ZVO air base in the Pskov region has been replenished with two Mi-35

At the army airbase aviation in the Pskov region received two attack helicopters Mi-35, reports MIC with reference to the representative of the Western District Igor Muginov.

“The new combat vehicles went through all stages of factory inspections and tests, were adopted by the engineering staff of the air base. Currently, their active use has begun in the course of training activities, ”said Migunov.

According to the colonel, "along with the Mi-24 and Mi-8 helicopters, the new combat vehicles will perform tasks as part of flight tactical exercises, and will also be used in various tactical exercises from company to brigade level."

Migunov recalled that “Mi-35 helicopters are designed to destroy armored vehicles and manpower of a conventional enemy, fire support for motorized rifle and tank subunits, landing of troops, as well as transportation of goods in the cabin and on an external sling. "

The crew of the helicopter - 2 person, the number of seats for paratroopers - 8.

Comments

[dchegrinec]

Wet turned out MI-35 ... to modify! And so the machine is promising!

[Tanker55]

Comrade Colonel general I want to read. Thank you.

[dchegrinec]

From the flock "I am a helicopter pilot of units 1,2,3, XNUMX, XNUMX" were earlier. The pilot himself talked about each type of helicopter.

[Tanker55]

Thank you, of course, but if you yourself piloted this device, then it would be a plus. And thanks so much!

[dchegrinec]

We all, including you, rely on written materials. I believe it is not very correct not to trust a Russian pilot.

[Tanker55]

I have no reason not to trust our Soviet-Russian pilots, but when you read, or talk one on one, you ask, then it’s a completely different matter.
I myself sometimes sit down with friends and talk about Russian military equipment and I am pleased to talk about the T-72, BREM-1 battle tank.
Thanks for the dialogue. Plus!

[Ezhaak]

Quote: dchegrinec

Wet turned out MI-35 ... to modify!

Tell me, have you personally ever created something original and without subsequent alterations, in order to improve it? I suspect the answer: Never created anything.

[Dembel77]

"Mi-35 helicopters are designed to destroy armored vehicles and manpower conditional the adversary

Let real opponents not hope for a random (I hope) typo, according to them thirty fifths will work just fine too. Definitely!

[Nick]

Quote: dchegrinec

Wet turned out MI-35 ... to modify! And so the machine is promising!

What is the car damp? Mi-35 is one of the versions of the modernization of the famous Crocodile - Mi-24, which has been produced since 1971 of the year. Do you think that our engineers for 45 years have not managed to bring this helicopter to mind?

[dchegrinec]

They hit articles in three parts of a pilot who piloted all types of helicopters. His opinion is that the helicopter is a little worse in control than MI-24. It needs to be taxied all the time.

[Nick]

Quote: dchegrinec

They hit articles in three parts of a pilot who piloted all types of helicopters. His opinion is that the helicopter is a little worse in control than MI-24. It needs to be taxied all the time.

Let me link to the article

[Alexey-74]

not quite so, they are not damp. The Mi-24 is a legendary helicopter, and its 35th modernization, a bit more electronics, has become all-weather and it is possible to operate in the dark.

[klaus16]

The fact that 2 new boards came to the regiment is good. But this would be more pleasing: "In December, this regiment received 2 aircraft, in January 2 more are expected" "In the Southern Military District, in December, 3 vehicles were added to the 6rd regiment." And in that spirit. That is, you need more cars! I understand that not all at once, but still.

[remy]

Crocodile in the subject

[snc]

Only here in the photo is the imported version of the modernization ...

[Skifotavr]

Quote: Alexey-74

not quite so, they are not damp. The Mi-24 is a legendary helicopter, and its 35th modernization, a bit more electronics, has become all-weather and it is possible to operate in the dark.

Modernization can also be damp. By the way, the full name of this helicopter is Mi-35M.

[Sura]

MI-24 has been finalizing all of Avgan’s 8 years, KB representatives lived in combat units, and this will be finalized, and it won’t go anywhere.

[Lex69Rus]

What is promising then? Based on the obsolete Mi-24. This is not promising, but transitional, between the 24th and 28th. But in fact, neither fish nor meat. And not a full Mi-24 and not a Mi-28. Our command continues to suffer from inconsistency, purchasing at the same time 3 attack helicopters.

[Teberii]

Great car, a good decision to modernize and use as directed.

[oldav]

Why do they continue to produce them? There are already Ka-52 and Mi-28.

[Stanislav 1978]

Quote: oldav

Why do they continue to produce them? There are already Ka-52 and Mi-28.

Ka-52 and Mi-28 are purely attack helicopters, Mi-35 attack-transport helicopters, landing reconnaissance groups, participating in rescue operations, evacuating the wounded. Mi-35 goes to replace the Mi-24.

[oldav]

I especially do not remember the cases when it was used as an airborne evacuation. With these and mi-8 is not bad at coping. I just do not understand why produce several types of machines for the same purpose?

[Teberii]

In Chechnya, in Afghanistan. Mi-8 and its modifications are poorly protected, so it’s more realistic to use the Mi-35 on the battlefield.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Teberii

In Chechnya, in Afghanistan.

