Military Review

The best attack helicopter in the world

195

Thanks to the state-of-the-art arms to 2020 program of unprecedented scale for the third year in a row, the Russian military industrial complex ranks first in the world in terms of industry growth rates and second in terms of exports of weapons and military equipment. Recently published ranking of the largest manufacturers weapons The Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) includes six domestic companies, five of which (except for KLA) have significantly improved their performance compared with the previous study. The first place in terms of export earnings was taken by the Almaz-Antey Air Defense Concern (5,51 billion dollars), it rose in the SIPRI ranking by eight lines, 14 -th place. But the “advanced” helicopter holding on the list turned out to be the most “advanced” on the list, which went up ten positions at once. In 2012, he sold military equipment to 3,52 billion dollars, rising from 35 to 25. The Ka-52 “Alligator” attack helicopters have become the most sought-after product of the company, the annual “order” for which exceeds 0,9 billion dollars. This is an absolute record in modern stories. Let's see what is the secret of the success of the new Russian rotary-winged machine.


The Ka-52 "Alligator" (according to NATO's classification Hokum B) is a further development of the famous Ka-50 "Black Shark" helicopter. The main difference between the Ka-52 and the Ka-50 is the presence of a second place for the weapon operator, which extends the functionality of the Ka-52 from a pure attack helicopter to a reconnaissance and command vehicle capable of performing reconnaissance, target designation and coordination of the actions of a group of helicopters. However, if we compare its tactical and technical characteristics with world counterparts in the armament of other countries, then the conclusion is clear that Russian development is objectively the best attack helicopter in the world. This device has a long list of unsurpassed qualities that are inaccessible even for the promising devices currently being tested for the US Army. A comparative analysis of the performance of the Ka-52 with other newest helicopters of the world gives an unequivocal answer about its superiority in the main positions, including in comparison with the best American all-weather combat helicopter AH-64D "Apache".

First of all, this is a unique maneuverability - it can even fly forward with a speed of 130 km / h, sideways - 100 km / h, perform such aerobatic maneuvers with huge overloads that NATO and US pilots did not dream of. The maximum speed of the Ka-52 - 370 km / h is also the highest rate on the planet. If you talk about all the technical advantages of our device, you will have to write a book. Perhaps, among the main “best” characteristics, it is worth noting its amazing all-weather ability - it can even fly in a hurricane with wind speeds up to 140 km / h and at the same time clearly maintain its position in the air according to the coordinates of the radar and satellite data.

In the “ball” behind the glazing of the cabin there is the optics of the Samshit survey and search system, a daytime tele system for normal and low illumination, a thermal imager, a laser range finder target designator combined with a laser spot finder for automatic tracking of the target and highlighting it when the helicopter is moving, and goals In the afternoon, in good weather, the “Box” allows you to detect and recognize a tank from distances to 15 km (the American Apach of the latest generation only on 12 km). The nose fairing was occupied by a large radar antenna "Crossbow-52", which detects a tank from a distance of 20 km, gives a map of the area and warns of obstacles. Above the hub of the screw installed a small antenna of the same station to detect air targets and other objects - it even detects enemy shells and attacking missiles.

The take-off power of the forced TVZ-117BMA F is 2500 hp, and in emergency mode if one of the two engines fails, the other produces up to 2800 hp. The new electro-hydraulic regulation system improves acceleration, stability and reliability during transient conditions and during missile launches. Implemented output from the surge and "rotating stall" of the compressor, as well as the automatic recovery mode at deafening.

Ka-52 is equipped with a new flight-aiming and navigation system "Argument-2000". It consisted of the observation and piloting system, the search and sighting system GOES-451. They can work around the clock and in the fog along with the “Crossbow-52” locator, which is part of this complex, the main antenna of which is installed in the nose section. All equipment, including the airborne defense complex, as well as three radio stations, a secret system and data transmission equipment, the BCS-50 communication complex, are integrated into a single whole with the on-board BCGM-53 on-board network with an open architecture that allows you to change the composition of combat systems, installing a new "software."

The main weapon of a combat helicopter is the anti-tank missile system - the Vortex ATGM. His 9А4172 rocket with automated laser guidance destroys a tank with armor equivalent to a 900-mm homogeneous steel plate from a distance of up to 3 km. Moreover, dynamic protection is not an obstacle for its tandem cumulative fragmentation high-explosive warhead. The Whirlwind surpasses even the similar American AGM-114A ATGM, of which the States are so proud, but the Tula gunsmiths have already created an upgraded Whirl-M attack weaponry complex with the 9X4172 family of missiles. The complex destroys a tank with 1000-mm armor for dynamic protection from a range of 400 m to 10 km with a probability of 80% with one rocket. The American DARPA similar characteristics are still laid only on paper as a promising task. Provided round-the-clock defeat not only armored vehicles, but also defensive structures of a full-time warhead or new ones - fragmentation and thermobaric. The Ka-52 helicopter can cover four targets in a series of Whirlwind missiles in 30 seconds. KUV "Vikhr-M" can fire outside the range of self-propelled missile systems "Roland", Stinger, Mistral and the Gepard artillery systems currently in service with the NATO countries.

In the arsenal of the Ka-52 introduced and guided missiles X-25ML with a heavy warhead, designed for attack aircraft. A classic of its weapons remain unguided rockets - Ka-52 has four blocks B-8V20 twenty 80-mm shells, 8, which are delivered in 15 versions with warhead cumulative-fragmentation, volume-detonation or high-explosive penetrating, and against infantry - with arrow-shaped striking elements, etc. The American AH-64 also carries four NAR units, but 19-charging units, and the missiles in them are weaker - the caliber 68 mm. In addition to light C-8 projectiles, our Ka-52 can take 10 heavy NAR C-13 caliber mm 422 or four C-24 (mm 240). The traditional weapons of Russian helicopter gunships are free-fall bombs, which is not provided for the AN-64.

The advantage of the Ka-52 Alligator armament over similar NATO helicopters is also the 2A42 gun. The American M-230 fires at a range of up to 1500 m, and the range of our gun’s battle is 4000 m, and the damaging effect of Russian shells is higher than the American M789 and M799 - at a distance of 1500 m they pierce 15 mm steel armor at an angle of 60 degrees - an unattainable indicator in the world. American gun uses special aviation shells, and the reserve types are ammunition for airguns - the English ADEN or the French DEFA, but their ballistic data is even lower.

Placing the cannon near the center of mass on the Ka-52 increases the maneuverability and speed of the machine, and the accuracy of shooting is four times higher than that of the AN-64. In addition to the 2А42, the Ka-52 can take two CPN 23-250 UPK containers with GSH-23L cannons, which are effective against lightly armored targets and anti-aircraft installations at short distances. In the Ka-52 cockpit an indicator is installed against the background of the windshield IPS-28К. With it, you can shoot not only ground, but also on maneuvering air targets. The Kamov helicopter also has air-to-air guided missiles. He carries four XLUMXM9 Igla-V missiles. This modification of a portable anti-aircraft complex with a passive homing head, tested in combat, reliably identifies the true target at the rate of traps shooting one 39 seconds per second with their radiation power exceeding the emission of the target itself.

Now the main thing is maneuverability. A normal helicopter spends on compensating the reactive moment of the supporting rotor with a steering screw up to 10-20% of engine power, and when the operating mode of the power plant changes, the pilot must adjust the thrust. The coaxial scheme does not allow such losses, and due to the higher efficiency, its energy characteristics are higher by 6-10%. This is especially important when overclocking from a hover mode, for example, when attacking from an ambush. Its aerodynamic symmetry improves stability and controllability, and the lack of aerodynamic cross-links between the longitudinal and lateral movement and the independence of the control channels simplifies piloting and makes it safer. The pilot AN-64 or Mi-28, when changing the flight mode, must parry the rebalancing of the machine with roll and glide, while the Ka-52 pilot does not distract and does not expend the thrust of the power plant. The negative impact of air flow has been reduced. A coaxial helicopter has fewer moments of inertia and more control moments, which makes it possible to perform more vigorous maneuvers using normal overload. Due to the increased power of the longitudinal control Ka-52 "freezes" at the end of the maneuver. All this allows him to do incredible “pas” in the air - something that pilots of other helicopters only dream about. Only Ka-52 can perform a specific combat maneuver - a flat turn, vigorous course change without using normal overload. The Ka-52 flies with a slide that is unacceptable in the RV scheme, and attacks a regular helicopter, simply turning its nose at it and not changing its course. It can fly steadily forward at speeds up to 130 km / h, and at speeds 230 km / h, the slip angles reach ± ​​90 degrees. The enemy, in order to take a position for an attack, needs to be deployed “in an airplane” way, spending more time. A flat turn "nose against the wind" allows you to safely sit at low translational speeds when the aerodynamic velocity measuring devices do not work.

The energy and independence of the control channels enable the Ka-52 to continuously fire a circuit, constantly moving around it using the funnel maneuver. He can attack suddenly, energetically bypassing the hills horizontally (“slalom” maneuver) or by bending around them vertically with the “dolphin” maneuver, which allows destroying high-speed anti-aircraft guns while in the zone of their fire. The special mode of the radar "Crossbow-52" allows you to use these techniques even at night. Less severe restrictions on angular motions allow the Ka-52 to perform vertical “oblique loop”, “somersaults”, “ascending barrel” maneuvers with heels up to 140 degrees and pitch angles 90 degrees.

The reservation protects the crew from fire 12,7-mm machine guns and high-energy fragments of shells and rockets. The fuel system is protected from fire and explosion of fuel, as well as from the emergence of hydraulic shock in the tanks during an emergency landing. The flight experiment showed that the Ka-52 is able to continue flying with complete destruction of the tail, while the AN-64 and other modern helicopters do not retain controllability when the tail rotor fails. Screen-exhaust devices that reduce, scatter and distort the thermal trace of engines help prevent the hitting of missiles with thermal homing. Means of warning about the attack by missiles, helicopter exposure by enemy radars and laser targeting systems and jamming equipment are combined into a computer-controlled on-board defense complex.

If both engines fail, autorotation remains. The aircraft in such a situation is planning a helicopter using rotor self-rotation. Aerodynamic symmetry and the absence of cross-connections in control make landing during autorotation safer in comparison with a regular helicopter. In addition, the Ka-52 crew is protected from impact. If there is time to release the chassis, then the main part of the load will be absorbed by its shock absorbers, and then the pillars, breaking, will protect the fuselage and the cockpit from heavy damage. The armored nose resists deformation, and under the seats there are special crushed blocks that quench the energy of the fall. There are also ejection seats K-37-800М. They are designed specifically for helicopters, taking into account the specifics of their application, and are fully tested in a flying laboratory. When ejecting a special device "breaks" the glazing of the cabin, and the blades of the fires are fired.

On-board systems and weapons of the Ka-52 allow you to find and hit carefully disguised, “quiet” non-radiating objects, and this is extremely important during the period when the stealth technology is actively deployed on navy and in the ground forces. The ability to act against land, sea and air targets makes the Ka-52 indispensable in the offensive, and in defense, and in peacekeeping operations, and in the fight against gangs of militants.

The order for Ka-52 helicopters for the Ministry of Defense of Russia is 240 units. In 2012, the 21 helicopter was manufactured, in the 2013, the RF Ministry of Defense received another 24, in the 2014, according to the plan, it will be 28. About a hundred cars are going to adopt the Navy for fire support of amphibious assault forces, escorting deck transport helicopters, destruction of small and medium displacement ships.
Author:
Originator:
http://expert.ru/
195 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Igor39
    Igor39 8 February 2014 08: 51
    +29
    Ka Xnumx handsome
    1. SPACE
      SPACE 8 February 2014 11: 37
      +7
      Quote: Igor39
      Ka Xnumx handsome

      And then! good
      But now the VAF will fall out and prove to everyone that he is smarter than the author of the amateur, that only Apache needs advertising, KA-52 needs only reality and will give out military secrets about him, because tomorrow enemy tank avalanches are not expected otherwise. laughing
      1. Patton5
        Patton5 8 February 2014 13: 25
        +10
        why vaf ??? I want not advertising but an objective expert evaluation !!!! this phrase immediately alerted me))))

        In the "ball" behind the cockpit glazing
        1. Michael_59
          Michael_59 9 February 2014 11: 22
          +9
          Quote: Patton5
          this phrase immediately alerted me))))

          In the "ball" behind the cockpit glazing


          Take a look. There is such a letter!
        2. Michael_59
          Michael_59 9 February 2014 11: 24
          +4
          Quote: Patton5
          this phrase


          More ... (failed 2 images in 1 message, sorry)
      2. Meteor
        Meteor 8 February 2014 14: 10
        -20%
        The main weapon of a combat helicopter is the anti-tank missile system - the Whirlwind anti-tank missile system. His 9A4172 missile with automated laser guidance destroys a tank with armor equivalent to a 900 mm homogeneous steel plate

        Whirlwind surpasses even a similar American ATGM AGM-114A, of which the States are so proud

        "Anti-tank missile system AGM-114L "Hellfire-Longbow" with active radar homing head Designed to destroy enemy tank formations and other small targets at any time of the day, in conditions of poor visibility and in difficult meteorological conditions.
        The first fire tests of the AGM-114L "Hellfire-Longbow" ATGM were carried out in June 1994. The complex was adopted by the US Army in 1998. The estimated volume of purchases is 12905 pieces. "
        http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/longbow/longbow.shtml

        While the Ka-52 will "hang", providing guidance second-generation Vortex rockets, Apache will fire a third generation rocket and hide in the folds of the terrain. As a result of prolonged “hanging”, the Ka-52 will be detected and destroyed by short-range air defense systems.

        Tula gunsmiths have already created a modernized Vikhr-M strike weapon system (KVV) with a 9M4172 missile family. The complex with one missile destroys a tank with 1000 mm armor behind dynamic protection from a range of 400 m to 10 km with a probability of 80%.

        The American DARPA such characteristics so far laid only on paper as a promising task.

        In the United States is developing a new anti-tank missile JAGM. It is assumed that the new 3rd generation JAGM ATGM will be adopted by the U.S. Army in 2016, the firing range of the missile will be to 16 kilometers.
        http://topwar.ru/30011-protivotankovaya-raketa-novogo-pokoleniya-jagm-ssha.html
        1. beard999
          beard999 8 February 2014 15: 49
          +36
          Quote: Meteor
          GM-114L "Hellfire-Longbow" with active radar seeker

          If you are not too lazy to go to the Lockheed Martin Corporation website, you will find that the only SERIAL Helicopter ATGM for the US Army is now the AGM-114R Hellfire Romeo ATGM, with a semi-active laser seeker http: //www.lockheedmartin.com/content / dam / lockheed / data / mfc / pc / helfire-ii-missi
          le / mfc-hellfire-ii-pc.pdf. It is the ATGMs with the laser seeker that are now most in demand with the US Army, for their combat helicopters and LHC. But AGM-114L, at the moment, is not needed by anyone, they are in warehouses (and their shelf life is far from endless ...)
          Quote: Meteor
          Apache will fire a third generation rocket

          Of course, in a war with high-tech armies, missiles providing guidance on a target due to autonomous seekers have an advantage over missiles requiring support. But I would not do a cult from AGM-114L. It is possible to protect BTT from such GOS at the expense of fairly inexpensive means. MBT T-90 has an EPR - 29 square meters, it is also with the "Cape" - 6,5 square meters, with KCCZ - 2,1 meters http://www.niistali.ru/security/2010-07-05 -08-58-15? Start = 2, with ZME (developer of TsKB RM OJSC) is already 1 sq. M. At what range will the AGM-114L radar seeker capture the target with an ESR of 1 square meter?
          And if the target is temporarily hidden in the folds of the terrain, then the breakdown of the guidance of the GOS AGM-114L is likely. At Vikhr-M, the ACS as part of the Okhotnik MSOVI provides operation in a closed loop of auto tracking, as well as with full or partial screening of targets, with poor selection from the analyzed image, based on predicting the location of targets for a given time interval. For Whirlwind-M, short-term goal loss is not a problem. This is especially true taking into account the fact that the marching speed of the Vikhr missile complex is twice as high as the AGM-114L. In addition, Vikhr-M provides simultaneous firing of two targets, as well as firing of targets with two missiles in the same beam, which is also used to overcome KAZ. Air targets for 9-A-4172 missiles are also standard. AGM-114R ATGM Hellfire Romeo cannot do this.
          Quote: Meteor
          As a result of prolonged "hanging" Ka-52 will be detected and destroyed by short-range air defense systems

          Firstly, a long spring is less than 30 seconds. Secondly, if you mentioned "short-range" air defense systems, I want to remind you that in our air defense brigades they provide Osa-AKM, Tor-M1 / 2, and Tunguska-M1 air defense systems, all of them have launch range superior to the maximum launch range of missiles AGM-114L. Not the fact that Apache will even be able to get closer to the launch position. Especially when you consider that, in general, the modern Russian air defense of the SV is based on the principle of multilateral defense - S-300B4, Buk-M2 (Buk-M3), Tor-M2U (Tor-M2M), " Tunguska-M1 ”(“ Shell-S ”),“ Needle-S ”(“ Willow ”).
          Quote: Meteor
          In the United States is developing a new anti-tank missile JAGM.

          In Russia, Klevok-A is being developed (exp. Hermes-A) with a range of 15-20 km
          http://www.kbptula.ru/index.php/ru/razrabotki-kbp/mnogotselevye-kompleksy-upravl
          yaemogo-vooruzheniya / germes-a
          1. Mature naturalist
            Mature naturalist 8 February 2014 22: 38
            +2
            Quote: beard999
            In Russia, Klevok-A is being developed (exp. Hermes-A) with a range of 15-20 km

            "Kizil" is being developed in Russia with much more interesting characteristics and capabilities.
            They say that the name was invented, thanks to the cornel spear of Odysseus.
          2. Meteor
            Meteor 9 February 2014 14: 12
            -8
            Quote: beard999
            It is the ATGMs with the laser seeker that are now most in demand with the US Army, for their combat helicopters and LHC. But AGM-114L, at the moment, no one needs, lie in warehouses

            The Soviet Union collapsed. It is cheaper to extinguish the Papuans using rockets with a laser seeker.

            “At the end of 2013, Great Britain will adopt the upgraded Brimstone anti-tank missiles manufactured by MBDA.”

            «Rocket Brimstone-2 preserves the two-channel guidance system of the last serial modification of the Brimstone SD (Brimstone Dual Mode) with millimeter-wave active homing radar and semi-active laser channel, but with significant modifications, focused primarily on the defeat of high-speed and maneuvering ground targets, as well as targets with reduced visibility and EPR, and goals requiring high selection capabilities among other objects. "
            http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/news/ispytaniya-rakety-brimstone-2

            Quote: beard999
            But AGM-114L, at the moment, no one needs, lie in warehouses (and their shelf life is by no means infinite ...)

            ATGM JAGM 3 generation will be adopted by the US Army in 2016 year.
            JAGM is equipped THREE-MODE homing head. (millimeter-wave radar + infrared + semi-active laser)

            Quote: beard999
            It is possible to protect BTT from such GOS at the expense of fairly inexpensive means. MBT T-90 has an EPR - 29 sq. M., It is also with “Cape” - 6,5 sq. M., With KCCZ - 2,1 m., With ZME (developer of OJSC “TsKB RM”) is already 1 sq. M. At what range will the AGM-114L radar seeker capture the target with an ESR of 1 square meter?

            First, for what range is the EPR given and from what angle?
            Secondly, what happens if the tank damages this “Cape”? In Chechnya, there were cases when tanks tore off DZ blocks.
            Machine gun burst / debris / dirt?
            JAGM is equipped THREE-MODE homing head.

            Quote: beard999
            And if the target is temporarily hidden in the folds of the terrain, then the breakdown of the guidance of the GOS AGM-114L is likely. At Vikhr-M, the ACS as part of the Okhotnik MSOVI provides operation in a closed loop of auto tracking, as well as with full or partial screening of targets

            PREFLINES WHERE ????

            Quote: beard999
            the marching speed of the Vortex missile is twice as high as the AGM-114L

            For a third-generation rocket, this is not important, the helicopter does not need to "hang" in the danger zone.
          3. Meteor
            Meteor 9 February 2014 14: 14
            -1
            Quote: beard999
            In addition, the Whirlwind-M provides simultaneous firing two objectives

            JAGM provides simultaneous firing sets goals.

            Quote: beard999
            Firstly, a long spring is less than 30 seconds.

            SAM / SAM will sleep all this time ???

            Quote: beard999
            Secondly, in our air defense brigades they provide the Osa-AKM, Tor-M1 / 2, and Tunguska-M1 air defense systems all of which have launch ranges exceeding the maximum launch range of AGM-114L missiles.

            3rd generation JAGM ATGM will be adopted by the U.S. Army in 2016, with a missile range of up to 16 kilometer.


            Quote: beard999
            Especially when you consider that, in general, the modern Russian air defense of the SV is based on the principle of multi-sided defense - S-300B4, Buk-M2 (Buk-M3), Tor-M2U (Tor-M2M), " Tunguska-M1 ”(“ Shell-S ”),“ Needle-S ”(“ Willow ”).

            WATCH UP TO THE END !!!


            Quote: beard999
            In Russia, Klevok-A is being developed (exp. Hermes-A) with a range of 15-20 km

            GOS is also tri-mode, like the JAGM?
            1. dmit-xnumx
              dmit-xnumx 9 February 2014 20: 28
              +6
              Meteor, you yourself write that the vaunted rocket will be adopted in 2016, and over these two years, you think Russia will rest on its laurels? You are somewhat naive.
        2. SkiF_RnD
          SkiF_RnD 9 February 2014 00: 38
          +21
          We all know how good Americans are in advertising and self-promotion. If you feed mainly on reference literature created in the USA, then instead of becoming more informed, you can turn out to be the same dilettante, but already with a kilogram of noodles on your ears. You can talk a lot (in an admiring, hysterical voice, of course) about the miracle system "Aegis", which destroys all the unwanted at the moment, about the overhead radar and ATGM with ARGSN of the Apache helicopter, an invincible helicopter, which, of course, will fire a rocket and hide behind a hill before the stupid "Tunguska" sees him in the morning Hollywood haze ... laughing Well, and so on, praises in honor of Yuisei in the studio.

          Why am I? The fact is that several videos, recordings from the Apache helicopter have been posted on YouTube. The work of American turntables is clearly observed on them.

          The Apache cannon is apparently not very accurate. There you can see the location of the marker on the target, and the queues go like a criss-cross, crooked, and not at all in the crosshairs. The goal in that episode was a man, a dushman, apparently (although not a fact), and so it was far from the first attempt to kill him. But in the promo video, they burn tanks in batches (and in their victorious reports, of course).

          There is also the use of "Hellfires". You can find ranges of 1,5 kilometers, for example. So, the rocket reaches the target faster than the turntable has time to greatly change its position.
          This primarily refers specifically to the AN-64, because you cannot call it a champion of maneuverability. Imagine how he "jumps out" (yes, like a devil out of a snuff-box) from behind a hill, in the blink of an eye starts a rocket and after a few seconds he is no longer in sight, I cannot, at all desire. If there is a "Tunguska" behind the hill, and the helicopter crew knows about it, they will not agree to pull this trick with third generation rockets for any price. You can trust me. yes

          And if the turntables come out on a moving column of equipment, they will "knock out" all the targets easily and simply, and this does not require the expensive Apache Longbow. Any helicopter in the "anti-tank" attachment is enough. Apache is a good helicopter. Just do not tell stories about its power, the short-range air defense system will have enough reaction to both the Ka-52 and the Apache. And there will still be. Have pity on the pilots, I doubt they share your point of view that they can crush the army air defense, unlike the losers who did not get the Apache. smile
          Sincerely. hi
          1. Magyar
            Magyar 9 February 2014 13: 16
            +2
            Good afternoon. The article is honestly also an advertisement, in terms of marketing, we have achieved certain results in Russia. Now, in essence, the Ka-52 is certainly not the best helicopter in the world, it was right to say one of the excellent combat helicopters. Our military-industrial complex had 20 summer vacations, most of the enterprises stood idle without orders, including the factory in Arsenyev, note that they chose the Indians, they did not consider the Ka-52, they lost the Mi-28 due to the lack of design, they chose Apache, and all the conversations, but the Mi-17s take it very well knowing its reliability, this applies by the way, and they bought the Americans themselves for Afghanistan. Mi-35s are not bad bought, this helicopter is not worth talking about, and it’s not a great machine tested by armed conflicts. In short, you need to work on these machines to make fine-tuning. And then we like words that have no analogues, and the best in the world, modesty adorns gentlemen.
            1. SkiF_RnD
              SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 04: 48
              +3
              You will laugh (or not), but in the case of the Ka-52 specifically, I would really say "the best in the world." On condition, of course, that he has no problems with the avionics, that the characteristics correspond to those stated. The design is really the most progressive, in my opinion, for the Ka-52. Opportunities at the best level.

              Now, in essence, the Ka-52 is certainly not the best helicopter in the world


              Therefore, your words are not very clear. Why do you want to ask, then who is the best? Apache?
          2. Meteor
            Meteor 9 February 2014 14: 31
            -3
            Quote: SkiF_RnD
            We all know how good Americans are in advertising and self-promotion.

            We all know from The Carbon Monoxide (176 Tomahawk Hunter) that the Shell is a Tomahawk hunter. But in reality, the “Carapace” could not shoot down the E95M air target with anti-aircraft guns.
            The E95M aerial target simulates subsonic type maneuvering targets cruise missilePlanning bomb, UAV.
            http://www.enics.ru/bla?product_id=22
            Watch my video in the topic: Soon there will be a demonstration of a new anti-aircraft complex "Pantsir-SM"
            http://topwar.ru/39281-skoro-sostoitsya-demonstraciya-novogo-zenitnogo-kompleksa
            -pancir-sm.html # comment-id-1916140

            Quote: SkiF_RnD
            which, of course, will fire a rocket and disappear behind the hill before the stupid "Tunguska" sees it in the morning Hollywood haze ... laughing

            Tunguska
            Parameters of the zone of destruction of air targets, km:
            Rockets:
            Height - up to 3,5
            In range - from 2,5 to 8
            According to the exchange rate parameter - up to 4
            Anti-aircraft guns:
            Height - up to 3
            In range - from 0,2 to 4
            According to the exchange rate parameter - up to 2

            AGM-114L Hellfire-Longbow
            Range: 9 km.


            Quote: SkiF_RnD
            The Apache cannon is apparently not very accurate.

            The gun on the Ka-52 is more powerful, but because of the very high recoil, it was necessary to place it on the side and limit mobility. Due to the recoil, the Mi-28 will not get anywhere at all.

            Quote: SkiF_RnD
            There is also the use of "Hellfires". Can be found for ranges of 1,5 kilometers
            If there is a "Tunguska" behind the hill, and the helicopter crew knows about it, they will not agree to pull this trick with third-generation missiles for any price. You can trust me. yes

            AGM-114L Hellfire-Longbow
            Range: 9 km.

            ATGM Jagm 3rd generation will be adopted by the US Army in 2016, the missile range will be to 16 kilometers.

            Quote: SkiF_RnD
            Just do not tell fables about its power, the short-range air defense system will have enough reaction to both the Ka-52 and the Apache.

            First, where is the pruflink ???
            Secondly, see firing range AGM-114L и Jagm.
            1. SkiF_RnD
              SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 04: 09
              +8
              The fact that "Shell" is a hunter for Tomahawks does not mean that he will shoot them down with guns. He knocks down the same E95M well with rockets. The main component of the "Armor" (like the "Broadsword") are missiles. And yes, they shoot down the CD.
              Two, my comment on reference books can be summarized as "trust empirical knowledge, the arguments of well-deserved authorities, sound logic, after all, and last but not least, statistics, design characteristics, and other information."
              This also applies to your style analysis.
              "Tunguska" In range - from 2,5 to 8

              AGM-114L Hellfire-Longbow
              Range: 9 km.


