Startseite > Alle Kategorien > Cars & Transportation > Aircraft > Why do people say that the Mi-24 Hind is a bad helicopter?
广告730X
Why do people say that the Mi-24 Hind is a bad helicopter?
i just read a book about this helicopter and it said it is the most feared of all Soviet helicopters in the Russian army can you please tell me why people think it is a bad helicopter if you go to U tube and type in top ten helicopters Mi-24 Hind and then go to the fist video and watch it. you will see why it is the most feared helicopter in Russia.
广告730X
Weitere Antworten(1)
While it was a fearsome helicopter in its day, it is a very old design now. It was considered an assault helicopter. It is heavily armed, and could carry eight men. For modern use it is just too big and too slow to be considered one of the best.
While it was a fearsome helicopter in its day, it is a very old design now. It was considered an assault helicopter. It is heavily armed, and could carry eight men. For modern use it is just too big and too slow to be considered one of the best.
Weitere Antworten(2)
1) Because it is Soviet / Russian. Everything Russian is bad / crappy / flawed / outdated / poorly copied — choose any. Anti-Russian propaganda in action.
2) Because these people have never seen this machine in action, they have no idea about its characteristics / capabilities, they never flown it personally, they never were under its attack; also look @ pt.1).
Do you really care about what stupid / ignorant ones say? :)
BTW, here's a link for you (sorry, i couldn't find it in English, but you may try to google-translate it): http://www.airforce.ru/articles/mi24usa/…
@Trawler: Unfortunately, in your pursuit of picking Hind's flaws you forgot to mention two things: 1) whenever MANPADS are supplied to the enemy, especially in the areas with a difficult terrain, EVERY existing copter forces start suffering losses; 2) also, you forgot to mention new (and rehauled/upgraded) versions of Mi-24 with modern avionics, sights, armaments, jammers, engines etc. You prefer to remember only outdated models somehow. Why? A discriminatory logic?
1) Because it is Soviet / Russian. Everything Russian is bad / crappy / flawed / outdated / poorly copied — choose any. Anti-Russian propaganda in action.
2) Because these people have never seen this machine in action, they have no idea about its characteristics / capabilities, they never flown it personally, they never were under its attack; also look @ pt.1).
Do you really care about what stupid / ignorant ones say? :)
BTW, here's a link for you (sorry, i couldn't find it in English, but you may try to google-translate it): http://www.airforce.ru/articles/mi24usa/…
@Trawler: Unfortunately, in your pursuit of picking Hind's flaws you forgot to mention two things: 1) whenever MANPADS are supplied to the enemy, especially in the areas with a difficult terrain, EVERY existing copter forces start suffering losses; 2) also, you forgot to mention new (and rehauled/upgraded) versions of Mi-24 with modern avionics, sights, armaments, jammers, engines etc. You prefer to remember only outdated models somehow. Why? A discriminatory logic?
Weitere Antworten(3)
Considering a Mujahedin on the back of a camel with a Stinger could turn one into a smoking pile of rubble in a matter of seconds would make it the most feared... by the occupants.
Considering a Mujahedin on the back of a camel with a Stinger could turn one into a smoking pile of rubble in a matter of seconds would make it the most feared... by the occupants.
Weitere Antworten(4)
Its the fear of the pilots and riders who are in fear,,Its too big,,too slow,,and crashes due to bad design and poor maintenance,,,TH ATS why its feared..LOL
Its the fear of the pilots and riders who are in fear,,Its too big,,too slow,,and crashes due to bad design and poor maintenance,,,TH ATS why its feared..LOL
Weitere Antworten(5)
youtube fan videos say nothing about the actual combat record and efficiency.
i HAVE flown Hind personally. it indeed is eleven tonnes of steel flying; it indeed had unmatched cruise and top speed for a long time; it truly happens to behave as an airPLANE in forward flight..
YET its sensors suck, it's armament is outdated, and its design outlived itself (unless of course you are willing to pay the massive upgrade/overhauls to take it into the 21st century).
In Afghanistan and elsewhere, armed Hip actually had 50 percent more firepower (six rocket pods against four of Hind) while it could revert to its transport capability with a flip of one jettison switch.
Guided missiles Shturm require lineofsight shooting while the helicopter by large cannot fire the missiles from hover (yup, i calculated this in my Master work). at maximum range with 10x magnification, all you see is a speck in the spyglass. as Hind pilots from the Yugoslavian civil war claimed.. you cannot tell an armor from cow, shooting at a contrast speck... all that while being exposed to enemy AAA and SAM.
in a low threat enviroment, Hinds were and ARE viable asset. Iraqi pilots scored impressive record against Iranian armors AND cobras during the Iraq-Iran war. russian mercenaries are flying hinds across many regions of Africa, scaring the cr.p out of stoneage goatherders.
in A-stan, Chechnya and elsewhere, whenever MANPADS were supplied to enemy, Hinds suffered terrible losses.
@hammerite, aka "?". i talk on what >I< have experience with. as such, I talk about helicopters my country (proudly presenting itself as developed country) has. cannot speak about the Rwandan hinds with NVG. seriously, you cannot count the southafrican or izraeli upgrade with tv guided Spikes to be a "Russian" thing. can you?
as such, you could take my point of view as REALISTIC.. not discriminatory. let's have a dare.. provide numbers, deployments and equipment of your "refurbished" hinds. i can tell you ANY of the hinds lost in Chechnya were good ol' V or P versions with TV3-117VM, zero sensors and L166 that attracts more manpads than it diverts.
towards the claim about ANY helicopter force suffering losses.. MANPADs were NOT the major reason of losses in Iraq, 2003 and later.
bottomline> hammerite aka "?", do you know that the picture in the title of your link is unrealistic? the POH for Hinds explicitely PROHIBITS simultaneous usage of B8V20 and UB rocket pods. that's how much >I< know the Hind. besides, you cannot use the B8V20 on the outer pylons at all.
youtube fan videos say nothing about the actual combat record and efficiency.
i HAVE flown Hind personally. it indeed is eleven tonnes of steel flying; it indeed had unmatched cruise and top speed for a long time; it truly happens to behave as an airPLANE in forward flight..
YET its sensors suck, it's armament is outdated, and its design outlived itself (unless of course you are willing to pay the massive upgrade/overhauls to take it into the 21st century).
In Afghanistan and elsewhere, armed Hip actually had 50 percent more firepower (six rocket pods against four of Hind) while it could revert to its transport capability with a flip of one jettison switch.
Guided missiles Shturm require lineofsight shooting while the helicopter by large cannot fire the missiles from hover (yup, i calculated this in my Master work). at maximum range with 10x magnification, all you see is a speck in the spyglass. as Hind pilots from the Yugoslavian civil war claimed.. you cannot tell an armor from cow, shooting at a contrast speck... all that while being exposed to enemy AAA and SAM.
in a low threat enviroment, Hinds were and ARE viable asset. Iraqi pilots scored impressive record against Iranian armors AND cobras during the Iraq-Iran war. russian mercenaries are flying hinds across many regions of Africa, scaring the cr.p out of stoneage goatherders.
in A-stan, Chechnya and elsewhere, whenever MANPADS were supplied to enemy, Hinds suffered terrible losses.
@hammerite, aka "?". i talk on what >I< have experience with. as such, I talk about helicopters my country (proudly presenting itself as developed country) has. cannot speak about the Rwandan hinds with NVG. seriously, you cannot count the southafrican or izraeli upgrade with tv guided Spikes to be a "Russian" thing. can you?
as such, you could take my point of view as REALISTIC.. not discriminatory. let's have a dare.. provide numbers, deployments and equipment of your "refurbished" hinds. i can tell you ANY of the hinds lost in Chechnya were good ol' V or P versions with TV3-117VM, zero sensors and L166 that attracts more manpads than it diverts.
towards the claim about ANY helicopter force suffering losses.. MANPADs were NOT the major reason of losses in Iraq, 2003 and later.
bottomline> hammerite aka "?", do you know that the picture in the title of your link is unrealistic? the POH for Hinds explicitely PROHIBITS simultaneous usage of B8V20 and UB rocket pods. that's how much >I< know the Hind. besides, you cannot use the B8V20 on the outer pylons at all.
