Kazan Ansat 2RC Recon Helicopter

I always thought that this version of the Ansat helicopter had great potential.
All Ansat models are relatively low tech (low cost) choppers. This could have been a great platform for low intensity conflicts, recon missions, export to the not so rich countries etc.etc.
Now with the advant of the longer range (8-10 km)new version of the KORNET ATM and the upcoming HERMES, this platform makes even more sense.
I hope it gets renewed attention from the military.

Is interesting that they are going for a diverse, all heavy helo attack fleet, nothing really for light strike. Mi-28N, Ka-52, Mi-24BM, hell Mi-8s with rocket and guns pods...

Ansat is a very light helo, and would likely be a very good basis for a police helicopter, or anti terrorism helo.

It could even be a very useful armed light recon helo where its reduced size and weight make it much cheaper to operate than a larger heavier aircraft.

The problem is that a modern UAV could probably also perform most roles a light helo would be expected to perform now.

Ironically I think the Russians have gone the other way to the west in terms of attack helos, where the west has Tigers and Cobras and Mongoose helicopters which are all lighter, the Apache is the exception in being heavier and better armed. In the Russian stable they seem to have gone for even heavier than the Apache in terms of protection and weapons.

The Kornet-EM will be a very potent new weapon for light helos like the Ansat and indeed any armed versions of the Ka-226, but also with UCAVs.

Hermes will likely be too heavy for such light helos... at about 170kgs per missile you could pack about 5 Kornet missiles for each Hermes missile, and in terms of target detection the Kornet avionics will be smaller and lighter and more compact than the systems needed for Hermes.

Ironically fitting 16 Kornet EM missiles to an Ansat or Ka-226 means an 8km effective engagement range for armour and a 10km range against enemy aircraft... that is actually as good as or better than an Apache Longbow, as the Apache would use Stingers with an air to air range of about 6km and Hellfire missiles with an effective range of 8km.

Obviously the Apache also has an effective 30mm gun with 1200 rounds, while the light helos will have machinegun level weapons, though a 30mm grenade launcher alternative option would be useful. The new Balkan 40mm grenade launcher would be even better as its max range is 2,500m compared with 2,100m for the 30mm grenade launcher, and a much larger payload.

An added advantage is that the 40mm grenades of the Balkan are caseless so there is no empty case to eject or cycle... they are more like mini mortar shells.

They could be used as utility helicopters also like UH-72 in us air force

They certainly could, along with the new Mi-34C1 upgraded light helo which is apparently quite cheap and capable.

Would like to seem someone take on the armed ANSAT model... it just looks cool.

does anyone know if any armed versions have been built(not one off's/prototypes), they would be ideal for border control, i am sure latin american countries would be interested, would be cheaper than buying and run than MI-35 etc. I think an armed version would do quite well as an export.

d_taddei2 wrote:does anyone know if any armed versions have been built(not one off's/prototypes), they would be ideal for border control, i am sure latin american countries would be interested, would be cheaper than buying and run than MI-35 etc. I think an armed version would do quite well as an export.

No for Ka-226. But Kazan Ansat has an armed recon model. "Ansat 2RC"

George1 wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:does anyone know if any armed versions have been built(not one off's/prototypes), they would be ideal for border control, i am sure latin american countries would be interested, would be cheaper than buying and run than MI-35 etc. I think an armed version would do quite well as an export.

No for Ka-226. But Kazan Ansat has an armed recon model. "Ansat 2RC"

now thats what i am talking about
ideal to replace Mi-2. i am sure this would do well in south american countries for border patrol etc.

Isos wrote:They should design a gunship version with 2 heavy machines or grenade lunchers on both side and better armourd. A lot of country would buy it for anti guerilla role. They could complete Mi 28 and Ka 52 too.

Russia needs some of these machines. The Mi-8/17 are pretty big for that role.

yeah it would be good to see this in armed version, however the for small light attack heli they have the Ansat 2RC, which would be armed with 12.7mm guns, and 4 hard points to carry rockets, bombs, and small anti air missiles. its not that much smaller really.

http://www.military-today.com/helicopters/ansat_2rc.htm

Does anyone know if Russia will purchase Ansat 2C?
I know they have the ka-52 scout/attack but the 2RC could still be useful as a recce heli or escort missions and would obviously be a lot cheaper but for the price there is drawbacks no armour, reduced speed, range and altitude but for the price and role it's still useful could also be carried on a small ship deck.

d_taddei2 wrote:Does anyone know if Russia will purchase Ansat 2C?
I know they have the ka-52 scout/attack but the 2RC could still be useful as a recce heli or escort missions and would obviously be a lot cheaper but for the price there is drawbacks no armour,  reduced speed, range and altitude but for the price and role it's still useful could also be carried on a small ship deck.

unfortunately we have seen neither Ansat 2RC purchases nor Ka-60

On the issue of engine replacement couldnt Russia approach Iran? Iran does have in service bell 205,206,212,214, sea cobras,
but also builds the following:
Panha Shabaviz 2-75 (bell 205),
Shahed-278 (bell 206)
Panha 2091 "Toufan (bell AH-1J seacobra)

The 205 or 206 engine could be used and for ansat 2RC the sea cobra engines. And it's unlikely that Iran and Russia would fall out and place sanctions on each other this would save Russia time and money. Although for the ka-60 I think they might need something with a bit more powerful.

The US would likely claim ownership of those engine designs and therefore try to sue the Russian company that produced them for illegal copying.

The Russians have a few engine programmes in development, many of which should create a few engines in different power classes.... not the end of the world.

GarryB wrote:The US would likely claim ownership of those engine designs and therefore try to sue the Russian company that produced them for illegal copying.

The Russians have a few engine programmes in development, many of which should create a few engines in different power classes.... not the end of the world.

But surely if that was the case and current US and Iran relations that US would sue Iran for making copies of there engines. But they haven't I am thinking it could save Russia quite a bit of money if they used instead of development and testing or something made from scratch

Makes more sense to build something you own the full rights to... is made the same way you make engines to the specs and requirements of your military... I doubt those old engines were metric so you need a whole different tool set to work with them.

Iran is not exporting those helos or those engines in enormous numbers, but if the Russian military started using variants of those engines the US would jump up and down immediately because they are spoilt little brats that don't share and take every opportunity to put other down... as you know full well.

These Iranian engines are probably very nice but likely not state of the art, so it makes sense for Russia to use new technology and fill the gaps in its arsenal itself without outside interference or influence.

I agree of course your own engines is a better option but it seems that when they designed it they used western engines for silly reasons. But the Iran option was a way of avoiding western engines and sanctions and ad for USA complaining let them it's effectively an iranian engine regardless of origins so they can sell to who they want. And USA hasn't complained about Iran using it and they hate Iran. And don't forget that Russia is still supplying rocket engines to USA for now. I just think in future if an Russian engine isn't available an iranian one would be a safer option. But Russia is doing the sensible thing now and making most of its own parts etc

The reason they were forced to use western engines is because they had none of their own in that weight class.

Medium and light helicopters were not made in the Former Soviet Union... the Mi-2 was designed by Mil but produced in a warsaw pact country.

When that relationship stopped they could either continue to buy from what was now an unfriendly country that soon became part of NATO, or develop their own products... it was easy enough to develop new light helos, but new engines are not so easy to put together.

They went with French and American engines simply because they were already developed and would make their products more popular on the international market. Now however it makes more sense for them to spend money and develop new engines of their own... not cheap and not fast but in the long term the best option.

Buying engines from Iran or China is not a long term solution either.

Note many of the similar situations involved licence production first and then domestic evolution of the product, like thermal imagers etc.

An interesting article on the Ansat 2RC. Snippets below. Full article had a bit more info.

This is very much an early version of the helicopter whose configuration is almost certain to change as it develops.
This helicopter has a conventional gunship layout. The pilot seated in the rear and gunner at the front. The helicopter is fitted with nose-mounted optical and infra-red sensors. These sensors can operate in day/night and adverse weather conditions with limited vision. According to manufacturer’s specifications, can carry up to 1,300 kg of weapons and stores on four pylons under short wings in addition to a single fixed machine gun – the 12.7 mm Kord – installed at the starboard side. this ‘two crew’ helicopter is a ‘third seat’ in the rear part of the fuselage, accessed by a small door on the port side. Although the position is equipped with a support for light caliber weapons, it is intended to be for emergency use only, for such things as evacuating downed aircrew
two Russian companies are designing alternatives – Klimov in St Petersburg with its VK-800V, and Salyut in Moscow with its TV-500A.






S-5 rocket pod & extra fuel tank

UV-26 chaff/ flare dispensers

electro-optical TOES-521 turret with thermo-vision camera and laser rangefinder

L166V-11E Ispanka microwave IR jammer

There is a small door with observation window at the rear of the fuselage. It gives acess to avionics compartment. However it seems that in case of emergency this helicopter has a capability to carry one or two passengers during a combat rescue. The Russian Mi-28 attack helicopter also has got this capability.

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/ansat-2rc-reconnaissance-helicopter/amp/

Nice... I always liked that little helicopter and I think it has good potential if done well.

