From 8.5.2008 Todays pics:
Anyone know what kind of BRDM-2 mod that is?
They have not withdrawn from the treaty, they are just no accepting being bound by its limitations till someone else actually signs it too. They had signed it first and were limited by the treaty but no one else had signed it. Everyone else had pretty much said they wont sign it till the Russian troops are out of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. That is a bit cheeky as there is nothing in the treaty that requires EU or NATO forces out of Kosovo, or Russian forces out of Abkhazia or South Ossetia.Russia suspended the observance of CFE treaty obligations in 2007. No more limits, until CFE treaty is observed by the rest.
The Russians still want the CFE and will return to it when the other parties sign and are bound by its restrictions because it is the only thing limiting conventional armed forces in Europe. Russia can't afford a military arms race... NATO has the financial muscle to make rather more tanks and APCs and Helos and Artillery than Russias economy can afford to sustain. The Russians see the CFE treaty as the only tool they have to limit NATOs force levels. Of course not all of NATO has signed the CFE treaty anyway but as far as they are concerned something is better than nothing.
Thanks... that is nice to hear.. and thanks to others here for doing the right thing... this remains my favourite thread on the internet.Russian crew is 100% for You staying in this tread,
Thanks for that vid. I had seen it on another website but it was very high resolution... like DVD quality and it was something like 75MB for a 1.5 minute piece of video.Presentation video of the TIPCHAK UAV:
Interesting that it is launched by reusable bungee cord instead of the rocket booster the Pchelka uses. That should reduce costs as well as launch signature.
Stop being naughty Rostov... a mix of blur and sharp in a digital image can often be a case of the compression algorithm the JPEG compression uses.a definate photoshop, some of the lighting doesnt match, a mix of blur and sharp instances,
These gunpods are real and have been used in operations for quite some time.
Have heard that they are not hugely popular because they obviously are aimed by the pilot by manoeuvring the entire aircraft and that the 30 cal guns are effective out to only about 800m against soft targets out in the open while the 12.7mm guns are effective at longer range they really lack the punch of real cannon. A GUV universal gunpod with a 30mm grenade launcher is more popular but with only about 300 grenades per pod a UPK-23 probably makes more sense. At the range you would have to use it a 20 shot 80mm rocket pod would probably also be more effective in killing soft targets. For smaller point targets the UPK-23 is quite accurate and packs punch against most targets except tanks which it would only superficially damage.
[quote]Looks like the latest upgrade.[quote]
Is that the new model with side doors added and the chain powered belly wheels removed?
Trust me. The pod was designed to carry a single 12.7mm calibre gatling gun in the centre and two 7.62mm calibre four barrel gatling guns either side of it, or a single AG-17 30mm grenade launcher in the centre position. Ammo loads are something like 750 rounds of 50 cal and 1,250 rounds per 30 cal gun or 300-400 30mm grenades.Hmm....
How about you go to the Mil website to their gallery page and look at the picture I link to below:
On this page:
This picture... which I will admit isn't great:
In this picture you can see a Hind with ATAKAs on the outer wing positions and the outer weapons pylons (total = 8 which is the max capacity of that model due to wing wiring limits). On the inner wing pylons you can see two 80mm 20 shot rocket pods with a stack of rockets in front of each pod. This is the Model F Hind with the side mounted twin barrel 30mm cannon and ATAKA missiles (the E model having ATAKAs but retains the old 50 cal nose mounted gatling).
In front of the helo layed out from left to right is a dumb FAB-250-62 bomb, a twin barrel 23mm cannon pod, a GUV universal gun pod we are talking about with no weapons fitted into it, then two KGMU-2 cluster bomb cassettes (note these are like cluster bombs but remain on the aircraft. The bottom of them opens up to release cluster munitions and you can vary the types and numbers of munitions carried based on the intended target. Unlike a normal cluster bomb they remain attached to the aircraft and can be refilled and reused over and over.) Then there is a second GUV pod, another 23mm gun pod and another bomb.
