LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteA Brief Guide to Russian Combat AircraftOriginally Posted by Shipwreck
it only describes crashes that were fatal, but there were crashes that were not.
AH64D Apache Longbow
A129 Augusta Mangusta
Mi 28 Havoc
Kamov Ka52 Blackshark varients
Eurocopter Tigre
Rooivalk AH-2As
For the Cobra vs Hind engagements, the scores I've seen here and there vary between 10:6 in favor of the AH-1 and 10:6 in favor of the Mi-24. The Cobra vs Hind engagement that took place in November 1980 near Dezfûl (Iran) is said to be the first helo duel in history.
The Iraqis claimed their choppers (Mi-8, Mi-24/25, SA-342) destroyed 53 Iranian helos during the war of 1980-88.
Last edited by Shipwreck; 16 May 07, at 17:06.
A Brief Guide to Russian Combat Aircraft
it only describes crashes that were fatal, but there were crashes that were not.
Last edited by omon; 16 May 07, at 18:33.
Thanks Omon.
I ran across this website when I researched the subject. This page on the site has some interesting charts, but no source is given for the data.
From what I've observed, most US sources refer to The Bear Went Over The Mountain : Soviet Combat Tactics in Afghanistan by Lester W. Grau where it says :
The source given for the figures above is a manuscript by Aleksandr Lyakhovskiy entitled "Tragediya i doblest' Afghan", which, I presume, refers itself to other Soviet sources.The Soviets lost 118 jets, 333 helicopters, 147 tanks, 1314 armored personnel carriers, 433 artillery pieces and mortars, 1138 radio sets and CP vehicles, 510 engineering vehicles and 11369 trucks
I haven't been able to get hold of this manuscript yet, so perhaps someone on the board has read it and/or can provide further information on the primary sources available in the former Soviet Union.
Dedicated air-to-air helicopters are completely useless in my opinion. If a group of helis ever encounter enemy helis and have a problem dealing with them, can't they just call for fighter support? An F-16 or MiG-29 level or above fighter should be more than sufficient to deal with the heli problem. Only the country which doesn't have air superiority will need to care about this, and even if they do bring in dedicated A2A rotorcraft, fighter jets are still too much for them.
I guess Rooivalk is not doing that well after all
http://www.businessday.co.za/article...?ID=BD4A466341Arms maker to provide defence force with 264 combat vehicles
Political Correspondent
CAPE TOWN — Struggling arms maker Denel has been given an R8bn vehicle contract lifeline by Armscor. This comes hard on the heels of its failure to win a bid to supply Turkey with Rooivalk helicopters.
Denel has now decided that the Rooivalk, on whose development the government spent R8bn, is not commercially viable and it will not spend any new money on the helicopters.
Armscor and the defence department will now have to decide whether to subsidise the maintenance of Denel’s Rooivalk capability so that it can continue servicing the 12 helicopters bought by the South African Air Force over their 25-year lifespan.
The other option would be for the air force to mothball the helicopters and for the costs to be written off entirely.
Denel group CEO Shaun Liebenberg announced Denel’s decision on the Rooivalk and details of the Armscor contract — the biggest in the company’s history — ahead of Public Enterprises Minister Alec Erwin’s budget vote speech in Parliament yesterday.
He said Denel would not be able to afford to look after the air force’s Rooivalk aircraft in the future.
“There are some big strategic decisions which the air force and the shareholder must make on this product. The government could decide to subsidise it because of the defence force’s operational requirements,” said Liebenberg.
Erwin said in an interview that the departments of defence and public enterprises would have to decide later in the year what to do about the Rooivalk.
The R8bn Armscor contract, known as Project Hoefyster, would see Denel Land Systems supply the South African National Defence Force with 264 infantry combat vehicles in five variants over 10 years.
The new-generation combat vehicle would replace the Ratel and would be based on a Finnish Patria platform with a Denel- designed turret. It would be an 8x8-wheeled vehicle in the 25-ton class to transport and protect infantry troops.
“The contract signifies a tremendous boost to local industry and the economy,” Liebenberg said. “This contract puts Denel Land Systems on the road to sustainability” as well as commercial viability. South African companies would deliver more than 70% f the total value of the contract, 18% of which would be for the development of the turret systems.
Denel as main contractor would involve numerous local defence companies and subcontractors such as BAE Systems’ subsidiary Land Systems OMC in delivering the product.
The vehicle itself would be built locally under a Patria licence.
The helicopters are not such an easy target as many seem to think. If the fighter boys were to come down to the altitudes the choppers operate at they would be shifting fuel like there's no tomorrow and entering a zone defended by AAA and/or SAMs/Manpads. The choppers will be working in the FEBA/FLOT area, usually at extemely low level ( typically under 20 feet, and often at slow speed). The speed differential would be enormous and jinking targets are not the easiest to bag. In the trials I was involved with years ago, it was found that 'at least' 2 fighters, preferably more, were required to down a single helo - and that didn't assume a forward battle scenario. The fighters couldn't persist in the cat(s) and mouse game for long due to their fuel consumption.
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.
That certainly doesn't sound right - right now, radar guided AAM's have no problems hitting low-flying aircraft, be they cruise missiles, fighters or helis.
They can be launched with a huge altitude difference, they're hard to spoof, and there's no hiding from radar for a heli save for actually placing terrain between itself and the radar.
F-15's can pick up a heli sitting on the ground from 50nm so long as the rotor's turning - AWACS, much farther. And A-10 has shot down a heli in a dive from 8000' without much trouble - with gun. I wouldn't want to be flying a helicopter in a fighter-infested battleground, unless my own fighters were around to make themselves priority targets for enemy fighters.
The A-10s scored two air-to-air kills during ODS.
