Mi-28N proved to be an effective means of fighting tanks in Syria

133

In Syria, Russian Mi-28N helicopters have shown the highest efficiency in the fight against tanks radical groups. Today, a video appeared in the Internet, filmed in 2017 during the battles for Palmyra.

Footage demonstrates the work of the Mi-28 attack helicopter against terrorist armored vehicles.



A combat vehicle hit an enemy tank from a distance of 5,5 kilometers. At the same time, she herself moved at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour. The T-55 tank belonged to the fighters of the radical organization Islamic State banned in Russia.



The Mi-28N “Night Hunter” helicopter delivers an accurate blow to the enemy’s armored vehicles, giving them no chance to survive. It seems that the radicals did not even suspect that their combat vehicle was under the gun. The missile launched by the rotorcraft hit the rear of the tank turret. Most likely, she undermined the ammunition, so as a result of a powerful explosion, none of the militants survived.

This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles. It demonstrates that Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are formidable weaponstested in real combat conditions.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    133 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +13
      11 March 2020 11: 01
      The Mi-28n had a problem with the gearbox, due to which there were several disasters. Was it possible to solve this problem and make the car reliable, is that a question?
      And a mop can also knock out a tank if you attach a sight and a gun to it.
      1. -34
        11 March 2020 11: 21
        I fully agree. Where is t-55, and where is mi-28 For an inexperienced man in the street. Where are the similar videos with Leopards and Abrams? But no. Well, as a cherry on top of the cake, we have not been able to solve the problem of the shock-aiming system of the type, shoot and forget. ”The ugly Yankees mastered this back in the 80s of the last century. Are there experts? If not right, correct.
        1. +22
          11 March 2020 11: 59
          and what is the difference between a leopard and 55 as a target for an attack helicopter?)))
          1. -36
            11 March 2020 12: 01
            For you, nothing
            1. +1
              11 March 2020 13: 47
              And is there a video specialist here to explain?
              From the beginning, the video is a shot. You can see how it flies. On the second second hit, a small flash. And a complete explosion only in the 2th second ...
              Why such a delay?
              what
              1. +3
                11 March 2020 15: 18
                Take a closer look: this tracer blinks several times, and then an explosion.
              2. -2
                13 March 2020 08: 42
                How can a subsonic rocket fly 5 km in 2 seconds ??
            2. +1
              11 March 2020 22: 49
              Quote: General D
              For you, nothing

              And for you? Let's quickly on Wikipedia, gain knowledge and vice versa, tell us about anti-tank systems against Leopard and Abrams. especially from this angle of attack.
            3. -2
              13 March 2020 08: 42
              For a helicopter too, and the backlight detection sensor can also be plugged into the T-55.
          2. +15
            11 March 2020 18: 49
            Quote: carstorm 11
            But what is the difference between a leopard and 55 as a target for an attack helicopter?

            the tank is not particularly capable of hurting the helicopter (unless the terrain is very rough and the turntable comes under the fire of ZPU), and in terms of protection, modern western tanks are still better than the well-deserved T-55 veteran. In the case shown in the video, the tank crew did not even notice most likely where and what had arrived.
            Abrams and Leopard will inform the crew that they are on target, the tank’s fire control system will automatically shoot grenades with an aerosol and dipoles (which can complicate the life of the guidance machine and the rocket’s head), and even if there is a chance (thanks to the combined armor, screens, and deployed ammunition) live longer to stay. If KAZ is installed, then the chances are even higher (not every helicopter ATGM hits the roof)

            But in general. the conversation is pointless. The wildest case is discussed - a lonely tank on a flat terrain and a helicopter on a free hunt
        2. -2
          11 March 2020 12: 10
          T-55 and Leopards and Abrams of no difference for a helicopter
          1. +4
            11 March 2020 12: 19
            Quote: Nastia Makarova
            T-55 and Leopards and Abrams of no difference for a helicopter

            The thickness of the armor, its properties, complexes of active and passive defense, information awareness on the battlefield. And yes. No different, just like the tanks of the first world from the t-55. So we are fussing. On the airship flew up and drop bombs.
            1. +6
              11 March 2020 12: 37
              The roof of the tower on their armor is not particularly different. DZ is not there, and the active defense in the upper hemisphere is small effective.
              ]
            2. +10
              11 March 2020 12: 41
              Quote: General D
              The thickness of the armor, its properties, complexes of active and passive defense, information awareness on the battlefield.

              For the "Attack" missile of the "Shturm" complex with a radio command control system in the 9M120M modification / tandem warhead, with an armor penetration of about 950 mm of homogeneous armor behind the DZ, and a range of 8 m /, the factors you listed do not play a decisive role. Nearly.

              And against the background of the unexpected use of these ATGMs, even more so.
            3. +7
              11 March 2020 12: 42
              sorry forgive you) with a 5km tank the helicopter cannot see the target in principle. the thickness of the armor does not matter, since almost all helicopter hits fall to the weakest points. if you want to argue, do not give an example of a tank as a unit, but a combination of forces and means of a certain army. in this case, you just called a single car as a target. it is not difficult for a helicopter.
              1. The comment was deleted.
            4. +5
              11 March 2020 13: 47
              Quote: General D
              The thickness of the armor, its properties, complexes of active and passive protection,

              Seriously? That is, you think that for a helicopter, what is the thickness of the armor of Leopold or Abrasha from BOARD and in the STERN and ROOF?
              I strongly apologize, but is there a big difference in the thickness of the armor in the stern, roof and sides of the T-55 and Abrashi? And what can KAZ do if a helicopter is operating on the tank? Sung to the crew, God save the king?
        3. +5
          11 March 2020 12: 33
          Quote: General D
          were able to solve the problem of a shock-aiming complex of the "fire and forget" type

          Everything is much more complicated than you think.
          "Helfaers" with semi-active LGSN in the conditions of modern local wars are going away like hot cakes. So the US Department of Defense was forced to pay for the creation of another production line to assemble these missiles. Invest your money

