|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 07:49 AM by skippytjc
|
Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
I only saw one Mi-24 being shot down by a MANPAD, but i'm sure many more have been shot down, i'm not doubting that, but US helicopters are being
shot down by RPGs 
There is a HUGE difference here. Apaches getting shot down by RPG's are ones hovering just above urban warfare area's like cities and such.
Sitting ducks. Im sure any Hind would also easily be shot down if cought in such a situation. So please dont use that as an example. Ground
vehicles with 30 times the armor of ANY aircraft succumb to RPG's, your example implies that a Hind cant be hurt by one, and thats simply not true.
As far as I can recollect, Hinds havent been used in the same way Apache's are being used.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 08:07 AM by W4rl0rD
|
I would personally rate the Mi-24 and Longbow around the same, their capabilities are roughly equal,but Hinds need less maintainence, are cheaper and
are uglier (really,if you saw a Hind you would rather shoot yourself than get chewed up by its rockets and cannon)
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 08:35 AM by rogue1
|
Originally posted by skippytjc
There is a HUGE difference here. Apaches getting shot down by RPG's are ones hovering just above urban warfare area's like cities and such.
Sitting ducks. Im sure any Hind would also easily be shot down if cought in such a situation. So please dont use that as an example. Ground
vehicles with 30 times the armor of ANY aircraft succumb to RPG's, your example implies that a Hind cant be hurt by one, and thats simply not true.
As far as I can recollect, Hinds havent been used in the same way Apache's are being used.
Saddam used his Hinds to great effect putting dwon the shiite uprising in 1992. Some Hinds brazenly hovered in front of Shiite positions impervious to
anything smaller than .50 .
Hinds can take far more punishment from small arms than an Apache, but they are both highly vulnerable to MANPADS. Luckily very few have been seen in
Iraq and those that have been are of a far older less effective design then the modern ones.
Here is a link to a previous thread which has a link to the Hind shootdown :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 09:57 AM by GrOuNd_ZeRo
|
Originally posted by skippytjc
Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
I only saw one Mi-24 being shot down by a MANPAD, but i'm sure many more have been shot down, i'm not doubting that, but US helicopters are being
shot down by RPGs
There is a HUGE difference here. Apaches getting shot down by RPG's are ones hovering just above urban warfare area's like cities and such.
Sitting ducks. Im sure any Hind would also easily be shot down if cought in such a situation. So please dont use that as an example. Ground
vehicles with 30 times the armor of ANY aircraft succumb to RPG's, your example implies that a Hind cant be hurt by one, and thats simply not true.
As far as I can recollect, Hinds havent been used in the same way Apache's are being used.
Did I say there wasn't a huge difference? i'm just stating a fact, US helicopters are being shot down too, and thankfully the Iraqi's didn't have
any MANPAD's like SA-7's or worse, SA-18s.
You guys misinterpreted what I stated (which is my bad), and now you guys are attacking me because i'm not defending American technology as being
super uber 1337, My country uses MAINLY US equipment, it's good stuff, and do you guys suddenly take it that I attack it by stating they get shot
down by RPGs?  there is no need to be all defensive, i'm just stating what I know, and I don't mean to rub off as some anti-amercian terrorist
or what not...lol
If I offended you or what not, I apologize. but I didn't mean to
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 11:06 AM by longbow
|
The Hind sucks, besically because it cannot fly low to the ground without breaking down all the trees in neighbourhood. And it is not so invulnerable
like many of you state, it can be shot down by small arms or RPG. But the best helicopter design in service now is Hokum - although it has it's
disadvantages too - ,maintance,RCS, high drag and the older versions had only fixed gun, instead of turret.
About the "made them all with counterrotating blades" sugestion, I disagree. There are better designs today, like VTDP, NOTAR, or Canard-rotor-wing
(X-50 dragonfly). None of them is in service though so Hokum remains the best...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 11:23 AM by rogue1
|
Originally posted by longbow
The Hind sucks, besically because it cannot fly low to the ground without breaking down all the trees in neighbourhood. And it is not so invulnerable
like many of you state, it can be shot down by small arms or RPG. But the best helicopter design in service now is Hokum - although it has it's
disadvantages too - ,maintance,RCS, high drag and the older versions had only fixed gun, instead of turret.
