Ka-52 Alligator and AH-64D / E Apache in terms of weapons

Ka-52 with a full set of weapons, the cannon is aimed at the lower hemisphere. Photo "Russian Helicopters"

Any attack helicopter is an air platform for carrying and using barreled and / or missile weapons. It is the characteristics of the guns and missiles that make a decisive contribution to the overall combat effectiveness of such a machine. Consider from this point of view two modern models of equipment of the leading powers - the Russian Ka-52 Alligator and the American AH-64D / E Apache.

Helicopter as a platform

The maximum take-off weight of the Ka-52 reaches 10,8 tons. Of these, at least 2 tons are payloads in the form of various weapons and ammunition. The helicopter has a built-in weapon and external suspension points. Pre-production "Alligators" and cars of the first batches had two suspension units under each wing. Subsequently, their number was increased to six. Two pairs of medium ones are intended for a heavier load, the extreme ones are for light weapons.

Aggregates of the RLK "Arbalet". Photo Bastion-karpenko.ru

The Ka-52 is equipped with the Argument-52 or Argument-2000 sighting-flight-navigation system. The main means of observation and target detection in this PRPNK is the "Crossbow" radar with an antenna located under the nose cone. The locator is capable of detecting an airplane-sized target from a distance of 15 km. Ground targets of the "tank" type are detected from 12 km. Support for 20 ground and air targets was provided. There is also an optical-electronic station GOES-451 with detection characteristics not lower than that of the radar.

The maximum take-off weight of the latest Apache modifications has exceeded 10 tons. At the same time, the normal combat load does not exceed 800 kg. The helicopter is equipped with a built-in cannon mount and has four underwing pylons for hanging weapons, as well as two nodes for light loading at the tips.

AN / APG-78 overhead radar. Photo Wikimedia Commons

The AH-64D / E sighting and navigation system includes the AN / APG-78 Longbow radar system with an overhead circular antenna. The detection range of large air and ground targets is at least 6-8 km. A daily OES TADS with similar range parameters is envisaged. TADS is integrated with the pilots' night vision system.

Rotorcraft artillery

The Ka-52 helicopter is equipped with an integrated NPPU-80 installation with a 30-mm 2A42 automatic cannon with a variable rate of fire. Ammunition - 460 rounds with selective feed. Installation NPPU-80 is located on the right side of the fuselage and allows you to shoot forward and downward, as well as to the right. To the left of the installation remains a large dead zone, covered by the fuselage. To control the fire, an ECO is used, synchronized with the movement of the gun.

The Alligator is also capable of carrying two UPK-23-250 overhead containers. Such a product can accommodate a GSh-23L double-barreled cannon and 250 rounds. Shooting is possible only forward, using standard sighting devices.

The Apache bow with TADS devices. Photo Wikimedia Commons

The AH-64D / E has only built-in cannon armament. A full-revolving mount with a 30-mm M230 gun is located under the nose. Ammunition - 1200 rounds of two types with a choice. Fire control is carried out using the TADS system and related tools.

Unguided weapon

The Alligator is capable of attacking ground targets using a fairly wide range of unguided weapons. It can carry up to four blocks with two types of unguided rockets. Blocks B-8V20A accommodate 20 S-8 missiles with a range of at least 2 km. Blocks B-13L5 carry five S-13 missiles, flying 3-4 km. In service there are a number of modifications of both missiles with different characteristics and combat capabilities.

The Ka-52 is also capable of carrying bombs. On each of the main pylons, it is possible to suspend a free-falling or guided aerial bomb with a caliber of up to 500 kg - in total up to 4 pieces with a total weight of 2 tons.

The gun mount of the AH-64D helicopter. US Army Photos

Apache's unguided armament includes Hydra 70 rockets and their derivatives. The flight range of such weapons, depending on the modification, reaches 8-10 km. A wide selection of warheads is provided. A launcher of the required type with 7 or 19 guides is placed on any of the helicopter pylons. The sighting and navigation system with the corresponding update allows the use of AGR-20A APKWS guided missiles, unified with the Hydra 70.

Missile potential

The guided anti-tank weapons of the Russian Ka-52 consist of the 9K113U “Shturm-VU” and 9K121M “Vikhr-M” complexes. In both cases, it is possible to mount two launchers with six missiles each.

"Alligator" with unguided rockets S-8 and outboard fuel tanks. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

For use with "Shturm", 9M120 "Attack" guided missiles of various modifications are offered. Basic versions of "Attack" allow you to hit targets at ranges of up to 6 km; a modification with a range of 10 km has been developed. Guidance is carried out by commands from the carrier. Several types of warheads have been proposed: the main one is a tandem cumulative warhead that penetrates at least 800 mm of armor for reactive armor. High-explosive, fragmentation and volume-detonating warheads of several types have been developed.

The Whirlwind complex uses the 9M127 missile and its modifications. It is a supersonic missile with a firing range of up to 10 km during the day and 6 km at night. Guidance is carried out by a laser beam directed at the target by the carrier helicopter. A highly effective tandem warhead is used.

Block of unguided rockets Hydra 70. Photo by US Army

The main weapon of the AH-64D / E for engaging ground targets is the AGM-114 Hellfire guided missile, used with four-seat launchers. In service with the United States and other countries, there are a number of modifications of this product with differing flight and combat characteristics. Various modifications are equipped with a semi-active laser or active radar seeker. Various warheads are used, including a tandem cumulative one. The range of missiles of all types is 8 km.

Apache helicopters almost always use the AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missile or its derivatives in order to obtain maximum practical results. These products are completed by ARGSN and work on the "fire-and-forget" principle. Such a weapon allows the helicopter to more effectively hide behind natural barriers and get out of their protection for a minimum time.

By air targets

The Ka-52 is capable of defending itself against enemy fighters or helicopters. For this, a launching device for two Igla guided missiles with an infrared seeker is installed in the wing tip. The launch range is up to 6 km, depending on the missile modification.

Launcher with 9M120 Attack missiles. Photo Vitalykuzmin.net

The AH-64D / E has similar capabilities, but it uses AIM-92 Stinger missiles. TPK with these missiles are attached to the wingtip, above and below the plane. Ammunition - 4 missiles. With the help of Stingers, the Apache is protected within a radius of 8 km.

Correlation of forces

When comparing the weapon systems and combat capabilities of the Ka-52 and AH-64D / E, it will not be possible to determine the clear leader. Both machines and their weapons have certain features that determine the advantages over a competitor or lag behind him.

Russian radar "Crossbow" surpasses the American station AN / APG-78 in target detection range. However, it is located in the nose of the fuselage and monitors only the front sector, while the Longbow product has an all-round view and allows observation from behind cover. Thus, depending on the conditions, both helicopters can have advantages in radar and target detection.

Apache helicopter with typical payload - unguided rockets and AGM-114 products. US Army Photos

The American vehicle has a more successful gun mount with large aiming angles, not limited by the fuselage. In addition, the Apache has many times more ammunition. However, the Alligator can increase its firepower with the help of suspended cannon containers. Also, the Russian helicopter has obvious quantitative and qualitative advantages in unguided weapons. The wide range of modifications of the C-8 and C-13 gives advantages over the Hydra 70 products. In addition, in some situations, the ability to use aerial bombs will become an advantage.

The Ka-52 can use Whirlwind and Attack missiles, the most advanced modifications of which have a firing range of up to 10 km, which is significantly longer than that of the AGM-114. However, the Longbow Hellfire missile does not need external control, which reduces the risks to the carrier. At the same time, both helicopters are capable of launching missiles from outside the short-range air defense zone.

Ka-52 is firing unguided rockets. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Expansion of the range of guided weapons is expected in the near future. Thus, the American helicopter is planned to be equipped with Israeli Spike missiles with wide capabilities. A new Hermes missile system with an increased flight range is being created for Russian vehicles. The integration of new weapons will obviously have a positive effect on the combat potential of the Ka-52 and AH-64D / E.

Opportunities for active self-defense are approximately equal and are determined by the use of missiles from serial MANPADS. In addition, both helicopters have modern airborne defense systems with various types of equipment.

Thus, the Ka-52 and AH-64D / E have sufficiently high characteristics and effective weapons, allowing them to solve the assigned combat missions, with one or another specificity. Both helicopters have been tested in practice and have proven their capabilities in real conflicts. All of this indicates that both the Alligator and Apache may be considered the best of their kind - but they are the best in slightly different ways.

Comments

[Klingon]

the Yankees love to focus on fairly accurate cannon armament with a solid ammunition battery, be it Apache or A-10, while our onboard guns are of secondary importance, giving priority to NURS

[Real Pilot]

The article is written quite correctly. No kinks and honest.
The highlights are reflected.

