Question to the gun loadout of the Mi-24P

[Hajime]

Hey,

does the Hind we will get in DCS have a movable gun respectively a gun which can be turned of boreside?

 

Thank you for your answer

[Sabre_Ewan]

Nope. Fixed cannon.

[Sealpup]

You point the aircraft to aim the gun. Alternatively, you fire the gun to point the aircraft.

[Mars Exulte]

1 hour ago, Hyena said:

You point the aircraft to aim the gun. Alternatively, you fire the gun to point the aircraft.

  In Soviet Russia, gun aims YOU!

[Lurker]

8 hours ago, zhukov032186 said:

  In Soviet Russia, gun aims YOU!

 

I wouldn't have it any other way! Well, actually I would love to see the V or even better the VP variant at some point. Hopefully the P sells well enough that a VP variant could become a reality at some point even as a paid upgrade for more "dakka". (Sort of like what they did with the A10C) 

[WinterH]

22 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

I wouldn't have it any other way! Well, actually I would love to see the V or even better the VP variant at some point. Hopefully the P sells well enough that a VP variant could become a reality at some point even as a paid upgrade for more "dakka". (Sort of like what they did with the A10C) 

It is not more dakka though. It is A LOT LESS dakka in fact  23x115 out of a GSh-23L is not remotely comparable to 30x165 out of GSh-30K. I mean yes, turreted vs fixed, yes, that is a factor, and I would love seeing a turreted Hind eventually, but really, the movable guns put on Mi-24 were never impressive weapons, especially in the context of DCS where ground units can be deadly and though.

 

Also if we get a turreted Mi-24, I don't think it would be a VP, as that was very much a rare, fringe sort of variant. V would be more historically relevant, iconic, and cool in my opinion. I remember reading pilotmi8 (project leader for Mi-24 development as far as I know) saying that if they consider an additional Mi-24 variant it wouldn't be VP, but something later like Mi-35M but with recent news on Blackshark 3 going the dodo's way I am not sure if that will be too likely. Though, if it does happen it too shall have the 23mm like the VP.

 

Also, right now in DCS YakB is a bit better in armor penetration than GSh-23, which may well be realistic actually. They are both bad against even light armor, but 12.7 works a little better, while the 23 is better against soft targets due to HE shells.

I've tested 23mm guns on some relatively light APCs/IFVs recently: 

It takes some effort... later on I've tested both NATO .50 can and Russian YakB 12.7x108 in the scenario and they penetrate and deal damage a lot more consistently.

[Apok]

I wouldn't  consider Gsh23 a bad gun. DCS armour penetration is iffy at best.  Russians put that gun on everything they can. When my country bought Mi-35M they also bought Gsh23 gun pods regardless of the fact it already has that gun in turret. Answer I got for asking the reason for this is - pilots seemed to find it useful for "gun runs" where they pepper some small target area with as much rounds as they can.

[Kerberos]

Pilot Mi8 also said in the recent interview that the gun of the Mi-24VP was also not very combat effective because it did not have an advanced targeting computer. The turret is not super useful if it is difficult to hit anything with it.

The only Mi-24 variant with a combat effective turret seems to be the Mi-35p (or maybe the superhind) but I think its very unlikely that we will get that.

[WinterH]

I wouldn't consider it bad, but honestly, I wouldn't consider it good either. Depends on purpose. Every bit of info I could find online tells me that 23x115 is relatively bad when it comes to armor penetration, and it seems like there never was a specialized round with high velocity high density penetrator to rectify that. On the other hand, rounds have pretty decent amount of HE content in them, GSh-23 is a fairly high fire rate, decently accurate, and very lightweight gun, but with quite low muzzle velocity.

 

It is just obvious this was designed as a lightweight air to air fighter gun, and is quite alright in that kind of use. It is also quite good for strafing soft targets thanks to high fire rate and good HE payload in rounds. But low veloicty = relatively short range, parabolic trajectory, longer shell flight time, and finally comparatively bad armor penetration.