We were just talking about survivability and I didn't say the Hind was invulnerable. The fact remains though that in Afganistan they were tearing the
muj apart up until around 1986 when the stingers began to arrive. Up until then very few Hinds were brought down. They can aslo carry a heavy load of
weaponry allowing them to be more ' liberal ' with their use.
Apaches on the other hand are highly vulnerable to small arms fire even relatively light calibers such as 7.62. These rounds would barely scratch a
Hind.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 02:50 PM by WestPoint23
|
The Apache can take small arms fire, and still fly it wont be shot down by 7.62mm. In Iraqi several Apaches were all shot up with small arms fire on a
mission and they all returned back to base, not one of the pilots or gunners were hurt. Sure they need maintenance time, but I wouldn't trade its
capabilities for less maintenance time.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 02:55 PM by GrOuNd_ZeRo
|
The things that suck about the hind is the way it flies, it can't hover for very long since the wings inhibit the downward thrust.
Pilots that flew the hind discribe it as a hybrid between a heli and a fixed wing aircraft.
The fixed gun wasn't a big deal, hell, the AH-1 has a fixed 20mm gatling.
The hind is considdered one of THE best attack helicopters ever made since it's so well protected, so fast (fastest in the world IIRC), and so well
armed.
The Apache however is much more specialized and relatively stealthy since it's so good at sneaking up on it's targets. (I am not saying at all it's
STEALTH, but you know what I mean)
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 04:04 PM by longbow
|
Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
The hind is considdered one of THE best attack helicopters ever made since it's so well protected, so fast (fastest in the world IIRC), and so well
ar
Fastest in the world? Maybe officialy, butI had a friend working on them, and he said that when armed you cannot fly them more than 300km/hour,
because the components starts to "fly off"..
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 05:14 PM by cyberdude78
|
Personally I like the Russian Mi-28 Havoc. Sure it may be ugly, but it's practical.
That and the other Russian helicopter I like is the good old hind;
For US helicopters, well I liked the looks of the Commanche, too bad it got canceled. Darn Congress, forcing budget cuts. Oh well heres a tribute to
the hottest looking US chopper yet created;
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 05:34 PM by sweatmonicaIdo
|
Kinda off-topic, but I think the sight of a "Hind" emerging from behind a mountain and slowly approaching you is probably one of the most horrifying
and disturbing images anybody can ever witness. 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 06:12 PM by ShadowXIX
|
Originally posted by rogue1
Saddam used his Hinds to great effect putting dwon the shiite uprising in 1992. Some Hinds brazenly hovered in front of Shiite positions impervious to
anything smaller than .50 .
Hinds can take far more punishment from small arms than an Apache, but they are both highly vulnerable to MANPADS. Luckily very few have been seen in
Iraq and those that have been are of a far older less effective design then the modern ones.
I believe it Hinds did the same thing in Afghanistan they mowed down whole villages with impunity while fighting the mujahidin. They couldnt really do
much to stop them at first.
Allowing Saddam to fly Helicopters including gunships after his surrender in 1991 was a huge mistake. The Shiites couldnt fight those things and the
uprising was easliy crushed.
I have heard of some tactics used by the mujahidin against the Hinds that had some success. If they hit a HIND right on the Russian Red Star painted
on them they would bring them down much easier. Thats where I believe lightly protected oil cooler was located and a hit there would bring the beast
down.
Then they got US stinger missiles though
[edit on 1-4-2005 by ShadowXIX]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 06:35 PM by WestPoint23
|
We all remember the AH-64A in 91 destroying all of those tanks and armored vehicles. In 96 six AH-64D’s competed against 6 AH-64A and here is what
the Army stats say about the performance of the 64D of the 64A. The Apache Longbow AH-64D
Are 400 percent more lethal (hitting more targets) than the AH-64A, already the most capable and advanced armed helicopter in the world to
enter service.
Are 720 percent more survivable than the AH-64A.
Meet or exceed Army requirements for both target engagement range and for probability of acquiring a seleted target. The specific requirements and
results are classified.
Easily can hit moving and stationary tanks on an obscured, dirty battlefield from a range of more than 7 kilometers, when optical systems are rendered
ineffective.
