MI 24PN

[Russian Texan]

Tommorrow Russian army will recieve first five Mi 24PN helicopters which is an upgrade/evolution of Mi 24.

Special attention is paid to the round-the-clock application of guided and unguided armament in simple and adverse weather conditions.

It differs from the base model by:
- multifunctional complex of airborne radio-electronic equipment;
- high-performance armament complex;
- night vision goggles application;
- IF system of armament control;
- global positioning system;
- laser range finder;
- providing of closed radio communication;
- shortened wing with built-in load-lifting system and new external store racks;
- installation of high-rated engines;
- installation of fixed landing gear;
- new rotor system (fiberglass main rotor blades, X-shape tail rotor).
http://www.rostvertolplc.ru/GRAPHICS/FOTO/mi2409.jpg
http://www.rostvertolplc.ru/GRAPHICS/FOTO/mi2417.jpg

[UkrainianSpetsnaz]

Hey Muzhik! I said the same thing on the other forum too. But you know something what we needs is 2 or 3 thousand Ka-52's to go fly a "Humanitarian" mission to Chechnya.

[anonymous individual]

Hey Muzhik! I said the same thing on the other forum too. But you know something what we needs is 2 or 3 thousand Ka-52's to go fly a "Humanitarian" mission to Chechnya.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Groove]

Looks a little bit gay but i hope it will rocks in Chechnya !

Groove

[Vytiambergas]

Looks fine!

[George W. Bush]

Are helos still getting shot up with MANPADs in Chechnya or is it all secure now?

[UkrainianSpetsnaz]

AHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHA what are MANPADS??? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

Are those like uhh... LOL :hug:

[UkrainianSpetsnaz]

Some other Mi-24 pics


Mi-24D
http://naoruzanje.paracin.co.yu/mi24-1.jpg

Mi-24V
http://naoruzanje.paracin.co.yu/mi24-2.jpg

Mi-24V
http://naoruzanje.paracin.co.yu/mi24-5.jpg

Mi-24P
http://naoruzanje.paracin.co.yu/mi24-3.jpg

[Fox2]

AHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHA what are MANPADS??? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

Are those like uhh... LOL :hug:

MANPADS are MAN Portable Air Defense Systems, yah goof.


Hey, did you guys see that bit on Wings about the Mi-24 Hind in Afghanistan and such?

I learned a little interesting fact...If it is still currently a fact....

According to the program: Russian pilots are lucky to get a few flight hours a month due to money shortages (gas, etc.)

Which makes the most active Mi-24 Hind unit in the world...That's right...The OPFOR Aviation Training unit for the US Army.

[MVSpartan117]

Looks awsome!

I love ruskie hardware! woot

[Fox2]

Looks awsome!

I love ruskie hardware! woot

I like Russian hardware too! This Hind is really nice! Can take out armor and fortifications, and then land 8 troops on the ground.

It's neat how everything from the different countries has a sort of character to it that is unique to the country. Russia's stuff is very rugged, very reliable, able to stand up to a little dirt and rocks. But not quite as advanced as the West. (Well, that may not be true anymore)

Examples: Mi-24, Su-25, Kalashnikov series.

Whereas the US has that "Cowboy spirit" but with an edge of high technology, and not as rugged as Russian tech.

Examples: F-22, F-16, A-10 :) M16/M4

I think this is true of any nation, really.

[George W. Bush]

I didnt' notice that the wings were shortened to make it more maneuverable. good job russkies!

[Russian Texan]

AHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAAHAHA what are MANPADS??? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

Are those like uhh... LOL :hug:

MANPADS are MAN Portable Air Defense Systems, yah goof.


Hey, did you guys see that bit on Wings about the Mi-24 Hind in Afghanistan and such?

I learned a little interesting fact...If it is still currently a fact....

According to the program: Russian pilots are lucky to get a few flight hours a month due to money shortages (gas, etc.)

Which makes the most active Mi-24 Hind unit in the world...That's right...The OPFOR Aviation Training unit for the US Army.

This topic was already discussed in another thread.
That TV program, as well as an article, dates back to early nineties... And even though that statement was "slight" exaggeration, it still was pretty close to the actual situation.
The immediate years after break up of the USSR were the most miserable for the russian military in all senses and especially flight hours wise. In that period of time it was all about politics and finance schemes aimed at personal enrichement at the expense of anything and everything.
BTW, OPFOR unit has only one Mi 24, one AN 2 (1947 model year) and one Mi 8, wow... what a "strike squadron".

Mi 24 is my all time favorite combat helicopter.
Fast, heavily armed and armored, capable of operating in the NBC weapons contaminated enviroment, rugged, reliable, battle proven and simply beautiful in its own mean way :)

http://www.af.mil/photos/images/helicopters_mi24_0001.jpg

http://www.af.mil/photos/images/helicopters_mi24_0002.jpg

[HMMcrewchief]

Why switch to a forward firing cannon? I personally would orefer the chin turret gun version. Other wise I have always admired the MI-24, one hell of a chopper! An awsome design.

[thatguy96]

What about those Indonesian (IIRC) Mi-35s (export Hind) with the chin mounted dual 23mm cannon? Why is that only present on export models?

[Russian Texan]

The Hind-series gunships have been widely exported in special export variants, with slightly downgraded avionics. The "Mi-25" is an export version of the Hind-D, while the "Mi-35" is similarly an export version of the Hind-E, and the "Mi-35P" is an export version of the Hind-F.

As for the armament differences, judging by Mi 24, Mi 28 and Ka 50/52, russian army doesn't consider anything less than 30mm to be an option for their "domestic models" .
Twin Gsh-30 was higly praised by the flying crews in Afganistan and Chechnya and that is why they are sticking with it.
I remember seeing once, on TV, Mi 24 firing it's twin 30mm cannons...it was beyond definition of an "awesome firepower". The only problem is that in order to aim it, entire chopper has to be turned. Gsh-30 is not exactly a "surgical scalpel" like AH 64's cannon is, it's more of an "axe".

[obd]

Question: It seems on pic two of the new Hind that it has a combination of a fixed heavy cal. cannon and a turret mounted cannon as well. Is this the first time the two systems have been combined on the same helo?? I have seen examples with only the fixed cannon and then otherswith only the chin mounted cannon.

[16 OBr SpN]

I learned a little interesting fact...If it is still currently a fact....

According to the program: Russian pilots are lucky to get a few flight hours a month due to money shortages (gas, etc.)

Which makes the most active Mi-24 Hind unit in the world...That's right...The OPFOR Aviation Training unit for the US Army.

One thing is for sure, during both Chechen wars they flew (and still operate) much more than you can imagine.

Regards,
16 OBr SpN

[Fox2]

BTW, OPFOR unit has only one Mi 24, one AN 2 (1947 model year) and one Mi 8, wow... what a "strike squadron".

Mi 24 is my all time favorite combat helicopter.
Fast, heavily armed and armored, capable of operating in the NBC weapons contaminated enviroment, rugged, reliable, battle proven and simply beautiful in its own mean way :)


Well, like I said, I didn't know if it was still a fact!

The OPFOR unit is only supposed to help in training infantry soldiers. I was not saying that it is "oh so much better than the Russian units." So I don't appreciate your sarcasm. :P

I respect Russian aviators. Obviously they are and were pretty damned good if we (the US) thought you were a threat enough to design whole doctrines based on a counter to Russian doctrine!

And yes, I like the Hind also. ;) It was built in the same spirit as the A-10. Rugged, dependable, tough, and mean!

The thing I like about the Mi-24 is that it not only can do a lot in the attack role, but can also carry a whole infantry squad into enemy territory. No "Western" helicopter mimics that ability.

Although I have to say my favorite all-time attack chopper is the AH-64D Apache Longbow :D

Hey, I gotta represent my country here ;)

[GazB]

"I didnt' notice that the wings were shortened to make it more maneuverable."

The wing size was reduced to reduce weight and to effect lift from the rotors less.

Although they are smaller they are from the Mi-28 and therefore are wired to carry on the outer pylons 8 Ataka missiles each side. The original Hind could only carry 8 Atakas in total, so with the new stub wings can carry 16 Atakas and still have the two inner pylons free for rocket pods or fuel tanks or whatever.

The ability of this new model to fight and fly at night will greatly improve performance and reduce losses. Most of the weapons that bring down helos are optically guided and aimed, so flying at night reduces vulnerability. The addition of a laser rangefinder will also greatly improve the performance of unguided weapons.

"Which makes the most active Mi-24 Hind unit in the world...That's right...The OPFOR Aviation Training unit for the US Army."

That only applied during the times the Russians weren't operating in Chechnia.
And even then there are a rather large number of Hind operators around the world... I doubt the OPFOR US unit was in the top 5.

"Why switch to a forward firing cannon? I personally would orefer the chin turret gun version."

The problem with the chin turret is that it is a 50 cal. Granted with duplex rounds it could fire 9-10,000 projectiles per minute with an accurate range of 1,500m (note the duplex rounds have two bullets in each single bullet case... with normal ammo the rate of fire is still 4,500-5,000rpm with a four barrel gatling gun) but it is still a 50 cal. When the guys on the ground are firing back with 50 cal or 57 cal then you are in trouble. An early twin 23mm turret was tested but it had feeding problems. The next solution was to fit a twin 30mm cannon. Firing at 3,500 rpm this is a very powerful weapon with very good range and accuracy and was particularly effective against light armoured vehicles. It was operated by the pilot... just like the unguided Rockets, with the gunner operating the ATGMs with a stabilised sight and any other guided weapons.
The current solution is the Mi-24VP with a 23mm twin barrel gun in a nose turret with the feeding problem solved.

"It seems on pic two of the new Hind that it has a combination of a fixed heavy cal. cannon"

That second picture shows the model with the twin 30mm gun... the dark thing below the nose of the helo is the shadow of the twin 30mm.

There are quite a few variations including the training model of the hind which doesn't have any gun, to the artillery spotting version with the 4 barrel gatling and a large new sight next to it, but none with both weapons.

Of course the Russians have a gun pod that mounts a single 50 cal four barrel gun in the centre and two four barrel 30 cal gattlings on either side of the 50 cal... two of those would mean two 50 cal HMGs firing 5,000rpm plus 4 30 cals firing 6,000rpm each... that is 34,000rpm for the two... and a Hind can carry four plus its own armament. Not much good against anything armoured though.

[Uninen]

Fox2,

Just a little correction..

Su-25 and its variants have always been more high-tech than A-10 and that will remain that way..

Newest frogfoot in operational status:

Su-39..

with active laser protection system and all..

No need to carry hundreds of flare cartidges anymore..

And its sensors..

Well even Su-25 has sensors.. A-10 has none.. (Only laser range finder and marked target seeker..) well.. its AGM-65 has..

Sukhois have TV, FLIR, LLLTV.. etc..

rofl

Oh yeah..

Su-39 has also a radar..

:hug: rofl

[Fox2]

The Su-25 still doesn't have a true HUD though! :P :D

Yep, you're right, the 'Hog doesn't have all that fancy schmancy stuff...Because it doesn't need it! ;)

We don't need no stinkin' radar! :P

It's also more durable (I think)!

So...booyah!



On a more serious note....How many of the Su-39s are being fielded? Just curious.



EDIT: By the way, why is everyone coming after me? :roll: I didn't say anything bad about the Russian hardware! I infact said that I liked it! :bash:

Seems whenever someone (read: American) says something regarding the Western planes and the Eastern planes at one time regardless of its content or purpose, every non-American comes out of the wood and in essence says "Well, our stuff is better than your stuff! Look how big my ***** is!"

Once again, I like Russian stuff. I didn't say it was the worst thing since bread crums. I never said the West was vastly superior. I just conveyed the "spirit" of the different technologies. And I infact pointed out in my original sentence that I didn't know if the OPFOR statement was a fact! C'mon people!

Where's a fire extinguisher to douse these flames?

End rant.

[oldsoak]

Nice bit of Russian kit. Just the thing for chasing the Taliban.
rgds

[Russian Texan]

It is kinda funny to see a guy from Finland stand up for Russian hardware with such a passion:)

I just don't see why are you arguing, A 10 is a Great ground attack aircraft so is Su 25/39.
If you are going to fight, at least find some meaningfull controversial issue :)

Here is some info and pics of Su 39 (in service since '96)

http://vvv.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/su-39-roy-1.jpg

http://www.ef2000.de/images/su-39_02.jpg

http://www.bearcraft-online.com/museum/photos/b.65.0.jpg

http://arms.ashst.com/aircraft/su39.htm

[Fox2]

It is kinda funny to see a guy from Finland stand up for Russian hardware with such a passion:)

I just don't see why are you arguing, A 10 is a Great ground attack aircraft so is Su 25/39.
If you are going to fight, at least find some meaningfull controversial issue :)

Here is some info and pics of Su 39 (in service since '96)

Hey, I am not arguing, I said in the beginning they are both awesome! :D

Then, because I am an American and not Russian or European, everyone jumps on me with this East vs. West stuff. We're official allies now, folks. Okay? The Cold War is over.

