david b.
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:18 pm

Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 4:36 am

Which is more advance? A MI24 Hind D russian gunship or a apache? I think that the Russians used older technology. The Hind D seems to have more fire power. Anyone have any experience with this aircraft?
Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 6:35 am

In rough terms, the Apache, by far. But, the two do represent different generations (and ideas) of attack helicopters.

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
2912n
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 2:12 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:30 pm

The AH-64 was designed from the ground up as a tank killer. Crew of 2, high survivability/manuverability, lots of Hellfire missiles and a heavy cannon. The Hind was more of a heavily armed transport/attack aircraft. It had the ability to carry a squad of troops, plus it's own canon and rockets. (I think there was a wire guided missile on it but not sue there...) The Hind is/was a fearsome machine but was built in a different time and for a different purpose than the Apache. Really a better comparison would be with the Hog models of the UH-1 (B and M models mostly)
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 5:01 pm

The Apache.

Remember the Hind was out about 10 years before.

Also I no longer consider the Hind a true helicopter after I read an Air&Space Smithsonian article about it that appeared a couple years ago.

Things about the Hind that stuck out to me.

Most of it's lift is generated by those two wings sticking out of the side, they aren't just weapons pylons. Also there is a 6 minute hover limit on the transmission before it has to be removed for overhaul.

The aircraft is more of a autogyro with a powered main rotor. It must maintain forward flight in order to keep from overstressing the mechanical components.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 10:34 pm

"I think there was a wire guided missile on it but not sue there..."

Yep, the early ones were called "Sturm", I believe. It would carry two of those (or later equivalents) on a pylon under each wingtip.

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat Aug 03, 2002 10:36 pm

Also, I'm pretty sure later models of those missiles were laser guided.

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sun Aug 04, 2002 1:01 am

Better to think of Hind as an assault chopper with an anti-tank capability.
Designed for the central front in Europe.
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sun Aug 04, 2002 2:40 am

The Hind performed quite well in Afghanistan. Until the Mujahedin got Stingers that is...

twin barrel 25mm gun, 4 rocket pods, 4 guided missiles (different types, optical or laser guided depending on avionics package), and a squad of assault troops.
Heavy armour.

Effectively it's a flying AIFV, Apache is a flying battletank.
Both effective, but different.
I wish I were flying
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Tue Aug 06, 2002 11:06 pm

Pacific, you do relize that they didn't just shoot them down. They killed the crews (if they got to them first) and dragged the bodies though the streets. As one can imagine that is something that should tick off any American, when the primary reason that they were there was to ensure the distribute food to the people by the UN.

So you can fathom the disjust that I have with you post.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Wed Aug 07, 2002 1:50 am

Jwenting, it wasn't just the stingers. The natives found out that
if you shoot out the rear roter (wether with a RPG or a AK-47) it can bring down the helicopter.

Many of these people trained the people over in Mogadishu(sp).
And they brought down our helos with the expierence that they gained
from the Afghans that they hired.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Wed Aug 07, 2002 2:05 am

Well Pacfic how about this, we Americans, can just tell the world to buzz off after we have the missle defence system up. Lets see how people would like it when they have to feed and defend themselves.

Then maybe you can understand why I have no respect for countries that not only take our aid but also kill our people in the process.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
pacificjourney
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:12 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Wed Aug 07, 2002 2:42 am

Great, but until that day comes please watch your language.
" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
 
User avatar
vzlet
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:34 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat May 08, 2004 4:45 am

Some of the Mi-24 characteristics referenced in the Smithsonian article (which I admitedly haven't read) are ones that I'd consider to be in the "urban legend" category:

"...Also I no longer consider the Hind a true helicopter after I read an Air&Space Smithsonian article about it that appeared a couple years ago.

Things about the Hind that stuck out to me.

Most of it's lift is generated by those two wings sticking out of the side, they aren't just weapons pylons. Also there is a 6 minute hover limit on the transmission before it has to be removed for overhaul.

The aircraft is more of a autogyro with a powered main rotor. It must maintain forward flight in order to keep from overstressing the mechanical components."


The wings do generate a significant amount of lift in higher speed flight, helping to offload the main rotor, but they're not at all necessary for the Mi-24 to fly. How would a wingless Mi-24 perform? Pretty much just like an Mi-17, which uses essentially identical engines, transmission, and rotor. The high incidence of the wings allows a higher top speed and the incidence and anhedral serve to minimize the wings' negative impact on hover performance.

I can't say anything definitive about a 6-minute hover limit, but I've seen Mi-24s and Mi-17's hover for fairly long periods, such as during an SAR demo.

Just my opinions, based on observation.

-Mark
"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat May 08, 2004 6:46 am

L-188 is that straight skinny? That is is an autogyro? Because there is a huge difference between helicopters and autogyros.

In an autogyro the rotor is not driven by the engine (except possibly brought up to speed by a small motor) The airflow in an autogyro in forward flight is UP through the rotor. In a helicopter it is DOWN throught the rotor. In other words, an autogyro is in constant autorotation.

So I am wondering if that is really possible, that it de-clutches the rotor once it has forward speed?

Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
User avatar
vzlet
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:34 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat May 08, 2004 11:29 am

It's a conventional helicopter that benefits from cleverly designed auxiliary surfaces. (I guess one could make the case then that it's a compound helicopter...) An autogyro has to have some source of forward thrust other than the rotor because, as SlamClick alludes, the rotor is driven by the airstream.
"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Hind D Gunship

Sat May 08, 2004 12:46 pm

No, it doesn't fit the definition of an autogyro, because it does have a powered rotor.

Vzlet, what you say does make sense, I'll try and find that old Smithsonian article.

It wouldn't exactly surprise me if the Army was playing loose with some of the limits.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
JasperEMA
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 6:59 pm

RE: Hind D Gunship

Tue May 11, 2004 4:16 am

One is a computer controlled rapier the other is flying battleaxe ,10 years apart, but both are very scary. I can remember seeing Hind s patrolling the East German border whilst I was a poor infantry man in 1982 and they made me dig my trench just that little bit deeper. At the time they were thousands expected to come roaring down the Fulda Gap .We live in far better times !

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests