Best Attack Helicopter?

TR1 wrote:Mi-28 was barely ready at the time, and it is still not fitted out to the same extent as Apache.
No surprise.

More importantly the Apache won because it was the lowest bidder (L1) . In other words the cost of purchasing and MRO related to the Apache was found to be less than that of the MI 28 .

Had India been a Saudi Arabia or China or any other such country with tremendous amount of reserves there would have been no need for a L1 . But India like the US and EU runs huge current account deficits which runs into hundreds of billions of dollars ( primarily because of Govt mismanagement ) so it is unwise for such a country to go in for a bidder who charges a price that can be bettered by another.

Like was said previously, the Apache is a mature weapons system with all bells and whistles available and tested.

I kinda doubt it will work out cheaper than the Mi-28 and I don't think it's a better platform. The Mi-28 beat the Apache during the Swedish trials in the 1990's. But I guess Sweden can be considered similar to the Mi-28's natural environment.

________


Mi-28N Radar




More here: http://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-air/rls-vertolyota-mi-28n/

I was always impressed by Mil's armored layouts for their helicopters, especially the cockpit armor for the Mi-28 which is quite impressive:





...While in stark contrast The Apache's cockpit armor is not anywhere as stellar:

"...King and Tomblin's Apache was hit by a burst of AK-47 fire which penetrated the cockpit and struck the former in the throat as he was calling out fires..."

http://books.google.com/books?id=DHmkC_HOyCYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=AH-64+Apache+Units+of+Operations+Enduring+Freedom+and+Iraqi+Freedom&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0gvHUoPzCuHN2AX38YCgBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=AH-64%20Apache%20Units%20of%20Operations%20Enduring%20Freedom%20and%20Iraqi%20Freedom&f=false

Apache cockpit penetrated by AK fire? Really?
Good gosh that's weak

Most of the transparency is not armored at all, so no surprise.

The structure below is meant to absorb somewhat large rounds though.

flamming_python wrote:Apache cockpit penetrated by AK fire? Really?
Good gosh that's weak

I was surprised too! You'd think that the Pentagon would at least prioritize 7.62 x 39 mm resistant bullet proof glass in America's main attack helicopter, apparently that never crossed their minds...or maybe they have improved the Apache's cockpit armor, but you have to admit that was a glaring oversight/error in the Apache's initial design. I wonder if they haven't improved the cockpit armor why would the Indians choose an Apache over the Ka-52 with it's ejection seat technology if that's the case?

I don't understand why you are suprised.
It should be no news to you guys that i am totally insane when it comes to helicopters and especially Attack helicopters.
I  researched quite a few things about attack helicopters and for example the AH-64,AH-1, CSH-2 Rooivalk and Tiger EC665 all use the same cockpit glass made by the company "PPG Aerospace".

http://www.ppg.com/coatings/aerospace/transparencies/militaryaviation/documents/boeing_apache_ah-64_final.pdf

This file shows what kind of "bulletproof" glass the Apache exactly uses.
It says, it uses mainly acrylic "plastic" sheets and "polycarbonate" which is nothing else but a reinforced plastic.

The company PPG Aerospace itself differ their products in "Transparency Armor" which only sell bullet proof glass for ground vehicles such as Hummvees.
Go on www.ppg.com and "Transparencies" and than go on "Military Aviation" and "Military Aviation Programm" all aircrafts are listed use only Non bullet proof glasses.

It is a ballistic shield to improve performance and safety for pilots explecit against shockwaves from MANPADS and low protection against impacts of flying around parts, but not direct impact from a projectile nor fragmentations of any kind of Warheads.

Also the current bulletproof glasses in military regardless of what kind of vehicle are all made of sheets of real glass and plastic foils/sheets and weight alot, for those of you who don't know, glass that isn't flat can't be bulletproof like side windows on Mi-24 which are just reinforced acryl glass same as AH-1 and AH-64 side and top windshields, the Apaches Flat windshields infront of each Pilot have a few more sheets thinner and are flat to improve the transparency and visibility for the pilots, they also have higher crashworthiness and more resistant to scratches to endure a high optical quality.

The only thing on the Apache (or better to say inside of it) that is bulletproof is the single bulletproof sheet that is located exactly behind the WSO's head that seperates both cockpits, it is believed to withstand 12.7mm ammunition, but from the look of it from various videos and pictures it should only sustain fire of 7.62mm. I can be wrong about this but what i could see it looks like about 1.5cm thick, while 12.7mm bulletproof glass of Mi-28 is about 45mm thick.

1st Lt. King survived the single AK-47 round that hit his left side cockpit glass and hit his throat.

And the video you have posted was translated by me.  


PS: What i almost forgot to add.

Western countries have a very odd design of ballistic protection for their Pilots.
For example everyone knows how russians do it, they entirely bulletproof the cockpit from almost all angles, while western designes such as Apache or even worse the Tiger use only seperated ballistic protective armor sheets inside the hull centering around the pilot itself, instead of making the entire fuselage around the cockpit section bullet proof like russians do.

If you don't know what i mean look on this side picture from this side about AH-64 Apaches.



http://voodoo-world.cz/ah64/info.html

Of course the Aviation bay beneath the crew is protected by itself, but for example exact beneath the pilot is unprotected the Ammunition storage of the M230 cannon or the "robby tank" the 3rd fuel tank that can be installed to improve endurance but cuts of the ammunition from 1200 to 300 rounds of 30x113mm B.

The Tiger is one of the worst with even more laughable protection design. For instance, the german EC665 Tiger PAH-2 was reported (without proof) that the Bundeswehr (Bundesamt für Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung) which means "Federal Office of Defence Technology and Procurement" had purchased Tigers without the standardized armor but ordered a "lite" version. First this report sounded totally stupid but their was afterwards signs that it maybe true. Since they purchased ASGARD-F upgrade package which implemented armored steel sheets which were mounted to the pilots site of the fuselage.



And now comes the weirdest point of the ballistical protection of western helicopters, since the armor is scathered around the helicopter the crashworthy seats of the pilots are armored from sides to compansate the rather thin armor. It maybe not a big issue for Apache sins it has a 2 layered cockpit with a titanium alloy cockpit capsule or also called "bathtub" and than the outer skin that also gives the bird its more aerodynamic shape made of alluminium alloy same as Mi-28/24/Ka50/52, but the rest of western helicopters have a rather thin ballistical protection.
Just watch for example the A-129 which is so thin but were also advertised to be capable to withstand 23mm rounds, which i personally would not be so sure.

Very interesting writeup Werewolf.   

A picture is worth a thousand words...

I aggree, a picture is worth thousand words.

You all know that every current existing Attack Helicopter is advertised to survive or is capable to sustain single hits of 23mm HE,HEF,HEFI/HEI rounds.

Ok lets see the cockpit sections of all those helicopters and than decide which of this should sustain more.

A-129 and just take a look at the thickness of the cockpit armor section, it is scary thin compared to others.



Also a T-129P1 prototype crashed, or at least it supposed to be a Turkish prototype.
From such weak structural space beneath the pilots they will get higher G's to sustain then on other helicopters.

Just watch the space beneath the WSO compare this to other AH's.



Aftermath of crash



EC 665 Tigre

You can see a mechanic on the right side for size comperision to a human


CSH-2 which is believed to have same protection as AH-1Z,AH-64 and WZ-10.






ah-1Z Viper
The viper is little bit special since the hull was little bit widened to fit more redundant and more modern avionics in it which also the protection had its benefits, the empty weight increased from about 3tones of all previous models to 5.5t which adds for the armor when not counting the weight of new equipment the structural grow and newer rotor head system and IR supprressors about 20-30% of this or should be benefitial to to crew protection, mainly the protection from beneath and sides for the mid section.



