Military Helicopters: Pictures and Videos

Thanks, but what is the designation?

And it's also avialable for Ka-50s?
The standard HMDS for Ka-50s was the Obzor-800 and i guess for Ka-50N they would use the Top-Owl like on Ka-52.

Maybe you have link to more informations about this HMDS?



EDITED:

I have asked a chinese speaking guy for short translation, the main reason was the white rounded thing on the bottom...



A. MISSILE APPROCHING WARNING SYSTEM
B. LASER WARNING RECEIVER
C. CHAFF DISPENSER
D. RADAR interference SYSTEM
E. IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM
F. WIRE CUTTER
G. high frequency aerial
H. landing light

The wire cutters are interesting, even if i doubt that in the real situation it could safe the helicopter from striking with the rotor blades against the wires without any consequences of lose of the rotors or entangle with them.

Also the Radar interference system i think it's a combination of RWR and interference system for better location?

But the big question is what is the White thing on the bottom which is shown on the picture in chinese.

GarryB wrote:The other page:

Considering its shape and location, I would say dopplar altitude radar antenna, but could be wrong.

So it's a backup system for the laser altimeter?

If i am not wrong i saw it on russian helicopters too,but they already had a doppler radio altimeter, but i could be wrong.

Here a picture of a Ka-50N with the wingtip pod of Ka-52.

I guess your assume is right that it is for controll of UAV's, i mean if it was the L-370-3 jamming pod they would fit it in both wingtips.

Or what do you think?

http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3135/nrlgw9r5_jpg.htm

I guess you are right with the black antennas for better signal between UAV and Helicopter.
This one wingtip pod is not straight but it bends down towards ground few kilometers infront of the Helicopter when it would fly, i guess if they don't needed that it is facing down they could make it straight which should be easier to fit in the wingtip pod, i mean could it be that this wingtip pod is a kind of Radar interference Sensor to track and locate SAM's for example?




I have also found a picture of an extra adjustment for the camera.

Direct infront of the HUD there is the camera with first button with REC and second with EJECT, must be a dinosaur of a camera.

http://s14.directupload.net/file/d/3136/2d4e7vxk_jpg.htm

And also a second picture which has i don't know what that is small indicator displays or what ever.
I mean this small aparatures on both sides of the HUD Bright adjustment and Day/Night adjustment.

http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3136/yr67icjy_jpg.htm


I could assume this are head tracking sensors for the Obzor-800 Helmets, but also they don't on all Ka-50's.

http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/3136/mmr4u5ea_jpg.htm


Also i found a picture where it is stated that they had the newer Zsh-7VS helmet like here on picture.

http://s14.directupload.net/file/d/3136/erzone5q_jpg.htm

There is for fact no UAV links on Ka-52 guys, not yet.

The reason the pods themselves look unbalanced (one side flat, other roundish) is they both have laser-warning receivers, one facing front, one back.
Not the most elegant solution, but it works.
EDIT: In retrospect, the pods certainly look different, but that is the explanation I always read before....hmm.
I think the rear LWR is right under the tail, the little square?


I actually have a related question, since in recent years LWR has become all the rage on aircraft + choppers....how often do they get lased in actuality ? Both for targeting and distance-finding?
Launch warning seems to me to be far more critical...

I find it kind a hard to find credible and good information about the chinese WZ-10, mostly informations that contradict with others like ejection seats that AFAIK were disproven and lot of other nonsense.
Does anyone knows a good accurate and credible source for precise and more than just statistics about the WZ-10?

I guess here is noone interested in chinese military,but anyway i am always open for sources about WZ-10/19.

Cloesley every source i've checked says that the Ka-50/52 can have up to 512 flares where it has only 128 flare holes in total.
Do they use smaller flare cartridges to fit up to 4 inside one whole or just smaller flares than 26.5mm with another flare despenser or they use extra Flare dispensers like on Mi-24 which should be easily stripped and provided with wiring and control wires to let them work. Or is that just a parroted myth from one source to another?

Yes, i guess so, because i've rechecked few sources and they are even horrible parrots not able to parroting it 1:1 from other sources.
In one source they say it has total of 512 flares/chaff in pods and in another source they say 512 per one wingtip flare dispencing pod.

I guess this is a horrible translation and rephrasing failure, maybe the dimension of the UV-26 or they just seen that from another source which refered to something diffrent than Ka-50 somewhere else.

As long i don't find anything that supports this claim with pictures and description of how exactly want to arrange 26.6 x 85 mm flare decoy cartridges inside this small flare dispensers i will stay with the obviously 128 flares and the 8 signal flares.

Mi-28A/N compartment room maybe in early stage without seats.






