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

Tai Hai Chen
Tsavo Lion
Cyrus the great
Project Canada
max steel
Russian Patriot
82 posters

    Mi-28N Havoc: News


    Posts : 33570
    Points : 34084
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 20 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Jun 15, 2022 3:54 pm

    The beam divergence of laser target designators are typically in the nought point parts milliradians. An enormous beam would be wasting laser energy all over the place - which is not great from the POV of a portable system with minimal power requirements.

    A laser target marker projects a small spot on a target... the energy is concentrated on that spot but does not reflect a narrow beam... it appears like a small sun shining in all directions, which the laser guided munitions detect and home in on... the laser guided weapon could be coming from some distance so the reflection has to be as bright as possible, while the target might not be a good colour or texture to reflect the energy well.

    I seem to remember a situation in a conflict where the guy with the laser target marker decided to shine his laser beam on a particular soldiers helmet to get a good reflection for the very large aircraft delivered bomb that was coming... he wasn't some sort of sadist... the helmet gave a good laser reflection and would result in a good track for the bomb.

    The laser beam riders however like Kornet don't look at the target, they look back at their launch platform so a fine narrow beam is actually bad.

    What they actually use is four beams in different frequencies.

    To describe it to a person it is easier to use visible frequencies, so say top left is red, right is blue, bottom left is yellow, and bottom right is green.

    The centreline of the beam means looking back you see all four colours, but if you are flying high and to the right you see blue so the missile itself realises it must be high and to the right so it uses its control surfaces to descend and turn left... if it goes from blue to green it knows it is now too low and levels off and starts to climb again and keeps turning left... if it goes from blue to red then it stops turning left and starts to turn right again and continues to descend.

    When it sees all four colours it knows it is in the centre of the beam.

    Moving targets means it will be constantly manouvering to get into the centre of the beam... a big wide beam means the centre of the beam can be pointed more aggressively because there is less risk of the missile no longer seeing any colour and losing command guidance.
    Borders between one colour and another means two colours will be visible and depending on which colours they are it can stop manouvering in that direction and continue in the other direction till all four colours can be seen.

    As I mentioned 1km before target impact a Vikhr will have its aimpoint dropped 6m on to the point of aim of the target, and therefore the missile which was flying 6m high to avoid fences and bushes and other things on a battlefield will then drop down to the line of sight to hit the target.

    Tests showed the CEP of the Vikhr was 80cm or 0.8m at 8km which is pretty damn good... that was in the 1990s so it is presumably better now.

    For a target 8km away the laser beams for beam riding missiles only has to travel to the target, so 8km.

    If it was a SALH like a laser homing Hellfire... say an Apache is attacking a target 6km away from its position, the laser beam from the Apache needs to be visible from 12km... it travels 6km from the helicopter to the target, and then has to be visible from the helicopter for the Hellfire to get a lock before launch.

    The fact that a radar pod with Khrisantema allows target engagement in zero visibility means getting the enemy to pop smoke is a good thing because the Mi-28N with Khrisantema and the radar pod can see through smoke and also guide its missiles through smoke and heavy snow or rain or dust or blazing fires that would reduce the performance of optics or laser beams and render them useless.

    Losing a complement of smokescreen is far better than losing a complement of tanks. Establishing an ambush situation where your guys let off the first shot is no trivial feat. Lots of work would have to be done identifying likely routes of advance, making sure they follow that route, and of course preparing defensive positions, etc. All to lose that initiative with a couple of well-placed smokescreens.

    The Russians/Soviets had equipent to generate smoke screens kms long for landings or attacks, but they also have battlefield radar equipment down to equipment mounted on HMGs and Automatic grenade launchers to deal with zero visibility situations where targets are moving on a battlefield behind smoke screens...

    The Russians are still understandably reticent over expensive weapons with active sensors onboard. A neat alternative could be to use the Orlan-10 model: offload the sensors to a cheaper (and easily replaceable) platform that could still be reused. The Russian version of Javelin could easily be the Gran guided mortars guided by an Orlan-10 with a laser target designator. For the price of a single Jav missile you retain mass effect and precision

    Their Ka-52s seem to be intended as recon helicopters that could use their radar to scan the battlefield for targets... they have included pylon mounted boxes for drones that can be sent forward into dangerous areas to scout ahead, but with Khrisantema they could just as easily carry the wing pod and a pylon of missiles and use that for finding and engaging targets in zero visibility.

    AFAIK most of the weapons the Mi-28 and Ka-52 carry are command guided or laser beam riding, now with command guided weapons like sturm and ataka they used to use optics to detect targets and radio command antenna to guide the missiles using optical target and missile tracking with the radio command antenna sending course corrections... essentially replacing a wire link. As such even with MMW radar both aircraft cannot fire missiles in any weather conditions or zero visibility conditions because either the target can't be detected or the missile cannot be directed (with laser beam riding)

    With the Khrisantema and radar pod they should be able to use their own radar to find targets and then scan targets with the radar pod to get locks and launch radar pod guided missiles at the targets all without the target being visible... say a monsoon rain or dust storm or heavy cloud and fog or heavy snow.

