“Dagger” Apache versus the “Night Stalker” strategy: who is really cooler. "Night Stalker" vs. "Apache" - War and Peace Night Stalker vs. Apache
Apache vs Mi-28N
What is Apache versus Night Stalker?
This question once arose during a dispute about the state of the Russian army. Putin’s critics are so carried away that they completely deny quite obvious successes, including the latest achievements of the military-industrial complex. As an argument, the following quote from a media publication is given:
“If we compare the Mi-28N with the AH-64D Longbow helicopter, then the American analogue is superior to the new Russian combat helicopter. This is largely due to the condition of the Russian-style radio electronics components, of the 13,000 elements of which more than 70 percent are over 15 years old.”
I know the state of electronics - I do electronics myself. But how much did this affect the combat qualities of the helicopter? Due to my habit of checking other people’s statements, I had to go through military forums and study the characteristics of the Mi-28N Night Hunter, an attack helicopter that was recently adopted by us. Of course, I’m not an expert, but the information about this helicopter is still amazing. And some photos added to the impressions. Comparison with the main enemy - the AH-64D Apache Longbow simply filled us with pride for our military engineers. Moreover, the main design work occurred at the peak of Yeltsin’s collapse - the beginning of the 90s. For comparison, it is more convenient to summarize the main characteristics in a table:
Armament of the Mi-28N: One 30 mm 2A42 cannon with 300 rounds. Combat load - 1605 kg on 4 hardpoints: 4x4 ATGM Shturm or Ataka-V and 2 launchers UV-20-57 20x55 mm or UV-20-80 20x80 mm NUR or 2 launchers with 130 mm NUR. It is possible to install 2x2 R-60 air-to-air missiles, containers with 23 mm cannons or 30 mm grenade launchers or 12.7 mm or 7.62 mm machine guns, or 500 kg bombs, or mine launchers. Under the wings - 16 ATGM Whirlwind.
Armament of the AH-64D: One 30mm M230 Chain Gun with 1200 rounds. Combat load - 771 kg on 4 hardpoints: 16 (4x4) AGM-114D Longbow Hellfire ATGMs or 4 M260 or LAU-61/A launchers with 19x70 mm CRV7 or Hydra70 guided missiles, 4 AIM-92 Stinger or AIM air-to-air missiles -9 Sidewinder, Mistral and Sidearm, installation of Starstreak missiles is possible. A few photos (on the left is our Night Hunter, on the right is Apache Longbow, pay attention to the armor!):
Are you not impressed by the door on our Hunter? Compare with the doors on the Apache. Knowledgeable people they claim that the doors on the Hunter slam shut like a limousine. With the help of a special drive, of course. Our Hunter's armor is his special advantage, but more on that a little later. General flight characteristics indicate that our vehicle is heavier and capable of carrying more than twice the combat load. And this does not affect the speed and maneuverability of the vehicle - its engines are more powerful, and the magnitude of the horizontal spacing of the main rotor hinges... However, I’d better quote:
“Despite the heavy armor, the Mi-28 is not inferior to the Apache in maneuverability. This is largely determined by the horizontal spacing of the main rotor hinges: the larger this value, the better the maneuverability of the helicopter. The spacing of the Mi-28 hinges is 6%, Apache" - 4%. The five-blade main rotor of the Mi-28 is more efficient than the four-blade rotor installed on the AN-64A, especially at low speeds, and has a lower level of vibration; the latter is very important when aiming. The visibility from the pilot and gunner cockpits of the Apache is limited: forward- down - side sponsons with electronic equipment, back - engines.
In the Mi-28, the smoothness of the lateral contours of the front part of the fuselage is not disturbed in any way, and the faces of the pilots are closer to the glazing panels. At the same time, the glass area of the cabin of the American car is much larger. The glazing panels of the AN-64 cockpit have a slight convexity, while on the Mi-28 they are flat, capable of creating unidirectional glare in the cockpit (the so-called “spotlight effect”), interfering with the reading of instrument readings. In general, the visibility from the Mi-28 cockpit is no worse than that of the “Indian.”
Comparing the weapons of helicopters, some “experts” criticize the Hunter’s cannon:
“You can’t ignore the characteristics of helicopter cannon systems. For example, the mass of the 2A42 cannon of the Mi-28N helicopter is 2 times greater than the mass of the M230 Apache cannon, and the ammunition capacity of the latter is almost 3 times greater than that of our vehicle, and all this with the same caliber. Note that if the M230 was specially developed for the AN-64 helicopter, then the 2A42 was “borrowed" from the BMP-2. It’s time to cure these and other old diseases."
It turns out that the gun is heavy and has little ammunition. And in general, it is a tank, they took it from the BMP-2 out of poverty. In fact, the gun is a special song, this is another advantage of the Hunter. And they took it from the BMP not out of poverty or the stupidity of the engineers, but after a thorough analysis of the unique characteristics of the weapon:
"The powerful 30 mm cannon mount was borrowed from ground forces oh and is completely unified in terms of ammunition used with the BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicle. The 2A42 gun has a variable rate of fire and selective ammunition supply from two cartridge boxes loaded with armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation shells. This allowed for a 30% increase in the effectiveness of hitting ground-based lightly armored and air targets. The combat survivability of the 2A42 cannon barrel allows the entire ammunition load (500 rounds) to be fired without delays or intermediate cooling. Both on the BMP-2 and on the army combat helicopter, the cannon installation works reliably in dusty conditions. Generally speaking, the 2A42 cannon is one of the most (if not the most...) powerful helicopter guns in the world! It is capable of consistently disabling lightly and medium-armored targets and openly located enemy manpower at a distance of up to 3-4 km!!!
For example, the cannon of the American Apache helicopter, vaunted (by foreign authors, of course...), of the same caliber, barely hits 1.5 km... Just no comments... Although I won’t deny myself the pleasure... While the Apache walks on a collision course with any of our combat helicopters with a 2A42 cannon installed on it, our helicopter will have time to shoot it four times before the Apache enters the permissible shooting zone in which it would have at least some chance of hitting the target, but if we also take into account almost twice the speed of the 2A42 projectile (980 versus 550) and 30mm. caliber then... Apache's fate becomes extremely sad..."
The rest of the weapons are no worse - 16 Ataka-V ATGMs have a range of up to 8 km (similar to the AGM-114D Longbow Hellfire ATGM) and penetrate 950 mm of armor. The effectiveness of its predecessor, the Shturm-M missile, is confirmed by the history of the destruction of a column of American armored vehicles in Iraq by one Mi-24 helicopter with an Iraqi pilot. There are also statistics there: “Of the 43 tanks of the occupying forces destroyed by the Mi-24, 31 became victims of the Sturm ATGM, of which 16 American M1A2, 7 American M1A1, 8 British Challenger-Mk2. It is noteworthy that for the destruction of 31 The th tank needed only 34 launches..."
“In addition to the shortcomings of radio-electronic equipment, the Mi-28N helicopter, by its design, is a technology of yesterday. Currently, leading American aviation companies are inclined to think that the future in helicopter construction lies only with coaxial machines. This was repeatedly stated by representatives of the Sikorsky company at the Le Bourget Air Show and at the Farnborough 2006 exhibition. The first American coaxial aircraft is already being tested. In the next few decades, the Pentagon intends to completely re-equip all types of armed forces with combat and transport helicopters built according to this design."
This is another argument used by critics. Completely illiterate, I must say. While Sikorsky is going to re-equip the army with helicopters using this design and is testing the first coaxial unit, Russia has long adopted the Ka-50, which is made exactly according to this “advanced design.”
The advantages of such a scheme are not that great and are offset by some disadvantages. What does the encyclopedia say about the choice of coaxial design for the Ka-50?
“The choice of a coaxial design was determined by the higher thrust-to-weight ratio of the vehicle, due to the absence of loss of power from the power plant to the tail rotor drive, which in turn ensures a high rate of climb and a larger static ceiling.”
It should be noted that the tail rotor does not take so much power and the gain due to this is not large. Although the same Ka-52 can boast of a much larger combat load (up to 2800 kg) and a higher maximum speed - 350 km/h, apparently due to precisely this design (the engine is the same and the weight is similar). But this same scheme makes the helicopter significantly higher - due to the danger of the blades overlapping, they were spread almost a meter apart! Because of this, it is no longer possible to install an overhead all-round radar "Crossbow" on top, as was done on the Mi-28N.
The complexity of maintenance and higher price made the Ka-50 and Ka-52 “helicopters for special forces”, but the Okhotnik with a classic design is still recognized as a combined arms helicopter. Cheapness and ease of maintenance for the army are still of great importance, we must admit. It is better for the army to have two helicopters with slightly worse characteristics instead of one with better ones. However, it is never too late to change your mind if both types of helicopters are produced. It will reduce the cost of the Kamov and we will have another combined arms helicopter. But this has nothing to do with comparing the Hunter with the Apache - the Apache is made according to the classical design. That is, according to the critic, it is a technique of yesterday. By the way, maybe that’s why the choice fell on “Mil” - our military’s monkey instinct kicked in? This can also be the case, they are very afraid to make original decisions and you can understand them - mistakes here are expensive.