I, nevertheless, for the Ka-52. It is made according to a coaxial scheme and is more maneuverable, plus it has twice the carrying capacity with almost equal weight.

[ccsr]

Quote: RealPilot

I, nevertheless, for the Ka-52. It is made according to a coaxial scheme and is more maneuverable, plus it has twice the carrying capacity with almost equal weight.

The most important thing is that helicopters of this design are the most optimal for unification within the framework of all armed forces, and in my opinion, it should become the same for army aviation and naval structures, both combat and auxiliary.

[venik]

Quote: RealPilot

The article is written quite correctly. No kinks and honest. The highlights are reflected.

========
I agree! Here are just Kirill, he did not consider a few points:
1. Coaxial helicopters - a much more stable and stable platform for the use of weapons, which gives them advantages when using guns and NURS-s;
2. By maneuverability and "agility", "Alligator" significantly outperforms "Indian" (again because of the coaxial scheme, which makes it possible for him to easily move in any direction (including "sideways" and even "backwards", which is practically unrealistic for the "Apache");
3. Reservation (security). This is where the Alligator also has an advantage!
Well, in general - yes! Both turntables are worth each other! The most DANGEROUS vehicles (except for the Mi-28NM).

[Klingon]

it says the carrying capacity of the KA-52 is 10,8t. and the lifting capacity of the APACH exceeds 10t. where did you see there "twice?"

[Constanty]

Maximum takeoff weight of the Ka-52 reaches 10,8 item Of them not less than 2 t accounts for payload

Maximum takeoff weight latest modifications "Apache" has exceeded 10 tons. Moreover, the normal combat load does not exceed 800 kg

[Klingon]

exactly, I missed it, - oh, my carelessness

[sidoroff]

there is a slight distortion. maximum and normal combat load. empty Apache almost
2 tons lighter. and the maximum take-off is almost the same. so who can
more to take on board? Apache.

[vadim dok]

How can it be that with an almost equal take-off weight, the combat load of the APC is 2,5 times less than that of the Alligator?

[Constanty]

I have met such indicators for Ka-52: empty weight 7700 kg, takeoff weight 11300 kg, fuel capacity 1870 liters (1533 kg). Minus pilots (about 160 kg) would have weapons of about 1907 kg.

It is difficult to find similar data for the Guardian, although I have come across such data - the mass of an empty helicopter is 5170 kg, the mass with fuel and with a crew is 8000 kg. The maximum weight is 10430 kg. Thus, the AH-64E will be armed with about 2430 kg.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Finding this data is easy, you go to the manufacturer's website and everything is written there.

AH-64D / E

Gross Weight Main Mission 15 lb (075 kg)
Maximum Operating Weight 23 lb (000 kg)
Difference 3,6 tons
https://www.boeing.com/defense/ah-64-apache/

In the photo there is an Apache with 3 tons of cargo on pylons.

[Constanty]

Rather, I was thinking about the amount of fuel. There is nowhere to explain what this actually means the Gross Weight of the Main Mission.
As for the photo, there is no guarantee that all the tanks are full to the limit. Maybe everything is 2/3

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Constanty

what it really means is the Gross Weight of the Main Mission.

It is a Normal takeoff weight... The pilots, the fuel they enter there for sure, what kind of weapon is not clear.

Quote: Constanty

there is no guarantee that all tanks are full.

In the capabilities of the Apache, the ability to fly from 4 PTBs with 870 liters of fuel in each is directly written. Specifically, in the photo, the tanks may be generally empty, but he has the opportunity with 4 full ones.

[Constanty]

That would mean about 2850 kg on lines - quite a lot - he had to be without cannon ammunition and with a little fuel in the internal tanks to stay within the maximum weight. This means - the configuration is only for a flight to another base

[OgnennyiKotik]

Rounding off.
5,5 tons dry weight + 1,1 fuel in internal tanks + 3 on pylons + 0,2 pilots = 9,8 tons
leaves, the maximum takeoff 10,4 tons, somewhere 0,6 in stock. Of course, only for ferrying, but there is still weight for the shells.
It turns out that the Apache has the ability to lift 3 tons of weapons.

[Nikon O'Conor]

Looking at the photo, an interesting thought came up. Fit a contact fuse to the tank, and you get a sickly incendiary bomb with 870 liters of kerosene. Combat discharging of PTBs should be loved by anyone.

[OgnennyiKotik]

What for? Instead of PTB, you can hang GBU-32 weighing 467 kg. Only here's the point in this?

[Nikon O'Conor]

well .. this is purely speculative of course, GBU-32 let's say run out
consider that these were thoughts aloud ... in relation to our Armed Forces there were situations from which the enemy fell into perplexity "why?", but for ours such decisions were the only chance and they worked interestingly ...

[OgnennyiKotik]

Surprisingly, Vicki has something useful. In principle, the take-off weight indicated on the Boeing website corresponds to column A or E
And on top of that, it can lift another 3,6 tons of load.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Constanty

Thus, about 64 kg will remain in service with the AH-2430E.

In general, yes, the mass of real weapons is in the region of 2,5 tons

[ramzay21]

The fact that the Apache implemented the principle of firing and forgetting for the UR puts it in first place in the face of anti-air defense. During the attack, our Ka 52 is forced to highlight the target before the missile hits, and the probability of being shot down by the enemy's air defense is much higher than that of the Apache, which does not need to highlight the target.
In terms of flight characteristics, our Ka 52 is certainly out of competition.

[Incvizitor]

Of course, there is not enough "shoot-forget", but this can be finished in the future, but the "base" for the Apache can no longer be cut.

[Vlad.by]

It seems like Hermes and the extreme Attack are already sawing under "bummed / forgotten".
The Alligator's armor protection looks more thorough.
As for the weight of the weapons in the tables - "You can't trust anyone" (daddy Mueller), again, in the mountains there is one thing, at sea level there is another ...
The Alligator's maneuverability is much higher, and this is important for a combat support helicopter.

[KCA]

If you do not chase the barmaley one by one in the desert, aiming from the cannon, but attack the enemy positions, where everything can be present, ZPU, ATGM, air defense missile systems, it is more profitable to shoot with NURS and dump, the slave will heap the remaining cookies

[DominickS]

Not more profitable. The NURSs have too little range and accuracy. And if you act closer, it's easy to run into MANPADS, of which all sandy blacks are full.

[Denis Kozlov]

MANPADS for the Ka-52 is not an enemy, it has an LTC. And also an active jamming system. As for the ideas about creating lighters from fuel tanks, this is nonsense, because the Apache terribly does not like fire at him with a large-caliber machine gun, for example, Cliff. That will immediately fall, because the longbow will soon hit fifty dollars, the booking of engines is not to hell there

[Vadim F]

straight extravaganza ... to ruin an expensive car and pilots for the sake of a worthless salvo of Nursami, from which there is almost no benefit? :)))

[Incvizitor]

With normal air defense, hardly anyone will give up helicopters to fight, overwhelm everything, knock them out from afar, then the helicopters will arrive.
But without air defense, just the nursa will come in handy (no one sane Papuans will hammer with expensive missiles) and armoring with protection against manned air defense systems such as President s.

[V.I.P.]

The article indicates the range of our NURSs is 2-4 km, the range of Hydra is 10 km .. Ours has never dreamed of such a range)))). They shoot without entering the zone of destruction of MANPADS and any memory. ZPU. And ours fly over their heads receiving shelling from everything that the enemy has in the arsenal.

[AlexSub]

Quote: V.I.P.

the range of Hydra is 10 km ... we have never dreamed of such a range)

At 10 km. unguided rocket?
It's like poking your finger into the sky ..))

[V.I.P.]

Well, for our MLRS, a range of 120 km is considered "no analogue in the world" The Chinese have up to 450 km, the Belarusians have a Polonaise (Chinese) -300 km, the Americans have 270 km ..... And if ours cannot do this, it does not mean that this cannot be so ..... We have no VNEU , and copies of Spike-nlos, javelin - but this does not mean that they are not workable

[AlexSub]

Quote: V.I.P.

Well, for our MLRS, a range of 120 km is considered "no analogue in the world"

What does the MLRS and unguided helicopter missiles have to do with it? It's like comparing an ass with a finger ..))

[Vadim F]

just accept that American nourishes are much better than ours ... they don't even smoke.

[Roman Moskalenko]

you were told that 10 km for Nurs is a real overkill. no accuracy. if you do not have enough imagination to imagine why this is one thing for a helicopter, another for MLRS - I will tell you, the helicopter is limited in carrying capacity, the rocket is primarily a balance between the mass of the warhead and the range for a given mass and dimensions. for MLRS, where weight and size are not very important, you can easily increase the power of the warhead and the number of missiles in a salvo, since this is not aviation, where weight plays a primary role. comparing the same ammunition to a 30mm gun, hardly any of you paid attention to the power of the ammunition itself, for example, our muzzle energy is almost 3 times higher. so here.

[SHOPPING MALL]

Quote: AlexSub

The American vehicle has a more successful gun mount with large aiming angles, not limited by the fuselage. In addition, the Apache has many times more ammunition.

There is a modification of the NARs with laser homing (the missile is being retrofitted with a seeker similar to those installed on our UAS Krasnopol. It seems that we are also developing such guided NARs, but they are not yet available.

[Technical engineer]

Here is the practical and maximum range. Those. the launch range at which the missile has a normal speed to ensure stability on the course, plus it implies launching at a target at an angle (on a dive, albeit a gentle one). And the American launch range from a height of 4 km is good, even if it is straight ahead, and not with a raised nose. This is the whole trick of the skillful PR of American manufacturers. In general, the laws of physics have not been canceled, and the rocket is larger, incl. caliber flies on. Always approach such inconsistencies with sound critical logic, plus the Internet and many such sensations will reveal their truth.

[Revolver]

Quote: V.I.P.

The article indicates the range of our NURSs is 2-4 km, the range of Hydra is 10 km .. Ours has never dreamed of such a range)))). They shoot without entering the zone of destruction of MANPADS and any memory. ZPU. And ours fly over their heads receiving shelling from everything that the enemy has in the arsenal.

The other day there was an article
https://topwar.ru/181024-v-kachestve-vremennoj-mery-amerikanskie-vertolety-ah-64-apache-poluchili-izrailskuju-raketu-spike-nlos.html
The fact that "Apache" received the Israeli SPIKE NLOS missile, range up to 32 km, target designation from third-party sources, incl. drones, homing on the principle of "fire and forget". This removes all questions about the comparability of the combat capabilities of the turntables. However, it is quite possible, if the RF Ministry of Defense scrapes up the money, the Jews will sell missiles and even make them compatible with the Ka-52. As they say, only business, nothing personal.

[lucul]

The fact that "Apache" received the Israeli SPIKE NLOS missile, range up to 32 km, target designation from third-party sources, incl. drones, homing on the principle of "fire and forget". This removes all questions about the comparability of the combat capabilities of the turntables.

Ours will answer with Hermes - 20 km of range in the aviation version, the weight of one rocket is 90 kg, which, with a helicopter carrying capacity of 2 tons, will allow us to take a decent amount of rockets on board.
Nppominayu - the ground version of Hermes flies 100 km.

[SovAr238A]

There is not a single word that Hermes-A flies 20 km.
There is a fact that he flies 10 km, and words about that. that maybe the rocket will be modernized and it will fly 20 km.
News, real about Hermes, has long been gone. Some "rehash" news of 5-10 years ago.
At the moment, there is no news about the ongoing tests.
Not accepted for service.

The rocket has a semi-active two-channel laser seeker, which requires target illumination throughout the entire flight phase.
That for a missile with a range of 10 and even more 20 km in combat conditions is simply nonsense.

[Mister X]

Quote: SovAr238A

There is not a single word that Hermes-A flies 20 km.

The official website states the firing range of up to 15-20 km

[Technical engineer]

This Whirlwind has been flying 30 km for 10 years already) The first studies of Hermes meant the development of a Vortex with a second stage, Well, it was just that it was originally designed to be more long-range. Be careful)

[Roman Moskalenko]

Quote: Nagan

The fact that "Apache" received the Israeli SPIKE NLOS missile, range up to 32 km, target designation from third-party sources, incl. drones, homing on the principle of "fire and forget". This removes all questions about the comparability of the combat capabilities of the turntables. However, it is quite possible, if the RF Ministry of Defense scrapes up the money, the Jews will sell missiles and even make them compatible with the Ka-52. As they say, only business, nothing personal.

what kind of kindergarten, why when you indicate some characteristics, you do not indicate the rest. fly 32 km, and fly 4 - you have an engineering education, even if you do not have, you must understand that only there should be at least 10 times more fuel in the engine, and taking into account the fact that NOTHING is scaled in mechanics, then the mass of that fuel there is ~ 20 times more. the engine is also more powerful, you will compare the performance characteristics of those missiles. and how only thoughts of comparing them come into your head. then compare the PM and the D-30, which of them shoots next? I do not care about the performance characteristics.
that the rocket is stupidly weighs 10 times more, you probably don’t care, and to think that in order to hang them, you need to remove these kilograms of something. having removed all air defense missiles from the ka-52, you will only hang ONE that spike on those 32 km, it must be said that the chance to hit the target is not equal to one? already learn the word balance and mass when you are talking about aviation, you can go crazy and hang up the 9M317M and spit on the mass, you spit, then your darling will be calm? then the helicopter will play?

[Vadim F]

up to 40 km. 32 was not the limit.

[Denis Kozlov]

this is a mistake, there is an extra zero, Hydra 70 rockets since the days of Vietnam, more than one km they are fake, already at 2 km accuracy is 0.1

[paw]

I heard that the American gun has much more spread.

[Vadim F]

fucked up? less recoil and more spread? :)))

[Technical engineer]

Plus the suspension of the gun, although it provides large angles, is less stable (otherwise it would be kapets how heavy it would be), plus the lever from the center of gravity to the gun, here is a stronger impact and deflection of the barrel with weaker recoil (it is no coincidence that the Ka-50 gun was fixed at CT)

[KERMET]

Yes, they placed it on the Mi-28, I would like to compare its accuracy with the Ka-52

[Biodred]

It would be nice. However, I am afraid it will be difficult to find such data.

[The leader of the Redskins]

I would like to thank the author for the OBJECTIVE review of the two helicopters. Recently, this is such a rarity on the VO.

[vvvjak]

OBKIVNY is not very readable, but it will do for Friday evening. I also liked the article.

[Emil Azeri]

Soon on these US helicopters (Apache) there will be such things.

[jonht]

According to the style of the article, it is clear that Kirill Ryabov, but in fact the article without repeating the same material ... It is growing, I began to read the material more carefully. I am very glad, and it is pleasant to read.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Russian radar "Crossbow" surpasses the American station AN / APG-78 in target detection range.

Not true. AN / APG-78 has long been working on 16 km at sea, ground, air targets at 360 degrees.
https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/an-apg-78-longbow-fire-control-radar/

A wide range of С-8 and С-13 modifications gives advantages over Hydra 70 products

These modifications do not give any advantage, the Apaches no longer use the Hydra 70, they are armed with APKWS and analogues. In 2021, it is unacceptable to arm your army with NARs, only high-precision guided missiles.

However, the Longbow Hellfire missile does not need external control, which reduces the risks to the carrier.

Such a small nuance.

When comparing the weapon systems and combat capabilities of the Ka-52 and AH-64D / E, it will not be possible to determine the clear leader.

If half of the information about the Apache is not written or distorted, then of course. Nothing has been written about night-time applications, in which a simple flight in our helicopters is dangerous for the lives of pilots. The Ka-52 is at least a generation behind the Apache. It is necessary to change the radar, optoelectronic systems, PrPNK as a whole.

[Emil Azeri]

OgnennyiKotik, You spoil the dance every time !!
Who gave you the right to such a daring truth ??

[Dread]

Emil Azeri - his tales about the air defense system on the topic of air defense - he wrote yesterday, a propagandist, like you. Now he is afraid to hold a discussion, like you, with other trolls on VO. Have you learned the parameters of Russian air defense systems yourself?

[Bez 310]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

The Ka-52 is at least a generation behind the Apache.

Your truth.
One Longbow Hellfire rocket is worth a lot ...
Anyone interested in the Apache helicopter
I recommend the book "Apache" by Ed Macy.
Well, and a little about the helicopter:
https://a-lamtyugov.livejournal.com/500706.html

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Bez 310

Well, and a little about the helicopter:
https://a-lamtyugov.livejournal.com/500706.html

Thank you, read, interesting. But it is clearly outdated, for 10 years a lot has changed.
If the Apache returns to base, leaving behind a thick smoky plume, then all the ground personnel rush to meet them, pointing video cameras: what if it crashes on landing? You cannot miss such a frame in any way. - the truth of life.

[Zaurbek]

Not as an aircraft ... but as a system with sensors, weapons and applications.

[Bez 310]

Quote: Zaurbek

Not as an aircraft ... but as a system

A platform for the delivery and use of weapons.

[SHOPPING MALL]

Quote: Bez 310

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

The Ka-52 is at least a generation behind the Apache.

Your truth.
One Longbow Hellfire rocket is worth a lot ...
Anyone interested in the Apache helicopter
I recommend the book "Apache" by Ed Macy.
Well, and a little about the helicopter:
https://a-lamtyugov.livejournal.com/500706.html

So it's a rocket behind, not a helicopter. A helicopter is primarily a glider, and electronics can be improved.