Can use either its Target Acquisition Designation Sight or fire control radar as a targeting sight, offering increased battlefield flexibility.
Have the ability to initiate the radar scan, detect and classify more than 128 targets, prioritize the 16 most dangerous targets, transmit the
information to other aircraft, and initiate a precision attack -- all in 30 seconds or less.
Require one third less maintenance man hours (3.4) per flight hour than the requirement.
Are able to fly 91 percent of the time -- 11 percent more than the requirement.
LINK
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 07:19 PM by Lucretius
|
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Kinda off-topic, but I think the sight of a "Hind" emerging from behind a mountain and slowly approaching you is probably one of the most horrifying
and disturbing images anybody can ever witness.
It's like a spider isn't it? 
There is a game... "Operation Flashpoint" I play regularly... and the sound and sight of a Hind is still the most terrifying thing in the game.
you know it's the last thing you are going to see... they have unbeliebable firepower.
The AH-64, Cobra, Mi-17 and Mi-28 are not as scary as a hind on the battlefield... it's like a flying arsenal
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 08:32 PM by sweatmonicaIdo
|
Originally posted by Lucretius
It's like a spider isn't it?
There is a game... "Operation Flashpoint" I play regularly... and the sound and sight of a Hind is still the most terrifying thing in the game.
you know it's the last thing you are going to see... they have unbeliebable firepower.
The AH-64, Cobra, Mi-17 and Mi-28 are not as scary as a hind on the battlefield... it's like a flying arsenal
I love OpFlash, I play it very often as well. It's modded heavily, so it's got all realistic units too. 
And I agree, even in the game, the sight of an approaching Hind is a freakish sight.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 1-4-2005 @ 08:42 PM by W4rl0rD
|
Thats exactly my point. If any of you guys played Project IGI 2 you will probably know what I mean, if you don't get chewed up by the missles you
will get shot dead by the cannon.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 12:04 AM by rogue1
|
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Then they got US stinger missiles though
Yes a very efective weapon. Pakistanis 3 man ISI teams were the first to take them into Afghanistan for the muj. Rumour has it, that it's first use
against the Soviets was vidoe taped ( I think 2 Hinds were brought down ) and within 48 hrs it was shown to Reagan.
I wonder if this footage will ever surface.
The muj was supposed to keep the empty tubes back to Pakistan to prove they had used them and to obtain a fw more. however this became impossible to
confirm, leading to many ' black ' stingers floating around.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 09:22 AM by Broadsword20068
|
Originally posted by W4rl0rD
I'll pick 3 Russian helicopters, MiL-28, Ka-50 and the Mi-24.
Russian helicopters are the only thing that are ahead of US tech by around 5 to 10 years, after all they are more heavily armored and look
uglier  . Also,the Longbow, which is probably the most advanced US attack chopper now, is still using 80's tech and until now the US still has not
designed something new or went with the Commache.
Hey W4rl0rD, where on Earth did you ever get that idea? The Apache is capable of things the Hind never was. It was designed as a tank hunter. The
Longbow is NOT 80s tech. The AH-64 A Apaches used in the first Gulf War, which were analog, were 80s tech. The Longbow is 90s tech and now they have
upgrades for the Longbow, bringing it to 21st century tech. The Apache is one of the most survivable attack helicopters in the world.
Have you ever seen the difference between the cockpits of an 80s (AH-64A) Apache and a Longbow Apache? It's like the difference between a modern
nuclear submarine and a WWII German U-boat. HUGE difference in the technology.
Russian helos are not and never have been "5 to 10 years ahead" of the American helos. In 1989, the Apache had a helmet-mounted display that moved
as the pilot turned his head; the Hind's was fixed. Only recently has the Hind acquired more sophisticated digital technology. This is 2005.
What the Russians have proven is that they can make very robust, powerful helicopters that can take a lot of beating.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 09:42 AM by tomcat ha
|
I think that the helicopter market is very even. The apache doesnt have a clear lead over the later hinds or vice versa.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 2-4-2005 @ 11:09 AM by rogue1
|
If it came to a dog fight between a hind and an Apache, you'd have to bet on the Apache. It is far more manouvrable and its gun can be brought to
bare more quickly.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