 

So depending on what you want to with it, it is either a fairly decent, or pretty bad gun. I just wouldn't put any faith in it against any of the thougher IFV armor out there, and certainly not in a more than minimal threat environment. On the flipside, it can be really good for strafing an area full of infantry/artillery pieces/trucks etc, as long as there isn't a MANPADS or even AAA defending it.

 

As a helicopter turret gun, my opinion on it remains that... it just isn't particularly great for the task, but then, neither is YakB.

 

You also need to remember that a classic Mi-24 has no fancy aiming for the gun turret: it just looks at whereever the periscope is pointed by the gunner, but without any ranging... No helmet tracking either. It is not like Ka-50 or AH-64's gun at all. It is probably a lot different in Mi-35M, but a Mi-24V or VP won't have any kind of target tracking, rangefinding, or helmet coupling available for the gun turret, and the gun itself is a lot more limited in its capabilities compared to most other turret guns on other attack helicopters. Moreover, the range of YakB or GSh-23L may be further limited in a Mi-24 due to lack of any rangefinding/auto gun laying, coupled with sight field of view if you try to shoot at a distant target in high magnification, elevating the sight enough may perhaps put the target out of its field of view etc.

 

As for the DCS armor penetration, it is iffy especially in some units like Stryker for example, but honestly, it seems to have improved a lot more in last year or so compared to what I remember from it.

 

What I'm trying to say is, in the very specific case of Mi-24, having a fixed gun instead of available turret options is not that great a loss as one may think at first glance. Don't get me wrong, I still think it would be cool if we get a V or 35M down the line, I'd love it in fact! But P makes more sense than many people are willing to give it credit for.

[Mars Exulte]

2 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

I wouldn't have it any other way! Well, actually I would love to see the V or even better the VP variant at some point.

 

  The VP when I was looking online seemed to be produced in vanishingly small numbers, to the extent it really isn't a thing. It was just a ''one off'' they tried near end of production and then it meh'd. Superhinds even more so, never really leaving prototype/mockup stage.

 

 To add to the 23mm discussion, as one rightly observed it has been routinely used as a fighter air to air gun, with high fire rate HE rounds, but as far as ''putting it on everything'' not really. The 30mm 2A42 (if I remember) and associated variants seem to be the go to both on vehicles and helos for some time now. In RL it can be used more effectively in the low intensity environments we mostly see currently, but in DCS these kinds of soft targets are abnormally resistant to such weapons. A low velocity HE autocannon like that is very borderline useless and nearly anything else would be more effective in an anti-vehicle role.

Edited February 16, 2021 by zhukov032186

[Lurker]

So what's the takeaway here? That even the 30mm gun on the P is borderline useless? I was hoping that it would be decent against most targets in DCS up to and including APCs. 

 

In any case the reason why I would like to see a turreted version at some point, is simply because it would be one more thing the guy in front can play with. It's more about the fun you can have in DCS, than any "realism" reasons...like I said it's no biggie if it doesn't happen. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Lurker

[WinterH]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

So what's the takeaway here? That even the 30mm gun on the P is borderline useless? I was hoping that it would be decent against most targets in DCS up to and including APCs. 

30 should be just fine against IFVs and APCs, and in very marginal cases may even at least hurt tanks. I wouldn't rely too much on the latter though, unless we go the full propa' orky waaaaghh route with appropriate life expectancy after the attack  30 should do fine against great majority of light armor. At least as fine as such things can do in DCS.

23 minutes ago, zhukov032186 said:

Superhinds even more so, never really leaving prototype/mockup stage.

 

 To add to the 23mm discussion, as one rightly observed it has been routinely used as a fighter air to air gun, with high fire rate HE rounds, but as far as ''putting it on everything'' not really. The 30mm 2A42 (if I remember) and associated variants seem to be the go to both on vehicles and helos for some time now. In RL it can be used more effectively in the low intensity environments we mostly see currently, but in DCS these kinds of soft targets are abnormally resistant to such weapons. A low velocity HE autocannon like that is very borderline useless and nearly anything else would be more effective in an anti-vehicle role.

