Cyrus the great wrote:Werewolf wrote:
Yes the JHLHSL helo looks very much like Mi-26 because it makes very good use of internal volume while keeping a very good aerodynamic shape.
The Ka-50 isn't really limited to just 12 Vikhrs by design but they limited it by layout since what you gonna do with 24 fucking ATGM's? Use ATGM's against every single running guy and waste highly capable weapons isntead you could use unguided rockets. The thing is such helicopters are used against combined arms, you will never see tanks in more numbers than soft targets, that is never going to happen. They will always be accompanied by soft armored and infantry in more masses then you could find tanks on the battlefield. HEAT is not bad against everything but HE-Frag unguided ammunition is still superior against soft armor and infantry that are scattered around or sitt in BTR's/IFV's or are remotley buy. The Vikhr has a HE-Frag warhead aswell but it is just to expensive to waste so many missiles if you have better suited weapons for that.
I wonder if Mil would ever team up with Kamov to comprehensively upgrade the Mi-26 with coaxial rotors and side propellers -- possibly giving it greater speed, range and maneuverability. Now, I understand that maneuverability is not really required in a heavy transport helicopter, but it would be a positive [unintentional] byproduct of the coaxial set up.
The Ka-52 is my favourite attack helicopter and I suspected that it could carry more than 12 missiles. I certainly don't think it needs to carry 24 ATGMs, but it certainly should be able to carry 16 missiles -like the Mi-28- if needed. I agree with you about HE-Frag and I look forward to Ugroza rockets being deployed to add precision to the mix, in addition to them being much cheaper than ATGMs.
Thanks for clarifying things for me, mate.
I doubt that Kamov and Mil would cooperate together unless they are ordered to do it, but usually there is a competition for both unless one is significantly better and for heavy lifters Mil is unparalleled, but if the requirements for a new helo with higher MTOW would be not feasible by Mil design capabilities they could be pushed to try to figure out solution with Kamov. Think it is unlikely because i haven't heared about requirements for heavier lift then they have right now. First there need to be an urgend need for such requirement before they even take into consideration for a new plattform while most weights that are above Mi-26 are carroud out by cargo planes. Unlikely but not impossible for a KaMi Helo.
The Ka-52 already can carry more than 12 missiles, even tho the inner pylons are prohibited to be used for Sprial class ATGM's due to saftey reasons dating back to Mi-24A to avoid possible ATGM to fuselage collition in maneuvering launchese which happen more than some might think in heat of battle. The inner pylons are allowed to be used for ASM, AShM and GR Ugroza S-24/25 guided rockets. So it has 14 missles. 12 destroyed tanks and two destroyed small fregates or corvettes or two destroyed bunkers, radars, SAM/SHORADs or infrastructure like bridges. No other attack helicopter can destroy bridges, vessels or SHORADs due the weapons integration. The other only helo that comes close to such capabilities is AH-1 which has AGM-65 Maverick integrated in it in different versions. That is also why i would prefer AH-1Z over AH-64E along with future projects of integrating Longbow as the Cobra Radar System and jamming pod ALQ-231 and more fancy stuff.
The funny thing about the Robertson IAFS is that it only gives the AH-64 less than an hour [53 minutes] of extra flight time and it still has less range than the Ka-52 --> 545 km to the Apache's 497 km. I still don't understand how it is that the Apache has greater ferry range. Americans still boast about how their Apaches are armed with 1200 30mm rounds even though they lost that capability starting in 1997.
The americans use on Apaches 230 gallon fuel tanks russians use around 130 gallons if i didn't miss something. So yes it is a big plus for Apaches for self deployment even tho that comes at cost of time it takes and the extra time it takes again to maintain the helo after that long range of self deployment.