But the main complaint about the helicopter was and remains its “outdated electronics.” Or avionics, as electronics for flying vehicles are commonly called. Moreover, for some reason, it is not its capabilities and functions that are discussed, but its age. Are the engineers of the military-industrial complex to blame for the fact that Russian electronics are now in a comatose state? Despite the fact that it has never been advanced? One can talk for a long time about Russia’s long lag in electronics, but this is a separate topic. Now it is important to separate the concept of the age of electronics from the capabilities implemented in a particular machine. In battle, it is not the age of the electronics that decides, but its reliability and implemented functions. This is what we should be talking about. It would be possible to fight with a stone ax if it were more effective than missiles. And if you look specifically at the implemented avionics functions, then the Night Hunter has something to brag about. How and on what basis they were implemented - let it remain a secret of our talented engineers. Yes, even on lamps! If only it flew better than on microprocessors.
The media write that “the Mi-28N is the only helicopter in the world capable of automatically flying at an altitude of 5 meters and following the terrain both day and night.” And this time it's true:
“When solving combat missions, the Mi-28N integrated on-board equipment complex (ISO) provides terrain-following piloting in both manual and automatic modes. The helicopter is equipped with a multifunctional Arbalet radar manufactured by NIIR Phazotron in a spherical fairing above the main rotor hub. ". It provides information about obstacles, including free-standing trees and power lines, making it possible to fly around the clock at an extremely low altitude of 5 - 15 meters, even in difficult weather conditions.
The same purpose is served by night vision goggles and a flight thermal imaging station, which can provide information as an infrared “window into the night” ahead along the course or in any direction indicated by the rotation of the pilot’s head, receiving target designation from a helmet-mounted system or on-board computer. The helicopter is also equipped with a high-resolution cartographic information system and a bank of digital data on the terrain in the combat area. Based on this data, the computer system can form a three-dimensional image of the area where the helicopter is located, and this can be easily clarified using satellite navigation combined with inertial navigation. The whole variety of information is presented to the pilot and navigator-operator on color liquid crystal displays installed in threes in the front and rear cockpits.
The electronic equipment also includes a system for orientation based on the physical fields of the Earth, and a set of communications equipment and an overhead all-round radar "Crossbow". The radar allows the helicopter to search for targets, working together with the Rotor OPS in normal mode. The helicopter can search for targets, hiding in folds of the terrain or behind trees, exposing only its “top of its head” from behind the cover. In this case, only the use of radar is sufficient. Having determined the targets and their type, distributing them as necessary among the helicopters of the group, selecting an object for attack, the helicopter energetically leaves the ambush and “processes” the targets with weapons or directs strike aircraft or other helicopters of the group. In addition, the Mi-28N radar, unlike the AH-64D "Longbow" radar, is capable of solving flight and navigation tasks."
In my opinion, as an electronics engineer, these functions are quite up to date and exceed the capabilities of the Apache, which cannot use its radar for automatic piloting. It is hardly possible to come up with something more perfect. Perhaps completely eliminate the pilot, entrusting the conduct of combat to the electronic brain. That is, make an unmanned version. But this is already the next generation, the idea of making a UAV in the form of an attack helicopter is possible and brewing in the brains of engineers, but so far there are not even rumors about it. In the end, all military equipment will be controlled by automatic machines; development is moving in this direction. This is understandable - people make decisions too slowly, and the situation on the modern battlefield is changing very quickly, and will change even faster in the future. The only thing that the Apache can boast of in terms of electronics is the ability to recognize types of targets and track a larger number of them. However, for the success of the battle this is not so fundamentally important - there is no point in accompanying more targets than there are missiles. It is much more important to be able to fight at a height of only 5 meters. The Hunter can do this, but the Apache cannot.
The final test of any weapon is in a combat situation. Our Hunter has not yet passed such a test, but his competitor has. Combat operations in Iraq, where Apaches were used very intensively, provided an opportunity to evaluate this vehicle. What did they show?
Quote:
During the year of war, the coalition troops lost at least 30 helicopters various types. Up to 150 coalition troops died on board. The American military command in Iraq announced its dissatisfaction with the results combat use fire support helicopter AH-64 Apache and AH-64 D Apache Longbow. The car turned out to be extremely expensive and poorly protected from ordinary fire. small arms.
The concept of a “long-range combat helicopter” did not materialize in Iraqi conditions. The focus on detecting and hitting targets at maximum range from medium altitudes in Iraq has shown to be ineffective. Poor visibility, urban conditions, and close combat contact between the warring sides forced the Apache pilots to operate in the altitude range from 100 meters to 500, at ranges rarely exceeding 800 - 1500 meters. As a result, the helicopters found themselves in the zone of effective small arms fire. First of all, machine guns and chargers. The Iraqis quickly mastered fire ambush techniques, opening concentrated fire from several machine guns into the rear hemisphere or from a three-quarter angle. As a result, at least 10 Apache helicopters were lost in Iraq during the year. According to the application former commander 101st Airborne Division by Maj. Gen. David Petraeus “We need a battlefield helicopter. A helicopter capable of hanging on the shoulders of the enemy. Inexpensive and well protected car. "Apache" turned out to be of little use for this..."
It seemed to me that the Major General was talking about our Mi-28N? Does he dream of a less expensive and more secure car? We have it:
The armored crew cabin, the so-called “bath,” is made of 10 mm aluminum sheets, onto which 16 mm ceramic tiles are glued. The cabin doors are made of two layers of aluminum armor and a layer of polyurethane between them. The cabin windshields are made of transparent silicate blocks 42 mm thick, and the side windows and door windows are made of the same blocks, but 22 mm thick. The pilot's cabin is separated from the operator's cabin by a 10-mm aluminum armor plate, which minimizes the defeat of both crew members with one shot. Fire tests carried out at GosNIIAS showed that the sides can withstand bullets from the American 20-mm Vulcan machine gun, the windshield can withstand 12.7 mm caliber bullets, and the side windows and door windows can withstand 7.62 mm bullets.
The Hunter's armor makes him what he dreams of American general after just a year of fighting in Iraq. I think that after several years, his dream has already turned into a hopeless melancholy. For the loss army aviation The United States and its allies have already deployed 125 helicopters in Iraq since 2003, about half of which were shot down by fire from the ground. This is according to unofficial data, as Russian experts believe, while official data is underestimated by approximately half and amounts to approximately 60 vehicles. Which is also a lot. AND American experts finally came to the conclusion that their helicopters were poorly protected from conventional small arms and RPGs. Was it worth waiting for such losses to reach such a conclusion? One look at the car is enough!
The idea that an armored helicopter had a better chance of surviving in a combat situation finally occurred to them. Fortunately, our engineers had this idea earlier and made it possible to make the vehicle not only well-armed, but also well-protected, and also equipped with a unique crew rescue system. But I won’t describe these details anymore. Enough has already been said. The Mi-28N is not just better than the Apache, it is many times superior to it.
http://malchish.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=203&Itemid=33
According to Litovkin, the Mi-28N is a kind of response to the helicopter created by American designers. Compared to the AH-64 Apache, the Russian vehicle has a number of advantages.
Thus, the Mi-28H power plant (2000 hp) is much more powerful than the American one (1900 hp). One could argue that the Russian helicopter is heavier than the American one, but the Night Hunter carries a larger payload and is more heavily armored. Thus, the maximum combat load of a Russian helicopter is 2300 kg, and that of an American helicopter is 771 kg.
 |
In addition, the Mi-28H is equipped with a powerful 2A42 cannon, which is used on infantry fighting vehicles and has an initial speed of an armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile of 1120 m/s (usually 970 m/s); the Apache gun is much weaker: the M230 Chain Gun fires at a shorter range , and the projectile speed is only 792 m/s. Also, the “Night Hunter” carries supersonic “Attack” missiles, and the “Apache” is armed with subsonic ones.
 |
Dmitry Litovkin also pointed out the unique characteristics of the Russian aircraft, noting that the Mi-28N is the only helicopter in the world that can carry out automatic flight, following the terrain at an extremely low altitude of up to 5 meters. And thanks to the presence of the Arbalet radar station, the helicopter can ambush the enemy.
 |
In terms of survivability, the Russian helicopter is also ahead of its American competitor. Dmitry Litovkin noted that the Mi-28N has an almost completely armored cabin, therefore, when the helicopter crashed during testing, the armored capsule did not collapse and saved the lives of the pilots.
For the Americans, the situation is exactly the opposite: during the Iraqi campaign, an Apache was shot down using a rather old weapon. Most likely, the bullet hit between the armored shields directly into the engine.
Therefore, Litovkin summarized that with the same level of pilot skill, the Russian machine will win: after all, the Mi-28N has higher maneuverability and combat performance.
Based on the results of technical tests, the Indian military decided to purchase American AH-64D Apache helicopters developed by Boeing, rather than Russian Mi-28N Night Hunter attack helicopters.
Information about this was confirmed to Russian agencies by the Indian Ministry of Defense and the Arms Procurement Commission. According to unnamed sources, the reasons for the choice of the Indian side “are not of a political nature.” “The reasons for the refusal of the Mi-28 helicopter were of a technical nature. According to our experts, the Mi -28N does not meet the requirements of the tender on 20 points, unlike the Apache helicopter, which showed better characteristics,” RIA Novosti quotes the words of its interlocutor from the arms procurement commission. In May of this year, it was announced at the Le Bourget air show Russia has signed a contract for the supply of 80 Mi-17 helicopters to India. The Indian Ministry of Defense’s plans for the purchase of helicopter equipment also provide for several more competitions in the future, including for the supply of multi-purpose helicopters for the country’s Navy. According to experts, in the next ten years India will put into service about 700 new helicopters.