[Russian Texan]

I wasn't talking to you, it was addressed to the Uninen.

[GazB]

Actually the Su-39 has not entered service and will not for the forseeable future. The Su-39 is better known as the Su-25TM, which was designed in the Mid 80s based on testing in Afghanistan of the Su-25 and was designed almost in parallel. Things added included improved autopilot, improved navigation and lots of guided weapons and modern self defence suite that included Anti radiation missiles. These features (except the improved autopilot) were not needed for Afghanistan, but were expected to be necessary for use in Europe and were added by Sukhoi without the RuAF requesting them.

Currently the Su-25SM upgrade has been approved and is entering service. Several hundred aircraft will receive the upgrade, which includes EO targeting system and radar. The latter allows 24 hour all weather bombing and the use of R-77 (AMRAAM class) AAMs for self defence. Also it can attack ships, and the Vikhr missile can be loaded on two of the pylons... when loaded the 16 Vikhr missiles use up only two of the 11 weapon pylons and have a range of 15km. (The Su-25SM adds a centreline pylon).

[Fox2]

I wasn't talking to you, it was addressed to the Uninen.


:| I keep doing that. :oops:

To all future people who I misunderstand...Please accept my apologies and forgive me for my reading too far into messages. :|

Breathe, Fox....I need less stress 0.o

[Russian Texan]

GazB, I have different info regarding Su 39/25 TM. I looked around and and most of the sources, including MilParade say it entered service back in 1996.
This article is about 6 years old but still provides some info regarding "TM" and there is another one (in Russian though) mentioning 25 TM flying missions in Chechnya.

Russian Air Forces have eight Su-25Ts, delivered to Akhtubinsk test centre (two) and Lipetsk training base (six) in 1990-91; further 12 remain uncompleted at Tbilisi, but all planned to be upgraded at Ulan-Ude to Su-25TM. Four Lipetsk aircraft took part in bombing of Chechnya during 2000. Two of Tbilisi stock delivered to Ethiopia (with two UB trainers) in early 2000. Initial batch of seven Su-25 TMs built at Ulan-Ude; third aircraft was first delivered to Russian Air Forces in early 1998. Initial Russian requirement for 24 Su-25TMs to serve in six regional rapid-deployment groups, each of four Su-25TMs and 12 Su-25s, plus helicopters. Two TMs (Nos. 4 and 5) ordered by Russia in 1999 and due for delivery in 2001; further three planned for funding in 2001. Georgia has requirement for 50 TMs, and reportedly ordered three in 1996 and more in 1998.

[Kingpin]

Actually the Su-39 has not entered service and will not for the forseeable future. The Su-39 is better known as the Su-25TM, which was designed in the Mid 80s based on testing in Afghanistan of the Su-25 and was designed almost in parallel. Things added included improved autopilot, improved navigation and lots of guided weapons and modern self defence suite that included Anti radiation missiles. These features (except the improved autopilot) were not needed for Afghanistan, but were expected to be necessary for use in Europe and were added by Sukhoi without the RuAF requesting them.

Currently the Su-25SM upgrade has been approved and is entering service. Several hundred aircraft will receive the upgrade, which includes EO targeting system and radar. The latter allows 24 hour all weather bombing and the use of R-77 (AMRAAM class) AAMs for self defence. Also it can attack ships, and the Vikhr missile can be loaded on two of the pylons... when loaded the 16 Vikhr missiles use up only two of the 11 weapon pylons and have a range of 15km. (The Su-25SM adds a centreline pylon).

Su-39 entered service in limited numbers and it is battle proven (1999 Dagestan)

[GazB]

It is not really in service... it is still in the experiemental stage. The design itself is mature as it is a mid 80s design but having a dozen in service means you can test it, and you can create the flight manuals and create procedures and tactics for using it but it is not really fully in service. It is a bit like if there were 25 AN-94 rifles being used by Spetsnaz troops. They will no doubt be taken into combat areas, tested both on ranges and in the field, but to be fully operational they really need to be produced in much larger numbers. In this case the Su-25SM has been chosen to be produced in large numbers. It is cheaper than the TM modification and almost as capable. No doubt the use of the TM in active units against real targets helped the design of the SM, much like the early model Su-25s were tested in afghanistan and modified before the final model was ready for serial production.