Back Mil Mi-24
1969

Mi-24D

The Mi-24, which has the NATO reporting name 'Hind', was developed during the mid-1960s to provide a multi-role military helicopter-of formidable capability. It appears to be evolved from, the Mil Mi-8/Mi-14 family, but a combination of reduced size and increased power gives this aircraft improved manoeuvrability and performance. While of the same basic configuration as its predecessors, and with a dynamic system based on that of the Mi-8, the Mi-24 has a more slender fuselage suitable for the gunship role, but with sufficient capability to accommodate a crew of four and a maximum of eight armed troops. The tricycle landing gear has retractable main units and a semi-retractable nose unit. Short-span cantilever shoulder wings with considerable anhedral are a distinguishing feature, and each provides mountings for a variety of weapons. Entering service in 1973-74 and deployed initially in East Germany, the Mi-24 has developed during military exercises into variants for armed assault, for anti-armour use, and for use as a helicopter escort, well able to oppose enemy helicopters in air-to-air combat. About 1,500 'Hinds', in production since the early 1970s, are currently in service with CIS forces. The type saw much action in Afghanistan, used as the proving ground for many operational improvements to the 'Hind'. The type was also used in the Iraq/Iran war of the early 1980s. The Mi-24 has been widely exported and a number are in service on most continents, with examples delivered to, or operating in, Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Bulgaria, Chad, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Hungary, India, Iraq, Libya, Mozambique, Nicaragua, North Korea, Peru, Poland, Sri Lanka, Syria, Vietnam and Yemen. Production continues at a low rate and by 1991 more than 2,300 had been built. FAI records set by the A-1O experimental variant of the 'Hind' gave some indication of the type's capabilities, as when on 2 September 1978 over a 15/25km course it achieved a speed of 368.4km/h.

VARIANTS

Mi-24 'Hind': early production version, reported in 1972 but not seen until 1973; introduced into Soviet service in 1973/74

Mi-24 'Hind-A': second production model, with tail rotor moved from the starboard to port side of the tailfin; used as armed assault helicopter, carrying eight troops and three crew members

Mi-24'Hind-B': initial production model with tail rotor on starboard side, wings without anhedral, no wingtip stations and only four underwing hardpoints; test use only

Mi-24 'Hind-C': dedicated training helicopter similar to 'Hind-A', but without nose-gun installation and wingtip stations

Mi-24D 'Hind-D': initial dedicated gunship variant; first reported around 1977, Mi-24D is basically a late production 'Hind-A' with revised forward fuselage containing separate cockpits for pilot and gunner, the latter controlling a single 12.7mm turret-mounted machine-gun and pylon-mounted AT-2 'Swatter' wire-guided ATMs; some versions had 23mm cannon in turret

Mi-24W 'Hind-E': improved version of 'Hind-D' gunship first reported in early 1980s; equipped with 12 AT-6 'Spiral' radio-guided ATMs mounted on stub wings together with AA-8 'Aphid' air-to-air missiles for self-defence

Mi-24P 'Hind-F': Mi-24P (P for pushka, cannon) version of gunship, appeared in 1982 fitted with 30-mm GSh-30-2 cannon in starboard uderfuselage nose pack which includes 750 rounds of ammunition

Mi-24R 'Hind-G 1': fitted with wingtip 'grapplers' or 'clutching hands' apparently used in connection with NBC technology, the Mi-24R was first reported in 1986 after the Chernobyl disaster

Mi-24K 'Hind-G 2': similar to Mi-24R but with large camera installed in cabin with lens on starboard side

Mi-25: export version of 'Hind-D'

Mi-35: export version of 'Hind-E'

Mi-35P: export version of 'Hind-F'

D.Donald "The Complete Encyclopedia of World Aircraft", 1997

Mil Mi-24

NATO reporting name: Hind

TYPE: Twin-turbine gunship helicopter, with transport capability.

PROGRAMME: Development began second half of 1960s, as first fire support helicopter in former USSR, with accommodation for eight armed troops; 12 prototypes built; first flight 19 September 1969; first reported in West 1972; photographs became available 1974, when two units of approximately squadron strength based in the former East Germany; reconfiguration of front fuselage changed primary role to gunship; new version first observed 1977; used operationally in Chad, Nicaragua, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), Angola, Afghanistan, Chechnya and Iran/Iraq war, when at least one Iranian F-4 Phantom II destroyed by AT-6 (NATO 'Spiral') anti-tank missile from Mi-24; low-rate production continued for export until 1994. Late models still available from Rostvertol.

VERSIONS

Mi-24A ('Hind-A, B and C'): Early versions with pilot and co-pilot/gunner in tandem under large-area continuous glazing; large flight deck; about 250 built.

Mi-24BMT: Modified 1973 for minesweeping.

Mi-24D: (Type 24-6; 'Hind-D'): Interim gunship version; design began 1971; entered production at Arsenyev and Rostov plants 1973; about 350 built 1973-77. Basically as late model 'Hind-A' with TV3-117 engines and port-side tail rotor, but entire front fuselage redesigned above floor forward of engine air intakes; heavily armoured separate cockpits for weapon operator and pilot in tandem; flight mechanic optional, in main cabin; transport capability retained; USUP-24 gun system, with rangefinding; undernose JakB-12.7 four-barrel 12.7mm machine gun in turret, slaved to adjacent KPS-53A electro-optical sighting pod, for air-to-air and air-to-surface use; Falanga P (Phalanx) anti-tank missile system; nosewheel leg extended to increase ground clearance of sensor pods; nosewheels semi-exposed when retracted.

Detailed description refers to Mi-24D, except where indicated.

Mi-24DU: Dual-control training version has no gun turret. (See also Mi-25.)

Mi-24K (korrektirovchik: corrector) ('Hind-G2'): As Mi-24R, but with large camera in cabin, f8/1,300mm lens on starboard side; six per helicopter regiment for reconnaissance and artillery fire correction; gun and B-8V-20 rocket pods retained. No target designator pod under nose; upward hingeing cover for IR sensor. About 150 built 1983-89.

Mi-24P (Type 24-3; 'Hind-F'): Development started 1974; about 620 built 1981-90; first shown in service in 1982 photographs; P of designation refers to pushka = cannon; as Mi-24V, but nose gun turret replaced by GSh-30-2 twin-barrel 30mm gun (with 750 rounds) in semi-cylindrical pack on starboard side of nose; bottom of nose smoothly faired above and forward of sensors.

Mi-24PS: Special version for Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs; prototype exhibited at Moscow Air Show '95. Equipment includes undernose FLIR, searchlight on port side, loadspeaker pack on starboard side; hoist, climbdown ropes, stations for radio operator.

Mi-24RKR ('Hind-G1'): Identified at Chernobyl after April 1986 accident at nuclear power station; no undernose electro-optical or RF missile guidance pods; instead of wingtip weapon mounts, has 'clutching hand' mechanisms on lengthened pylons, to obtain six soil samples per sortie for NBC (nuclear/biological/chemical) warfare analysis; air samples sucked in via pipe on port side, aft of doors; datalink to pass findings to ground; lozenge-shaped housing with exhaust pipe of air filtering system under port side of cabin; bubble window on starboard side of main cabin; small rearward-firing marker flare pack on tailskid; crew of four wear NBC suits; six helicopters are deployed per regiment throughout RFAS ground forces. Designation (also appearing as Mi-24RCh) indicates Razvedchik: reconnaissance/chemical. About 150 built 1983-89.

Mi-24RR: Derivative of Mi-24R for radiation reconnaissance.

Mi-24U: unarmed dual-control trainers (first flight 1972).

Mi-24V (Types 20-1 and 24-2; 'Hind-E'): As Mi-24D, but modified wingtip launchers and four underwing pylons; weapons include up to eight 9M114 (NATO AT-6 'Spiral') radio-guided tube-launched anti-tank missiles in pairs in Shturm V (Attack) missile system; ASP-17V enlarged undernose automatic missile guidance pod on port side, with fixed searchlight to rear; R-60 (K-60; NATO AA-8 'Aphid') air-to-air missiles optional on underwing pylons; pilot's HUD replaces former reflector gunsight. Deliveries to former Soviet Air Force began 29 March 1976; about 1,000 built at Arsenyev and Rostov 1976-86. (See also Mi-35.)

Mi-24VM: Proposed upgrade first shown in model form at Moscow Air Show '95.

Mi-24VP: Variant of Mi-24V with twin-barrel 23mm GSh-23 gun, with 450 rounds, in place of four-barrel 12.7mm gun in nose; photographed 1992; small production series built at Rostov.

Mi-24 Ecological Survey Version: Modification by Polyot industrial research organisation, to assess oil pollution on water and seasonal changes of water level. First seen 1991 with large flat sensor 'tongue' projecting from nose in place of gun turret; large rectangular sensor pod on outer starboard underwing pylon; unidentified modification replaces rear cabin window on starboard side.

Mi-25: Export Mi-24D, including those for Afghanistan, Cuba and India.

Mi-35: Export Mi-24V. Unarmed, dual-control trainer version also produced for India.

Mi-35M: Upgraded Mi-24/35 designed to meet the latest air mobility requirements of the Russian Army.

Mi-35M1: Upgrade of latest production standard of Mi-24VP.

Mi-35P: Export Mi-24P.