Technical and political reasons
The reason for the loss of the Russian Mi-28N combat helicopter in the Indian tender was a whole complex of factors, and technical condition cars are not the most important among them, Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, told RIA Novosti. According to Pukhov, three sets of reasons played a role in this defeat.
“At the moment, two more helicopter tenders are being held in India: for the purchase of a multi-purpose helicopter, the Russian Ka-226 is participating in it, and a super-heavy one here Russian participant- Mi-26. Both helicopters have a very serious chance of success. And the Indians simply cannot give all three victories to Russia,” he noted.
In addition, according to him, the current “fascination” with American weapons also played an important role in the decision of the Indian Ministry of Defense. “Indians are well aware of the strengths of American military equipment, but they are not very aware of the weak ones. And many surprises await them,” the expert noted. At the same time, the director of CAST said that the Mi-28N has not been developed to an ideal state. Currently, two more tenders are being held in India for the supply of helicopters: 12 heavy transport helicopters and 197 light multi-purpose helicopters. Based on the results of these tenders, contracts with a total value of $2.5 billion. In the first competition, the finalists were the Russian Mi-26T2 helicopter and the American Chinook, and in the second, the Ka-226T and Eurocopter AS550. The losing tender, the Mi-28N Night Hunter, is a fire support helicopter that can become the basis of Russian front-line aviation. According to the plan, it should replace the Mi-24 helicopters. The Russian Ministry of Defense previously announced its intention to purchase 300 Night Hunters for the needs of the army.
In order to understand, you need to look at the technical specifications.
The new generation combat helicopter Mi-28N (“Night Hunter”) is designed to search and destroy enemy tanks, armored vehicles, and manpower; destruction of protected objects and destruction of area targets (trench lines, defensive structures, etc.); laying minefields; search and destruction of boats and other small watercraft; combating high-speed and low-flying enemy aircraft; destroying low-speed air targets day and night in simple and adverse weather conditions.
Mi-28N - developed by the Moscow Helicopter Plant named after. M.L. Mil based on the Mi-28 combat helicopter (the base helicopter is sometimes designated Mi-28A).
Before drawing up the technical specifications for the Mi-28N, for several years the plant’s specialists, together with institutes of the Ministry of Defense, shaped the appearance of this helicopter. The helicopter was intended to work with the Ground Forces, therefore the specific features of these troops (work at any time of the day, in simple and difficult weather conditions, away from airfields and stationary bases, compatibility of fuels and lubricants, ammunition, communications and control equipment, ease of operation of the used technicians) demanded appropriate qualities from the Mi-28N.
The first prototype was rolled out of the assembly shop on August 16, 1996, and on November 14, 1996, the helicopter took off for the first time.
On December 24, 2008, the state commission, based on the results of state tests, recommended adopting the Mi 28N combat helicopter into service with the Russian Ministry of Defense and putting it into mass production. The Mi-28N will be produced by the Rostov plant (JSC Rostvertol).
The Mi-28N is a two-seat (pilot and navigator-operator) helicopter with a classic single-rotor design with a five-blade main rotor and an X-shaped tail rotor controlled by a stabilizer, wheeled fixed landing gear with a tail support. The wing is used for mounting weapons and additional fuel tanks.
The helicopter is equipped with a complex of on-board radio-electronic and instrumentation equipment (avionics), which ensures the use of weapons and the solution of flight and navigation tasks day and night in simple and difficult weather conditions at extremely low altitudes with automatic contouring of the terrain and avoiding obstacles.
The avionics also provides control over the operation of the power plant and other systems; voice notification to the crew; radio communications between helicopters and with ground stations; communication between crew members and recording of their conversations.
Design features ensure high survivability of the helicopter. Crew survival during emergency landings with vertical speeds of up to 12 m/sec is ensured by the use of a passive protection system with energy-absorbing structural elements (chassis, seats, fuselage elements).
Performance characteristics of the helicopter:
Crew - 2 people (if necessary, another 2-3 people can be transported in the rear compartment).
Power plant - 2 TV3 117VMA engines with a power of 2200 horsepower each.
Takeoff weight:
normal - 10700 kg
maximum - 12000 kg
Combat load weight - 2300 kg
Flight speed:
maximum - 305 km/h,
cruising - 270 km/h.
Static ceiling - 3600 m.
Dynamic ceiling - 5700 m.
Range of flight:
normal - 450 km
in distillation version - 1100 km
Overall dimensions of the helicopter:
length -7.01 m
height 3.82 m
width 5.89 m
Main rotor diameter - 17.2 m
To perform combat missions on a helicopter, the following weapons are used:
Fixed mobile gun mount NPPU 28N with a 2A42 cannon of 30 mm caliber with 250 rounds of ammunition.
Universal gun containers UPK 23 250 (2 pcs.) with a GSh 23L cannon of 23 mm caliber and an ammunition load of 250 shells in each container.
Anti-tank missile system 9 A2313 "Ataka-V" with guided missiles 9M120, 9M120F, 9A 2200 (up to 16 pcs.).
Guided missiles with thermal homing head "Igla" (up to 8 pcs.).
Unguided rockets type C 8 caliber 80 mm in B8V20 A blocks (up to 4 blocks).
Unguided rockets type C 13 caliber 122 mm in B13L1 blocks (up to 4 blocks).
Unified containers of small-sized cargo KMGU 2 (up to 4 blocks).
AH-64 Apache attack helicopter
In early 1984, the first group of AH-64A Apache helicopters entered service with the US Army. The AH-64A, according to NATO experts, is the most advanced of all combat helicopters in service with the alliance countries. It was created to combat enemy tanks in conditions of high saturation of the battlefield with weapons military air defense. The AH-64 Apache can perform its assigned tasks in difficult weather conditions, poor visibility conditions, day and night. According to experts, the AH-64 Apache is the helicopter of the 21st century. It has good maneuverability, high speed flight. Its design is designed for overloads from -1.5 to + 3.5. The engines are equipped with a special device that disperses the jet and reduces the exhaust temperature, which reduces the likelihood of the helicopter being hit by missiles with an infrared guidance head. The main rotor blades are covered with a layered structure made of steel and composite materials. Fundamentally new solutions were used when attaching the blades to the propeller hub. The blade remains operational when hit by 12.7 mm bullets. The landing gear is non-retractable, which significantly increased the payload of the helicopter. The AH-64A has an X-shaped tail rotor, which is much more efficient than a conventional one. The AH-64 Apache is equipped with modern electronic equipment. For the first time, a helmet-mounted target designation system has been installed on a combat helicopter, allowing it to control small arms and missile weapons movement of the head.
The AH-64A helicopter has the following weapons: Hellfire anti-tank guided missiles with a laser guidance system, a Hughes H230A-1 Chaingun automatic cannon installed between the main landing gear, containers with unguided aircraft missiles. The use of two independent hydraulic systems, an armored cabin and the most important systems and areas of the airframe, as well as the use of fuel tanks special form and design allowed the developers to create a vehicle capable of completing a combat mission and returning to base after a helicopter was hit by 23 mm caliber shells. Since 1985, the United States began developing a new helicopter, the AH-64B Apache Bravo, which has a larger wingspan and engines of increased power. The modification includes replacement of electronic equipment. The helicopter kit includes a knife for cutting high-voltage wires. The AH-64A Apache performed well during the Iraq War (1991). Currently, McDonnell-Douglas is producing a new model of the AH-64D helicopter, called the Longbow Apache. The AH-64D is equipped with a more modern weapons control system, which ensures targeted shooting from long distances. The Dutch Air Force and the British Royal Air Force plan to purchase 30 and 67 AH-64D helicopters, respectively.
Modifications of the AH-64 helicopter
AH-64A Apache - the first production modification.
The AH-64B Apache Bravo is an upgraded version of the AH-64A, with a new radar and a new gas turbine engine and the ability to use the AIM-9L Sidewinder air-to-air missile.
The AH-64C Apache is an upgraded version of the AH-64A to the AH-64D standard.
AH-64D Longbow Apache - an improved version of the AH-64 Apache combat helicopter with a Longbow fire control system based on a Westinghouse millimeter wave radar above the main rotor hub, more powerful General Electric T700-GE-701 gas turbine engines (1417 kW or 1930 hp .), improved AGM-114D Longbow Hellfire ATGM, Doppler navigation system and processor. The helicopter is equipped with a system that allows it to receive information from the US Air Force Joint-STARS complex. The AH-64D is equipped with an targeting system based on the Target Acquisition Designation Sight (TADS - AN/ASQ-170) and Pilot Night Vision Sensor (PNVS - AN/AAQ-11). The first helicopter with the Longbow system made its first flight on March 11, 1991, the first launch of the Hellfire ATGM was made in May 1995, deliveries to the US Army began in 1996. The helicopters are also planned to be delivered to the armies of Great Britain and the Netherlands. The English version of the helicopter will be equipped with Rolls-Royce/Turbomeca RTM322 gas turbine engines.
AH-64 Sea Apache - helicopter version for Copus Marine Corps with F/A-18 aircraft electronic equipment, APG-65 radar and the ability to use AGM-84 Harpoon and/or AGM-119 Penguin anti-ship missiles and AIM-120 AMRAAM or AIM-132 ASRAAM air-to-air missiles.
Armament of the AH-64 Apache: 1 30 mm M230 Chain Gun with 1200 rounds of ammunition. Combat load - 771 kg on 4 hardpoints: 16 (4x4) AGM-114 Hellfire ATGMs or 4 M260 or LAU-61/A launchers with 19x70 mm NUR, 4 AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles, or combinations thereof .
TTX AH-64
Year of adoption 1984
Main rotor diameter 14.63 m
Tail rotor diameter 2.79 m
Helicopter length with rotating propellers 17.3 m
Length 14.97 m
Height 4.66 m
Main rotor sweep area 168.1 sq.m
Crew 2 people
Service ceiling 6400 m
Static ceiling 4570 m
Maximum flight range (only with internal reserve fuel) 400 km
Maximum flight range (with external fuel supply) 1900 km
Internal fuel capacity 1157 kg
PTB 4 x 871
Maximum flight duration 3 hours 9 meters (with internal fuel reserve)
Engines 2 x General Electric T700-GE-701C
Power 2 x 1825 hp (1342 kW)
Maximum rate of climb 942 m/min
Maximum vertical rate of climb 474 m/min
Speed - Maximum 365 km/h
Speed - Cruising 293 km/h
Rate of climb 14.6 m/s
Weight - Maximum 9520 kg
Weight - Normal 5550 kg
Weight - Empty 5165 kg
Now, by comparing the numbers, you can see where we lost.
Behind last years Many comparisons of the main attack helicopters of Russia and the United States, the Mi-28 “Night Hunter” and AH-64 Apache, respectively, appeared, in which various “experts” often spoke poorly of the Russian helicopter. To dot the i's, the Zvezda TV and Radio Broadcasting Company asked a military expert, pilot Dmitry Drozdenko, to make this comparison. When we are talking about two machines with similar tasks, the comparison begins with the characteristics: who flies faster, who shoots further, who has more weapons. But in fact this is fundamentally wrong. The fact that helicopters have the same tasks does not mean that they will solve them in the same way. When comparing the Night Hunter with the Apache, you need to remember that we are talking about two different concepts for the use of rotorcraft on the battlefield. Work on the Mi-28N Night Hunter and the AH-64 Apache Longbow began at the same time, in 1970 -s years. Their task is to support the Ground Forces, destroy manpower, armored vehicles and fortified points of the enemy. That is why helicopters are built using a single-rotor design with an X-shaped tail rotor and a fixed landing gear. From a distance, an inexperienced person can easily confuse these helicopters. However, these are two different cars, and the differences start with the cabin. The helicopter starts from the cockpit The cabin of the AN-64D Apache Longbow is more spacious than that of the Night Hunter, but the forward view is limited, the side sponsons interfere with your downward gaze, you mechanically reach to the side to the glass, and the engines hinder your view into the rear hemisphere. And although the American helicopter has a larger glass area, the Mi-28N has better visibility. In general, the ergonomics and visibility of both cars are equally good, but my feelings were different. Because if you imagine yourself in the cockpit of an “American” under heavy fire, then your soul becomes alarmed: the feeling of security is much less than in the cockpit of the Mi-28N. In a Russian helicopter, everything is different. Even visible elements of protection, such as powerful doors that close like on an armored limousine, and strong glazing, give confidence. And if you also know about the hidden protection of the “Night Stalker”, then a feeling of invincibility can be added to your confidence. And that's why. Apache Tactics I have often heard that " best system detection and targeting allowed the Americans to remove excess armor from the helicopter and add speed and maneuverability.” But that's not true. And the Americans didn’t remove the “excess armor” anywhere: it simply wasn’t there to begin with, because their approach to the issue of armor protection for combat helicopters is completely different. Western designers only cover the crew and especially important elements with armor, and sometimes there is no armor at all. The cockpit is covered on the sides and bottom with Kevlar and polyacrylate armor plates. The side glazing, engine and transmission are not armored at all. The survivability of the helicopter assumes the possibility of partially completing a combat mission in the event of indirect damage with a caliber of no more than 23 millimeters. It is assumed that the Apache, thanks to its radio-electronic complex, will not enter the enemy’s air defense zone at all, and if it is overtaken by an enemy projectile, it will be easily “let in” and “released” by a thin panel of the side wall. What if there is a pilot sitting behind the projectile entry point? Or is a vital node located? 
Hunter strategy Russian tactics suggest that the helicopter can enter the air defense zone, carrying out an attack “on the move”, when external control of the crew’s actions is reduced to a minimum, and interacts more closely with the Ground Forces on the battlefield, providing them with direct fire support. Therefore, Russian designers approached the armoring of the vehicle according to the old, time-tested principle “you can’t spoil porridge with butter.” By the way, this principle justified itself on the best attack aircraft of World War II, the Il-2, the famous Mi-24 helicopter. It was also used on the Night Hunter. 
The armored crew cabin, the so-called “bath,” is made of 10-mm aluminum sheets, onto which 16-mm ceramic armor elements are glued. The cabin doors are made of fiberglass with an aluminum plate and ceramic armor. Armored plane-parallel glazing withstands direct hits armor-piercing bullets caliber 12.7 millimeters, high-explosive fragmentation shells 20 mm caliber, both from the front and from the sides, the blades remain operational when hit by 30 mm shells. "Dagger" of the "American" The composition of the weapons of both attack helicopters is, in principle, the same and includes a guided 30-mm cannon, anti-tank guided missiles, air-to-air missiles, unguided missiles and just little things. The scope of the article does not allow us to consider all this separately, so we will focus on the main weapon of the AH-64, which is considered its main advantage. The Hellfire AGM-114A laser-guided and AGM-114B radar-guided missiles have a range of 6000–8000 meters (this is in ideal conditions), and there can be two ways of using them. They depend on the type of target designation - autonomous or external. In the case of an autonomous (from the carrier) helicopter, it is required to illuminate the target during the entire flight of the missile from the moment of launch until it hits the target. In this case, the crew independently searches, identifies, targets and launches the missile. 
In the case of external target designation by a helicopter, only the launch is carried out, and the guidance is carried out by the crew of another helicopter or a ground observer. Helicopter most time, it is camouflaged using the terrain, which greatly increases its survivability, and a massive salvo inflicts significant damage on the enemy. However, this method requires very clear interaction and planning of actions between the “shooter” and the “gunner,” and this is not always possible in modern combat conditions. You need to understand that real combat can make serious adjustments to this strategy. Smoke on the battlefield will significantly reduce the launch range and target acquisition accuracy of the Hellfire missile. Electronic countermeasures can disrupt communication channels, and the AN-64 will be forced to operate in autonomous launch mode, thereby entering the active air defense countermeasures zone. It is worth noting that the combat use of Apache in most cases was carried out only after enemy air defense was completely suppressed. Russian attack The Mi-28N uses the Ataka-VN supersonic high-precision missile with radio command guidance. Such missiles find their targets in conditions of jamming, smoke and dust, which scatter laser beams, seriously interfering with laser-guided missiles. The firing range of the Ataka-VN is 8,000 meters, while the 9M120D modification has a range of up to 10,000 meters. The speed of the product is 550 meters per second. The missile is aimed in semi-automatic mode, which requires the operator to constantly keep the aiming mark on the target. Of course, a helicopter can maneuver over a wide range of course and roll, but the target must be constantly tracked, which increases the risk of the helicopter being hit by enemy air defense systems. But it can attack from a greater range than the Apache, especially in poor weather conditions. 
The Mi-28N's electronic equipment and weapons are constantly being improved, and I would not be surprised that in the near future another advanced guided missile will be attached to the helicopter's pylons. For example, with beautiful name"Chrysanthemum". A new modification of this missile was developed for the Mi-28NM and provides two-channel guidance to the target - via a laser beam and a radio channel. This increases the likelihood of hitting a target and allows you to target two targets simultaneously. Apache in real combat Now let's talk about how these two concepts work in real combat. At present best helicopters NATO AN-64 have extensive combat experience, which cannot be said about the Russian Mi-28N. But this combat experience was gained in conflicts with countries armed with outdated equipment, and nevertheless there were serious losses. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the United States faced an outdated but not suppressed air defense system. Result: 30 of 33 helicopters were seriously damaged. As a result, one was shot down, and of those who returned to base, only seven remained airworthy. After the occupation of Iraq, 27 Apaches were lost due to combat reasons alone, and this despite the complete and overwhelming superiority of the US Army in the air and on the ground. Yes, after the suppression of Iraqi air defense, AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters began a systematic hunt for Iraqi T-72 tanks. What if it was a modern air defense system? Would hunting be so easy? 
