Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3984
    Points : 3980
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole Sat Nov 28, 2020 12:43 pm

    An 80mm rocket is not very useful to transport goods. It could transport 2 or 3 kg of supplies which is not even enough to support one guy.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28568
    Points : 29098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Sun Nov 29, 2020 6:50 am

    80mm is not huge but they are long and some things they might need like batteries or water or specific ammo types... it would be amazing what you could fit in an 80mm rocket tube... the rocket weapons normally have a 5-8kg HE warhead.... and a gliding delivery drone could be launched from 10km altitude at very low velocity with a low energy rocket motor to just launch it clear of the aircraft so you could play with the weight distribution.

    The heaviest 80mm rocket seems to be the S-8BM which is the concrete piercing model with a rocket weight of 15kgs and a warhead of 7.4kgs, but the S-13 rockets the S-13 T rocket which is a double warhead concrete piercing rocket is a 75kg rocket with a tandem warhead of almost 40kgs.

    That would be plenty of space for all sorts of payload... they don't need a lot of velocity so you could halve the size of the rocket motor or even quarter it and fit it with folding wings to glide to the position...

    they already have an enormous range of rocket types anyway including illumination and even chaff and jammer models for launching into enemy airspace ahead of attack aircraft.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3273
    Points : 3275
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  LMFS Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:03 am

    The delivery schedule for the latest mi-28NM Has been approved

    Within two years, the Aerospace forces will receive five such helicopters

    https://iz.ru/1094574/anton-lavrov-roman-kretcul/dozhdalis-superokhotnika-utverzhden-grafik-postavok-noveishikh-mi-28nm

    GarryB, franco, medo, dino00, lyle6 and Finty like this post

    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 128
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  TMA1 Thu Dec 03, 2020 11:03 am

    Been thinking about that combat approved video on the mi-28nm. It brought many to believe that the not-too-terribly censored missile was the article 305. Now that we know it is Hermes based, I have not heard much about this other missile.

    But recently I remembered seeing maybe here or on another forum tandem missile tracks that look identical to the single track which held the censored missile. I cannot seem to find an image or any discussion on it, but it makes me think. Those missiles are extremely powerful and are infrared based from what I saw on combat approved. Imagine twin duel racks, one for each wing stub of the mi-28nm. Four of these powerful missiles would be really amazing, and I bet there is still plenty of room to fill the inner racks with standard rocket pods.

    What do you guys think?
    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 128
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  TMA1 Fri Dec 04, 2020 12:56 am

    🤦 not tandem dangit i meant side by side. they were dual side-by-side missile racks. so it looks like one double missile rack could probably fit on the outside pylon of each wingstub. would be awesome to imagine an mi-28 with four of those missiles as well as two rocket pods.

    sorry about that! had a smooth brain moment there! Embarassed drunken
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 4026
    Points : 4056
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  franco Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:38 am

    TMA1 wrote:🤦 not tandem dangit i meant side by side. they were dual side-by-side missile racks. so it looks like one double missile rack could probably fit on the outside pylon of each wingstub. would be awesome to imagine an mi-28 with four of those missiles as well as two rocket pods.

    sorry about that! had a smooth brain moment there! Embarassed  drunken

    You should be able to edit your original post thumbsup
    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 128
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  TMA1 Fri Dec 04, 2020 4:52 am

    Damnit.... haha

    But do any of you have the images of the duel rack for that new missile? I cannot find the picture anywhere. Also cannot find info on that missils.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 399
    Points : 401
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  lyle6 Fri Dec 04, 2020 5:10 am

    TMA1 wrote:Damnit.... haha

    But do any of you have the images of the duel rack for that new missile? I cannot find the picture anywhere. Also cannot find info on that missils.

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Eaiy-DcWkAE6lru?format=jpg&name=medium

    GarryB, dino00, magnumcromagnon, Hole and Finty like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28568
    Points : 29098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Fri Dec 04, 2020 12:10 pm


    But do any of you have the images of the duel rack for that new missile? I cannot find the picture anywhere. Also cannot find info on that missils.

    What I don't understand is that they have been showing pictures of Hermes for ages... you can see quite detailed information about it on the KBP website.... so why are they blurring the image of it on the aircraft?

    I can't remember the last time they blurred out the image of something.... if it was secret they just didn't mention it or just didn't show it.

    Like the nuclear powered cruise missile or Zircon.

    The Hermes seems to be a tube launched weapon that are carried four to a weapon pylon, while this 305 item appears to be a single missile in the videos... but I agree I remember seeing it on the pylon mounted in such a way that they probably could have side by side or even quad loaded them... but were only testing one missile so only had one missile mounted.

    @lyle6

    Nice post... pretty definitive really.... but also interesting too because Hermes is supposed to be quad mounted/carried by helicopters and Su-25 aircraft.

    And that is another factor... this new weapon is good for helicopters in terms of standoff range and the safety of the helicopter from air defences, but it will be just as good for Su-25s and even swing fighters like MiG-29M2s and strike aircraft like Su-24 and Su-34 for precision strikes... perhaps twin missile mounts on Su-25s could mean 16 missiles on 8 weapon pylons... quite a potent loadout...

    But of course 80mm rocket pods add versatility and flexibility... and they mentioned the capacity of the Mi-28 against enemy drones will be improved... with laser detonated HE rounds from the 30mm cannon it becomes a rather potent aircraft in that regard... 250 shots is a cheap and quick way to deal with such problems and the mobility of a helicopter would be valuable too for protecting bases but also convoys from drone attack...
    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 128
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  TMA1 Fri Dec 04, 2020 12:28 pm

    thanks, lyle6! never seen that image before! cheers

    more and more I dont think LMUR is product 305. the blurred missile is very large and had large cruciform wings on back and smaller in front. you could also vaguely see that it is an IIR missile with the transparent dome for the seeker head in front. what I could not understand is that the rack for the missile has an overhanging portion at the front that covers the seeker head. never seen that before...

    the image I saw had a description that it was showing the new racks for the missiles and in the image there were a few of them. they were just like what could be seen on combat approved episode but instead of a single rack it was a double rack that itself would connect to the singer outer pylon of the wing stub.

    I wish I could figure out why those racks have that overhang, or whatever you call it. never seen anything like it.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28568
    Points : 29098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Sat Dec 05, 2020 2:06 am

    more and more I dont think LMUR is product 305.

    Lyles post seems official, and calls the product 305 LMUR, I think the question you and I are asking is what is Hermes in relation to LMUR.

    On the face of it Hermes was supposed to be A LMUR... in the sense that Hermes is supposed to be a light missile intended to engage a range of ground and aerial targets, but as I have mentioned all the previous information about Hermes shows a tube launched missile intended to be quad loaded on helicopter and light aircraft mounts.

    Also as you point out despite the blurring the missile appears to be long relatively slim, with fins at the very front and very rear with an EO port in the nose.

    I agree the rack part that covers the nose of the missile is strange... the Russian laser homing Krasnopol missile fired by 152mm gun artillery has a nose cap that covers the nose mounted optical port so the round can be treated like a standard round of ammo and can be loaded into the standard ammo handler of Russian 152mm artillery vehicles. When handled the cap is never removed and it is designed to be ejected in flight, while the US equivalent Copperhead the nose port has to be repeatedly checked to make sure there is no damage or dirt on the seeker window while handling and loading... it has to be loaded manually...

    Considering the missile is supposed to be a lock on after launch weapon with a datalink I would think a half cover that is transparent in its centre to allow the missile to see forward over a narrow field of view could be used and when in flight as it approaches its target area it ejects the whole cover and gets ideal visibility to find and engage the target wouldn't be that hard... or maybe the cover is part of a cooling system to reduce the temperature of the optics and lens port to make it see better when launched... who knows...

    I wonder when they will lift the secrecy regarding this weapon....

    marcellogo and TMA1 like this post

    AMCXXL
    AMCXXL

    Posts : 419
    Points : 419
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  AMCXXL Sun Dec 13, 2020 2:47 am

    Mi-28NM Nº74
    Probably the first Mi-28NM under the supply contract for 98, after installation batch of Mi-28NM Nº70 and Nº71 and installation batch of Mi-38T Nº72 and Nº73

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 27648210

    medo, dino00, LMFS and Finty like this post

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3273
    Points : 3275
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  LMFS Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:43 am

    Source: army receives first upgraded Mi-28NM helicopters

    https://ria.ru/20201230/vertolet-1591499196.html

    GarryB, dino00 and Finty like this post

    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 8627
    Points : 8720
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  JohninMK Sun Feb 07, 2021 12:35 pm

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 EtlAFFNWgAApFKc?format=jpg&name=medium

    GarryB, magnumcromagnon, zepia, DerWolf and Finty like this post

    PhSt
    PhSt

    Posts : 419
    Points : 423
    Join date : 2019-04-02

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  PhSt Tue Mar 23, 2021 5:49 pm

    So did they just removed the nose antenna or simply moved it elsewhere?

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 275592

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 277107

    Finty likes this post

    avatar
    Daniel_Admassu

    Posts : 77
    Points : 79
    Join date : 2020-11-18
    Age : 40
    Location : Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Daniel_Admassu Tue Mar 23, 2021 6:58 pm

    PhSt wrote:So did they just removed the nose antenna or simply moved it elsewhere?

    Maybe the rotor mast antenna took over its role. Whatever the case, I can't say I terribly miss the pinocchio nose on the hunter. Russians military designers may be competent in any number of things, but aesthetics probably isn't one of them.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3984
    Points : 3980
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Hole Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:21 pm

    The Mi-28NM will only use laser-guided or fire-and-forget missiles, no more radio-controlled ones.
    TMA1
    TMA1

    Posts : 128
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2020-11-30

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  TMA1 Tue Mar 23, 2021 8:22 pm

    Haha I love ruskie aesthetics it is what first drew me to their weapons, but I can see where you are coming from. To each their own I guess!

    TMA1 likes this post

    avatar
    Daniel_Admassu

    Posts : 77
    Points : 79
    Join date : 2020-11-18
    Age : 40
    Location : Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Daniel_Admassu Wed Mar 24, 2021 3:30 am

    TMA1 wrote:Haha I love ruskie aesthetics it is what first drew me to their weapons, but I can see where you are coming from. To each their own I guess!

    Well, there are exceptions for me too. The Flanker series for instance have the best appeal among all the fourth generation fighters. But I generally hate how their helicopters look, especially the Mi-8/17 derivatives. My nation operates a number of them and I have had a chance to closely examine a few at a civilian airport. It is as though they took a barrel and stuck a boom on it. Neither do they look terribly aerodynamic, so no functional argument there. Maybe there is a cost one there. But it seems to me they could have spent a little more effort to make them less ugly. A little bit of form doesn't hurt even in military gear.

    But things seem to be changing. The Mi-38 is definitely an improvement.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28568
    Points : 29098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Mar 24, 2021 3:49 am

    The black nose thimble was a command antenna for controlling Shturm and later Ataka command guided ATGMs.

    The newer Ataka missiles now use laser beam riding guidance because it is simpler and cheaper and harder to interfere with, while the new replacement Krisantema use laser beam riding and radar homing options.

    The BMPT also uses the laser guided Ataka missiles though I would think the Hinds will continue to use up old stocks of Shturm and Ataka missiles as they were cheap and certainly accurate enough for most jobs.

    They had a small patrol boat that also had Shturm missiles... its guidance thimble was mounted up on the mast of the boat... a useful weapon to get targets to stop by force out to about 5km range.

    Should mention regarding the LMUR missile being discussed previously the new Baikal missile that is ground launched with a range of 15km seems to have the same physical shape as this blurred image on the Mi-28NM... which makes sense because a long range optically guided missile that could climb up and find a target and then dive down on it to attack it would be rather useful for ground forces as well as attack aircraft (drone, rotary, and fixed wing).

    The initial problem was quality of optics and all weather performance from a sensor that is essentially a single use item.

    Javelin for instance is enormously expensive for what it is because the thermal sensor in the nose of the missile has to be good enough to get a decent view of the battlefield in flight to find and identify targets, but be cheap enough to be expendable.

    It was not cheap.

    New QWIP chips could be stamped out like CCD chips in digital cameras and cover the near IR range for all weather day night use and be cheap enough to be used in enormous numbers.

    The thing is that 15km range... diving top attack IIR seeker and presumably two way data link... this could also be Morfei as an air to air missile and ground to air missile and ground to ground and air to ground and also at sea a CIWS self defence missile.

    The drawing in the ATGM thread... ie:

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Ewr5e410

    Seems to have the same profile as the blurred out missile on the Mi-28NM...

    But I generally hate how their helicopters look, especially the Mi-8/17 derivatives.

    Actually I quite like the Mi-8 and Mi-17 design... especially the model with the flat ramp rear doors... it is vastly superior to the Black Hawk which only has side doors so it can't carry light vehicles and it slows down the troops getting on and getting off in a combat situation only being able to use the side doors.

    The front of the helo is explained for visibility...

    What helicopter in its weight class is more aerodynamic and how much of a difference would it even make for such an aircraft type?

    Making military equipment look pretty is the definition of what is wrong with the west... being good at what they do is what makes them look good.

    TMA1 and Finty like this post

    avatar
    Daniel_Admassu

    Posts : 77
    Points : 79
    Join date : 2020-11-18
    Age : 40
    Location : Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Daniel_Admassu Wed Mar 24, 2021 5:23 am

    Hmmm.... I don't have data for this but I am kinda sure the more aesthetic appeal a military product has, the more customer are interested in it because in every business there are PR people who want to make their organization look good, including militaries. That in turn can fuel R&D.
    The_Observer
    The_Observer

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2021-01-03

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  The_Observer Wed Mar 24, 2021 5:53 am

    Daniel_Admassu wrote:Hmmm.... I don't have data for this but I am kinda sure the more aesthetic appeal a military product has, the more customer are interested in it because in every business there are PR people who want to make their organization look good, including militaries. That in turn can fuel R&D.

    I have to disagree.

    Aesthetics of military equipment are rarely judged in the conventional sense of the word. As Garry said, military equipment "looks good" when it effective at what it does.
    I don't think military brass making decisions on which equipment to buy worry too much about appearance as they do about the efficacy of the said weapon. Now, on the subject of appearance and aesthetic appeal of military equipment; my sense is that they are not at all judged in the conventional sense of the word.
    Besides judging how effective the weapon is, it's also important for the weapon to "look the part". If you build a killer weapon, it better look like a killer weapon. Take the Hind (mi-24) as an example. Ugly ass mother**** in the conventional sense, but looks like a remorseless killing machine. This "mean" appearance makes it a runway model in the military sense.
    avatar
    Daniel_Admassu

    Posts : 77
    Points : 79
    Join date : 2020-11-18
    Age : 40
    Location : Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Daniel_Admassu Wed Mar 24, 2021 6:55 am

    I agree that form needs to follow function in any machinery. If a back ramp adds more value to a military chopper, even if it makes a fat rear end, do so by all means. But whenever function allows for some aesthetic liberty, why not? In addition  to the obvious rugged reliability, Russian military gear sells worldwide because of;
    1. They come with no strings attached
    2. They are less expensive
    If they made at least some effort in the exterior design and trimming, I am sure that their sales will further improve without compromising function. What is wrong with that?
    The Mi-24 is, in my opinion, not ugly at all in overall form. Obviously it is designed with more speed and maneuverability in mind but even the bubble canopy isn't enough to ruin its general appeal.

    This all depends on personal taste of course. But in general I believe traditional Russian gear lacks in presentation. However,  recently Russia seems to put some effort in this regard with its clean sheet designs. Look at the typhoon class MRAP for its army, or Gorshkovs for its navy. They look way better and better reflect the times.

    Am I the only one with this opinion? Really?
    The_Observer
    The_Observer

    Posts : 55
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2021-01-03

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  The_Observer Wed Mar 24, 2021 8:30 am

    Daniel_Admassu wrote:I agree that form needs to follow function in any machinery. If a back ramp adds more value to a military chopper, even if it makes a fat rear end, do so by all means. But whenever function allows for some aesthetic liberty, why not? In addition  to the obvious rugged reliability, Russian military gear sells worldwide because of;
    1. They come with no strings attached
    2. They are less expensive
    If they made at least some effort in the exterior design and trimming, I am sure that their sales will further improve without compromising function. What is wrong with that?
    The Mi-24 is, in my opinion, not ugly at all in overall form. Obviously it is designed with more speed and maneuverability in mind but even the bubble canopy isn't enough to ruin its general appeal.

    This all depends on personal taste of course. But in general I believe traditional Russian gear lacks in presentation. However,  recently Russia seems to put some effort in this regard with its clean sheet designs. Look at the typhoon class MRAP for its army, or Gorshkovs for its navy. They look way better and better reflect the times.

    Am I the only one with this opinion? Really?

    Your idea of "presentation" seems to be heavily influenced by the western design paradigm. Russia and Soviet designs are quite distinct. To each their own.

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28568
    Points : 29098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Mar 24, 2021 8:42 am

    But whenever function allows for some aesthetic liberty, why not?

    Because it is an extra complication and cost that adds time and money to the development and who is to say you are making it look worse or look better?

    1. They come with no strings attached
    2. They are less expensive

    So why doesn't a country like Australia buy Russian weapons?

    The simple facts are that Russian military equipment is effective and not over priced and generally reliable and tested in hot and cold environments most countries don't have to worry about.

    If they made at least some effort in the exterior design and trimming, I am sure that their sales will further improve without compromising function. What is wrong with that?

    Nobody bought weapons they thought looked pretty. Even if every member in the Australian Army decided the current model Hind was awesome and cool and amazing no Australian politician would give it a second thought because suggesting Australia buys Hinds would be the end of the career of that politician in Australia.

    If the Army went to the politicians and said they needed a new attack helicopter... one that could carry a small number of troops and weapons at the same time it doesn't matter how pretty or how much trimming a Hind gets... it wont get considered.

    Conversely it doesn't matter how bad you make the F-35, how many problems there are with the fundamental design, or how much they are going to charge you for the privilege of beta testing their new fighter plane a died in the wool ass kisser like Australia will always go for F-35s despite Su-35s being a much better choice.

    The Mi-24 is, in my opinion, not ugly at all in overall form. Obviously it is designed with more speed and maneuverability in mind but even the bubble canopy isn't enough to ruin its general appeal.

    The Mi-24 evolved from the Mi-8 and originally had an Mi-8 canopy but it was not good for the job so they changed it to make it more effective in combat. Looks never came in to it.

    But in general I believe traditional Russian gear lacks in presentation.

    Countries who buy based on name and look... like Saudi Arabia end up buying useless shit and end up getting their asses kicked by flip flop wearing Houthie freedom fighters.

    Am I the only one with this opinion? Really?

    By all means please post a thread showing the ugly Russian stuff with the pretty western equivalent... perhaps Russian designers have something to learn from bullshit western consumerism PR men.

    I think the west would be in much better shape if western politicians had not fired all the advisers and accountants and smart people and hired all the spin doctors and lawyers.

    Sponsored content

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 17 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:15 pm