          It suddenly turned out that third-generation complexes did not provide the necessary control.
        4. +3
          11 March 2020 15: 13
          ,, shot and forgot. "The ugly Yankees mastered this back in the 80s of the last century .... it's not good to lie, there were no helicopter complexes like" shot and forget "on the ground in the 80s, and now and not will be in the future, without exception, all helicopter ATGMs are at most semi-automatic, and with aiming, everyone has the same problems
          video with Leopards and Abrams? ........ the guidance system of the ATGM Shturm for the Mi-28 is similar to the guidance system of the ATGM Kornet, the only difference is that the Sturm warhead is heavier and the speed of the UR is all. so type in the search engine the video "Cornet vs Abra or Leo and you will be happy
          1. +2
            11 March 2020 15: 43
            Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
            .that's not good to lie, there were no "shot and forget" helicopter complexes on the ground in the 80s, and now and will not be in the future

            You're wrong.
            AGM-114L Longbow adopted in 1998
            1. 0
              11 March 2020 16: 25
              You're wrong.
              The AGM-114L Longbow was adopted in 1998 .... are you mistaken, or wish to wishful thinking, the AGM-114L Longbow can only be used with the APG-78 radar that illuminates the target, the radar of the seeker’s radar is semi-active. however, the target can be highlighted by a third-party source, saving the crew from controlling the shot, so there are no shots and I forgot,
              1. -1
                11 March 2020 17: 38
                Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                GOS radar is semi-active.

                http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/aat/agm114l.html
                1. +3
                  11 March 2020 17: 48
                  it is not clear why the exile .... along the way, I explained that the radar station is on them, to what they were exiled, it is probably not difficult to understand that firing at vehicles with anti-tank systems requires correction for various reasons. but the first and main thing is the state of the atmosphere, in the case of the radar, the situation is much more necessary in correction, the underlying surface can distort the picture to the point of being unrecognizable (target recognition), so no reference is needed. especially about ARLS in this link, no, you should not powder your brains. no about "fire and forget" at a ground target,
                  1. 0
                    11 March 2020 18: 04
                    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                    why did they refer

                    In addition, to understand that there is no smell of semi-activity there
                    1. +4
                      11 March 2020 18: 14
                      In addition, in order to understand that it doesn’t even smell like semi-activity ......... it smells exactly like that, for this purpose they’ll mold a radar cake on top of the swivels, adjust the position of the target regardless of the state of the atmosphere and the underlying terrain, so why it’s even logically understandable that all IR infrared seekers have restrictions towards the sun. all infrared seekers have a huge spectrum of capture of extraneous sources in the infrared range, which is with regard to active radar type RCC. I’m grieving. on ground-based ARLS targets in off-line mode the GSN UR simply does not work, unlike sea targets, the high reflecting surface of the land is to blame, so there is no need for fornication about the shot and forgot
                      1. -2
                        11 March 2020 19: 03
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        for this purpose they’ll mold a radar cake on top

                        Find the radar in the photo


                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        ARLS in offline mode ГСН УР simply does not work

                        "Helfair-L", "Brimstone", JAGM ... In your opinion, is it really all a grandiose cut?
                        1. 0
                          11 March 2020 19: 12
                          Locate the radar in the photo ... first you need to find a helper with ARLS in the picture

                          "Helfair-L", "Brimstone", JAGM ... In your opinion, is it really all a grandiose cut? ........ well, probably a rich country has developments, maybe failures. but it is permissible. What about "fire and forget" is perhaps a topic for the Air-to-Air class and MANPADS, but not an ATGM, for example, Jovel ATGM --- is it so dangerous despite the huge cost compared to other ATGM , or rather, in terms of "cost-effectiveness", well, it's like a reminder that you can forget about the ATGM for now "fire and forget"
                        2. 0
                          11 March 2020 19: 16
                          Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                          For starters, you need to find a helper with ARLS in the picture

                          Everywhere it is indicated that the Stryker MSL can use the entire line of "Helfires", including the "L".

                          Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                          . well, probably a rich country has developments, maybe disastrous. but it is permissible.

                          You have not answered.
                        3. 0
                          11 March 2020 19: 38
                          Everywhere it is indicated that the Stryker MSL can use the entire line of "Helfires", including the "L" ..... you yourself must understand that without an on-board radar, it is impossible to beat with radar helpers ....
                          In your opinion, is this really all a grand cut? ... depending on what is considered to be a cut ... if weapons are being developed with dubious combat qualities, yes ... and if there are any projects that have a future many times higher than existing ones but require there’s no talk of a bit of funding, there is no talk about the cut on speech with the topic on anti-tank systems and there can’t be, there is a ruler that overlaps one another. nevertheless, helfair with PRLS is not considered as dominant
          2. -1
            11 March 2020 19: 02
            Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
            there were no helicopter complexes of the "fire and forget" type in the 80s, and now and will not be in the future

            hmm .. and the American Hellfire Longbow (AGM-114L) with RLGSN ??? German helicopter ATGM PARS-3 Trigat with TGSN ??? Israeli Spike-er?
            1. 0
              11 March 2020 22: 17
              and the American Hellfire Longbow (AGM-114L) with RLGSN ??? German helicopter ATGM PARS-3 Trigat with TGSN ??? Israeli Spike-ER? ..... read above my comments with Lopatov
              1. 0
                12 March 2020 09: 44
                Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                read above my comments with Lopatov

                in which you absolutely did not prove anything.
                About Hellfire:
                The search for targets is carried out using the TADS (Target Acquisition Disignation Sight) or radar detection system (FCR), the data from which are transmitted by the GOS and inertial CH missiles. After the missile seeker detects the target, the capture is carried out, and after launch and until the end of the flight, information from the seeker is used.

                those. a helicopter after launching an ATGM can scoop on its own affairs, the rocket itself will find a target, it does not need to be adjusted