    Even if the target detects the MMW radar and pops smoke it wont matter, and if they move the radar will continue to track them.

    By any measure, K-52 is used more extensively in this war. I believe that MoD will end up changing purchase contract till 2027 to increase purchase numbers for K-52M at the expense of Mi-28NM.

    The Ka-52 is oriented as a scout helicopter.... it is very heavily armed but its US equivalent would be the Commanche but without the stealth of course, which is just useless for a helicopter anyway. The Mi-28NM on the other hand is an attack helicopter, and in that regard I don't think it is inferior in that role... the upgraded NM model has new optics and systems and looks rather impressive... more so when airburst 30mm cannon shells are introduced and new optics and systems and new weapons are added like guided rockets in rocket pods and a variety of new missiles including SOSNA and Hermes... and upgraded radar.

    There have been claims that MANPADS make helicopters too vulnerable on a modern battlefield, and actually many ATGMs are dangerous for low and slow aircraft as well, but the Russians seem to not have lost as many helicopters as such claims would suggest were likely... their self defence systems and tactics appear to make them quite viable systems.

    George1, flamming_python and Werewolf like this post


    Posts : 33570
    Points : 34084
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 20 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Sat Jun 18, 2022 7:29 pm

    I should point out that I described the laser beam riding missiles guidance laser as being four beams of different colours... obviously that was only to make the description easier to understand... in actual use the lasers will be non visible light either IR or UV and will be different shades of those frequencies so they would be invisible to the human eye but the missile looking at the beams could determine its place in the entire beam and manouver to get into the centre of the beam.

    Obviously if the target is moving then the beam will also be moving so remaining in the centre of the beam might mean constantly manouvering.

    The operator would put a crosshair on the target.... in many versions a computer based auto tracker would then follow the target automatically but the computer system would also get involved perhaps pointing the laser beam 6m high until the missile gets within 1km of the target where the beam drops down on target to avoid flying into fences or bushes... equally the beam might lead the target so early in the flight it might lead the target by quite a bit but as the missile get closer and closer to the target the lead might be reduced to ensure it gets a nice clean hit on the target at a good angle.

    The lack if a wire to carry control signals to the missile means the launcher does not need to remain still to avoid snagging the wire and breaking contact wiht the missile... launch from altitude would give a steep angle of attack which would be useful against heavy armoured vehicles... from drones like HALE or MALE such missiles would be excellent... cheap and accurate. New smaller missiles like Bulat would be even better as you could carry four times more and even delay the launch till the angle is near vertical... with a steep dive on top armour from 10km altitude it would be coming in very very fast... maybe a kinetically armed model could be used for use against enemy armour.

    Posts : 708
    Points : 726
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 20 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  limb Sun Jun 19, 2022 6:21 am

    caveat emptor wrote:It will be interesting to see if current orders for purchase of Ka-52 and Mi-28 will be changed to favor Ka-52 more?
    By any measure, K-52 is used more extensively in this war. I believe that MoD  will end up changing purchase contract till 2027 to increase purchase numbers for K-52M at the expense of Mi-28NM.

    This is dumb, because in this conflict, the Mi-28NM is safer from MANPADs because it has a mast mounted radar which allows it to target vehicles while being behind cover, while the ka-52 can only do indirect unguided rocket pod strikes.

    Posts : 33570
    Points : 34084
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 20 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  GarryB Sun Jun 19, 2022 1:10 pm

    To be fair both aircraft have largely unified weapons so both can use Vikhr and Ataka and Khrisantema as well as Hermes and LMUR as well as various rocket pods and bombs and gun pods.

    Either on their own would be excellent gunships for any country, but the Russians are using both.

    The seem to be using the Mi-28s as attack aircraft hunting individual air defence and artillery vehicles, for which it is fast and very well armoured.

    Most attack helicopters have thick strong canopy windscreens... the flat front screens on the Hind will stop 23mm cannon fire... and the front screen of the Apache will stop 20mm cannon rounds, but the vast majority of attack helicopters do not have armoured side windows... the curved canopies of the Hind and Hokum are not armoured AFAIK... not a big easy target but not well protected either... the enormous side windows of the Apache are not armoured either and have been penetrate in combat by 7.62 x 39mm AK calibre ammo from the ground... which means they are basically perspex and not bullet resistent at all.

    In comparison the side cockpit windows of the Mi-28 are small but also very thick and probably better protected than some helicopter front windscreens... there was a video of a 14.5mm HMG placed about 4 metres away from the side canopy and fired directly into the glass. After multiple hits the side door is opened and the tester rubs his hand over the inner surface of the glass to show it is smooth and undamaged.

    It is not longer transparent, but it is also not penetrated at all.

    In terms of surviving ground fire it is probably one of the best... but nothing is invinicible.

    The side by side seating of the Kamov allows much better communication, and also seems more suited to recon missions, while its 6 weapon pylons and larger 30mm ammo bins means it is better armed.

    Broski likes this post

    Sponsored content

    Mi-28N Havoc: News - Page 20 Empty Re: Mi-28N Havoc: News

    Post  Sponsored content

      Current date/time is Sun Jul 03, 2022 12:46 pm