Posted on 03/14/2017 5:33:29 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Russian Helicopters is on track to deliver this year the first examples of the Kamov Ka-52 attack rotorcraft to export customer Egypt.
Parent company Rostec confirms that the first of an eventual 46 Alligators will be handed over to Cairo this year.
Dating from an order revealed in December 2015, the helicopters will operate from a pair of French-built Mistral-class amphibious assault ships acquired by the Egyptian navy.
Russian Helicopters
Flight Fleets Analyzer lists Algeria as the only other export buyer for the Ka-52, with an order for 12 aircraft. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2019.
Russian Helicopters holds a total of 115 commitments for the twin Klimov VK-2500-powered helicopters records Fleets Analyzer, the majority from the Russian defence ministry under a contract running until 2020.
Egypt used to be America’s friend - that is, until Obama tried to install an islamo-fascist government upon them, and nearly caused a civil war there
Highly innovative ejection seats.
Since these examples are destined for Egypt, they should be renamed from Alligator to Nile Crocodile.
“...the helicopters will operate from a pair of French-built Mistral-class amphibious assault ships acquired by the Egyptian navy.”
Somebody can rack up a ship kill and helo kills with one strike.
They make the most beautiful jets these days, but all their choppers look like flying piles of trash
I disagree with your assessment of Russian Helicopters. I find them fascinating and ergonomic looking. The MI-24 and KA-52 as well as the other MIL transport helicopters look better to me than the tailwheel AH-64, and Blackhawks. Tricycle landing gear looks better to me.
BUT, I agree with your assessment on other aircraft as well. Their transports, like the IL76 look very aerodynamic, as well as their submarines which have a very swept sail, and their warships have a naval architecture quality look that is very pleasing to the eye compared to US ships. I think there was even some institute in the USSR at one time anyway if memory serves me, that combined engineering with ergonomics, with looks and function.
Russians have fascinating and capable engineering. I am not saying they are better than the west, but I definitely believe they are capable and worthy opponents we have to take seriously in their capabilities.
Don’t get me wrong, I am NOT saying Russians have better,,,anything, but maybe some things they do, in some areas. Their avionics absolutely suck (that which I have seen) and their cockpits are archaic, which matches their general minimalist engineering philosophy, which perhaps may function better in a highly EMP charged environment in a general nuclear war which otherwise requires a lot of electrical hardening, but hopefully we never have to find out who is better there.
One thing they do have better than ours, in my opinion is small arms. AKs in particular. With an operator who doesn’t suck, they are very capable of killing a wild hog at 400 yards. I’ve always preferred eastern bloc weapons to our overly expensive, breakable, too-tightly-machined, plastic Barbie doll rifles that can’t get dirty. A lot of this bias, in all honesty, is that I can’t use aperture sights. I could never shoot an AR worth a flip but I can write my name with my mak90 at 100. With an AR, I struggle to shatter a bottle at that distance. I realize that’s not the fault of the weapon, but V notches agree with my eyes and I’m a fair shot
Build quality IS a thing with AKs however. I only buy ones made in certain plants from certain countries. Chinese are generally the best, contrary to popular belief. There are absolute $h!t AKs out there, I don’t deny. That’s coming from me, who is their biggest fan and life long AK user. But when they are constructed properly and with care, there are few better.
Nice Looking Gunship
I agree with you on small arms.
I have a couple AKs in 5.45, and love them. I also have an AR, which is lighter, more accurate to some degree anyway with my civilian experience, and very ergonomic, but the AK is a beautiful battle weapon. You can run it over with a T-55 tank and it will still work, and until Magpul started making AR magazines the metal AR 30 round mag was almost fragile in comparison to the Russian mags.
Again, I am not saying either is better because that is beyond my experience, but I think I would prefer the AK/Russian in the concept of using the weapon in battle.
5.45?? Nice! I’ve been looking at a 74 and wondered about them. How do they perform relative to a 5.56? I haven’t had the chance to use one. I understand their velocity is WAY more than my older 47 but that’s about the extent of my working knowledge as far as 5.45 goes
One thing I always wanted to do was develop a new 7.62x39 and make essentially a new round with the same overall specs. Kinda like the .45 acp/ .460 Rowland type deal. The 7.62x39 is good at everything but not great for anything. I would like to remedy this. I agree, and have always agreed with Kalashnikov that the round should have undergone further development, rather than adopt the 5.45. But there is room for both
I have a Inter Arms Polish Tantal AK-74 that is my favorite, chrome lined barrel, but not hammer forged like Saiga, but more accurate than the same caliber Saiga. I can’t tell for sure at 100 yards with open sights, but I would say it is very close to the AR, and maybe even better in accuracy.
The ammo is cheep, especially if you could get the surplus 7n6 which is AK reliable in the gun. Unfortunately off the market to import, maybe with Trump that will change, but ATF made it illegal to import because it is body armor capable, but that has to do with a hand gun version with that ammo. To be determined I suppose. One thing I will say is that against metal targets it does leave a small dent, and exposes the steal core inside the lead in the bullet in the pieces around the steel target.
Saiga, Arsenal and Inter Arms are the names you want with a AK-74 from my experience.
Indeed. I endorse the same manufacturers. The finish issue on arsenals isn’t a big deal for me, as I typically spray camo my own guns. Also, AKs CAN have accuracy matching an AR, you are correct. The key is pressing the barrel into the trunnion perfectly pencil straight (not as easy as it sounds without the right equipment) and press THAT into the receiver. If all that is done to perfection, the kalash isn’t any less accurate than an AR. You’d be looking at fractions of MOA difference by comparing the two, and that’s liable to be shooter error anyway. Bulgaria (arsenal) Russia (Saiga) and my personal favorite, Norinco, from china, are where its at from an accuracy standpoint. Gone are the days of driving the barrel in there with a rubber mallet, lol
I’m surprised that we don’t use the NOTAR (no Tail Rotor) Technology on our Military Helicopters.
The Russians use Twin counter rotating Technology as seen on this Attack Helicopter.
I would think that the additional moving Parts used to operate the Tail Rotor, not to mention its Achilles Heel tendency would necessitate design changes.
As an aside, I was at an Air Show years ago where they had the Airwolf Helicopter from the TV Show on display.
You would be shocked (maybe not) by the number of people asking the guy behind the rope barrier if it could really do what it does on TV. You know, Supersonic Flight, hidden Rocket Pods , retractable Machine Guns in the Pylons etc.
I was cracking up.
I’m still in the early phases of trying to open my own AK build shop for custom builds, similar to Rifle Dynamics, Definitive Arms, and stetson-level AKs like that. I’m gonna be based in a tiny village called Slagle, Louisiana, where I’m from. My mother died before my father and it was their land. I’m thinking of the name Widower’s Patch Arms Co. It’s a little 5 acre plot I own, a grove carved out of the Kisatchie national forest
>The Russians use Twin counter rotating Technology as seen on this Attack Helicopter.
>I would think that the additional moving Parts used to operate the Tail Rotor, not to mention its Achilles Heel tendency would necessitate design changes.
The problem with the Russian design is how quickly the chopper flys apart if the blades get out of sync. They had to add a blow up the blades + rocket ejection seat system to make it safe. The real question is how well would that system hold up in combat? With tail rotor you generally have some time to bail out or land if you get hit by ground fire. So until the Russian chopper has some combat experience the jury is still out.
As it stands right not the best attack chopper on the planet is still the older Russian armored ones simply because they take a lot more ground fire than other choppers.
With all due respect, I would think the very complex transmission needed to drive counter-rotating rotors would amount to more moving parts than a simple shaft driving a tail rotor. I’m no expert, but I am a bit of a mechanic, and while I haven’t SEEN such a transmission, I imagine its a mess to produce and maintain, as opposed to an old, trusty turboshaft. Makes sense to me, but I could be wrong. Hopefully someone who knows more than me sets me straight if I am
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.