Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Warplane Weapons Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Mil-28 versus AH-64 Apache
red star    5/25/2003 6:09:00 PM
I will go for good old Mil.
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   NEXT
interrested 2    RE:Mi 29 vs Apache - fullamongo   4/19/2004 5:05:42 PM
interresting, tank busting without a good anti tank missle (or am I missing one?) Fighter in general have not been good tank busters, maybe the brimstone will change that. It's electronics are said to be smart enough and it's ofcourse as deadly as the hellfire so...maybe it's a good combo
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:Mi 29 vs Apache - fullamongo   4/19/2004 6:16:09 PM
He said Mi-29 not MiG-29. I am assuming he meant Havoc but made a typo....
Quote    Reply

fullamongo    RE:Mi 29 vs Apache - fullamongo   4/20/2004 7:31:12 AM
Sorry. I got totally mixed up. I think that the Hind configuration is best ie. heavily armoured and armed with troop carrying capacity. I am a firm believer in using A-10/Su-25 for the anti-tank/CAS role. The Hind's origional role is to lay down supressing fire and put troops on the ground to secure an airhead/bridgehead. The apache/havoc are tank killers. I think helicopters are more suited to the hinds role than the apache's. They are over extending the usefulness of the helicopter. CAS should be left the planes.
Quote    Reply

interrested 2    RE:Mi Mil 28 vs Apache   4/20/2004 8:28:51 AM
The Mi24 ahve very little armor, have a large turning radious, are outklimed, out flown by the apache and KA50 with ease. As troop carries they have little capacity, Yes they can provide some organics fire support but so does a UH60 with ESS (loaded wich 70 mm and hellfires) backed up by two GAU 17 And the blackhawk can carry more people, has a much user friendly glass pit, secure radio's, good SA, etc etc...and yes the UH60 is more tolerant to small arms fire than many believe. The hind is not a really big thing anymore, it tries to do the job of the UH60 and AH64 in one but fails to do either. ...So boris, I'm ducking for cover....
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:Mi Mil 28 vs Apache   4/20/2004 7:57:38 PM
The Hind is great vs. soft targets and is rarely used for troop-carrying. Nonetheless, it's pretty dated and nor as great as it once was. ...interested 2, you may come out now....
Quote    Reply

interrested 2    RE:Mi Mil 28 vs Apache   4/21/2004 5:50:10 AM
....heej no overflying ordanance? Damned, I always enjoy a good fireworks display :) Well it's hard to discuss when we agree..:)
Quote    Reply

Okoshka    RE:Interested 2   4/21/2004 9:04:56 AM
Do you think that the working cost of Mig 29 could be higher than the western planes? For example compare with F 16. Some say so but I don't believe.
Quote    Reply

interrested 2    RE:Interested 2   4/21/2004 10:17:15 AM
Purchase is probably cheaper, but than there are also things like: 1. fuel burn/use 2. Maintenance 3. Reliability (how many do need to order to have an x amount of fighters always ready?) 4. Number of flighthours 5. Growth options, (when does it become obsolete?) 6. Partner countries so share costs 7. etc, etc, Also consider that the F16's (A models) can be bought at bargain basement prises. With a MLU/ACE package you're very contemporary. When the JSF comes of the production line the F16 models will be put up for sale in a huge way. (USA,EPAF,etc etc etc) When buying and old MIG you can also buy upgrade packages but these also cost a bundle. I'm not going to do another F16 vs MIG thread but in the long run the mig will most probably be more expensive. The capabilities will be quite similar and it's up to your personal preference which you chose
Quote    Reply

jacques    RE:Mil Mi 28 vs Apache   4/22/2004 7:32:39 AM
Mil Mi 24 is a brainchild of the KGB. They need a patrol helicopter patrol the soviet vast border area. A helicopter that can insert a small security detachment and be able to perform attack function. That was the hind original function. The soviet forntal aviation liked what they saw and so they ordered more productions of the Mi24. That is the story behind the Hind development. The Husky was a good short range rescue helicopter. It has intermeshed rotors which attributed to it superb hover ability. However it was not an assault nor attack helicopter. That helicopter had never performed high speed hi-lo-hi flight profile (nap of earth flight). Sadly some people here get over excited about the KA 50/52 due to its strange look. Guys you can't give merit to an attack helicopter because it looks good. That KA50/52 is going to be the biggest liability to its operator. If you want a beautiful helicopter then go the for Dauphin/Panther that is the most beautiful helicopter out there. Boris said the Tiger is a light helicopter and it's not as effective as other helicopter. I disagree. It's the best attack helicopter out there. Size is not what make attack helicopter effective. If size and weight are the criteria then the Rooisvak and the Cheyenne are the biggest and heaviest. The Tigre is the best not because of its' size and weight but its' superior design.
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Mil Mi 28 vs Apache   4/23/2004 3:07:17 PM
the most beautiful helo out there to my eye would be the s76. classic design with very clean lines.
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   NEXT