Iraqi airforce takes delivery of Mi-28 attack helicopters - Polidicks

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/nvUvMPC.png[/IMG] [QUOTE]Iraq has taken delivery of its first batch of Mil Mi-28NE 'Havoc' (Night Hunter) attack helicopters, as well as additional Mil Mi-35M 'Hind' assault helicopters, Russian state media announced on 2 July. The first three Mi-28NE helicopters and four new Mi-35M helicopters arrived in-country aboard Antonov An-124 'Condor' transport aircraft, a military-diplomatic source reportedly told the ITAR-TASS news agency. The report continued that all the helicopters had been delivered in a combat configuration, and were fully night-vision capable. According to Rostvertol figures recently seen by IHS Jane's , the Iraqi Army Aviation Command, which is part of the Iraqi Army and operates all the country's military helicopters, is set to receive a final total of 15 Mi-28NEs and 28 Mi-35Ms. Four of the latter are already in service. The Mi-28N/Mi-28NE is an all-weather day-and-night anti-armour and anti-personnel attack platform that has only recently entered service with the Russian armed forces. Similar in appearance to the Boeing AH-64 Apache, the Mi-28N is equipped with a mast-mounted, 360 o -scan, millimetre-wave radar, as well as a nose-mounted forward looking infrared (FLIR) turret. The tandem cockpit is heavily armoured to provide a high level of ballistic protection for the two crew members, and its two TV3-117VMA turbo-shaft engines provide added redundancy should either be hit by ground fire. The Mi-28NE's weapons package includes: an under-nose, turret-mounted 2A42 30 mm cannon (with 250 rounds in side-mounted boxes); 9M114 Shturm (AT-6 'Spiral') or 9M120/9M121F Vikhr/Ataka-V (AT-12 'Swinger') air-to-surface missiles; 9M39 Igla-V (SA-16 'Gimlet') and R-73 air-to-air missiles; S-8 and S-13 rockets; and UPK-23-250V 23 mm gun pods.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.janes.com/article/40250/iraq-receives-first-mi-28ne-attack-helos-alongside-additional-mi-35ms[/url]

Mi-28s are pretty fucking scary

[QUOTE=Cabbage;45282478]Mi-28s are pretty fucking scary[/QUOTE] Like an Apache with roid rage.

The Mi-28 looks way more graceful and sexy than the KA-50 and Mi-24 Hind variants. If you squinted you could more or less mistake it for a western make.

Gah. I hate to say this but the modern Russian tech is so much prettier than anything NATO can field. Look at the MiG-29, Su-35, Mi-28, Tu-22, Tu-160 to name a few. They get style points all round.

Mi28 is pretty good as well, in trials vs apache it was only beaten by accuracy/avionics. It's faster and heavier armoured. Possibly cheaper as well.

[QUOTE=Jon27;45282846]Gah. I hate to say this but the modern Russian tech is so much prettier than anything NATO can field.[/QUOTE] It's a matter of opinion. Russia builds extremely utilitarian stuff and if something works, they just keep improving upon it until whatever the core design is can no longer handle it. It also means crew comforts are at a minimum and the shape is left almost solely to the purpose. I'd probably take a lot of flak for saying I like the Warthog and Frogfoot in almost equal measures. I'm gonna forgo NATO because I'm a dirty American and just use good ol' USA as a base; but the reason our stuff looks vastly different is we over-engineer and multi-purpose everything to shit. (Goon165 writes a hilarious post about this in the War Thunder thread.) We're not afraid to make sure our troop transport has amphibious, recon, stealth, and combat capabilities, along with a turret, anti-tank missiles, and a microwave oven for burgers on the go.

I was reading about the insurgency when I noticed that the Iraq army use Cessna Caravans, 172s and other traditionally civilian light single-engine Cessna aircraft in their air force. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/An_AC-208_fires_a_Hellfire_at_practice_target.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg/1024px-Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=mac338;45282999]I was reading about the insurgency when I noticed that the Iraq army use Cessna Caravans, 172s and other traditionally civilian light single-engine Cessna aircraft in their air force. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/An_AC-208_fires_a_Hellfire_at_practice_target.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg/1024px-Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] We do too for liason and training stuff [editline]3rd July 2014[/editline] Also light aircraft are actually really good at COIN operationd

I wonder how comparable those Mi-28s are to an Apache. I always thought the Russian military was behind technologically, but assume that their special forces at least get top tier technology.