 

Superhinds do actually serve with a few customers actually I think, one being Azerbaijan. But in very small numbers, and frankly it really is a very much fringe part of Hind history/family. All those stuff bolted on it has apparently rather upset its flight characteristics too, but it got some nice systems/weapons. (ok looked it up a bit, various marks of superhind is apparently in service with a few militaries in decent numbers apparently, but still very much a fringe thing, like a MiG-21Bison, F-5S, F-4E 2020 Terminator etc).

[Northstar98]

On 2/15/2021 at 8:18 PM, Hajime said:

Hey,

does the Hind we will get in DCS have a movable gun respectively a gun which can be turned of boreside?

 

Thank you for your answer

 

We're getting the P which has a GSh-30-2K (essentially a longer barrelled version of the gun on the Su-25), I think we're also getting the GUV-8700 pods which contain either the 12.7mm YakB + 2 GShG-7.62 (both being 4 barrelled rotary machine guns).

 

I think we might be getting another GUV-8700 pod, but with an AGS-30 automatic 30mm grenade launcher. Both GUV pods are present on the Mi-8MTV-2

 

All of the above are fixed forward firing weapons.

 

Hopefully in the future we'll see a V (the most numerous and arguably the most iconic Hind variant) but hell, I'd even take the Mi-24D.

 

I don't really care that the YakB is worse than the GSh-30-2K, the main advantage for me is that it's traversable and I don't have to point the whole helicopter to aim it, not to mention the most important reason of all - it looks cooler.

 

Ultimately the Huey has even worse gun options being limited to 7.62, and it never seemed to be an issue there. It's just as difficult to aim with no stabilisation or FCS or even ranging systems. But in both cases the guns fire so rapidly anyway that making corrections isn't that hard, and it's not like these are particularly long-range weapons in the first place - unlike the M230 or 2A42, which can reach out further, with stabilisation, head-tracking and a FCS. On the subject of stabilisation and FCS the Mi-24P gun doesn't have any either and you have to point the entire aircraft.

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by Northstar98

[Lucas_From_Hell]

I often see the fact that the gun is fixed listed as a disadvantage here but in practical terms I'd say that's not an issue.

 

The YakB is a 12.7mm, meaning it has a shorter effective range, lower armour penetration and worse accuracy as well due to the primitive aiming system. Neither the YakB nor the GSh-30-2K are good ideas against IFVs, which leaves APCs and soft targets on the menu. Now, any self-respecting APC in this game has either a .50 M2 or a 14.5mm KPVT turret.

 

The GSh-30-2K can handsomely outrange these machine guns, and thanks to the computed solution on the ASP-17 sight the pilot can come in, place a very accurate burst on the targets then break away without ever entering their firing envelope. Practically speaking, this will look exactly like a Su-25 or A-10 strafing run. The 30mm rounds destroy most APCs and soft targets with a couple of hits.

 

The YakB on the other has no aiming aids, it has worse penetration power and an effective range that matches the M2 and is worse than the KPV. The potential results aren't good. At the ranges where the gun is effective, the enemy can shoot back. If you fly slow, they'll chew up the helicopter in seconds, so you need to be fast. If you set the gun to the traverse limit to avoid flying directly at the target, the enemy will have a harder time hitting you but you also won't be hitting much since the aiming system is poor. Because the gun itself is weak, you'll need multiple hits to kill anything, which then means multiple passes, potentially running out of ammo before bagging a single M113 or BTR.

 

The only advantage the YakB has is when picking off soft targets with no defences whatsoever, since you can calmly take care of them one by one, but it's not really a game changer because the Mi-24P pilot can just come closer and snipe them one by one with the ASP-17, or if time over target is an issue there's eighty S-8 rockets at hand that to dispose of them instantly.

 

Against MBTs, both Mi-24V and Mi-24P are stuck with the Shturm/Ataka, and the same broadly applies to IFVs as well. However, the Mi-24P can still engage an IFV with its cannon in an emergency, whereas the Mi-24V can't touch them at all.

[notproplayer3]

I'm not sure if it is entirely accurate but from what I see, most Russian hinds in Syria today are actually P models, plus, if I remember correctly, it's the second most produced model after the mi24v and stayed in production till the 90s which is pretty late for the "classic" mi24 family.

I am not trying to draw any uneducated parallels but I could still blindly guess that the 20mm traversable turret wasn't necessarily the killer feature that was essential on the battlefield, hence the success of the P model until today in Syria for example (which, on a different note, gives sense to having the P variant because of the Syria map).

[Mars Exulte]

2 hours ago, Lurker said:

So what's the takeaway here? That even the 30mm gun on the P is borderline useless? I was hoping that it would be decent against most targets in DCS up to and including APCs. 

  Not really, in DCS it should be comparable to the A-10's gun more or less as far as firepower, and is more of an anti-vehie weapon than the 23mm gun being referred to. The gun on the Hind is a beast, although not particularly accurate due to instability of putting something like that on a helicopter. If they ever get around to improving the vic dm it'll become a lot more effective as penetration will be better modeled (likely making it more effective against light armor but less against tanks) but more importantly, it would add additional forms of damage.

 

  Most modernised tanks are too heavily armored to really pen directly except from certain angles, but the gun barrel, optics, radios, tracks, turret ring, etc are all vulnerable parts that can be degraded or damaged to the extent of rendering the vic ''alive'' but ''combat ineffective''.

 

 

4 minutes ago, notproplayer3 said:

I'm not sure if it is entirely accurate but from what I see, most Russian hinds in Syria today are actually P models, plus, if I remember correctly, it's the second most produced model after the mi24v and stayed in production till the 90s which is pretty late for the "classic" mi24 family.

I am not trying to draw any uneducated parallels but I could still blindly guess that the 20mm traversable turret wasn't necessarily the killer feature that was essential on the battlefield, hence the success of the P model until today in Syria for example (which, on a different note, gives sense to having the P variant because of the Syria map).

 

  Yeah, and then with the Mi-28 and Alligator they worked em around to get traversable 30mms, best of both worlds The Hind is like a lot of things, ''post production addons'' have been tried, but not being designed for it have their own issues. It really takes a deliberate effort to be effective with something like that.

Edited February 16, 2021 by zhukov032186

[Lucas_From_Hell]

The Afghan experience with the Mi-24P and accuracy...

 

Quote

The accuracy of the fire was also excellent: the gun made it possible to conduct aimed shooting to a two-kilometer range, and at usual distances of several hundred meters an experienced pilot cut down a tree or a camel in a caravan with one or two shells.

 

[Mars Exulte]

''Several hundred meters''

ie close range

 

''Cut down a tree''

30mm that penetrates halfway into the tree before exploding

 

''Or camel''

....

 

''With one or two shells''

ie he's firing semi-automatic. At that range and single shot the first round will more or less always be on target.

 

 

 However, the GSH-30-2 is a 4000rpm autocannon that causes the helicopter to visibly pitch down when fired in a 1-2 second burst. A short blip of the trigger will shotgun a few dozen rounds into the approximate area of the target, one or two will hit, most will miss, HE rounds will distribute considerable damage to all soft targets in the immediate vicinity of the hits.

 

Tldr; not that accurate, except at close range, fired semi-automatic. Thus the prevalence of the long barreled, slower firing gun used on the Havok and Alligator. The gun on the Hind is not a sniper rifle by any means, it's similar to the Gau-8 on the A-10, only without a stable firing platform or the computer compensation.

 

-edit

I forgot one

 

''Aimed shooting up to two kilometers''

  The round will travel that far and remain effective, assuming you hit anything, which is possible but unlikely with any one shot. Firing at that range is going to be ''area fire'' unavoidably, but particularly if not fired at a very slow rate.

Edited February 16, 2021 by zhukov032186

[WinterH]

I think GSh-30K is slightly different than original GSh-30-2 in that it features a selectable fire rate between 300 rpm and 3000ish. Since a Mi-24 is not a Su-25, high fire rate setting will probably be a rarity to use, perhaps in short bursts from high speed attacks, on area targets. There is a video of a Mi-24P firing the gun at high fire rate in a very short burst, and it is visibly jarred around. In 300 rpm setting though, it should be fairly accurate, but even then still with short bursts probably... we'll see

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Like WinterH said, the gun has a low rate-of-fire mode that barely affects the nose, and in that mode a tap of the trigger will get you one to two shots. The Mi-24 is a very stable platform by design, in the slow mode the recoil is hardly an issue. You can see it well in this video (starting at 1:55):

 

 

As for the range, it's still a better performer than the YakB in any scenario. At longer ranges where the YakB simply can't reach the GSh-30 can still go for area effect fire, and at close ranges where the YakB is marginally effective the GSh-30 beats it both in accuracy and firepower.

[Fri13]

23 hours ago, Lucas_From_Hell said:

The YakB is a 12.7mm, meaning it has a shorter effective range, lower armour penetration and worse accuracy as well due to the primitive aiming system. Neither the YakB nor the GSh-30-2K are good ideas against IFVs, which leaves APCs and soft targets on the menu. Now, any self-respecting APC in this game has either a .50 M2 or a 14.5mm KPVT turret.

 

The 12.7 mm as caliber is very effective for long ranges, problem is always to just hit the target. And that is where the firerate comes by and just getting shots at the target.

Regardless any vehicle crew that is getting shot at, they will seek cover very likely as first action, especially if surprised. If they know threat that is shooting at them, commander can make a decision to simply return fire if their armor and firepower will give a better protection at the moment.

 

The YakB doesn't have a "primitive aiming system". It has automatic sight compensation for the helicopter movement and target range, what you need to do as WSO is to put the crosshair on the target and shoot.

 

Quote

The GSh-30-2K can handsomely outrange these machine guns, and thanks to the computed solution on the ASP-17 sight the pilot can come in, place a very accurate burst on the targets then break away without ever entering their firing envelope. Practically speaking, this will look exactly like a Su-25 or A-10 strafing run. The 30mm rounds destroy most APCs and soft targets with a couple of hits.

 

12.7 mm guns like NSV is used against air targets up to 1500-2500 meters, and against ground targets up to 2000-2500 meters as effective range (the caliber has longer effective range, but those are the limitations for the average shooter). With a 12.7 mm AP round, you are putting holes to most APC and IFV at those ranges, and if not holes, then causing severe spalling that requires anti-spalling protection from them to protect somewhat the crew compartments, engines and gear.

 

The problem is that as helicopter pilot, you do not get to shoot those targets at such range that you do not enter to their self-defense ranges. You would need to gain so much altitude that you become easy target for the MANPAD troops.

 

Trucks and APC's etc requires multiple hits to become destroyed by even 30 mm caliber. The APC main task is to transport infantry quickly to the combat and out of the combat, while offering good protection against fragments, splinters and small caliber fire. That means basically anything smaller than 7.62x51. A one good hit to engine, tires, vision blocks (optics etc) is enough to do lots of damage. A 6/8x wheeler APC can withstand losing two any of its tires, but even losing one can make it suffer severely in mobility in rough terrain. Not all are equipped with a full rubber tires to avoid blow outs.

The APC most vulnerable part is the squad it is transporting. Sure a 30 mm HE on the troop compartment side sounds bad, but similar way it is with 12.7 mm. A 30 mm API round is different case, it is guaranteed penetration and makes any personnel on its way a sausage. Similar capability is with 12.7 mm AP round, just with some smaller change for penetration depending the angle.

 

What comes to trucks, vans, and any other vehicle that is unarmored, 12.7 mm doesn't care. Sure a 30 mm HE exploding inside a rear section that has 12-18 men will be terrible, but 12.7 mm going through 2-3 men in line is not less worse when you get 3-4 of them hitting there.

The APC is not meant to be the moving non-penetrable cover for infantry. It is their way to get out and it is protected by the infantry. It can come to support the infantry if required with its 12.7 mm or 14.5 mm HMG (or these days 20 mm autocannon) but it is when it is not in risk to be destroyed. It is strategically more wise to keep the APC out of the threat way as it is then the infantry only way to retreat quickly from the area if overrun.

 

And Mi-24 is not going to do the strafing runs like A-10 or Su-25, unless those two will come low like the Mi-24, or Mi-24 will raise high in the altitude to do same. But again all those low flying aircraft are easy targets for HMG when going toward.

In DCS the proper european tactics is not found, as AI is too stupid to shoot and mission designers use AI as gunner fodder as the AI doesn't have any intelligence in its I.

 

 

Quote

The YakB on the other has no aiming aids, it has worse penetration power and an effective range that matches the M2 and is worse than the KPV.

 

YakB aiming aid is the automatically corrected sight for the WSO. It is quickly and easily slewed by the WSO anywhere just by placing crosshair on target and firing. If required, it is easy to do a aiming correction even by the shooter himself as few tracers makes possible to see where you are really hitting.

 

Edit: Check these two out as examples about V model sight operation:

 

 

 

 

Doesn't it look familiar?

You have a computer to take some aircraft values (speed, altitude, etc) and sight values (turning speed, angles) and you get a adjusted crosshair for the firing the gun. Instead operating a stick or mini-stick etc, you operate a larger easily moved sight. You put the crosshair on target and shoot.

If the computer gets broken, then you have that backup sight that you flip front of the sight glass and you do all that by yourself, you see only weapon boresight point like with any gun and you need to make all estimations where to aim and shoot.

 

The YakB aiming is far more effective than 30 mm cannon when it comes to close range engagements, low altitude flyby at high speed, performing turns and especially when it comes to common European landscape (Caucasus, Normandy and Channel maps) where engagement ranges are short and ground units has effective means to conceal and cover themselves.

 

The rotating turret is very capable idea, where fixed cannon was a response for the Afghanistan where you don't have cover to fly behind but you are at open, and where you want longer firing range to stay away from the targets that can just duck behind simple rock and be protected from 12.7 mm.

In European kind terrain the 30 mm is not enough for that task either. Flying toward the enemy is suicide and idea to gain altitude to be able perform long range attack runs are idiotic as you get missile (or something worse, as 23-40 mm shells).

 

A 12.7 mm HMG mounted on vehicles, on tripod etc is effective self-defense weapon against low flying air threats. Even a squad with their personal weapons is very effective to take down helicopters if they dare to fly closer than 1000 meters, and you do not want to be flying where you get bullet impacts. And soon it will be something much worse so better get quickly out from the area.

 

Quote

The potential results aren't good. At the ranges where the gun is effective, the enemy can shoot back.

 

Same way it is with 30 mm.

 

Quote

If you fly slow, they'll chew up the helicopter in seconds, so you need to be fast.

 

And being fast means you have less time to react on anything, less time acquire target, less time to turn your helicopter toward the threat to shoot it.

Slewable gun makes the difference, give the second pair of eyes to do the spotting, just requiring to place a crosshair on target without any displays or periscopes between line of sight, and shoot. Let the pilot to use area effect weapons like rockets for area suppression in primary area.

 

Quote

If you set the gun to the traverse limit to avoid flying directly at the target, the enemy will have a harder time hitting you but you also won't be hitting much since the aiming system is poor.

 

It is more effective than "poor".

 

Quote

Because the gun itself is weak, you'll need multiple hits to kill anything, which then means multiple passes, potentially running out of ammo before bagging a single M113 or BTR.