[dauria]

It is necessary to change the radar, optoelectronic systems, PrPNK as a whole.

And throw the helicopter itself. Moreover, together with the Mi-28. To waste so much time and money on repeating the characteristics of the Mi-24, and worsening them, is a talent. Instead of just fine-tuning the electronic equipment and weapons.
For fans of coaxial exotics, the Mi-24 did not slip in horizontal flight at all, this Mil achieved by tilting the HB axis and an asymmetrical beam.
What did you get in the end? Yes, the same thing. Air-to-air missiles? It's funny. The experience of helicopter-helicopter battles has proven that the easy one wins.
11-ton tanker even against a simple cardboard Iroquois with a conventional ATGM.

[English tarantas]

Lovers of coaxial exotics

Witnesses of a coaxial miracle. I suspect that if you compare the drawings of the coaxial and classic vert, you can find that coaxial is many times more complicated, which means it is more expensive and more demanding to operate. The argument about LTX is empty, why a helicopter should perform aerobatics is unclear, why exactly coaxial to the fleet is needed, it is unclear, the classic also takes off from the deck and normally.

[SHOPPING MALL]

Quote: dauria

It is necessary to change the radar, optoelectronic systems, PrPNK as a whole.

And throw the helicopter itself. Moreover, together with the Mi-28. To waste so much time and money on repeating the characteristics of the Mi-24, and worsening them, is a talent. Instead of just fine-tuning the electronic equipment and weapons.

And in what way were they worsened?

Quote: dauria

Air-to-air missiles? It's funny. The experience of helicopter-helicopter battles has proven that the easy one wins.
11-ton tanker even against a simple cardboard Iroquois with a conventional ATGM.

Helicopter-helicopter battles were too few to draw general conclusions.

[vadim dok]

By the way, controlling the weapon with a monocular. Wherever the gaze is directed, the weapon is directed there!

[abc_alex]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

They did not write anything about night-time applications, in which a simple flight in our helicopters is dangerous for the lives of pilots

Where did you get this "truth" from?

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

The Ka-52 is at least a generation behind the Apache.

And do not tell me the criteria of generations?

[ammunition]

We desperately need an air-to-ground missile with fired-and-forget characteristics.

[Roman Moskalenko]

you probably have fantasies that all such missiles hit everything and everyone?
you are very mistaken, and the use of manual guidance in fact raises the chances of hitting the target.
the opponents have not yet canceled the jamming system; only a person can effectively counter optoelectronic, smoke and other interference. but released and forgotten effectively against the truck and any shaitan of the cart. which you most likely will be able to oppose something vryatli. and when you shoot at a tank, believe me, it will resist, and at least the same T90 with a curtain and its aerosol fumes is pretty decent protection against this fashionable "fire and forget".
I am not saying that homing is bad, but it is not a panacea or some kind of "victory weapon".

[ammunition]

Quote: Roman Moskalenko

you probably have fantasies that all such missiles hit everything and everyone?

Maybe in fantasies-)) However (as a physicist and as a mathematician), I perfectly "see" how you can get around all the obstacles and obstacles you described. Inexpensively and in low weight and volume of equipment on board such a rocket.
---------------
Very uncomfortable I imagine .. how the helicopter hangs motionless, directing the rocket .. and substituting itself under the DShK and other ZU-23. And he loses precious time, during which he could have fired another 3-4 missiles (fired and forgotten) for other targets.

[Your stranger]

And how many to 52 are in service in the Russian Federation and how many Apaches are in the USA?

[Zaurbek]

Glanoe is not this question ... but Apache alone is in service with the army ... and in the Russian Federation Ka52, Mi28, Mi35 and MI24 ...

[Zaurbek]

1. I was surprised that the devices have the same weight:

The maximum take-off weight of the Ka-52 reaches 10,8 tons. Of these, at least 2 tons are payloads in the form of various weapons and ammunition, and the maximum take-off weight of the latest Apache modifications has exceeded 10 tons. At the same time, the normal combat load does not exceed 800 kg

[OgnennyiKotik]

Play on words. In one case, the payload is 2 tons, in the other, the combat load is 0,8 tons. It’s not the same thing, the author compares on different grounds. Both parameters for these helicopters are approximately equal.

[Zaurbek]

It seemed to me that the Apache was easier on the class ....... and its range is higher.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Mi-28, Ka-52, AH-64D / E, AH-1Z "Viper" - all in the same class of heavy attack helicopters, ours have a higher dry weight due to armor. Because of this, other performance characteristics of US helicopters are better.

[Zaurbek]

Tiger and Cobra are light, Apache is medium, Ka and Mi are heavy.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

Play on words. In one case, the payload is 2 tons, in the other, the combat load is 0,8 tons. It’s not the same thing, the author compares on different grounds. Both parameters for these helicopters are approximately equal.

What time I catch you on open lies!
An open release on the Turkish tender covered the following data on the combat load of the Kak-52.

The combat load:
2000 kg (option with 4 suspension points)
2800 kg (option with 6 suspension points)

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

An open release on the Turkish tender covered the following combat load data AS-52.

You still need to manage so thinly. The Ka-50-2 participated in the Turkish tender, and the layout, performance characteristics of the layout can be written whatever you like.

AH-64D / E

Gross Weight Main Mission 15 lb (075 kg)
Maximum Operating Weight 23 lb (000 kg)

Difference 3,6 tons

https://www.boeing.com/defense/ah-64-apache/

Ka-52

Empty weight: 7800 kg
Maximum takeoff weight: 10 800 kg (11 300 kg)

Difference: 3 tons (3,5 tons)

https://rhc.aero/catalog/ka-52alligator
www.airwar.ru/enc/ah/ka52.html

This is the difference for everything: pilots, fuel, weapons and other payloads.

So who's the balabol?

[arkadiyssk]

The article is clearly manipulating numbers. A combat load of 2 tons is given without indicating that the dry mass is 7.5 tons and the Ka-52 equipped with 9.800, as a result, with such a load, it will either have empty tanks, or there are no 2 tons in a combat sortie and not close. But the Apache, with 5.5t dry weight and 7.5t curb weight, has a huge reserve either in fuel or in flight characteristics. Who is better that with such little articles they defeated an American on the Internet? Hurray :( Careerists damn ...

[Zaurbek]

Radius, as a keepsake for ours, somewhere 300 km, for Apache 600-700

[venik]

Quote: Zaurbek

Radius, as a keepsake for ours, somewhere 300 km, for Apache 600-700

========
Your memory is failing! 600-700 is only for the first and lightest modification of the "Apache" (without radar, simplified BO and reduced ammo for the gun.). the AN-64D Apache Longbow has 480 km, slightly more than the Alligator (450 km).

[businessv]

Quote: arkadiyssk

Who is better that with such little articles they defeated an American on the Internet? Hurray :( Careerists damn it ...

Come on find fault! Approximately the same bearing capacity! In any case, it is not worth discussing + - 200 kg!

[venik]

Quote: arkadiyssk

The article is clearly manipulating numbers. A combat load of 2 tons is given without indicating that the dry mass is 7.5 tons and the Ka-52 equipped with 9.800, as a result, with such a load, it will either have empty tanks, or there are no 2 tons in a combat sortie and not close.

=========
Not understood! Ka-52:
Empty weight - 7800 kg
Maximum takeoff - 11300 kg
11300 kg - 7800 kg = 3500 kg;
3500 kg - 2000 kg = 1500 kg (weight of fuel + pilots) - 250 kg (approximate weight of pilots in flight gear) = 1250 kg (weight of fuel).
1250 kg / 0.78 kg / l (density of aviation kerosene) = 1602 l (kerosene). Taking into account the fuel consumption of the VK-2500 engines - even more than enough for a flight at a distance of 455 km! Somewhere like that ...

[Free wind]

The author is lying here as he breathes, or rather does not finish speaking. He brings the Apache data with outboard fuel tanks, 3 tons. And the Ka-52 without, if the tanks are hung on the aligators, then he also carries about 500 kg of weapons. Naturally, without tanks, the Indian will take away 2-2.5 tons of bombs

[OgnennyiKotik]

There is no official information about the combat load, all these 800 kg are taken from photographs.
The example you gave. Apache with 4 PTBs, each with 870 liters of fuel, 1 liter of kerosene about 0,8 kg, 870 liters ~ 700 kg, let the PTBs themselves be 50 kg.
700 * 4 = 2800 kg + 200 kg = 3 kg

Approximately 3 tons Apache can carry on external sling. Accordingly, he will raise 3 tons of bombs and missiles.

[Zaurbek]

And the question is:



Blocks B-8V20A accommodate 20 S-8 missiles with a range of at least 2 km. Blocks B-13L5 carry five S-13 missiles, flying 3-4 km and the Apache unguided armament includes Hydra 70 missiles and their derivatives. The flight range of such weapons, depending on the modification, reaches 8-10 km.