                The same applies to the PARS-3 Trigat. He has an infrared seeker. Which generally does not imply any external correction (as well as UR explosives with TGSN).
                Target designation is carried out using an over-sleeve sighting system. After the target is identified, a laser rangefinder is used to determine the distance to the target. The operator then determines the target and captures. When the operator decides to open fire, the helicopter makes a "jump", the missile seeker carries out the final "alignment" and immediately after the target is locked, an automatic launch occurs. Further, the guidance of the ATGM is carried out using a thermal imaging seeker


                Spike needs no introduction.
                1. 0
                  12 March 2020 09: 52
                  the fact that you have poured Grisha .. it's just inattentively read my comments, read it again. and finally turn on logic by combining science and media information. screening the husk will immediately lead to a definite answer. go for it
                  1. +2
                    12 March 2020 09: 57
                    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                    it's just inattentive I read my comments

                    Believe me, carefully enough. And in the comments you slipped into the flaws of the systems, but didn’t refute the absence of the principle of shot-forgot, nothing, especially for missiles with TGSN
                    So who heaped up is an open question
                    1. -1
                      12 March 2020 10: 09
                      but did not refute the lack of the principle of fire-forget, ..... how so did not refute ??? I very much denied it, the only thing I didn’t publish was that the IR and radar-range systems are currently equipped with an additional unit of the inertial gyroscopic system, which does not require correction from outside at distances of 10 km. By the way, to increase your informational content .. in NURS, GCI units are also introduced. but NURs are much cheaper - that is, they are "fire and forget"
                      1. +1
                        12 March 2020 12: 29
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        very denied

                        ) I have not heard a single sane argument why the above systems are not complexes of the principle shot-forgot

                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        the only thing

                        the only thing you do is slide into a ditch, moving away from the topic

                        In rockets, the shot and forgot aiming is carried out once, after which the automation of the rocket remembers the position of the target and guides it after launching independently. The helicopter crew can then go about their business - the rocket no longer needs it from the word at all.
                        And this principle is consistent with PARS-3 Trigat, and Spike, and AGM-114L. There are no similar Russian ATGMs yet

                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        but NURs are much cheaper - that is, they are "fire and forget"

                        still, it’s uncontrollable) Like a bullet. Or a stone. Only we are talking about guided missiles (specifically - about helicopter ATGMs). However, while you wrote a comment, you probably forgot about that. It happens...
                        1. 0
                          12 March 2020 15: 03
                          However, while you wrote a comment, ...... I print comments outlining thoughts, and I emphasize a little better than the therapist. but although, unlike the writings, something can be disassembled ....
                          The helicopter crew can then go about their business - the rocket no longer needs it from the word at all.
                          And PARS-3 Trigat, Spike, and AGM-114L correspond to this principle ....... these ATGM systems do not have any shot and forgot, you need correction and EVERYTHING. and the principle of the crew to "forget" about the shot is to transfer the correction to a third-party gunner, or to the operator, ... call me, but I can't give a lecture about the impossible and possible from scratch, in the commentary you can only share information that is not to the opponent for some reason was known. and you just need to start from scratch. and not to absorb any nonsense about the ATGM fired and forgot
          3. 0
            11 March 2020 22: 16
            Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
            the Sturm warhead is heavier

            Is it much?
            And on BB?
            1. 0
              11 March 2020 22: 20
              Is it much?
              And on BB? ...... depending on which version in TPK
              1. +1
                11 March 2020 22: 29
                with tandem cumulative warhead. It seems like an ATGM))
                1. 0
                  11 March 2020 22: 48
                  with tandem cumulative warhead. It seems like an ATGM ... and the equipment in the F-style is 10 kg HE, I think that 10 kg is about 200 RGD at one point, interesting, and some armored vehicles can survive in such conditions. and there’s also a variation of the thermal bar. so choose the taste of what to die in armored vehicles
                  1. 0
                    12 March 2020 10: 17
                    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                    the equipment in the F style is 10 kg of a land mine, I suppose that 10 kg is about 200 RGD at one point, it is interesting, and some armored vehicles can survive in such conditions. and there’s also a variation of the thermal bar. so choose the taste of what to die in armored vehicles

                    If everything is so simple, then why the cumulative ATGMs with an armor-piercing capacity of 900-1300mm?
                    1. -1
                      12 March 2020 10: 25
                      If everything is so simple, then why are the ATGM cumulative, ... ECHO of the Cold War ... and the loudest echo was tanks, and in huge numbers ... at the moment tanks play a modest role in local conflicts, but echo .. .it's all
      2. +6
        11 March 2020 11: 27
        Mi-28n had a problem with the gearbox
        The radar and target designation, in addition, it was a good idea to acquire a supply of shots - I forgot, and 5km is not enough.
      3. 0
        11 March 2020 22: 15
        such questions do not interest VO
      4. 0
        11 March 2020 23: 34
        There were no problems with the gearbox. The crash at the air show where Igor Butenko was killed was due to platitudes - the tail rotor pitch is controlled by an asterisk, control cables are attached to the ends of the chain. There was a defect at the junction - the cable broke and rolled onto the drive shaft and jammed it. The tail rotor drive collapsed at the most critical moment - a u-turn. They could not get out of it, they fell. One pilot managed to run away, Igor died from a fallen blade.
      5. -2
        12 March 2020 03: 18
        Quote: sanik2020
        And a mop can also knock out a tank if you attach a sight and a gun to it.

        That's what I watch anti-tank helicopters do not build at the barmalei! What for? After all, there are mops!

        Abra! Mop! Cadabra! - A true anti-tank tool, if anyone did not know, yeah.

        One question. Tie scopes and ATGMs with scotch tape or screeds?
    2. +5
      11 March 2020 11: 19
      Unmanned aerial vehicles can successfully cope with the work of destroying tanks and other armored vehicles without endangering the lives of pilots. I can’t say that attack attack helicopters have become obsolete, but they are already really being squeezed.
      1. 0
        11 March 2020 12: 26
        So it goes further - pigeons will begin to destroy tanks. And what can be done against pigeons, when there are hundreds of them, and each with a nano-missile from Chubais! wink
        1. +5
          11 March 2020 12: 44
          Quote: bessmertniy
          each with nano-rocket from Chubais

          Here Chubais just this nanu in nanu and insert, without nanoprotector ...
      2. -1
        12 March 2020 22: 25
        Quote: kjhg
        Unmanned aerial vehicles can successfully cope with the work of destroying tanks and other armored vehicles without endangering the lives of pilots. I can’t say that attack attack helicopters have become obsolete, but they are already really being squeezed.


