Keesje From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 8523 posts, RR: 26 Posted (1 month 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3285 times:
The Brazilian government has used a visit by Russian president Dmitri Medvedev to confirm that it signed a contract with Moscow's Rosoboronexport arms agency in late October for 12 Mil Mi-35M attack helicopters.
Worth around $300 million and also including a sizeable spares package, weapons and training services, the deal represents the Brazilian air force's first purchase of a Russian aircraft.
The air force earlier this year shortlisted AgustaWestland's AW129 and the Mi-35M as candidates for its attack helicopter requirement. The Russian design will be delivered equipped with avionics supplied by Israel’s Elbit Systems.
Another clear signal from the Russians. You fool around in my backyard, I'll be visiting yours..
Pyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 1937 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (1 month 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3197 times:
That was a surprise, never saw that coming. Too bad they are only buying a dozen, I can see attack helicopters being very useful in the type of combat Brazilian forces can see themselves in. Just imagine a Hind flying low over Rocinha, the effect if wouldn't have...
Quoting Keesje (Thread starter): Another clear signal from the Russians. You fool around in my backyard, I'll be visiting yours..
Brazil was never the U.S.'s background and Lula is not Chavez, I doubt the US is very worried about this. When it all comes down to it, it is just Brazil buying the best helicopter for their needs.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
MCIGuy From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1495 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (1 month 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3169 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 1): Brazil was never the U.S.'s background and Lula is not Chavez, I doubt the US is very worried about this. When it all comes down to it, it is just Brazil buying the best helicopter for their needs.
First, I don't think we consider Brazil an enemy or even a potential enemy. Second, we give a damn who Brazil buys helicopters from? Third, saying Brazil is in our "back yard" is like saying Portugal is in Russia's back yard.
LMP737 From United States, joined May 2002, 3650 posts, RR: 14 Reply 4, posted (1 month 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3166 times:
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 1): Brazil was never the U.S.'s background and Lula is not Chavez, I doubt the US is very worried about this. When it all comes down to it, it is just Brazil buying the best helicopter for their needs.
Most people in the US could care less about the sale. Heck, most are not even aware of it. Not something that's front page news.
I doubt the US government is that concerned either. Like you said Lula is not Chavez.
Lumberton From United States, joined Jul 2005, 3547 posts, RR: 13 Reply 5, posted (1 month 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3151 times:
I wouldn't be shocked to see the Mexican government buying a few either. How many bodies & beheadings are being discovered each week in Mexican border towns? Their army may find a use for them if the Russians could provide an attractive deal.
[Edited 2008-12-02 14:07:13]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 5180 posts, RR: 27 Reply 6, posted (1 month 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2995 times:
Even though I was hoping for the AW129s, I can see this as a positive thing. Let's try out Russian equipment with a dozen or so helicopters before we get into spending billions upon billions on fighters or anything else.
Btw, Brazil flies UH-60s, and they are fairly new as well, so this isn't like Chavez going for Russian equipment.
[Edited 2008-12-03 08:41:32]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 5180 posts, RR: 27 Reply 7, posted (1 month 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2966 times:
The Sao Paulo-based newspaper Valor Economico reports that they will be used in the Amazon region, where they would operate in conjunction with Brazil’s Embraer land and ground surveillance jets (R-99A/P-99A), Super Tucanos, S-70 Pave Hawks, and other local assets. If so, the helicopters are very likely to find themselves based in Manaus. Note that the Amazon region borders both Venezuela and Colombia, and is a prime location for trans-national narco-terrorists and drug traffickers.
The Brazilian newspaper “Folha de São Paulo” offers an interesting side note, claiming that the purchase was delayed because the Brazilian Air Force wanted the helicopters to be fitted with Elbit Systems’ avionics, manufactured and/or assembled by Elbit’s Brazilian subsidiary AEL. The Russians argue that this would be uneconomic for such a small batch of aircraft, but the choice would provide important commonality with avionics already present in the FAB’s Super Tucano light attack and surveillance turboprops, F-5BR fighters, and A-1M AMX light attack jets. News reports regarding the contract signing have not revealed whether this issue was addressed in the contract.