              Reality is not a calculation of performance characteristics on paper, to compare so is a senseless undertaking. A one-on-one meeting is unlikely, this is an important point. Most likely, the air defense system will not be a single copy, and the pilots are not stupid either, they understand this very well. 9 km of range is, if translated into understandable, nine kilometers of line of sight. It is necessary to detect, identify, lock the target and launch. Do you understand? And there may be other troops nearby (that is, additional targets. Which one of them is the SAM complex, and not the field kitchen, can you determine from 9 kilometers?). "Zelenka", building, whatever. And then - what an advantage - 9 km against 8. Wow, it looks like "Tunguska" is over laughing No offense, okay? In reality, the first to open fire is the one who first identifies the target. And for heaven's sake, don't start convincing me that it is harder to spot a helicopter than a mobile air defense system. In Iraq, the Americans lost Apaches to air defense fire despite the fact that the Tungusok were not there at all. How so, because they have a launch range of "Hellfire" 9 kilometers. The conclusion suggests itself that the range of fire is not a panacea.
              My answer completely removes the question about the reaction of the air defense system against the reaction of the helicopter crew. If you are not satisfied with "Tunguska", compare with "shell" and "Thor". I see no reason to discuss this further.
            2. SkiF_RnD
              SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 04: 11
              +4
              If you have decided to argue about the cannon, then let's compare them. The firing accuracy of the Mi-28N and Apache helicopters is similar (that is, both are "oblique"). There is a video, it was not banned on YouTube, probably. I will not post, there are different ones, it will be interesting for you to see. Moreover, the Apache cannon is much weaker. The power is much lower, the range is less, the accuracy is low, despite the significantly lower recoil. Ammunition "American" is several times larger; in contrast to the Soviet cannon from the BMP-2, the American 30ku often wedges in dusty conditions. IMHO, the Mi-28N cannon is better in terms of its characteristics. But honestly, I don't like both. It is very difficult to hit a dangerous target quickly, it is easier to launch a rocket. Designed, obviously, for unanswered fire, as in the video with the Taliban ... Placing a gun on the Ka-52 gives a higher accuracy, and about the limited maneuver with fire, I will answer that the machine is spinning perfectly, it can perform a "funnel", cutting circles around it and pouring cannon and rocket fire. You can move in one direction and turn the body to the other. It is important to understand that it will be necessary to turn the helicopter nose to the target, that is, to take the most advantageous position in terms of security. And the defense of the Ka-52 is very solid. And it just takes a couple of seconds. So, such a maneuver will not be superfluous. And the "Apache" or Mi-28N, flying past the target, turning the cannon to the side and aptly hitting enemies, is ridiculous. I really don't see the real disadvantage of the Ka-52 over its competitors. To summarize, the location of the Alligator's cannon does not constrain him in maneuvers, but is adapted to them, and if the Mi-28N cannot hit, then the Apache too.
              Sincerely. hi
              1. toster666
                toster666 3 January 2015 08: 37
                +1
                Normally adjusted Apache gun gives excellent accuracy up to 1500-1800 m
                cm 2.20 - 1500 m

                The stabilization of Apache optics is an order of magnitude better than that of the Mi-28. Which, when firing a cannon (in the direction of travel! I'm not talking about firing perpendicular to the hull), it is impossible to observe the target.
                When the missile is launched at 3 km, due to poor stabilization of the Mi-28, the sight can easily go beyond the target, which will give a miss. (See the film "Legendary helicopters. Mi-28")
                Mi-28 missiles of the most lousy type are radio command.
                They can be easily neutralized by as many as 2 methods - to blind the receiver of the missile's "tracer" or to jam the radio command line with interference.
                The use of radio command missiles in the 21st century is not even stupidity.
                (No, it’s going to shoot spirits, but to compare with helfire or brimstone ???)

                Judging by the film, the dispersal of the MI-28 gun is an order of magnitude greater than the Apache gun :)

                8 km Apache has a great still picture.


                >> and about the limited maneuver with fire, I will answer that the car spins perfectly, can perform a "funnel", cutting circles around it and pouring cannon and rocket fire

                Yes, in the film a black eye, this maneuver is remarkably shown. But in reality, I somehow doubt that one person will be able to fly sideways for a long time, while shooting hajjs scattering like cockroaches (and this is almost the majority of Apache videos.

                >> It is very difficult to hit a dangerous target quickly, it is easier to launch a rocket.

                The Apache cannon is instantly aimed at the target with a movement of the head, and the rocket needs a relatively long time.

                >> American 30ku often go crazy in dusty conditions.

                In fact, these are quite rare cases.
            3. toster666
              toster666 3 January 2015 07: 49
              0
              This is not a complete video. Actually, there were at least 4 lines and shot down almost overhead, by accident.
              If you watch the video with the Goalkeeper, then he throws several missiles into one missile from one line.
              Phalanx - gets into a mortar mine.
        3. toster666
          toster666 3 January 2015 09: 01
          0
          Volley launch


          PS: Whirlwind is still alright.
          A radio command attack ???
          How can a helicopter with a radio command missile even think about claiming the title of best ???
      3. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 8 February 2014 14: 21
        +9
        Quote: SPACE
        But now the VAF will fall out and prove to everyone that he is smarter than the author of the amateur,

        Demyan, do you have the same experience in the Air Force as Sergei? ..........
        wink

        1. Is the Whirlwind adopted?
        2. Or maybe "Hermes-A" continues to be developed?

        I am an amateur in aviation. Maybe someone will comment on my two questions, I will be very grateful.
        1. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 8 February 2014 16: 30
          +6
          Quote: Aleks tv
          1. Is the Whirlwind adopted?
          2. Or maybe "Hermes-A" continues to be developed?

          Already a hundred comments by experts in aviation for this article, but no one could answer me, a tanker, are missiles adopted for Ka-52? ...
          And where should I go, armor-faced, to whom to ask questions ...
          Eheh.
          recourse
          1. Rustam
            Rustam 8 February 2014 17: 26
            +5
            And where should I go, armor-faced, to whom to ask questions ...


            We’ll answer a colleague :) I didn’t see it, after all, on the mobile and the Olympics

            - by Whirlwind recently, from the second attempt, a large order was made at the Kalashnikov concern

            -by Hermes from KBP (a promising system) at one time was wrapped to please the attack
            1. Aleks tv
              Aleks tv 8 February 2014 18: 06
              +6
              Quote: Rustam
              - by Whirlwind recently, from the second attempt, a large order was made at the Kalashnikov concern

              This is good news, thanks Rustam.

              And then after all, it is somehow not solid for a combat helicopter without missiles ...
              The birds will laugh.

              Good luck to the military-industrial complex in this matter.
              drinks
              1. Volkhov
                Volkhov 9 February 2014 19: 01
                0
                Quote: Aleks tv
                And then after all, it is somehow not solid for a combat helicopter without missiles.

                http://www.scandaly.ru/?p=36207
                http://topwar.ru/39344-unesennye-vihrem.html
                Well, they will make equipment in return for scrap metal, restore lost secret documentation and launch rockets. In the meantime, you can drop barrels of explosives like Syrians - the most powerful weapon is obtained. There are many barrels in the north.
        2. SPACE
          SPACE 8 February 2014 17: 11
          +7
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Demyan, do you have the same experience in the Air Force as Sergei? ..........

          Alexey hi I really do not have experience in the armed forces, I’ve only plainclothes, I didn’t even fly helicopters and planes, I'm afraid lol what can you do amateur request it happens! But, nevertheless, military equipment still remains technology, and the site itself is not a means of communication purely for military professionals, although their presence should be welcomed by everyone and for what I’m just for it, you just don’t have to reduce everything to a banal srach and justify your case with your own authority. It is possible to communicate normally, wisely without tricks and a little patriotism will never hurt, it must be educated in people, especially in such visited places, including young people. As for me, you don’t have to say what to do and I won’t say where (not you) others need to go.
          Quote: Aleks tv
          1. And "Whirlwind" is adopted? 2. Or maybe "Hermes-A" continues to be developed?

          I believe that much of what we are trying to discuss here is a state secret, which means that a lot is not known, I believe the VAF as well, and even if it is known, this should be careful. Everything flows, everything changes, people work in the design bureau ... And as for the technology, it didn’t take part in the hostilities so much, I’m glad to admit, it’s better to fight on the site in word than in real life, that is, we can argue only hypothetically, presumably on based on available information, knowledge and logic. As for the information, I personally do not believe unconditionally to anyone or anything the first time, to be convincing, I need to have information from various sources and let everything pass through my own brains. By the way, that's why I never give links.
          Z.Y. He wrote an article about tanks for a long time, well, his amateurish thoughts, but he was afraid to post everything here, so he decided to try it all the same, and I invite you to discuss it.
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 8 February 2014 17: 27
            +7
            Quote: SPACE
            As for me, you don’t have to say what to do and I won’t say where (not you) others need to go.

            Demian, I didn’t mean to hurt you.
            request
            Quote: SPACE
            He wrote an article about tanks for a long time, well, his amateurish thoughts, but he was afraid to post everything here, so he decided to try it all the same, and I invite you to discuss it.

            With pleasure.
            yes
            When are you staying?
            1. SPACE
              SPACE 8 February 2014 18: 14
              +2
              Quote: Aleks tv
              Demyan, I didn’t mean to hurt you

              Well, you didn’t seem to hurt
              Quote: Aleks tv
              When are you staying?

              from the moderators of the site will be veiled, on weekdays very busy, but next Friday or Saturday, then fellow I would like to invite Eugene Mechanics and generally all specialists and non-specialists, because the whole point will be in the discussion of technical details.
              1. Aleks tv
                Aleks tv 8 February 2014 18: 23
                +9
                Quote: SPACE
                because the whole point will be in the discussion of technical details.

                It's great to chat on the Military site about technology.
                Good luck with the article, Demian.
                drinks
                1. And Us Rat
                  And Us Rat 9 February 2014 00: 46
                  +4
                  Quote: Aleks tv
                  It's great to chat on the Military site about technology.

                  Oh, how I agree with you good Politics are sick of it hi
                  1. Apollo
                    Apollo 9 February 2014 00: 52
                    +4
                    Quote: And Us Rat
                    Politics are sick of it

                    Military topics are inseparable from political ones. Everyone chooses his own soul. Nobody forces you.
                    1. And Us Rat
                      And Us Rat 9 February 2014 00: 58
                      +3
                      Quote: Apollon

                      Military topics are inseparable from political ones. Everyone chooses his own soul. Nobody forces you.

                      I agree, but lately there has been 10% of military subjects and 90% of political issues, not unbalanced like that. request
      4. Normman
        Normman 8 February 2014 14: 43
        0
        With all due respect, the empty mass of the 52 spacecraft is 7800 kg. Apache - 5200 kg. The maximum take-off for the 52 spacecraft is 10800 and for the Apache 10400. That is, Apache can carry 5000 kg of fuel, weapons and ammunition, and 52 only 3000. If you subtract 1,5 tons of fuel, the 52 spacecraft has only 1500 kg for weapons and ammunition, and Apache 4000 kg. This despite the fact that the remaining parameters are approximately equal. Who has the ammunition run out sooner?
        1. alexbg2
          alexbg2 8 February 2014 17: 11
          +7
          Quote: Normman
          With all due respect, the empty mass of the 52 spacecraft is 7800 kg. Apache - 5200 kg. The maximum take-off for the 52 spacecraft is 10800 and for the Apache 10400. That is, Apache can carry 5000 kg of fuel, weapons and ammunition, and 52 only 3000. If you subtract 1,5 tons of fuel, the 52 spacecraft has only 1500 kg for weapons and ammunition, and Apache 4000 kg. This despite the fact that the remaining parameters are approximately equal. Who has the ammunition run out sooner?

          The sweet magic of numbers. How true are they? And where so sly data came from.
          Apache can not bear the combat load of 4000 kg, if it can, then I would like to get the calculation of these weapons on the points (actually used weapons).
          Where does the Ka-52 come from? From only fuel in the internal tanks and the PTB can take 3219 kg. A simple calculation gives the weight of 7800 + 3219 = 11019.
          Quote: Normman
          ... This despite the fact that the remaining parameters are approximately equal. Who has the ammunition run out earlier?

          Which parameters are equal? The number of crew members? Yes equal.
          By booking? I have no data, but there is a suspicion that the Ka-52 is better armored.
          By engine power? Ka-52 is much more powerful.
        2. Ivan79
          Ivan79 8 February 2014 20: 27
          +4
          But the K-52 has better protection for pilots and units, plus ejected seats. Let's remove all this, make the reservation thinner ...
          Maybe then we will be equal in "carried weight". But why is it necessary?
          What would any Papuan from Berdanka knock down like that Apache?
        3. cherkas.oe
          cherkas.oe 8 February 2014 23: 43
          +1
          Whose picture went awry, mishandled? After all, you discredit a person with your casuistry, the troll is cheap. Ugh on you more than once.
        4. dmit-xnumx
          dmit-xnumx 9 February 2014 20: 41
          +1
          Please Normman, remind about helicopter battles, if you can
        5. SkiF_RnD
          SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 21: 15
          +2
          Figures, these figures again. The maximum takeoff weight of the AN-64D Longbow Apache helicopter during the mission is 7867 kg. The configuration is such an automatic cannon + 38 seventy-millimeter NAR "Hydra". "Escort" is called smile This is with a low-altitude flight profile (for a turntable it is easier because the speed is low, the difference in drag is not so important at different altitudes, on the contrary, fuel consumption will be less without gaining altitude. Explained just in case). Armament is suspended only under two pylons. Welcome to the world of helicopters. fellow
          If we fly to burn tanks, and a long range is not required, then down with the PTB, we hang 16 Hellfires under the wings, take the full ammunition of the cannon shells (yes, there are also variants with 320 shells instead of 1200, for ease). Our takeoff weight will be 7728 kilograms. This is also at low altitude (of course, we attack).
          The maximum take-off weight of the AN-64D is 10432 kilograms. It is with a full supply of fuel, without weapons. In fact, a helicopter can take off from the ground and reach its destination, this is the weight of the machine when relocating to another airfield. Suspension options of 10 tons for combat missions do not exist, because this turntable cannot carry 5000 kg of fuel, weapons and ammunition. Simply put, you deceived us hi
          In fact, the maximum weight of fuel and weapons in a combat mission never exceeds + 50% to the mass of an empty helicopter, and outboard weapons will never weigh more than 1080 kilograms (4 * 19 70-mm NAR "Hydra, the weight of the equipped M261 block 270 kilograms) , although I have not seen the variant with four NAR units at the Apaches.

