    About Us
    VR-Technologies was established in 2014 as an innovative design bureau of the Russian Helicopters holding.

    Now the company is developing a light multi-purpose helicopter VRT500 and unmanned VRT300.
  36. av58
    av58 5 January 2020 19: 44
    0
    Quote: abc_alex
    Maybe you didn’t know, but the aiming and navigation complex is an integral part of the helicopter and is created by the cooperation of the helicopter developers, and not by the rocket men. True, the PNK for the Mi-28 was developed by the manufacturer of the Sturm.

    Maybe for a start you will try to re-read what the author writes about: weapons or on-board equipment of a helicopter :-)
  37. av58
    av58 5 January 2020 19: 46
    0
    Quote: abc_alex
    Field tests have shown that the Ka-50 can’t fight.

    The practical use of the Ka-50 in Afghanistan has shown that it is fighting well. So look for problems after all in the heads (and in the eyes, but with this problem already to the ophthalmologists) :-)
  38. av58
    av58 5 January 2020 19: 49
    0
    Quote: abc_alex
    Aircraft radars and OLS are much better at searching for targets, it is easier for them - the sky is around, and not trees, folds of terrain and buildings. And "friend or foe" identifiers simplify the identification of the enemy. Now, if the horizon is removed, the "clearing" is leveled and all enemies are equipped with identifiers, then a helicopter with one pilot will be able to fight.

    Keep this kindergarten for yourself. For fun, at least once look at the video of a fighter flight at low altitudes, they are full on YouTube.
    1. agond
      agond 6 January 2020 22: 21
      0
      On the Ka-50, you can add the option of a co-pilot, virtual and "cloud",
  39. storm
    storm 11 January 2020 00: 01
    0
    As Syria has shown, it is better to produce two multipurpose Mi-35MV than one "glamorous" one, but with the same combat capabilities of the Ka-52.
    The KA-52M program needs to start with the mass modernization of the Ka-52 combatant drills, as soon as they are brought to mind, the production of new turntables can begin.
  40. VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 11 January 2020 04: 44
    +1
    Ilya is the Apache will catch up with the KA-52M. Apache and another system, and excuse me for the full .KA -52 better maneuverability, higher payload. You need to think.
  41. Efreytor
    Efreytor 12 January 2020 21: 10
    -3
    Recall that the most effective manager sits on the board of directors of Russian Helicopters. Tolya, one of Vova's friends. So you can give up on helicopters. But someone will have 30 kg of gold jewelry.
  42. surok1
    surok1 15 January 2020 11: 54
    0
    Look, the super designer woke up. A nurse with a duck. SchA bows, a nose from an Apache, a tail from a gazelle. Samokhotelkin, look.
  43. 2Albert
    2Albert 2 February 2020 22: 33
    0
    Some kind of crap are "unknown Egyptians", given that the coaxial scheme just has an advantage in the hot air of the desert and the rarefied air in the mountains, all the power of the engines goes to the rotors. As well as complaints about the operation of engines similar to those on the Mi-8/24/28
  44. Valdaev
    Valdaev 26 February 2020 20: 50
    0
    "Ka-52M: how the new helicopter will catch up with Apache"which has been in operation since early 1984
  45. Interested
    Interested 3 March 2020 12: 06
    0
    I have been reading and "following" for a long time about the dispute between the Mi-28vsKa-52, or Ka-52vsApach. The following opinion was formed:
    1. Why are the Ka-52 and Mi-28 compared together? Or why the howl is heard: "Expensive two attack helicopters." Why two attack helicopters? Let's turn to history: the history of fire support helicopters or, in fact, attack helicopters began in the United States with the AN-1, then the AN-64 appeared, and the AN-1 became a fire support helicopter, and the AN-64 became a high-precision attack / anti-tank helicopter stuffed with electronics. but the AN-1 can also be shock / anti-tank under certain conditions. All niches are divided. What prevents to divide the "clearing" for the Mi-28 and Ka-52 is not clear ... It's like arguing about the Su-25 and Su-24, which is better - the goal is the same: the destruction of ground targets, the specifics of the application and the cost are different. -28 is very roughly speaking: the Mi-24 without an airborne squad, and the Mi-24 is a fire support helicopter. The Ka-50 was planned as a new generation, and it is a pity that the level of development of electronics did not allow the creation of a complex of onboard computers capable of replacing the second crew member.
    2. The following follows from the previous one: why was the Mi-28 and Ka-50 competition organized? Thanks should be said to the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the Air Force, and probably to the Command of the Ground Forces, which had to choose a helicopter concept to support their forces.
    3. Kamovtsy and Milevts can be reproached that they didn’t get involved in the competition, but in the game in the sandbox, who would take away the toy from anyone first, although it was possible to agree on the division of R&D into Shock and Fire support. Moreover, if the Milevts were jealous of the breakthrough concept of the Ka-50, then the niche of the fire support helicopter would not have been taken away from them for sure.
    4. Now you can do the same thing, separate these helicopters, all the more you do not need to forget about the Mi-24 and Mi-35, which are not yet going to be scrapped, that they are @ /// b to Kamov? Without a piece of bread will not remain.
    5. It would be more relevant for the Mi-28 to solve the problem with the gun than with the radar, the NARs work on areas, anti-tank missiles for some purposes are expensive to shoot, can it make sense to install a 23-mm installation and work with the modernization of the ammunition for it?