The first one on 6 February 1991, when Capt. Bob Swain of the 706th TFS (flying s/n 77-0205) shot down one of two Iraqi BO-105s (presumably). After two unsuccessful locks on the first pass, Swain re-attacked twice with his GAU-8, firing a total of approx. 375 bullets (75 + 300).
The second one on 15 February 1991, when Capt. Todd Sheehy of the 511th TFS (flying s/n 81-0964) shot down one Mi-8. Sheehy made two passes, firing a total of approx. 500 bullets (300 + 200).
In both cases, the Iraqi choppers were unarmed and it took a fair amount of 30mm ammos to bring them down.
Last edited by Shipwreck; 19 May 07, at 21:16.
You are probably right. I last flew a helicopter in 1980 so obviously my views are long out of date. I have read though of helos themselves being fitted with A2A missiles, but I don't know how effective they might be against really fast movers.
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.
You're pretty right against fighters with guns and heaters though! Helis are tough targets (but that may be changing with the introduction of FPA-based seekers now) if they play their cards right.
As for helis being fitted with A2A weapons: The Marine Cobra (AH-1Z or W? I forget which) is cleared for and flies with AIM-9's.
AH-64's were cleared for Stinger stacks, IIRC, and Ka-50's for Igla-V stacks, but neither helicopter uses them operationally - my guess is they're not expected to use them at all (you can't -really- do more than get a lucky shot against a fighter, and against a heli you may as well just use the onboard payload - ie. hellfires). I don't know the official rationale for this though, it's just my guess.
The Marine Cobra's have a slightly different mandate when escorting rescue choppers, I'd imagine they're expected to defend those against other helis as well as low flying attack aircraft, as opposed to avoid them which is what Army helis are supposed to do, IIRC - so it may not be a matter of effectiveness at all.
TWO PASSES against slow target!!! I guess the Kamov guys were right in their evaluation of A-10.... without stabilized targeting system its gun is good only against slow onground targets like a tank.... it is definitelly not a A2A platform!!!
Hei GGTharos, seems like you were right on the radar on Ka-50 on the picture... In one Russian forum the guy who participated it tests stated that it was a mock up radar on that particular foto.... the empty body of the radar made for flight testing. However, it was tested with functioning radar......
Hi Shipwrick and Omon, I remember reading links in Russian. The statistics on losses in Afghanistan are declassified and are available in Russian libriaries.... there is a big book giving details for more than a half of all pilot losses in Afghanistan.
In total, 333 Soviet helicopters and 108 jets were lost, killing 465 pilots and technicians.
out of total losses 20-30% were estimated as non combat losses. Stingers were reported for mere 10% of total losses, against total of 1500 detected lauches. A paradox is that stingers took much higher toll against fixed wing aircraft.... shot down at lower atlitudes.... around half of downed aircraft are for the account of stingers. Most of helicopter losses were due to 12.5mm DSHK machine guns.... + RPG fired during landing and take offs.
these are some links which I found
ÎÔÈÖÈÀËÜÍÛÅ ÄÀÍÍÛÅ Î ÑÎÂÅÒÑÊÈÕ ÏÎÒÅÐßÕ Â ÀÔÃÀÍÈÑÒÀÍÅ. Êàðòà ¹ 24-25
ÆÀÐÊÎÅ ÍÅÁÎ ÀÔÃÀÍÈÑÒÀÍÀ. Áîåâûå âåðòîë¸òû Ìè-24
List of Soviet aircraft losses in Afghanistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ÂÊÎ
ÐÎÑÑÈß È ÑÑÑÐ Â ÂÎÉÍÀÕ XX ÂÅÊÀ. Ãëàâà VI. ÏÎÒÅÐÈ ÑÎÂÅÒÑÊÈÕ ÂÎÅÍÍÎÑËÓÆÀÙÈÕ ÏÐÈÍÈÌÀÂØÈÕ Ó×ÀÑÒÈÅ Â ÎÊÀÇÀÍÈÈ ÂÎÅÍÍÎÉ È ÂÎÅÍÍÎ-ÒÅÕÍÈ×ÅÑÊÎÉ ÏÎÌÎÙÈ ÄÐÓÃÈÌ ÑÒÐÀÍÀÌ, À ÒÀÊÆÅ Â ËÈÊÂÈÄÀÖÈÈ ÏÎÃÐÀÍÈ×ÍÛÕ ÂÎÅÍÍÛÕ ÊÎÍÔËÈÊÒΠ(1946-1991 ãã.)
Last edited by Garry; 31 May 07, at 17:27.
hi Garry, I rememeber some 10 years ago, they use to show Stinger hits filmed in the Afghansitan in US and Canadian TV channels. By any chance would you know any online source where some of those hits are available.
thanks in advance
If we contrast the rapid progress of this mischievous discovery of gunpowder with the slow and laborious advances of reason, science, and the arts of peace, a philosopher, according to his temper, will laugh or weep at the folly of mankind. - Edward Gibbon
The stingers effectiveness wasn't in the aircraft it brought down, but in the aircraft it kept up. Up high and inefective where rocket savos and cannon fire the helicopters delivered lost accuracy and concentration degrading thier performance.
Garry,
Could you post the complete references for this book (title, author, publisher,...), please ? I'd like to try and get hold of a copy.
Garry,
May I ask where you got your figures from for the Stinger ?
Open sources in the US generally suggest that :
1. a total of approx. 900-1,200 Stinger missiles were shipped for delivery to the mujaheedins, together with about 250 gripstocks.
2. Pakistan reportedly withheld approx. 200 of these missiles for its own usage (the so-called *missile tax*).
3. The mujaheedins fired about 340 Stingers against both Soviet and Communist Afghans jets and helos between 1986 and 1989.
4. The mujaheedins scored about 269 kills with Stingers during the entire war.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: