Monday, January 12, 2015
Ka 52 Alligator Attack Helicopter. Will AESA radar give it an advantage?
I hope you watched this vid till the part where they started talking about its avionics. The closest analogy to this is the long dead Sea Apache concept which was rejected.
Question. How much of an advantage will an AESA radar in this attack helicopter give it in a fight against the AH-1Z and AH-64E? Before you answer consider that these helicopters were originally designed with an anti-helicopter mission in mind.
Has anyone considered that we've fallen behind in the attack helicopter race?
Sidenote: Notice the simple yet elegant solution for forward firing that is displayed here? Why can't a similar solution be used for the MV-22?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
A proper AESA, if it has the right software, can produce patch-maps of good quality (and geo-location references) to use to pass off to precision artillery or other sources as well as on-board weapons. If it has another mode such as GMTI (ground moving target indicator) this would also be useful. So yes it would have a wide variety of uses if the Russians pursue such a thing and could be valuable on the battlefield. With that, it is not mast-mounted so more of the airframe would be exposed if certain threats are around.
ReplyDeleteI can see the utility of this chopper in supporting amphib landings.
DeleteWhy do they need a helicoptor to fire Anti Ship missiles ? Isnt that task on a routine basis handed over to aircraft ?
ReplyDeleteAs Russia did't have any true carrier born plane for a long time they put many task of them on to helos. Just like the Brits with Sea King and Lynx's. And using anti ship missiles don't mean those large ship killers but smaller missiles like Kh-35.
DeleteMany navies use helicopters as anti-ship missle platforms most are light to medium weight meant to deal with smaller craft up to Corvette size all tough even if the missile doesn't sink the ship it hit it will most likely take it out of the fight .
DeleteMedium weigh missiles like Exoset are quite heavy for most helicopters. In any case helicopters provide over the horizon radar and targeting data for ship launched missiles.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?161795-Light-antiship-missiles-for-helicopters
AESA in helicopters is meant for antishiping duty ,its the missles that give Ruskis the edge basic Vikhr has been designed with anti-helicopter capability in mind and is faster and longer ranged than hellfire .When equiped with AAMs they are more or less equal ruskis cary Vypel R73 which is similar in preformance to Aim-9 altough new versions are very long leged and once you go beyond visual range AESA will provide considerable edge.
ReplyDeleteoff topic, sorry
ReplyDeletehttp://www.digi24.ro/Stiri/Digi24/Actualitate/Stiri/Romania+vrea+sa+cumpere+inca+o+escadrila+de+avioane+F-16
use google translate
Romania will get another batch of 12 F-16
I still wondering why countries like eastern europe, Belgium, Slovakia , Austria, Slovenia, Etc.. etc.. that for size reason can't negotiate in a competitive way to buy all toghether (since they are in EU already) to get bigger batchs in defense deals at a more affordable price.
DeleteEU and NATO is just a temporary thing...in my opinion.
DeleteI wouldn't accept a decision like that for my country.
We're surrounded by countries living in the 19th century and ready to shake hands with russia anytime to get what they want.
Doesn't change the fact that buying 60 F-16 in place of 12 would be way cheaper for all, how they are used it is another problem
DeleteIt is an interesting addition but not a game changer in any way. It give the helo better ground mapping, a slightly better radar range but as helos operate on rather low level it will not use it at full potential. On sea it will be better as it of course lack of ground obstacles.
ReplyDeleteAnd that the K-52/52 were design to fight with enemy helo is a myth, urban legend and a big over interpretation. Some not that wise "specialist" when saw the single seat Ka-50 imagine that it is a fighter-helicopter. And that was bullshit. He is the same "fighter" like AH-1Z or AH-64 with ability to carry sidewinders.
Both helos are attack ones, with Ka-52 is more a "improvisation" to put additional crew member that can reinforce pilot in to longer operations. It lost the famous heavy armored bath that protect Ka-50 pilot (pity as dude siting in Ka-50 is probably the best protected pilot in every helicopter created... ever) and some other things, but now it work better in longer missions. also two pairs of eyes are always better then one.
