Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 4016
    Points : 4006
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Isos on Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:40 pm

    Ka-52 is better and cheaper. That's logical. Mi-28 have serious issues as all the crashes in last years showed.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3896
    Points : 3876
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:12 pm

    Plus Ka-52 avionics we're better too.

    Too bad about Mi-28 but I have a feeling Mil will go back to negotiations when they are not getting the contracts they expect.

    Its good to know the Russian mod won't simply roll over and accept whatever the defense companies demand.

    They should get more.Mi-35's too.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 4016
    Points : 4006
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Isos on Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:28 pm

    Mi-35 and ka 52 is enough. Mi-28 brings nothing new, only more maintenance difficulties as they share nothing in common. Even the atgm are different.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3896
    Points : 3876
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:39 pm

    Isos wrote:Mi-35 and ka 52 is enough. Mi-28 brings nothing new, only more maintenance difficulties as they share nothing in common. Even the atgm are different.

    IMHO the Mi-28 just kind of tried to be the Ka-52 and Mi-24 but ended up not being better than either of the two in their rolls. Mi-24/35 compliments the Ka-52 and vice versa. Ka-52 being in production a long time, and already has much better avionics like its thermal systems and its radar, while being cheaper is an insult overall that Mil is trying to screw the MoD.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2333
    Points : 2331
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole on Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:12 pm

    Mi-28N was in production before the Ka-52.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1624
    Points : 1626
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:12 am

    The managers of these state-owned companies need to understand that the reason for their existence is to produce the weapons that the Russian state needs at the best possible prices and to build them to meet specification and schedule. Anything else is simply corruption. Mad Mad

    It seems the execs at Russian Helicopters think they are running a Western privately-owned MIC conglomerate and that the enrichment of the shareholders at the public expense is their primary purpose. Sorry boys, but no big bonuses for you...Twisted Evil
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5283
    Points : 5436
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:11 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:The managers of these state-owned companies need to understand that the reason for their existence is to produce the weapons that the Russian state needs at the best possible prices and to build them to meet specification and schedule.  Anything else is simply corruption. Mad Mad

    It seems the execs at Russian Helicopters think they are running a Western privately-owned MIC conglomerate and that the enrichment of the shareholders at the public expense is their primary purpose.  Sorry boys, but no big bonuses for you...Twisted Evil

    The problem lies in the fact that they are 'Joint-Stock' companies, meaning partially privatized, meaning groveling at the feat of shareholders...hardly a mechanism of efficiency. Nowhere more evident is the partially-privatized naval industry, which is out to nickel-and-dime as opposed to being efficient in any shape or form. Time to buy back the shares of under-performing MIC design bureaus, and come under complete govt. control. Once under full govt. control, they should sell to the govt. equipment at cost (because they exist because of govt. funding anyway), and any profits made should be from exports.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3896
    Points : 3876
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:40 am

    That's almost the case now.

    And to be honest, at least now these companies are forced to either make adjustments or lose sales entirely which then screws their bottom line anyway.

    Mi-28 was rather underperforming compared to Ka-52. Ka-52 is by all means a superior aircraft. If it's cheaper, that makes it even better. Mi-35's on other hand are also cheap and super effective. So yeah.

    I guarantee you the company will come back to try and propose a compromise with the MoD. Cause no one else is interested in the Mi-28 to be honest for obvious reasons
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:07 am

    Interesting price negotiation technique they have there...

    Ka-52 is better and cheaper. That's logical. Mi-28 have serious issues as all the crashes in last years showed.

    Say what?

    If the Ka-52 was better and cheaper then why is there an Mi-28NM being developed?

    The Ka-50 was seriously more expensive than the Mi-28A, and I doubt newer models have changed this situation...

    The Mi-28 has lots of commonality with the Mi-24 and Mi-35 with new components of the Mi-28 being retrofitted to older models as upgrades to improve performance and commonality across the range.

    Kamov makes naval helos... the only other Kamov type operated by the Army is the Ka-31/35 AEW type.

    Plus Ka-52 avionics we're better too.

    Which is largely why they were much more expensive... the Su-39TM didn't go ahead because of the cost of the Shkval-M EO system it carried... which was directly related to the Shkval-M system in the Hokum.

    Too bad about Mi-28 but I have a feeling Mil will go back to negotiations when they are not getting the contracts they expect.

    They clearly need to talk about costs and production and options to better finance improvements so they don't drive costs up so much...

    Mi-35 and ka 52 is enough. Mi-28 brings nothing new, only more maintenance difficulties as they share nothing in common. Even the atgm are different.

    True, but the other way around... the Hind and the Havoc share many components... more so with Hind upgrades with Havoc parts.... there are only the bare essentials in common regarding the Hokum.

    It seems the execs at Russian Helicopters think they are running a Western privately-owned MIC conglomerate and that the enrichment of the shareholders at the public expense is their primary purpose. Sorry boys, but no big bonuses for you..

    Well that could be one inference, but it seems to me that the military is playing hardball and outing them in the media about the costs to try to shame them to shift on their position... we know the Russian military is used to getting simple functional systems cheap and in large numbers... the Mi-28NM is supposed to have helmet mounted sights and all sorts of new flash capabilities... that does not come for free...

    The problem lies in the fact that they are 'Joint-Stock' companies, meaning partially privatized, meaning groveling at the feat of shareholders...hardly a mechanism of efficiency. Nowhere more evident is the partially-privatized naval industry, which is out to nickel-and-dime as opposed to being efficient in any shape or form. Time to buy back the shares of under-performing MIC design bureaus, and come under complete govt. control. Once under full govt. control, they should sell to the govt. equipment at cost (because they exist because of govt. funding anyway), and any profits made should be from exports.

    I don't disagree, but brand new technology costs money and new stuff is always more expensive when you first get it... they wanted an improved design and they got it but now they are choking on the bill...

    Mi-28 was rather underperforming compared to Ka-52. Ka-52 is by all means a superior aircraft. If it's cheaper, that makes it even better. Mi-35's on other hand are also cheap and super effective. So yeah.

    A few assumption in there... they adopted the Mi-28N as their standard attack helo, while the much more expensive Ka-52 is for a recon role... in many ways the Mi-28N is the Apache and the Ka-52 is a non stealthy Commanche in this scenario... the Ka-52 certainly wont be cheap by any standards...

    BTW complaints about it being more expensive... the difference between the Mi-28N and the Mi-28NM is the latter has 360 degree air to air radar and front 120 degree air to ground MMW radar... of course that is going to be cheap.... BTW did you know that the radar on the Apache D model is also very expensive and only one in four Apache D model helicopters is fitted with a radar... because having every helo with a radar was too expensive for the Americans...

    The Algerians and Iraqis seem happy with their Havocs... how many countries apart from Egypt with their Mistral carriers will buy Hokums?


    Last edited by GarryB on Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:34 am; edited 1 time in total
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 218
    Points : 224
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  marcellogo on Fri Feb 22, 2019 10:57 am

    They talk about retrofitting existing Mi-28 to bring them to MN standard instead of buildind new ones: so they will not get rid of the model at all, probably the initial idea was to refit them anyway + acquiring a batch of new ones but maybe such a solution just turned out to be non-economically convenient in front of just ordering a comparable number of Ka-52 coming from a already functioning serial assembly line.
    It could be also a good news about the actual state of army aviation and generally speaking of all VKS: no more need to order a whole array of overlapping items from all possible producers in order to both reach a viable percentage of updated aircraft a.s.a.p. than to keep a decaying industrial base afloat but instead the possibility to go for the more convenient choices, either economical, operative or logistical.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2333
    Points : 2331
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole on Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:26 pm

    Russian Helicopters is 100% owned by Rostec.

    Joint-stock company is just a legal term. It doesn´t mean that a company is partly owned by private shareholders.

    Both the Mi-28N and the Ka-52 cost roughly the same - 15 to 16 Mio. $.

    The MoD had no problem to buy Mi-28UB´s which are fitted with a mast-mounted radar. The only difference of the Mi-28NM are the new optics and a few equipment items internaly. The prize tag couldn´t be that different.

    In the end it´s a zero sum game. Either the MoD pays the demanded prize and the company can make a profit and grow naturaly or it pays less and the company will need subsidies or cheap loans from the state.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:14 am

    They talk about retrofitting existing Mi-28 to bring them to MN standard instead of buildind new ones: so they will not get rid of the model at all, probably the initial idea was to refit them anyway + acquiring a batch of new ones but maybe such a solution just turned out to be non-economically convenient in front of just ordering a comparable number of Ka-52 coming from a already functioning serial assembly line.

    The Mi-28s entered service into units with Mi-24 and Mi-35s and are attack helicopters.

    As the older helos get upgrades with Mil parts their commonality increases...

    The Hokums in service are in recon units... are you suggesting they withdraw all the Mi-28s and replace them with Ka-52s... there is zero commonality between the Ka-52 and old, new and upgraded model Hinds...

    I would suggest they will bitch and moan and reduce the number of airframes they upgrade and new aircraft they buy and spread it over a longer period to reduce costs... like they normally do in such situations.

    It could be also a good news about the actual state of army aviation and generally speaking of all VKS: no more need to order a whole array of overlapping items from all possible producers in order to both reach a viable percentage of updated aircraft a.s.a.p. than to keep a decaying industrial base afloat but instead the possibility to go for the more convenient choices, either economical, operative or logistical.

    Actually if any company is being protected here it is Kamov... the Indians are about to start making Ka-225Ts, and the Egyptians are getting Ka-52Ks for their Mistrals but otherwise they are not exporting very much at all... in comparison Mil are selling Hips and Hinds and Havocs all round the place and are now making Mi-38s... not to mention joint ventures with China on their new helo and of course the Mi-26 and of course the new high speed projects as well...


    Both the Mi-28N and the Ka-52 cost roughly the same - 15 to 16 Mio. $.

    Yeah... nah...

    In 2013, the AAC "Progress" has completed the contract with the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, signed in 2009, and would begin the next long-term contract for supplying 143 Ka-52, worth about 120 billion rubles (≈US$3.5 bln)

    3.5 billion divided by 143 gives us about $25 million per aircraft... which sounds about right...

    On wiki it has 15-16 million per aircraft, but that is for the Ka-50/Ka-52... which I rather suspect is the former of the two rather than the latter as it has air and ground search radar as well as modern advanced EO systems and self defence suites that will not be cheap.

    The wiki page for the Mi-28N also says 15-16 million each, but how many Mi-28Ns are there really?

    Technically the Mi-28N has a mast mounted radar and upgraded EO systems for night and all weather capability... most in service Mi-28s look like they have the EO systems in the nose mounted balls but no mast mounted radar... pretty much making them a half way house between the daylight fair weather only Mi-28A and the night and all weather Mi-28N...

    Personally I would think the Havocs with night and all weather EO but no radar would be 15-16 million each, the full Mi-28N would be 18-20 million each and these new Mi-28NMs are probably coming in at the same price as the expensive but capable Ka-52s at 25-26 million each or thereabouts.

    I suspect their final solution will be the same as used in the US for their Apaches... the vast majority will be upgraded with all systems bar the expensive radar at about 18 million each or perhaps slightly less, and one or two in each flight will be the full standard more expensive model with radar and full systems... they can share target data so the one with the radar always gets the job of popping up to find targets and to hand off target data to the other aircraft in the attack...

    The Hokum could do that for some time and could also communicate target information to HQ and ground forces including forward observers and other helos in its flight... hope they have implemented that in the new Havocs... it seems all Russian platforms are getting this sort of capability.


    The MoD had no problem to buy Mi-28UB´s which are fitted with a mast-mounted radar. The only difference of the Mi-28NM are the new optics and a few equipment items internaly. The prize tag couldn´t be that different.

    My understanding is that it is a serious upgrade including AI assisted targeting and helmet mounted sights with rather more than just a blinking cursor in them...

    This new type has completely upgraded the fire control and navigation and communications systems...

    As I mentioned above they might be upset by the price but all they can really do is change the ratio of new and upgraded models they buy and extend the period over which they buy them...
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:15 am

    Perhaps they should get some to Syria as soon as possible and work out any kinks and then send some to India to see if they want to change their mind regarding buying Ah-64s and their special relationship with the US...
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 218
    Points : 224
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  marcellogo on Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:41 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    They talk about retrofitting existing Mi-28 to bring them to MN standard instead of buildind new ones: so they will not get rid of the model at all, probably the initial idea was to refit them anyway + acquiring a batch of new ones but maybe such a solution just turned out to be non-economically convenient in front of just ordering a comparable number of Ka-52 coming from a already functioning serial assembly line.

    The Mi-28s entered service into units with Mi-24 and Mi-35s and are attack helicopters.

    As the older helos get upgrades with Mil parts their commonality increases...

    The Hokums in service are in recon units... are you suggesting they withdraw all the Mi-28s and replace them with Ka-52s... there is zero commonality between the Ka-52 and old, new and upgraded model Hinds...

    I would suggest they will bitch and moan and reduce the number of airframes they upgrade and new aircraft they buy and spread it over a longer period to reduce costs... like they normally do in such situations.

    It could be also a good news about the actual state of army aviation and generally speaking of all VKS: no more need to order a whole array of overlapping items from all possible producers in order to both reach a viable percentage of updated aircraft a.s.a.p. than to keep a decaying industrial base afloat but instead the possibility to go for the more convenient choices, either economical, operative or logistical.

    Actually if any company is being protected here it is Kamov... the Indians are about to start making Ka-225Ts, and the Egyptians are getting Ka-52Ks for their Mistrals but otherwise they are not exporting very much at all... in comparison Mil are selling Hips and Hinds and Havocs all round the place and are now making Mi-38s... not to mention joint ventures with China on their new helo and of course the Mi-26 and of course the new high speed projects as well...


    Both the Mi-28N and the Ka-52 cost roughly the same - 15 to 16 Mio. $.

    Yeah... nah...

    In 2013, the AAC "Progress" has completed the contract with the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, signed in 2009, and would begin the next long-term contract for supplying 143 Ka-52, worth about 120 billion rubles (≈US$3.5 bln)

    3.5 billion divided by 143 gives us about $25 million per aircraft... which sounds about right...

    On wiki it has 15-16 million per aircraft, but that is for the Ka-50/Ka-52... which I rather suspect is the former of the two rather than the latter as it has air and ground search radar as well as modern advanced EO systems and self defence suites that will not be cheap.

    The wiki page for the Mi-28N also says 15-16 million each, but how many Mi-28Ns are there really?

    Technically the Mi-28N has a mast mounted radar and upgraded EO systems for night and all weather capability... most in service Mi-28s look like they have the EO systems in the nose mounted balls but no mast mounted radar... pretty much making them a half way house between the daylight fair weather only Mi-28A and the night and all weather Mi-28N...

    Personally I would think the Havocs with night and all weather EO but no radar would be 15-16 million each, the full Mi-28N would be 18-20 million each and these new Mi-28NMs are probably coming in at the same price as the expensive but capable Ka-52s at 25-26 million each or thereabouts.

    I suspect their final solution will be the same as used in the US for their Apaches... the vast majority will be upgraded with all systems bar the expensive radar at about 18 million each or perhaps slightly less, and one or two in each flight will be the full standard more expensive model with radar and full systems... they can share target data so the one with the radar always gets the job of popping up to find targets and to hand off target data to the other aircraft in the attack...

    The Hokum could do that for some time and could also communicate target information to HQ and ground forces including forward observers and other helos in its flight... hope they have implemented that in the new Havocs... it seems all Russian platforms are getting this sort of capability.


    The MoD had no problem to buy Mi-28UB´s which are fitted with a mast-mounted radar. The only difference of the Mi-28NM are the new optics and a few equipment items internaly. The prize tag couldn´t be that different.

    My understanding is that it is a serious upgrade including AI assisted targeting and helmet mounted sights with rather more than just a blinking cursor in them...

    This new type has completely upgraded the fire control and navigation and communications systems...

    As I mentioned above they might be upset by the price but all they can really do is change the ratio of new and upgraded models they buy and extend the period over which they buy them...

    Noo! What have you (mis-)understood, Garry?
    I have said that they will update existing Mi-28 to a NM like standard and they would produce Ka-52 instead of + acquiring a (limited) batch of new (Mi-28NM) ones, not any substitution of already existing items.

    And not, it's not a question of protection in this case: it's just Mi-28NM being a totally new product would require to set up a new or almost modify an already existing assembly line (and this would mean adding additional costs and loss of time) while Ka-52 is actually already in production so they would just need to put their own order in queue (or just add a working shift, if the actual line is not working at 100% capability).
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2333
    Points : 2331
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole on Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:14 pm

    Its just the typical blackmailing.

    So the Mi-28NM is to expensive.
    There are rumours that the VKS is still buing some Mi-35M´s a year.
    And the VDV wants an new armored transport helicopter.

    A solution could be the ressurection of the Mi-40 program = a Mi-28 with troop cabin like Mi-24/-35. Fit it with the systems of the Mi-28NM and you got a helicopter with the same sensor and weapons capabilities like the Mi-28NM and the capacity to transport 8 soldiers. VKS can skip the Mi-28NM and stop buying Mi-35M´s and no need for a special development program for a special helicopter for the VDV.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:05 am

    Noo! What have you (mis-)understood, Garry?
    I have said that they will update existing Mi-28 to a NM like standard and they would produce Ka-52 instead of + acquiring a (limited) batch of new (Mi-28NM) ones, not any substitution of already existing items.

    They are using the Mi-28s and Hinds as attack helos and Ka-52s as recon helos.

    If you are trying to say they will buy Ka-52s instead of new Mi-28NMs and just upgrade existing Mi-28s to NM standard then you are suggesting they use mixed brigades of Ka-52s, Mi-28NMs, and upgraded Hinds as attack helos...

    Sounds a bit strange to me.

    And not, it's not a question of protection in this case: it's just Mi-28NM being a totally new product would require to set up a new or almost modify an already existing assembly line (and this would mean adding additional costs and loss of time) while Ka-52 is actually already in production so they would just need to put their own order in queue (or just add a working shift, if the actual line is not working at 100% capability).

    They are making Mi-28s for Algeria and Iraq... so why would there not be a production line able to produce the aircraft they need?

    A solution could be the ressurection of the Mi-40 program = a Mi-28 with troop cabin like Mi-24/-35. Fit it with the systems of the Mi-28NM and you got a helicopter with the same sensor and weapons capabilities like the Mi-28NM and the capacity to transport 8 soldiers. VKS can skip the Mi-28NM and stop buying Mi-35M´s and no need for a special development program for a special helicopter for the VDV.

    The reason they went to the Mi-28 design was because they found that combining designs of transport and attack helos was not enormously successful.

    Sitting on the ground while people get out is dangerous, and it makes more sense to put people in a transport like an Mi-8 or Mi-17 where they can get out the sides and the rear because the faster they get out or get in the better in terms of transport helos... for an attack helo not being on the ground is the best solution because it renders even the most capable attack helo a sitting duck...

    The only improvement I could see would be that with a rear ramp door you could have a rear facing gun and optics... these days you could use lightweight ceramic armour for use against small arms and DIRCMS for use against guided weapons but there is always the threat of ATGMs and of course unguided rockets like RPGs.

    I would suggest they just harden up and buy the damn things...
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2333
    Points : 2331
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole on Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:26 am

    Mi-40 came after Mi-28.

    If the VKS or VDS didn´t want this feature or it was´t so successful the woudln´t purchase the Mi-35.

    The Mi-35 is like a BMP-2, the Mi-40 (or however they would call it) would be like a T-15.
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 218
    Points : 224
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  marcellogo on Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:10 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    They are using the Mi-28s and Hinds as attack helos and Ka-52s as recon helos.

    If you are trying to say they will buy Ka-52s instead of new Mi-28NMs and just upgrade existing Mi-28s to NM standard then you are suggesting they use mixed brigades of Ka-52s, Mi-28NMs, and upgraded Hinds as attack helos...
    -
    Sounds a bit strange to me.
    -

    They are making Mi-28s for Algeria and Iraq... so why would there not be a production line able to produce the aircraft they need?

    Still much less strange that the one you tough I have originally proposed, so I replied to clarify the point.

    I give there for sure that they would improve Mi-28A and N to a standard comparable to the one of NM i.e. put state of the art seekers, ECM and comm on them independently from the fact that they would order NM or Ka-52.

    Yes, they are producing Mi-28 for Algeria and Iraq and Ka-52 for Egypt but in the first case they are not NM for sure.
    Can they switch into producing them without added cost and time or they need to wait these order to be completed and after that to stop and modify the serial assembly line? Price and time to deliver would be way greater in the latter case.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4913
    Points : 4943
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:39 pm

    GarryB wrote: The reason they went to the Mi-28 design was because they found that combining designs of transport and attack helos was not enormously successful.

    it was technically, just then Russians switched to US concept. Which wasnt really suitable for VDV as we can see now,

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Thhfht2224


    GB wrote: Sitting on the ground while people get out is dangerous, and it makes more sense to put people in a transport like an Mi-8 or Mi-17 where they can get out the sides and the rear because the faster they get out or get in the better in terms of transport helos... for an attack helo not being on the ground is the best solution because it renders even the most capable attack helo a sitting duck...


    Would you suggest that is it better to use un-armored trucks not IVFs to deliver/support troops on battlefield?



    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2333
    Points : 2331
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 43
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole on Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:37 pm

    Look, a successor for the Mi-35 based on the already tested Mi-28NM would mid-term save a lot of money.

    No purchase of Mi-28NM and Mi-35
    No develpment of a special helicopter for VDV

    The Mi-XX (Mi-40?) could be used as

    - "simple" attack helicopter for CAS and AT
    - transportation of soldiers/Special Forces for Army/VKS/VDV/Navy
    - CSAR
    - MEDEVAC
    - transportation of freight, even additional ammunition/rockets/missiles for the CAS/AT roles

    Development of special versions (flying command post, EW and so on) would be possible.

    But in the end it doesn´t matter. At MAKS both sides will find a compromise (= the ministry of economy and trade will subsidize the purchase with a loan to the company) and the Mi-28NM will be purchased. Very Happy
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:30 am

    Would you suggest that is it better to use un-armored trucks not IVFs to deliver/support troops on battlefield?

    Not the same thing... landing troops in helos makes the troops vulnerable... not so much like transporting troops in trucks as having them sit on the outside of tanks operating on the front line...

    Their experience was that a Hind was no safer or better off than a Hip when both are on the ground... but you need about four Hinds to effectively deliver the amount of troops one  Mi-8 can deliver in one go and having four Hinds on the ground means they are unable to use their weapons.

    They started putting troops in Hinds and ended up just putting extra ammo in them and using them to lift out individuals or small groups.

    That is why the replacement Mi-28 has room for 2-3 people in a pinch so it could rescue a downed air crew, but is not intended as a helicopter to land troops...

    Look, a successor for the Mi-35 based on the already tested Mi-28NM would mid-term save a lot of money.

    Except it would not be ready for ten years at least... though the bonus will be that it should be able to take advantage of the improvements in design they develop from the new high speed helo programmes...

    The Mi-XX (Mi-40?) could be used as

    All fine and good... but the Mi-28NM is already an excellent CAS and attack helo and the Mi-17 and soon Mi-38 already have the transport applications covered too.

    Why would they need a whole separate new helo design to do two jobs better done by separate platforms...

    Development of special versions (flying command post, EW and so on) would be possible.


    They already have those based on the Hip...

    At MAKS both sides will find a compromise (= the ministry of economy and trade will subsidize the purchase with a loan to the company) and the Mi-28NM will be purchased.

    As I have said... they have little real choice on both sides.... that will be what they cost, so the Military will just need to change their plans and reschedule the upgrades and purchases to spread the costs out and make it more affordable... they might change their minds about a few of the more exotic capabilities of course... put them off for a later date when the technology is more mature and cheaper...
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4913
    Points : 4943
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:21 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Would you suggest that is it better to use un-armored trucks not IVFs to deliver/support troops on battlefield?

    Not the same thing... landing troops in helos makes the troops vulnerable...


    Those troops never land in Mi-8 at first place They will be destroyed in the air, same unarmored tucks would be.
    I think you get wrong concept of using "flying ivf" concept.  AFAI understand  It is not to fly to prepared airfield where there is no enemy fire.
    It is to fight to suppress enemy fire points  and then deploy troops  and continue supporting.



    GB wrote: Their experience was that a Hind was no safer or better off than a Hip when both are on the ground... but you need about four Hinds to effectively deliver the amount of troops one  Mi-8 can deliver in one go and having four Hinds on the ground means they are unable to use their weapons.

    IVF can carry   6-8 troops, average truck can carry  20-30  same ratio. Well armored IVF has no problem with 12,7mm fire, truck is destroyed then. With troops.








    GB wrote: They started putting troops in Hinds and ended up just putting extra ammo in them and using them to lift out individuals or small groups.

    not really both Mi-42 project + new VDV request say something else.



    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 1507391086_mi-42-6
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5283
    Points : 5436
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:43 pm

    Why not modify an existing design like the Mi-26, which it's carrying capacity allows it to be flexible enough to up-armor the cockpit, and add wings with weapon pylons. A good portion of it's payload could be dedicated to those modifications, but still have significant payload for soldiers and equipment.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22332
    Points : 22876
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:50 am

    Mi-40 came after Mi-28.

    There was a plan for an Mi-40 to compliment the Mi-28 in the same way the Mi-8 and Mi-24 compliment each other as transport and attack helo, but the Mi-40 never got off the drawing board AFAIK.

    If you want to be MR Fussy the Mi-24 is broadly based on the Mi-8, so having the Mi-40 based on the Mi-28 is just a continuation of what they have been doing...

    the fact that they have Mi-28s in service and are still buying a few Mi-35s suggests the few transports they wanted are being satisfied relatively cheaply with Mi-35s.

    Yes, they are producing Mi-28 for Algeria and Iraq and Ka-52 for Egypt but in the first case they are not NM for sure.
    Can they switch into producing them without added cost and time or they need to wait these order to be completed and after that to stop and modify the serial assembly line? Price and time to deliver would be way greater in the latter case.

    The better question would be how different is the Mi-28 in production and the Mi-28NM they want... have they fundamentally changed the structural design like MiG did with the MiG-29M2/KR/35?

    Look, a successor for the Mi-35 based on the already tested Mi-28NM would mid-term save a lot of money.

    Not as much money as basically fitting the Mi-35 with Mi-28NM components like rotors and engines and wings etc etc...

    IVF can carry 6-8 troops, average truck can carry 20-30 same ratio. Well armored IVF has no problem with 12,7mm fire, truck is destroyed then. With troops.

    Debarking troops under heavy enemy fire is not going to go well in either case...

    not really both Mi-42 project + new VDV request say something else.

    Is that genuine or bullshit like the MiG-37 Ferret?

    The nose of that aircraft looks like a British Lynx...

    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1024
    Points : 1065
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  dino00 on Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:12 pm

    The Ministry of Defense agreed on the serial deliveries of the Mi-28NM to the troops

    ROSTOV-ON-DON, March 7 - RIA News . The Ministry of Defense and the Russian Helicopters holding agreed on the price of the Mi-28NM helicopter, a contract is being prepared, said Alexei Krivoruchko, the deputy head of the military department.
    Earlier in a number of media reports have appeared that the army will not buy these cars due to the high cost.

    "We have reached a full understanding on the price, we are preparing, we are starting work," Krivoruchko told reporters.
    He noted that a large contract was prepared "both for the Mi-28 and for the Ka-52."
    The volume of the first order for the Mi-28NM is now being discussed, it will be six or 18 cars.
    The Deputy Minister stressed that the work on improving the helicopter will continue: the appearance and equipment may change.
    The head of the Russian Helicopters holding company, Andrei Boginsky, said that the military’s arguments about the price of the Mi-28NM were heard, the car was subjected to serious improvements, including its flight performance.
    He added that a consensus "on pricing" with the customer was reached.
    The Russian Helicopters also reported that they handed over to the Ministry of Defense seven combat vehicles: two transport combat Mi-35M, two combat training Mi-28UB and three Mi-28N "Night Hunter".

    https://ria.ru/20190307/1551629504.html

    Sponsored content

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 11 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:09 am