even if true, Kamov better diversify & expand its line! The Russians r using a different logic.
The future potential would be powerful electric motors with electric drive, where complex transmissions would not be needed and synchronised gearboxes would be a thing of the past.
As shown by their example 600km/h plus model where free spinning coaxial rotors are used for take off and landing but normal flight is like a jet powered plane seems by far the best solution... who needs tandems then? Or tilt rotors?
The Indian Army’s Aviation Corps (AAC) is also in the process of procuring AH-64Es and intends to stand up three separate AH-64E squadrons with a total of up to 39 helicopters.
I am looking forward to when the Indians ask for a cheaper anti tank missile, because Hellfires are expensive, and the Ataka proves they really don't have to be.
u r not getting it: many people there live too far away from any airstips.
Don't you think they are a long way away from air strips for a reason? If their location is not worthy of building an airstrip, then they probably don't require enough supplies to make constant air access necessary. Occasional air access can be parachuted supplies or An-2 visits on open empty stretches of land or water.
Israel must be very dumb to buy & use them, even if they didn't pay most of the price!
Like any new toy they probably thought it was cool to start with, and the money they used to buy then probably came from US military aide so they probably haven't paid a cent of their own money for them... which likely eases the sting, but at the end of the day an F-15 or F16 can fly faster and further with a much heavier payload for a fraction of the operational costs of an F-35... they must be wondering what was the point... unless the point was to help NATO countries meet their 2% commitment by giving them aircraft that cost them 2% of their GDP to operate...
it's ancient history now; they traded, raided, & fought with/against Russia for centuries. Now, to restore her great power status, Turkey who has no trust in the US/EU will de-facto, if not de-jure, divorce NATO & buy more Russian made arms until she can produce everything herself.
The driving force is US stupidity from the top, and of course the fact that the EU has never considered Turkey to be European anyway.
Personally I think an Su-35 and Su-57 with Turkish components and design input could be a rather improved platform and I think some countries in the EU might be a little jealous at having to buy F-35s for probably four times the price, but not four times the performance.
India now also has both types, & they don't obstruct/compete with each other.
I would suggest the Chinook is too expensive to operate everywhere and they just want to use it in a few specific roles.
It's a multi-mission fighter-bomber, & they got the $ for it,etc from India & PRC:
No... the designation is important here.
Su-30 is an Su-27UB with minor changes. The Su-30M had an upgraded radar and systems to enable it to be used by the PVO as an airborne mini awacs to control groups of interceptors in places where ground based radar was patchy or stretched... neither aircraft was intended for the air to ground role and they could carry nothing but air to air guided missiles and dumb unguided rockets and bombs for use against ground targets.
It was only the Su-30MKI and Su-30MKK etc where multi role air to ground capability was added. The Russian military had the Su-24 and Su-34 and they weren't interested in multirole aircraft because they didn't have any squadrons trained in different roles to use them.
The MiG-29SMT failed to be bought in numbers by the Russian air force because the Russian Air Force were not interested in multi role aircraft.
a civilian Ka-102 won't be a very costly mistake, if at all. Mil. versions will have commonality with it, thus not costing too much either.
There is no civilian market for the Ka-102, so if they make any it will be a costly mistake. There is no military requirement, and even if there was the new Russian Chinese 10-15 ton payload helo is being developed and its development is being planned and paid for, which on its own kills any prospect for the Ka-102 anyway.
then, pl. regard the Ka-102 as the Yak-24 & CH-47 de-facto follow on.
The Soviet Buran shuttle was not a follow on from the US Space Shuttle, it had a fundamentally different design... the Soviet shuttle was a glider that was launched via a big rocket, while the US Shuttles were big super heavy aircraft with huge fuel tanks and solid rocket boosters to get it moving.
The Buran was not a follow on to anything because they had not made one previously... the Ka-102 is not a follow on because Kamov are not Yakovlev or Boeing or whoever makes Chinooks.
no, but it's more probable that this prediction will also come true!
That is not how probability works.
a paper helo won't get much exposure; wait until a mockup & then a prototype appears.
That costs money... were there even any posters at MAKS 19? There is nothing on their website.
as I pointed out, that infrastructure takes a long time to build. U can take a train from Moscow to Vladivostok/Yakutsk or from Beijing to Lhasa/Kashgar, but huge areas to the side of those lines need helos to be reachable.
any flying prototypes yet? Time will tell!
They have a requirement and there is demand for faster helo designs... not slightly faster like a tandem rotor, but much faster...
a few years ago, the richest man in the world was a Mexican; if he distributed all his wealth to every1 in Mexico below the poverty line, each would get ~$16K. But it's his choice to buy a business jet, another mansion, etc. or to give to charity. India has more poverty & strife, but has $Bs to spend on imported arms & cargo aircraft.
Yeah, you are confusing a private person and what they do with money they earned, and the use of the money of Indian people by the Indian government that should be spent to benefit and improve the lives of the Indian people paying tax to fund the government budget.
those C-17s & CH-47Fs were available & they got them, while their relations with US r still good. Iran under the Shah also got everything he wanted; the new regime stopped Iraq aggression & still uses some of it. Her rival Pakistan has mostly American & PRC made arms. It would be stupid to rely only on Russian imports.
Stupid to rely only on Russian imports. Stupid why? I agree it would be stupid to rely on one source of weapons if those weapons were eye wateringly expensive, did not guarantee support at the level of the UNSC, and also if that source started to tell you who else you could or could not buy weapons from, or indeed had a government structure where over night someone could decide to impose sanctions on you to force you to do something you don't want to do... ie BLACKMAIL.
But based on this information I would say for India it would be stupid to rely on the US as a source of military material, but relying on Russia has not caused problems in the past and is unlikely to do so in the future... they have a good record of selling their best stuff to India... at the time India was getting Su-30MKI fighters the Russian Air Force didn't have anything better than that in service. They leased SSNs... Charlie class and Gepard class to India... will the US lease a Seawolf to India? Now India is making AKs in India and Brahmos, and lots of other things with Russian support and when was the last time Russia imposed sanctions on India of any kind?
So, they r following in Saudi Arabia footsteps & try to show China, Japan & the US that they r in quasi alliance with the West.
Free cheese can be found only in a mouse trap!
Funny you make the comment about the cheese because Saddam and Gaddafi and Assad were all turning west when they found out that the cheese was actually located within a large and complicated trap... only Assad managed to evade the trap and only just... and Libya and Syria and Iraq have all paid a heavy price for that foray towards the west.... many in the Trump administration probably thought... india is now buying Apaches and C-17s and P-8s and Chinooks... we own them and can now tell them to stop buying S-400 and to not bother looking at Su-35s or improved Su-30MKIs because we will be selling them F-16s...
it is just a matter of telling them and they will obey...
and the Kamov people said that they r developing the Ka-102! Who knows if/when a new helicopter to replace the Helix family will be accepted, & will it kill the Ka-102 project with 100% certainty?
The Helix family equates to the sea based Hip family, so with a Mi-17/-38 new helicopter at sea as well, and a new 10-15 ton payload capacity helo presumably with both naval and land based models being made, then there is no gap for a huge number of Ka-102s... and if there is no requirement for a huge number there wont be any money for development because it is just not needed.
well, if they were quite revolutionary & important to the US, as many independent experts think so, Russia isn't a special country in this context.
Not special, just different. Light aircraft like the An-2 costs a fraction of any of the solutions you mention, and good enough in terms of speed and range and ability to operate from rough strips.
it could be both a survival situation & lifestyle choice for many species.
Bamboo is low in energy... they pretty much spend their entire lives eating and sleeping.
Many ice age animals died out but many other species got smaller & survived. Isolated marsupials in Australia & Moa birds in NZ survived in large #s while S. América lost similar species after it drifted & joined to C. América with more advanced animals moving South. So it's not always random.
The survival chances of the Moa became zero when the apex predator in the country became the human. They were an easy meal, and had no previous experience at being food for anything, so they didn't know to run away or defend themselves.
This is what I'm talking about regarding the airstrips in Siberia:
So they have a 1.6km runway for a small town... and the planes seem to operate from such airstrips well enough... what makes you think spending 500x more by supporting that town with helicopters and tilt rotors would improve things at all?
Russia has a lot of aircraft that can operate from rough airstrips... their military does too, it makes more sense to develop transport aircraft that can operate in such conditions than to create new helicopter and tilt rotor types because they will be more expensive over time than the cost of flying in the materials and building a proper runway.
Near where I live there is a rather steep hill on a motorway. There is a rail tunnel that already goes under the hill but in their wisdom it was decided to continue using the hill, so millions have been spent on making a two lane motorway over the hill. Over the decades it has been there I don't know how much it has cost in terms of having to grit the road every winter, or the fact that trucks have to burn fuel climbing slowly up and then burn more fuel using engine brakes all the way down the other side when an obvious solution of extending the rail tunnel could have solved the problems...
You can spend billions of dollars developing tilt rotors and then millions more producing them and subsidising their cost so small communities in the far east can be connected and supplied, but it makes rather more sense building rail lines and runways and the odd road to connect some of these areas with much cheaper and more reliable transport means. Many isolated places it will be easier to build rail lines north to ports to connect them to the world and as they joint together then it becomes cheaper to visit and these places will grow and develop if there is something there worth staying for.
If there isn't then who cares?