Jump to content

Ka-50 and the Kh-25. What is the story?


Schmidtfire

Recommended Posts

This is purely out of interest. What is the story on Ka-50 and Kh-25?

 

I have not seen a video or picture of Ka-50 flying with Kh-25 missiles. Some sources states that it was tested but never fielded. Other sources states that the Kh-25 did damage the helicopter itself.

 

We have the ML laser-guided variant in DCS but there are also speculations that Ka-50 could carry the MP and MPU anti radiation missiles.

 

I guess ED team, like Chizh and Yo-Yo has a ton of info about this, but it is very difficult to find anything about real use of Black Shark and Kh-25 online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm love to see a KA50 with the ARM's.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If KA-50 would receive a Kh-25MP variants, it would become extremely effective against long range targets by flying NOE as ABRIS would easily help to find the target locations.

 

But what I am always more interested is the Su-25 <-> KA-50 cooperation where you would paint the target as KA-50 and let the Su-25A to launch the missiles at range, or even vice versa.

 

But this Kh-25ML requires as well the laser burning to be rechecked, how the temperature raises etc.

 

 

BUT, this again brings up the things that so many says that KA-50 can't launch the R-73 as its smoke would cause the engine to stop, so what does then a Kh-25 family missiles do? What does the Vikhr do? It is already said that any rockets can't be shot while in hover as smoke gets in engines and you drop, but then again all these when your rotor is pushing all the air down above all, and engine inlets are above missiles too.

 

Maybe it would be better not to be able launch anything as nothing is possible.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT, this again brings up the things that so many says that KA-50 can't launch the R-73 as its smoke would cause the engine to stop, so what does then a Kh-25 family missiles do? What does the Vikhr do? It is already said that any rockets can't be shot while in hover as smoke gets in engines and you drop, but then again all these when your rotor is pushing all the air down above all, and engine inlets are above missiles too.

 

Maybe it would be better not to be able launch anything as nothing is possible.

 

Interesting. I was looking for videos and found this. Its a KA-52 shooting rockets.

That is quite a bit of smoke.

 

X52

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been given as an excuse for why the Ka-50 can't have nice things throughout the years. Yet it can launch massive rocket salvo's without any problems. Somehow, I don't believe that smoke is going to affect the engines much.

 

 

Therefore, we should be able to carry just about anything the Ka-50 can lift and get instruments for.


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny - in all the time I've been on the forum I don't think I've ever heard that mentioned as a reason why it couldn't be carried, only that the aircraft was never made capable of carrying it.

 

Do you know who said it ? E.D. or a forum poster ? (know of a link ?)

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet it can launch massive rocket salvo's without any problems

 

It's possible (& this is just speculation on my part) that there are restrictions on the launch parameters* to ensure that smoke isn't ingested & the same parameters might limit the usefulness of A2A missiles.

 

( * Like a minimum launch speed ? - Even in situations where there seems to be confidence that there aren't manpads or heavy weapons the helicopter rocket runs I've seen are always carried out with a reasonably high forward airspeed. Remember that the S-24 was taken out of service with the Su-25 because it was causing flame-outs on the engines - but E.D. didn't model that particular 'feature'.)

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was definitely smoke ingestion for the Su-25 - now I think there's something where they fire the igniters (?) for some period of time after launch, and the plane is rated for the weapon again.

 

Turbulence could be the issue for the Ka-50 though.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's that model which had never carried R-73s. There is no other reason other than this capability was not implemented. Not iglas, either.

 

The mentioned upgrade is AFAIK a different Ka-50 model which is equipped to use iglas.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny - in all the time I've been on the forum I don't think I've ever heard that mentioned as a reason why it couldn't be carried, only that the aircraft was never made capable of carrying it.

 

Do you know who said it ? E.D. or a forum poster ? (know of a link ?)

:book:

 

Поддержка, планировалась, но не реализована.

В частности потому, что такие достаточно мощные ракеты как Р-73 способны вызвать газодинамические проблемы у двигателей (вспомни упавший Ми-28 после пуска НАР).

Именно по этому сейчас планируют устанавливать на Ка-52 более легкие ПЗРК Игла. У них выхлоп значительно меньше и есть стартовый, вышибной заряд.

Ну, вот после падения Ми-28 на него внедрили систему охлаждения входящего воздуха водо-спиртовой смесью. Чему вероятно рады технические службы. ))

На Ка-50 такого не было. Ну и поскольку вертолет не имел законченного технического лица на момент закрытия программы, то до ракет ВВ руки ни у кого не дошли.