I've found on NII Ekran's site the "Кольчуга" translated as "mail" it's a selfdefense-suite also refered to L370-3 jammer but still not precise information about the squared wingtip pod on the left side of Ka-52.

http://www.samtel.ru/~ekran/koltsuga.htm

Onboard defense "Mail" (BSO)

BSO is designed to protect helicopters from defeat air defense systems short-range anti-aircraft artillery systems, man-portable air defense systems, fighter jets. Protection is provided by the detection of threats and counter attacking agents.

composition
CU
- Control unit complex
RWR
- The receiver of the radar radiation
-of-view, deg 360 x 60

-detection range of 120% of the range of the radar
- Range, GHz D-J

EW
- Radar jammer
- Working sector 120 x 60
- Range, GHz G-J
- Energy potential, W 300 ... 1000

LWR
- Receiver laser irradiation
- Field of view, deg 360 x 90
- Determining the bearing up, 10 degrees
- Wavelength, 0.4 mm ... 1.1

DIRCM
- direct infrared counter measures
- Protection sector, deg 360 x 90
- The width of the beam, degree 7
- The power of light in the infrared range, kW / sr 1.4

UV-26 flare dispenser
- Ejection device resources had
- Caliber 2.6
- The number of rounds of ammunition, 128 pieces (512x flare bullshit busted)

MAW
- missile launch detector
- Detection range, km 15
- Field of view, deg 360 x 90


Through the markings on the website i guess it's an old layout of MAW arrangement, even if i can't remember when they were planned and placed at front wingtip pods.

I guess the "purple" marking is not referring to the squared wingtip pod on the other side to be the radar jammer?
Also from the place where it is marked on this terrible small picture i can't see on any Ka-52 model any space on the stubbed wings for holdings or screws for external devices like jammers, so i guess it's the squared wingtip pod, also it's pointing down to the ground where radar stations in J-G band mostly are.

Sea trials with Test pilot Vitali Lebedev

I might be wrong but apparently here's some footage of the Iraqi military's Mi-28's in action in Iraq:

Maybe.

There are two possibilities i can think off.
A all this footage is from another vehicle that didn't launched the missiles and could possibly be Mi-28NE or that this are not necessarily Mi-28, since in the 3rd video there is clearly either a designation of the "target area" or an computerized sub system for heat target indication and i am not aware that Mi-28NE should have such system. Maybe a designation from the filming Helicopter for coordination with the actual launching Mi-28NE which would proof with the impact few meters next to the designation.


Maybe that are Mi-28NE and operating in 2 packs like i said in the last suggestion.

Edit: The 4th video shows it is a plane that designates targets, which exclude the filming of the Mi-28 but gives still the coordination and targeting for the helos.

It`s not Mi-28 , Iraq doesn`t have them in service in spite of report that 13 have been delivered.

And it`s not Mi-35M also but Cessna armed with two Hellfire missiles.

Werewolf wrote:Maybe.

There are two possibilities i can think off.
A all this footage is from another vehicle that didn't launched the missiles and could possibly be Mi-28NE or that this are not necessarily Mi-28, since in the 3rd video there is clearly either a designation of the "target area" or an computerized sub system for heat target indication and i am not aware that Mi-28NE should have such system. Maybe a designation from the filming Helicopter for coordination with the actual launching Mi-28NE which would proof with the impact few meters next to the designation.


Maybe that are Mi-28NE and operating in 2 packs like i said in the last suggestion.

Edit: The 4th video shows it is a plane that designates targets, which exclude the filming of the Mi-28 but gives still the coordination and targeting for the helos.

You might be right...time for some military mythbusters, the uploader loaded another video with no sound that resembles another video from an Apache firing on terrorists in Afghanistan:



^^^^The alleged Iraqi video.

Now here is the Apache footage in Afghanistan:

That is definetley an Apache, just looking at the inaccurate gun fire. Just waste of ammunition, no wonder it needs 1200 rounds.

This is what Iraqis use, and seen on posted videos.





Cessna-208

We will soon see Mi-35M vids in action , i hope.

I've seen Eurocopter Tiger firing its gun in similar situation, it was also very "innacurate", I think it is by intention. You want some spread when firing at groups of personnel.

TR1 wrote:I've seen Eurocopter Tiger firing its gun in similar situation, it was also very "innacurate", I think it is by intention. You want some spread when firing at groups of personnel.

On Apaches it was initially intented to be spread. There for the M230 also got the designation AWS (Aeral Weapon System). Before 2000 it was reported that the M230 accuracy has doubled and were reported to have 8.0m CEP from 1 km distance in hovering mode, meaning before it was around 16.0m CEP. But the plans have changed and they did try to make it more accurate which is not that easy with a weapon that was initially designed to "spray" the ammunition, but like you know they also use M789 HEDP which are nothing else but little shaped charged grenades and such inaccuracy is not helpfull when they are used against light armor, bad if you don't hit the target since they make no damage to APC's if they don't hit.

For EC 665 Tigers, they were never intented to be inaccurate. The weapon was not only advertized to be one of the most accurate with 2-3.0m CEP (only when firing in front sphere up to 8-10°+-), the problem with it is they use a M781 30mm Nexter gun which has 80% recoil of what the fully loaded Tiger has on its weight meaning with 6-8 kN.

The entire fuselage titls in longer firing bursts and those bursts you know are adjusted to  10-25 rounds bursts. They also found out this 30mm low-pressure Adena ammunition which is  same as Apache uses 30x114mm B still to powerfull for the NTOW or even MTOW of an Eurocopter Tiger. They really need to downgrade it to a 20mm weapon with 20x139mm like South Africa uses and their entire problems around fuselage cracks around the gun mounting and the really awfull offbore accuracy of the gun will disappear.