Who would actually consider the Ka-52 purely because of its anti-helo capabilities? Anyone who claims the Ka-52 is going to dominate the battlefield purely because of this is lying, are you telling me Ka-52 pilots are trained in ACM? What about DACT? And shall we just forget that fighter aircraft exist? As advanced a a helicopter is it will always be vulnerable to higher flying and inherently much faster fixed wing aircraft.
ReplyDeleteThe Russians know their helicopter isn't as capable as the Ah-46E or AH-1Z so they have to differentiate it some how.
Since when as anti-helicopter capability been the measure on which attack helicopters are judged? This gave me a good chuckle.
The Ka-52 doesn't even have a movable turret!
When sea apache was considered cannon was deleted all together . Naval helicopters have a different set of priortiys than typical attack helicopter.
Deletehttp://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/mcdonnell_sea_apache.php
Their helicopters are as capable as anything in the west in some areas they are markedly more capable than their western eqivalents .Mi28 and K50 protect their pilots way above AH-64, AH-1Z (a .223 can easly kill pilots in both Apache and Cobra as side canopy offers no protection whatsoever) they also offer more firepower and higher hot and high preformance due to having about 1000HP more and in case of K50-52 additional benefit of having a coaxial rotor. Ka50 or Ka52 could carry more armament in high altitude operations like Afghanistan.
Naval helos with AShM are force multipliers.
DeleteConsider an upgraded OHP with two Seahawks armed with Penguin missiles. The Lynx and Seaskua is an even better example when you have to take out corvettes and missile boats.
Btw: check this design boys, it's some kind of fresh approach. http://www.yankodesign.com/2008/09/17/1-h1-fugu-helicopter/
ReplyDelete@Question. How much of an advantage will an AESA radar in this attack helicopter give it in a fight against the AH-1Z and AH-64E?@
ReplyDeleteSolomon, Ka-52 is told (officially, at least) to be command helicopter to organize warfare of another helicopters and drones. Not a helos killer (and it is logical according to system analysis of it technical features) It looks like the question is not fully correct.
I’m a complete dummy in aviation (specially in Western) but it looks like Ka-52 and Mi-28 helos for Russians are non-regular weapon, for special purpose (IMHO, of course). Mi-8 keeps role of main “work-horse” – its mod. Ми-8АМТШ (have no idea about analog-name in English term) can carry AA “Igla” missiles. I guess for western helos most danger is in Russian land AA-teams or vehicles – which we have a lot. Have no idea about AV’s of “new view” but Soviet military requirements meant two AA systems in each BTR-80.
"Has anyone considered that we've fallen behind in the attack helicopter race "
ReplyDeleteNo ! Because quantity and QUALITY , does matter.
How many Mi-28 and Ka-52 combined has Russia in service ?
Compare that with the Cobras and Apaches the US has.
Its like comparing the Su-35 vs SH, sure the SU-35 is better , but how many are there operational ;)
Totally agree. And it is directly connected with quality of pilots (as KSingh said above) – because of greatly larger number of helos and more active usage of them – quality of western pilots should be better the Russian one.”Transition from quantity to quality” – on of main principles of Marksizm-Leninizm. Bggggg
Deletequality of westeren pilots might be doubtfoul as we can now read many reports on fewer and fewer hours they are able to fly due to cost cutting many programs being axed to pay for F35 . Even countries where F35 is not the main contender are cutting corners ,germany only has about dozen full operational Typhoons of total that is about 130 same goes for UK . We have seen when it comes to operational deployment you have most nato countries deploy under 10 planes so both quantity and quality are not to be taken for granted.
Deleterussian rusticity will count when all west rotors will be grounded for maintenance while russian remaining ones will still flying...
DeleteIn terms of mission the KA52 is being aimed for a number of mission roles. If comparing to US Machines it's 1 KA52 = 1 AH64D/E, 1 AV8B+++, 1 OH58D Kiowa warrior and 1 AH1Z.
ReplyDeleteWhy? It supports Russian VDV as there Prime cas making it like the AH64D/E of the 101st Airborne, It's meant to be operated off the deck of a LHA as the Russians retired there Yak 38 and aborted the Yak141 So it's there Harrier, it's there dedicated Scout chopper hence Oh58D and the only attacker for there Marines if they ever sort there LHD's out.
Numbers wise it's small maybe 70 max. Standing order is 140 units
There Prime modern attacker is the Mi28 series which is maybe 100 hunts it compares to the AH64 although with a higher dash speed and better hover in ground effect, but the Russians plan maybe 140 units combined it's got nothing on the Us army's AH64D which is something over 600 and that's not even counting the AH64E's on order or the Marines AH1's and AH1Z's. Technologically the Kamov is impressive until JMR roles in the Kamov is the fastest Attack chopper and it could be made even faster. But the prime Chopper of the Russian Federation remains the HIND and will remain it for at least another decade.
BTW: Photo Ka-52K (Navy mod) model. Controversial approach for the propeller’s folding - in the most weak place, I guess.
ReplyDeletehttp://sdelanounas.ru/i/a/w/1/f_aW1nODM1LmltYWdlc2hhY2sudXMvaW1nODM1LzUzMzcva2E1MjEuanBn.jpeg
You realize that the "Longbow" is an AESA system??
ReplyDeleteare you sure? i thought it was some millimeter wave mumbo jumbo deal.
DeleteLongbow is no AESA not even PESA just old fashioned and neot quite a
Deletestate of the art mechanicaly actuated milimetre wave K band radar with range of barely 8 kilometers
http://www.uasvision.com/2012/01/06/longbow-gets-181m-us-army-contract-for-high-bandwidth-data-link-for-apache-block-iii/
Don't believe that the range is only 8 km, maybe the early versions.
DeleteLatest Hellfire modifications have a range beyond 9km, so i guess they must have updated the radar , atleast with software. Maybe even the apertue.
First, it's moronically silly to combine BMC2/ISR taskings with combat ones. For value, vulnerability and maintenance, you simply don't do it (largely because the sensors -vastly- outrange the weapons systems) and IF you don't do it, a whole other option opens up in choosing a utility vs. attack configuration fuselage for your platform.
ReplyDeleteThe array in the video (Kinzhal or Kopyo?) is not an AESA but simply a dual horn cassegrain antenna. This provides good lobe stability and sidelobe control but not the rapid beam agility necessary to do wide swath GMTI with micro-SAR patch maps needed for targeting. It is simply not possible to get an array of sufficient size in a nose-on targ
If you look at the SOTAS, Orchidee and Mi-24K (Hind G2) as key examples you have a 10-15ft long antenna array and/or a 20" optical bore telescope which, in the 1980s, could only be fitted as large folding 'bar' arrays with electronic azimuth sweep across a fixed or mechanically articulated elevation axis (the Russian optical artillery finder was fitted into the cabin on a semi-fixed, vibration dampened, pallet)
While this can and did provide excellent GMTI mapping out to about 35km, it had limited squint angle ability to do DBSM mapping with GMTI overlays as a means of precision geolocation sufficient to cue Motiv/ECS-1 'Universal' (brilliant submunition) bus out points in real time. Today, AESA TRM tech is small enough that, if you pulled the weapons wings to clear the lateral LOS lines, it could be fitted inside a composite LO fairing (faceted chine + NOTAR = good side on signature reduction).
This in turn would let you use waveform and scan variances to build micro-centroids around which to stack radiometric mass deflections as shapes. Which is critical if you are doing boresight handoffs to platforms with weapons systems like the Spiral or Swinger and KAB series LGB/EOGB where rapid geolocation is essential to cue the targeting optics to the guide the missile at LOS ranges.
