Soviet/Russian Attack Helicopter tactics for the Hind? - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2020, 09:55 PM   #11
Lucas_From_Hell
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,664
Default

In the DCS context, you'll want at least one Ka-50 to scout ahead and eliminate any area denial threats and communicate the situation to the assault party (composed of Mi-24s and Mi-8s), and then these roll in with the Mi-24 blasting targets to clear the landing zone while the Mi-8 deploys troops. Usually the Mi-8 flew with two pods so they could perform as auxiliary air support to clear the LZ or to support the troops afterwards, but the Mi-24 was the main battering ram.
Lucas_From_Hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2020, 10:05 PM   #12
Rogue Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,693
Default

Not a bad strategy.
A Ka50, Hind and Mi-8 delivery package of hate and absolution.

not a bad combo at all.
__________________

HP pro Reverb.

Current settings:
Windows VR setting: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, 90Hz refresh rate.
Steam: VR SS set to 100%, motionReprojectionMode set to "motionreproduction" and Locked in at 45 Hz display,
DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 2 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA.
My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed.
VR Driver system:
I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and 2080ti graphics card, 32 gigs Ram 3200 Hz. No OC at the mo.
Rogue Trooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2020, 11:26 PM   #13
Fri13
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sLYFa View Post
I think that depends a lot on ambient conditions (pressure, temperature). I heard that Hinds sometimes struggled to maintain hover out of ground effect when fully loaded in Afghanistan.
Those were in the mountainous airbases, near their max altitude ceiling. Where they were they were easier to take-off by rolling.

The hovering max altitude is not so high, I have now faint recollection that it was 1500 meters or so.

This was as well reason for one of the accidents that happened between, was it Pakistan border, where patrolling helicopter crews typically met with the Pakistan partners, and they flew together the same route. And there they sometimes did play the "imitation game" where one side did something and other was to repeat that. And over a mountain it was to hover or something (don't remember exactly that what) and when it came to turn for Hind crew to mirror the move, they ended up to VRS and crashed to the mountain hill. Since then the operational command was that they are not to fly below 100 km/h speed in given altitude.

This similar thing was the problem for Mi-24 helicopters that were in Chechnya, where KA-50 was tested in 2001 and it was found to be superior to Mi-24 in mountains where severe gusts were trouble for Hinds, but KA-50 had great climbing rate and capabilities to hover at high altitudes, so it could perform missions that Hind was challenged or impossible because danger.
The KA-50 was meant to be replacing the Mi-24 fleet and could have been great one, but military loved the idea transport troops and cargo as well.

I don't remember that Mi-24 was so great with combination that it had a full armament (like 4x S-8 rockets + 4 ATGM missiles) and 8 men infantry squad, so it was more like either one. Why it was nicely combined with Mi-8 transporting troops that Mi-24 covered around the landing zone and engagements.

What comes to Mi-24 attack patterns, there were many all kind from the "star shaped" to various wings and other group attack formations, where attacks were performed simultaneously from different directions or as in waves, changing the amount of helicopters from 2 to 8-12 IIRC.

Combine it all with ground troops, so you have plenty of BMP-1/BMP-2, especially BTR vehicles with 20 mm cannons and then even more trucks. It would be a hell to be there where you are hit by attack helicopters with quick pop-ups and overflies, and same time under them comes the infantry with support from attack vehicles.
And if this happens after a artillery barrage, you start to be very weak in that moment.
__________________
i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.
Fri13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2020, 11:41 PM   #14
VampireNZ
Senior Member
 
VampireNZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogue Trooper View Post
The true worth of the hind is how it was used with the MI-8.
These two together are a very special combination, one range finding... the other carrying indiscriminate fire power.

With the high velocity dual cannon 30 mike mikes with a shockingly rapid rate of fire and all the rockets god would want.... you got a potent weapon system.

Of course comms and human pilots make this so.
Combined with the fact it was pretty much bullet-proof - potent indeed.

....not particularly Stinger-proof thou..
__________________
Asus Maximus VIII Hero Alpha| i7-6700K @ 4.60GHz | nVidia GTX 1080ti Strix OC 11GB @ 2075MHz| 16GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz DDR4 CL14 |
Samsung 950 PRO 512GB M.2 SSD | Corsair Force LE 480GB SSD | Windows 10 64-Bit |
TM Warthog with FSSB R3 Lighting Base | VKB Gunfighter Pro + MCG | TM MFD's | Oculus Rift S | Jetseat FSE


Last edited by VampireNZ; 08-03-2020 at 11:46 PM.
VampireNZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2020, 10:53 AM   #15
pepin1234
Senior Member
 
pepin1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,886
Default

In DCS...? If they don’t improve infantry AI all will be stuck as now we do. Extensive use of ATGM. Don’t even try S-8 rockets in a heavy defensive position.
__________________
pepin1234 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2020, 04:26 PM   #16
Fri13
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VampireNZ View Post
....not particularly Stinger-proof thou..
http://europauniversitypress.co.uk/auth_article416.html

Quote:
SUMMARY: The alleged performance of STINGER missiles in Afghanistan in the 1980s was grossly exaggerated. By comparing the number of STINGERs provided to the Afghans with the number of aircraft downed, the impossibility of the accepted claims about effectiveness is shown. The success rate of the STINGERs against all aircraft is calculated to have been, at best, in the 20% range. Even after the STINGERs arrived in Afghanistan, the majority of aircraft continued to be downed by less sophisticated weapons, and the maximum total number of aircraft that may have been downed by STINGERs is calculated as 150 over three years, with the actual number most likely less than that. A well documented chronology of events shows that the STINGERs did not initiate, or increase the rate of, the decline in air attacks against the Afghan Resistance in the latter years of the war. Logical analysis refutes the idea that the relatively small military and economic costs that resulted from the STINGERs had any significant influence on the course of the war, or on the Soviets’ decision to withdraw from Afghanistan which evidence indicates had been made before the deployment of the STINGERs..
__________________
i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.
Fri13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.