In front it looks like three belts of ammo that I would guess by the look of their size are 23mm for the 23mm gunpod at the rear, 12.7mm for the GUV gunpod next and in the front 7.62 x 54mm also for the GUV gunpod.
As you can imagine that when the enemy has access to 50 cal and even 57 cal HMGs that the 50 cal weapons on the Hind were not popular. The 30mm grenade launcher allowed lots of HE to rapidly sweep an area or LZ but the 12.7 and 7.62mm weapons were really only good for close range sweeping an area... a PK in the rear door or a chin mounted turreted 50 cal was better for this than wing mounted fixed gunpods.
There is a reason the chin turret was replaced with first a fixed twin 30mm gun and then later a nose turret mounted twin 23mm gun. With a pod mounted 23mm gun there was little reason to carry the GUV most of the time so it was not widely used or particularly popular.
For those that can read Russian would you mind translating this:
Для наращивания огневой мощи вертолетов Ми-24 всех модификаций в конце 70-х гг. были разработаны подкрыльевые контейнеры ГУВ (гондолы универсальные вертолетные) с двумя вариантами оснащения: либо один пулемет ЯкБ-12,7 и два таких же высокотемпных пулемета ГШГ-7,62 (ТКБ-621) калибра 7,62 мм, либо гранатомет АГС-17 «Пламя» калибра 30 мм. В дальнейшем на боевых вертолетах стали устанавливать универсальные пушечные контейнеры УПК-23-250 с пушкой ГШ-23 калибра 23 мм. Кроме блоков неуправляемых реактивных снарядов малого (57 мм) калибра С-5 на Ми-24 стали использовать блоки неуправляемых ракет С-8 (калибра 80 мм), а также более крупные НАР типа С-13 (122 мм) и С-24 (240 мм), блоки осветительных ракет, универсальные контейнеры малых грузов КМГ-У, различные бомбы калибра до 500 кг. В опытном порядке была проверена возможность оснащения Ми-24 и другими типами вооружения, в том числе ракетами класса «воздух — воздух» Р-60, Р-73 и 9М39 «Игла». Во второй половине 80-х гг. некоторые Ми-24В в войсках были дооборудованы держателями под ракеты Р-60.
Which is also from the Mil website:
I know it is talking about the GUV... or ГУВ. It also mentions the 30 cal and 50 cal gatlings and the AGS-17 Plamya AGL. I can't read what else it says... it probably mentions it wasn't popular of effective but would be interested to read a proper translation of it.
For upgrading of firepower of MI-24 all modifications, in the end of 70-s were made under-wing containers GUV (Gondola Universalnya Vertoletnaya (Helo)) with 2 variants of equipment: 1 machinegun ЯкБ-12,7 and 2 fast-shooting machineguns ГШГ-7,62 (ТКБ-621) 7.62 caliber, or АГС-17 “Plamya” 30 mm cal. Next on military helos were installed universal gun containers УПК-23-250 with Gsh-23 gun 23 mm cal. With dumb rocket pods of small caliber (57mm) C-5, on Mi-24 started to install dumb rocket pods C-8 (80mm cal), and bigger C-13 (122 mm cal) C-24 (240 mm cal), also pods for light flares, universal containers for small cargo КМГ-У, bombs up to 500 kg caliber. In Experimental order, was tested ability of installing on MI-24 over types of weaponry, AA missiles R-60, R-73 and 9M39 “Igla”. In second half of 80-s some MI-24B were upgraded with locks for R-60 missiles
wow. I just looked at the first 50-60 pages of this thread. Amazing photos from a guy named RomanS.
BIZON submachine gun. This one is an inert one.
Also, They do still have the largest Nuclear ****nal, that is a deterrence right there. And the CFE treaty is what they fell from, just like America did in 2004. So they will build up their army, if you like it or not. That is why they are in good relations with China, they can probably use China as quite the ally in terms of man power. At that, don't think it will be just NATO vs Russia. It will be more like NATO vs Russia + CIS countries that are loyal to Russia, China, and probably some third world country Russia could use as missile bases and what not (Cuba).