 

It is more effective than "weak". You do not go to "kill" anything with even 30 mm. That is where you use rockets and AT missiles. Each rocket is like a RPG-7V.  Far more effective than 30 mm. For the enemy that has dig the defensive positions, 30 mm is not much. But volley of HE rockets does a lot. And to be able spot the vehicle from distance that is concealed itself, 30 mm is not enough but blind shot of rocket volley in the area has better changes.

 

Quote

The only advantage the YakB has is when picking off soft targets with no defences whatsoever, since you can calmly take care of them one by one, but it's not really a game changer because the Mi-24P pilot can just come closer and snipe them one by one with the ASP-17, or if time over target is an issue there's eighty S-8 rockets at hand that to dispose of them instantly.

 

The YakB advantage is to be effective in quick situations and off-angle from the attack line.

In the DCS there is not even proper group column modeling, instead we have all vehicles stacking up to be shot at once. Idiotic! They work like in a urban combat where you need to move quickly through the narrow streets, but at the open you keep hundreds of meters distance to vehicle at front. A column can have 500-1000 meters separation, that is their air defense as well because you can not engage more than one vehicle at the time, and all others are around you giving a anti-air fire.

 

When a column is on the move, it has eyes on everywhere. It has radio contact when radars at area detects threats. They get to know direction and heading of the threat.

The column itself prepares itself for self-defense, on the first moment when the threat appears, vehicles pulls to cover. You don't see them anymore from the air if they were on the road. They scatter around like a cockroaches when you lit a light. They are just gone. And while you are trying to see where did they pull over, they are unmounting infantry, the vehicles seek position to shoot at you while you can't see them. The infantry has already prepared shoulder launched missiles so when you do a overpass, you get missile at your arse.

 

And if you dare to come for a second attack run, instead a 50-100 meter attack area for easy pray like in DCS, you should be looking a 2-3 km area that has effective destruction capability to shoot down aircraft in 5x10 km area. You had just one change, and that is that you get one vehicle, maybe two vehicles destroyed or damaged.

Longer you stay in the area, more likely you will get shot down.

 

Quote

Against MBTs, both Mi-24V and Mi-24P are stuck with the Shturm/Ataka, and the same broadly applies to IFVs as well. However, the Mi-24P can still engage an IFV with its cannon in an emergency, whereas the Mi-24V can't touch them at all.

 

Have you seen a modern IFV like BMP-3M or CV9040 to shoot down aircraft? They have almost 100% hit capability for low flying fighter or helicopter.

And if there are infantry, there are some who has at least few MANPADS available. If there is a IFV, then there is more than just a few.

If you are attacking a company positions, that means you are already against AAA and short range SAM systems.

 

The Mi-24P with the cannon is not going near there without massive amount of ground troops and massive artillery support etc.

 

This is why so many european countries did focus to lightweight helicopters like Gazelle or Bo-105 with ATGM as it had better capabilities to stay at distance and get a shot from small narrow opening and then change position. That instead having a heavy attack helicopter with massive size and weight that is required to attack only straight toward the anti-air capable enemy.

 

It is totally different case to fight somewhere in middle-east on the rocky mountains area than in European landscape, and against more capable enemy than just AI as in DCS.

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by Fri13
Added the vieos and 3D model pictures of sight.

[Lurker]

I'm not sure what points you are trying to make here Fri13. That the V's gun is more useful than the P's because it can fire off-boresight? That the P is better suited to Afghanistan because "rocks" and less high value targets and armored vehicle columns etc? 

 

You're not making much sense, because in a way these are the same helicopter. They would have to face the same threats and would need to react to the same threats. The P came after the V, and was the most mass produced version of the Mi24. I think that there is probably a reason for why that is, and since the main difference between these two airframes was the chin turret, I'd say that was the reason. 

[Northstar98]

10 hours ago, Fri13 said:

[...]

 

Absolutely!

[S.E.Bulba]

16 часов назад, WinterH сказал:

I think GSh-30K is slightly different than original GSh-30-2 in that it features a selectable fire rate between 300 rpm and 3000ish…

 

KBP Instrument Design Bureau - GSh-30K (kbptula.ru).