That's easy. The Mi-24/35 is a piece of sh*t. And that is said without any flag waving, or nationalistic pride, instead I speak on professional experience. It is simply a giant turkey.
The first question: why the hell do they even need an attack helicopter? It's a dramatic shift away from the current fleet of Cougars, Panthers and a few Black Hawks. So I don't know why they bought them. But then again, this wouldn't be the first time a country made a poor decision!
And I don't know what I would have bought, because I don't know what they're trying to accomplish. If they were looking for a good attack helicopter, they screwed up. If they were looking for an infantry support helicopter, they screwed up. If they were looking for a duel attack and troop carrying helicopter, they screwed up. I don't know what they want, so I don't know another helicopter to suggest.
But I have spoken, time and time again, on this forum about my assessment of the Mi-24/35. People think it's this big bad ass helicopter. Hell, even some American military personnel still retain the fear ingrained in our collective psyche, from the Cold War era. So the truth of the matter remains: all myths and legends aside, the Mi-24/35 blows.
The Mi-24 is far from a piece of shit. It might not be the best attack helicopter out there but it isn't crap by any means. It has been sold all over the world and achieved much combat success. You're obsessed with your beloved Blackhawk too much to appreciate anything else. I bet you don't like anything else Russian made either. On the other hand, I'm sure there's a Mi-24 or Mi-17 pilot out there that hates the UH-60 blindly, so I guess it all balances out in the end.
And by the way, I think both the UH-60 and the Mi-24 are great helicopters...
MCIGuy From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1495 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (1 month 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2642 times:
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 14): On the other hand, I'm sure there's a Mi-24 or Mi-17 pilot out there that hates the UH-60 blindly, so I guess it all balances out in the end.
I wouldn't say "blindly", there are several Mi-24s at Ft. Bliss that are maintained in flying condition for adversary training, so I'd say UH60FtRucker speaks from some position of experience.
UH60FtRucker From Tajikistan, joined Mar 2005, 2667 posts, RR: 71 Reply 15, posted (1 month 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2635 times:
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 14): You're obsessed with your beloved Blackhawk too much to appreciate anything else. I bet you don't like anything else Russian made either.
I knew someone was going to get sore in their crotch over my statement. Such a shame.
Look, I flat out said, my assessment had nothing to do with flag waving, nationalistic pride, or anything of the sort.
And please, don't give me that crap about me being unable to see the value of helicopters beyond my own airframe. Go back and look at my assessment of other helicopters, such as the NH-90, US101, CH-53, CH-47, etc. It's just pure crap to suggest that I cannot be trusted to make a fair assessment, when one is due.
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 14): I bet you don't like anything else Russian made either.
Again, total crap. You're simply throwing unfounded insinuations out there, because you got offended over what I said.
Look at my list of top ten helicopters, and I treat Soviet/Russian equipment just as fairly as Western equipment. You're flat out wrong, to suggest that I "have it out" for Russian helicopters.
Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 14): And by the way, I think both the UH-60 and the Mi-24 are great helicopters...
Well congratulations.
But the difference is, I am basing my opinion off of professional experience... not on how I saw a picture in a magazine and thought a certain helicopter looked "cool" or "badass."
My assessment of the Mi-24/35 is a matter of public record on these forms. I evaluated numerous operating characteristics, and other hard facts. And let me repeat this for you, since you apparently skipped over it the first time: it had nothing to do with what flag I wear on my shoulder.
Assuming that PPVRA is right about the basing and likely role of the Mil 35, it could be a useful addition to the Brazilian Air Force.
IMO, it could combine the ability to strike terrorists/drug smugglers with the ability to land police/soldiers to tackle drug plantations on the ground.
This is not really a role for an all out Attack Helicopter, but perhaps they feel that a MG equipped UH1/UH60 would not be sufficient.
It is also possible that cost/availability could be an issue.
I am not disputing UH60FtRucker's knowledge of the subject, but "it is a piece of sh*t" is not terifically helpful as an assessment.
If you feel professionally that it is the wrong type, perhaps you could give some details.
UH60FtRucker From Tajikistan, joined Mar 2005, 2667 posts, RR: 71 Reply 17, posted (1 month 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2577 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 15): I wouldn't say "blindly", there are several Mi-24s at Ft. Bliss that are maintained in flying condition for adversary training, so I'd say UH60FtRucker speaks from some position of experience.
I have seen the Iraqi Hinds we captured, but not only that, I have worked along side the Hind in combat; both Polish and Afghani. And I have had the opportunity to speak to Indian Mi-35 pilots.
This is my entire point. This is more than me reading a book, and declaring myself an expert. I'm not an expert, but I do have upfront knowledge and experience. I would not be so bold, to make such strong statements, if I didn't believe I could back them up.
Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 17): I am not disputing UH60FtRucker's knowledge of the subject, but "it is a piece of sh*t" is not terifically helpful as an assessment.
If you feel professionally that it is the wrong type, perhaps you could give some details.
Well, as I've said, I have detailed my assessment in numerous threads on this forum, which all are archived, and public record. Since they are quite detailed, if you permit me, I will simply repost much of what I have already said. Why reinvent the wheel, right?
But before I launch into my opinion of the Mi-24, let me just say that it is exactly that: an opinion. There are undoubtedly individuals who will think that the Mi-24/35 Hind is god's gift to aviation. And I can respect that person, so long as they are able to make an intelligent argument, based on facts. But I have no respect for unfounded arguments, or arguments based on nothing more than, "well it looks cool." With that being said....
The Hind a beast of a helicopter. I can remember the first time I walked up to one, the closer I got, the more intimidating it looked. If looks mattered on the battlefield, then this helicopter would score serious points. In fact, perhaps looks do matter? The psychological fear factor, arguably still remains. The Hind simply looks mean and tough.
However, with that being said, I think it's highly overrated. Remember back in the good ole days of the Cold War... whether it was with Soviet tanks, fighter aircraft, etc. Western analysis had a tendency to over-estimate the abilities of Eastern-bloc equipment. The arrival of the Hind was a major event to Western observers. The problem is, as they had done with other pieces of equipment, the West grossly over-estimated the Hind's abilities.
She's very fast on a straight dash. I was flying along side two Polish Hinds, and we were doing 140kts at 200ft. We were bogged down by all kinds of additional combat equipment, so we were pulling the guts out of our helicopter, just to stay with them. And then they pulled in a bunch of collective, pitched the nose down, and away they went. It was a sight to see. But after they finished showing off how fast they could go, and we settled into our flight route, we started reaching ACPs that required significant course changes... and that's where the Hind's low agility was apparent. Fast on the straight, sluggish on the turns.
The Hind really doesn't have the agility I would expect from an "attack" helicopter. Admittedly, the AH-64 loses a lot when they're loaded down with a full stack of weapons, and a full bag of gas... but the loss of maneuverability is nowhere near as significant, as the Hind.
The power lag was significant, and the xmsn energy loss would be totally unacceptable in western helicopters. The time between collective inputs and engine response is very slow. When you are flying the Hind, you cannot burn into an LZ quickly, and expect to decrease airspeed and altitude descent, by pulling in a lot of sudden torque. You will easy get into settling with power. Additionally, as I mentioned, agility is lacking. When you are entering extreme maneuvers, power management is critical. Transient droop can be significant, and you can easy dissipate rotor energy, and ruin your day.
The Mi-24's IR signature is totally unacceptable and offers very little protection against IR homing threats. Granted, all helicopters suffer from an acute vulnerability to heat-seeking mapads, but the Mi-24 is just horrendous. When I look at Afghani Mi-35s under my FLIR system, it's like looking at the sun. Now I also understand there are recent modifications to correct this deficiency, by adding the Russian version of a HRSS. Indeed, many western helicopters were modified throughout the years with similar systems: the UH-60, AH-64, OH-58. The problem with the Mi-35's system: drag. Plot out their performance chart, comparing one with, and one without, the system. There's a significant difference. And it's because the original engine exhaust was designed so poorly, that any type of fix would incur significant drag penalties.