Would add a minor error, the rocket pod shown is an S-8 rocket pod for 80mm rockets, this particular model is a 7 shot version for light aircraft... the SM-92P patrol aircraft and presumably drones will carry a similar model, though I suspect the new box shaped models with 10 rockets might be a good replacement.

The new rocket pods include equipment to launch special rockets including UAV type rockets.

The S-5 is a 57mm calibre rocket no longer widely used because the payload was a little small.

Best known for its 32 shot 57mm rocket pods on older model Hinds and also smaller 16 shot rocket pods for fighter aircraft.

With the newer and much bigger and heavier 80mm S-8 rocket pods there are two of the old type... this 7 shot pod for light aircraft, and the standard 20 shot versions of two types... flat fronted for helicopters and pointed for fast jets... both with 20 rocket tubes.

Here is the 7 shot S-8 rocket pod on the SM-92P patrol aircraft which I also thought looks rather cool in the 1990s, but seems to have disappeared completely.

Nice design for lighta attack/recon helicopter. I wonder why MoD didnt proceed with orders

George1 wrote:Nice design for lighta attack/recon helicopter. I wonder why MoD didnt proceed with orders

No protection

Put the weapons on standard model and you basically get the same thing for fraction of the price and hassle

GarryB wrote:Nice... I always liked that little helicopter and I think it has good potential if done well.

Would add a minor error, the rocket pod shown is an S-8 rocket pod for 80mm rockets, this particular model is a 7 shot version for light aircraft... the SM-92P patrol aircraft and presumably drones will carry a similar model, though I suspect the new box shaped models with 10 rockets might be a good replacement.

The new rocket pods include equipment to launch special rockets including UAV type rockets.

The S-5 is a 57mm calibre rocket no longer widely used because the payload was a little small.

Best known for its 32 shot 57mm rocket pods on older model Hinds and also smaller 16 shot rocket pods for fighter aircraft.

With the newer and much bigger and heavier 80mm S-8 rocket pods there are two of the old type... this 7 shot pod for light aircraft, and the standard 20 shot versions of two types... flat fronted for helicopters and pointed for fast jets... both with 20 rocket tubes.

Here is the 7 shot S-8 rocket pod on the SM-92P patrol aircraft which I also thought looks rather cool in the 1990s, but seems to have disappeared completely.

The company went bankrupt.

PapaDragon wrote:

George1 wrote:Nice design for lighta attack/recon helicopter. I wonder why MoD didnt proceed with orders

No protection

Put the weapons on standard model and you basically get the same thing for fraction of the price and hassle

Actually Ur wrong. It has protection in form of various systems as mentioned in the article, the standard version doesn't have them. And there has been talk of putting light Kevlar armour on it, but even then a Heli of this class adding would be detrimental the weight added would reduce weapons load, bullet proof class on cockpit, and a few Kevlar sheets around cockpit and engines is Max u would ever want and only upto 7.62 or 12.7mm protection, but it's small size and scout role will most likely reduce this threat, the soft kill systems, chaff and jammers will hopefully deal with manpads. Your comparing this to Mi-28 etc this isn't the same type of Heli. It's more of a scout, hit and run Heli, not close fire support, and costs are around 1/3 of a mi-28. This would be a brilliant export opportunity for forces who need such a Heli for the roles its designed for, or for forces which can't afford the more expensive mi-28/Ka-52. And if you already operate the transport Ansat then this would make sense and stream line parts and training. Although I don't see Russia buying it as it can afford the more expensive mi-28 or Ka-52. This is an export opportunity for a light, cheap, scout attack heli. I was actually surprised at the defensive systems it had as the original model didn't have them. And It can carry everything that mi-28 can carry although in smaller quantities.

flamming_python wrote:You might as well use a drone these days instead of a light recon/attack helicopter

Drones and scout attack heli have their pros and cons. Drones are unmanned so zero loss of life if lost, depending on the drone the payload could be smaller on the drone. The drone doesn't have any defensive systems like this has. And a drone can't pick up a downed pilot like this can. I see it as more of a export opportunity for forces who either need a light, cheap scout Heli, or can't afford the more expensive mi-28 Ka-52. And if they already operated the Ansat it would make sense to keep parts and training the same. This costs for this is around a 1/3 of the more expensive Heli. Just like that yak-130 cheap light fighter for poorer nation's but not something Russia would use in combat. I read an article end of last year where they talked about COIN aircraft Vs drones, mentioned the super tucano which is brilliant at what it does, the article basically said both have there uses and neither can fulfil each others role better than the other. Also stated drones aren't as agile as Helis or turboprops, light fighters.