Jump to content

GSh-30K Ammo Capacity?


Go to solution Solved by zerO_crash,

Recommended Posts

Is there a confirmation on how much ammo load will be available for the Mi-24P in DCS?

 

I've been looking around online and have seen sources quoting both 250/260 and 750 rounds, but no real official documentation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Solution
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Lucas_From_Hell said:

As far as I know the Mi-24P can carry up to 750 round, while the Su-25 has 'only' 250 in its related gun.

 

That´s wrong. Many places keep quoting 750 rounds on Mi24P for some reason. It has 250 rounds.

 

https://books.google.no/books?id=tlW1CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=mi24+gsh+30k&source=bl&ots=l7rn-JPZ6N&sig=ACfU3U2HBqRQajzdTwAbCmMg2IrCSWKtfw&hl=no&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkoNbZyYzwAhVriYsKHSnuDz8Q6AEwD3oECA0QAw#v=onepage&q=mi24 gsh 30k&f=false

 

http://vimpel-v.com/guns/avia/avia_helic/811-mi-24-rossiya.html


Edited by zerO_crash
  • Thanks 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing the Mi-24P gun ammunition being replenish, there is no way that you could get a 750 shells fitted to its box. 


Edited by Fri13
  • Like 1

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 post
Share on other sites

 

Well maybe it's both true and false at the same time: it may be that the ammo tray/box can only hold 250. But maybe the 750 rounds was meant to be including an additional 500 rounds in the rear cabin, for use in combat when far from the FARP. They could just touch down say 10km from the fight, and hand load them into the main magazine, and help to provide close support just 10 minutes later. Maybe? I doubt that was done very often, or even once in real life, but maybe that was a planned tactic for a full Cold War battle?

 

I don't know anything, just speculating out my butt ! But it does sound like something the Soviet Army officers would have considered doing in those days. I do vaguely recall there was talk about carrying extra armaments in the troop cabin, and I wondered how much weight that would be, how it would impact the flight characteristics. It may not have been realistic, might have just been game-play oriented for the old DI "Hind" sim/game, which is where I first heard about it, but now seems an unlikely item, at least for lots of rockets and ATGM's. But maybe that was doable for a modest number of cannon rounds? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rick50 said:

 

Well maybe it's both true and false at the same time: it may be that the ammo tray/box can only hold 250. But maybe the 750 rounds was meant to be including an additional 500 rounds in the rear cabin, for use in combat when far from the FARP. They could just touch down say 10km from the fight, and hand load them into the main magazine, and help to provide close support just 10 minutes later. Maybe? I doubt that was done very often, or even once in real life, but maybe that was a planned tactic for a full Cold War battle?

 

I don't know anything, just speculating out my butt ! But it does sound like something the Soviet Army officers would have considered doing in those days. I do vaguely recall there was talk about carrying extra armaments in the troop cabin, and I wondered how much weight that would be, how it would impact the flight characteristics. It may not have been realistic, might have just been game-play oriented for the old DI "Hind" sim/game, which is where I first heard about it, but now seems an unlikely item, at least for lots of rockets and ATGM's. But maybe that was doable for a modest number of cannon rounds? 

 

Unfortunately the in-field reloading is a myth. The Mi-24 in high and hot Afghanistan was severely weight limited with regular/light combat loads so carrying extras in the internals is a no-go. There aren't even really any provisions for securing said ammo in the back of the hind anyway, and a rearm would require pilots to land, turn the engines off, get out, rearm, and then start back up again. Why would you do that when you can just go back to wherever you took off from and rearm safely? Rearming in the field just wasn't something that happened, and it would be very unsafe to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rick50 said:

 

Well maybe it's both true and false at the same time: it may be that the ammo tray/box can only hold 250. But maybe the 750 rounds was meant to be including an additional 500 rounds in the rear cabin, for use in combat when far from the FARP. They could just touch down say 10km from the fight, and hand load them into the main magazine, and help to provide close support just 10 minutes later. Maybe? I doubt that was done very often, or even once in real life, but maybe that was a planned tactic for a full Cold War battle?

 

I don't know anything, just speculating out my butt ! But it does sound like something the Soviet Army officers would have considered doing in those days. I do vaguely recall there was talk about carrying extra armaments in the troop cabin, and I wondered how much weight that would be, how it would impact the flight characteristics. It may not have been realistic, might have just been game-play oriented for the old DI "Hind" sim/game, which is where I first heard about it, but now seems an unlikely item, at least for lots of rockets and ATGM's. But maybe that was doable for a modest number of cannon rounds? 

 

You are remembering correctly. 

The cargo was used sometimes for the extra ammunition. Like second set of the rockets and missiles. So why not have gun ammunition as well?

 

That is something I would like to see in the Mi-24, as it would make it more different from others as you can land anywhere and resupply yourself in few minutes (hey, if it takes from ground crew to rearm in so short period, then it takes from the crew as well...) and get back to fight for a second set. 

38 minutes ago, Korshtal said:

 

Unfortunately the in-field reloading is a myth. The Mi-24 in high and hot Afghanistan was severely weight limited with regular/light combat loads so carrying extras in the internals is a no-go.

 

We are not in Afghanistan. 

The same way was said that it is myth that Mi-24 carries infantry, but it still happens. It is not the normal thing but still. 

 

38 minutes ago, Korshtal said:

There aren't even really any provisions for securing said ammo in the back of the hind anyway, and a rearm would require pilots to land, turn the engines off, get out, rearm, and then start back up again.

 

There is old video where the flight engineer and the WSO performs the rearming while pilot keeps engines running.

 

38 minutes ago, Korshtal said:

Why would you do that when you can just go back to wherever you took off from and rearm safely? Rearming in the field just wasn't something that happened, and it would be very unsafe to do so.

 

Because your base can be 100-150 km away? 

It is a fact that it is not a normal procedure as you don't come with fully loaded up because you can, but you will add more helicopters for the flight or add another section if you need extra firepower and tactics. 

 

But the possibility is there.

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 post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Korshtal said:

The Mi-24 in high and hot Afghanistan was severely weight limited with regular/light combat loads so carrying extras in the internals is a no-go.

Sorry for my OT post but every time i read this(EDIT: as response to the cargo compartment discussion), me -> :rotflmao:

The Mi-24 was designed for a european war and not for the hot/high environment of Afghanistan, thats why you had that limitation of the Mi-24 because nobody thought "let's design a cool helicopter that can fight in hot/high altitude conditions because WW3 will take place in afghanistan". No they designed it to fight in europe, you don't have that limitations in europe....


Edited by unknown
  • Like 1

Modules: KA-50, A-10C, FC3, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, CA, MIG-21bis, FW-190D9, Bf-109K4, F-86F, MIG-15bis, M-2000C, SA342 Gazelle, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, F-14, C-101, FW-190A8, F-16C, F-5E, JF-17, SC, Mi-24P Hind

 

System: Win 10 64bit, Ryzen 3800X, 32gb RAM DDR4-3200, Gigabyte Aorus 1080ti XE ,1 x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe, 2 x Samsung SSD 2TB + 1TB SATA, MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - VIRPIL T-50CM and VIRPIL MongoosT-50 Throttle - Oculus Rift S, using only the latest Open Beta DCS Settings PD 1.5

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Consider that some combat heli units do practice hot refueling, meaning they get fuel while the turbines and rotors are still running. I believe they also will re-arm rockets, shells and missiles too. I don't think this practice is all that common, as it means more training expense and significant risk, but for nations that can afford to do such training, like the US Army, it does happen. I would have guessed that the Soviets might have practiced the same, maybe a few years after Hind units became operational and the ground crews got a year or two of experience. You know, to be able to do full-intensity operations and such.

 

Usually cannon rounds on belts are stored and transported in steel ammo cans or wooden crates... I would imagine that for special purposes, not regular ops, it might be possible for them to carry a few extra steel cans, and cargo-strap them secure. Or even chain them down, maybe using a "come-along" or something?

 

 Maybe. Perhaps there's no mounting points for D-rings and such in a Hind, but I'd think that were a significant design shortcomming, considering the operational need for unusual flexibility in real world mil ops... but again, I don't know, and I'm very much not an expert in the Hind or Soviet military helo ops!

 

Edit:

Is it possible the "750 rounds" was confusing variants? Meaning, how many rounds does the 12.7mm Hind-D or Hind-A carry in the main belt magazine? 


Edited by Rick50
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, unknown said:

Sorry for my OT post but every time i read this(EDIT: as response to the cargo compartment discussion), me -> :rotflmao:

The Mi-24 was designed for a european war and not for the hot/high environment of Afghanistan, thats why you had that limitation of the Mi-24 because nobody thought "let's design a cool helicopter that can fight in hot/high altitude conditions because WW3 will take place in afghanistan". No they designed it to fight in europe, you don't have that limitations in europe....

 

It was designed to operate all over the Soviet Union (Russia) and that country has as well high temperature and high mountainous lands. That is why their vehicles are made to operate from -50 C to +50 C as they need to cover whole country. 

 

But that argument about the rolling take-off, it was tested for how to get faster in the air. Like why you would first go to hover and then start to move forward when you can simply start rolling and take-off? The Mi-24 flying at 4000-5000 meters altitude is severe limitation for almost any helicopter, what brings the KA-50 co-axial design that works far better in high gusty mountain environments at high altitudes etc. But you are not operating in such conditions normally so it is just one place where you really want to utilize tactics to safely take-off and land. 

 

There are lot of myths about Mi-24 like it can't hover or it can't take-off without doing rolling take-off and all.

 

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 post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, unknown said:

Sorry for my OT post but every time i read this(EDIT: as response to the cargo compartment discussion), me -> :rotflmao:

The Mi-24 was designed for a european war and not for the hot/high environment of Afghanistan, thats why you had that limitation of the Mi-24 because nobody thought "let's design a cool helicopter that can fight in hot/high altitude conditions because WW3 will take place in afghanistan". No they designed it to fight in europe, you don't have that limitations in europe....

 

It was designed to operate all over the Soviet Union (Russia) and that country has as well high temperature and high mountainous lands. That is why their vehicles are made to operate from -50 C to +50 C as they need to cover whole country. 

 

But that argument about the rolling take-off, it was tested for how to get faster in the air. Like why you would first go to hover and then start to move forward when you can simply start rolling and take-off? The Mi-24 flying at 4000-5000 meters altitude is severe limitation for almost any helicopter, what brings the KA-50 co-axial design that works far better in high gusty mountain environments at high altitudes etc. But you are not operating in such conditions normally so it is just one place where you really want to utilize tactics to safely take-off and land. 

 

There are lot of myths about Mi-24 like it can't hover or it can't take-off without doing rolling take-off and all.

 

Mi-24_cargo1.jpg

40 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

Edit:

Is it possible the "750 rounds" was confusing variants? Meaning, how many rounds does the 12.7mm Hind-D or Hind-A carry in the main belt magazine? 

 

It is almost 1500 rounds for the YakB and almost 500 rounds for the 23 mm cannon. So the 30 mm being 250 is just its main load then. 

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 post
Share on other sites

 

Thing is... in the cabin pictures I've seen so far... there's nothing obvious I can see in the pics to hook cargo straps to. Ok maybe the airframe lightening holes, but those would not be strong enough to properly cinch a load for contour flying and straffing runs. At least, not from what I can see. IT might be that cargo points might be quick-detach, like a larger version of a QD sling mount for a hunting boomstick, but I dunno. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The soviets didn't want you to know what worked and what didn't work in Afghanistan because they were addicted to maskirovka.

the confusion is all there on purpose.

pathologically addicted to secrecy. to the point of paranoia.

why nobody knows how much ammo a mi-24p officially carried.

you need to actually look at an export version rather than trust "official" sources. (which is what ED has done)

lots of wrong numbers float around in official soviet sources. on purpose. to the soviets it made sense.

  • Like 2

My Rig: i7 4930k 4.5Ghz, 16GB DDR3 2400, 2x SSD, EVGA 1080 Superclocked, Warthog Throttle and Stick, MFG Crosswinds, Oculus Rift.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, it would make sense to some degree: hide your capabilities means your foe is never totally sure about anything. Maybe it can do this, maybe it can do that, maybe it isn't possible to do what I think they'd want to do. It can promote a lot of extra second-guessing, that leads to significant mistakes earlier in a conflict.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

250 Rounds was the max loadout for the GScha-30-2K. In the weaponsystem was no more space. We used the P Version also in the NVA in East Germany. So we have the official Information about that and a good webside in german about Helos as a weapon system and the training of pilots and lots more. It is a great storage from the past. The best Info Guide about the Details of the Mi-2, Mi-8 und MI-24 and KA koaxial rotor technics. https://www.nva-flieger.de/ Sorry about the german language. But they have to learn russian and not english. 😉

The best Book about the Mi-24 in english and german was written by Michael Norman.

https://www.amazon.de/Mil-Mi-24-Attack-Helicopter-Worldwide/dp/0764358677

 

410zZFvr7RL._SX387_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg


Edited by NightStalker63
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...