Kamov Ka-50 / Ka-52 Hokum Family Thread

Defense Updates has put out a video about the destruction of these two Ka-52 Hokum Bs and and two Mi-8 Hips by a HIMARS attack:


The Ukrainian military said on Monday that it used US-made rockets to destroy four Russian helicopters.
Ukraine's Special Operations Forces said that they carried out the attack deep behind the front lines in Russia's Belgorod region and took out two Ka-52s and two Mi-8 helicopters.
Belgorod Oblast, which borders Ukraine's Sumy, Kharkiv, and Luhansk oblasts, is regularly used by Russian forces to launch attacks on Ukrainian territory.
The unit said, "Once again, (Russia) thought deep rear positions were unattainable. We proved that nothing is out of reach for Ukraine's Special Operations Forces"
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how Ukraine took out two Ka-52 & two Mi-8 stationed inside Russia with HIMARS?
#defenseupdates #ukrainewar #himars
Click to expand...
Chapters:
0:00 TITLE
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:39 THE SCENARIO
02:30 THE HELICOPTERS
05:17 HIMARS strikes with M30A2 rocket
07:08 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...
 
Look like it shot down a scaled down model of a Ukrainian drone. Look at the turn done by the drone, the Alligator slow speed and complete destruction of the target.
The presence of a water body right below intercept point make it even more suspicious.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
Look like it shot down a scaled down model of a Ukrainian drone. Look at the turn done by the drone, the Alligator slow speed and complete destruction of the target.
The presence of a water body right below intercept point make it even more suspicious.
Click to expand...

I think this kind of mental gymnastics is more suspicious than any body of water could ever be
 
Scar said:
Ka-52 doing interceptor job
t.me

Воевода Вещает

Самый лучший и очередные фраги. Спасибо одному хорошему генерал-майору, что идея «Ка-52-истребитель» пошла в массы.
t.me t.me
Click to expand...

Russia and Ukraine both heavily utilize helos for drone hunting, using both missiles and guns to engage targets, be it Mi-8, Mi-24 or Ka-52.

I have to say that it makes so much sense, given the lower operating cost compared to fighter jets and the fact that these drones and helicopters operate in the same range of speed. Something I pointed out in the Ukrainian F-16 thread, given that Ukrainian negligence killed several pilots and destroyed several aircraft trying to do just anything with the F-16 for PR, although they have previously used helicopters and prop driven aircraft to deal with drones more effectively, safely and cheaper.

Helos are just really good drone hunters, I wonder if unmanned helicopter type drones would lend themselves even better.
 
yasotay said:
The U.S. DoD ran a test several years ago at Nellis AFB. The results reported that helicopters were the weapon of choice against low/slow UAV.
Click to expand...
Makes sense, and we're now seeing these findings verified under genuine circumstances in the real world.

Helicopters are versatile, something the "helicopters are done" crowd often tends to forget.
 
EmoBirb said:
Makes sense, and we're now seeing these findings verified under genuine circumstances in the real world.

Helicopters are versatile, something the "helicopters are done" crowd often tends to forget.
Click to expand...
And most attack helicopters are designed around packing 38x APKWS or more as a standard thing these days. Wouldn't surprise me to see a couple birds with the full ARA 4x19 setup these days!
 
I suspect that we will see this mission (low altitude defensive counter air) increase in priority for attack helicopters. This along with long range (50km+) sniping of priority targets. Killing tanks will likely only occur at extended ranges defensively.
 
yasotay said:
The U.S. DoD ran a test several years ago at Nellis AFB. The results reported that helicopters were the weapon of choice against low/slow UAV.
Click to expand...
We also have recent footage of AH-64s engaging Iranian drones, though the weapon of choice was a gun, which is suboptimal -
Hydras with laser targeting would've fared better. Though it raises question, why Russians use Iglas/Verbas to shoot the drones and not Vikhrs, when latter had A2A mode. MANPADS have trouble locking reliably on smaller drones, so dumb beam-riding Vikhrs would be a better choice.
 