WZ-10, which is about the figure of protection level near AH-1Z and AH-64.

The side windows are definetley not bulletproof, but the front flat windshield could be, even tho i couldn't find perfect pictures of a closeup from the right angle to see its thickness.



AH-64



The structural skelette of AH-64 which resambles the titanium alloy inner protection line, the titanium plates are only surrounding the pilots seperatley.
The Apache and the crew survivability benefits from the avionic bay that is later built around the cockpit section along with the weapon feeding system, giving it a little bit more armor.

And for my astouning the Apache has one of the highest if not the highest crash worthyness when considering how the M230 chaingun is mounted, right beneath the WSO, even after very hard crashes were pilots almost died or died, the canon wasn't smashed through the floor into the cockpit.

I guess i don't need to post farther pictures of Mi-28/24 and Ka-50/52 which have the highest amount of armor.


http://www.file-upload.net/download-8479237/-----50----.---------------1997-.djvu.html

From the book of A. Mazepov, A. Mihkaev, V. Zenkin, A Zhirnov and A. Fomin about the Ka-50 called Polygon from 1996, on Page 31, there is said how the Armor was made on Ka-50 and after that also installed on Mi-28.
It is  a 3 hardlinered armor, the inner cockpit section made of a full single titanium alloy "bathtub" covering both pilots, followed by a middle liner of ceramic plates, which caused trouble first after a single shot they break apart and lost all its protective abilities, they avoided that by covering this ceramic plates with kevlar/aramid that was glued on tightend and the outer liner which gives the aerodynamic shape and is made of alluminium alloy with a part carbon in it. The total armor per pilot for russian Ka-50 which they could use was about 300kg while the Apache uses about 90kg of armor per pilot. The Mi-28 has about 250-280kg which was mentioned somewhere else. The Ka-52 has less armor than both Mi-28 and Ka-50 spend for each pilot but it is still in the figure of 150-200kg.


And all of this Helicopters clearance of space beneath the pilots is much higher than on A-129/T-129 which would have to suffer higher injuries from crashes than any other AH.

Thank you very very much, GarryB.

I'm collecting such informations for personal work, it also gives me some ground to make a "mapping" of what weapons are effective and less effective against certain attack helicopters.


I also tried to find someone willing who speaks chinese and knows the common military terminology to provide informations about WZ-10 direct from chinese sources, if you ever find something reliable i would be happy to lie my eyes on that information.

Is there footage of other helicopters firing their cannons at insurgents, is there enough video footage which we could compare accuracy. How does the Apache's cannon accuracy stack up against the Mi-24/35, Mi-28, Ka-50/52? I know you said by default M230 is probably the worst, but technical data is also helpful, thanks!

Well i can only recall data for the chainguns autocannons in closed accuracy tests, since videoes of attack helicopters are rare and influences of different temperature,wind, range and flight speed has an effect on the accuracy.

During closed accuracy tests for the weapons for certain helicopters were performed dring hovering about 30-50m altitude on distance of 1km.

AH-64A
M230 with about 16.0m CEP and were reported to have modernized to reduce it to 7.0-8.0m CEP

calibre:               30x114mm B (low pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      1.68m
weight:               56kg with turret ( about 200kg+)
recoil in kN:        13-15 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 7.0-8.0m CEP


EC 665 Tiger
M781 Nexter 30mm same calibre as M230 with 2.0-3.0m CEP  (only in frontal sphere of about 8-10° to each side, since reports of afghanistan have stated that the accuracy drops dramatically if it is fired offbore.

calibre:                30x114mm B (low pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      1.87m
weight:               65kg  (with turret 205kg)
recoil in kN:        13-15 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 2.0-3.0m CEP

CSH-2 Rooivalk
Armscor F2 M693
calibre:                20x139mm B (high pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2m
recoil in kN:        3.5 kN  (doubtful source)
effective range:   2-2.5 km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 2.0-3.0m CEP

AH-1Z
M197 (turret desig. A/A49E-7(V4))
calibre:                20x102mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.52m
weight:               60-68kg (with turret feed sys. --) maybe 180kg
recoil in kN:        5.8-20 kN  (20 kN in endless burst)
effective range:   1.5km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 8.0m CEP

A/T-129 same figures as AH-1Z since it uses same weapon, but probably with lower accuracy since it weights less and has already an output of 5.8 kN recoil in bursts.

WZ-10  (hard to come by for certain informations, but the gun is a Type 23-1 which already provides good informations)
Type 23-1 copy of AM-23-1

calibre:                23x115mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.45m
weight:               39kg (with turret feed sys. --) maybe 145kg
recoil in kN:        4-8 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
Since i don't know exact figures for it and since it uses a rather moderate weapon on a havier helo the figures should be between2.0-5.0m CEP

Ka-50/52
2A42 Shipunov on turret NPPU-80

calibre:                30x165mm (high pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2.4m
weight:               115kg (with turret around 160-180kg)
recoil in kN:        40-50 kN  (source of BMP-2 figure)
effective range:   4km (against infantry)
accuracy at 1km range hovering  under 2.0m CEP, figures of Ka-50 given by Chief Designer Sergej Viktorowich Mikhev that the accuracy was not higher than 1.5m CEP!!

Mi-24VM2 (Mi-35M)
Gsh-23L (turret NPPU-23)

calibre:                23x115mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.54m
weight:               51kg (with turret 205+kg)
recoil in kN:        80 kN  (through the RPM of 3400)
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering was not provided (assumption 8-12m CEP)

Mi-24P
Gsh 30-2K

calibre:                30x165mm (highest pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2.4-2.7m
weight:               126kg
recoil in kN:        120 kN  (with 2600 RPM)
effective range:   1.5-4km (when fired in low RPM of 300 it is highly accurate and effective range is 4km but not in 2600rpm than it varies from burst length and skill of pilot)
accuracy at 1km range hovering from 4.0m to 20m CEP, depends mostly on skill of pilot

Mi-28N
2A42 Shipunov

calibre:                30x165mm
Barrel lentgh:      2.4m
weight:               115kg (with turret feed sys. 665kg)
recoil in kN:        40-50 kN  (BMP-2 figures)
effective range:   3.5-4km (vs infantry)
accuracy at 1km range hovering 3.0-4.0m CEP

I can't give you one source since it is all information which i have collected from various sources with mostly from the gun manufactorer themselfs on the specific plattforms they were intented to be used, i contain the majority of such information in an excel file and txt files on my HDD.

Werewolf wrote:Well i can only recall data for the chainguns autocannons in closed accuracy tests, since videoes of attack helicopters are rare and influences of different temperature,wind, range and flight speed has an effect on the accuracy.

During closed accuracy tests for the weapons for certain helicopters were performed dring hovering about 30-50m altitude on distance of 1km.

AH-64A
M230 with about 16.0m CEP and were reported to have modernized to reduce it to 7.0-8.0m CEP

calibre:               30x114mm B (low pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      1.68m
weight:               56kg with turret ( about 200kg+)
recoil in kN:        13-15 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 7.0-8.0m CEP


EC 665 Tiger
M781 Nexter 30mm same calibre as M230 with 2.0-3.0m CEP  (only in frontal sphere of about 8-10° to each side, since reports of afghanistan have stated that the accuracy drops dramatically if it is fired offbore.

calibre:                30x114mm B (low pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      1.87m
weight:               65kg  (with turret 205kg)
recoil in kN:        13-15 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 2.0-3.0m CEP

CSH-2 Rooivalk
Armscor F2 M693
calibre:                20x139mm B (high pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2m
recoil in kN:        3.5 kN  (doubtful source)
effective range:   2-2.5 km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 2.0-3.0m CEP

AH-1Z
M197 (turret desig. A/A49E-7(V4))
calibre:                20x102mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.52m
weight:               60-68kg (with turret feed sys. --) maybe 180kg
recoil in kN:        5.8-20 kN  (20 kN in endless burst)
effective range:   1.5km
accuracy at 1km range hovering 8.0m CEP

A/T-129 same figures as AH-1Z since it uses same weapon, but probably with lower accuracy since it weights less and has already an output of 5.8 kN recoil in bursts.

WZ-10  (hard to come by for certain informations, but the gun is a Type 23-1 which already provides good informations)
Type 23-1 copy of AM-23-1

calibre:                23x115mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.45m
weight:               39kg (with turret feed sys. --) maybe 145kg
recoil in kN:        4-8 kN
effective range:   1.5-2km
Since i don't know exact figures for it and since it uses a rather moderate weapon on a havier helo the figures should be between2.0-5.0m CEP

Ka-50/52
2A42 Shipunov on turret NPPU-80

calibre:                30x165mm (high pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2.4m
weight:               115kg (with turret around 160-180kg)
recoil in kN:        40-50 kN  (source of BMP-2 figure)
effective range:   4km (against infantry)
accuracy at 1km range hovering  under 2.0m CEP, figures of Ka-50 given by Chief Designer Sergej Viktorowich Mikhev that the accuracy was not higher than 1.5m CEP!!

Mi-24VM2 (Mi-35M)
Gsh-23L (turret NPPU-23)

calibre:                23x115mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.54m
weight:               51kg (with turret 205+kg)
recoil in kN:        80 kN  (through the RPM of 3400)
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering was not provided (assumption 8-12m CEP)

Mi-24P
Gsh 30-2K

calibre:                30x165mm (highest pressure)
Barrel lentgh:      2.4-2.7m
weight:               126kg
recoil in kN:        120 kN  (with 2600 RPM)
effective range:   1.5-4km (when fired in low RPM of 300 it is highly accurate and effective range is 4km but not in 2600rpm than it varies from burst length and skill of pilot)
accuracy at 1km range hovering from 4.0m to 20m CEP, depends mostly on skill of pilot

Mi-28N
2A42 Shipunov

calibre:                30x165mm
Barrel lentgh:      2.4m
weight:               115kg (with turret feed sys. 665kg)
recoil in kN:        40-50 kN  (BMP-2 figures)
effective range:   3.5-4km (vs infantry)
accuracy at 1km range hovering 3.0-4.0m CEP

I can't give you one source since it is all information which i have collected from various sources with mostly from the gun manufactorer themselfs on the specific plattforms they were intented to be used, i contain the majority of such information in an excel file and txt files on my HDD.

Out of curiosity is Ka-50/52 cannon accuracy due in large part to the stability of the co-axial rotary design, or is it more to do with the gun itself?

Ka-50 has exactly same gun as Mi-28 (2A42), but it is attached essentially to the fuselage with only limited aiming angles, as opposed to the Mi-28s rotating turret mount.

From what I have seen on videos the Mi-28 is hardly pinpoint accurate with its gun either (despite the 2A42's reputation as a heavy, accurate piece) so I guess it shares same limitations and design of all flexible mount cannons.

TR1 wrote:Ka-50 has exactly same gun as Mi-28 (2A42), but it is attached essentially to the fuselage with only limited aiming angles, as opposed to the Mi-28s rotating turret mount.

From what I have seen on videos the Mi-28 is hardly pinpoint accurate with its gun either (despite the 2A42's reputation as a heavy, accurate piece) so I guess it shares same limitations and design of all flexible mount cannons.

Indeed.

And since all this accuracy tests on helicopter plattforms are always performed in hovering and only shooting to the front they have the highest stability as soon they shoot offbore the accuracy drops dramatically especially on high pressure weapons, but on Mi-28 during exercise shooting as long it shoots to the front with minor angles to the side it is still by far more accurate than what you can see on Apaches.