In Chechnya and Afghanistan, Mi-8s were used as airborne evacuation vehicles. Mi-24s mainly worked undercover.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: oldav

I just do not understand why produce several types of machines for the same purpose?

The order for the Mi-35 was issued when the Ka-52 and Mi-28 were even more raw than now. In those days, the secluded this couple did not have BKO and could not fire guided missiles. Now, EMNIP, the problems are only with NAR.

[Alexey-74]

so precisely such turntables are simply necessary

[Alexey RA]

Quote: oldav

Why do they continue to produce them? There are already Ka-52 and Mi-28.

Because both of these cars are still raw. Denis Mokrushin recently had an interview with a helicopter pilot:

- What would you like to modify or additionally have on the Mi-28H?

- Hmm ... Probably, to just cure all childhood diseases of the machine. The helicopter from series to series is becoming more reliable, but I would like it to be completed more efficiently. For example, there used to be a problem with gearboxes. Very warm, there was a bad airflow, poor cooling of the oil. Finished. Overheated ceased.

[oldav]

Cars are 35 years old and are they raw ??

[Alexey RA]

Quote: oldav

Cars are 35 years old and are they raw ??

For 35 years, there are only prototypes flying on big holidays and piloted and serviced by specialists of design bureaus and factories.
Serial vehicles in combat units, which are operated much more often and which are piloted and serviced by the army, always in the first few years demonstrate a whole bunch of glitches and bugs.
In addition, during the development of machines, their avionics changed several times. And he has the same problems: we can lick prototypes, but immediately make a glitch-free series - no.

[Igor39]

"The crew of the helicopter is 2 people, the number of seats for paratroopers is 8."
He flew in Mi 24, seven men barely climbed, after 30 minutes of flight, barely straightened his legs, despite the fact that we were without weapons.

[Tanker55]

I assure you Igor39, in combat conditions, in order to quickly leave the battlefield, this unit will enter more than expected (I'm not sure, but it entered the T-72).

[Igor39]

In Mi 35, the wings were cut, the number of pylons was reduced to two, thereby reducing the wing area, the article was and the pilot said that the Mi 35 is less stable at the rate than the Mi 24, which was confidently walking, it’s possible to put it there, but it’s a bit much even for Mi 24.

[Igor39]

Minus is not mine, I will raise your rating))))

[Tanker55]

Less more, less less! The truth is the matter, and it is born only in dialogues and disputes.
Thanks Igor 39.

[Tanker55]

Quote: Tankman55

I assure you Igor39, in combat conditions, in order to quickly leave the battlefield, this unit will enter more than expected (I'm not sure, but it entered the T-72).

Thank you for the minus. And if you need, how many passengers enter your car? I suggest you conduct an experiment.

[KBR109]

I can tell you quite reliably that INSIDE BTR-70 28 people enter and the car is quite capable of completing at least 50 km. march then.

[Vadya718]

It is about the BTR-70. I don’t know about 28 people, but we - 2 squads (22 soldiers), apart from the driver and commander, our armored personnel carrier took out normally. Yes, it was a bit crowded, but tolerant, especially in conditions close to military ones (exercises).

[Al_oriso]

While we have an insufficient number of helicopters, such events are certainly encouraging.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

It would be much more logical to modernize the Mi-24 armed with modern weapons.

And get as a result of this modernization ... Mi-35.
In addition, what is the service life of those in service with the Mi-24? It seems to me that for the most part they still remember the USSR. It’s better to have new Mi-35s than pour new wine into dilapidated bellows.

In general, the name "Mi-35" only confuses everyone. For some reason, most people consider him a new model. Although in reality it is the Mi-24VP-M or VM.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

If, as a result of the modernization of the Mi-24, the Mi-35 is obtained, God forbid. But it will be a modernization of the combat machines already in service, the resource of which is far from exhausted.

I'm afraid that the cost of this modernization will approach the cost of a new helicopter. Kapitalka hull, engines and transmissions, a complete replacement of electrics and electronics, a new chassis and wing ...
It’s not the indestructible T-72s, which were produced so much that you can find hundreds of vehicles (relatively intact and with a low consumption of resources) in the warehouses for conversion into the T-72B3. A helicopter is a delicate and fragile thing, and it does not withstand long storage in our conditions. And only combat machines, which often have already passed two Chechnya, remain for modernization.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

Aleksey, after all, both the hull, the engines, and the transmission are all the same necessary because capital is necessary, technology is technology. It is better not to touch the wing and chassis at all. It turned out to be too dubious an innovation on the Mi-35. The short wing and fixed landing gear really make the LTX worse. Well, avionics, yes, I need to change.

As a result of such modernization, we get a new avionics and new engines in a practically new building. Isn’t it easier to immediately build a new helicopter?
Fixed gear worsens aerodynamics. But it increases safety. And most importantly - it gives a gain in weight of 90 kg.
As for the wing, it, EMNIP, gives a win only at high speeds. And on small ones - on the contrary, the car "zazhelyatsya", falling under the stream thrown by the rotor (pomnitsa, when designing the Mi-26, the wings were thrown out altogether, based on similar problems on its predecessor, the Mi-6). In addition, after all the upgrades, the original Mi-24 has grown so heavy that the designers are fighting for almost every kilogram. So the wing was cut off (I generally have a suspicion that if the Mi-35 had been left with the old wing, then it would not have taken off when all 6 points were loaded).

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

Both have problems with take-off, as well as hanging. That of the 24th, that of the 35th. I didn’t believe it until I realized that the Mi-24 was taking off from the front landing gear.

So this is standard practice since the days of Afghanistan.

Vertical take-off in conditions where the helicopter "barely carried itself" was almost never used. From the runway, they usually climbed like an airplane, with a 100-150-meter take-off run. According to the LII technique, an even more radical method of takeoff with a takeoff run only on the front wheels was mastered. At the same time, the car tilted forward 10-12 degrees vigorously accelerated and took off from the ground twice as fast, and the starting weight could be increased by 1000-1500 kg. However, this method required a refined piloting technique. In November 1986, in Bagram, during an emergency flight, the pilot started the run right from the parking lot and, striking his blades on concrete, went on a mission with wingtips bent up. He did not dare to return back under the squeal of a mutilated propeller, sat down in the field and there he waited for the repair team.

However, they did not invent a methodology for such a take-off from scratch - until Afghanistan such a take-off was a regular take-off for heavy helicopters.

According to the methodology adopted in the Soviet Air Force, take-off on heavy helicopters was carried out with a small take-off, and landing with a small mileage, which required a runway with a length of at least 350 m and withstanding certain glide path characteristics. It was far from always possible to comply with all these rules, and more or less suitable landing sites were used to receive the Mi-6.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

Aleksey, your question is, isn’t it easier than bothering with the modernization of the old T-72s to launch the new T-72B3s in a series? Not T-90MS, namely 72B3? The analogy is straightforward.

Nope. And you know why? Because the armored hull, suspension and cannon of the tank are much more tenacious and indestructible than the body of the helicopter.
For the tank, you can take the T-72B from storage, take out the inside and sandblast the hull to remove rust. For it takes another 100-150 years for the body to rust to a loss of strength.
But in the case of a helicopter, you will have to carefully check the entire set and casing.

Quote from rudolf

And with the old Mi-24s, what do you propose doing? Write off scrap as unnecessary? And then what will we stay with?

If the resource is knocked out so much that modernization is reduced to transferring the nameplates and plates to a virtually new helicopter, then such a machine should be sent only for decommissioning. The rest should be exploited until the resource is exhausted. Alas, we do not have stock reserves of zero or slightly curb Mi-24.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from rudolf

Alas, Alexei, I understand your logic, but not this logic, the 35th is obliged to be adopted. I repeat, we should not have it. The new version of the Mi-24, designed exclusively for export. Only problems with the development of the Mi-28 were the cause. Well, the lack of UB Mi-28N. In any case, the official version was voiced like that. Temporary need and nothing more.

And that too.
On the one hand, we had "raw" Mi-28 and Ka-52 with long terms of development in units.
On the other hand, the high cost of modernizing the existing Mi-24 fleet and its considerable "killed off" by 20 years of operation without planned replacement or with replacement in homeopathic quantities.
With the third - Mi-35, mass-produced for a foreign customer.

In short, the domestic Mi-35 is a typical order of the times of the furniture maker. When there was no longer time to wait for the wunderwaffe from the domestic industry (the army risked remaining generally "horseless"), they began to order mass-produced export equipment for their army. So we got the Mi-35, 11356, 636.3, two modifications of the Su-30 ...

[Lex69Rus]

Moreover, I believe that helicopters no longer play the first violin. The use of helicopters as it now carries a huge risk of losing both an expensive machine and most importantly the life of a pilot. Today's war belongs to universal aircraft with high-precision weapons, with advanced detection systems. Impact drones also play an increasingly important role. Helicopters are necessary either to destroy lightly armed formations or, again, to destroy enemy equipment with high-precision weapons, from distances inaccessible for enemy defeat. IMHO is too large a number, and judging by the purchases of other countries with the exception of the United States, nobody buys hundreds of helicopters. In our realities, 200-300 modern attack helicopters will be enough. For reference, we now have 200 mi-24s and the same total of mi-35 28ok and ka-52. Total more than 400. In Syria, for example, only 12 helicopters are involved, and no 28oks and ka-52s. Obviously, for a local conflict, several 10k helicopters will be enough.

[Avis24]

Mi-35 is damp. Like the Mi-28 and Ka-52. Bring to mind do not hesitate. Over the past 3-4 years, much has been done. With a creak with scandals and obscenities, but they do. On the Mi-35, the supporting system is composite, lighter. And this greatly affects the features of piloting. There are pilots who fly with great pleasure on the Mi-28 than on the 35th. They say shaking too. So the aerodynamic layout, when considering the mutual influence of structural elements, a serious thing. There is a lot of evidence in the birth stories of aircraft.

[Black Colonel]

"... Mi-35 helicopters are designed to destroy armored vehicles and manpower conditional adversary..."
It’s somehow strange to read.