Last edited:
Anduriel said:
We also have recent footage of AH-64s engaging Iranian drones, though the weapon of choice was a gun, which is suboptimal -
Hydras with laser targeting would've fared better. Though it raises question, why Russians use Iglas/Verbas to shoot the drones and not Vikhrs, when latter had A2A mode. MANPADS have trouble locking reliably on smaller drones, so dumb beam-riding Vikhrs would be a better choice.
Click to expand...
I would argue the opposite, if any helicopter can engage a drone with a gun it should. It's cheaper and has a higher ammo count, it should save APKWS for higher leval drones and manpads for the highest level drones that the helicopter can't take out any other way.
 
Cjc said:
I would argue the opposite, if any helicopter can engage a drone with a gun it should. It's cheaper and has a higher ammo count, it should save APKWS for higher leval drones and manpads for the highest level drones that the helicopter can't take out any other way.
Click to expand...
Helicopter is not very stable platform (especially AH-64/Mi-28 with gun way forward from the center of mass) to shoot gun at small flying target.
 
yasotay said:
I suspect that we will see this mission (low altitude defensive counter air) increase in priority for attack helicopters. This along with long range (50km+) sniping of priority targets. Killing tanks will likely only occur at extended ranges defensively.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if the Army added a couple extra birds to the Attack Helicopter battalion, maybe 4 birds.
 
Anduriel said:
Helicopter is not very stable platform (especially AH-64/Mi-28 with gun way forward from the center of mass) to shoot gun at small flying target.
Click to expand...
But as the us and Israel have show recently, still good enough for most drones these days.

A ground based solution would Probably be cheaper and easier to use with helicopters only advantage being speed.
 
Cjc said:
I would argue the opposite, if any helicopter can engage a drone with a gun it should. It's cheaper and has a higher ammo count, it should save APKWS for higher leval drones and manpads for the highest level drones that the helicopter can't take out any other way.
Click to expand...
It takes more time, plus increases risks on the ground.
Time per Target is important in general, but here especially so: helicopter, when in can prosecute multiple targets, is more limited by fuel.
 
Ainen said:
It takes more time, plus increases risks on the ground.
Time per Target is important in general, but here especially so: helicopter, when in can prosecute multiple targets, is more limited by fuel.
Click to expand...
That's a complex equation, though.

Does a helicopter's speed to get to a new firing position and more targets engaged per hour make up for the increased fuel consumption?
 
The attack helicopter should not be considered a replacement for ground-based air defense systems in any way. However, even the larger military forces cannot cover all ground with air defense systems, so they are prioritized toward critical mission locations. A radar equipped armed helicopter that can move across the width and depth of a battlespace at ~160kmh adds depth to the areas not given point coverage. It could be argued that the attack helicopter could also be as rapidly rearmed as the ground systems, but from more dispersed locations. As to cost, in most cases today this is not an issue as antique Mi-8 Hip are being used successfully and most of the radar equipped attack helicopters are already in inventory or on order.
I agree with @Cjc that having an inexpensive quantity ammunition for this sort of mission is desirable, although concern for where the bullets that don't hit the drone are going is real. I would imagine that soon enough aircraft with electronic means to effect drones will be coming along to resolve some of this issue.

While germane to the Ka-52 Family thread we ought to take this conversation on the future or attack helicopters at large to another thread somewhere.
 
Last edited:
yasotay said:
The attack helicopter should not be considered a replacement for ground-based air defense systems in any way. However, even the larger military forces cannot cover all ground with air defense systems, so they are prioritized toward critical mission locations. A radar equipped armed helicopter that can move across the width and depth of a battlespace at ~160kmh adds depth to the areas not given point coverage. It could be argued that the attack helicopter could also be as rapidly rearmed as the ground systems, but from more dispersed locations. As to cost, in most cases today this is not an issue as antique Mi-8 Hip are being used successfully and most of the radar equipped attack helicopters are already in inventory or on order.
I agree with @Cjc that having an inexpensive quantity ammunition for this sort of mission is desirable, although concern for where the bullets that don't hit the drone are a concern. I would imagine that soon enough aircraft with electronic means to effect drones will be coming along to resolve some of this issue.