Let’s imagine that when attacking the formations of a deployed battalion at a depth of up to one kilometer from the front line, a helicopter will meet the Verba MANPADS, and at a depth of 1.5 kilometers - the Tunguska-M1 complex, equipped with two 30-mm machine guns and eight guided missiles . I note that due to the use of two air defense systems, this complex covers the zone of 0-3500 meters in height and 200-10000 meters in range, which exceeds the launch range of the Hellfaire missile to kill, and the AN-64 armor is designed to protect against 23-mm shells ZSU "Shilka", and not the 30-mm "Tunguska-M1". The Strela-10m3 complex will also add to the troubles. By the way, on February 15, 1991, during Operation Desert Storm, the outdated Strela-10 complex of the Iraqi air defense shot down two American A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft at once. Further, at a distance of three to five kilometers, there are the Tor-M1 air defense systems ", and at a distance of seven to ten kilometers - the Buk-M1 air defense system. In the case of urban battles, MANPADS are placed on the roofs of buildings, "Tunguska-M1" and "Strela-10M3" - at intersections and open roads, "Tor-M1" stands in parks and other open areas, and "Buk-M1" covers the city with outskirts. A nightmare for enemy aircraft. The weak armor of the American helicopter makes even small arms dangerous for it. Thus, on May 28, 2012, an AH-64D Apache was shot down by small arms fire in Afghanistan during a patrol ( serial number 05–
07012).
Modern Russian tanks, unlike American and German ones, are equipped with active protection systems, for example Shtora-1 and Arena. If these systems are used, the survivability of the tank increases by approximately two times, and the ability of stable guidance of ATGMs with a laser seeker decreases by approximately 80%. The effectiveness of these systems was clearly demonstrated on T-90 tanks in Syria. By the way, the American Abrams M1A2 SEP v4 with an active protection system will begin to enter US troops no earlier than 2021, but for now the “best” tank in the world is rather weak against modern anti-tank systems. "Hunters" over Syria Russia in modern history did not wage wars similar to the American ones, and the Mi-28N did not participate in massive hostilities. The exception is the operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria, where the vehicle was tested well in difficult combat conditions. She showed herself exclusively with positive side, causing significant damage to the terrorists' manpower and military infrastructure. Unfortunately, during the operation in the vicinity of the city of Homs, one Mi-28N was lost. The crew died. According to the commission's conclusion, the crash was associated with the loss of spatial orientation of the crew when flying in difficult conditions over unfamiliar, directionless terrain, and not with hardware failure. The helicopter systems were operating normally. 
A global assessment of the combat use capabilities of Russian attack helicopters can be made by analyzing the combat experience of the Mi-24. Over its long history, it has worked all over the world and performed very well. His “son”, the Mi-28N “Night Hunter”, absorbed the best qualities of the famous twenty-four and confidently stepped forward. The Mi-28 is rapidly improving, acquiring new electronic systems and more powerful weapons. In a matter of years, designers have come a long way and not only caught up, but also in many ways surpassed their foreign competitors. conclusions What should I say in conclusion? Comparing “classmates” is a thankless task. Both helicopters are good and have their pros and cons, but if I had to carry out a combat mission, I would prefer a Russian helicopter, and, frankly, I want one thing - not to have combat missions. But this seems to be an illusion...Text: Dmitry Drozdenko
By analogy with the Americans, a competition was announced with the participation of the Moscow Helicopter Plant named after. M. L. Mil and in the OKB N. I. Kamov. Despite the fact that the specifications for the implementation of the design and development work were approved by the commanders-in-chief of the Air Force and Ground Forces only in 1980, the preliminary requirements became known earlier. The new aircraft for round-the-clock and all-weather use was supposed to have a high indicator of the “efficiency-cost” criterion, borrowed from the West and becoming “fashionable” in the USSR. In addition, it was necessary to ensure crew survival in critical situations, autonomous operation with minimal use of ground equipment, high operational manufacturability and low cost in mass production, a highly automated on-board complex, powerful precision weapons. One or two crew members had to cope with such a multifunctional creation.
Scheme Selection
A special feature of the competition was the participation of design bureaus - adherents of various helicopter designs. Thus, the problem of determining methods for comparing them was initially laid down. It would be naive to assume that existing developments will not be used in new projects. To justify the design decisions taken, specialists from both design bureaus analyzed transverse, single-rotor and coaxial designs, and assessed their impact on the performance of main combat missions, one of which is air combat. To solve this problem, it was necessary to increase maneuverability, the achievement of which was impossible without taking into account the latest advances in the field of aerodynamics and strength. Increasing combat survivability required measures to armor and duplicate some units and systems. The optimal composition of the crew, its placement and rescue scheme were determined. At the same time, foreign analogues were analyzed, the latest achievements of science and technology, and the latest weapons were taken into account. Rotary-wing aircraft designed to support ground forces, escort transport helicopters, destroy armored vehicles, and conduct close combat air combat, was supposed to be operated primarily at extremely low altitudes (ELA), flights at which have features that affect design solutions.
Drawing of a transverse rotorcraft made by S. N. Fomin
Experience in the combat use of helicopters has shown that in order to minimize the impact of air defense, they must fly in the so-called “safety corridor” at a PMV of 5-15 m. At the same time, reducing the likelihood of damage was achieved by increasing maneuverability, by increasing permissible overloads, roll and pitch angles, and flight speeds and sliding angles.
A complex task was being solved - piloting while simultaneously searching for and destroying targets. Working in such conditions is characterized by high level linear, angular accelerations and psychophysiological loads on the pilot under time pressure. These factors favored a two-person crew. To save them, the customer required the installation of ejection seats, based on information about the presence of such on the S-72 helicopter, created in the USA under the RSRA program (Rotor Systems Research Aircraft - an aircraft for researching rotor systems). The use of catapults presupposed the mandatory shooting of the NV blades, however, tests carried out on the Mi-4 showed the difficulty of implementing safe shooting, so the developers of the MVZ considered as a priority the option of a twin-rotor rotorcraft with a transverse design, including with a pusher propeller. This solution not only guaranteed safe ejection outside the NV zone, but also made it possible to include the wing, which had become almost an iconic element, in the design. All previously developed strike vehicles in the United States had it, including the notorious AN-56, which could not but influence Soviet design thought. There were also developments on the wing on the Mi-6, Mi-24 and V-12. Not only did it make it easier to place the entire range of weapons under the wing, it also made it easier to take off an overloaded vehicle with a running start, providing advantages over a classic helicopter, and also unloaded the NV in flight, preserving its service life.
At OKB im. N.I. Kamov had a good groundwork for the Ka-22 transverse rotorcraft. The design of transverse combat helicopters in this design bureau was carried out under the leadership of the head of the technical projects department, S. N. Fomin. He personally did the drawings of the external views.
The design of the B-100 combat rotorcraft with a transverse rotor arrangement and an additional pusher propeller was brought to the stage of a demonstration model. Not without the influence of “Cheyenne” - the B-100 was distinguished by the high degree of novelty of the proposed scientific and technical solutions. The initial projects of this team were two-seater.
The designers of the N.I. Kamov Design Bureau, in their research on a transverse rotorcraft, which had fairly perfect aerodynamic shapes, only went as far as layout drawings and models. The cost center specialists went further.
In 1972, under the leadership of chief designer M. N. Tishchenko, the design of “product 280” began. In 1973, they designed a twin-engine machine with a take-off weight of 11.5 tons, with two propellers with a diameter of 10.3 m and a pusher propeller. The pilot production of the cost center built its full-size model with relatively conservative shapes.
Demonstration model of a two-seat transverse combat rotorcraft B-100 with two three-bladed, folding NVs, one pusher propeller and an air-to-ground missile
However, calculations carried out by both companies showed that when performing coordinated horizontal maneuvers, even not with maximum roll values, a transverse helicopter will always reach heights above 15 meters due to the large transverse dimensions compared to helicopters of other configurations. In this case, the probability of its defeat increases to 85-90%. In addition, lateral stability and controllability deteriorated during uncoordinated maneuvers due to aerodynamic features and cross-links on transverse helicopters, which is unacceptable in WWI. Satisfying air transportability requirements also became significantly more difficult. For the B-100, a rather complex version of folding the LNV with rotating the wing and fixing it along the fuselage was worked out.
Model of a twin-rotor MVZ helicopter with a transverse design and a pusher propeller
Kamovites also analyzed the design of a longitudinal combat helicopter, as evidenced by the presence in the design bureau of a demonstration model, beyond which the work did not progress. The transverse design, despite its promise in terms of achieving a maximum speed of 450-550 km/h, was rejected by both companies. Thus, the designers turned to traditional, single-screw and coaxial designs.
Model B-100 with folded NV blades and rotated wing
Demonstration model of a helicopter from the N. I. Kamov Design Bureau, indicating the development of longitudinal design projects at the company
Interest in the coaxial design was fueled by the fact that since 1973, Sikorsky had been conducting research under the ABC (Advance Blade Concept) program. Two experimental S-69 (XN-59A) helicopters were built with rigid coaxial NVs, which solved the problem of their “clapping”.
This helicopter reached a maximum speed of 296 km/h, in a flat dive - 358 km/h, and with the use of additional turbojet engines - 485 km/h. The coaxial design was a priority of the N.I. Kamov Design Bureau, which initially designed a two-seat combat helicopter. Later they developed a single-seat vehicle based on the developments of S. N. Fomin.
The design of a single-seat aircraft was considered by the OKB to be a progressive step, a qualitatively new technical step in helicopter engineering and should have a positive effect on improving combat and operational characteristics. The focus was on development information technologies to provide intelligent support to the pilot. At the same time, it was planned to preserve the possibility of ejecting the pilot. An experimental machine of a coaxial design with semi-rigid fastening of the blades to the HB bushing by means of a plate-like metal torsion bar was designated B-80.