 

It's possible (& this is just speculation on my part) that there are restrictions on the launch parameters* to ensure that smoke isn't ingested & the same parameters might limit the usefulness of A2A missiles.

 

( * Like a minimum launch speed ? - Even in situations where there seems to be confidence that there aren't manpads or heavy weapons the helicopter rocket runs I've seen are always carried out with a reasonably high forward airspeed. Remember that the S-24 was taken out of service with the Su-25 because it was causing flame-outs on the engines - but E.D. didn't model that particular 'feature'.)

:yes:

 

<…>

См. обведённое красным цветом на сканах ниже [из книги 2 «Инструкции экипажу вертолёта Ми-24В»]

НАР С-5, С-8, С-24Б [стр.26–27]:

 

Mi24V-26.png

Mi24V-27.png

 

НАР С-13 [стр.47]:

 

Mi24V-47.png

 

<…>

 

Sorry, I don't speak English, so I use Google Translate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Copy/paste from online Russian English translator:

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Chizh viewpost.gif

Поддержка, планировалась, но не реализована.

В частности потому, что такие достаточно мощные ракеты как Р-73 способны вызвать газодинамические проблемы у двигателей (вспомни упавший Ми-28 после пуска НАР).

Именно по этому сейчас планируют устанавливать на Ка-52 более легкие ПЗРК Игла. У них выхлоп значительно меньше и есть стартовый, вышибной заряд.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Support, planned but not implemented.

In particular, because such sufficiently powerful missiles as the R-73 are able to cause gas-dynamic problems in the engines (remember the fallen Mi-28 after the launch of the NAR).

That is why they are now planning to install lighter Igla MANPADS on the Ka-52. They have a much smaller exhaust and have a starting, Bouncing charge.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Chizh viewpost.gif

Ну, вот после падения Ми-28 на него внедрили систему охлаждения входящего воздуха водо-спиртовой смесью. Чему вероятно рады технические службы. ))

На Ка-50 такого не было. Ну и поскольку вертолет не имел законченного технического лица на момент закрытия программы, то до ракет ВВ руки ни у кого не дошли.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, here is after the fall of the Mi-28 on him implemented system cooling incoming air water-alcohol a mixture of. What probably glad of the technical service. ))

On the Ka-50 was not like this. Well, since the helicopter did not have a complete technical person at the time of closure of the program, the missiles in the hands of no one reached.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by S.E.Bulba viewpost.gif

<…>

См. обведённое красным цветом на сканах ниже [из книги 2 «Инструкции экипажу вертолёта Ми-24В»]

НАР С-5, С-8, С-24Б [стр.26–27]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

See circled in red on the scans below [from book 2 " Instructions to the Mi-24V helicopter crew»]

NAR S-5, S-8, S-24B [pp. 26-27]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it still does not answer the Kh-25 story :) Quite far from topic actually. I was asking around for any information about IRL use (test or fielded) of Kh-25.

 

If launching the R-73 is a big no-no, there must have been at least some serious issues with the Kh-25 as it is a quite big and smokey missile.

 

Obviously not the standard loadout. But is it total fantasy? Could it be fielded?


Edited by Schmidtfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's not saying you couldn't launch an R-73, only that you couldn't launch one from a hover (or less than 100km/h forward speed), or - put differently, you could only launch it at targets in front of you while you were maintaining more than 100km/h forward speed - which makes it pretty useless.

 

The S-24 is on that list of available weapons, and that's the one the Su-25 had issues with, while the Su-25 has no such issues with the Kh-25.

 

Presumably if it can launch the S-24, it can launch the Kh-25ML.

 

What we probably shouldn't be able to do is launch any rockets / missiles except the Vihkr ( & Igla when it turns up) from a hover...

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it's not saying you couldn't launch an R-73, only that you couldn't launch one from a hover (or less than 100km/h forward speed), or - put differently, you could only launch it at targets in front of you while you were maintaining more than 100km/h forward speed - which makes it pretty useless.

 

The S-24 is on that list of available weapons, and that's the one the Su-25 had issues with, while the Su-25 has no such issues with the Kh-25.

 

Presumably if it can launch the S-24, it can launch the Kh-25ML.

 

What we probably shouldn't be able to do is launch any rockets / missiles except the Vihkr ( & Igla when it turns up) from a hover...

 

 

I agree that all this talk of "engines have problems with exhaust gas" doesn't make much sense, when I can launch VAST volleys of S-8 rockets without a hickup from the engines. They are on the inboard pylon, closest to the engines, so it doesn't make logical sense that a single R-73 launched from the outboard pylon would cause so much trouble. I would think that it would have a LOT less gas coming from it, then a whole volley of S-8 rockets.

 

 

EDIT: Meh, I don't know. After watching the above video, that DOES look like a lot of gas coming off of that R-73.


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

I would think it is a matter of necessity, just because the capability is there, does not mean it would be a common thing. say the chips are down and there is a crate of missiles here... can my helicopter carry and fire them?... well yes.... if you use a certain launch envelope say above 50 kph and 7 mps vertical. you would need to be crazy or have a death wish, or be about to die anyway, but it is possible...

We are Virtual Pilots, a growing International Squad of pilots, we fly Allies in WWII and Red Force in Korea and Modern combat. We are recruiting like minded people of all Nationalities and skill levels.



http://virtual-pilots.com/

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

I would think it is a matter of necessity, just because the capability is there, does not mean it would be a common thing. say the chips are down and there is a crate of missiles here... can my helicopter carry and fire them?... well yes.... if you use a certain launch envelope say above 50 kph and 7 mps vertical. you would need to be crazy or have a death wish, or be about to die anyway, but it is possible...

 

 

Yeah, agreed. It's like the Kh-25ML's. You would be kind of desperate to mount those. A fighter jet would be a much more appropriate carrier for them.

 

 

It's like I want to be able to carry igla's. USUALLY, you wouldn't send a chopper into a battlefield filled with jets. But modern battlefields seem to have thrown the old rule book out, and now you just don't know what you are going to encounter. Hence, the "extra" armaments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that all this talk of "engines have problems with exhaust gas" doesn't make much sense, when I can launch VAST volleys of S-8 rockets without a hickup from the engines. They are on the inboard pylon, closest to the engines, so it doesn't make logical sense that a single R-73 launched from the outboard pylon would cause so much trouble. I would think that it would have a LOT less gas coming from it, then a whole volley of S-8 rockets..

The fact that you can launch VAST amounts of S-8 in the game and have no issues doesn't mean it's possible in real life.

 

To my non-Cyrillic reading eye, S.E.Bulba's doc appears to say in the real world S-8 rockets shouldn't be launched with less than 100 km/h forward speed, but that's not how it works I the sim at the moment.

 

Adding flameout from gas ingestion / turbulence would be a nice addition to engine modelling in Black Shark III :)

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, agreed. It's like the Kh-25ML's. You would be kind of desperate to mount those A fighter jet would be a much more appropriate carrier for them.

maybe…

 

If you're hunting insurgents in narrow winding mountains valleys the Ka-50 @ 100 km/h probably makes a better platform to search and destroy hideouts than fast movers.

 

If that's what you're doing, then a Kh-25ML will deliver a warhead that is ten times the size of a vihkr warhead, and is designed to penetrate bunkers not tank armour.

 

Horses for courses.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

… Horses for courses.

:music_whistling:

 

<…>

НАР С-13 [стр.47]:

 

Mi24V-47.png

 

<…>

2.6.5. На вертолётах с установленными блоками Б13Л1 при полётах на боевое применение запрещается:

  • производить одиночные, серийно-залповые пуски по одной или две ракеты для ракет С-13Д на скоростях менее 100 км/ч независимо от барометрической высоты полёта, а для ракет С-13ОФ на скоростях менее 150 км/ч на барометрических высотах более 3000 м;
  • производить пуски ракет С-13Д и С-13ОФ серией и серией залпов по 5 ракет на скоростях менее 240 км/ч и на пикировании с углами тангажа более 25°;
  • применение блоков Б13Л1, подвешенных на внутренние держатели, из-за снижения газодинамической устойчивости работы двигателей вертолёта.

Да, согласен. С-13 на внутренние пилоны не вешаются.

Не помню уже почему мы сделали так.

 

… Adding flameout from gas ingestion / turbulence would be a nice addition to engine modelling in Black Shark III :)

:dunno:

 

На счет газодинамической устойчивости движков Ка-50 будем думать.

 

Sorry, I don't speak English, so I use Google Translate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just going back to the OP…

I guess ED team, like Chizh and Yo-Yo has a ton of info about this, but it is very difficult to find anything about real use of Black Shark and Kh-25 online.

 

…the main issue is that the Black Shark is for all intents and purposes a fantasy platform, much like the Su-25T. Not fantasy as in it doesn't exist, but as in, so few were built and so few flight hours were logged that they might as well not exist. You won't find anything online about real use, not because of a lack of capability, but because it wast just… never really used.

 

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there's more flight performance and capability data collected on the X-29 than on the Shark or Tankovyj.

❧ ❧ Inside you are two wolves. One cannot land; the other shoots friendlies. You are a Goon. ❧ ❧

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...