To achieve the rapid beam pointing and sub array function however AESA uses a very high duty cycle which brings with it a big thermal management problem. This requires efficient thermo-exchange volume liquid loop (PAO Polyalphaolefin) and that means you have to dedicate a significant internal volume to supporting AESA as well as the radar data processor environmental control system needs. Again, having a cabin as opposed to a compartment is a great way to get the required exchanger volumes.
The Ka-50/52 have another issue however in that their rotor systems are in fact based on the older Ka-27 Helix which is to say fully articulated coaxials intended for storage ease on a naval surface combatant rather than high G maneuvering. While helicopter transmission issues are not a specialty of mine, basically there are points in the envelope where the disks go soft and the blades can be made to mesh. To the extent that FES testing in digital CFD 'wind tunnels' showed that the Ka-50 could not perform even as well as the Hind had, in environments like those of AfG where you were constantly pulling up and pushing over in very thin air around the mountain canyons.
As such, it would be a mistake to assume that the Ka-52 is akin to the XH-59 ABC or AH-56 rigid compound.
ReplyDeleteXH-59 ABC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIFkCxQWAfU
And that is an issue where you need the ability to rapidly zoom climb, take your radar or optical scans and dive back to cover at significantly greater heights than those associated with an AAH bobup for ATGW (LOS/squint issues again).
The XH-59 solution was elegant in the form of J60 turbojet packages on the side of the airframe but, in addition to the obstructive blockage of any realistic AESA array, there would be huge issues with fuel burn.
Alternative propulsors like the VTDP ducted fan and the X-2 propfan are equally unworkable in any platform which needs to be seriously stealthy and here the very nature of the Ka-52s fat fuselage might provide it some options. In that, one of the propulsion alternatives tested on the McDonnell/Bell LHX concepts during the early, 'unlimited', stage; was that of a large, enclosed, fan INSIDE the fuselage, mounted directly to the aft frame wall behind the engine compartment. While still imposing a minor power loss condition, this large fan fed the NOTAR for torque control but it _also_ was used with a condi variable throat nozzle on the back of the tail as an acceleration booster.
Intended more to enable pushoffs from NOE based conditions without having to tilt the fuselage plane, it proved to be quite zippy in forward flight acceleration as well.
CONCLUSION:
If you want to put the power back in attack, you need to micromunition systems like the Hellfire/APKWS so that they can be drop-launched from altitude off an airframe that has significant performance margin (200-300 knots) and EW package support to be survibable above 3,000ft (out of trashfire, much less noisy). If you are willing to accept some drag trades (the current gun is worthless, nose mounted sensors with 10nm range are overkill) these dropfire weapons can still be externally podded on much smaller, lighter, airframes with an approach similar to the Vebal Syndrom or 'Vertical Ballistic Weapon' (modern SG-113), using laser guided Griffin or smaller rounds in stacked clusters.
This is the nature of helo warfare in a COIN age.
OTOH, if you want to do targeting for other assets, you need to forget about being up their with the hunters and instead use lagged offsets to enable tangential lookin on target arrays in a fashion that outright DENIES threat air the chance to be a nuissance. If you have 30-40km capable sensors it simply doesn't make sense to enter the Breyr Rabbit's Bryar Patch.
The neat thing here is that if you continue to update Hellfire through JCM/JAGM equivalents (more powerful motor, bettern IMU, multispectral sensors) you can then also standoff your Anti Armor force rather than play stalking games with it.
The radar/optical platform does the long dwell look-in, finds the targets and hands them off to the attack helicopters which simply fire their rounds into the seeker basket, with LOAL updates coming from the 'scout' which is in fact a RISTA asset (the original plan for Pave Mover and Tacit Blue was to do exactly this with ATACMS as a BAI F2 and breakout OMG killer).
Hence you have both the COIN and the High Intensity warfare missions covered with a platform mix that is cheaper, lighter, farther reaching, and _not so exposed_.
This is not the Ka-52. WHich, to me, looks more like your grand dad's Caddy.
Not to mentio the Brimstone missile, the russian air force is not even planing to add such a weapon to its arsenal in the near future.
Delete