Experimental helicopter S-69 (ХН-59А) with rigid coaxial rotors
Model of the first version of the two-seat combat helicopter of the N. I. Kamov Design Bureau of a coaxial design with a fixed gun
The designers of the cost center approached coaxial and longitudinal schemes, at least according to the residual principle, and turned to their favorite classic single-rotor scheme. At the same time, the requirements for the possibility of performing flight in the mode of following the terrain and delivering strikes from low and ultra-low altitudes led to the abandonment of catapults. The pilots simply did not have time to use them during WWII; they had to rely only on the strength of the vehicle and means of survival. The latter involved the use of safely deformable structural elements, an energy-intensive chassis and energy-absorbing seats.
The first layout option for a single-seat combat helicopter, proposed by S. N. Fomin
The abandonment of the rotorcraft design made it possible to increase the weight output, combat load and simplify the design.
Many models and several mock-ups were built, including six full-size ones, which made it possible to work out the optimal layout. Among them there was a transverse design with an NV with a diameter of 8.25 m and two GTD-10FP engines with a power of 1,950 hp. With. each and two mock-ups of a single-rotor design: with an NV with a diameter of 14.25 m and two GTD-10FP engines, as well as with a diameter of 16 m and two TVZ-117F engines. The latter option was considered more promising; a significant role was played by the fact that reliable TV3-117 had already been mastered by industry.
Model of the first version of a single-seat combat helicopter from the N. I. Kamov Design Bureau with a self-aligning wing and a fixed gun
By 1976, the appearance and layout of the “ed. 280" have decided. The main weapons were to be the Sturm ATGM and a mobile 30-mm cannon. The cockpit and main units had to be protected from 7.62 and 12.7 mm caliber bullets, and the flight navigation system had to ensure operation in minimal weather conditions, day and night. The maximum speed was set within 380-420 km/h. The work was headed by Deputy Chief Designer A. N. Ivanov, the responsible leading designer was M. V. Weinberg.
Before the approval of technical specifications for R&D in 1980, both companies carried out preliminary design, based on their own understanding of the concept and based on known requirements. Design bureaus had relative freedom of action, which led to competition unprecedented in the history of aviation. Combat helicopters were designed that differed not only in aerodynamic design, but also in weight, armament, equipment and crew.
The helicopter, designated Mi-28, was designed as a two-seater. This made it possible to divide the functions of piloting, observation, target recognition, aiming, and communications between crew members. Placing pilots side by side was abandoned after analysis of side-view diagrams from the cockpit. The qualitative assessment of the view from the Mi-24 taken as a basis was “satisfactory” and became “insufficient” when assessing the left pilot’s view to the right, with the “side-by-side” layout. The asymmetry of the view made it difficult for the pilot to perform maneuvers to the right due to the difficulty of assessing the distance to the ground on the PMV. And this, in turn, affected survivability and combat effectiveness.
The choice of the “tandem” design, with a fairly narrow fuselage and a high pilot position relative to the side, provided “excellent” visibility, like the AN-64 “Apache”, which was to be surpassed in key indicators.
Weight perfection with a given strength, reliability and combat survivability were achieved thanks to the optimal design method, which proved its effectiveness in the creation of the Mi-26 (see “Science and Technology” No. 3/2013). At the same time, a layout with the so-called “central core” was considered, when vital units and systems were located inside the longitudinal load-bearing frame, and secondary equipment and units were outside it. The difficulties in achieving compliance with vibration and strength characteristics, as well as the vulnerability of auxiliary equipment, forced us to abandon this attractive design and return to a traditional layout.
One of six full-size mock-ups of “product 280”, in which there is a clear resemblance to the nose of the Mi-24, but artillery installation, as in US AAN projects
The given level of combat survivability was ensured by duplicating the main units with their maximum separation and shielding by less valuable ones. The selection of materials, design dimensions and armor provided enough time to return to base in case of damage and prevented catastrophic destruction of the vehicle.
The preliminary design was completed by the end of 1977. For another year and a half, the requirements for the weapons system and the sighting, flight and navigation system were coordinated. The approval of the TTZ was completed only in 1979, after which detailed design and work began in specialized research institutes and flight test organizations such as TsAGI, LII, VIAM, NIIAS, State Research Institute of the Air Force, etc. Such a number of participants indicates that the design of the “product 280" took on the character of a national comprehensive program, comparable in complexity to the creation of a promising combat aircraft. To test the units, 54 ground stands and several LLs based on the Mi-8, -24 were created.
The barrel of the Mi-28 gun board 012 was used as a tool rod on which the PVD and ROV were placed
Second prototype Mi-28 board 022, intended for weapons testing
In August 1980, the Military Industrial Commission approved the construction of two prototypes, pending the official conclusion of the layout commission, the positive conclusion of which was received only at the end of the next year. In 1981, a sample was ready for static testing, and in July 1982, the first flight sample was ready - board No. 012, on which on November 10, 1982 test pilots (G. R. Karapetyan and V. V. Tsygankov) performed a hover, and December 19, 1982 - first circular flight.
In September 1983, the second flight prototype was ready - board 022, on which weapons were mainly tested. Both prototypes, intended for use in daytime, limited adverse weather conditions, were tested until 1987.
Features of national competition
In 1983, factory tests of the Ka-50 and Mi-28 helicopters were completed, and in December the first stage of state tests began, ending on September 20, 1984 and April 19, 1985 for the Ka-50 and Mi-28, respectively. 27 flights were carried out on each type of helicopter, after which they were transferred to the State Research Institute of the Air Force named after. Chkalov for the second stage of testing.
In 1986, the Mi-28 successfully passed the main part of the state testing program, received a high rating, fully corresponded to its purpose and was superior in many respects to helicopters of a similar class. MAP decided to mass produce the Mi-28 at the Progress plant in Arsenyev. By this time, the pre-production prototype “Product 286”, designated Mi-28A, was ready at the Moscow Helicopter Plant. This was the third experimental vehicle 00-03, the construction of which began in 1985 and in which all the wishes of the military were taken into account. However, the customer chose the Ka-50, considering that at the current pace of electronics development it was possible to create an automated complex that would allow a single-seat combat helicopter to more effectively cope with the tasks assigned to it.
Experimental B-80, first flight, which took place in June 1982
In addition, during the tests it turned out that the Ka-50 had superiority in static ceiling, rate of climb, ease of piloting, the efficiency-cost criterion and the effectiveness of supersonic ATGMs. According to the commission, the only advantage of the Mi-28 was the presence of a mobile cannon installation. The dispute turned to tactics and safety of use. Supporters of the Mi-28 put forward the argument that one pilot cannot detect, recognize targets and attack them at the altitudes specified by the TTZ, due to safety conditions. In contrast, S.V. Mikheev voiced the essence of the concept of a single-seat attack combat helicopter: “There is no need to prove that one pilot works better than two, there is no need to prove the unprovable. But if one pilot on our helicopter can do what two pilots on a competing helicopter will have to do, that will be a victory.” The Ka50 clearly appealed to the fighter pilot, Air Force Commander-in-Chief P.S. Kutakhov, a participant in the Great Patriotic War, and was chosen for mass production. The achievements realized during the creation of the Mi-28 were proposed to be used for a new modification of the Mi-24, which corresponded to the principle of reverse unification laid down in the TTZ, i.e., the possibility of using components and assemblies of the helicopter being developed to modernize existing ones.
The third experimental pre-production Mi-28A No. 032. Photo taken at the Flight Research Institute in Zhukovsky by A. Oblamsky, courtesy of S. Moroz
The experimental helicopter Mi-28N (OP-1) board 014 was converted from the first experimental Mi-28 No. 00-01, board 012
The third prototype of the Mi-28 No. 032 was the first to be equipped with an X-shaped tail rotor and a new design. For exhibition in Le Bourget, it was assigned the exhibition number “H-390”
The authority of the Air Force Commander-in-Chief, member of the CPSU Central Committee, deputy Supreme Council The USSR did not allow this decision to be discussed during the life of P.S. Kutakhov. However, his death allowed the management of the Moscow Helicopter Plant to appeal to the new Air Force Commander-in-Chief, Air Marshal A. N. Efimov, and to the MAP with a request to continue comparative tests of the Mi-28 and Ka-50 in testing conditions as close as possible to combat ones.
It was decided to carry out the tests according to a single program for both helicopters in a short time with a minimum allocation of resources. At the first stage, performance characteristics, characteristics of stability, controllability, maneuverability, and strength were assessed. At the same time, the target environment of the training ground was formed and a method was developed for comparative assessment of the capabilities of helicopters to search for ground targets. At the second stage, it was necessary to study the main characteristics of SD, NAR, and cannon weapons and evaluate the safety of their use. To do this, single and group targets from tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers and vehicles were placed at the training grounds, which, at the command of the experiment leader, could appear unexpectedly for the pilots, on periodically changed routes. To record the accuracy of ATGM hits, there were shields with frontal and side projections of tanks, which could move at variable speeds. In the target area, light, smoke and dust interfered with the ATGM guidance systems. Penetration was assessed based on the impact on armor plates 1,000 mm thick and on real tanks. Separate target fields were intended to determine the accuracy characteristics of the NAR and the gun. The escort helicopter filmed the launches and firing, and also noted the results of the hits.