        Where and whom are UAVs pushing? UAV can only work in the absence of electronic warfare. He, though unmanned, but manned.
    3. +2
      11 March 2020 11: 29
      Quote: sanik2020
      The Mi-28n had a problem with the gearbox, due to which there were several disasters. Was it possible to solve this problem and make the car reliable, is that a question?
      And a mop can also knock out a tank if you attach a sight and a gun to it.

      And a monkey can write a comment on VO if it knocks on the keyboard for a long time.

      Only now no one in the world for some reason puts sights and guns on something there, if only it flies, but they fight for millimeters, kilograms and km / h units. Apparently, the characteristics of the helicopters still matter, no matter how strange it may seem to your advanced consciousness. Meanwhile, an aphorism about monkeys typewriting exists, check out.
      1. -9
        11 March 2020 12: 14
        Quote: Mentat
        Quote: sanik2020
        The Mi-28n had a problem with the gearbox, due to which there were several disasters. Was it possible to solve this problem and make the car reliable, is that a question?
        And a mop can also knock out a tank if you attach a sight and a gun to it.

        And a monkey can write a comment on VO if it knocks on the keyboard for a long time.

        Only now no one in the world for some reason puts sights and guns on something there, if only it flies, but they fight for millimeters, kilograms and km / h units. Apparently, the characteristics of the helicopters still matter, no matter how strange it may seem to your advanced consciousness. Meanwhile, an aphorism about monkeys typewriting exists, check out.

        1.No, the monkey will not be able to write a comment, only an indistinct set of letters.
        2. They say that Turkish drones with a carrying capacity of 50 kg and the cost can not be compared with a helicopter, cut a lot of armored vehicles in Syria
        1. +2
          11 March 2020 12: 48
          Quote: Vol4ara
          slaughtered a lot of armored vehicles in Syria

          Something was cut out. But against the background of their video performances with the destruction of "a lot of things", as that many doubts creep in.
      2. +7
        11 March 2020 12: 35
        Quote: Mentat
        for some reason no one in the world sets sights and guns on something there, just to fly

      3. 0
        11 March 2020 20: 27
        Quote: Mentat
        Only now no one in the world for some reason puts sights and guns on something there, if only it flies, but they fight for millimeters, kilograms and km / h units.
        Battle hang gliders? No, have not heard. PTAB-2,5-1,5 in 1942 developed. Nothing prevents the dark night (at risk) ATGM drag on a hang glider.
    4. +4
      11 March 2020 11: 31
      All the same, changes will come to aviation! Drones have already announced themselves seriously and can still !!!
      as always, an integrated approach is effective!
    5. -7
      11 March 2020 11: 35
      I saw a landmine in the video. The caliber is very large. The detonation is long.
      It demonstrates that Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are a formidable weapon that has been tested in real combat conditions.

      Rather, the already upgraded type Mi-28Mx. And yes, T-55 .... I cried =) ... are .... IT demonstrates
    6. +2
      11 March 2020 11: 36
      We survived, the terrorists already had tanks, before there were a maximum of ak-74s, soon they would have their own aviation. Where the world is heading ..
    7. -2
      11 March 2020 11: 44
      Did he shoot a gun?
      Hit the side of the tower?
      Traces of rocket movement would be visible from NURs
      1. +7
        11 March 2020 11: 48
        at the very beginning, the point moves toward the target, reconsider, then it is not visible, apparently too far
        1. +2
          11 March 2020 11: 50
          Thanks, I didn’t make out. good
      2. +7
        11 March 2020 11: 49
        Did he shoot a gun?
        From the time sheet TT.
      3. +6
        11 March 2020 11: 58
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Did he shoot a gun?
        Hit the side of the tower?
        Traces of rocket movement would be visible from NURs

        T-55 was destroyed near Palmyra from a distance of about 5500 km Atakoy-V.
        The main weapons of the Mi-28N are Ataka-V missiles, capable of striking various targets at a distance of 6 meters. The tandem warhead provides penetration of 000 mm of armor.

        More advanced versions of this ATGM with a range of up to 10 thousand meters and armor penetration of 950 mm were also created.
        In addition, it is possible to install even more powerful weapons - the 9M123M anti-tank missiles of the Chrysanthemum-VM complex.
        It was also reported about the tests in Syria of the newest Mi-28NM with "Product 305", capable of destroying the enemy at a distance of 25 kilometers.

        https://rg.ru/2020/03/10/mi-28n-dokazal-svoiu-effektivnost-v-borbe-s-tankami-v-sirii.html
        1. -1
          11 March 2020 12: 23
          Well, thank you . Nothing is clear from the note. But nevertheless, I suspect that this is -9M120F because it was withered with a delay.
      4. +8
        11 March 2020 12: 20
        Most likely they were shooting "attack", the target illumination laser periodically flashes on the tank.
        1. +5
          11 March 2020 12: 23
          AND! Right Of course, a laser. And I took these glare for rebounds on the armor of a 30 mm gun.
          1. +5
            11 March 2020 12: 55
            if I’m not mistaken, then these glare is not from the laser-beam guidance system, but from the IR lamp installed in the rear of the 9m120 Ptur. from these flashes, the equipment on the helicopter determines the position of the rocket relative to the aiming point. The Mi-28n guided weapon system uses a radio command command and control system,
            and the 9m120-1 missile from the Ka-52 guided weapons complex is indeed guided by a laser beam.
            1. -2
              11 March 2020 12: 56
              Quote: Nikolay R-PM
              and from the IR lamp installed in the rear of the PTM 9m120

              Definitely not her.
              The headlamp is constantly on.
              1. +6
                11 March 2020 14: 35
                Quote: Spade
                The headlamp is constantly on.

                Is the pulse (!) Lamp "shining" constantly? Is the infrared range visible to the "naked" eye? ...
                1. +1
                  11 March 2020 15: 23
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  The pulse (!) Lamp "shines" constantly

                  Ага.
                  Because the optical coordinator must constantly see the position of the missile relative to the "PU-target" axis

                  And by this "impulse", imperceptible to the eye, the equipment distinguishes the headlamp of "its" missile from other missiles and from various other kinds of interference.

                  Matrimony laughing
                  1. +3
                    11 March 2020 16: 24
                    Quote: Spade
                    The pulse (!) Lamp "shines" constantly

                    Ага.
                    Because the optical coordinator must constantly see the position of the missile relative to the "PU-target" axis

                    Well, about the "impulse" of the lamp, I joked a little ... It turns out that in vain ... anyway "nobody understood anything"! Another thing is when "tovarischi" saw "glare" ("blinking") from IR-Lamps!
                    1. 0
                      11 March 2020 17: 40
                      Quote: Nikolaevich I
                      blinking ") from the IR lamp!

                      It's impossible.
                      It is either constantly visible, or not at all, if it is a thermal imager and the spectrum in which it operates does not "see" the headlamp.
        2. 0
          11 March 2020 12: 36
          Quote: loki565
          "attack", the target illumination laser periodically flashes on the tank.

          There is no semi-active laser seeker on the Attacks.
          1. -2
            11 March 2020 12: 44
            There is no semi-active laser seeker on the Attacks.

            maybe whirlwind
            1. +2
              11 March 2020 14: 39
              Quote: loki565
              maybe whirlwind

              "Whirlwind" - "laser-beam" ... (no GOS ...). "Whirlwind" .... "feature" Ka-52 ...
              1. 0
                11 March 2020 15: 46
                9M127 rocket, controlled by a laser beam, there wasn’t any talk about what gos. On Mi28 they also put it
                The round-the-clock surveillance and sighting system I-251 "Shkval" is used to guide the missile. A laser missile guidance system in combination with an automatic target tracking system guarantees high firing accuracy, practically independent of range. The radiation power of the control system is an order of magnitude lower than the threshold power of operation of foreign warning systems for laser irradiation, which ensures high secrecy of use.

                1. +4
                  11 March 2020 15: 56
                  Quote: loki565
                  9M127 rocket, controlled by a laser beam, there wasn’t any talk about what gos. On Mi28 they also put it

                  Yes ... now they are putting on (or trying to put on ...). But "originally" it was a "feature" of the Ka-50/52 ...
            2. -2
              11 March 2020 19: 09
              Quote: loki565
              maybe whirlwind

              The whirlwinds on the Mi-28 didn’t
              1. The comment was deleted.
        3. 0
          11 March 2020 13: 46


          The title of the video mentions an attack! Yes
          1. +3
            11 March 2020 14: 44
            Quote: keeper03
            The title of the video mentions an attack!

            It should not be forgotten that one of the latest modifications of the "Attack" is equipped with a combined guidance system (radio command + laser-beam) ...
            1. 0
              11 March 2020 14: 58
              true, otherwise it would be impossible to use a single gun 9m120-1 as part of the assault-cm, assault-in, assault-vk, attack-vn and attack-t complexes. for help, you can refer to the website of the developer of the plant Kolomna KBM
            2. -2
              11 March 2020 15: 29
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              that one of the latest modifications of the "Attack"

              All modifications of missiles "Attack" 9M120
              Because missiles controlled only by radio 9M114 belong to "Shturm"
              Matrimony
              1. +3
                11 March 2020 16: 08
                Quote: Spade
                All modifications of missiles "Attack" 9M120
                Because missiles controlled only by radio 9M114 belong to "Shturm"
                Matrimony

                And sho says "materiel"? But what (!) ... the 9М120 "Attack" rocket appeared "in 1996 and was equipped with a" clean "radio command guidance system! The 9М120-1 rocket with a combined guidance system (radio command + laser-beam) appeared not earlier than 2010 I will not argue ... perhaps by now a significant part of the 9M120 "has been converted into a version of" 9M120-1 "with ..." nuances "! ; but since 1996. to 2010 "Attack" was "pure" radio command! I don’t think all the "radio command" Attacks are gone by now! Repeat "materiel"!
                1. -1
                  11 March 2020 16: 13
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  and was equipped with a "clean" radio command guidance system

                  It never happened.
                  It just didn’t make sense to fence the garden. laughing

                  A missile with only a radio command has an index of 9M114
                  1. +3
                    11 March 2020 16: 49
                    Quote: Spade
                    It never happened.

                    Mdaaa .... tough case! Well, let the "people" judge ...
                    1. -1
                      11 March 2020 17: 36
                      Quote: Nikolaevich I
                      Mdaaa .... hard case!

                      Naturally.
                      A man who graduated from an artillery school. and in Kolomna it’s difficult to hang noodles on the ears about ATGMs ... laughing
                      I even know why there are "horns" on "Assaults", and where is the button to turn the drum when loading laughing
                      1. +3
                        12 March 2020 07: 35
                        And yet .... Despite all your "titles and titles" I recommend "to repeat the materiel" ... "Repetition is the mother of learning"!
    8. -12
      11 March 2020 11: 53
      This video shows only the backlog of Russian sighting systems and missile weapons.
      1. +4
        11 March 2020 12: 14
        This video demonstrates the real state of things in 2017. Now 2020 if that)
        1. -3
          11 March 2020 13: 33
          At the pace that innovations are being developed and adopted in our country, these 3 years are just a moment for which, in the best case, changes in TK will coordinate.
      2. -1
        11 March 2020 14: 17
        Quote: Roman 57 rus
        This video shows only the backlog of Russian sighting systems and missile weapons.

        Exactly
    9. -4
      11 March 2020 12: 07
      This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles.

      It would be strange if it were different. And what could the T-55 against the Attack?
      1. +3
        11 March 2020 12: 24
        It would be strange if it were different. And what could the T-55 against the Attack?

        same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.
        1. -4
          11 March 2020 12: 25
          same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.

          With "Attack" then? Anyone, even Mouse, even Toyota, even Abrams.
        2. 0
          12 March 2020 10: 26
          Quote: loki565
          same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.

          Was it hit in the roof of the tower?
    10. -3
      11 March 2020 12: 27
      This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles. It demonstrates that Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are a formidable weapon that has been tested in real combat conditions.

      The author's "real combat conditions" are: a single, outdated in the XX century tank, located openly in the desert, without any opposition from air defense and electronic warfare, and the absence of aviation, reconnaissance and strike drones, and battlefield control aircraft and enemy AWACS ... "Real combat conditions," yeah. lol .
    11. +3
      11 March 2020 12: 41
      Quote: General D
      For you, nothing

      And for you?
    12. +1
      11 March 2020 12: 43
      Quote: Roman 57 rus
      This video shows only the backlog of Russian sighting systems and missile weapons.

      Of course. Shown from the tenth shot, finally. the rocket hits the target. But does not destroy her.
    13. 0
      11 March 2020 12: 44
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles. It demonstrates that Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are a formidable weapon that has been tested in real combat conditions.

      The author's "real combat conditions" are: a single, outdated in the XX century tank, located openly in the desert, without any opposition from air defense and electronic warfare, and the absence of aviation, reconnaissance and strike drones, and battlefield control aircraft and enemy AWACS ... "Real combat conditions," yeah. lol .

      Sit in the latest one and show how your canned food will react after the attack.
    14. -1
      11 March 2020 13: 41
      Yes, not everything is so good, here the pilots complain that after a test in Syria a good rapid-firing gun was replaced with the formulation of too high ammunition consumption. It used to say that the APC could be cut in half, and now the gun is too slow.
      1. +2
        11 March 2020 23: 40
        C'mon! there was always a tempo switch. There were 2 modes, now 3. What to flounder then? 300-900-2000.
    15. -2
      11 March 2020 17: 28
      Quote: Spade
      Quote: Mentat
      for some reason no one in the world sets sights and guns on something there, just to fly


      And what did you portray, the example of the mighty aviation of Bandustan? This, of course, is “someone” in the aviation world, to be equal to such models, to reach such heights!

      In Vietnam, not the most underdeveloped country, we note, until recently, were in service with the T-34 (!) But we are a little different, right?
      1. -1
        11 March 2020 19: 30
        Quote: Mentat
        This, of course, is “someone” in the aviation world, to be equal to such models, to reach such heights!

        It's not about the heights, but in the ratio of efficiency / cost. It’s cool, of course, to drive a strategic bomber to hit Toyota with machine guns. Missile cruiser - to combat poachers. And nothing that you can use the tool is not so cool, but quite coping with its responsibilities.

        Both ATGMs and cluster bombs hang almost everything that can fly - from light aircraft, former civilian helicopters to UAVs and ganships.

        statement that
        Quote: Mentat
        Only now, for some reason, no one in the world sets sights and guns on something there, if only it would fly
        quite far from the truth
    16. mvg
      -1
      11 March 2020 18: 03
      And what is cimus? Tank 60 years, without the so-called "warning about exposure". A contrasting target, walking alone in the desert. The distance is 5 km. Where is the stuffing then?
      Any modern tank, having received a warning that it would be attacked like this, would have thwarted the attack, either with aerosols or with counter radiation.
      Where missiles ATGM 4th generation "shot-forgot" and a distance of 8-10 km. And at night, it's the Night Hunter! Or who?
      PS: A video for children of Uryakalok, from 2017 already years. Against Turkey, try to take it off
      1. +1
        12 March 2020 23: 04
        Quote: mvg
        Any modern tank, having received a warning that it would be attacked like this, would have thwarted the attack, either with aerosols or with counter radiation.


        Then he will make piiu a ray of death, take off and leave the battlefield in afterburner. :)

        Is the melofon mounted on "any modern tank"? How will he determine the targeting on the TV channel? The attack has radio command guidance. The laser is used only once to determine the distance before launch. Where would "any modern tank" get a warning? From space? The KAZ that you are talking about is far from being on any modern tank and they work against missiles going to laser illumination. For such rockets, aerosols really create a "wall". And for a visually guided Mi-28 missile, this is not critical, if the operator sees a target on the PNK monitor, he will hit it. At least through the window.



        Quote: mvg
        Where missiles ATGM 4th generation "shot-forgot" and a distance of 8-10 km. And at night, it's the Night Hunter! Or who?


        I have repeated many times and I will repeat: fired and forgotten is not the same as fired and hit. In nature, there are NO working algorithms that give confident selection of the tank against the background of the earth. Hellfire-longbows praised everywhere at the training ground "confused" tanks with civilian vehicles and even heaps of stones warmed up in the sun. Under equal conditions, controlled systems are more reliable and efficient than automatic ones. And what are the 8-10 km to the devil? The helicopter in search mode can barely see at 5-7. And the aiming mode has a too narrow sector. Without a radar, such ranges cannot be. They put a radar on the Mi-28NM - you will have a rocket, and at 8, and at 10 and at 20. And even with a combined seeker. And without any "hundred-tenth" generations. Just an aviation modification. :) By the way, Attack flies to 8000+. It is impossible to aim her at such a distance.
        And what do you dislike about the Mi-28 IR channel? What makes you think, for example, that the video was not shot from him? :)

        Quote: mvg
        A clip for children of Uryakalok, from 2017 already year. Against Turkey, try to take it off

        Well, those who have a topic have something to see. For example, the operation of the target tracking machine. Chic work. And against Turkey, why fly on one helicopter? Or do you personally decide on a solo helicopter mission against the Turkish Armed Forces? Or would you just blurt out something and it doesn’t matter what?
    17. -2
      11 March 2020 18: 25
      and from the bottom of the screen is a countdown, is this the calculated time the missile hit the target? as much as 3 seconds. before the rocket exploded, a bit too much error from 14 seconds.
      1. 0
        12 March 2020 23: 08
        Quote: _Ugene_
        and from the bottom of the screen is a countdown, is this the calculated time the missile hit the target? as much as 3 seconds. before the rocket exploded, a bit too much error from 14 seconds.

        wink
        Have you looked at big numbers? Big numbers like these are speed and distance. What are they not telling you?
        1. 0
          13 March 2020 10: 46
          Have you looked at big numbers? Big numbers like these are speed and distance. What are they not telling you?
          talk about the flight speed of the mi-28 and the distance to the target, so what? is it really difficult for modern computing systems to take these factors into account and adjust the estimated time to hit the target in real time? it's a trivial task
          1. 0
            15 March 2020 09: 32
            Quote: _Ugene_
            is it really difficult for modern computing systems to take these factors into account and adjust the estimated time to hit the target in real time? it's a trivial task

            Well, firstly, who told you that the Mi-28N has a modern computing system. I won’t reveal a big secret if I say: if the military didn’t delay the summing up of the competition for the Ka-50, Mi-28N would be written off today by replacing it with a new model. This helicopter is not crammed with the latest in computer technology.
            Secondly, distance measurement is made by a laser range finder. Do you offer to shine a beam across the tank all the way?
            Thirdly, during the flight of a rocket, computers, and so there is something to do, I assure you.
            Fourth, and what's the point in data that constantly shifts back and forth? The operator does not really need these numbers. He needs to hold the scope of the sight if he is guiding a rocket with his hands. Why then should he know? It seemed to him at the time of launch, the rest is not important to him. The very same computer and automatic tracking machine are busy with the correction of the trajectory.
            Fifth, why? Why time before collision to accurately calculate and show? Does something depend on this?
            1. 0
              15 March 2020 10: 19
              all this is very sad, but what's the point of displaying incorrect data on the display? even then let the remaining parameters show anyhow, but we will find a hundred excuses for this. then remove them altogether, or is it necessary to unconsciously instruct the operator not to believe the data on the display?
              1. 0
                23 March 2020 14: 07
                Quote: _Ugene_
                all this is very sad, but what's the point of displaying incorrect data on the display? even then let the remaining parameters show anyhow, but we will find a hundred excuses for this. then remove them altogether, or is it necessary to unconsciously instruct the operator not to believe the data on the display?


                Well, firstly, where did you get that you see the monitor of the operator, not the pilot? :)
                And secondly, I will repeat: the operator, during manual aiming, DOES NOT NEED to know the exact time for the missile to contact the target. He needs to keep the "frame" on the target. Everything that he needs, he received with high reliability at the time of launch. The rest is a matter of automation.

                And do not be sad, there will be new computers on the Mi-28NM.
    18. -1
      11 March 2020 18: 32
      "This video demonstrates the effectiveness of the Night Hunter in the fight against armored vehicles. It demonstrates that the Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are a formidable weapon that has been tested in real combat conditions."
      It proves this only in the context of the use of toothless fighters in the absence of technical (and other) intelligence tools and developed military air defense.
    19. 0
      11 March 2020 18: 37
      Quote: sanik2020
      A mop can knock out a tank

      The mop is unlikely, no one flew on it, but the broom in skilled hands is a formidable weapon.
    20. 0
      11 March 2020 19: 16
      The Mi-28N “Night Hunter” helicopter delivers an accurate blow to the enemy’s armored vehicles, giving them no chance to survive

      This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles. It demonstrates that Russian Mi-28 attack helicopters are a formidable weapon that has been tested in real combat conditions.

      what do we see in the video? Shooting a single tank in a polygon on flat terrain. Nowhere to go, no cover. No resistance, no air defense, no interference. It's even silly to doubt the outcome of the "battle"
    21. -3
      11 March 2020 20: 45
      Quote: Gregory_45
      ATGMs hang almost everything that can fly - starting from light-engine aircraft, former civilian helicopters

      Please provide examples of these absolutely brilliant examples of engineering, so as not to be unfounded.
    22. 0
      11 March 2020 22: 08
      Quote: Gregory_45
      the wildest case - a lone tank on a flat terrain and a helicopter on a free hunt

      There are such cases, through time)
      Barmalei, with the exception of seasoned mercenaries, are very disorderly warriors.
      1. -1
        12 March 2020 08: 57
        Quote: Comrade Kim
        Barmalei, with the exception of seasoned mercenaries, are very disorderly warriors.

        The Turks, just now, leopard their type almost the same framed. Seasoned warriors, damn it ...
    23. -1
      12 March 2020 08: 02
      Yeah, impressive!
    24. -1
      12 March 2020 08: 54
      It seems that the radicals did not even suspect that their combat vehicle was under the gun.

      It is a pity, it is easy to "leave"
    25. 0
      12 March 2020 09: 33
      I don’t think this video is an indicator of anything. In the absence of any anti-aircraft defense, very many helicopters can hit a single target such as a TANK. (and it doesn’t matter t-55, t-90, leopard or abrams). About the effectiveness of the complex can only speak of its real use in combined arms combat, or in a mess like the confrontation between Syria and Turkey.
      1. 0
        12 March 2020 22: 35
        Quote: lBEARl
        I don’t think this video is an indicator of anything. In the absence of any anti-aircraft defense, very many helicopters can hit a single target such as a TANK. (and it doesn’t matter t-55, t-90, leopard or abrams). About the effectiveness of the complex can only speak of its real use in combined arms combat, or in a mess like the confrontation between Syria and Turkey.


        Well, if you can bring footage of a combat helicopter working in conditions of antiaircraft defense at least at the level of the battlefield, against the masses of armored vehicles, please send a video to the studio. A helicopter is not a tank; it is not intended to break through an echeloned defense. Only full ..... will send helicopters into the thick of combined arms combat. Even in a turmoil "similar to the confrontation between Syria and Turkey," helicopters will not go towards the tank divisions.
        1. +1
          13 March 2020 16: 41
          No, I can’t bring such a video. Just the name is too provocative. I would not comment on the article, but to pass off the destruction of an old tank in a landfill environment as an effective tool in the fight against tanks is a bit of an overkill.
    26. +2
      12 March 2020 10: 02
      The video is about nothing.
      The conditions are purely polygon. There was no fire on the helicopter. The tank did not have any means to disrupt missile guidance - it did not even shoot smoke grenades.
    27. -1
      12 March 2020 18: 05
      Quote: Mentat
      Quote: Gregory_45
      ATGMs hang almost everything that can fly - starting from light-engine aircraft, former civilian helicopters

      Please provide examples of these absolutely brilliant examples of engineering, so as not to be unfounded.

      Those. there will be no examples, respectively, a person was engaged in pure balabolism.
      But of course it’s necessary to put the cons (in silence), some characters are especially unpleasant to realize that there is nothing to say, and they poked it with their nose.
    28. 0
      13 March 2020 01: 40
      Yes, yes! Just a real killer of antikvariata. And with PNV the problem has already been solved, or so the pilots continue to suffer? Or maybe the missiles appeared "fired-forget", so that there is no extra time looming over the battlefield?
      1. -1
        15 March 2020 09: 39
        I wonder how many times this retarded flyer’s retarded tale will be repeated? The NVD, on which you made a stand, has a relationship with a helicopter. It is included with OPTIONAL equipment. Do you have a set of wrenches in your car? Doesn't it occur to you to discuss their quality with the car developer? What about the jack? What about the pump? :)
        This NVD, by the way, was accepted by the same flying general to supply the Air Force.
        1. -1
          15 March 2020 11: 01
          no "moronic fairy tale"! This "fairy tale", or rather the MI-28 problems identified in Syria, was criticized by the former commander-in-chief of the Aerospace Forces in general. And criticized on the topic, since everyone jumped and ran to fix the problem. And, as later, said that the Syrian Mi-28s had been modernized. And the rest of the Mi-28 fleet?
          Or maybe the mi -28 doesn't have any problems with the pturas either? Did they change it to "fire-forgotten"?
          1. 0
            23 March 2020 14: 03
            Quote: Gosha Smirnov
            no "moronic fairy tale"! This "fairy tale", or rather the mi-28 problems identified in Syria, was criticized by the former commander-in-chief of the Aerospace Forces in general.


            So he, this former one, took these glasses to equip the Air Force! Under him, they were introduced and equipped with helicopter pilots. Where did he look THEN? :)

            The moronity of this tale is that these glasses have nothing to do with the Mi-28N. For piloting a helicopter at night, they are not needed AT ALL. The aiming and navigation complex of the helicopter is equipped with an IR channel, and allows you to perform all tasks at night. These goggles are ADDITIONAL equipment that, when he was active, was introduced into the equipment of ALL helicopters of the RF Armed Forces. And they are needed ONLY for takeoff and landing, when the pilots I want to to control the situation by the method of "sticking the head out of the window". These goggles were never intended for piloting under any circumstances. Those who piloted with these goggles grossly violated the rules for operating the helicopter. And there is the dashboard illumination and the blinding of the rocket exhaust. The garbage did not have to be done, but to do what was prescribed by the instructions.

            Quote: Gosha Smirnov
            And criticized on the subject, since everyone jumped up and ran to fix the problem.

            Where and who jumped? How to fix what is not there? They gave them to the "inventors", made them learn the operating instructions, and reduced the power of the dashboard backlight.
            And the modernization of helicopters following the results of Syria was done according to another program.

            Quote: Gosha Smirnov
            Or maybe the mi -28 doesn't have any problems with the pturas either? Did they change it to "fire-forgotten"?

            Yes. For a long time already, instead of fire-and-forget rockets, fire-hit rockets have been used.
            1. 0
              23 March 2020 23: 17
              Well, I did not expect to read anything but a fabulous mess and a miserable attempt to justify real shoals. And then (when this modification of the machine was adopted), there was actually no then in Syria and testing of equipment in real combat conditions.
              1. 0
                24 March 2020 16: 07
                Quote: Gosha Smirnov
                Well, I did not expect to read anything but a fabulous mess and a miserable attempt to justify real shoals. And then (when this modification of the machine was adopted), there was actually no then in Syria and testing of equipment in real combat conditions.

                :) The difference between me and you is that I operate with verified and reliable data. :)
                1. 0
                  24 March 2020 23: 54

                  The difference between me and you is that I operate with verified and reliable data.
                  And the words of the former commander of the VKS and not only, like the subsequent modernization of mi28, was it not so and unreliable? Or maybe the modernized machine adopted by the Syrian company was not finalized after? Do you even understand how much you contradict even the BANAL logic of man?
                  1. 0
                    29 March 2020 02: 32
                    Quote: Gosha Smirnov
                    And the words of the former commander of the VKS and not only

                    I repeat again. These glasses are set to equip aviation precisely with this former. And this former THEN had no complaints against them. And I suspect that he just decided to cover his ass. There were no other complainants.

                    Quote: Gosha Smirnov
                    subsequent modernization of mi28

                    I repeat again. Noctovisor glasses are NOT part of a helicopter. Therefore, it is precisely in this direction that there is no modernization and could not be. It was recommended to reduce the luminosity of indicators and screens. ALL. All other work on the modernization of the Mi-28N had nothing to do with these fucking glasses.

                    Quote: Gosha Smirnov
                    Or maybe the modernized car adopted by the Syrian company was not finalized after?

                    It was, but certainly not so that strange people could pilot it, putting noctovisors on their foreheads. :)

                    Quote: Gosha Smirnov
                    Do you even understand how much you contradict even the banal logic of man?


                    Yes, it’s just that your logic is based on an initially incorrect postulate. Therefore, the result of your reasoning is not correct. The helicopter was finalized, this is normal following the results of military operations. But this modernization did not concern glasses-noctovisors. They were not needed for piloting a helicopter, and are not needed now.
                    1. 0
                      29 March 2020 03: 12
                      Quote: abc_alex
                      But this modernization did not concern glasses-noctovisors. They were not needed for piloting a helicopter, and are not needed now.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"