          Got something to argue? winked
        6. SkiF_RnD
          SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 21: 59
          +1
          Now about the Ka-52. I must say right away that the lighter Apache can climb to a slightly higher altitude (but this does not make much sense because there are no missions for attack helicopters at altitudes of several kilometers. In fact, both will fly in the altitude range of 5-1500 meters, and this can be done by any turntable).
          The practical range of the AN-64D is indicated as 407 kilometers, for the Ka-52 it is 460. At the same time, the mass of the Russian helicopter is greater, and the engine power is higher. The rate of climb is similar, but the information in different sources differs, in Wikipedia it is 7,5 meters per second for Longbow. For the Ka-52, it is usually indicated from 10 to 12,5 meters. The wiki says 12. I don’t think the data is accurate, but the "American" has no advantage.
          The Ka-52's ferry range is much lower, because there is no large-capacity PTB, apparently there is simply no such need.
          The maximum speed of the Longbow is no more than 287 kilometers per hour without any decrease in altitude. Ka-52 300 kmph.
          Judging by the available data, the performance characteristics of our "toothy" are superior to those of the "Indian".
          And the most interesting thing is the combat load.
          I did not find an option with ATGM at four points of the suspension, so I can not say that this is provided. The standard option is ATGM suspension on long-distance pylons, six missiles each. The weight of these missiles in the TPK is 60 kilograms, that is 360 kg at one suspension point.
          Unguided missiles:
          S-8 (80 mm, 20 * 4);
          S-13 (122 mm, 5 * 4);
          Igla-V air-to-air missiles with TGSN-2 * 2.
          The weight of the NAR S-8 block is from 320 to 470 kg, depending on which missiles and which block.
          Weight 20 missiles S-13 missiles themselves, without blocksand a half tons, a helicopter can take just four blocks of such missiles.
          Combat load Ka-52 up to 2000kg. This is a pendant weapon. I draw your attention to the fact that Igla-V missiles do not use standard suspension points, that is, a helicopter can take 460 rounds into battle for its 30-mm tank gun, twelve supersonic ATGMs, forty 80-mm NURSs and four missiles for air combat ... There is a difference? Ka-52 takes 2 times more weapons, 2 times. Don't fool people stop
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 8 February 2014 12: 13
      +9
      Ka-52 in flight


      View from the cabin


      "preparing for the sea"


    3. Rustam
      Rustam 8 February 2014 14: 32
      -6
      The best attack helicopter in the world


      O_o As always, the best in the world, and even with the AH-64E compared, of course, where this poor Apache is.
      Only while KA-52 did not interest anyone, but why do they buy for Apache?
      There Iraq pays three prices just to get

      PS - I'm not saying that the KA-52 is bad, but it needs to be improved as a ball and
      Guided missiles - there is potential

      But what immediately kills the words of PR specialists - The best helicopter in the world! I would like to honestly, but
      1. spech
        spech 8 February 2014 16: 38
        +10
        There Iraq pays three prices just to get
        but doesn’t it seem strange to you that Iraq will buy what they say?
        or what sad give a loan
        1. Rustam
          Rustam 8 February 2014 17: 19
          -2
          Iraq will buy what they say?
          or what


          No, we discussed this. Iraq pays with real money and with stock buying weapons
          As in the USA, Russia, Ukraine, Europe, South Korea
      2. Old skeptic
        Old skeptic 15 February 2014 16: 13
        0
        Quote: Rustam
        Only while KA-52 didn’t interest anyone, and why do they buy for Apache? Iraq pays three prices to get it


        Iraq acquires 40 combat helicopters Mi-35 and Mi-28 “Night Hunter” from Russia

        Give more precise arguments, please.
    4. sub307
      sub307 9 February 2014 11: 07
      0
      Not just handsome, but straight handsome.
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. air wolf
      air wolf 9 February 2014 12: 08
      0
      Yes, but for such grandmothers it was possible to produce a larger number of Ka-29s, which, if modernized, would not differ in any way from the Ka-52, believe me, which piloted various Kamov helicopters. There is only one scheme, and whatever the fuselage does not stick on it, it also flies sideways and backwards and hangs from a speed of 200 to 0 in 5 seconds.
      The development of the Ka-50 is a significant mistake, it was necessary to develop the Ka-29, how many hospitals would additionally be configured in kafkaz)))
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 9 February 2014 14: 21
        0
        Well, yes, with Mi-24 it just so turns out that he seems to be there, and the Mi-8 does half the work for him.
    7. tilovaykrisa
      tilovaykrisa 9 February 2014 23: 14
      0
      There is no doubt about the handsome man, but how many of these are in service? One hope for helicopters like a state program is being carried out normally.
    8. Su24
      Su24 10 February 2014 04: 21
      0
      The order for Ka-52 helicopters for the Ministry of Defense of Russia is 240 units. In 2012, the 21 helicopter was manufactured, in the 2013, the RF Ministry of Defense received another 24, in the 2014, according to the plan, it will be 28. About a hundred cars are going to adopt the Navy for fire support of amphibious assault forces, escorting deck transport helicopters, destruction of small and medium displacement ships.


      Where are these numbers ??)) I demand new news from the military-industrial complex))
  2. SibRUS
    SibRUS 8 February 2014 08: 55
    +2
    First of all, this is a unique maneuverability - it can even fly forward with a speed of 130 km / h, sideways - 100 km / h, perform such aerobatic maneuvers with huge overloads that NATO and US pilots did not dream of. The maximum speed of the Ka-52 - 370 km / h is also the highest rate on the planet. If you talk about all the technical advantages of our device, you will have to write a book. Perhaps, among the main “best” characteristics, it is worth noting its amazing all-weather ability - it can even fly in a hurricane with wind speeds up to 140 km / h and at the same time clearly maintain its position in the air according to the coordinates of the radar and satellite data.

    During the entire period of testing and operation, four Ka-50 and K-52 accidents occurred. On April 3, 1985, test pilot Hero of the Soviet Union Yevgeny Laryushin crashed on a Ka-50 prototype. And on June 17, 1998, in Torzhok (Tver Region) as a result of the Black Shark crash, the head of the Army Aviation Combat Training Center, Hero of Russia, Major General Boris Vorobyov, was killed. The Ka-50 crashes occurred due to the fact that the helicopters were sharply maneuvering, as a result of which there was an overlap of the rotors...
    Each advantage has a downside; the machine must be balanced. And the best or not - it can be determined only in conditions of hostilities.
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 8 February 2014 09: 01
      -14%
      Well, yes, the KA also disappointed me a little, especially that the gun was motionless, and the lack of sane missiles to it.
      1. Professor
        Professor 8 February 2014 09: 31
        -25%
        Quote: mirag2
        Well, yes, the KA also disappointed me a little, especially that the gun was motionless, and the lack of sane missiles to it.

        ... there is no over the radar hub, there is no real combat experience, but already the best in the world. smile
        1. Rus_87
          Rus_87 8 February 2014 10: 41
          +28
          How do you imagine a nad-hub radar on helicopters with coaxial propellers? And to be honest, I can't imagine such a "bookcase". If there is a nadvtulochnaya radar station on your favorite Apaches, this does not mean that now it is necessary to mold it everywhere. And somehow I didn’t hear from our pilots, who fly on Sharks and Alligators, that the absence of an overhead radar station somehow infringes upon them.
          And about the lack of combat experience, you got excited. They have this experience in Chechnya at least. Yes, of course not as wide as that of Apaches, but nonetheless.
          1. tomket
            tomket 8 February 2014 11: 03
            +5
            By the way, on the Tigers they abandoned over-bus placement, they did it like an alligator.
            1. Ofellon
              Ofellon 10 February 2014 23: 37
              0
              oh ... and what is it
          2. vtur
            vtur 8 February 2014 12: 29
            -21%
            Quote: Rus_87
            And somehow I didn’t hear from our pilots who fly on Sharks and Alligators that the absence of a super-muzzle radar somehow infringes them.

            Until they met with the "Appachi" in a duel ...
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 8 February 2014 13: 24
              +19
              Quote: vtur
              Until they met with the "Appachi" in a duel ...

              Somewhere in the wrong direction you were carried, the main task of the nadvtulochny radar - hunting for armored vehicles and air defense systems "from an ambush". stop
            2. Patton5
              Patton5 8 February 2014 13: 29
              +18
              how do you imagine such a duel?))))) the battle over the radar bushings?)))
            3. EvilLion
              EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 20
              +1
              Helicopters do not collide with each other in battle.
              1. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 8 February 2014 15: 09
                -1
                Quote: EvilLion
                Helicopters do not collide with each other in battle.

                Is it too self-confident statement? lol
                The first battle helicopter in world history in the Iran-Iraq war - in November 1980, a pair of AN-1J attacked and shot down a pair of Mi-24Д. From the 3km range, the AN-1J attacked the Mi-24 with a pair of TOW ATGMs (one from each helicopter). Both missiles hit the target, but the Mi-24D continued to fly. The wingman's helicopter was hit in the lower part of the landing cockpit, which caused a loss of fuel from the tank and a short-term fire. However, despite the fact that the vital systems of the Mi-24 slave were not damaged, and he turned around to give the enemy a fight. The lead helicopter was damaged more severely - the cumulative jet of the TOW rocket hit the right engine, and fragments of the hull damaged the gearbox, and the helicopter began to withdraw towards the positions of the Iraqi troops. However, the slave did not have time to strike back - the “cobras” released another TOW. The first missed, but the second fell into ammunition, as a result of which the helicopter exploded in the air, and the Phalanga rocket launched by it, lost contact with the helicopter and uncontrollably fell.

                Here's something else on the topic.
                1. EvilLion
                  EvilLion 8 February 2014 22: 55
                  +1
                  And planes from mortars and tank guns shot down. Does this make such cases even meaningful?

                  and he turned around to give the enemy a fight


                  The co-driver simply unfolds in place.
                2. SkiF_RnD
                  SkiF_RnD 10 February 2014 22: 18
                  0
                  Mi-24 showed excellent performance in the Iran-Iraq war. hi
            4. vtur
              vtur 10 February 2014 15: 51
              0
              It's fun to watch me collectively overwhelming the rating here.
              And I actually meant a hypothetical duel between two types of helicopters, for example, somewhere in the mountains of Afghanistan. I think it’s far from a secret that in addition to attacks against ground targets, a helicopter of this class should be able to at least protect itself from other helicopters. Not to mention the need to covertly identify ground targets. So any enemy detection system, which is located above the rotor hub, is very necessary in combat conditions with a serious enemy ...
              1. s_eight
                s_eight 1 March 2014 23: 52
                0
                Colleague, watch the movie FIRE BIRDS - there is just Apache advertise. An interesting film, and at the end of the battle of 2 helicopters - APACH against Scorpio (it seems).
          3. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 8 February 2014 13: 12
            +2
            Quote: Rus_87
            If the supra-muzzle radar is on your favorite Apaches, this does not mean that now it is necessary to sculpt it everywhere.

            Teach materiel. laughing

            Quote: Rus_87
            And somehow I didn’t hear from our pilots who fly on Sharks and Alligators that the absence of a super-muzzle radar somehow infringes them.

            Does that mean for fun developing? lol

            1. EvilLion
              EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 21
              +1
              Be that as it may, the radar on the Ka-52 will be larger. An overtuller will need to be done.
          4. Professor
            Professor 8 February 2014 13: 30
            -6
            Quote: Rus_87
            And about the lack of combat experience, you got excited. They have this experience in Chechnya at least. Yes, of course not as wide as that of Apaches, but nonetheless.

            He acted there against armored vehicles, with the active use of electronic warfare against him, air defense?
            1. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 9 February 2014 00: 36
              +4
              Quote: Professor
              He acted there against armored vehicles, with the active use of electronic warfare against him, air defense?

              And where did the Apache take part?
              1. Professor
                Professor 9 February 2014 09: 34
                -2
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                And where did the Apache take part?

                So in Iraq they like not only fired from silicon rifles ...
                1. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 9 February 2014 10: 47
                  0
                  Quote: Professor
                  So in Iraq they like not only fired from silicon rifles ...

                  Like this?

                  The article, and in my opinion, too bravadochny, Ka-52 is still in search, but promising.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 9 February 2014 11: 04
                    +3
                    Quote: saturn.mmm
                    Like this?

                    No. Like this.
                    1. 0255
                      0255 9 February 2014 11: 33
                      +2
                      from such photos the heart rejoices! drinks
                    2. saturn.mmm
                      saturn.mmm 9 February 2014 15: 47
                      0
                      The Taliban air defense and electronic warfare worked well.
                      Zabul 2006
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 9 February 2014 16: 13
                        +1
                        Quote: saturn.mmm
                        The Taliban air defense and electronic warfare worked well.

                        The beaten Apache Sea on the Internet, because This papelats has real combat experience.



                      2. saturn.mmm
                        saturn.mmm 9 February 2014 17: 47
                        +6
                        Quote: Professor
                        The beaten Apache Sea on the Internet, because This papelats has real combat experience.

                        Destroying Iraq's air defense and electronic warfare? How is real experience in Afghanistan different from real experience in Chechnya? I very much doubt that the Apaches were breaking through Iraq's air defense.
                      3. 0255
                        0255 9 February 2014 19: 01
                        +4
                        I very much doubt that the Apaches were breaking through Iraq's air defense.

                        in words, the Americans in 2003 heroically tore up in Iraq ... Russian-made S-300 air defense systems laughing Which Hussein was not even close.
                        And if Iraq had normal air defense, the United States would not have attacked Iraq
                      4. papik09
                        papik09 9 February 2014 23: 10
                        +2
                        They would, as usual, use diapers laughing
    2. rolik
      rolik 9 February 2014 22: 19
      +7
      Quote: Rus_87
      Yes, of course not as wide as that of Apaches, but nonetheless.

      You will ask about the experience of the Apaches from the NATO peacekeepers who were in the former Yugoslavia. When the "best" Apache helicopters in the world dangled out of sight during the battle, and proudly and swiftly flew after its end. How grateful the Western solzhers were to them, what words of "gratitude" they said on the air)))))
  3. rumpeljschtizhen
    rumpeljschtizhen 8 February 2014 11: 47
    -3
    agree Professor early to somehow call the worst in the world
    1. 0255
      0255 8 February 2014 12: 33
      +25
      Quote: rumpeljschtizhen
      agree Professor early to somehow call the worst in the world

      so the professor has the best everything that is done in the USA and Israel laughing
      1. Professor
        Professor 8 February 2014 13: 22
        -5
        Quote: 0255
        so the professor has the best everything that is done in the USA and Israel

        in my vocabulary "the best in the world" and "no taxes" is not present.
  4. And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 8 February 2014 13: 15
    +8
    Quote: Professor
    ... no over radar sleeve

    What is this? wink
    1. Alex 241
      Alex 241 8 February 2014 13: 17
      +6
      If the memory of the photo from the 2005 air show with the prototype of the sub-muzzle radar does not change memory hi
    2. Professor
      Professor 9 February 2014 11: 06
      -1
      Quote: And Us Rat
      What is this?

      And this is a sham or if you want a layout.
  5. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 9 February 2014 00: 02
    +10
    He seems to be smart, but the fourth desire to cheat runs ahead of sanity. Apache, only against the unarmed and babayev then fought. And about nadvt .. generally pearl, congratulations "prohvessor".
  • spech
    spech 8 February 2014 18: 47
    +1
    that the gun is motionless
    But is there a proof on a rigidly fixed gun?
  • Michael_59
    Michael_59 9 February 2014 10: 26
    +4
    Quote: mirag2
    that the gun is motionless


    The Ka-52 is equipped with the well-known, battle-proven powerful 30 mm cannon launcher used in the ground forces on the BMP-2, BMD-2, BMD-3, BTR-90, BMPT, in aviation - on helicopters Ka-50, Ka-29, Mi-28 and fully unified in terms of ammunition. The 2A42 cannon has a variable rate of fire (single and automatic fire, high and low speed)
    and separate selective ammunition from two rounds of ammunition equipped with armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation shells. This allowed a 30% increase in the effectiveness of destruction of ground lightly armored and air targets. Combat survivability of the barrel allows you to shoot the entire ammunition (500 rounds) without delay and intermittent cooling. The gun mount works reliably in dusty environments. Placing the gun at the center of mass of the helicopter - to maintain high firing accuracy. This meets the strength requirements and does not require reinforcing the design of the machine. In addition, the impact of recoil on the helicopter during shooting is reduced, weight is saved and the alignment of the machine is not disturbed at the expense of shells.
    An electro-hydraulic follow-up drive allows the barrel to move in horizontal and vertical planes, maintaining the direction of fire.
  • Rus_87
    Rus_87 8 February 2014 10: 35
    +18
    Overlapping screws, dear, happened only once, in 1985. Then the design was radically improved, and overlaps no longer happened.
  • donavi49
    donavi49 8 February 2014 10: 42
    +31
    Materiel would be to teach you.

    1) The overlap on the Ka-50 Vorobyov happened not just like that and not on a production car, but on a special aerobatic flight, with disabled restrictions on exit modes. Look at what he was doing in the air and you’ll understand everything. He constantly went beyond the bounds, and this was to happen. I will say more, from such aerobatics and the classical scheme, a helicopter can be made to slash along a beam.
    2) Board number 99 was lost in Torzhok while flying to SMU at extremely low altitude. Do not miss each other with a pine. Of course, the car is to blame.
    3) The test board in Moscow was lost due to a technical malfunction of the gearbox, which stopped turning the top screw. This also happens on classical-type helicopters - in case of tail rotor failure, which quite often happens with different results.
    1. SibRUS
      SibRUS 8 February 2014 11: 53
      -10%
      When a projectile or a large-caliber bullet hits, a rigid blade (it is not dynamic) is “forced to deviate” from the plane of rotation (like an elastic beam fixed at one end) and falls under the second blade rotating towards.
      This conclusion was expressed by the South Koreans in their conclusion about the KA-50 following the results of the competition, when it was offered to them as the main combat helicopter. The conclusion they, as Oriental people, carried out a thorough and punctual - they would not have been otherwise South Koreans. General conclusion: the helicopter with the presented propeller installation diagram is "NOT a combat" helicopter, due to the great vulnerability of such a propulsion system. As positive qualities noted - really exceptional simplicity and precision of control - in static modes! - low speeds and hovering.
      Everything else is here:
      http://www.titus.kz/?type=nweap&previd=4768
      1. 0255
        0255 8 February 2014 12: 26
        +13
        Quote: SibRUS
        When a projectile or a large-caliber bullet hits, a rigid blade (it is not dynamic) is “forced to deviate” from the plane of rotation (like an elastic beam fixed at one end) and falls under the second blade rotating towards.
        This conclusion was expressed by the South Koreans in their conclusion about the KA-50 following the results of the competition, when it was offered to them as the main combat helicopter. The conclusion they, as Oriental people, carried out a thorough and punctual - they would not have been otherwise South Koreans. General conclusion: the helicopter with the presented propeller installation diagram is "NOT a combat" helicopter due to the great vulnerability of such a propulsion system.

        or maybe they came up with all this in order to choose something American in the troops? Did the Ka-50 have at least one chance to get into the air force of a pro-American country?
        If you kill the tail rotor at least "Apache", AN-1 "Cobra" at least "Tiger", Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-28, then crying
        1. SibRUS
          SibRUS 8 February 2014 12: 56
          +1
          I am also a patriot of my country, like you, but you have to look at such things objectively. Ka-52 is not a Mi-24, which has gone through "fire and water", it is too early to draw conclusions.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 26
            -14%
            Mi-24 is such a UG that half of the work for it is done by Mi-8.
        2. FRITZ LANG
          FRITZ LANG 8 February 2014 13: 00
          +10
          most likely a western-made helicopter will crash, as will the Mi-8 and Mi-28. but in the presence of an experienced pilot, the Mi-24 landed with a torn tail rotor. similarly, if a helicopter crashes on a ka-52 blade of one of the rotor carriers (and there will be more than one), and on mi-24 in afghan pilots often flew to the base with a completely torn blade. I respect all the designers, but my personal opinion is brand helicopters KA are good at sea
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 29
            +4
            Endings are very common. And do not care. Detachment of the blade itself will not cause uncontrolled left rotation, since the mass of the blade is small, so that it coaxes if there are no other damages. Mi-24 does not land without a tail rotor, it just falls in an uncontrolled rotation, you can only reduce the severity of the blow, and then burn in the cabin if you can not get out, because there is no catapult.
            1. FRITZ LANG
              FRITZ LANG 8 February 2014 14: 35
              0
              I don’t agree with you, the Mi-24 has a tail that’s not so flat, just for this. The oncoming flow does not allow you to go into uncontrolled rotation, so you land on an airplane
              1. spech
                spech 8 February 2014 18: 42
                +4
                Quote: FRITZ LANG
                I don’t agree with you, the Mi-24 has a tail that’s not so flat, just for this. The oncoming flow does not allow you to go into uncontrolled rotation, so you land on an airplane

                Damn more delirium did not read am
                1. Nikotin13
                  Nikotin13 8 February 2014 20: 24
                  +2
                  comrade obviously suffered, probably something cut off ... wink
      2. kare
        kare 8 February 2014 12: 49
        +3
        Yes, in addition to being oriental, they are also great friends of the Pentagon. Something I don’t remember where I said the greatest competence of Koreans in the field of armaments
      3. EvilLion
        EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 25
        +4
        Bullshit, a shell will shoot the blade and everything, otherwise combat helicopters would not exist as a class, since for a misaligned helicopter such a defeat would end with a blow of the blade on the tail boom, or even on the cockpit, which often happens.

        Not surprisingly, after so many years of lies and PR from Milevtsi, the Ka-52 eventually outperformed the Mi-28 in the number of cars ordered.
        1. FRITZ LANG
          FRITZ LANG 8 February 2014 14: 42
          0
          Milevtsy proved that their equipment is in the list of the best world analogues, which Kamovtsy have not been able to this day. What is the lie and PR?
  • 0255
    0255 8 February 2014 12: 03
    +18
    On April 3, 1985, test pilot Hero of the Soviet Union Yevgeny Laryushin crashed on a Ka-50 prototype. And on June 17, 1998, in Torzhok (Tver Region) as a result of the Black Shark crash, the head of the Army Aviation Combat Training Center, Hero of Russia, Major General Boris Vorobyov, was killed. The Ka-50 crashes occurred due to the fact that the helicopters were sharply maneuvering, as a result of which there was an overlap of the rotors ...

    Unfortunately, there are no trials without incidents. Think the Apaches didn't crash?
    Each advantage has a downside; the machine must be balanced. And the best or not - it can be determined only in conditions of hostilities.

    Ka-50 fought in Chechnya and showed their best side.

    Another question is that the Ka-50 should have been used en masse, and not a few pieces for experimental purposes. So let's say thanks to the Gorbo-Yeltsin "reformers" for the collapse of the Russian military-industrial complex and the commander of the Air Force, who did not want to take the Ka-50 into service. Yes, damn it, ejection seats in a helicopter, a coaxial scheme with new ensuing capabilities, excellent electronics, ease of maintenance (even a stepladder is not needed for the Ka-50!) - these are terrible disadvantages request
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 34
      0
      Ka-50 adopted, they even began to mass-produce, part of the backlog eventually went to Ka-52.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 19
    +4
    After the accident, Laryushin increased the distance between the screws. Accidents with screw blows on the tail boom are also common in the classics. The main disadvantages of the nipples are the complexity of the transmission and the increased resistance of the screw column, so the Ka-60 / 62 is not aligned.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 8 February 2014 09: 14
    +14
    Even taking into account that the article was written in the spirit of a commercial, there is only one thing left to say: Russia has something to be proud of! And God forbid that our industry builds up its pace, and the Armed Forces - train, raise, train pilots so that formidable cars are in good hands.
  • vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 8 February 2014 09: 38
    +24
    As always, opponents of Kamov helicopters will wake up now. Collapse a bunch of far-fetched arguments. And it is striking that every critic considers himself no less than an expert in the field of helicopter engineering. What is it about the Kama engineers, scientists, they are all as one half-educated, dvoeshniki. They created a bad helicopter, they had to give advice to our all-knowing critics before, but no, all for yourself, but for yourself.
    1. AnaBat
      AnaBat 9 February 2014 00: 34
      +1
      Critics were, are and will be, but our spacecraft is popular and in demand - FACT! The best argument in favor of our helicopter pilots!
      1. Firstvanguard
        Firstvanguard 9 February 2014 17: 05
        +2
        I recalled a children's film.
        "And throw mud?"
        "You can throw mud at anyone."
        Nowhere in the world have they been able to build a serial helicopter coaxial FACT scheme. The mudbuckers will immediately say - because nafig is not needed, so they didn’t build it. So after all they built, there were many attempts, but not one effective one. The second fact.
        The third fact, such a small fact from personal experience, a friend and friend is fond of radio models of helicopters. In moments of tides of friendly feelings, gives than a thread to steer. I mastered Sososki for a long time, I do not twist aerobatics, but just flying is not a problem. Once I tried the classics, having already had a decent flight experience, picked it up a couple of meters and put it back, was afraid to break an expensive toy, after the nipple the feeling that it was not controlled at all request Of course, these are only models, but the principles are the same.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 9 February 2014 19: 19
          0
          Success came to the co-mates only in the 70s with Ka-27, before it were true Ka-15 and Ka-25. Nipple is not the only symmetrical scheme, if we discard multi-axis machines that do not go beyond the scope of toys, then there are also synchroppers, in the USA such helicopters are manufactured by Kaman. They are used in the same niche as co-aligners, i.e., tasks associated with long-term hanging.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 9 February 2014 22: 27
            0
            Quote: EvilLion
            ..... there are also synchroppers, in the USA such helicopters are manufactured by Kaman. They are used in the same niche as co-aligners, i.e., tasks associated with long-term hanging ...

            [img = left] http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4661531134657364&pid=1.7 [/ img]


  • Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 8 February 2014 09: 39
    +6
    The article is one-sided. The car is excellent, but comparisons are needed. We have MI28. And in this article, NATO and other countries attack helicopters should have been brought in to understand that it is the best. request
  • Know-nothing
    Know-nothing 8 February 2014 10: 17
    +3
    Sergey Tikhonov again zhzhot.
  • alexbg2
    alexbg2 8 February 2014 10: 20
    +4
    The car is beautiful, original. Near me passes the route along which they fly from Korenovsk to the training ground, it is mesmerizing in the sky, but all the same praising epithets are still upfront.
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 10: 36
    -47%
    The Ka-52 is unsuitable as a battlefield helicopter. If they can be used, then only where they do not shoot. Or, at least, they shoot from a small caliber: for special operations, against bandits and sabotage groups. The helicopter has a huge number of shortcomings and certainly is not the best in the world. And the very concept of a “strike helicopter” is only suitable for countries with a backward military-industrial complex, because the experience of military operations has shown that it is much cheaper and more efficient to use unmanned aerial vehicles than to invest in the production of reconnaissance and attack helicopters and training pilots with subsequent risk for machines and crews. That is why the US Army decided to close the Comanche helicopter program.
    1. Rus_87
      Rus_87 8 February 2014 10: 53
      +19
      I haven’t read such a heresy a long time ago, they made a laugh, thanks good
      The use of only drones is notoriously a losing option. It is enough for the enemy to drive a couple of "Avtobaz", and similar machines to the theater of operations, so that you completely lose the opportunity to use the submarine. In turn, ground troops without air cover are doomed to destruction. Thus, long live the American drones, even if the entire Air Force will be replaced by them, it will be easier for us with the "backward" Alligators and "Night Hunters" to destroy the hordes of Abrams, Bradleys, etc.
    2. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 11: 10
      +12
      That's why Prince Harry was sent to Apache, why didn’t they make his UAV operator ????? safer, more efficient and prestigious .... the campaign is just your head is not suitable for use)))))
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 8 February 2014 11: 14
        +4
        Because of the prince it was necessary to make a bogeyman of a patriotic British, and the patriots are not sitting at the remote control, they are in the forefront!
    3. Michael_59
      Michael_59 8 February 2014 19: 25
      +4
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      ... the concept of a “strike helicopter” is only suitable for countries with a backward military-industrial complex, because the experience of military operations has shown that it is much cheaper and more efficient to use unmanned aerial vehicles ...


      You contradict yourself. UAVs can also fight with impunity only against the "backward" ...
    4. Current 72
      Current 72 8 February 2014 22: 00
      +1
      Do not make people laugh !!! If not a specialist, better absorb the information, and do not judge what you do not know !!!
  • Turkestan
    Turkestan 8 February 2014 10: 48
    +22
    I had to talk with the guys in helicopter pilots who were present on the set of the movie Black Shark in Chirchik. Helicopter pilots who actually fought in Afghanistan looked at this aircraft with admiration. And then he noted that for the effectiveness of the use of this helicopter, another crew member is required as an operator. Designer well done that heeded the opinion of helicopter pilots. It is a pity that she was not accepted into the series 30 years ago
    1. 0255
      0255 8 February 2014 12: 12
      +9
      By the way, I recently watched "Black Shark" - an excellent film, especially against the background of "true" military heresy like "Stalingrad" and "9th company". Maybe you need to make such a film about the Ka-52? Only Bondarchuk should not shoot the film, otherwise he will screw up the Ka-52.
      1. vtur
        vtur 8 February 2014 14: 13
        0
        Quote: 0255
        recently watched "Black Shark" - great movie

        There is nothing "great" about the Black Shark Movie. A low-budget film with a primitive plot, which is typical of the time when it was filmed. And the main character does not look like Tom Cruise at all ... :)
        Unfortunately, a good story about Ka-50 / 52 just does not occur. But to make a film of lemons for 50 greens about our helicopter pilots in Afghanistan, with good actors, full-scale shootings and a decent storyline - it would really be GREAT ...
        1. vladsolo56
          vladsolo56 9 February 2014 05: 26
          +8
          Quote: vtur
          But to make a film of lemons for 50 greens about our helicopter pilots in Afghanistan, with good actors, full-scale shootings and a decent storyline - it would really be GREAT ...

          Another Bondarchuk Stalingrad, who needs it. For your information, Leonid Bykov's film "Only Old Men Go to Battle" is also low-budget, but who dares to say that it is bad? Everyone sees what he wants to see.
          1. vtur
            vtur 10 February 2014 16: 54
            0
            Quote: vladsolo56
            Another Bondarchuk Stalingrad, who needs it. For your information, Leonid Bykov's film "Only Old Men Go to Battle" is also low-budget, but who dares to say that it is bad? Everyone sees what he wants to see.

            The point is that the film does not work out, such as "Stalingrad", "White Tiger", "Burnt by the Sun -1 ... 3", etc ...
            As for "Only Old Men Go to Battle" - the film is undoubtedly a masterpiece, but only of its time. The film "Torpedo bombers", for example a later and more truthful ...
        2. typhoon7
          typhoon7 10 February 2014 17: 01
          0
          In this film, if I'm not mistaken, the main role was played by Colonel Kvachkov. There generally roles were played mainly by specialists. Test pilot, GRU, etc., wanted to try.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 35
        +5
        And in the role of the pilot of the "Black Shark" a real pilot of the "Black Shark". :)
        1. atalef
          atalef 8 February 2014 15: 04
          +3
          Quote: EvilLion
          And in the role of the pilot of the "Black Shark" a real pilot of the "Black Shark". :)

          And in the role of * Black Shark * - a real black shark wassat
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 41
      +7
      The Ka-50 was created for other conditions, this is a helicopter of the great war, where the machine does not last long, and pilots need to be saved, so the uniqueness of the mass of combatant vehicles interspersed with commander’s (you still need a spark) at the level of at least the link is justified. The goals, as a rule, are reconnoitered and very dangerous, to act on them only as IL-2, or Su-25 / A-10 hit everything that fell into the sight, and fired, we don’t need a co-pilot here, attack aircraft with URs and they cope in one, and there are no delays between the detection of the target by the commander and its defeat by the operator. In counterguerrilla operations, they fly in small groups and someone stupidly needs someone to twirl their head.
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 11: 04
    -23%
    Quote: Rus_87
    I haven’t read such a heresy a long time ago, they made a laugh, thanks


    Stop talking nonsense. Or do you believe that with the use of the Russian complex of the executive RTR "Avtobaza" the Iranian air defense planted the American RQ-170 Sentinel UAV? This information does not seem to correspond to reality and even exceeds the theoretical potential of Avtobaza.
    1. Rus_87
      Rus_87 8 February 2014 11: 12
      +21
      Live further in your pink world and the American flag is in your hands. I won’t even argue with you.
      The Americans will defeat everyone with their UAVs, where we are gray and miserable with their SU-35, PAK-FA, T-90, S-400 and Topoli with GREAT and UNBEATABLE compete.
      PS
      By the way, about the fact that our Carpool planted Amer. I didn’t say anything about the UAV in Iran; you yourself thought it up. I just wanted to say that with the use of one of the sides of such systems, the possibility of using the UAV is zero. Since the Autobase was originally created not for intercepting control of another UAV, but for clogging the control channel with interference by this very UAV.
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 11: 12
    -31%
    Quote: Rus_87
    Destroy hordes of Abrams, Bradleys, etc. with Alligators and Night Hunters.


    I can imagine how 70 Mi-28N and 60 Ka-52 destroy 7000 Abrams and 7000 Bradley. lol
    1. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 11: 56
      +3
      in Libya, the Danish f-16 with a small amount of stuffed a huge amount of technology, even the British called them bloody, what will hurt ours ????
    2. 0255
      0255 8 February 2014 12: 21
      +5
      I can imagine how 70 Mi-28N and 60 Ka-52 destroy 7000 Abrams and 7000 Bradley. lol

      if the Americans were sure that Russia was not able to destroy the Abrams and Bradleys, they would have attacked long ago.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 8 February 2014 16: 11
        +4
        They didn’t attack because of this. Have you tried to think with your head?
      2. 0255
        0255 8 February 2014 16: 18
        +4
        and here is how the Ka-52 will destroy the Abrams and Bradleys:
        1. Drummer
          Drummer 8 February 2014 18: 23
          +1
          S-8 offer Abram to wet? A bold idea.
          1. edeligor
            edeligor 9 February 2014 09: 55
            +3
            Quote: Drummer
            S-8 offer Abram to wet? A bold idea.

            Read about the use of Abrams in Iraq. From RPG-7 to the auxiliary engine and .... AMBA, a high-tech miracle!
        2. Professor
          Professor 8 February 2014 20: 29
          -1
          Quote: 0255

          0255 Today, 16:18 ↑
          and here is how the Ka-52 will destroy the Abrams and Bradleys:

          NURSami? wassat
          1. Kasym
            Kasym 9 February 2014 00: 24
            +10
            Hello professor! I think laughing in vain. If NURs hit, all the add-ons of the tank (optics, sensors, antennas, etc.) will be disabled.
            And if he lies down heap, then a reduction in his fighting abilities is guaranteed - unequivocally for repairs. Even an attack with a heavy machine gun, not to mention AP, can significantly reduce the capabilities of the tank.
            So the tankers will not be laughing. I assure you, I have seen more than once.
            Sincerely, hi !
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 9 February 2014 01: 15
              +4
              At the airfield where I served, this is a normal practice - an attack on columns of armored vehicles (MBT, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles) with NURS, KP and AP. The spectacle must say something else. If there is still a group (2,4 or 8), then in general ... a song. "Dust with a pillar - put out the light."
              300 days a year. Flights practically every "working" day, and if bad weather, then on Saturday. The plan is nlan. So we worked on targets 2 times a week. We decided to somehow simulate the soldiers on the armor. Cobbled stones for armor - kg. 10 at least. 8 pieces were put on the armored personnel carrier. And a bucket of lime was placed on the tank (we sprinkled it on earthy airplane silhouettes in summer - imitation of aircraft parking, and in winter with slag). And a couple of days later, when we arrived again, the bucket tore into several pieces of tin, the cobblestones into gravel, and some were lying on the ground. And the armor ... clean. Apparently the blast waves blew off all the "husk" with lime.
            2. Professor
              Professor 9 February 2014 09: 37
              -4
              Quote: Kasym
              Hello professor! I think laughing in vain. If NURs hit, all the add-ons of the tank (optics, sensors, antennas, etc.) will be disabled.

              I saw what NURSs with concrete shelters do, but they still have to get there. World War II technique on the best world attack helicopter? You can’t laugh here, just cry.
              1. Kasym
                Kasym 9 February 2014 16: 35
                +3
                Good day and good health to you, Professor! I would equate the turntables to high-precision weapons. I specifically before the demobil asked the timekeeper for
                1. ATGM very accurately. For 2 years of service no more than 4-5 misses. Given the cadets. Imagine! We like turntables, then ATGMs must be allowed.
                2. The bombs. Always hit the bomb circle. Very precisely laid down. Low speed, longer aiming time. No, it cannot be compared with fighters.
                3. NURS. Their difference from ATGMs is that there are many of them. Mass shooting from them is a guaranteed hit of at least one of them on the target. So you shouldn't be so bad about "WWII weapons". Up to 80 rockets are placed on the turntable. If the combination or the first sorties to the landfill, then as a rule the smallest in 2 cassettes. In general, this type of shooting is the most spectacular.
                4. AP and PC. Here, the impact is affected. But the pilots get used pretty quickly.
                I assure you by helicopter that the accuracy is many times higher than that of a fighter. If the enemy has nothing to answer, then I assure you the spinner will figure it out - it will not seem enough. hi
                1. Professor
                  Professor 9 February 2014 16: 56
                  -2
                  Quote: Kasym
                  I would equate the turntables to high-precision weapons

                  That's it. But like that, high-precision weapons and NURSs do not fit. I have nothing against turntables, although they are a thing of the past (IDF air force strikes militant commander in Gaza
                  Palestinian agency Maan reports that Israeli unmanned aircraft fired a rocket at the motorcycle. Two Palestinians were injured in the air attack. The condition of one of them is assessed as serious. The injured were taken to Al-Aqsa hospital.

                  The Palestinian Information Center, an online Hamas resource, reports that the Israeli UAV fired at a motorcycle in Dir el-Balah while it was near the Al-Aqsa hospital.
                  ).
                  1. Kasym
                    Kasym 9 February 2014 23: 29
                    +3
                    The tactics are different from those in the West. Airplane-like. With a decrease in height and distance to the target. Therefore, they beat for sure when the distance and aiming are not in doubt. I have never seen in 2 years that the helicopter "hangs" and fired. Everything is like an airplane. Approaching the combat course, and went to the target (of course, there is no such dive as the plane has). He puts bombs in the bull's eye, but there is a chapel in height.
                    Especially difficult when there is a lot. Imagine 4 quarters, one after the other. After the first call, it is so dusty in the summer that then you can't see it anymore. The timekeeper notes all this in the spec. card. Date, type and type of weapons, hit-no, removal. So the pilots are not indifferent to all this - and the timekeeper with the observers "hang", what you see there, everything is covered in the dust of explosions.
                    And NURS is the same as Katyusha. Gave a volley, so much so for sure. There is chaos on the ground, in a tank in either an infantry fighting vehicle or an armored personnel carrier, there is no difference, the damage is intended. Very effective weapons and are unlikely to be removed from service in the future, like the PATRON. hi
    3. vtur
      vtur 8 February 2014 12: 26
      -3
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      I can imagine how 70 Mi-28N and 60 Ka-52 destroy 7000 Abrams and 7000 Bradley

      That's why all developed countries are rapidly reducing their tank fleet - building tanks has become insanely expensive, and you can destroy them all with the regiment of AH-64 helicopters or A-10 attack aircraft. Events in Iraq have confirmed this ...
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 44
        +4
        "Tunguska" laughs at you. The developed countries simply do not have money for normal weapons, so they switch to all sorts of "strikers".
      2. Commodus
        Commodus 8 February 2014 19: 02
        +5
        The regiment plya? You are my dad addict. There were more than a thousand aircraft of the coalition tons alone. Plus turntables, plus their Abramysh tanks, about 1000, and hell knows how many bird touches on the Bradley and Hamer chassis. Plus artillery and special forces groups and missile attacks by tomahawks. Yes EPT one regiment of everything!
      3. edeligor
        edeligor 9 February 2014 10: 00
        +4
        Quote: vtur
        all developed countries are rapidly reducing their tank fleet

        Buddy, have you fought? Or have you picked up videos about the American contactless war? You know, when everyone is shitting around and there is a box next to it, you start to treat the "tractor drivers" and their machines differently.
        1. vtur
          vtur 10 February 2014 16: 22
          0
          Quote: edeligor
          Man, did you fight?

          And you see the "strategist"? Let's comment correctly and not provoke opponents!
          I recommend, for example, to read the article "The further path of the tank" from the site "Arms of Russia"
          http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124050056054057049.html
          I will allow myself a quote essentially:
          "Since it is not possible to simplify and reduce the cost of tanks, small (and then, apparently, large) countries in Europe will abandon them altogether. It is extremely difficult now to predict the fate of tanks in the United States.

          The Future Combat System program is closed, i.e. a new tank is not expected here. "Abrams" can serve for a long time, although, of course, not indefinitely. There is little doubt, however, that the US is no longer considering the possibility of conducting large-scale Cassic land wars. "
    4. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 43
      +7
      "Abrams" produced TOTAL 8000. Some of them burned down, some were given to the same Iraqis, some were written off for a long time, the number of M1A2 SEP is less than 2000. So don't scare it, it's not scary.
    5. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 9 February 2014 14: 19
      0
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      I can imagine how 70 Mi-28N and 60 Ka-52 destroy 7000 Abrams and 7000 Bradley. lol

      Well, we will drown the "abrams" until they are transported from n-i-ndosia, and the "brads" are right there, on the island tongue still p-o-d-p-indosnikov will have questions?
  • kind
    kind 8 February 2014 11: 21
    0
    The order for Ka-52 helicopters for the Russian Ministry of Defense is 240 pieces.

    Where do we get so many trained crews from?
    1. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 8 February 2014 17: 03
      +10
      Quote: Good
      Where do we get so many trained crews from?

      In the good old way - we will teach.
    2. edeligor
      edeligor 9 February 2014 10: 02
      0
      Quote: Good
      Where do we get so many trained crews from?

      Syzran will help!
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 9 February 2014 14: 24
      +1
      We’ll train for now, and in the long run, Russian women will give birth to 20. Or do you know other ways of producing people?
      1. edeligor
        edeligor 9 February 2014 14: 52
        0
        Quote: EvilLion
        Or do you know other ways of producing people?

        SVVAUL increased the recruitment of cadets. In GSh M0 of the Russian Federation, too, are not fools, 2 + 2 is easy to add.
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 11: 21
    -10%
    Quote: tomket
    that's why Prince Harry was sent to Apache


    The US Army has unveiled a development plan for the next 25 years. The document provides for the conversion of the Army's existing aircraft fleet into unmanned aerial vehicles "with the ability to be piloted by humans." According to the Army Command, converting the existing helicopter fleet into UAVs will save significant funds. According to preliminary data, the AH-64D Apache Longbow, CH-47F Chinook and UH-60M Blackhawk helicopters, which are in service with the US Army's air units, already have a set of onboard equipment, which in the future will allow them to implement a remote control system on them. At the same time, the American company Sikorsky is already developing an unmanned version of the UH-60M. According to the requirements of the US Army, the new drones "should be as autonomous as possible." In particular, they must independently fly on a given route, as well as take off and land in a fully automatic mode. However, autonomy does not apply to those drones that have weapons. It should be noted that the United States has relied on drones in future wars, deciding to quadruple the number of such devices in the next 30 years.

    Quote: tomket
    the hike is just your head is not suitable for use


    On their own people are not judged.
    1. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 12: 07
      +3
      in general, it is necessary to develop guided weapons so that the platform on which it is placed has minimal fire contact, and even a short response time to a request, or a long time in the waiting area, in principle, helicopters that control UAVs over helicopters equipped with long-range weapons do not have much , and there and there the operator, there and there he sits for hours in the cab, except that the load falls on twice as much. It is better to develop support equipment than once again to try to create a universal soldier.
    2. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 12: 09
      +1
      yes, and what you wrote about Ka-52 is true for Apache, Tiger, and so on, with noticeably less chances of survival, in general you have empty rhetoric, or a stream deliberate, choose to taste)
    3. Hitrovan07
      Hitrovan07 8 February 2014 14: 23
      +4
      But do you not consider the fact that the US Army has so unskilled personnel (for example, problems in troops with nuclear weapons) - that it is easier to have one operator for several UAVs than to train pilots for the same number of vehicles?
    4. edeligor
      edeligor 9 February 2014 10: 07
      +2
      This is American money and they spend it as they want. My opinion, I have already talked about this more than once, the fashion for the widespread use of drones is a dead end branch of the Air Force. Americans can throw such a misinformation, it happened more than once in history (remember SDI)
      1. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 9 February 2014 12: 30
        -2
        Quote: edeligor
        My opinion, I have already talked about this more than once, the fashion for the widespread use of drones is a dead end branch of the Air Force.

        Be kind - justify, it became curious request
        1. edeligor
          edeligor 9 February 2014 14: 35
          +2
          This is purely my opinion, I could be wrong. I believe that the modern development of electronics cannot guarantee the successful use of UAVs. I served in aviation for 12 years, was engaged in the radar equipment of aircraft. Maybe my knowledge is outdated, I do not deny the breakthrough advanced American technologies ... but! It is impossible not to take into account all the parameters affecting the aircraft during the flight, and this is in conditions of modern electronic suppression! This requires artificial intelligence.
  • Rus_87
    Rus_87 8 February 2014 11: 27
    +23
    AvadraCedavra, I suggest you change the avatar to this one. I think it’s more suitable ... drinks
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 12: 03
    -7
    Quote: Rus_87
    I just wanted to say that with the use of one of the sides of such systems, the possibility of using the UAV is zero.


    Do you think that the US Army did not think about issues of drone breakthroughs in conditions of powerful electronic warfare? Even now, in the X-47B, a bet has been placed on enhancing the role of autonomous flight programs - as opposed to semi-automated remote control by a human operator. Given the development of computers (the creation by 2016 of exaflops computers), after 10-15 years, fully autonomous machines may appear.
    1. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 12: 14
      +6
      they can not get rid of the trembling sight on the f-35, and you're talking about fully autonomous cars, stop dreaming for nothing)))))
      1. Michael_59
        Michael_59 8 February 2014 19: 37
        +8
        Quote: tomket
        can't get rid of the trembling sight on f-35


        This is where it all lies - eF-35 has long been an exascale artificial intelligence, created in the image and likeness of the average citizen of the SGA, and he is wildly scared for his "stern part" - that's why the sight trembles ... belay
        1. Firstvanguard
          Firstvanguard 9 February 2014 17: 15
          0
          Thank you, neighing from the heart! fellow laughing good
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 46
      +5
      That's when the program will be autonomous, then we'll talk, but so far there are no UAVs capable of performing something more complicated than what the Buran did in 1987. I do not count remotely controlled toys as UAVs.
      1. atalef
        atalef 8 February 2014 14: 49
        -4
        Quote: EvilLion
        That's when the program will be autonomous, then we'll talk, but so far there are no UAVs capable of performing something more complicated than what the Buran did in 1987. I do not count remotely controlled toys as UAVs.

        Ds yfdthyjt yb d ntvt
        There was no crew aboard the American space shuttle X-37B, writes Giovanni Caprara in an article published on the website of the newspaper Corriere della Sera.

        "In total secrecy, the X-37B-OTV-2 spacecraft landed at the Vandenberg military space base in California. Thus ended the shuttle's second longest flight. There were no astronauts on board, and this indicates the high technological level of the shuttle: independently solve all mission tasks, including takeoff and landing, "the newspaper writes.

        "The X-37B has been in orbit for 468 days, 13 hours and 2 minutes since launch on March 5, 2011 with the Atlas-5 launch vehicle from Cape Canaveral. This is a real record, which was one of the mission objectives: to determine the duration of the flight in space under This is the second flight of a military shuttle, built in two copies: the first was in space for 2010 days in 224. What these shuttles were doing in orbit is a mystery. It is known that the military shuttles use a large solar panel of a new generation, which allows them to stay in orbit for a longer time, "the article says.
        "The new shuttles have on board surveillance equipment and sensors of unknown nature. They have allowed the X-37B to change orbit and even approach the Chinese mini-station Tiangong-1. The dimensions of the new shuttles are small: only 10 meters in length. But the new ships are more effective ceramic shielding, improved aerodynamic performance, and a high-precision self-steering and orientation system. Nothing is known about the tasks that are set for the new shuttles, in addition to repeated flights into space: the first military space shuttle, which flew in 2010, is scheduled to start at the end of the year. " , - writes the author of the article.

        1. tungus
          tungus 8 February 2014 17: 27
          +7
          Quote: atalef
          There was no crew aboard the American space shuttle X-37B

          On November 15, 1988, the Buran orbital vehicle was launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome using the Energia carrier rocket. The flight duration was 205 minutes, the ship made two orbits around the Earth, after which it landed at the Yubileiny airfield in Baikonur. The flight took place without a crew in automatic mode using an on-board computer and on-board software.

          What have the Americans done new? Increased flight time? 25 years after the Buran flew? What else, besides automatic takeoff and landing, can that X-37B do? And who said that this device, being in space, was not controlled from the Earth?
    3. edeligor
      edeligor 9 February 2014 10: 09
      +1
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      the creation of exaflops computers by 2016), in 10-15 years, completely autonomous machines may appear.

      And the Americans will create artificial intelligence that will enslave the people of planet Earth am
  • Tex
    Tex 8 February 2014 12: 20
    +5
    the car is what you need, and not so important the best or not. it is important that, like the shark is light, it means that it can be used in the fleet not only by helicopter carriers (which is important). the absence of a second screw is also a plus, the shaft running along the entire tail boom is also vulnerable like the screw itself. comparison with mi-24 (28) is not appropriate, it is irreplaceable during landing operations, and in general it can be considered BMP of the future (the scheme itself). more than both vehicles in the army per year, and trained pilots for them. excellent equipment that does not require roads, capable of solving a wide range of tasks, comrades are moving in the right direction drinks
  • vtur
    vtur 8 February 2014 12: 22
    +7
    In the article, in fact, the Ka-50 helicopter is skipped. The theme of the behind-the-scenes struggle in the Moscow Region (I personally don’t know much about it) between two and single-seater variants is not covered at all. The very concept of a single, with a high level of on-board electronics, a maneuverable rotorcraft of the battlefield (and even in such an arrangement) looked too innovative. As for me, the rejection of mass production of the Ka-50 is a big mistake. It was worth preserving this helicopter (along with the Ka-52, which, of course, is also needed) in production and equipping it with individual squadrons (in which it would be necessary to attract talented pilots able to cope with the loads presented for the combat use of a single-attack attack helicopter).
    As for the "overhead" radar, it is a highly effective piece of equipment for surprise attacks from cover. As for me, an indispensable thing in, for example, a helicopter versus helicopter confrontation in difficult terrain, such as mountains ...
  • svp67
    svp67 8 February 2014 12: 27
    +4
    Cheers cheers!!! Nice advertising article ...
    A comparative analysis of the TTX Ka-52 with other latest helicopters in the world gives an unambiguous answer about its superiority in basic positions, including in comparison with the best American all-weather combat helicopter AH-64D Apache.
    Here are just the "Apache" already has a rich combat experience and thousands of them have already been released, but our "battle stone" ... How could it come in handy and save many soldiers' lives earlier ... We wish him great luck and good prospects, including and in export deliveries ...
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 12: 38
    -6
    Quote: tomket
    they can not get rid of the trembling sight on the f-35, and you're talking about fully autonomous cars, stop dreaming for nothing)))))


    Do you judge this by flying it in Battlefield 3? Update your graphics card driver should help.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 47
      +2
      In BF-3 I remember generally F / A-18E was. What symbolizes.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 8 February 2014 16: 16
        +2
        There are also F-35s on some maps.
    2. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 14: 57
      +1
      I judge him strictly by what the Americans themselves say when shooting from a cannon problems arise. in 35 it’s not the only problem, although the plane itself is quite classic, but for some reason I can’t bring it to mind yet
  • undusk
    undusk 8 February 2014 13: 03
    +11
    The name "BEST", any type of military equipment that has no real combat experience, jars the perception. Only the past tense can show (judge) what was better and what was not!
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 13: 16
    -9
    Quote: 0255
    If the Americans were sure that Russia is not able to destroy the Abrams and Bradleys, they would have attacked long ago.


    Yes, they are afraid of 100 Russian helicopters to hiccups and therefore do not attack. laughing
  • AvadraCedavra
    AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 13: 36
    -27%
    Quote: tomket
    in Libya, the Danish f-16 with a small amount of stuffed a huge amount of technology, even the British called them bloody, what will hurt ours ????


    Probably the lack of complete superiority in the air. lol
    Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).
    1. alexbg2
      alexbg2 8 February 2014 14: 09
      +11
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      ... in the case of large-scale hostilities), with the invasion of NATO, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

      You can’t even dream about this.
    2. sss5.papu
      sss5.papu 8 February 2014 14: 15
      -6
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

      Actually, I thought for 2-3 months.
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 8 February 2014 14: 47
      +5
      And all NATO countries within one day.
    4. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 15: 06
      +10
      considering that Libya did not find a sufficient number of Typhoon crews in Libya, and there were problems as spare parts, and there were huge problems in planning and choosing priority targets after the United States limited its participation in the conflict, so your NATO praises are not justified . I would say this - On the fifth day we will go to the English Channel, and this will not be far from the truth.
    5. alexbg2
      alexbg2 8 February 2014 16: 16
      +15
      Quote: AvadraCedavra

      Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

      Almost as Hitler counted ...
    6. Current 72
      Current 72 8 February 2014 22: 15
      +2
      Oh well !!! Let's try it !!! Will you take away the legs !!!
    7. edeligor
      edeligor 9 February 2014 10: 16
      +2
      Quote: AvadraCedavra
      Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

      Yes, agreed! I liked about NATO the most. They have higher combat readiness ?! I beg of you! Well, if suddenly this happens, then the whole world will come kirdyk. MAY NOT Doubt !!!
    8. Firstvanguard
      Firstvanguard 9 February 2014 17: 19
      +1
      Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

      This is already from the category desired, for the real. Hitler and Napoleon reasoned about the same way. Which in general clearly demonstrates your ideological affiliation.
      1. nightingale
        nightingale 9 February 2014 22: 31
        0
        Hitler with Napoleon
        reasoned about the same way.
        The situation is very critical.
        then the army was not reduced but increased many times. with great difficulty defeated them. they will now put 1000 new aircraft into the army; this should be 70 percent of the total. in Soviet times, the European theater of operations considered aviation losses to be 200 aircraft per day
        1. Firstvanguard
          Firstvanguard 13 February 2014 03: 13
          +1
          military operations, aviation losses amount to 200 aircraft per day

          yes, yes, yes, the chances of bringing down aircraft more than Soviet industry produced at that time wassat
          Where are the respected firewood?
  • sss5.papu
    sss5.papu 8 February 2014 14: 13
    -1
    The K-52 is not, in fact, an attack helicopter, but a commander-reconnaissance one. And the parallel crew placement speaks for itself. It is a modernization of the K-50 (with the participation of Israel). The main attack helicopter in Russia is the Mi-28, which is considered by the Americans as an enemy of the A-64, but not the K-52. The author simply threw another "sweet cake" for lovers of all his ...
  • kaktus
    kaktus 8 February 2014 14: 29
    +4
    "The Russian military-industrial complex ranks first in the world in terms of industry growth rates ..."
    well, from such a low start, after the collapse, still ... it remains to catch up with the 80s drinks
  • sataha666
    sataha666 8 February 2014 14: 40
    +5
    Guys, mine AvadraCedavra ordinary paid (and modet and free) Troll. Do not pay attention to it
    1. tomket
      tomket 8 February 2014 15: 19
      +3
      nuuu, you can annoy him by painting how the abrams will burn, the Americans howl in POW camps without Coke and wiping themselves with a newspaper, and the hounded LGBT people of France will shave half their heads with all these ghouls so that they can be seen from afar) as after the liberation of Paris )))
      1. AvadraCedavra
        AvadraCedavra 8 February 2014 17: 54
        -18%
        Rather, the opposite. The Russian army will continue to fall apart, the weapons left over from the USSR will become obsolete, military officials will continue to steal defense budget money, and conscript soldiers will engage in begging and prostitution.
        1. sss5.papu
          sss5.papu 8 February 2014 20: 46
          -13%
          Quote: AvadraCedavra
          Rather, the opposite. The Russian army will continue to fall apart, the weapons left over from the USSR will become obsolete, military officials will continue to steal defense budget money, and conscript soldiers will engage in begging and prostitution.

          All right! Toko many do not like the truth, especially if it does not suit them. And you will be in the cons all the time.
    2. atalef
      atalef 8 February 2014 15: 22
      -6
      Quote: sataha666
      Guys, mine AvadraCedavra ordinary paid (and modet and free) Troll. Do not pay attention to it

      And what to pay attention to?
      1. tomket
        tomket 8 February 2014 15: 49
        +5
        all released Apaches were part of the US Army, or scattered around the world?
      2. tomket
        tomket 8 February 2014 15: 51
        0
        By the way, as one American general said: "I don't want my grandchildren to fly the Apache of some 50th unit."
      3. sss5.papu
        sss5.papu 8 February 2014 20: 53
        -12%
        Quote: atalef
        And what to pay attention to?

        Yes, the K-50 is just a victim of an abortion - it has never been adopted for service. And how he was first praised: "... it has one crew member for two, not like the Apache!"
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 8 February 2014 23: 01
          0
          No need to lie. Adopted in 93.
          1. sss5.papu
            sss5.papu 9 February 2014 10: 35
            -5
            Quote: EvilLion
            No need to lie. Adopted in 93.

            why then it is not mass-produced? And how many have riveted in 20 years - honest, are you mine?
            1. EvilLion
              EvilLion 9 February 2014 14: 26
              +8
              My dear, for the same reason that neither Su-27M nor T-90 were produced in any significant quantities. So go away.
              1. sss5.papu
                sss5.papu 9 February 2014 16: 56
                -9
                So how do Mi-28s produce? Yes, and the T-90 about 2000 produced. And anger is a sign of powerlessness, I don’t know which one you have specifically ... but I guess dui- ... yours, mine!
                1. EvilLion
                  EvilLion 9 February 2014 18: 49
                  0
                  T-90 for the Russian army produced about 500 pcs. Of these, the EMNIP 300 is already T-90 from the 2000, and the first series are from the beginning of the 90, when they were still working by inertia.

                  Mi-29 ordered 97 pcs, Ka-52 minimum 140. So who doesn’t produce?
                  1. sss5.papu
                    sss5.papu 9 February 2014 19: 51
                    -5
                    Quote: EvilLion
                    T-90 for the Russian army produced about 500 pcs. Of these, the EMNIP 300 is already T-90 from the 2000, and the first series are from the beginning of the 90, when they were still working by inertia.

                    Mi-29 ordered 97 pcs, Ka-52 minimum 140. So who doesn’t produce?