The movement parameters of the helicopter and ATGM systems, the control actions of the pilots and their psychophysiological state (pulse and breathing rates, attention reserve) were recorded. Video cameras recorded the direction of the pilot's gaze and the duration of his delay on the instruments and outside the cockpit.
The experimental Mi-28 board 012 was equipped with a three-blade tail rotor from the Mi-24. Photo taken at the LII Zhukovsky by A. Oblamsky, courtesy of S. Moroz
During tests of the Mi-28, a controllability margin was revealed, and by 1986 the customer wished to expand the range of permissible overloads for more energetic maneuvering. Refinement of the LNV and hydraulic system made it possible to increase the vertical overload when performing a “slide” to 2.65 units. at an altitude of 500 m and 1.8 units. at an altitude of 4,000 m. At the same time, the flight speeds “sideways” and “tail forward” increased. The successful development of the helicopter's systems and their compatibility with weapons made it possible to carry out the first experimental night launch of a guided missile against a ground target.
In 1987, an X-shaped tail rotor and an electronic control unit of a new design were installed on the Mi-28A No. 032, after which the appearance and equipment for production vehicles was finally determined. Testing of the helicopter began in January 1988, and since 1989 it has participated in the Le Bourget and MAKS air shows. Since 2010 it has been in the Museum of the Moscow Helicopter Plant.
Since January 1991, Mi-28A No. 042 joined the tests. During participation in LeBurget-93, it was assigned the exhibition number N-315.
In 1993, a preliminary conclusion was received based on the results of the first stage of state tests of the Mi-28A attack helicopter and a decision was being prepared to release their pilot batch. By that time, the general designer of the Moscow Helicopter Plant named after. M. L. Mil became M. V. Weinberg, who, taking into account world experience and achievements in the field of avionics and night vision systems, proposed to stop the development of the Mi-28A and begin the development of a round-the-clock, all-weather modification with a fundamentally new set of Mi-28A avionics 28N (“N” - night) R&D “Avangard-2”. The program was headed by chief designer V. G. Shcherbina.
According to the plan, the Mi-28N was supposed to perform combat missions at any time of the day, in any weather, remaining unnoticeable to air defense systems due to flight at an extremely low altitude of 10-20 meters, bending around the terrain and flying around obstacles in automatic mode. In addition, the helicopter must exchange data on enemy targets both with ground control points and with other aircraft via closed communication channels. For its ability to hit all kinds of enemy targets at night, the helicopter received the name “Night Hunter”.
The experimental Mi-28N (OP-1) helicopter, board 014, was converted from the first experimental Mi-28 No. 00-01, board 012 in August 1996. The crew of test pilot V. Yudin and navigator S. Nikulin first took it into the air on November 14, 1996 at the Moscow Helicopter Plant. M. L. Mil. On April 30, 1997, factory flight tests began. At the same time, the Rostov Helicopter Production Association (RVPO) was preparing for serial production in the face of an acute shortage financial resources, which delayed the creation of some complexes and systems for the Mi-28N.
In 2000, the general director of Rostvertol OJSC B. N. Slyusar (died in 2015) initiated a program to build prototype helicopters at the expense of the plant. "Rostvertol" together with the Moscow Helicopter Plant named after. By the beginning of 2004, M. L. Mil created a prototype in Rostov - “OP-2”, which performed its first hover on March 25, and already made its first flight on March 31.
In February 2005, a state commission was created to conduct state joint tests (GST) of prototypes - OP-1 and OP-2, the latter of which began testing in June 2005.
After the successful completion of the first stage of the GSI in March 2006, the state commission chaired by the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force, Army General V.S. Mikhailov, issued a conclusion on the release of the pilot batch of Mi-28N, and already in May the first production Mi-28N board No. 32 arrived for testing ( 01-01). In total, two experimental and seven production aircraft participated in the GSI, which performed more than 800 flights, after which on December 26, 2008, Air Force Commander-in-Chief A. N. Zelin approved the GSI Act for the Mi-28N helicopter.
A modern combat helicopter for the Russian Armed Forces has been created! On October 15, 2009, the President of the Russian Federation signed a decree on the adoption of the Mi-28N helicopter into service with the Russian Air Force as the main attack helicopter.
Modifications with dual controls and others
As soon as the Night Stalkers entered service, the need for a dual-control version arose. In April 2009, an agreement was concluded between Rostvertol and the cost center on its creation directly at the serial plant. At the same time, the Mi-28UB was supposed to be the first Rostvertol aircraft, in the production of which digital models were used. They decided to build a prototype Mi-28UB (OP-1) on the basis of the Mi-28N No. 02-01, tail No. 37, produced in 2007.
In 2012, the helicopter was returned to the factory to replace the nose with a new one, created using those same digital models. In addition to organizing a full set of redundant controls in the front cabin, other changes were made: the cabin became wider, the canopy and the entrance door were slightly different, the side glazing area was increased to improve visibility, and the configuration of the energy-absorbing seat changed. Now in the front cockpit, instead of a navigator-operator, there was a pilot-instructor or an operator, if necessary.
This allows the Mi-28UB to be used for effective training in piloting helicopters of the Mi-28N (NE) type while fully maintaining all the combat capabilities of the base vehicle.
On July 31, 2013, the crew consisting of honored test pilots of Russia - commander S. S. Barkov and operator G. A. Ananyev - took the vehicle off the ground for the first time, and on August 9 performed the first full-profile flight.
In 2013, it became known that the creation of a prototype of a deeply modernized version of the Mi28NM, which has been under development since 2008, began. The new modification must differ significantly from its prototype and be fully adapted for operation in network-centric wars, which involves full integration into the global system for transmitting video images, target coordinates and other information through available channels. The helicopter, like its competitor, the latest modification of the AN-64E, will be capable of working with UAVs. According to the deputy head of the Russian Helicopters holding company A. Shibitov, tests of the Mi-28NM should begin soon.
Comparative assessment of the MI-28NE helicopter with its competitor AN-64D
Correct comparison is impossible without conducting sufficiently in-depth scientific research. In the USSR, such research was carried out in the air force academies - engineering named after. N. E. Zhukovsky, who turns 95 years old on November 23, 2015, and the team named after. Yu. A. Gagarin. Based on the analysis of available information, methodological manuals were published, which were sent to combat units to study the aircraft of a potential enemy and successfully combat them. In 1986, such a manual was published on the AN-64A. Similar work was carried out at TsAGI, in this case the results were used by the Design Bureau and other industrial organizations to create promising aircraft.
In 1995, the Swedish Ministry of Defense decided to update its fleet of combat helicopters and selected the Russian Mi-28A and the American AN-64A Apache from various types to conduct comparative tests. Our Mi-28A board 042 was delivered on an Il-76 transport aircraft to Sweden, where it was tested, including live firing.
Mi-28 board 042 with exhibition number N-315 and a tool rod for PVD and DUAS installed on the left side of the forward fuselage. Photo: S. G. Moroz
Roll out of the first Mi-28N, produced at Rostvertol in 2005, which became the second prototype of the Night Hunter (OP-2)
On the territory of the Northern Military District, the Mi-28A performed combat training missions: combat with an advancing group and a strike on targets in deep enemy defenses. Strikes from different directions against targets against a real tactical background were simulated. The Mi-28A helicopter was countered by short-range air defense systems RBS-90 and ZSK LVKV 90, as well as JA-37 2Vigen fighters.” The Mi-28A did not perform real combat firing, but the use of all types of weapons was simulated. The surveillance and sighting system functioned flawlessly, and even Swedish operators without the appropriate level of training found it easy to work with it. The tests demonstrated the high probability of target detection, the speed of bringing weapons into combat readiness and the ability to use weapons from the maximum distance from the target. At the training ground in Vidzel, the “twenty-eighth” completed a one-day live firing program with all types of weapons. The helicopter was piloted by a Swedish crew. The 9M114 “Sturm” ATGM was launched from a hover at a target 900 m away, and the 9M120 “Attack” was launched from a horizontal flight at a speed of 200 km/h and a target distance of 4,700 m. Both missiles passed at a distance of about 1 m from target tank. The Swedes considered this result to be good, and the preservation of hit accuracy with increasing range and flight speed of the carrier was amazing.
The launch of the S-8 NAR was carried out from horizontal flight at a speed of 160 km/h to a range of 2,000 m and from pitching up at a speed of 220 km/h to a range of 4,000 m.
The fourth prototype of the Mi-28 board 042 is in flight
The main part of the missiles covered an area measuring 400-600 m by 100-200 m. The launch results from 2,000 m were considered acceptable, and from a range of 4,000 m - surprisingly good. During one of the launches, due to the non-design mode of use of the NAR, a surge occurred in one of the helicopter engines. The electronic regulator brought the second engine to maximum power, and the crew managed to land the car safely. The Swedish pilot explained to Russian specialists that on any other type of helicopter he was familiar with, a similar incident could have ended very sadly.
After firing at the training ground, the Mi-28A made a flight of almost 1,000 km to the Central Military District. Here, against a real tactical background, two more combat training missions were completed: containing mechanized forces and supporting the advance of tank units, and then a second demonstration flight took place. In total, the Mi-28 “Technical Demonstration Program” took three weeks and about 30 flight hours.
