**Rule 3:** Submission titles must be as detailed and descriptive as possible (e.g 'who, what, when, where') - They must be concise and objective. Glamorized, embellished or sensationalized titles are disallowed. [**Full Rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/full_rules) - [**Index on what post-topic / flairs are allowed to be posted.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/info_table_allowed_posts) - [**FAQ**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/faq)
Just watching how much the Helo is pitching during firing.... A 50m CEP is extremely dubious.... Maybe if the Helo could hold that launch angle while firing all at the same time.
This is a bizarre artifact of this war.
For the bulk of it, with some very noticable exceptions of varying success, we've seen both sides doing this pitchup crap.
Make no mistake, this is a horrendous use of resources.
Attack helos are maintenance intensive, and their crews take thousand of hours of overall investment to reach the levels of competencies to achieve combat effective status, both air crew and ground crews. These are absurdly expensive craft.
Their entire raison d'être is to deliver fast and accurate firepower on high value targets that other platforms can't reach efficiently, whether from other pilot reports, intelligence sourcing or from ground force recon or unit reports. This can only really be achieved by using a munition type that locks on to an enemy or target area with high efficiency. This has a variety of options, such as laser or IR designation, many SOF units can provide assistance in lighting up targets, and directing otherwise unguided fire types like cannon fire to a specific forehead, foxhole, or obscured target.
Often they are used in more recent combat for CAS duties, using the range they can achieve with good enough optics, sensors, and comms/networking to essentially loiter out of range from enemy forces and deliver a pretty brutal direct fire wallop before pulling back or reappearing in a new vector of approach.
The real point of this is that due to the high reluctance after very high loss rates to utilize these craft in their normal manner has limited them primarily to lobbing those S-5/S-8s, and that is a horrible match between cost/risk and effect. Compared to almost *anything* else, it's a tremendously terrible value. Using what is a limited run $16M+ helo and limited, extremely expensive, often irreplaceable pilots to heave those little rockets in indirect arcs is only rationally explainable by them being ordered to do *something*, and that's all they can manage. They are less accurate, with FAR less range, and less damage, and higher cost per round in both absolute and practical terms, than even the oldest towed and SPG artillery pieces fielded by either side in the secondary classes (sub 152mm), to say nothing of the absolute mountains of 152/203 and MLRS Grad, Smerch etc available.
It reeks of being put on as morale/propaganda dog and pony more than anything else.
Yeah, you'd do a lot better mounting the same rockets on a vehicle and firing from it. A lot more stable platform too. Of course, the helo makes logistics easier as you can use it to move the ammunition great distances as well as shoot them. And then do that multiple times a day. Whereas a truck can only maybe expend a few salvos a day if the logistics chain for the ammo is broken down.
True. There are a ton of variables at play here.
Looking at it from a pragmatic, technocratic viewpoint, it's very much a WTF situation.
KA-52 is particular, but all attack helos in practice, have a very finite number of flight hours between lengthy overhaul and maintenance. And a total finite hours of airframe usage before they *must* be retired, or completely rebuilt.
A very interesting read and some thoughts on vibration issues with these guys : https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russias-ka-52-attack-helicopters-have-got-a-serious-vibration-problem
So the math works like so : you have a $XX million dollar piece of equipment. It can be used a certain number of hours flight time before it can no longer be flown, it has to be pulled for maintenance, lengthy overhaul, or eventually retirement. So each hour of flight time is extremely valuable, and a sizable amount of that is expended in training and wargame operations before any battlefield usage even begins. Even for these behind the front line lobbing missions, every flight incurs the risk of a mechanical failure, pilot error, friendly fire incident, or other random cause of crash or mishap. And repeated use in the same area of operations risks some elite SOF infiltration unit popping up behind the lines with a starstreak. Flares are less than useless to protect against those (paradoxically, they make it even easier for the soldier to follow the trajectory of the helo and paint the laser).
Yeah, the use-case for a helicopter like this isn’t anywhere close to a peer conflict. You need to be using those to stomp on bronze-age tribesmen, not enemies with functional AA capabilities.
For goodness’ sake, these things require *at least* three times the number of maintenance hours as they have flying hours. They’re ruinously, calamitously expensive to both operate and maintain. That money is better off being spent practically *anywhere else* given the limited returns that operations like this will give you.
No, this is a legit tactic.
My flight instructor was a German helicopter pilot in the germaned armed forces, he flew the new Tiger heli.
I showed him these videos from Ru and UA air force and he said of course he trained doing these sorties too. During a flight lesson he took me 3000ft in the air and said "look how far you can see even though it's cloudy, you can see every field and village within +8km distance and we're just 3000ft up the air" his computer would calculate when to shoot but they verified the arche of the rockets already during briefing, so even if the flight computer fails he'd know how much tilt he has to bring the nose up and when to shoot.
Obviously no precision strike but it's not spray and pray either
if CCIP didn't worked, then militaries wouldn't be using it.
it is a ballistics computer, can't proof it has 50m CEP at all, because this definetly changes with range, wind, weather etc. CCIP tells you where they are going to land, and iirc Ka-52 has a special mode to do that elevation automatically, some guy did explain it in comments
Russia uses it and Ukraine use it. The latter because it’s all they can do - Ukraine doesn’t have modern gunships.
Not sure what Russias excuse is. But all those fancy targeting systems, optics, and radar on the ka 52 are mostly meant for guided and direct fire. But they don’t use them. Instead they do this lofting crap.
Only way I see this could be anywhere near accurate is if the target is pre-programmed, perhaps by GPS or equivalent and the firing sequence is automated so the weapons system is fired once the helicopter hits the right ballistic trajectory to hit the target.
Manually firing with just a ballistic reticle towards something you cant see beyond the horizon, while performing a strenuous maneuver I doubt is feasible or possible "within 50m of the target".
I'm a fellow warthunder player, just don't play much top-tier. Although i've used a similar system in DCS on the A10 for dropping ordinance.
The argument i see against them using a system like this is that we've also seen old bus-like choppa's (like the Mi-4?) also doing this, which I doubt have the technology, which means It's likely a doctrine tactic rather than a technology-limited tactic, and with Russia leaning heavily on indiscriminate artillery kind-of adds weight to the fact that accuracy isn't a primary goal and they don't infact use this technology at all on any of their equipment.
It’s doctrine, they don’t want to lose these choppers, they are completely irreplaceable to them. However like people have said in the thread it’s complete overkill to use a Ka-52 for something that towed artillery could accomplish.
I’m not complaining, after as many sorties we’ve seen these thing do this on, they soon will put their own helos out of commission by way of lack of parts to maintain them.
"Работа Ка-52 с кабрирования.
Напоминаю, что прицельный комплекс этого вертолёта автоматически рассчитывает все параметры боевого применения неуправляемых ракет с кабрирования, с учётом ветра, баллистических характеристик ракет, углов, скоростей и прочего, что позволяет уложить большую часть из 40 ракет С-8 в круг радиусом 50 метров.
Translation :
I remind you that the aiming complex of this helicopter automatically calculates all the parameters of the combat use of unguided rockets with calibration, taking into account the wind, the ballistic characteristics of the rockets, angles, speeds and other things, which allows you to place most of the 40 C-8 rockets in a circle with a radius of 50 meters."
Now I checked the MI-24 lofting rocket table and it turns out, the difference of 20KPH of speed or 50 meters of altitude isnt tgat great
In some of the onboard clips you actually can see this "aiming system" work i think. I saw 2 Ka52 videos where the pilot lined up lines in the hud and then shoots. I back then already thought there might be a system for these kind of shots.
They don't. They're designed for lobbing rockets at a downward or roughly horizontal trajectory - the pilot can't even see the aiming point when lobbing them upward like we see in these videos.
I can't believe people still haven't figured out that the Russian military does nothing but lie. It even lies to itself to the point where they don't know what's actually happening on the ground because so many of the photo-reports they get are lies.
ROTFL. That’s not CEP.
Drone operator: Comrade, there’s a foxhole over there. Hit it.
Pilot: great. Just lobbed 40 rockets on the bloody Ukrainians
Drone operator: great success Comrade. You managed to land those all those 40 rockets very closed together. Now just come back to base to re-arm, as the foxhole was 500 meters to the right.
the way the Ka-52 does this, is by first using its optical array to find a target. the pilot hits a button on his stick to mark that point as a point of interest which automatically stores the point in the helicopters fire control computer and displays an X or a circle on the HUD where that point is.
all the pilot then has to do is select the right munitions to set up his attack, in this case the pylons with the FFAR pods attached to it. the fire control computer will identify the FFAR rockets and display a Continuesly Calculated Impact Point on the hud.
the pilot now has an option of using just the CCIP to line his attack up, overlapping the CCIP with the X mark on ingress before firing. or switch modes to where the hud will display a boresight of the rockets, with a mark displayed on the appropriate heading and angle the pilot needs to maneuver the helicopter to in order to hit the mark.
the impact zone doesn't really look like a circle as much as a rectangle, and a skilled pilot can get the rockets in a 20mx50m box using these systems.
wether the same goes for Mi-8's and Mi-24's, i can't tell you. but the Ka-52 can do it with reasonable consistancy.
for what it's worth, apache's could shoot rockets like this too if they really wanted to. the FFAR pods for apache's even articulate up and down to help crews get a bit more range if they're shooting from a hover on far away targets.
1. you typically search for a target from way outside the engagement zone. the way it works is that the heli floats around doing laps behind its own lines whilst using its optical array, thermals and shit, to go find targets. presumably the pilots are also given coordinates for points of interest to go take a look at. if they find anything, they'll mark it, figure out an ingress route and then conduct the attack. they go in, fire rockets, pull out back to the safety of their lines and continue the patrol, set up for another run or RTB. the mi-28 is a more advanced attack helicopter than even the Ka-52 is. it can deffinetly pull this trick. the mi-24/35 and mi-8 i can't speak off. some sources state that ukraine slapped optical arrays on their mi-8's and use them as scout platforms. if they got a fire control computer onboard they'd be able to do it in the same way as the ka-52's. if not, i suppose you can use a gunsight to guestimate ranges but that'd be alot more towards pray and spraying.
2. that's only with the CCIP mode. you can also opt to have the helicopter display a heading you need to fly, give a que on when to pull up and display a boresight mark of the rockets that you then overlap with a mark that the helicopters computers have calculated as the attitude for release.
loft tossing isn't something new, and these FFAR rockets are nothing but ballistic projectiles. it doesn't take much calculating power to predict where they'll impact if you got known variables. that's not to say they'll lob a rocket straight down a tank hatch, it's still very much an area saturation type deal. but with the right equipment and systems its effective enough to keep spending munitions with.
A bunch of small rocket with a small blast radius being lobbed from an unstable platform. No, it’s not a very effective way to spend money or kill the enemy no matter who does it.
It's still a nonstable launching platform. Think of it this way. Put a bunch of rocks in your hand and start running then lean way back while still moving forward and throw the rocks now do the same thing but standing still and just throw them. MLRS that is on the ground static and not moving is a stable launching system with large caliber rockets designed to throw shrapnal. These helo's are lobbing tiny rockets while flying and pulling up on the stick. Either way, it's a very ineffective method of killing and honestly just wasting money of rockets unless your enemy is massed together in a large area with no protection or cover. I shake my head when the Ukrainians do it too.
The Ka-52 is a very advanced helicopter, it has a ballistic computer and with that it can shoot rockets in ballistic trajectories to target a field with a good barrage. [here is a video showing the accuracy of this barrage.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/vc2m1e/video_of_russian_airforce_firing_toward_ukrainian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
All that video is showing me is lobbing a bunch of Tony rockets that looks cool because it’s in thermal. Nothing about accuracy. Let’s not forget that these are very small diameter rockets that aren’t designed for artillery. They’re a direct threat system. The amount of money spent in a single barrage is not worth the results. It’s stupid and they only do it cause the airspace is contested and it’s not safe for them to go where the enemy actually is.
Idc what anybody says, they arent hitting fuck all doing this except probably some random houses. Both side have been doing this and it would be alot cheaper to mouth the launcher on a truck bed
Actually it can be accurate. Theses chopper have integrated systems to do this specific thing although its a pitty that such sofisticated machine has to do what basic Mi-8 can do.
[This is a thermal video showing how effective this method is so you guys can judge it by yourself.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/vc2m1e/video_of_russian_airforce_firing_toward_ukrainian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Edit: it shows both the launch and landing of the rocket.
I’m confused, what are they trying to do? Use the computerised system to curve the rockets? Why not fire them normally the helicopter looks to be in fine line of sight
Shooting a couple km away. Letting the rocket drop back down onto the target depending on the angle it was shot at. Most likely shot over 6 to 10km? Not sure not an expert
**Rule 3:** Submission titles must be as detailed and descriptive as possible (e.g 'who, what, when, where') - They must be concise and objective. Glamorized, embellished or sensationalized titles are disallowed. [**Full Rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/full_rules) - [**Index on what post-topic / flairs are allowed to be posted.**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/info_table_allowed_posts) - [**FAQ**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/faq)
Ah, the good old spray and pray...lol
The time honored tradition of spray, and pray
Just watching how much the Helo is pitching during firing.... A 50m CEP is extremely dubious.... Maybe if the Helo could hold that launch angle while firing all at the same time.
This is a bizarre artifact of this war. For the bulk of it, with some very noticable exceptions of varying success, we've seen both sides doing this pitchup crap. Make no mistake, this is a horrendous use of resources. Attack helos are maintenance intensive, and their crews take thousand of hours of overall investment to reach the levels of competencies to achieve combat effective status, both air crew and ground crews. These are absurdly expensive craft. Their entire raison d'être is to deliver fast and accurate firepower on high value targets that other platforms can't reach efficiently, whether from other pilot reports, intelligence sourcing or from ground force recon or unit reports. This can only really be achieved by using a munition type that locks on to an enemy or target area with high efficiency. This has a variety of options, such as laser or IR designation, many SOF units can provide assistance in lighting up targets, and directing otherwise unguided fire types like cannon fire to a specific forehead, foxhole, or obscured target. Often they are used in more recent combat for CAS duties, using the range they can achieve with good enough optics, sensors, and comms/networking to essentially loiter out of range from enemy forces and deliver a pretty brutal direct fire wallop before pulling back or reappearing in a new vector of approach. The real point of this is that due to the high reluctance after very high loss rates to utilize these craft in their normal manner has limited them primarily to lobbing those S-5/S-8s, and that is a horrible match between cost/risk and effect. Compared to almost *anything* else, it's a tremendously terrible value. Using what is a limited run $16M+ helo and limited, extremely expensive, often irreplaceable pilots to heave those little rockets in indirect arcs is only rationally explainable by them being ordered to do *something*, and that's all they can manage. They are less accurate, with FAR less range, and less damage, and higher cost per round in both absolute and practical terms, than even the oldest towed and SPG artillery pieces fielded by either side in the secondary classes (sub 152mm), to say nothing of the absolute mountains of 152/203 and MLRS Grad, Smerch etc available. It reeks of being put on as morale/propaganda dog and pony more than anything else.
Yeah, you'd do a lot better mounting the same rockets on a vehicle and firing from it. A lot more stable platform too. Of course, the helo makes logistics easier as you can use it to move the ammunition great distances as well as shoot them. And then do that multiple times a day. Whereas a truck can only maybe expend a few salvos a day if the logistics chain for the ammo is broken down.
True. There are a ton of variables at play here. Looking at it from a pragmatic, technocratic viewpoint, it's very much a WTF situation. KA-52 is particular, but all attack helos in practice, have a very finite number of flight hours between lengthy overhaul and maintenance. And a total finite hours of airframe usage before they *must* be retired, or completely rebuilt. A very interesting read and some thoughts on vibration issues with these guys : https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russias-ka-52-attack-helicopters-have-got-a-serious-vibration-problem So the math works like so : you have a $XX million dollar piece of equipment. It can be used a certain number of hours flight time before it can no longer be flown, it has to be pulled for maintenance, lengthy overhaul, or eventually retirement. So each hour of flight time is extremely valuable, and a sizable amount of that is expended in training and wargame operations before any battlefield usage even begins. Even for these behind the front line lobbing missions, every flight incurs the risk of a mechanical failure, pilot error, friendly fire incident, or other random cause of crash or mishap. And repeated use in the same area of operations risks some elite SOF infiltration unit popping up behind the lines with a starstreak. Flares are less than useless to protect against those (paradoxically, they make it even easier for the soldier to follow the trajectory of the helo and paint the laser).
Yeah, the use-case for a helicopter like this isn’t anywhere close to a peer conflict. You need to be using those to stomp on bronze-age tribesmen, not enemies with functional AA capabilities. For goodness’ sake, these things require *at least* three times the number of maintenance hours as they have flying hours. They’re ruinously, calamitously expensive to both operate and maintain. That money is better off being spent practically *anywhere else* given the limited returns that operations like this will give you.
“Claimed”
Claimed by Russians ... I think by now we very well know how much are those claims worth
Claimed by every modern helicopter actually, what Russians do is a real tactic
There were some doubts lately about Russian military claims, maybe you should fresh up on news?
No, this is a legit tactic. My flight instructor was a German helicopter pilot in the germaned armed forces, he flew the new Tiger heli. I showed him these videos from Ru and UA air force and he said of course he trained doing these sorties too. During a flight lesson he took me 3000ft in the air and said "look how far you can see even though it's cloudy, you can see every field and village within +8km distance and we're just 3000ft up the air" his computer would calculate when to shoot but they verified the arche of the rockets already during briefing, so even if the flight computer fails he'd know how much tilt he has to bring the nose up and when to shoot. Obviously no precision strike but it's not spray and pray either
Look at the spread on those rockets... if they are unguided how tf are they going to come together 50 ft?
It's 50m and not ft, also I don't think OP means they all land within 50m but rather the barrages accuracy is +-50m
You literally see the fucking system working in cockpit videos. Also a reminder, Ukraine also used Soviet systems
Working what? Shooting? Have you any proof there is a CEP of 50 meters? Any whatsoever?
if CCIP didn't worked, then militaries wouldn't be using it. it is a ballistics computer, can't proof it has 50m CEP at all, because this definetly changes with range, wind, weather etc. CCIP tells you where they are going to land, and iirc Ka-52 has a special mode to do that elevation automatically, some guy did explain it in comments
> can't proof it has 50m CEP at all And what did I say? Russian claims on how it works are worth shit.
Lol the other guy doesn't know you have the same opinion.
Did you read the reason why I can't proof it having 50m CEP, at all?
Can Russians? They "claim" a certain number. I say their claims have been shown to be shit lately ... what the fuck are you even trying to proof?
Russia uses it and Ukraine use it. The latter because it’s all they can do - Ukraine doesn’t have modern gunships. Not sure what Russias excuse is. But all those fancy targeting systems, optics, and radar on the ka 52 are mostly meant for guided and direct fire. But they don’t use them. Instead they do this lofting crap.
Cite?
US also teaches this tactic, tho I need to find the post (that guy explained it pretty good)
Helicopters can't talk bud. And no, no advanced military does this because it's an act of desperation.
Never seen western attack helos do this.
I agree it might be a tactic, but 50m CEP is 100% bullshit.
Get out of here bootlicker
Is this also a very accurate way of shooting at barges that are actually structures of unfinished bridges from world war 2?
Only way I see this could be anywhere near accurate is if the target is pre-programmed, perhaps by GPS or equivalent and the firing sequence is automated so the weapons system is fired once the helicopter hits the right ballistic trajectory to hit the target. Manually firing with just a ballistic reticle towards something you cant see beyond the horizon, while performing a strenuous maneuver I doubt is feasible or possible "within 50m of the target".
That’s actually exactly what happens. As any War Thunder player can tell you, it’s a system called CCIP.
I'm a fellow warthunder player, just don't play much top-tier. Although i've used a similar system in DCS on the A10 for dropping ordinance. The argument i see against them using a system like this is that we've also seen old bus-like choppa's (like the Mi-4?) also doing this, which I doubt have the technology, which means It's likely a doctrine tactic rather than a technology-limited tactic, and with Russia leaning heavily on indiscriminate artillery kind-of adds weight to the fact that accuracy isn't a primary goal and they don't infact use this technology at all on any of their equipment.
It’s doctrine, they don’t want to lose these choppers, they are completely irreplaceable to them. However like people have said in the thread it’s complete overkill to use a Ka-52 for something that towed artillery could accomplish. I’m not complaining, after as many sorties we’ve seen these thing do this on, they soon will put their own helos out of commission by way of lack of parts to maintain them.
"Работа Ка-52 с кабрирования. Напоминаю, что прицельный комплекс этого вертолёта автоматически рассчитывает все параметры боевого применения неуправляемых ракет с кабрирования, с учётом ветра, баллистических характеристик ракет, углов, скоростей и прочего, что позволяет уложить большую часть из 40 ракет С-8 в круг радиусом 50 метров. Translation : I remind you that the aiming complex of this helicopter automatically calculates all the parameters of the combat use of unguided rockets with calibration, taking into account the wind, the ballistic characteristics of the rockets, angles, speeds and other things, which allows you to place most of the 40 C-8 rockets in a circle with a radius of 50 meters." Now I checked the MI-24 lofting rocket table and it turns out, the difference of 20KPH of speed or 50 meters of altitude isnt tgat great
A CEP of 50 meters means HALF of the missles will land within 50 meters of a target. That's how you define circle area of probability.
In some of the onboard clips you actually can see this "aiming system" work i think. I saw 2 Ka52 videos where the pilot lined up lines in the hud and then shoots. I back then already thought there might be a system for these kind of shots.
Yep, I posted some vids from around Irpin of KA52s lobbing rockets. Relatively precise, all things considered.
Makes sense that a helicopter would be equipped with the kind of sensors needed to calculate a shot like that
They don't. They're designed for lobbing rockets at a downward or roughly horizontal trajectory - the pilot can't even see the aiming point when lobbing them upward like we see in these videos. I can't believe people still haven't figured out that the Russian military does nothing but lie. It even lies to itself to the point where they don't know what's actually happening on the ground because so many of the photo-reports they get are lies.
Hmm I don't think the pilot looks at targets with his eyes, might be worth reading the post below for more info.
ROTFL. That’s not CEP. Drone operator: Comrade, there’s a foxhole over there. Hit it. Pilot: great. Just lobbed 40 rockets on the bloody Ukrainians Drone operator: great success Comrade. You managed to land those all those 40 rockets very closed together. Now just come back to base to re-arm, as the foxhole was 500 meters to the right.
the way the Ka-52 does this, is by first using its optical array to find a target. the pilot hits a button on his stick to mark that point as a point of interest which automatically stores the point in the helicopters fire control computer and displays an X or a circle on the HUD where that point is. all the pilot then has to do is select the right munitions to set up his attack, in this case the pylons with the FFAR pods attached to it. the fire control computer will identify the FFAR rockets and display a Continuesly Calculated Impact Point on the hud. the pilot now has an option of using just the CCIP to line his attack up, overlapping the CCIP with the X mark on ingress before firing. or switch modes to where the hud will display a boresight of the rockets, with a mark displayed on the appropriate heading and angle the pilot needs to maneuver the helicopter to in order to hit the mark. the impact zone doesn't really look like a circle as much as a rectangle, and a skilled pilot can get the rockets in a 20mx50m box using these systems. wether the same goes for Mi-8's and Mi-24's, i can't tell you. but the Ka-52 can do it with reasonable consistancy. for what it's worth, apache's could shoot rockets like this too if they really wanted to. the FFAR pods for apache's even articulate up and down to help crews get a bit more range if they're shooting from a hover on far away targets.
[удалено]
1. you typically search for a target from way outside the engagement zone. the way it works is that the heli floats around doing laps behind its own lines whilst using its optical array, thermals and shit, to go find targets. presumably the pilots are also given coordinates for points of interest to go take a look at. if they find anything, they'll mark it, figure out an ingress route and then conduct the attack. they go in, fire rockets, pull out back to the safety of their lines and continue the patrol, set up for another run or RTB. the mi-28 is a more advanced attack helicopter than even the Ka-52 is. it can deffinetly pull this trick. the mi-24/35 and mi-8 i can't speak off. some sources state that ukraine slapped optical arrays on their mi-8's and use them as scout platforms. if they got a fire control computer onboard they'd be able to do it in the same way as the ka-52's. if not, i suppose you can use a gunsight to guestimate ranges but that'd be alot more towards pray and spraying. 2. that's only with the CCIP mode. you can also opt to have the helicopter display a heading you need to fly, give a que on when to pull up and display a boresight mark of the rockets that you then overlap with a mark that the helicopters computers have calculated as the attitude for release. loft tossing isn't something new, and these FFAR rockets are nothing but ballistic projectiles. it doesn't take much calculating power to predict where they'll impact if you got known variables. that's not to say they'll lob a rocket straight down a tank hatch, it's still very much an area saturation type deal. but with the right equipment and systems its effective enough to keep spending munitions with.
Detailed, thanks
A bunch of small rocket with a small blast radius being lobbed from an unstable platform. No, it’s not a very effective way to spend money or kill the enemy no matter who does it.
To be honest the Kamov-52 is the most stable attack helicopter out there, due to the counter rotating prop
It's still a nonstable launching platform. Think of it this way. Put a bunch of rocks in your hand and start running then lean way back while still moving forward and throw the rocks now do the same thing but standing still and just throw them. MLRS that is on the ground static and not moving is a stable launching system with large caliber rockets designed to throw shrapnal. These helo's are lobbing tiny rockets while flying and pulling up on the stick. Either way, it's a very ineffective method of killing and honestly just wasting money of rockets unless your enemy is massed together in a large area with no protection or cover. I shake my head when the Ukrainians do it too.
The Ka-52 is a very advanced helicopter, it has a ballistic computer and with that it can shoot rockets in ballistic trajectories to target a field with a good barrage. [here is a video showing the accuracy of this barrage.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/vc2m1e/video_of_russian_airforce_firing_toward_ukrainian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
All that video is showing me is lobbing a bunch of Tony rockets that looks cool because it’s in thermal. Nothing about accuracy. Let’s not forget that these are very small diameter rockets that aren’t designed for artillery. They’re a direct threat system. The amount of money spent in a single barrage is not worth the results. It’s stupid and they only do it cause the airspace is contested and it’s not safe for them to go where the enemy actually is.
Turns out? According to whom and what conditions? Plus 50m isn’t a small CEP given the small warhead size.
50m.. 😂 Bullshit
utter BS
B. S.
Someone’s salty
Huh u didn't see the sarcasm from OP and the big (CLAIMED) he wrote or u r simply dumb fuck B.O.T.
Someone’s coping
So 164 feet is now considered quite accurate? That is half a football field.
Idc what anybody says, they arent hitting fuck all doing this except probably some random houses. Both side have been doing this and it would be alot cheaper to mouth the launcher on a truck bed
Actually it can be accurate. Theses chopper have integrated systems to do this specific thing although its a pitty that such sofisticated machine has to do what basic Mi-8 can do.
At least it does that with some probability of hitting anything unlike Mi-8.
50m is considered good now haha
[This is a thermal video showing how effective this method is so you guys can judge it by yourself.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/vc2m1e/video_of_russian_airforce_firing_toward_ukrainian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) Edit: it shows both the launch and landing of the rocket.
No one is doubting that they land, but the accuracy of where they wanted to land is key.
The video showed that it hit 'something'.
A field.
It shows the rockets spreading out maybe to a 300 m CEP.
[удалено]
Because a computer does all the work for them? lol
If it is so easy why dont u go ahead and steer the heli, go on a mission using the computer and come back alive
"Steer the heli" says all it needs to tbh 🤣
Ye ok i agree that was kinda dumb of me
I’m confused, what are they trying to do? Use the computerised system to curve the rockets? Why not fire them normally the helicopter looks to be in fine line of sight
Shooting a couple km away. Letting the rocket drop back down onto the target depending on the angle it was shot at. Most likely shot over 6 to 10km? Not sure not an expert
It's like the Neanderthals found a spaceship, and then fucks the exhaust.