                    Do not produce K-50 !!! Which, according to your data, was put into service already in 1993 !? Or do you have a phase shift - not remembering, are you mine?
      4. Michael_59
        Michael_59 8 February 2014 22: 49
        +5
        Sorry, the expectations of some who were waiting (and not only waiting, but also did a lot for this) did not live up to the promise that Russia would not make a single helicopter at all, and would drink and sell the rest from the USSR.
  • Leader
    Leader 8 February 2014 16: 23
    +2
    In order to characterize the K-52 helicopter as "the best attack helicopter in the world", it would be nice to give clear and confirmed results of combat work in some kind of military conflict.
    Spells in the press, flights on "Max" and beautiful pictures - for the kids.
    When, where and how did this helicopter differ? In the fight against whom or what? Who awarded him this title?
    Thanks in advance for the answers to the case.
  • patsantre
    patsantre 8 February 2014 16: 31
    +6
    Another one-sided advertising scribble, even funny to read. I do not dispute that the Ka-52 is a good helicopter, but using the word "best" is VERY BOLD in any case, and especially in relation to the Ka-52. A lot of the data is taken from the ceiling or from the wiki, but that's not even the point. If Oleg Kaptsov, promoting his opinion, looks convincing enough and argues his opinion well, then everything is very, very thick. Almost like trolling.
    What superiority of the Whirlwind over Hellfire-2 can we talk about if Hellfire-2 is the next generation rocket? The Apache pilot barely leaned out from behind the shelter, letting out several Hellfires at a time and hiding without a trace. The Ka-52 will hang, exposing itself under fire, launching a rocket one at a time, each pointing individually. Although the warhead of a Whirlwind is more powerful, Hellfire strikes a technique in a less protected horizontal projection.
    I won’t continue, mainly Apache’s superiority lies in its avionics, although it was mentioned above about its greater payload. I can only say that each helicopter has its own advantages, although, frankly, Apache’s capabilities are really impressive, and much of this 52 are not yet available. In addition, Apache is tested by time and military operations. Therefore, to call the Ka-52 better than Apache and the best in general is very stupid and inconspicuous.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 8 February 2014 17: 02
    +2
    "Kamov's handwriting" and the technology of two-axle vehicles (starting with KA-8, KA-10), developed over the decades, made it possible to create a truly correct combat helicopter. Of course, I would like to hear the assessment of the same Yankees competitors and "third specialists". There are no aircraft without "weak points". The question is how critical they are for combat use.
  • Watchman
    Watchman 8 February 2014 17: 49
    +1
    Great helicopter. If only he had fired and forgot the rockets, he wouldn't have had a price! And as for the fact that the Americans have only 2000 Abrams, then in my opinion it is necessary to look with apprehension at those who have thousands of tanks and millions of crews for them. A tank avalanche from China can only be stopped by joint efforts of the Ground Forces and the Air Force of the Russian Federation, and the Ka-52 should play an important role in this process.
  • Rash
    Rash 8 February 2014 18: 14
    +1
    Quote: sss5.papu
    The main attack helicopter in Russia adopted the Mi-28, which is considered by the Americans as the enemy of the A-64, but not the K-52. The author just threw another "sweet cake" for lovers of all his

    Threw guano on the Ka-52 blades! laughing
  • dmitry21
    dmitry21 8 February 2014 20: 17
    0
    Quote: AvadraCedavra
    Quote: tomket
    in Libya, the Danish f-16 with a small amount of stuffed a huge amount of technology, even the British called them bloody, what will hurt ours ????


    Probably the lack of complete superiority in the air. lol
    Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

    BlitzKrieg again? May be enough?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • melman
    melman 8 February 2014 22: 33
    0
    Why does the article not say about the "President-s" short-range air defense complex?
  • cesar65
    cesar65 8 February 2014 23: 20
    +1
    Quote: vtur
    There is nothing "great" about the Black Shark Movie. A low-budget film with a primitive plot, which is typical of the time when it was filmed. And the main character does not look like Tom Cruise at all ... :)
    Unfortunately, a good story about Ka-50 / 52 just does not occur. But to make a film of lemons for 50 greens about our helicopter pilots in Afghanistan, with good actors, full-scale shootings and a decent storyline - it would really be GREAT ...

    The film and the helicopter were unlucky in the collapse of the Union.
  • Duke
    Duke 9 February 2014 00: 27
    +1
    Quote: AvadraCedavra
    Given the state of the armed forces of the Russian Federation (complete non-combat readiness, in the case of large-scale hostilities), during the NATO invasion, the army of the Russian Federation will be destroyed within 2-3 days (this is even in a good situation).

    The Estonian "army" should apparently invade first?
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 9 February 2014 03: 07
    +2
    One of the most dangerous enemies of combat helicopters: the heavy machine gun. When firing at the blades, pulling out their pieces, it changes all the properties of the HB. So, the Mi-24 single-rotor helicopters in Afghanistan repeatedly returned from such situations to the base with one blade partially or completely torn out. "Ka" with twin propellers in such a situation is completely DOED - it enters the mode of uncompensated rotation directly over the battlefield with fatal consequences clear to all. The coaxial propeller, as already mentioned, is a well-balanced aerodynamically symmetrical system. Because of this, it is "easier to manage". The imbalance makes the system inoperable. For coaxial helicopters, in the event of combat damage to the blades, it is necessary to consider not the dynamics of the behavior of an isolated (damaged) main rotor, as in a single-rotor design, but the dynamics of a system of two main rotor.
    And this is not counting the fact that the “Ka” sticks up a meter upwards on the coaxial screw: the thrust is five times more than the affected area than the Mi-28NM, 8 times than the Mi-24VPI. One KPV bullet or 20mm shell in APNV traction - and a khan to a helicopter.
    According to the stories of helicopter pilots, the Mi-24 remained manageable even with the tail rotor completely shot off. At speeds above 200 km / h, the oncoming air pressure does not allow the tail boom to “overtake” the car and it can fly “in an airplane”, get to its native airfield and even sit down, as the pilots say, “with braking about the hangar”.
    "Ka-52" in case of damage to HB immediately die directly above the battlefield.
    1. Michael_59
      Michael_59 9 February 2014 09: 03
      +1
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      One KPV bullet or 20mm projectile in APNV traction


      + to you for identifying a vulnerability problem. However, not everything is so bad - the control rods of the swashplate remain active even if each of them has 2 holes from bullets of a heavy machine gun.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 9 February 2014 14: 39
      +2
      Oleg, do you generally understand that spontaneous left rotation occurs under the influence of a reactive moment? Shooting a blade does not seriously change the mass of the rotor, i.e., the rotation moment will be small. But the Mi-24 without a tail rotor just flies in a spiral to the ground, like any classic. Damage to the tail rotor is generally the main reason for the loss of helicopters in combat conditions.

      Well, actually, as it was in Chechnya:

      In one of the take-offs on January 6, 2001, the Ka-50 No.25 attacked a target detected by the Ka-29 helicopter with unguided missiles from extremely low altitude. Having completed the task, the pilot felt a vibration and decided to land at the Khankala airfield. After landing, inspection revealed damage to the tip of the blade fragments. The engineering staff of the damaged area was cut off and the helicopter flew to the airfield. After that, the “25 board” waited three weeks for a spare set of blades from Torzhok.


      That is, a spinner without a piece of blade with a violation of symmetry is completely controllable to itself, the loss of the endings is generally typical.
  • Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 9 February 2014 03: 08
    +1
    The K-52 helicopter has two screws. The probability of lesion of the lower lobe near 0,1 (10%). If the shell passed it, then in front of it the blades of the second screw !!!
    Thus, the probability of hitting screws with conventional air defense systems in a military battle with K-50 is two times higher than that of MI ... If it is strictly mathematical, then the probability is approximately 0,23-0,24 due to the distance between the planes of the screws - the point is that the projectile can hit only one upper blade passing above the bottom and not hooking it ...
    MI and K helicopters belong to machines with different types of blades. MI has a semi-rigid type, and K has a hard type ... The point is that during helicopter flight, the ends of the MI blades make flywheel movements that balance the helicopter over the entire speed range. When a fragment or bullet hits, the blade (dynamically moving) SAMA is rejected with minimal damage ...
    In helicopters of the coaxial scheme K, the blades do not swing movements, because they can chop each other, however, the speed characteristics of the helicopter increase, i.e. achieve greater speed at the same power.
    When a projectile or a large-caliber bullet hits, a rigid blade (it is not dynamic) is “forced to deviate” from the plane of rotation (like an elastic beam fixed at one end) and falls under the second blade rotating towards ...
    AFTER THIS HELICOPTER loses its qualities ... and handling ...
    The mass of the machine gun bullet and its momentum will not have a noticeable effect, but automatic guns and large-caliber machine guns are another matter.

    It turns out which side do not look, but coaxial helicopters cannot be released under fire - they are too vulnerable. As a Ka-52 attack helicopter, it turns out to be completely unsuitable.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 9 February 2014 14: 44
      +2
      Lord, yes, learn about the materiel, blades make flywheel movements on any helicopter, tossing up the classic blades will simply simply result in the demolition of the tail rotor, or even the cockpit.

      And do not write nonsense about high-speed qualities, just at the nipple, because of the high resistance of this column of screws, the resistance increases, so the Ka-60 / 62 whose task is to stupidly fly upright and fly at a cruising speed in a straight line and not a nipple. Hypothetical superhigh-speed helicopters will be coaxial for everyone, but for another reason, there is a problem in the speed of the blades, they begin to come out to supersonic. For the same reason, the Tu-95 ultra-high-speed screw is coaxial.
    2. alexbg2
      alexbg2 9 February 2014 16: 22
      +4
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      The K-52 helicopter has two screws. The probability of lesion of the lower lobe near 0,1 (10%). If the shell passed it, then in front of it the blades of the second screw !!!
      Thus, the probability of hitting screws with conventional air defense systems in a military battle with K-50 is two times higher than that of MI ... If it is strictly mathematical, then the probability is approximately 0,23-0,24 due to the distance between the planes of the screws - the point is that the projectile can hit only one upper blade passing above the bottom and not hooking it ...

      If you really want to, you can manipulate mathematics.
      If the blades are likely to be damaged, it can still take into account both the swept area of ​​the rotors and the number of blades. And in the Mi-28, to the equivalent in effect, also include the tail rotor blades + the drive of these blades and, accordingly, the areas occupied by them.
      It’s even harder to get into the Ka-52 throwing circle initially, because of the smaller diameter relative to the Mi-28, and only after that you can calculate the probability of defeat.
      PS I like both cars, I'm for honesty.
      1. Firstvanguard
        Firstvanguard 9 February 2014 17: 28
        0
        Plus, dear, you must also add that in a separate, upper or lower rotor, there are fewer blades than in the only classic.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 9 February 2014 19: 32
        0
        The area of ​​the blades themselves in the Ka-50 / 52 and Mi-28 is approximately the same.
  • shelva
    shelva 9 February 2014 06: 25
    +1
    As always !, the idea is magnificent, the car is cool, but execution is a brake, while the army is armed, new developments will appear.
  • loginovich
    loginovich 9 February 2014 07: 05
    +2
    And who appointed him the best?
  • Michael_59
    Michael_59 9 February 2014 08: 40
    0
    Interestingly, is it realistic to cover the axis and thrusts of the upper screw with armor?
  • Conepatus
    Conepatus 9 February 2014 12: 45
    -1
    Gone are the days when the best was fast and maneuverable. Now the radius of action and electronic filling come first.
    1. Firstvanguard
      Firstvanguard 9 February 2014 17: 30
      0
      Alas, not so simple.
  • andrey903
    andrey903 9 February 2014 13: 51
    -3
    At competitions abroad, it is removed immediately because it is knocked out of anything when firing at the gearbox, in addition to 3 tons of heavy Apache
    1. alexbg2
      alexbg2 9 February 2014 16: 39
      0
      Quote: andrey903
      At competitions abroad, it is removed immediately because it is knocked out of anything when firing at the gearbox, in addition to 3 tons of heavy Apache

      On single-rotor, the area occupied by the tail rotor drive and the tail rotor itself, hit from anything, is significantly larger than the added gearbox area with the coaxial design.
      The Mi-35 is more than 3 tons heavier than the Apache AH-64D, with weaker engines than the Ka-52, and when did this hinder sales?
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 9 February 2014 21: 35
        +1
        If the Ka-52 and Mi-28 were mature designs, then no one would buy the Mi-35.
  • Sfera
    Sfera 9 February 2014 14: 10
    +3
    AH-64s have been heavily deployed since the first day of the Iraq invasion in March 2003. For the first time, AH-64D modification machines were involved. In general, the Apaches confirmed their high reputation in this war. Difficulties arose mainly due to unsuccessful tactics of use, the most famous example of which was a raid against a brigade from the Medina Republican Guard division on March 24, 2003. During takeoff, one helicopter crashed. Faced with an unsuppressed and well-organized enemy air defense system, 30 of the 33 Apaches participating in the raid received combat damage. 1 helicopter was shot down, of the returned helicopters, only 7 remained flightable, 2 damaged were decommissioned. The crew of a downed helicopter was captured, and the helicopter was later destroyed by an air strike. The Apaches managed to knock out 12 Iraqi tanks. One of the Apache pilots miraculously managed to bring the car to the base after being wounded in the neck by a bullet from a Kalashnikov assault rifle, which pierced the helicopter’s armor. [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]

    With the start of the guerrilla war in Iraq, the loss of the AH-64 began to increase. The main reason for this is the unexpectedness of shelling from the ground, characteristic of a guerrilla war, especially during a flight over city blocks when it is impossible to determine where the fire is being fired from. The helicopter simply does not have time to make an anti-aircraft maneuver. In addition, the Apache armor is intended only for protection against fire from machine guns and, in part, from small-caliber anti-aircraft guns. Like any other helicopter, it is vulnerable to MANPADS missiles. In 2005, only 27 “Apaches” were lost in Iraq for military reasons only (see also Air Force Losses in the Iraq War).

    just the same super duper helicopter
  • michurinec
    michurinec 9 February 2014 23: 45
    0
    Finally, the KA-52 out of the category of just promising. In truth, he did not like the MI-28 due to the fact that he inserted sticks into the wheels of coaxial machines.
  • miihhan
    miihhan 10 February 2014 07: 27
    0
    Dear, is there any info about the Ka-50-2 "Erdogan"
  • Forest
    Forest 10 February 2014 15: 32
    0
    "because it is knocked out of anything when shooting at the gearbox" is a masterpiece of "expert critics." Whoever saw the HB gearbox of a helicopter will understand))).
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 10 February 2014 17: 14
    0
    It was originally planned to focus on mi28. One squadron per mi28 squadron. But then something went wrong with the MI 52 lobbyists and now it’s planned to have 28 more than MI 52, although 28 is much more expensive. By the way, this is one of the reasons why they do not buy it.
  • frame5
    frame5 11 February 2014 21: 45
    0
    An intercepted helicopter, it seems to me.
    A strange solution with a 30MM gun on its side (as they say in the center of mass, although it is even visually visible that the center of mass from the screw goes to the left of the gun, and therefore it should create a pushing moment when shooting). If you look at the video using Apaches, and many helicopters in general, you can see that they control the lower hemisphere, which is very convenient when patrolling and freezing when it is necessary to control threats and be on the lookout. The same MI-28 it can, it is also equipped with equipment for night flights and remote control turrets, and it is cheaper and easier to operate, but there is no Shark. Plus a textbook overlap of screws.
    For me, all else being equal, an attack helicopter MI-28 is more promising.
  • Baloo
    Baloo 11 August 2014 21: 31
    0
    I am not a pilot, but the events in Ukraine require active protection against missiles, something like an automatic multi-barrel machine gun, creating a kind of shield on the way of MANPADS or any other missile from any direction.