Ultimately, the Swedes assessed the Mi-28 as a very durable and reliable helicopter, well suited for use in field conditions, with high survivability. Not a single flight was disrupted due to mechanical system failures. Maintenance could perform personnel conscript service under the direction of a technical officer. It was especially emphasized that the Mi-28 turned out to be capable of effectively performing combat missions in accordance with the Western concept of using anti-tank helicopters. The Mi-28 is focused on the Russian tactics of striking on the move, when external control of the crew’s actions is reduced to a minimum. The Swedes “profess” Western tactics - launching ATGMs at maximum range from an almost stationary position in folds of the terrain (before launching a missile, the helicopter “bounces”) with preliminary reconnaissance of the target and issuing target designation to the crew of a combat helicopter.
According to the Swedes, the helicopter proved to be “very reliable and well adapted to field conditions" The Swedes demanded that the helicopter be equipped with equipment that would allow it to conduct combat operations at night. The second stage of the tender was postponed to 2001 and later cancelled.
As soon as the “Night Hunter” entered service with the armed forces of its country, it became in demand on the world market, for which the Mi-28NE modification was created.
One of the Mi-28Ns successfully completed a series of demonstration flights in July 2007 North Africa. According to media reports, Venezuela and Algeria are showing interest in purchasing them. In 2009, the Mi-28NE participated in a tender announced by the Indian Defense Ministry for the purchase of 22 modern combat helicopters. The finalists of the tender were the Russian Mi-28NE and the American AH-64D. In 2010, both helicopters performed a series of demonstration and test flights in the difficult climatic and mountain conditions of India, and before that, one Mi-28N (No. 38) underwent special tests in the vicinity of Elbrus, confirming high performance characteristics in high altitude conditions. However, it happened again old story— in the final choice, preference was given to Apache.
According to media publications, the first foreign operator of the Mi-28NE should be Iraq. Potential customers may be countries such as Algeria, Venezuela, Peru, etc.
Some sources on helicopter topics say that from a distance of 3,000 m at certain viewing angles the AN-64 and Mi-28 are difficult to distinguish, explaining this by external similarity and blaming Once again Russians in plagiarism. Yes, both helicopters have almost the same aerodynamic configuration for the Mi-28 and YAN-64A modifications, but different external contours and contours. In addition, the Mi-28 fuselage is longer and wider, which led to a larger projection area of the helicopter from below. The cross-sectional areas of helicopters are approximately the same. Another significant difference is the five-blade NV with a larger diameter than the four-blade Apache propeller. Based on this, the Russian helicopter is heavier than the American one and has differences in performance characteristics. Comparative characteristics helicopters Mi-28NE and its competitor AN-64D are shown in the table.
Despite the fact that the Russian helicopter is three tons heavier than the American one, the ratio of normal take-off weight to engine power of the Mi-28 is better. In terms of mass and specific weight of the combat load, the Mi-28NE surpasses its competitor, it is almost 21%, while for the AN-64D this figure is about 19%. In terms of other performance characteristics, the Mi-28NE is inferior to its opponent. Nevertheless, it also has significant advantages. We cannot agree with the opinion of some representatives of the Indian Air Force that the AH-64D is more maneuverable and its armor protection is superior to the Mi-28N.
Thus, at a speed of more than 120-150 km/h, gliding for the AN-64 is limited or not allowed at all due to the strength of the flywheel and tail boom, which significantly limits the ability to perform combat maneuvers, while the Mi-28 performs basic maneuvers aerobatics, despite the heavy armor.
In addition, the five-blade NV Mi-28 is more efficient than the four-blade propeller installed on the AN-64, especially at low speeds, and has a lower level of vibration, which is very important when aiming. The view from the Apache's pilot and gunner's cabins is limited: forward and down by the side sponsons, back by the engines. On the Mi-28, the smooth lateral contours of the front part of the fuselage provide good visibility. At the same time, the glazing area of the cockpit of the American car is larger, and the panels have a slight convexity, while the flat panels on the Mi-28 are capable of creating unidirectional glare in the cockpit, interfering with the reading of instrument readings.
Pre-production Mi-28N board 38 during testing in high altitude conditions. This machine became a model of the export version of the Mi-28NE and participated in test flights abroad
The design of both helicopters is designed to withstand 23mm shells. At the same time, the Mi-28 has a greater chance of surviving in battle due to better armor, since the Apache only has armor covering the cockpit.
The design of the Mi-28 allows it to withstand a collision with the ground without serious consequences for the crew with a vertical descent speed of 15.4 m/s, while the Apache has this speed limited to 11.69 m/s.
The vehicle's on-board equipment includes an all-round radar. Unlike the radar of the American Apache helicopter, it is capable of solving flight and navigation problems.
A comparative assessment of the Mi-28NE helicopter in terms of the use of cannon armament indicates that the 2A42 cannon is superior to the M230 ChainGun in terms of range of use and mass per second salvo. The use of the 2A42 gun made it possible to increase firepower, but, at the same time, aggravated serious problems. With a gun mount mass of about 200 kg, the recoil when firing is much higher than that of aircraft guns. Placing the gun on the turret entailed local strengthening of the structure and an increase in the weight of the empty helicopter. Due to the high recoil and the presence of a shoulder to the center of mass, the helicopter sways, which leads to a deterioration in shooting accuracy. Nevertheless, representatives of the Moscow Helicopter Plant guarantee better shooting accuracy than the AN-64. The Apache has 1,200 rounds of ammunition, the Mi-28 has only 250, but it requires fewer rounds to destroy a target, given the much more high efficiency its gun mount (according to various estimates, 3-4 times).
In addition, it is possible to install two universal gun containers UPK-23-250, with a 23-mm GSh-23L cannon and an ammunition load of 250 shells.
The main caliber of “tank hunters” are ATGMs. Their number is the same for both helicopters. However, the Hellfire has laser guidance, and its use at night is problematic, while the Attack has radio command guidance, which is susceptible to radio interference, but has no restrictions on atmospheric transparency.
Self-guided supersonic air-to-air missile of the Igla-V type ensures destruction of all types of tactical aircraft, helicopters, cruise missiles and UAVs in conditions of background and artificial interference, operates on the “fire and forget” principle at altitudes from 10 to 3 500 m and is not inferior to the American AIM-92 Stinger.
The NAR S-8 80 mm caliber, S-13 122 mm caliber and S-24 240 mm caliber used on the helicopter have a greater range and armor penetration than the 70 mm M260 and Hydra 70 missiles.
Competing helicopters have an onboard defense system that is approximately the same in composition and capabilities, including spreaders of IR traps and dipole reflectors and receivers that warn of laser and radar irradiation. However, potential customers stated that American helicopter surpasses the export version of its Russian competitor in the capabilities of electronic warfare systems, survivability, the level of situational awareness of the crew, the ability to conduct combat operations at night, the effectiveness of on-board electronics, as well as its weapons. At the same time, as we remember, the Swedes noted the impossibility of using it in night combat as the biggest drawback of the Mi-28A, expressing confidence that the Mi-28N would be able to cope with such a task.
In relation to the Apache, the excessive complexity of on-board equipment and systems was noted. Its maintenance requires lengthy training of engineering and technical staff.
Considering that the modernization of the AH-64D and -E helicopters is currently ongoing and a new modification of the Mi-28NM is being created, they will remain competitors and the most advanced combat helicopters in the world for a long time. But which one is better and by what criteria is up to you to decide, based on the above analysis and the history of the development of combat helicopters. At the same time, we should not forget that “all other things being equal, in a real battle much is decided by chance and not so much by the characteristics inherent in military equipment, but by its skillful use.”
We remind you that in our journal "Science and Technology" you will find many interesting original articles about the development of aviation, shipbuilding, armored vehicles, communications, astronautics, exact, natural and social sciences. On the website you can purchase an electronic version of the magazine for a symbolic 60 rubles/15 UAH.
In our online store you will also find books, posters, magnets, calendars with aircraft, ships, tanks.
Found a typo? Select a fragment and press Ctrl+Enter.
Sp-force-hide ( display: none;).sp-form ( display: block; background: #ffffff; padding: 15px; width: 960px; max-width: 100%; border-radius: 5px; -moz-border -radius: 5px; -webkit-border-radius: 5px; border-color: #dddddd; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px; font-family: Arial, "Helvetica Neue", sans-serif; background- repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center; background-size: auto;).sp-form input ( display: inline-block; opacity: 1; visibility: visible;).sp-form .sp-form-fields -wrapper ( margin: 0 auto; width: 930px;).sp-form .sp-form-control ( background: #ffffff; border-color: #cccccc; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px; font- size: 15px; padding-left: 8.75px; padding-right: 8.75px; border-radius: 4px; -moz-border-radius: 4px; -webkit-border-radius: 4px; height: 35px; width: 100% ;).sp-form .sp-field label ( color: #444444; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold;).sp-form .sp-button ( border-radius: 4px ; -moz-border-radius: 4px; -webkit-border-radius: 4px; background-color: #0089bf; color: #ffffff; width: auto; font-weight: 700; font-style: normal; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;).sp-form .sp-button-container ( text-align: left;)