While germane to the Ka-52 Family thread we ought to take this conversation on the future or attack helicopters at large to another thread somewhere.
Click to expand...
Thing is that no military can have all assets all the time, nobody (not even the usa) can afford it. So its nessary to figure out effectiveness of a system inorder to figure out if a system is worth prosoing. Helicopters are expensive as shit, even that mi-8 is still more expensive to buy and operate then a say a s-400 battery let alone something built specifically for drone work. Being able to cover an area in depth is nice but is it needed, or would that point defense be plenty? Wether Helicopters are the best way to deal with drones is very much up in the air right now and it might be very well be that there only being used because they are avaliable right now.
 
Cjc said:
Thing is that no military can have all assets all the time, nobody (not even the usa) can afford it. So its nessary to figure out effectiveness of a system inorder to figure out if a system is worth prosoing. Helicopters are expensive as shit, even that mi-8 is still more expensive to buy and operate then a say a s-400 battery let alone something built specifically for drone work. Being able to cover an area in depth is nice but is it needed, or would that point defense be plenty? Wether Helicopters are the best way to deal with drones is very much up in the air right now and it might be very well be that there only being used because they are avaliable right now.
Click to expand...
Can't argue that helicopters are not more expensive but point air defense systems can't kill armored attacks of provide suppressive fires to ground assaults when they are not doing air defense missions. So, the cost of the helicopter is somewhat amortized by their ability to do multiple missions vice just one.
 
Perhaps the PLAN has decided to go with Kamov due to naval familiarity? The Ka-52 is combat demonstrated and has also recently shown an air to air ability against the now ubiquitous drones. Egypt has been operating Ka-52 from a helicopter carrier for several years I believe. It is in production now. The PLAN is working very hard to meet specified timelines.
 
I think the sell is ka-52 is even more of a sea apache than sea apache itself was.
Fighter-sized (and banded) multirole radar and optics ball, heavy weapons, convenient seating, performance. Z-21/Apache/Mi-28 are just different capability sets(flying AFV), despite same weight class.
 
with the Z-21 being noticeably larger and likely heavier than the Z-10, and now news about a potential Ka-52 sale.. I wonder if there is something about the Z-10 China is not satisfied with? perhaps too small or under armed? Turkey and Italy has also went from a lighter design to a larger one to replace the Mangusta.
 
Z-10 is China's AH-1 Cobra (earlier Army models, not AH-1Z). It has provided the PLA with a very good tool to learn attack helicopter operations and met the initial requirements for the service. But like the Cobra requirements change over time. Thus the larger Z-21. Ka-52 provides a combat proven aircraft that has been demonstrated to be able to functional from naval vessels and has a wide variety of weapons available to it. Then there is a potential that China is getting a great deal on the aircraft.
 
Surprised at China buying the Ka-52, I would have thought that China would have stuck with the Z-21 no matter what the issues are and get them sorted.
 
FighterJock said:
Surprised at China buying the Ka-52, I would have thought that China would have stuck with the Z-21 no matter what the issues are and get them sorted.
Click to expand...
I think China will continue with Z-21. It will take the place of Z-10 in some of the units. I think Ka-52 will be the PLAN attack helicopter. Alternatively the Kamov coaxial rotor helicopters that do not have tail rotors are supposedly very good at higher altitudes. Perhaps they will be used for mountainous terrain operations.
 
ComradeVortex said:
This wasn't on my bingo card.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032078982896566510
View: https://x.com/i/status/2032078982896566510
Click to expand...
Well, cause the contract was signed in 2022, over two years before Z-21 even flew. It's probable that PLA was initially going to buy Ka-52Ms as a stopgap to develop a more advanced domestic helicopter before quickly realising Russia cannot deliver within the promised timeline so they started a new or reworked the original domestic project into the current Z-21 to deliver something ASAP to meet modernisation goals etc.
 
yasotay said:
Perhaps the PLAN has decided to go with Kamov due to naval familiarity? The Ka-52 is combat demonstrated and has also recently shown an air to air ability against the now ubiquitous drones. Egypt has been operating Ka-52 from a helicopter carrier for several years I believe. It is in production now. The PLAN is working very hard to meet specified timelines.
Click to expand...
That was my first thought, too.


FighterJock said:
Surprised at China buying the Ka-52, I would have thought that China would have stuck with the Z-21 no matter what the issues are and get them sorted.
Click to expand...
If there's specific things that the Ka-52 does better than the Z-21, there's a use case for it. Like Yasotay said, either naval or mountain-warfare uses are possibilities.

But if they're only getting 48 of them, I think I'm leaning towards mountain warfare units, not PLAN marines.
 
Tomboy said:
Well, cause the contract was signed in 2022, over two years before Z-21 even flew. It's probable that PLA was initially going to buy Ka-52Ms as a stopgap to develop a more advanced domestic helicopter before quickly realising Russia cannot deliver within the promised timeline so they started a new or reworked the original domestic project into the current Z-21 to deliver something ASAP to meet modernisation goals etc.
Click to expand...
Very good point about Russia's ability to deliver.
 
Tomboy said:
Well, cause the contract was signed in 2022, over two years before Z-21 even flew. It's probable that PLA was initially going to buy Ka-52Ms as a stopgap to develop a more advanced domestic helicopter before quickly realising Russia cannot deliver within the promised timeline so they started a new or reworked the original domestic project into the current Z-21 to deliver something ASAP to meet modernisation goals etc.
Click to expand...
if its 2022, it could be in response to the 2020-2021 clashes between India and China leading to an urgent need for a helicopter that can operate in high altitudes. But since it's cooled down significantly, China has more time to work on developing an indigenous solution?
 
yasotay said:
Very good point about Russia's ability to deliver.
Click to expand...
Issue just being that Russia has a steady Ka-52M production line and that despite the war in general has a net positive in overall aircraft fleet growth and exported the likes of Su-57E, Su-35E and Su-34ME.

Meaning, they have no trouble selling, producing and delivering even the most high end stuff they offer for export, to which Ka-52M belongs.

That said, I'm not convinced either that a contract for the acquistion has materialized. But that the interest was there, even in the 2020s is definitely a testimony that the helicopter has been deemed a suitable alternative by a very modern and capable PLA. In essence, even if the sale never happened and China ultimately went with the Z-21 (which does seem more like a Mi-28NM though, rather than a Ka-52M analog) instead, that the interest was there is good for Kamov/Vertolyoty Rossii, as it validates the concept.
 
Tomboy said:
Well, cause the contract was signed in 2022, over two years before Z-21 even flew. It's probable that PLA was initially going to buy Ka-52Ms as a stopgap to develop a more advanced domestic helicopter before quickly realising Russia cannot deliver within the promised timeline so they started a new or reworked the original domestic project into the current Z-21 to deliver something ASAP to meet modernisation goals etc.
Click to expand...
Its for China's LHD's , maritime attack heli, overall requirement is limited to ~50 helis so they decided its better to buy an already developed heli from russia , than to start their own program( modified Z-21?)for small numerical requirement, atleast for short-medium term.


images.jpeg
ka-52k-image03.png ka-52k-image04.png
 
Last edited:
Perhaps, aside from all the hype about how great the Ka-52 is, and the assumption that China is only buying it to copy it or as proof of its shortcomings, we should wait and see if anything actually comes of it.
A lot has happened since 2024, and we've heard similar reports and claims—like the alleged order for 20 Il-78Ms—quite often with NOTHING happening in the end!

So, let's stay calm, avoid jumping to conclusions, and wait for the facts.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom