what is /k/'s favorite attack helicopter?
the hind's winds were long to enable it to do rolling take offs with a full load using it's underpowered engine. However, the wings were so large they negated some of the lift of the rotor by covering the area below too much. Making the wings smaller means the Hind has better vertical lift capacity.
they also saved weight by incorporating fixed landing gear at last.
HAHAHAHA I got that! 9/11 right?! fuckin ameriboogers got btfo that day by a bunch of goat herders and they still call themselves the best of the world, TOPKEK.
>Can perform any maintenance without support equipment or test sets.
Really? Nobody for the Comanche?
A Hind-d? Colonel, what's a Russian gunship doing here?
>They are courting death.
if they wanted to court death, they would have bought Ospreys.
Was too expensive too
But now we're buying even more expensive helicopters so that doesn't make much sense either
Maybe they wanted to cancel it to make stealth choppers in secret.
>superior chinese helos
>The Kamov design bureau was contracted to perform the development work under a secret contract. Kamov worked with the Chinese to establish base specifications, such as weight, speed and payload capacity after which they had full freedom to design the helicopter. Kamov designed, tested and verified the helicopter design, after which it was provided to the Chinese team.
The coaxial rotor makes it much more stable, but the original Ka-50 overtaxes its pilot by asking him to operate both the aircraft and the weapons and sensors. Also, that's a Ka-52 in the OP's pic, the two-pilot version
The US doesn't generally go for the coaxial rotor configuration, mainly due to the fact that the main rotor mast requires dark voodoo magic to keep in good working order, and thus renders most choppers in that configuration into glorified hangar queens.
>higher than any known heli
Video a lie. KA-52 a shit.
>no ones posted mousecopter yet
gaze upon best attack helo
they are two completely different roles
AH64 is the US/NATO equivalent of the Mi-28
Something like the MH-60L DAP would be comparable to the Mi-24/25 if it's carrying capacity wasn't taken up by 7.62 and 30mm M230 ammo
the best comparison of Ka-50 is something like the Tiger HAD. Ka-50 has a limited training ability on its 2A24 30mm cannon as well, which dictates a different use case as opposed to the AH64
AH64D longbow can be compared to the Ka-52, as both have sophisticated radar suites and twin seats and function more as recon hunter/killers than frontline attack helicopters
Fun fact, the Ka in Ka-5x is pronounced "Kah," not "Kay-Ay"
The Cheyenne. Could have been amazing but was killed by politics.
Nope. Only the baddest motherfucking chopper to ever dominate the skies during the 80s. That fucker could even take on planes. Had rocket thrusters too. Truly an incredible machine.
All helicopters can use sliding/rolling takeoffs when power is insufficient for IGE hover. You don't need wings for it to work.
The wings are more for weapons carriage, and to relieve/circumvent some of the forward-speed limitations of rotor blades (in particular, by carrying some of the helicopter's weight, the rotor requires less collective-pitch in forward flight and thus retreating blade stall is delayed).
>However, the wings were so large they negated some of the lift of the rotor by covering the area below too much
I strongly doubt that is true to any significant degree. In hover, the majority of lift is produced along the edges of the rotor where rotor blade velocity is highest. You can actually stick your hand out of a helicopter in a hover and not feel any significant rotor wash near the fuselage.
It was a cool aircraft to see up close and touch. If i remember correctly they only made 2. Or at least only had 2 built when I saw it.
Who is that badass riding that thing and is this something that happens often?
you're better than this /k/
Zulu Cobra hands down.
Ka-52 is a close second though.
The Ka-52 would be a contender if it didnt have a fixed forward cannon.
I get that its a fuckoff huge gun, but the flexibility given up by that is nowhere near worth the trade on a mobile platform like a helicopter. If you need to engage armor thats why you have ATGMs
>I get that its a fuckoff huge gun, but the flexibility given up by that is nowhere near worth the trade on a mobile platform like a helicopter. If you need to engage armor thats why you have ATGMs
it actually swivels for fine aiming- since its set upon the helo snuggly it fires ridiculously accurately.
Does the AH-64 automatically adjust for target movement and does it have automatic target tracking?
If so, it might be comperable, if not the gun systems on the two are different enough to both warrant their existance.
>So does the apache's chin mount, but at a 320 more degrees. Again if you need to engage anything heavier than a truck, you have ATGMs
its not. spreads really wide compared to the 30 on the Ka-52. nothing unusual about this, just the fact that a fixed(but slightly swiveling) mount is more stable and transfers recoil much better to the rest of the helo than a turret mount ever could.
Hmm... it's hard to say. It's technically feasible that the M230's fire control computer could make all the necessary calculations based solely on tracking data from the Longbow radar, but I don't see any clear evidence that this capability is directly supported. The closest I can find is that TADS can be slaved to the radar so it points directly at a radar target, and that the M230 can (obviously) be slaved to the TADS - which would function effectively as an indirect approach to "automatic target tracking" but possibly without lead-compensation for moving targets.
Everything you've written is legit as far as I know.
It's certainly possible and likely that the AH-64 automatically tracks, ranges and leads targets, it's just that I haven't seen anything that says outright that it does.
Direct HMS tracking isn't much help to anyone who wants to hit anything at the sort of ranges a helicopter needs to be engaging at not to be shot down by junk-fire.
u wot mate?
its called americunt you silly willy
They've only recently figured out how to make compound helicopters stable, and there's still going to be 10-15 years of bug-squashing before it's even ready
The YAH-56 could get into its harmonically resonant frequency just by a bit of pilot-induced oscilation, which is something that happens to everyone now and then, it had issues with rotor instability, it killed a test pilot, and by the time all the bugs were in the process of being squished the Army had moved on to the project that got us the Apache
>only recently figured out
>10-15 years of bug squashing
>implying they didn't already know to to make one because I mean fuck Kamov did it in the 80s
>10-15 years to sort out all the bugs
Good thing Sikorsky already made a coax/prop helicopter and tested it thoroughly. The Raider has already done hover and ground tests, it's not going to be more than 4-5 years before this it starts serious flight testing.
Jesus christ of course it does! Target stabilization had been around since the 70s! How do you think a su25t can keep a laser pointed at a truck 10km away while moving at 500kph? How do you think mavericks work?
Ka-50 has one pilot seated behind the other, where as the Ka-52 has them seated side by side.