Weitere Antworten(6)
Strange, from my experiance the "Mil Mi-24 Hind" is usually well spoken of on YT, as is the MI-8 / Mil Mi-26 Halo, & most others. Only Criticism i've ever seen is from ""Americans""
(which is a given, as they're bias against anything They didn't Develop, or Claim to have done anyway).
Trawler is right though. Pretty much all Online Critics of the Hind have never even seen one first hand, let alone actually flown it. To this date the Hind remains the most Multipurpose Helicopter Gunship yet Built, so much so it's also the Only Combat Helicopter that can carry & has actually Dropped Bombs in Combat.
By the same Token it is important to note that although she was State of the Art fo rmany years after her introduction (not to mention until the advent "Westland Lynx" she was the fastest Military Helicopter in the world [despite her size]) she is for the most part outdated by the more modern Helicopter Gunships KA-50 Black Shark & Mil Mi-28 Havoc. Thsu why the Russian Airforce is in the process of Replacing her in Service with the aforementioned two Gunships
The Stinger's Reputation is rather overblown, while it claimed more kills than Captured Soviet Handheld SAM's (which the Afghan Mujahideen also possessed in limited numbers), it often refused to fire, sitting on it's launcher leaving the Operator exposed & vulnerable.
All together tough the Hind will be in service across the world for a great many years yet, & as a Design still has much room for Powerplant / Avionics & Weapons Upgrades.
Seperately: Take note everyone that If not for the Russian Revolution & Civil War the US WOULDN'T have "Sikorsky" today, as Igor Sikorsky wouldn't have immigrated to the US at all, he would have stayed in Russia where he built his first Prototypes & Machines (which in particular included the "Sikorsky S-22 Ilya Muromets" [contrary to popular myth she was the first Four Engined Bomber in the world, not the B-17]).
Strange, from my experiance the "Mil Mi-24 Hind" is usually well spoken of on YT, as is the MI-8 / Mil Mi-26 Halo, & most others. Only Criticism i've ever seen is from ""Americans""
(which is a given, as they're bias against anything They didn't Develop, or Claim to have done anyway).
Trawler is right though. Pretty much all Online Critics of the Hind have never even seen one first hand, let alone actually flown it. To this date the Hind remains the most Multipurpose Helicopter Gunship yet Built, so much so it's also the Only Combat Helicopter that can carry & has actually Dropped Bombs in Combat.
By the same Token it is important to note that although she was State of the Art fo rmany years after her introduction (not to mention until the advent "Westland Lynx" she was the fastest Military Helicopter in the world [despite her size]) she is for the most part outdated by the more modern Helicopter Gunships KA-50 Black Shark & Mil Mi-28 Havoc. Thsu why the Russian Airforce is in the process of Replacing her in Service with the aforementioned two Gunships
The Stinger's Reputation is rather overblown, while it claimed more kills than Captured Soviet Handheld SAM's (which the Afghan Mujahideen also possessed in limited numbers), it often refused to fire, sitting on it's launcher leaving the Operator exposed & vulnerable.
All together tough the Hind will be in service across the world for a great many years yet, & as a Design still has much room for Powerplant / Avionics & Weapons Upgrades.
Seperately: Take note everyone that If not for the Russian Revolution & Civil War the US WOULDN'T have "Sikorsky" today, as Igor Sikorsky wouldn't have immigrated to the US at all, he would have stayed in Russia where he built his first Prototypes & Machines (which in particular included the "Sikorsky S-22 Ilya Muromets" [contrary to popular myth she was the first Four Engined Bomber in the world, not the B-17]).
广告730X
广告240X
广告240X
...