Now, the Hind has some heavy armor for a helicopter... but at what point do you go overboard? One of my biggest complaints is the cockpit visibility, especially the front seat. Having sat in an Apache, and then a Hind, I was shocked. The armored tub the pilots sit in extends too high and interferes with seeing anything beyond the 4 and 8 o'clock positions. The window structural beams were fat, and created sizable blind spots... and when IR missiles are such a threat to this helicopter, the last thing I'd want is restricted visibility. And the pilots may be quite safe, with their armored tub... but what about critical systems? The main xmsn is not nearly as protected. In fact, I would argue it is quite vulnerable. There are no engines, or additional components flanking the xmsn, to offer as barriers. The engines sit right next to each other, not protected by significant armor, and they're vulnerable to small arms. The Hind is armored, yes, but it's still very vulnerable to the same threats as any other helicopter. So much of that extra weight, needlessly drags performance down.
The cockpit layout was inefficient. Cluttered with hundreds of small buttons, pressure gauges, dials, etc... And again... as a helicopter pilot, you need to know where EVERYTHING around you is, and it needs to be easily accessed. Recent updates include more modern cockpit displays and instruments. But here's my thing: the map is a nice feature, but why not include large digital system displays? What is more important? A moving map, or a large display of your engine and drive train performance? We're talking about a helicopter always flying heavy, and always in need of constant power management. So instead of that crappy little dial gauge... why not give the pilots a large digital display of their torque or TGT? When I'm burning into an LZ, torque is far more important than some shitty ass map.
The flight control system is antiquated. When you're handling such a beast, the last thing you want to do is waste energy manipulating the controls. Modern helicopters, and especially large helicopters, have SAS, FPS, Trim, and Boost to all aid the pilot in reducing the workload. When you're heavy with troops, or lining up on a gun run, you can't be focusing on the controls - that needs to come naturally. And we talked to the pilots, and they all said they eventually got use to the physical workload, but my argument is this: they shouldn't have too, in the first place! As a helicopter pilot, your job can be extremely taxing on the body. So it's best to deplete your energy with your brain, and not your arms and legs.
It makes a crappy troop transport. (I know, that's not it's primary mission). You can't do efficient fast rope or rappelling insertions. You cannot do SPIE or FRIE extractions. You can't use a bambi bucket or hoist. You cannot perform paradrops. And the troop doors are cumbersome and do not allow for quick exit, when such is needed in a hot LZ. I understand the argument: the Hind is not a utility helicopter in the Western sense. Instead it is designed to bring an infantry squad to the battle, and then provide CAS. Got it. But the way it goes about that - with those doors and those stub wings and the cramped cabin... jeez, talk about poor execution.
As a former crew chief - I especially did not like the Mi-24. When you were coming into a tight LZ/PZ you cannot stick your head out and monitor the tail. It is very easy for the pilots to stick that tail rotor into a tree or building. If you're going to design the helicopter to do troop transport and CASEVAC... AND you're not going to give the pilots decent flight characteristics... then you're creating a situation where you're needlessly increasing the risk factor.
Also the avionics and weapons packages were subpar. I was very disappointed to say the least.
....Ok, so please excuse that long winded response. There are other issues I could continue to talk about, but I am trying to keep this somewhat readable! Anyway, I hope you understand that I am not calling the Hind "shitty" just because I don't like Russian equipment, or that I only love my Black Hawk. It just is not true.
I've seen it in action. I've seen it up close. I've talked with the guys who fly it. And I have the fortune to be able to compare it against other helicopters. And it is my opinion that it does not come close to its vaunted reputation.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 8523 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 1937 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 3817 posts, 
From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1495 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 5180 posts, 
From Tajikistan, joined Mar 2005, 2667 posts, 
From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 1684 posts, 
Go back and look at my assessment of other helicopters, such as the NH-90, US101, CH-53, CH-47, etc. It's just pure crap to suggest that I cannot be trusted to make a fair assessment, when one is due.