Kamov Ka-52K Katran

Cannonfodder43

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
154
Question on Ka-52 and Mi-28 operations. They've been used in Ukraine and I think also Syria among others.
I believe there's a large overlap in roles between the two in combat.. but is the Russian military using them for different purposes in these conflicts? or the same?
Thus far, the Mi-28 seems to have had a bit less losses than the 52 and wondering if an apples to apples comparison can be made
Based on what has been seen, their operational usage and effectiveness is basically the same. With the agility and speed advantages of the Hokum-B being the only notable difference.

Although more Hokum's have been lost than Havok's but that is in all likelihood due to Hokum's being the more predominant attack helo in use by the Russians.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
2,121

Although more Hokum's have been lost than Havok's but that is in all likelihood due to Hokum's being the more predominant attack helo in use by the Russians.

any reason why the Hokum are preferred over the Havoks?
 

Cannonfodder43

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
154

Although more Hokum's have been lost than Havok's but that is in all likelihood due to Hokum's being the more predominant attack helo in use by the Russians.

any reason why the Hokum are preferred over the Havoks?
No idea why the Hokum's are so prevalent in Ukraine.

We know that in Syria, Mi-24/35Ms, 28Ns and Ka-52's were all used to varying degrees.

I presume that those who hastily planned the Special Operation happened to pick Hokum units since they were avaliable and seen as very desirable against the threats they expected. And honestly considering what they are up against they are doing quite well.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
310
Reaction score
383
Guys, this is not simple vibrations. It's a flutter problem, meaning that something was badly executed during the design, the testing phase and service introduction.
@TomcatViP caveat all of my flutter experience is fixed wing, but from the very short clip it looks to be more of a resonance than flutter. The key characteristic of flutter is the convergence of the critical frequency for both bending and torsion, usually driven by higher speed flow for the lifting surface (can be Mach or q). Bad angle, short clip I can only easily see the torsional mode not to mention the relative wind is straight down on the stub wing, gut feel is resonance.
 

Trident

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
1,052
No idea why the Hokum's are so prevalent in Ukraine.

Could be the nature of the expected threat or the armament. At least until recently, MAWS and DIRCM equipment was much more widespread in the Ka-52 fleet, so against a dense IR-guided MANPADS threat you might prefer it over the Mi-28 for survivability. Or the longer-range Vikhr with better laser beam-riding guidance is what made the difference (the Havoc is slated to receive the missile as well, but probably hasn't so far).
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
Ka-52 is a reconnaissance/strike complex, designed to conduct armed reconnaissance, actually more in line with the Mi-24/35 as a multi-functional platform, vice a specific attack helicopter designed like western attack helicopters. It might be seen as having more mission flexibility than the Mi-28. One should recall that western attack helicopters were originally designed as a defensive platform to rapidly move to the point of need to service large attacking armor formations.
 

timmymagic

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
266
Reaction score
531
Question on Ka-52 and Mi-28 operations. They've been used in Ukraine and I think also Syria among others.
I believe there's a large overlap in roles between the two in combat.. but is the Russian military using them for different purposes in these conflicts? or the same?
Thus far, the Mi-28 seems to have had a bit less losses than the 52 and wondering if an apples to apples comparison can be made
Whats noticeable is how we've seen Mi-28 and KA-52 operating together as a pair a lot. And from the early part of the war to date. That would imply that there is a deficiency in 1 or both of the helos that operating them together mitigates in some way.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
Question on Ka-52 and Mi-28 operations. They've been used in Ukraine and I think also Syria among others.
I believe there's a large overlap in roles between the two in combat.. but is the Russian military using them for different purposes in these conflicts? or the same?
Thus far, the Mi-28 seems to have had a bit less losses than the 52 and wondering if an apples to apples comparison can be made
Whats noticeable is how we've seen Mi-28 and KA-52 operating together as a pair a lot. And from the early part of the war to date. That would imply that there is a deficiency in 1 or both of the helos that operating them together mitigates in some way.
Actually the Scout Attack Weapons Team is one of the older, more standard Army rotorcraft tactical methodologies.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
2,121
Question on Ka-52 and Mi-28 operations. They've been used in Ukraine and I think also Syria among others.
I believe there's a large overlap in roles between the two in combat.. but is the Russian military using them for different purposes in these conflicts? or the same?
Thus far, the Mi-28 seems to have had a bit less losses than the 52 and wondering if an apples to apples comparison can be made
Whats noticeable is how we've seen Mi-28 and KA-52 operating together as a pair a lot. And from the early part of the war to date. That would imply that there is a deficiency in 1 or both of the helos that operating them together mitigates in some way.
I'm wondering why or if there are any plans to alleviate these deficiencies so only one type is needed
(and if so, which would you rather choose between the two?)

were both types agreed upon simply as a jobs creation policy? similar to how the US opted for two types of LCS ships that competed against each other?
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
1,263
I lend more into the Job creation policy, as well as politics. Kamov type were used to be mainly naval helicopter maker, while MiL got bigger share of cakes of generic military and civil types.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
It is my (very limited) understanding that you have to carefully balance the rotor phasing (where they pass over each other) or it can cause serious resonance issues. I do not know if this is something that is set in the design and is not changeable in the field, or if it is something that can be effected by less than adequate field maintenance.
Ha! Nailed it! ...for once.

From: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...icopters-have-got-a-serious-vibration-problem

"First off, we spoke to an aeronautical engineer whose professional experience includes heading up the future projects division of a major helicopter manufacturer.

He quickly identified the vibration issue as “vertical bounce at (maybe) blade passing frequency.”

Ultimately, a helicopter rotor acts like a kind of vibration filter, with the main variation in load that gets passed down the rotor shaft being a vertical input that varies according to the blade passing frequency.

Blade passing frequency differs from helicopter to helicopter, based on the number of rotor blades. A Bell 47 or a JetRanger, for example, has a vertical load component of two per revolution, as each has a pair of rotor blades. For a five-bladed S-61 Sea King, by contrast, the largest single component of vibration would be at the blade passing frequency of five per revolution.

As for the Ka-52, this has two three-bladed rotors and each of these assemblies will produce the largest single component of vibration at a blade passing frequency of three per rev. As the two rotor assemblies turn in opposite directions, it’s conceivable that some loads will be reduced, and others reinforced as a result."
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
5,626
Reaction score
5,411
Yes. Not a flutter effect as I misnamed it. The vertical landing video extract rules out an aerodynamics coupling.
Well done.
Still, you've to wonder how something like that could even reach the frontline...
 
Last edited:

Anduriel

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
138
Reaction score
199
No idea why the Hokum's are so prevalent in Ukraine.
That's because Kamov helo is pretty much superior in every way that matters, apart armor. Question is why the they produced Mi-28, when Ka-52 also exists? Until Mi-28NM, it's a no-brainer as to which helo to choose. And even then Ka-52M also in the works.
Kamov has:
-vastly superior EOTS compared to Mil, you can clearly see by image quality in various Russian videos, even if videos from MFD are overly compressed.
-Kamov has radar, which is massive bonus in locating targets and night-time flying. Ukraine is not Syria or Iraq, it's more developed an populous with much more obstacles such as powerlines, masts etc.
-Kamov has DIRCM, which for whatever reason wasn't installed on Mi-28, despite Mi35M having it along with some variants of Mi-8.
Better ATGM - Vikhr is superior over 9M120 in range, which is critical in Manpads saturated environment.
-better overall avionics.
That's why Kamov is preferable choice and faces more action. And that's why Mil works alongside with Kamov - former detects threats better, latter act as support.
 

Cannonfodder43

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
154
No idea why the Hokum's are so prevalent in Ukraine.
That's because Kamov helo is pretty much superior in every way that matters, apart armor. Question is why the they produced Mi-28, when Ka-52 also exists? Until Mi-28NM, it's a no-brainer as to which helo to choose. And even then Ka-52M also in the works.
Kamov has:
-vastly superior EOTS compared to Mil, you can clearly see by image quality in various Russian videos, even if videos from MFD are overly compressed.
-Kamov has radar, which is massive bonus in locating targets and night-time flying. Ukraine is not Syria or Iraq, it's more developed an populous with much more obstacles such as powerlines, masts etc.
-Kamov has DIRCM, which for whatever reason wasn't installed on Mi-28, despite Mi35M having it along with some variants of Mi-8.
Better ATGM - Vikhr is superior over 9M120 in range, which is critical in Manpads saturated environment.
-better overall avionics.
That's why Kamov is preferable choice and faces more action. And that's why Mil works alongside with Kamov - former detects threats better, latter act as support.
All very good points but I am curious as to the Mi-28N's lack of a radar.

Certainly the mast mounted radar would be useful. Unless the radar on the Havok proved to be less than useful in practice?
 

RavenOne

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
561
Reaction score
1,028
i saw the Katran up close and very personal 7 months ago at Dubai Air Show here are my photos below on static and performing on the first day.

cheers
 

Attachments

  • 9EF8F2A0-F9EA-4A18-B3FB-656B3A6C3C5C.jpeg
    9EF8F2A0-F9EA-4A18-B3FB-656B3A6C3C5C.jpeg
    2.6 MB · Views: 64
  • 4FC99AF8-A7E0-4A11-B329-69A290BEFEFC.jpeg
    4FC99AF8-A7E0-4A11-B329-69A290BEFEFC.jpeg
    6.6 MB · Views: 45
  • 956B47DE-6C06-4E1F-A0CC-61ED26CC84B2.jpeg
    956B47DE-6C06-4E1F-A0CC-61ED26CC84B2.jpeg
    6.8 MB · Views: 36
  • 86CBD9B9-0422-4FFD-A7BA-EFCB7648CC74.jpeg
    86CBD9B9-0422-4FFD-A7BA-EFCB7648CC74.jpeg
    6.8 MB · Views: 38
  • 06349D79-12B0-4D98-9D13-B8075B635A02.jpeg
    06349D79-12B0-4D98-9D13-B8075B635A02.jpeg
    6.8 MB · Views: 34
  • 648BE47B-804B-4D13-BB74-CF9C387579EB.jpeg
    648BE47B-804B-4D13-BB74-CF9C387579EB.jpeg
    2.9 MB · Views: 40
  • EE76601F-2B97-4675-925A-C2AA28AE9B67.jpeg
    EE76601F-2B97-4675-925A-C2AA28AE9B67.jpeg
    2.4 MB · Views: 42
  • 28B4CF1E-3F3D-4339-AFFC-FBD3A761CFAA.jpeg
    28B4CF1E-3F3D-4339-AFFC-FBD3A761CFAA.jpeg
    3.2 MB · Views: 57

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
2,121
^ is that the M version? I read that it appeared at the Dubai air show, not sure if mock up form or flying
 

RavenOne

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
561
Reaction score
1,028
^ is that the M version? I read that it appeared at the Dubai air show, not sure if mock up form or flying

IT is most certainly not a mock up as it was on static in the morning and then went onto the flightline for the afternoon flying display!

cheers
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
No idea why the Hokum's are so prevalent in Ukraine.
That's because Kamov helo is pretty much superior in every way that matters, apart armor. Question is why the they produced Mi-28, when Ka-52 also exists? Until Mi-28NM, it's a no-brainer as to which helo to choose. And even then Ka-52M also in the works.
Kamov has:
-vastly superior EOTS compared to Mil, you can clearly see by image quality in various Russian videos, even if videos from MFD are overly compressed.
-Kamov has radar, which is massive bonus in locating targets and night-time flying. Ukraine is not Syria or Iraq, it's more developed an populous with much more obstacles such as powerlines, masts etc.
-Kamov has DIRCM, which for whatever reason wasn't installed on Mi-28, despite Mi35M having it along with some variants of Mi-8.
Better ATGM - Vikhr is superior over 9M120 in range, which is critical in Manpads saturated environment.
-better overall avionics.
That's why Kamov is preferable choice and faces more action. And that's why Mil works alongside with Kamov - former detects threats better, latter act as support.
I would also add that the lack of a tail rotor is a significant plus for a combat helicopter. Better than 50% of the bullets that hit helicopters hit the rear portion of the platform due to poor lead of the helicopter by the shooter. Thus no tail rotor. or tail rotor drive shaft, requirement makes for a more survivable combat helicopter against non-guided gun systems.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
2,121
I would also add that the lack of a tail rotor is a significant plus for a combat helicopter. Better than 50% of the bullets that hit helicopters hit the rear portion of the platform due to poor lead of the helicopter by the shooter. Thus no tail rotor. or tail rotor drive shaft, requirement makes for a more survivable combat helicopter against non-guided gun systems.

I was actually a big fan of the co-axial rotor and short tail layout for helicopters before this war.. and I still largely am.. at least for naval and civilian use.

But looking at the helicopters that were damaged in this war.. I am wondering if tail rotor damage is actually a big an issue as advertised, at least in modern day conflicts.
manpads are now very common and they're going to impact the center of the helicopter and bring it down tail or no tail.
even Yemen militias, which are not as well armed, were able to take down Saudi Apaches with Manpads rather than gunfire.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
5,626
Reaction score
5,411
Watching that Apache shot down video in Yemen, is there any plans for Helicopters pilots to wear parachutes?
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
@TomcatViP - Interestingly the Ka-52 has ejection seats with parachutes. I could be mistaken, but think that they have been used successfully in combat. Most combat helicopters will be flying at very low level for the foreseeable future to reduce visibility to air defense systems, so parachutes without and ejector seat is not practical.

@helmutkohl - As we do not usually get information on the helicopters that make it back to base with combat damage, I suspect there are more frequent combat damage from small arms and medium machine guns than we are aware of. There is a video from Russian MoD of one such Ka-52 with small arms and medium caliber from several weeks ago. I can tell you that for US forces there were a number of helicopters that received combat damage from small arms that were patched up and sent back in over the last couple of decades.

No one wants to show you helicopters that got home with damage because it can assist an enemy. The only things we see are the victories that help a specific message.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
5,626
Reaction score
5,411
@yasotay : that particular Apache was flying above 6000ft when it took a hit from, I guess, a repurposed A2A missile. An airframe free falling from that height leaves plenty of time for any surviving crew to exit and bail out. The perspective of dying a long agony inside a burning airframe deprived of its main rotor (think fragmention warhead hitting CFRP blades) isn't really a motivation for new recruits. Since many missions will still involves flying at altitude, the simple addition of a parachute could help.
 

mil

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
141
Reaction score
84
In mid-March, the crew of Major Roman Kobts and Captain Ivan Boldyrev flew to cover ground troops. The Ka-52 was hit by fire from the ground, and then the pilots, for the first time in world practice, left the car with the help of a jet-ejection system. On the ground, the pilots entered into battle with the nationalists, and were rescued by an evacuation group.

The problem of creating jet-parachute rescue equipment for helicopter crews in the USSR began to be dealt with in 1972. For the first time, the K-37-800 jet ejection seats were installed on an experimental Ka-50 helicopter in the late 80s. Before ejection, at the command of the pilot, the main rotor blades were fired with the help of squibs. In a fraction of a second, the roof of the cockpit was fired, then the pilot's seat was fired with the help of a towing missile. And only after that the rescue parachute opened.

Until recently, the K-37-800 jet-ejection seats were used only for testing. Now Russian pilots have tested them in combat.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
@yasotay : that particular Apache was flying above 6000ft when it took a hit from, I guess, a repurposed A2A missile. An airframe free falling from that height leaves plenty of time for any surviving crew to exit and bail out. The perspective of dying a long agony inside a burning airframe deprived of its main rotor (think fragmention warhead hitting CFRP blades) isn't really a motivation for new recruits. Since many missions will still involves flying at altitude, the simple addition of a parachute could help.
Indeed I remember the video painfully well. Thinking the very same thoughts you mention. I agree that giving the aviator the option to wear a parachute, if the mission dictates flying at high altitude, ought be a consideration. Interestingly most US helicopter pilots are not keen on the idea because the potential to run into the whirly bits is a very real possibility. Now that there is a higher threat environment most are training to operate at tree top height more like fixed wing CAS from the cold war era.
 

GARGEAN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
778
Reaction score
586
More than decade in service. Hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of video in all kinds of situations. Working as intended for all observable time. Few seconds of video from conflict where it is used by evil side. Internet experts: "This is clearly core design flaw that can't be fixed by any means. They clearly weren't aware what they were doing when they introduced that thing in service"
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,155
Reaction score
2,113
I was not aware that the Ka-52 or the Mi-28 had optically guided (or at least optical tracking) missiles. Are we sure that this is not fixed wing launched missile attacks?
 

QuadroFX

Russia, Chelyabinsk
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
267
Reaction score
750
Website
paralay.iboards.ru
I was not aware that the Ka-52 or the Mi-28 had optically guided (or at least optical tracking) missiles. Are we sure that this is not fixed wing launched missile attacks?
Not for Mi-28N and Ka-52 but for Mi-28NM and Ka-52M which are in service already
 

Attachments

  • photo_2022-06-20_12-46-03.jpg
    photo_2022-06-20_12-46-03.jpg
    157.9 KB · Views: 23
  • photo_2022-06-20_12-46-04.jpg
    photo_2022-06-20_12-46-04.jpg
    258.6 KB · Views: 23

Similar threads

Top