[QUOTE=cqbcat;45283083]I wonder how comparable those Mi-28s are to an Apache. I always thought the Russian military was behind technologically, but assume that their special forces at least get top tier technology.[/QUOTE] Russia as a whole, as far as my extremely limited knowledge goes, is pretty up to date with the rest of the world as far as military tech goes. I think the only thing they lack is an extensive Navy, but I don't really know. You'd think otherwise, because they shovel out all the out-of-date tech to anyone willing to buy. Not that different than the US in that regard.

[QUOTE=Jon27;45282846]Gah. I hate to say this but the modern Russian tech is so much prettier than anything NATO can field. Look at the MiG-29, Su-35, Mi-28, Tu-22, Tu-160 to name a few. They get style points all round.[/QUOTE] Several of the planes you just mentioned are decades old. the Tu-22 is 52 years old, for example.

[QUOTE=mac338;45282999]I was reading about the insurgency when I noticed that the Iraq army use Cessna Caravans, 172s and other traditionally civilian light single-engine Cessna aircraft in their air force. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/An_AC-208_fires_a_Hellfire_at_practice_target.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg/1024px-Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] If it works, why not use it?

The TU-22M is newer and in service while the TU-22 Blinder is over 50, and no longer used. They don't even look the same. Most of those aircraft have been modified and upgraded a lot as well, making them viable in todays modern battlefield. Even the F-22 is a few decades old design.

[QUOTE=darunner;45283377]Several of the planes you just mentioned are decades old. the Tu-22 is 52 years old, for example.[/QUOTE] Most of the planes that are in service nowdays are decades old. And I pretty much like a lot of western planes as well as russian ones. I totally adore harrier's design, for example. [t]http://33.media.tumblr.com/e96a13d486eecf79f7f045d978800225/tumblr_n6eoqn8u6n1qbqq0oo1_1280.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=cqbcat;45283083]I wonder how comparable those Mi-28s are to an Apache. I always thought the Russian military was behind technologically, but assume that their special forces at least get top tier technology.[/QUOTE] Mi28 is heavier, more armoured and faster Apache carries more ammo and has better avionics. There was a trial in sweden which found the MI28 to be superior but a trial in india which found the apache to be supirior. Apache is slightly more expensive but only by a few million. Apache might be better for Iraq since they will probably need the offensive capacity more than a flying tank but the cost might mean they have to choose otherwise. [editline]3rd July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=antianan;45283543]Most of the planes that are in service nowdays are decades old. And I pretty much like a lot of western planes as well as russian ones. I totally adore harrier's design, for example. [t]http://33.media.tumblr.com/e96a13d486eecf79f7f045d978800225/tumblr_n6eoqn8u6n1qbqq0oo1_1280.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] That looks totally badass. A damn shame we brits stopped using it.

[QUOTE=Doom14;45283181]Russia as a whole, as far as my extremely limited knowledge goes, is pretty up to date with the rest of the world as far as military tech goes. I think the only thing they lack is an extensive Navy, but I don't really know. You'd think otherwise, because they shovel out all the out-of-date tech to anyone willing to buy. Not that different than the US in that regard.[/QUOTE] I can't remember if it was Riller or TrunkMonkey, but someone did a pretty good explanation of the way the Soviet Union (and now Russians) operated. They made something like 3 different models of everything, a home model, a friend export model, and a cheap anyone model. You hear about the cheap anyone models getting absolutely pounded by Abrams or whatnot, but the full home model is pretty much on par.

Too bad that these aircraft will do nothing; not when the Iraqi army has shit leadership.

[QUOTE=mac338;45282999]I was reading about the insurgency when I noticed that the Iraq army use Cessna Caravans, 172s and other traditionally civilian light single-engine Cessna aircraft in their air force. [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/An_AC-208_fires_a_Hellfire_at_practice_target.jpg[/t] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg/1024px-Iraqi_Air_Force_C-172.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] We used Cessna's in Vietnam with rockets as well. Although I think they where just for marking targets for dedicated attack aircraft, but it's still pretty funny.

[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;45282812]The Mi-28 looks way more graceful and sexy than the KA-50 and Mi-24 Hind variants. If you squinted you could more or less mistake it for a western make.[/QUOTE] double the rotors double the sexy [IMG]http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/helicopter-m/ka50/ka50_04.jpg[/IMG]