[venik]

"....The Ka-52 is capable of defending itself against enemy fighters or helicopters. For this, a launching device for two Igla guided missiles with an infrared seeker is installed in the wing tip. Launch range - to 6 km, depending on the modification of the rocket.
..........
The AH-64D / E has similar capabilities, but it uses AIM-92 Stinger missiles. TPK with these missiles are attached to the wingtip, above and below the plane. Ammunition - 4 missiles. With the help of "Stingers" the protection of "Apache" is provided within a radius of 8 km...... "
==========
Well this is from what "hangover", the "Stinger" firing range as much one and a half times morethan Needle ??? Or did I oversleep something?

[Professor]

What is there to discuss here? The Ka-52 is the best platform, and the Apache is better armed. Now, if the Ka-52 is in the right hands ...

[Free wind]

In the Apache, the flyers sit one after another, the view is not blocked and the armor is not bad. In Ka-52 they sit shoulder to shoulder, the pilot can only control his hemisphere.

[venik]

Quote: Free Wind

In Ka-52 they sit shoulder to shoulder, the pilot can only control his hemisphere.

=======
And in the "Apache" - the pilot can only control what is on the right and left in the front hemisphere, the head of the operator-operator is in the way!
-------

Quote: Free Wind

and the armor is not bad

=======
Not bad ..... Holds a 23 mm projectile. "Alligator" - too! The only difference is that the "Apache" is assessed according to the STANAG standard, and this means that the concept of "withstand a hit" means that no more than 50% of shells penetrate the armor .... And according to our standards, "withstand a hit" means that armor is penetrated by no more than 0% of shells ...

[Professor]

Quote: venik

Not bad ..... Holds a 23 mm projectile. "Alligator" - too! The only difference is that the "Apache" is assessed according to the STANAG standard, and this means that the concept of "withstand a hit" means that no more than 50% of shells penetrate the armor .... And according to our standards, "withstand a hit" means that armor is penetrated by no more than 0% of shells ...

What nonsense? You confused it with the so-called. "ballistic limit". Along the stanag, behind the armor, an aluminum foil 0.5 mm thick is installed and there should be no penetration in it.

Quote: venik

Quote: professor

Now, if the Ka-52 is in the right hands ...

=========
And now - IN WHAT? Or do you think the truly "correct" are only Israeli? So you (Ka-52) like and you do not want buy....

And now the Ka-52 is an excellent platform with ancient avionics and weak weapons.

Quote: venik

Quote: professor

and the Apache is better armed.

======
This despite the fact that the Alligator has 2.5 times more payload, and the range of weapons is 2 times more extensive?
PS I certainly understand that Hellfire "is a longer-range thing compared to Whirlwind and Attack (although an improved Whirlwind with a firing range of 15-20 km is already on its way, Hermes (20 km) is being tested." product 305 "- analogue of" Hellfire "with a range of 25 km) .....
Yes, "Hydra70" shoots farther, but it has less power, and the cost - oo-oo-oo- "
But the gun at the "Alligator" looks more impressive!
And the point is not only in the range (although this is an important parameter)

The payload mass speaks only of the platform. Nomenclature speaks of quantity, not quality.
"Whirlwinds" and "Attacks" are certainly very sexy, but the bourgeois are armed with third-generation anti-tank systems with a range of 30 + km, and they have successfully passed combat use.

"Hydra70" does not shoot at all, bourgeois NURSs do not use at all in battle.

Does the Alligator's cannon look sexier? This is great, but you have to talk about efficiency. Like where the pilot's head turns, the cannon automatically turns there. The time to hit the target is minimal, regardless of the time of day and weather. Remember this movie? But Putin remembers.

[EvilLion]

bourgeois do not use in battle at all.

This is nonsense. It is NURSs that are used in intense battles.

ATGM of the third generation with a range of 30 + km, and successfully passed combat use

Thank you, I laughed. Do you even understand that a 100 kg air-to-air missile, like the R-73, which is launched from a carrier rushing at great speed in a rarefied atmosphere, and in which there is no powerful warhead, has a range of 20 km?

[Professor]

Quote: EvilLion

This is nonsense. It is NURSs that are used in intense battles.

Let's take a video of the application.

Quote: EvilLion

Thank you, I laughed. Do you even understand that a 100 kg air-to-air missile, like the R-73, which is launched from a carrier rushing at great speed in a rarefied atmosphere, and in which there is no powerful warhead, has a range of 20 km?

Struck? Are you afraid of us? Now march to learn materiel /

[EvilLion]

I understand that there is no mind, but the crews sit down in tandem, only because there is not enough space. As soon as the seat appears, the crew sits shoulder to shoulder.

[venik]

Quote: professor

Now, if the Ka-52 is in the right hands ...

=========
And now - IN WHAT? Or do you think the truly "correct" are only Israeli? So you (Ka-52) like and you do not want buy....

[venik]

Quote: professor

and the Apache is better armed.

======
This despite the fact that the Alligator has 2.5 times more payload, and the range of weapons is 2 times more extensive?
PS I certainly understand that Hellfire "is a longer-range thing compared to Whirlwind and Attack (although an improved Whirlwind with a firing range of 15-20 km is already on its way, Hermes (20 km) is being tested." product 305 "- analogue of" Hellfire "with a range of 25 km) .....
Yes, "Hydra70" shoots farther, but it has less power, and the cost - oo-oo-oo- "
But the gun at the "Alligator" looks more impressive!
And the point is not only in the range (although this is an important parameter)

[lopvlad]

since we are talking about an attack helicopter sharpened directly for use on the battlefield, it did not hurt to consider the security, survivability of the helicopter when all the ammunition was exhausted and the pilot from the armed enemy was separated only by the walls of the helicopter body.

[iouris]

"Helicopter" from the point of view of armaments - that is not how you say it, it is wrong.
Alternative option: "Comparative analysis of helicopter weapon systems ..."

[mvg]

No, well, I do not like this author, but I did not notice any specific uryapatriotism behind him. I understand that he himself does not understand most of the articles that are published on his behalf. But, so to distort the characteristics ... at least I checked the materials that go to print.
PPP: And yet, the style of writing is clearly not "Ryabov's" smacks of plagiarism.
The performance characteristics of radars of Turkish, American and Russian production, for example, are shown in this plate.

It does not converge anymore ... the rest can not be read ... for example, the data is also crap in terms of carrying capacity ..

[EvilLion]

What a genius Turks, no industry profile, but 35 kg radar in total, and the range is greater than that of 200 kg of an American product. Nu-nu.

[Klingon]

not all the same, it seems that these machines are a little different, it would probably be more appropriate to compare the APACH with the MI-28NM.

[Real Pilot]

Quote: Klingon

it says the carrying capacity of the KA-52 is 10,8t. and the lifting capacity of the APACH exceeds 10t. where did you see there "twice?"

Good evening, colleague!
This is about the maximum take-off weight. That is, 10 tons is generally everything that takes off (fuselage, fuel, ammunition, pilots ...)
The Ka-52 has a payload of about 2 tons, the Apache has 800 kg. Again because of the coaxial design and its aerodynamic benefits. And also because of the American overload with additional equipment in fresh modifications.

[Free wind]

The Indian has hanging top tanks for 3 tons during the hauls. Without them, he can carry 2-3 tons of bombs, missiles, etc. The aligator has hanging tanks for 2 tons, with them he has no luck either. just a cannon and a couple of missiles. The author did not finish writing a little, well, by 2-3 tons, well, just a little.

[bk0010]

The locator is capable of detecting an airplane-sized target from a distance of 15 km. Ground targets of the "tank" type are detected from 12 km.

Not enough, to triple the range. The "partners" already have an ATGM with a range of 28 km, probably we will soon have such, plus it takes time to "swing" ... On the other hand, the helicopter usually flies low, does not see far ...

[EvilLion]

Nobody has such ATGM, please do not write enchanting nonsense.

[bk0010]

The fact that you do not know something does not mean that it is nonsense. A quick search gave the link: https://vpk.name/news/150480_pochemu_nochnoi_ohotnik_proigral_dlinnomu_luku.html, the phrase "The new missile installed on the Apache will have a firing range of 16 km, which will significantly increase the effectiveness of destruction of enemy tanks (the firing range of ATGMs from aircraft - up to 28 km). As a result, due to the large firing range of the JAGM missile, the helicopter does not enter the enemy's short-range air defense system. "

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: EvilLion

Nobody has such ATGMs,

This missile is called Spike NLOS, it is produced by Israel, the US Army is adopting it. In February, they tested it at a range of 32 km. So you write nonsense.
https://topwar.ru/181024-v-kachestve-vremennoj-mery-amerikanskie-vertolety-ah-64-apache-poluchili-izrailskuju-raketu-spike-nlos.html#comment-id-11327439

[Basarev]

Spike's introduction to the Apache is undeniable. The missiles are mass-produced, Israel and the United States are friends ... But how much Hermes will be produced (and whether they will be produced at all), how the implementation will take place is a much more serious question. So, most likely, the Apache is superior to the Ka-52.

[Pavel57]

It was necessary to compare it with the Mi-28.

[Alexey Zigalov]

Cyril's comparison is highly incorrect. The Apache has been in service since the early 70s of the last century. More than 6 units were produced. Alligators and Mi-000s, 28 each. Mi-60 crashed production in 24, so they should have been decommissioned a long time ago. The Mi-1990 flies 35% slower than the Mi-30. We have 24 helicopters, the Americans and NATO have 2000, and after the start of the conflict they will be in Europe within a month. A little about the Apache, I am reading a document of 15, to help combat units of the Supreme Arbitration Forces of the USSR mines of defense. Two people can replace the engine on a helicopter in 000 minutes, the editor-in-chief can be undocked and removed from the helicopter without dismantling the main rotor, removal and installation of the helicopter's HB blades can be performed by two people without the use of lifting equipment, etc. ten more points. Ka-1986, mi-25, Apache are very good machines, but they have different concepts. And more air combat helicopter aircraft wins helicopter in 52%.

[EvilLion]

I understand that it is difficult to learn the materiel, but the most massive combat helicopter in history, the Mi-24 was produced in an amount of 3.5 thousand units, and the Apache was only 2 thousand. The total production of the Mi-28N and Ka-52 has long seriously exceeded 100 units each. ... In fact, variations of the Mi-24 in our Air Force have not dominated for a long time, and perhaps already in the minority, even taking into account the new construction of the Mi-35.

As for the number of combat helicopters, the United States has 500-600 Apaches. We have several hundred, there are no more countries with a large fleet of attack helicopters. So do not write nonsense, and do not mislead people.

[czes]

B ... when are we going to make our Longbow Hellfire ?!

[lopvlad]

Quote: czes

when will we make our Longbow Hellfire ?!

The main thing is that our Ka-52 has armored glazing in the cockpit (it can withstand a shot from the SVD, and according to the results of the Syrian company, it was decided to increase the armor of the glass to withstand a shot from a 12.7 mm heavy machine gun) and it cannot be filled with a Berdan gun by shooting the pilots in the cockpit like in the Apache where the glazing of the cockpit has no reservation at all.
Therefore, the stories about what they say can fill the Apache with a flintlock are not surprising.

[EvilLion]

One thing is bad, these stories are a myth.

[TatarinSSSR]

You are probably an adult, but you all believe in fairy tales. About "Berdanka" is a fairy tale. An Apache crash-landed in Iraq due to technical problems. The crew left the helicopter. Local residents managed to pose against the background of the damaged Apache, rubbing their guns. Then the helicopter was blown up by the Americans. You probably also believe in the Khibiny, who turned off Cook?

[lopvlad]

Quote: TatarinSSSR

You are probably an adult, but you all believe in fairy tales.

and what is the fairy tale? or do you seriously believe that ordinary plexiglass from which the glazing of the Indian cockpit is made is capable of holding a bullet?

[TatarinSSSR]

Don't ask me about what I didn't write. They came up with it themselves, they themselves attributed it to me, they themselves asked for it. I just said that the Apache knocked down from the gun is a fake, as well as the Khibiny Kuk, disabled, etc.

[Azimuth]

The maximum takeoff weight of the latest Apache modifications exceeded 10 tons. normal combat load does not exceed 800 kg... The helicopter is equipped with built-in gun mount

You shouldn't read this nonsense further ...

[Constanty]

By the way, if you had missiles of the "fire-and-forget" type and the helicopter "hooked" on the unified control system of the tactical link ESU TZ, a very interesting and promising attack helicopter would again be the Ka-50 - with one pilot, narrower and lighter fuselage , which would correctly affect the tactical and technical characteristics.

[Linxs]

Both are just damn beautiful machines.

[lopuhan2006]

Key points: 1. Apache has all-round visibility, gun turning angles and "fire and forget". From here we have a sniper. 2. The Ka-52 has armor and ejection seats, a significantly higher load and the cannon from the BMP-2 is many times more powerful than that of the Apache. Accordingly, we have an attack aircraft with the ability to survive more serious damage.
Hence the different tactics of use. Both are good, but there is also the Mi-28 as something in between, but closer to an attack aircraft. Verdict: For us, both are good, but it could be better, but for them the Apache is gentle and not tenacious enough, which is more than compensated by the characteristics of weapons and equipment. If our gunsmiths create an effective fire and forget system, then this is already a serious bid for the best helicopter.

[ccsr]

Quote: lopuhan2006

The Ka-52 has armor and ejection seats, a significantly higher load and the cannon from the BMP-2 is many times more powerful than that of the Apache. Accordingly, we have an attack aircraft with the ability to survive more serious damage.
Hence the different tactics of use.

Yes, you are one of the few who understands why the order was made for the development of this helicopter, because, first of all, these characteristics were the most important for the customer. I will only add that the Ka-52 has a smaller size, which is very important for camouflage and when breaking through an air defense system. Well, the absence of a tail rotor increases the survivability of this vehicle under heavy fire from large-caliber small arms. And all this was included in the requirements of the TTZ at the last stage of research and development - this is obvious for any armed man. I think that in this case, the comparison of these two helicopters is incorrect - after all, the Ka-52 is a more specialized machine than the Apache. In my opinion, of course ...

[lopuhan2006]

The Mi-28 has a dignity - an over-sleeve radar, but so far it does not have enough shot and forgot. He is like a heavier analogue of Apache. But Kamov is more original and possibly more promising for controlling drones at the expense of his cockpit.

[DMi]

IMHO, attack drones will soon destroy attack helicopters as a weapon class. They solve the same problems. And drones will be more efficient and cheaper.

[Klingon]

Quote: DMi

IMHO, attack drones will soon destroy attack helicopters as a weapon class. They solve the same problems. And drones will be more efficient and cheaper.

that's for sure. another bunch of UAVs + long-range artillery with precision ammunition looks interesting where the UAV is just a flying sight for guns

[CommanderDIVA]

From the analysis of the text, I realized that the Apache is superior to the Ka, first of all, in the possibility of using the "fire-and-forget" principle and the range of use of weapons, these are the key parameters where we are still losing outright to the Americans, I'm not a specialist in these matters, but do we have any analogues kamikaze drones from a helicopter for aerial targets? In the same place, like the Kalashnikov concern, such a Lancet drone has already begun to produce

[EvilLion]

An anti-aircraft missile is a kamikaze drone.
Your cap.

[SHOPPING MALL]

The American vehicle has a more successful gun mount with large aiming angles, not limited by the fuselage. In addition, the Apache has many times more ammunition.

On the Ka-52, the cannon is located in the center of mass, its mass and barrel are longer, which ensures higher accuracy and accuracy of fire - technical dispersion when firing: 2 - 42 thousand range for 0.4A0.5, 2304 thousand range for M8.

The M-230 has a 30x113 mm projectile, and the 2A42 has 30x165 mm. For 30x113, the mass of explosive is 21,5 g, for 30x165, the mass of explosive is 48,5 grams.

In addition, it has selective ammunition supply, i.e. two types of shells are fed from different shell boxes - you need, switch to armor-piercing, you need to - to the HE. In the Apache, shells can be placed alternately 1 HE / 1 AP. Accordingly, when working on infantry, armor-piercing is of no use, when working on an armored target, on the contrary, consider - divide the ammunition by two.

In addition, the US Army's use of a special Robertson IAFS internal fuel tank reduces the cannon's ammunition to 300 rounds.

[Thomas N.]

Quote: AVM

On the Ka-52, the cannon is located in the center of mass, its mass and barrel are longer, which ensures higher accuracy and accuracy of fire - technical dispersion when firing: for 2A42 0.4 - 0.5 thousand range ...

2A42 has 0.4-0.5 etc. is it in line or single?

[SHOPPING MALL]

Quote: Thomas N.

Quote: AVM

On the Ka-52, the cannon is located in the center of mass, its mass and barrel are longer, which ensures higher accuracy and accuracy of fire - technical dispersion when firing: for 2A42 0.4 - 0.5 thousand range ...

2A42 has 0.4-0.5 etc. is it in line or single?

Most likely in a burst, I'm not sure that they are being considered for single fire from a helicopter - there will be no sense, the platform itself is not rigidly fixed - wind, turbulence.

[ddmm09]

Quote: OgnennyiKotik

Finding this data is easy, you go to the manufacturer's website and everything is written there.

AH-64D / E

Gross Weight Main Mission 15 lb (075 kg)
Maximum Operating Weight 23 lb (000 kg)
Difference 3,6 tons
https://www.boeing.com/defense/ah-64-apache/

In the photo there is an Apache with 3 tons of cargo on pylons.

Don't write nonsense. In your photo, these are outboard fuel tanks and they contain 2,7 tons of fuel. Do not confuse the arsenal of our Ka-52 and the Apache, the Apache arsenal is more modest both in weight and choice.

[jekasimf]

It's strange, why compare the two, which are essentially different in application and in the concept of a helicopter? It is more logical to compare Apache and MI-28N ...

[Azimuth]

But how, then, to flood and start demagoguery? ...
We are lagging behind the Americans and for a long time, we need to make up in practice, and not fantasize by cheering up the feces that they say they are equal and keep parity. Somewhere there is parity, but somewhere we are lagging behind, and in the latter case, you need to think about how and how to eliminate this gap, and not how to cover up each other's eyes.

[EvilLion]

Well, if you come up with some "different concepts".

[vadivm59]

s-13, caliber 122 mm, flies at 4 km, and hydra, caliber. 70 mm, at 10. how is it? Are the Americans so much ahead of us in terms of fuel quality for the NAR?

[Viktor Sergeev]

I don’t understand one thing, but what is it about the Apache that he, having no armor and less load, weighs like an Aligator?

[EvilLion]

"Apache" is initially smaller, but if you hold out, then you can reach the weight of the Ka-52, while the share of the load will be less.

[made13]

It all depends on the theater of operations and the tasks that the turntables will solve. At sea, the Alligator will have an advantage, and in the folds of the terrain, the Apache, due to the radar and weapons.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Yeah, and in the folds of the terrain, of course, the enemy will not have reconnaissance and his own helicopters, plus if the terrain is hilly ATGM dramatically loses its range. There are no means of countering the Ka-52 when using an ATGM, during the flight of the missiles, not a single air defense system will be able to react and destroy the helicopter, so the missiles are not so good: I fired, I forgot, and given their cost, they are just awful. I generally keep quiet about local wars, there is no Apache at all, since very few people need his expensive missiles, and he has few other weapons, and he has no armor.

[TatarinSSSR]

I do not think that the Apache rocket is more expensive than a tank destroyed by it or an enemy air defense system. Obviously many times cheaper. Secondly, if 1 expensive missile is spent on hitting a target, and 4-6 cheap ones, then I see no point in saving.

[Maxim_ok]

LONGBOW FCR has a detection range of 16 km. Your data is out of date. the new single JAGM missile will also have a range of 16 km. when launched from a helicopter.
The downside of the Alligator is that it does not have homing ATGMs. plus less perfect avionics

[Vladimir Basov]

And rockets up to a maximum of 10 km.

[EvilLion]

Well, when will be.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Can you tell me when the lack of homing prevented the Aligator in modern wars? What is the cost of homing missiles? Are you going to shoot rockets worth 70-100 thousand dollars at the jipps of the terrarians?

[SARANCHA1976]

Can you tell me what modern wars Aligator took part in?

[Viktor Sergeev]

Will the war in Syria suit?

[Maxim_ok]

What kind of modern war is this?

[Viktor Sergeev]

This is modern warfare. Can you tell me what modern war did Apache take part in? Just do not give examples of war that resemble the beating of babies. What kind of war in which the opponents were equal in strength?

[Maxim_ok]

Jeeps can be hit with a cheaper APKWS guided missile (created on the basis of a 70-mm NAR) with a range of 5 km (more than 35 thousand missiles have already been produced) or walk from a cannon. In general, everything is according to the situation. It is worthwhile to realize for a long time that there are no cheap high-tech military toys and it is worth stopping to approach them with philistine standards. In addition, much depends on the degree of danger of a particular target. The same pickup truck can be packed with people with AK, and maybe with MANPADS or ATGM, the degree of damage from which can be much higher than the cost of a guided missile fired at them.

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

Quote: Victor Sergeev

Are you going to shoot rockets worth 70-100 thousand dollars at the jipps of the terrarians?

With great pleasure. Suppose we have a very large group of terrorists numbering 15 people (in fact, such a group is the scale of an entire country of average size - if you do not take the fantastic reports on 000 destroyed headquarters). They have 100 "technicians" with at least 000 crew members (driver + gunner). The destruction of this armada will cost 2000 at a missile price of 4000. Taking into account that not every missile hits the target, we raise the amount to three hundred million. At the same time, the destruction of 200 "technicians" is not only depriving the enemy group of mobility, but also reducing its personnel by almost a third, which together radically undermines its overall combat capability. Compare this with the real costs of fighting the Basmachis - not only of the "expensive" Americans, but also of our "cheap" ones.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Are you sure you can hit a moving jeep with at least 3 rockets? Will the rockets fly by themselves, or is the carrier needed and the costs for it? To destroy a jeep, an IL2-type aircraft with a battery of cannons is sufficient, or as the Americans did: a transporter with a bunch of cannons on board, for example, a 30 mm caliber, is much cheaper and more efficient.

[Vladimir Basov]

1230 shells for the cannon, this is five times more than ours, not a very bad indicator)

[EvilLion]

Only the shells are many times lighter.

[Maxim_ok]

You're wrong. Firstly, the M230 is a special gun for a helicopter. Lightweight, flexible installation, large BC. And the "Alligator" has a cannon "from what it was", that is, the 2A42 used on armored vehicles even with the BMP-2, the gun is twice as heavy, the ammo is 460 rounds. The mobility of the gun in the Alligator is limited due to the installation location. Further, the amount of explosives in these projectiles is practically the same (48-43 grams) and in the domestic fragmentation-tracer generally 11,5 grams. And besides, the Yankees have a HEAT shell.

[Viktor Sergeev]

And what about increasing the accuracy of the 2A42 with a similar arrangement, 3-4 times than that of the Apache? And the difference in projectile speed at 170m / s (armor-piercing) and 320 (subcaliber) is nonsense? The Americans made a cumulative projectile, because the gun is rather weak (the armor penetration of our armor-piercing and their cumulative ones) is not much different, and the striking effect of our armor-piercing is higher. And you did not confuse the weight of the explosive in the projectile, like the American has 27 grams, and ours has 48.
Yes, our cannon is heavier, but it is much more effective against infantry and lightly armored targets, there is even nothing to compare, it's like comparing German air cannons with ours, like the caliber is the same, but in reality ours were head and shoulders above, but also heavier.

[SARANCHA1976]

Forgot how many Apaches were produced and how many k50 .. that's where the tears are

[Viktor Sergeev]

Have you forgotten the other attack helicopters? And most importantly: what's the point of releasing more than necessary? This is what distinguishes Russia: it buys weapons not with the aim of stealing and filling pockets, as in the United States, but equipping the army with the required number.

[SARANCHA1976]

And how much is needed? Regiment? (A "real" patriot will always answer as much as is necessary.) Buying without cuts? What reality are you from

[Viktor Sergeev]

It is not for you or me to determine how much is needed. The MO determines the quantity itself, taking into account the need and funding. Considering the presence of a heap of Mi24, as well as the lack of the possibility of a large non-nuclear war, the need is calculated in the amount sufficient to destroy the army of any non-nuclear country that is not a NATO member. So, for this, the amount that is available is enough, more equipment, more pilots are needed, operating costs.
Now in service with Russia about 100 Ka52, more than 90 Mi28 and 330 Mi24 \ 35, enough for the eyes.
As for the cuts, I will surprise you, yes, it is purchased almost without cuts, at least not on the same scale as in the USA. I am from real reality and know how the public procurement system works, including for defense orders. You, as I understand it, judge everything by Rain and Echo.

[Viktor Sergeev]

They forgot to say how many Apaches participated in a real war, how much it cost to maintain the pile that they did and determine: why should Russia do as many Ka50 (52) as the US did Apaches? In any technique, the main thing is the mind. Russia cannot afford, like the United States, to make a huge amount of unnecessary equipment for the sake of embezzling the budget, and then maintain it.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Tell me, why do you need to produce so many KA52s (K50 turned out to be not great after all)? You are like in the USSR: overtake and overtake, no matter what is not needed.

[SARANCHA1976]

Something doesn’t agree with you .. a bunch of non-upgraded Mi-24s on the balance sheet, is that reasonable? And I wonder if the big P comes, will you stamp helicopters to the required number on your knees in a week?

[Viktor Sergeev]

If big P comes, why do you need helicopters? You will really need them in a nuclear fire. By the way, the Mi24 is just reasonable, a great car, and there is no point in upgrading it too much.

[SARANCHA1976]

Big P is not necessarily a nuclear fire. The crocodile is an excellent car .. for the 80s, the impossibility of hovering + the landing compartment not necessary for the attack aircraft, inflated dimensions and weight, even if it is pumped up to mi35, what kind of grandmother will it take?

[EvilLion]

a more successful cannon installation with large aiming angles, not limited by the fuselage

Yes, this is nonsense, in flight they shoot only at the aircraft, strictly along the course, and in hovering you can turn the body, but the Ka-52 has a gun in the center of mass area.

Our cannon's projectile is much heavier, this one seems to be quite a ground weapon, therefore there are fewer of them.

[kova1967]

Why is nothing said about the booking? The KA-52 has firearm armor up to 12mm. Apache doesn't have it! So the same bailout, the Apache has no KA-52! And also a KA-52 special forces helicopter. More specifically to compare the Apache with MI-28!

[TatarinSSSR]

I love articles where, without any hurray, they adequately compare in terms of characteristics and practicality similar one-class specimens of military equipment. The article is interesting, thanks to the author! We are waiting for new articles with a comparison of other types of equipment, and not only American with Russian, but also other countries. It is also interesting to compare American aircraft, ships, tanks, etc. times of the 50-80s with similar Soviet military equipment of that period.

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: TatarinSSSR

It is also interesting to compare American aircraft, ships, tanks, etc. times of the 50-80s with similar Soviet military equipment of that period.

It was there that the USSR gave heat, there was no question of lagging behind. In some ways we were better, in what they are. But this is within the framework of history already.

[nikant]

under equal conditions, the pilot and target designation win ... given the level of electronics - not only here - there is nothing to catch in the near future ... if these design bureaus are also dispersed, as they are going to flyers, then you just need to shoot the initiators of this ...

[JD1979]

Another article ... If we compare spherical horses or just helicopters themselves as a technique, then the Ka-52 is definitely better in terms of, well, more beautiful)) But if we compare it in a complex ... then the Apache wins in the main thing - combat capabilities, convenience and the use of weapons by the crew of weapons with a minimum time spent by the vehicle in the zone of possible destruction, well, the capabilities of avionics and information awareness of the crew about the situation.

[Sedoy]

useless comparison ...
by all objective indicators, and not by "may", the Apache is a more preferable car

[Viktor Sergeev]

Well, tell me by what objective indicators Apache is more preferable?

[Baron pardus]

I will answer several people at once.
a) Radar. Over-sleeve radar - 360 degree view. Radar in the nose ... you are unlikely to find anything through your own body. Win - APACH
b) RADAR. Nadzulochny radar - you can hide behind the folds of the terrain with only the radar. This cannot be done on a nose-mounted radar. You win - APACH.

Coaxial versus conventional system. Here many said the right things, yes, Coaxial is more complicated and more expensive, But. There is one big BUT. The coaxial system is not afraid of several hits by the helicopter in the beam and tail. Hits that will interrupt the transmission from the motor to the tail rotor. Without which the turntable does not fly much. By the way, is the coaxial system complex? In the USA, back in the 60s, there was a helicopter with TWO main propellers on different axes HH32 Husky (Laika). And it is even more difficult to synchronize such screws than coaxial ones. By the way, Kamov's new turntable K-Max works on the same principle.

A gun. Someone who noted here wrote that the gun on the Apache is supposedly "weak" well, let's check it out. M230 - initial speed 805 m / s. Projectile weight 220g. 2A42, Initial speed 960 m / sec. Projectile weight 390g ... Win ... 2A42. But. The APACH cannon is mounted on a turret with a high firing angle and depression angle, a much more tactically flexible weapon. Although it is inferior in power to 2A42.

NURS. So. Hydra 70. Weight 6.2kg, warhead (HE) 4kg, muzzle velocity 700m / s
C-8. Weight 11.5kg, warhead weight 3.6kg. speed 610m / s
CRV-7 Canadian variant of Hydra. 4,200-4,500ft / sec
By the way, it has been repeatedly noted that due to the better chemical composition of the rocket fuel, which provides a more uniform (and less smoky) combustion, the accuracy of both Hydra and CRV-7 is twice as high as the accuracy of C-8. In addition, the laser seeker for Hydra / HVAR and CRV-7 is ALREADY in production. Laser seeker for S-8 only in project.

ATGM. You can talk a lot about power. I'm not going to talk about "what may be," I'm talking about what is already in the series. Hellfair L in the series since 95 ALREADY flies with a radar seeker operating on the "Shoot and forget" system

Engine:
Klimov VK2500. Weight 300kg, power 2700hp. Fuel consumption - 0.21-0.22 kg / kW / hr. Power / weight ratio -6.62 kW / kg
GE T700. Weight 200kg. Power. 2700hp Fuel consumption -0.283 kg / kW / h Power weight: 7.37kW / KG

The American engine is one and a half times lighter with the same power, consumes 30% more fuel.

I do not dispute the aerodynamic data of the KA-52. But the helicopter is not only about the speed / maneuverability and torque of the Immelmans. It is also a SYSTEM. REO / EW system, weapons, etc., etc. So far, in terms of Radio Electronic Equipment and weapon systems, the APACH is ahead. ATGMs and NURSs are more accurate and more accurate, GOS systems for NURS are already in production. The gun, although less powerful, is more tactically flexible. The helicopter does not need to be deployed, it is enough to turn the turret.


So that's it. At the moment, the Apache has weapons, if not superior to the Ka-52 in terms of power, then much more tactically flexible, as well as electronics. The 2A42 cannon is more powerful, but the American one on the turrets is more flexible.
Radar On the Apache can be used while the APACH itself is hiding behind a fold of terrain.
ATGMs on APACH operate on the "fire and forget" principle (although the Russian ATGMs have a more powerful warhead).
NURS on APACHE is less smoky, and more heap (thanks to higher quality fuel, which is naturally more expensive to manufacture). Canadian Variant of HYDRA - CRV-7 Out of competition at all. Hydra and CRV-7 are ALREADY in the GOS series, not on the C-8.

I am not saying that there will be "tomorrow", then that "in the future" these are the data of the agencies "OBS" and "VPVP", I am comparing what is flying and shooting now.

[Viktor Sergeev]

The radar in the nose allows you to see the target perfectly, for some reason such an arrangement does not interfere with fighters at all. The radar over the propeller, it's good in the mountains, and it's specific, I think very few people will really need it, although it won't hurt.
The Ka52's cannon is 3-4 times more accurate, the projectile is more powerful, plus the Ka52 can turn to the target faster, the rotation of the cannon is not so important for it.
Are you sure that "fire and forget" is so good and justified with a sharp increase in the cost of a shot?
But the Ka52 has armor.
Let's just say: Ka52 and Apache are sharpened for different tasks, in accordance with the concepts of the creators, it is simply useless to compare them.

[decimalegio]

I thank the author for a balanced analysis of the two media

[Alex flim]

Some kind of game that will happen that most of the comments
Helicopters are almost twins brothers in LTH
Formally, the spacecraft is heavier, but practically - their carrying capacity and range are almost the same.
So only the equipment makes sense to roughly compare

The Apache has a 360-degree radar and the spacecraft has only straight ahead.
All-round visibility plus? -a plus
Is the gut plus? - not for an attack helicopter - maybe the weapon hangs even below the nose - you still have to climb

Ka- provides the rescue of the crew by ejection
Apache can't do that - is this a plus for Ka? a plus
The spacecraft has an active jamming complex, and the Apache does not have a plus? a plus

The Apache has a cannon with an almost circular attack - is this a plus? a plus
The Ka cannon is more powerful and more accurate - is that a plus? a plus

Yes, and their BC is almost the same as all the Apaches of the last series with reduced to 300 BC

Ka in a typical load carries 12 ATGMs and the Apache only 8 is a plus? a plus
The Apache, somewhere in theory, has missiles fired and forgotten (but in practice they use helfires with a laser gsn - and even with a bow and not bim riders like vortices) it's still a plus

You can also argue how much of an advantage is the fact that all ATGMs of the spacecraft are much faster than all ATGMs of the Apache .. and that vortices are bimriders, which means they are infinitely more resistant to active interference than helly, but this is already nonsense

Well, Apache is better than the guidance station - stupidly the picture is better, is this a plus? a plus
All
KA-52++++
Apache ++++
Now decide for yourself what you like best - a slightly better picture and a radar for 360 or 50% more missiles and the ability to eject
I am personally impressed by more missiles and a catapult - somehow more comfortable.

[RaDeVl]

The location of the crew is in the Ka-52's piggy bank. It is more convenient when the pilot and the navigator-operator interact shoulder to shoulder, this is based on the Mi-24 and Ka-29. And for specialists with all kinds of preparations, it is convenient and faster, with the same filling. By the way, the S-8m and S-8kom are quite up to 4 t.km.