GarryB wrote:The Apaches gun is actually pretty effective and high precision is not usually a high priority for a helicopter gun as targets often move and those that don't generally need a few hits anyway.

The 30 x 165mm round the Soviet helos use is very powerful and would only be accurate in short bursts, but remember these helos have ballistics computers and laser rangefinders and high velocity or low velocity the rounds will certainly impact near target.

The reason the Hokum does so well is that its gun is mounted next to its centre of gravity so recoil is absorbed better. Its limited angles of rotation don't come into it.

The Havoc and Hokum should get excellent accuracy with single shot or very short bursts.

The Apaches HEDP ammo is effective against hard and soft targets with lots of shrapnel bouncing around the place to mess up any troops in the open or trying to escape from vehicles being hit.

The other thing is that Ka-50, especially Ka-50 has a image proccessing subsystem, meaning it can recognize synthetic lines, roads, bridges, vehicles and also recognize pixels and follow them.
Since the Ka-50 was planned to have a radar but they had problems to make it work they implemented software on weapon computer. After that the Shkval-V has a scanning mode and will give the position of recognized targets on the ABRIS advanced mapping system. For example the operator can even Lock on one single human and the computer and gun will adjust the gun or/and fuselage to the current position of the target. That is also the reason why KA-50/52 have such a high precision.

Ok lets now come to the point which GarryB made about M789 HEDP of M230 ok here are the statistics for both american made standard used HEDP M789 for all targets and the Russian made HEFI 3UOF8 which are used for soft targets.



Weight Cartridge (weight*)                                                                           339g    
Projectile weight                                                                                           236g
Propellant weight                                                                                           50g
Muzzle Velocity                                                                                           805 m/s
effective radius min-max                                                        1-4m
Explosive charge                                                                                           27g
Explosive filler                                                                                               PBXN-5                                                                                      
Self-destruction
Fuze                                                                                                             impact
max pressure of gases kg/cm²                                                                     2854 - 3160
key features                                                                                                 counter spining shaped charge liner to reduce negative spining effect on penetrator jet

Force of impact kJ                                                                                        
Self-destruction (range)
RHA penetration capability at 500 m at 50° (R50 performance marked)             25 mm

This is currently used american standard round for all targets and since most of the targets are either infantry or just pick up trucks we will stick to the explosive charge and the effective radius.


Russian made 30x165mm 3UOF8 HE-FI rounds for light armored and soft targets such as infantry,trucks and APC's.

Weight Cartridge (weight*)                                                                           842g    
Projectile weight                                                                                           390g
Propellant weight                                                                                           123g
Muzzle Velocity                                                                                           960 m/s
effective radius min-max                                                        4-8m
Explosive charge                                                                                           48,5g
Explosive filler                                                                                               A-IX-2                                                                                      
Self-destruction                                                                                            10-12 sec
Fuze                                                                                                            AF34 impact delayed (~0.02sec)
max pressure of gases kg/cm²                                                                     3600
key features                                                                                               Reliable at -50° and +50°C all weather and high lethality
Force of impact kJ                                                                                        150-180 kJ
Self-destruction (range)                                                                                 5000-5200
RHA penetration capability at 500 m at 50° (R50 performance marked)             no information

The HEDP M789 can be used as in anti-soft target role but has a lower lethality and effect than dedicated rounds, it has almost half of the explosive charge and about a half of the effective explosive range of the round.

I'm planning for some time now to make a scale size of all attack helicopters how big they would be next to each other.

I already have relative accurate measurements from developers of CSH-2, AH-1Z, Ka-50 but still lack majority of the rest and just the lentgh and height are not enough to make a good scaled size to compare them to each other to give a good impression to people with most times a bad perception which of this helicopters is actually "gigantic" and which is not.

If someone comes a cross pictures and preferable measurements of attack helicopter sizes, not only lentgh and height, but also height from ground to engine, rotorhead, fuselage borders, measurements of skids/landing gear, cockpit and so on.