 

Скрытый текст

 

 

11 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

12.7 mm guns like NSV is used against air targets up to 1500-2500 meters, and against ground targets up to 2000-2500 meters as effective range (the caliber has longer effective range, but those are the limitations for the average shooter)…

Why not write that the NSV machine gun has an "effective range" of up to 6000m? 

 

The NSV-12.7 Utyos Manual

Скрытый текст

 

Цитата

… The effective range of fire from a machine gun against lightly armored targets is up to 800m, for unsheltered manpower, fire units and air targets is up to 1500m.
<…>
The aiming range is 2000m, the maximal flying distance of the B-32 bullet is 6000m.

 

11 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

… With a 12.7 mm AP round, you are putting holes to most APC and IFV at those ranges, and if not holes, then causing severe spalling that requires anti-spalling protection from them to protect somewhat the crew compartments, engines and gear.

Can you prove it, or is it just your words?

 

Скрытый текст

Original in Russian

11 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

12.7 mm guns like NSV is used against air targets up to 1500-2500 meters, and against ground targets up to 2000-2500 meters as effective range (the caliber has longer effective range, but those are the limitations for the average shooter)…

Почему бы не написа́ть, что пулемёт НСВ имеет «эффективную дальность» до 6000 м? 

 

11 часов назад, Fri13 сказал:

… With a 12.7 mm AP round, you are putting holes to most APC and IFV at those ranges, and if not holes, then causing severe spalling that requires anti-spalling protection from them to protect somewhat the crew compartments, engines and gear.

Вы можете это доказать, или это всего лишь Ваши слова?

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by S.E.Bulba
UPD.

[Northstar98]

9 hours ago, Lurker said:

You're not making much sense, because in a way these are the same helicopter. They would have to face the same threats and would need to react to the same threats. The P came after the V, and was the most mass produced version of the Mi24.

 

AFAIK the Mi-24V was the most produced, not the P.

 

And after the P they went back to a trainable turret, with a smaller calibre (and a gun more designed to engage aircraft than ground targets); then you have the Mi-35M and Mi-35P with exactly the same trainable 23mm turret (GSh-23L) with an improved FCS.

 

The majority of Hinds and Hind variants have trainable turrets.

 

Quote

I think that there is probably a reason for why that is, and since the main difference between these two airframes was the chin turret, I'd say that was the reason. 

 

Yes, the main difference (only difference?) is the trainable turret with a smaller gun. The P was chosen by ED as that's what real operators wanted, and because in SP the P is easier flown from the front; whereas the V is less usable due to the sighting system for the turret, which means the instruments are in less usable places, and the cockpit is a little more cramped.

 

8 hours ago, S.E.Bulba said:

 

KBP Instrument Design Bureau - GSh-30K (kbptula.ru).

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Why not write that the NSV machine gun has an "effective range" of up to 6000m? 

 

Because your source says maximum flying/ballistic range, by then I imagine the 12.7mm will have lost much of its penetration and would be more difficult to aim and be less precise.

 

Quote

Can you prove it, or is it just your words?

 

There I will agree with you, the YakB isn't going to be much more of an anti-infantry weapon or for engaging unarmoured targets. But against armoured targets (which will most likely have some mobile air defence with them) you're probably not going to be using the gun in either the V or P; the V's gun will be pretty useless, and in the P you will have to fly straight towards them to engage them with its gun, which makes it pretty vulnerable, and unlike fixed wing aircraft, the hind is slower and has a reduced climb rate, worsening its survivability which is why I imagine the majority of attacks by the Hind will be done at pretty low altitudes - not much higher than NOE, and mainly with ATGMs and rockets with the gun being more of a last resort - at least I would've thought. 

 

Just try engaging an armoured column with the Ka-50 (even if it's just IFVs) with its gun boresighted.

 

In both cases rockets and ATGMs are going to be the main way you engage anything armoured, so the V and P will be much the same.

Edited February 17, 2021 by Northstar98