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


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.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sanik2020 11 March 2020 11: 01 New
    • 34
    • 21
    +13
    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. General D 11 March 2020 11: 21 New
      • 31
      • 65
      -34
      I fully agree. Where is the t-55, and where is the mi-28. For an inexperienced layman will do. Where are the similar videos with Leopards and Abrams? But no. Well, as a cherry for the cake, we could not solve the problem of the impact-sighting complex by the type of, “I shot and forgot.” The ugly Yankees mastered this back in the 80s of the last century. Are there any experts? If you’re wrong, correct it.
      1. carstorm 11 11 March 2020 11: 59 New
        • 33
        • 11
        +22
        and what is the difference between a leopard and 55 as a target for an attack helicopter?)))
        1. General D 11 March 2020 12: 01 New
          • 11
          • 47
          -36
          For you, nothing
          1. Shurik70 11 March 2020 13: 47 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            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. Xenofont 11 March 2020 15: 18 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Take a closer look: this tracer blinks several times, and then an explosion.
            2. EvilLion 13 March 2020 08: 42 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              How can a subsonic rocket fly 5 km in 2 seconds ??
          2. ROSS_51 11 March 2020 22: 49 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            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. EvilLion 13 March 2020 08: 42 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            For a helicopter too, and the backlight detection sensor can also be plugged into the T-55.
        2. Grigory_45 11 March 2020 18: 49 New
          • 15
          • 0
          +15
          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. Nastia makarova 11 March 2020 12: 10 New
        • 14
        • 16
        -2
        T-55 and Leopards and Abrams of no difference for a helicopter
        1. General D 11 March 2020 12: 19 New
          • 21
          • 17
          +4
          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. loki565 11 March 2020 12: 37 New
            • 11
            • 5
            +6
            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. Insurgent 11 March 2020 12: 41 New
            • 14
            • 4
            +10
            Quote: General D
            The thickness of the armor, its properties, complexes of active and passive defense, information awareness on the battlefield.

            For the Ataka rocket of the Sturm complex with a radio command control system in the 9M120M / tandem warhead modification, with 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. carstorm 11 11 March 2020 12: 42 New
            • 10
            • 3
            +7
            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. NEXUS 11 March 2020 13: 47 New
            • 9
            • 4
            +5
            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. Lopatov 11 March 2020 12: 33 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: General D
        were able to solve the problem of the impact-sighting complex by type, "shot and forgot"

        Everything is much more complicated than you think.
        “Helfaires” with semi-active LSGS in the conditions of modern local wars go away like hot cakes. So the US Defense Ministry was forced to pay for the creation of another production line for the assembly of these missiles. Invest your money

        It suddenly turned out that third-generation complexes did not provide the necessary control.
      4. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 15: 13 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        ,, shot and forgot. "The ugly Yankees mastered it back in the 80s of the last century .... here it’s not good to lie, there weren’t any helicopter complexes like“ shot and forgot ”on the ground in the 80s and now and now will be in the future, without exception, all helicopter ATGMs will be semi-automatic maximum, and with aiming all have the same problems
        video with Leopards and Abrams? ........ The Sturm ATGM guidance system for the Mi-28 is similar to the Kornet ATGM guidance system, the only difference is that the Sturm warhead is more weighty and the speed of SD is all. so type in the search engine video "Cornet against Abra or Leo and you will be happy
        1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 15: 43 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
          .that is not good to lie, helicopters of the type "shot and forgot" on the ground weren’t in the 80s and now and will not be in the future

          You're wrong.
          AGM-114L Longbow adopted in 1998
          1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 16: 25 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            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. Lopatov 11 March 2020 17: 38 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
              GOS radar is semi-active.

              http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/aat/agm114l.html
              1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 17: 48 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                it’s not clear what the exile is for .... along the way I explained that the radar protection system stands on them, what they referred to, it’s probably not difficult to understand that firing at anti-tank systems requires correction for various reasons. but the first and main is the state of the atmosphere, in the case of radar, the situation is much more necessary for correction, the underlying surface can distort the image until it is recognizable (target recognition), so there is no need for links. especially about ARLS in this reference, there is no need to powder brains. no about “shot and forgot” on a ground target,
                1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 18: 04 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                  why did they refer

                  In addition, to understand that there is no smell of semi-activity there
                  1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 18: 14 New
                    • 5
                    • 1
                    +4
                    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. Lopatov 11 March 2020 19: 03 New
                      • 1
                      • 3
                      -2
                      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

                      "Helfaer-L", "Brimstone", JAGM ... In your opinion, is this really a grand cut?
                      1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 19: 12 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Locate the radar in the photo ... first you need to find a helper with ARLS in the picture

                        "Helfaer-L", "Brimstone", JAGM ... In your opinion, is this really a grand cut? ........ well, a rich country probably has some developments, maybe disastrous. but it is permissible. with regards to “shot and forgot,” this is probably a topic for the Air-to-Air class and MANPADS, but nothing like ATGMs, for example ATGM Jovel --- is it dangerous despite the enormous cost compared to other ATGMs or rather, in terms of the "cost-effectiveness" parameter, well, it’s something like a reminder that for now you can forget about the ATGM "shot and forgot"
                      2. Lopatov 11 March 2020 19: 16 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        For starters, you need to find a helper with ARLS in the picture

                        Everywhere indicate that Stryker MSL can use the entire line of "Helfaer", including "L".

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

                        You have not answered.
                      3. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 19: 38 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Everywhere they point out that Stryker MSL can use the entire line of "Helpers", including "L" ..... you yourself must understand that without an onboard radar it is not possible 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. Grigory_45 11 March 2020 19: 02 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
      there were no helicopter complexes of the “shot and forgot” type on the ground 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. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 22: 17 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        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. Grigory_45 12 March 2020 09: 44 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          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).
          Targeting is carried out with the help of a super-sighting complex. After identifying the target, a laser rangefinder is used to determine the distance to the target. After that, the operator determines the target and captures. When the operator decides to open fire, the helicopter makes a “jump”, the missile seeker performs the final “alignment”, and immediately after capturing the target, it automatically starts. Further guidance ATGM is carried out using thermal imaging seeker


          Spike needs no introduction.
          1. Crimean partisan 1974 12 March 2020 09: 52 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            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. Grigory_45 12 March 2020 09: 57 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              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. Crimean partisan 1974 12 March 2020 10: 09 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                but didn’t refute the absence of the principle of shot-forgot, ..... how didn’t it refute ??? even refuted it, the only thing he didn’t do before was that the infrared and radar systems are currently equipped with an additional unit of an inertial gyroscopic system that does not require correction from outside at distances of 10 km. by the way to increase your informational content .. in NURSI also the blocks of IHS are introduced. but NURSs are much cheaper, that is, they are "shot and forgot"
                1. Grigory_45 12 March 2020 12: 29 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  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 NURSs are much cheaper, that is, they are "shot and forgot"

                  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. Crimean partisan 1974 12 March 2020 15: 03 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    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 this principle corresponds to PARS-3 Trigat, and Spike, and AGM-114L ....... these ATGM systems do not have any shots and forgot, they need correction and EVERYTHING. and the crew’s principle that to “forget” about the shot is to pass the correction to an outside gunner, or an operator, ... call me, but I can’t give a lecture about the impossible and possible from scratch, in a comment you can only share information that the opponent doesn’t for any reason was famous. and you just have to start from scratch. and do not absorb any stupidity about anti-tank guided missiles and forgot
    3. Tamer 11 March 2020 22: 16 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
      the Sturm warhead is heavier

      Is it much?
      And on BB?
      1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 22: 20 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Is it much?
        And on BB? ...... depending on which version in TPK
        1. Tamer 11 March 2020 22: 29 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          with tandem cumulative warhead. It seems like an ATGM))
          1. Crimean partisan 1974 11 March 2020 22: 48 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            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. Tamer 12 March 2020 10: 17 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              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. Crimean partisan 1974 12 March 2020 10: 25 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                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
  • Threaded screw 11 March 2020 11: 27 New
    • 13
    • 7
    +6
    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.
  • Alexey from Perm 11 March 2020 22: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    such questions do not interest VO
  • Nikolay Balashov 11 March 2020 23: 34 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    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.
  • Shuttle 12 March 2020 03: 18 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    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?
  • kjhg 11 March 2020 11: 19 New
    • 15
    • 10
    +5
    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. bessmertniy 11 March 2020 12: 26 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      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. Insurgent 11 March 2020 12: 44 New
        • 8
        • 3
        +5
        Quote: bessmertniy
        each with nano-rocket from Chubais

        Here Chubais just this nanu in nanu and insert, without nanoprotector ...
    2. abc_alex 12 March 2020 22: 25 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      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.
  • Mentat 11 March 2020 11: 29 New
    • 13
    • 11
    +2
    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. Vol4ara 11 March 2020 12: 14 New
      • 7
      • 16
      -9
      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. Insurgent 11 March 2020 12: 48 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Quote: Vol4ara
        slaughtered a lot of armored vehicles in Syria

        Something cut out. But against the background of their video productions with the destruction of "a lot of things," as it creeps in doubts that a lot.
    2. Lopatov 11 March 2020 12: 35 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Quote: Mentat
      for some reason no one in the world sets sights and guns on something there, just to fly

    3. Simargl 11 March 2020 20: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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.
  • rocket757 11 March 2020 11: 31 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    All the same, changes will come to aviation! Drones have already announced themselves seriously and can still !!!
    as always, an integrated approach is effective!
  • CBR600 11 March 2020 11: 35 New
    • 6
    • 13
    -7
    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
  • Andrey Koptelov 11 March 2020 11: 36 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    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 ..
  • voyaka uh 11 March 2020 11: 44 New
    • 5
    • 7
    -2
    Did he shoot a gun?
    Hit the side of the tower?
    Traces of rocket movement would be visible from NURs
    1. vadson 11 March 2020 11: 48 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      at the very beginning, the point moves toward the target, reconsider, then it is not visible, apparently too far
      1. voyaka uh 11 March 2020 11: 50 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Thanks, I didn’t make out. good
    2. Threaded screw 11 March 2020 11: 49 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Did he shoot a gun?
      From the time sheet TT.
    3. Sky strike fighter 11 March 2020 11: 58 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      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 weapon of the Mi-28N is the Ataka-V missiles, capable of hitting 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 - 9M123M anti-tank missiles of the Chrysanthemum-VM complex.
      It was also reported about the testing in Syria of the latest Mi-28NM with the “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. CBR600 11 March 2020 12: 23 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        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. loki565 11 March 2020 12: 20 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      Most likely they fired an “attack”; the target’s backlight laser flickers periodically on the tank.
      1. voyaka uh 11 March 2020 12: 23 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        AND! Right Of course, a laser. And I took these glare for rebounds on the armor of a 30 mm gun.
        1. Nikolay R-PM 11 March 2020 12: 55 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          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. Lopatov 11 March 2020 12: 56 New
            • 1
            • 3
            -2
            Quote: Nikolai R-PM
            and from the IR lamp installed in the rear of the PTM 9m120

            Definitely not her.
            The headlamp is constantly on.
            1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 14: 35 New
              • 7
              • 1
              +6
              Quote: Spade
              The headlamp is constantly on.

              Pulse (!) Lamp "shines" constantly? Is the IR range visible to the naked eye? ...
              1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 15: 23 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                Pulse (!) Lamp "shines" constantly

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

                And according to this “impulse”, which is invisible to the eye, the equipment distinguishes the lamp-headlight of “its” rocket from other missiles and from various kinds of other hindrances.

                Matrimony laughing
                1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 16: 24 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: Spade
                  Pulse (!) Lamp "shines" constantly

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

                  Well, about the "impulse" of the lamp, I joked a little ... It turns out that in vain ... anyway, "no one" understood! Another thing is when the "comrade" saw the "glare" ("blinking") from IR-Lamps!
                  1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 17: 40 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    flashing ") from the IR lamp!

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

        On the “Attacks” there is no semi-active laser seeker.
        1. loki565 11 March 2020 12: 44 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          On the “Attacks” there is no semi-active laser seeker.

          maybe whirlwind
          1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 14: 39 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: loki565
            maybe whirlwind

            "Whirlwind" - "laser beam" ... (no GOS ...). "Whirlwind" .... "chip" Ka-52 ...
            1. loki565 11 March 2020 15: 46 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              9M127 rocket, controlled by a laser beam, there wasn’t any talk about what gos. On Mi28 they also put it
              For guidance missiles used round-the-clock surveillance and sighting system I-251 "Flurry". The 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 response power of foreign warning systems for laser radiation, which ensures high stealth application.

              1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 15: 56 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Quote: loki565
                9M127 rocket, controlled by a laser beam, there wasn’t any talk about what gos. On Mi28 they also put it

                Yes ... they are betting now (or trying to bet ...). But "originally" it was a "Ka-50/52 chip" ...
          2. Grigory_45 11 March 2020 19: 09 New
            • 1
            • 3
            -2
            Quote: loki565
            maybe whirlwind

            The whirlwinds on the Mi-28 didn’t
            1. The comment was deleted.
      3. keeper03 11 March 2020 13: 46 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0


        The title of the video mentions an attack! yes
        1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 14: 44 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          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. Nikolay R-PM 11 March 2020 14: 58 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            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. Lopatov 11 March 2020 15: 29 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            that one of the latest modifications of the "Attack"

            All modifications of the "Attack" 9M120 missiles
            Because rockets controlled only by radio 9M114 belong to the "Assaults"
            Matrimony
            1. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 16: 08 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Spade
              All modifications of the "Attack" 9M120 missiles
              Because rockets controlled only by radio 9M114 belong to the "Assaults"
              Matrimony

              And sho says "materiel"? And here’s what (!) ... the 9M120 “Attack” rocket appeared in 1996 and was equipped with a “clean” radio command guidance system! The 9M120-1 rocket with a combined guidance system (radio command + laser beam) appeared no earlier than 2010 years! I will not argue ... perhaps by now a significant part of the 9M120 "has been redone into the 9M120-1 version with ..." nuances "! ; but since 1996. until 2010, “Attack” was “pure” by the radio command! I do not think that all the “radio command” “Attacks” have disappeared by now! Repeat the "materiel"!
              1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 16: 13 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                and 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. Nikolaevich I 11 March 2020 16: 49 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: Spade
                  It never happened.

                  Mdaaa .... hard case! Well, let the "people" judge ...
                  1. Lopatov 11 March 2020 17: 36 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    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 the “horns” are on the “Assaults,” and where is the button to turn the drum when loading laughing
                    1. Nikolaevich I 12 March 2020 07: 35 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      And yet .... In spite of all your “titles and titles” I recommend “repeating the materiel” ... “Repetition is the mother of learning”!
  • Roman 57 rus 11 March 2020 11: 53 New
    • 12
    • 24
    -12
    This video shows only the backlog of Russian sighting systems and missile weapons.
    1. akropin 11 March 2020 12: 14 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      This video demonstrates the real state of things in 2017. Now 2020 if that)
      1. Antidote 11 March 2020 13: 33 New
        • 2
        • 5
        -3
        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. Skubudu 11 March 2020 14: 17 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: Roman 57 rus
      This video shows only the backlog of Russian sighting systems and missile weapons.

      Exactly
  • Jack O'Neill 11 March 2020 12: 07 New
    • 3
    • 7
    -4
    This video proves the high effectiveness of the "Night Hunter" in the fight against armored vehicles.

    It would be strange if it were otherwise. Yes, and that the T-55 against the “Attack” could?
    1. loki565 11 March 2020 12: 24 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      It would be strange if it were otherwise. Yes, and that the T-55 against the “Attack” could?

      same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.
      1. Jack O'Neill 11 March 2020 12: 25 New
        • 2
        • 6
        -4
        same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.

        With "Attack" then? At least someone, at least Mouse, at least Toyota, at least Abrams.
      2. Tamer 12 March 2020 10: 26 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: loki565
        same as abrams, the roof of the tower will not withstand any tank.

        Was it hit in the roof of the tower?
  • Monster_Fat 11 March 2020 12: 27 New
    • 12
    • 15
    -3
    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 tank, obsolete in the XNUMXth century, open in the desert, without any opposition from air defense and electronic warfare, and the absence of aviation, reconnaissance and attack drones, and enemy control aircraft and battlefield . "Real combat conditions," yeah. lol .
  • Victor March 47 11 March 2020 12: 41 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: General D
    For you, nothing

    And for you?
  • Victor March 47 11 March 2020 12: 43 New
    • 6
    • 5
    +1
    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.
  • Victor March 47 11 March 2020 12: 44 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    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 tank, obsolete in the XNUMXth century, open in the desert, without any opposition from air defense and electronic warfare, and the absence of aviation, reconnaissance and attack drones, and enemy control aircraft and battlefield . "Real combat conditions," yeah. lol .

    Sit in the latest one and show how your canned food will react after the attack.
  • JonnyT 11 March 2020 13: 41 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    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. Nikolay Balashov 11 March 2020 23: 40 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      C'mon! there was always a tempo switch. There were 2 modes, now 3. What to flounder then? 300-900-2000.
  • Mentat 11 March 2020 17: 28 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    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. Grigory_45 11 March 2020 19: 30 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      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
  • mvg
    mvg 11 March 2020 18: 03 New
    • 6
    • 7
    -1
    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. abc_alex 12 March 2020 23: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      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 guidance on the television channel? The attack has radio command guidance. The laser is used only once to determine the distance before starting. Where does "any modern tank" get a warning? From space? The KAZ you are talking about is far from any modern tank and they work against missiles going to the laser light. But for such missiles aerosols really create a "wall". And for the visually guided Mi-28 missile, this is not critical, if the operator sees the target on the PNK monitor, he will hit it. Though 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 repeated many times and will repeat: shot-forgot is not the same as shot-hit. In nature, there are NO working algorithms giving confident selection of the tank on the background of the earth. Tanks with civilian vehicles and even piles of stones warmed up in the sun “praised” everywhere praised the Hellfire Longbow at the training ground. Under equal conditions, controlled systems are more reliable and more efficient than automatic ones. And what are 8-10 km to the devil? The helicopter in search mode barely sees at 5-7. And the aiming mode has too narrow a sector. There can be no such ranges without a radar. They put a radar on the Mi-28NM - you will have a rocket, and at 8, and 10 and at 20. And even with a combined seeker. And without any “one hundred and tenth” generations. Just a modification of the aircraft. :) By the way, the attack flies at 8000+. It’s impossible to aim 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?
  • _Ugene_ 11 March 2020 18: 25 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    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. abc_alex 12 March 2020 23: 08 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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. _Ugene_ 13 March 2020 10: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        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. abc_alex 15 March 2020 09: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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. _Ugene_ 15 March 2020 10: 19 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            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. abc_alex 23 March 2020 14: 07 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              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 repeat: when manually aiming, the operator DOES NOT need to know the exact time for the missile to contact the target. He needs to keep the “frame” on the target. All that he needed, 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.
  • Doliva63 11 March 2020 18: 32 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    "This video proves the high 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.
  • Senya Sem 11 March 2020 18: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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.
  • Grigory_45 11 March 2020 19: 16 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    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? Shot in a polygon conditions of a single tank on a flat terrain. Nowhere to go, no cover. No opposition, no air defense, no interference. Even stupid to doubt the outcome of the "battle"
  • Mentat 11 March 2020 20: 45 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    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.
  • Comrade Kim 11 March 2020 22: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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. Vasyan1971 12 March 2020 08: 57 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      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 ...
  • bratchanin3 12 March 2020 08: 02 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Yeah, impressive!
  • Vasyan1971 12 March 2020 08: 54 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    It seems that the radicals did not even suspect that their combat vehicle was under the gun.

    Sorry, it’s easy to “leave”.
  • lBEARl 12 March 2020 09: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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. abc_alex 12 March 2020 22: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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 the work of a military helicopter in the face of anti-aircraft defense at least the level of the battlefield, against the masses of armored vehicles - I ask for a video in the studio. A helicopter is not a tank; it is not intended to break through a layered defense. Only complete ..... will send helicopters into the thick of the combined arms battle. Even in the wake of a "similar confrontation between Syria and Turkey," helicopters will not go towards tank divisions.
      1. lBEARl 13 March 2020 16: 41 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        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.
  • Narak-zempo 12 March 2020 10: 02 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    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.
  • Mentat 12 March 2020 18: 05 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    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.
  • Gosha Smirnov 13 March 2020 01: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    yes, yes! It’s just a real killer of antiques. And have the pilots already solved the problem, or are the pilots continuing to suffer? Or maybe the missiles appeared “shot-forgot” so that there wouldn’t be too much time over the battlefield?
    1. abc_alex 15 March 2020 09: 39 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      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. Gosha Smirnov 15 March 2020 11: 01 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        there’s nothing like a “moronic fairy tale”! This “fairy tale”, or rather the Mi-28 problems identified in Syria, was criticized by the former commander of the VKS, actually. And he criticized on the subject, since everyone jumped up and ran to fix the problem. And, as later, stated that the Syrian Mi-28s have been modernized. And the rest of the Mi-28 fleet?
        Or maybe Mi-28 also has no problems with birds, have they already changed to “shot-forgot”?
        1. abc_alex 23 March 2020 14: 03 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Gosha Smirnov
          not a “moronic fairy tale” for yourself! This “fairy tale”, or rather the Mi-28 problems identified in Syria, was criticized by the former commander of the VKS actually.


          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 "protruding the head from the window." Never and under any circumstances were these glasses intended for piloting. Those who piloted with these glasses grossly violated the rules of operation of the helicopter. Itta and flashing the dashboard and blinding the exhaust of a rocket. Herney did not have to deal with, but do what is prescribed in 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? They gave lyuli to the "inventors", were forced to 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 Mi-28 also has no problems with birds, have they already changed to “shot-forgot”?

          Yes. For a long time already, instead of shot-and-forgot missiles, shot-and-hit missiles have been used.
          1. Gosha Smirnov 23 March 2020 23: 17 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            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. abc_alex 24 March 2020 16: 07 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              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. Gosha Smirnov 24 March 2020 23: 54 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0

                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. abc_alex 29 March 2020 02: 32 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  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. Thunderbolt 29 March 2020 03: 12 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    But this modernization did not concern glasses-noctovisors. They were not needed for piloting a helicopter, and are not needed now.