GarryB wrote:

Mi-24VM2 (Mi-35M)
Gsh-23L (turret NPPU-23)

calibre:                23x115mm
Barrel lentgh:      1.54m
weight:               51kg (with turret 205+kg)
recoil in kN:        80 kN  (through the RPM of 3400)
effective range:   1.5-2km
accuracy at 1km range hovering was not provided (assumption 8-12m CEP)

When South African pilots got to test the Mig-23 they were very impressed with the high accuracy of the twin barrel 23mm cannon. Twin barrel cannon are generally more accurate than gatlings because the barrels are stationary and there is no rotational force acting on the fired rounds either.

I have not found any direct test results of the accuracy on that weapon, the assumption is made based on RPM, it should be around 3-5m CEP in normal (low fire rate) with 300-400 rounds per minute.

ISN'T IT AN UNDERSTATEMENT ?

Russia's Ka-52, Mi-28 Attack Helicopters Can Compete With US Apache

The modern Russian Mi-28 and Ka-52 attack helicopters are comparable with the US AH-64 Apache helicopter in their onboard electronic systems, Andrei Shibitov, Deputy Director of Russian Helicopter Holding, told RIA Novosti.

"Ten years ago some of our systems fell short by 10-15 years, but now I can say that our latest projects are practically comparable with our foreign competitors and colleagues. The hardware of the Mi-28 and Ka-52 is definitely as good as the Apache systems," Shibitov said on the sidelines of a conference in Tatarstan.

He also noted that the Mi-28 and Ka-52 are more than just helicopters; they can be described as "helicopter complexes."


Established in 2007, Russian Helicopters is one of the world’s leaders in the helicopter-manufacturing industry and the single helicopter designer and producer in Russia. The holding comprises of five helicopter-manufacturing facilities, two design bureaus, repair facilities and a service company. The holding sells helicopters to Russian ministries, airlines and major foreign and domestic companies.

In 2014 Russian Helicopters’ revenues rose by 22.8 percent, to 169.8 billion rubles ($3.3 billion at the current ruble exchange rate). A total of 271 helicopters were delivere



http://sputniknews.com/military/20150527/1022607861.html

max steel wrote: ISN'T IT AN UNDERSTATEMENT ?

Russia's Ka-52, Mi-28 Attack Helicopters Can Compete With US Apache

The modern Russian Mi-28 and Ka-52 attack helicopters are comparable with the US AH-64 Apache helicopter in their onboard electronic systems, Andrei Shibitov, Deputy Director of Russian Helicopter Holding, told RIA Novosti.

"Ten years ago some of our systems fell short by 10-15 years, but now I can say that our latest projects are practically comparable with our foreign competitors and colleagues. The hardware of the Mi-28 and Ka-52 is definitely as good as the Apache systems," Shibitov said on the sidelines of a conference in Tatarstan.

He also noted that the Mi-28 and Ka-52 are more than just helicopters; they can be described as "helicopter complexes."


Established in 2007, Russian Helicopters is one of the world’s leaders in the helicopter-manufacturing industry and the single helicopter designer and producer in Russia. The holding comprises of five helicopter-manufacturing facilities, two design bureaus, repair facilities and a service company. The holding sells helicopters to Russian ministries, airlines and major foreign and domestic companies.

In 2014 Russian Helicopters’ revenues rose by 22.8 percent, to 169.8 billion rubles ($3.3 billion at the current ruble exchange rate). A total of 271 helicopters were delivere



http://sputniknews.com/military/20150527/1022607861.html

Russian helicopters were lagging in the field of electronics. Especially with regards to the Mi-28. However, recently the Mi-28 has caught up and the latest serial Ka-52's match the latest serial western counterparts with regards to electronics, but are deployed on a superior airframe. They also have widely deployed DIRCM's, which is still a rarity on other helicopters even though the technology is there. I agree with his assessment.

Any specific reason why russian helos were lagging in electronics ? Funds scarcity or foreign dependence .