ATE 'Super Hind': Upgrade configuration proposed by South Africa's Advanced Technologies and Engineering. Derived from Denel/Kentron PZL W-3WB Huzar upgrade. Extended nose in front of cockpit with undernose Kentron IR/EO sight and 20mm chain gun, cheek fairing to port for ammunition feed, designator, improved displays, new night vision systems and provision for Denel/Kentron Ingwe or Mokopa ATMs. Prototype ZU-BOI rolled out at Grand Central Airport, Midrand, by 15 February 1999.

Tamam Mi-24 HMOSP: Israeli upgrade configuration. US$20 million contract placed for upgrade of 25 (possibly Indian) Mi-24s based on existing Helicopter Multimission Optronic Stabilised Payload System, with TV, FLIR and automatic target tracker, integrated with helmet sight, digital moving map, integrated DASS and a new mission planning system. Cockpits can be reorganised to put pilot in front, weapon operator in rear.

CUSTOMERS: More than 2,500 produced at Arsenyev and Rostov.

DESIGN FEATURES: Typical helicopter gunship configuration, with stepped tandem seating for two crew and heavy weapon load on stub-wings; fuselage unusually wide for role, due to requirement for carrying eight troops; dynamic components and power plant originally as Mi-8, but soon upgraded to Mi-17-type power plant and port-side tail rotor. Main rotor blade section NACA 230, thickness/chord ratio 11 to 12%; tail rotor blade section NACA 230M; stub-wing anhedral 12°, incidence 19°; wings contribute approximately 25% of lift in cruising flight; fin offset 3°.

STRUCTURE: Five-blade constant-chord main rotor; forged and machined steel head, with conventional flapping, drag and pitch change articulation; each blade has aluminium alloy spar, skin and honeycomb core; spars nitrogen pressurised for crack detection; hydraulic lead/lag dampers; balance tab on each blade; aluminium alloy three-blade tail rotor; main rotor brake; all-metal semi-monocoque fuselage pod and boom; 5mm hardened steel integral side armour on front fuselage; all-metal shoulder wings with no movable surfaces; swept fin/tail rotor mounting; variable incidence horizontal stabiliser.

LANDING GEAR: Tricycle type; rearward-retracting steerable twin-wheel nose unit; single-wheel main units with oleo-pneumatic shock-absorbers and low-pressure tyres, size 720 x 320mm on mainwheels, 480 x 200mm on nosewheels. Main units retract rearward and inward into aft end of fuselage pod, turning through 90° to stow almost vertically, discwise to longitudinal axis of fuselage, under prominent blister fairings. Tubular tripod skid assembly, with shock-strut, protects tail rotor in tail-down take-off or landing.

POWER PLANT: Two Klimov TV3-117MT turboshafts, each with maximum rating of 1,434kW, side by side above cabin, with output shafts driving rearward to main rotor shaft through combining gearbox. There is 5mm hardened steel armour protection for engines. Main fuel tank in fuselage to rear of cabin, with bag tanks behind main gearbox. Internal fuel capacity 1,500kg; can be supplemented by 1,000kg auxiliary tank in cabin (Mi-24D); provision for carrying (instead of auxiliary tank) up to four external tanks, each 500 litres, on two inner pylons under each wing. Optional deflectors and separators for foreign objects and dust in air intakes; and infra-red suppression exhaust mixer boxes over exhaust ducts.

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot (at rear) and weapon operator on armoured seats in tandem cockpits under individual canopies; dual flying controls, with retractable pedals in front cockpit; if required, flight mechanic on jump-seat in cabin, with narrow passage between flight deck and cabin. Front canopy hinged to open sideways to starboard; footstep under starboard side of fuselage for access to pilot's rearward-hinged door; rear seat raised to give pilot unobstructed forward view; anti-fragment shield between cockpits. Main cabin can accommodate eight persons on folding seats, or four stretchers; at front of cabin on each side is a door, divided horizontally into two sections, hinged to open upward and downward respectively, with integral step on lower portion. Optically flat bulletproof glass windscreen, with wiper, for each crew member.

SYSTEMS: Cockpits and cabin heated and ventilated. Dual electrical system, with three generators, giving 36, 115 and 208V AC at 400Hz, and 27V DC. Retractable landing/taxying light under nose; navigation lights; anti-collision light above tailboom. Stability augmentation system. Electrothermal de-icing system for main and tail rotor blades. AI-9V APU mounted transversely inside fairing aft of rotor head.

AVIONICS: Comms: R-860/863 and Karat M24 com; SPU-8 intercom.
Flight: VUAP-1 autopilot, ARK-15M radio compass, ARK-U2 radio compass, RV-5 radio altimeter.
Instrumentation: Blind-flying instrumentation, and ADF navigation system with DISS-1SD Doppler-fed mechanical map display. Air data sensor boom forward of top starboard corner of bulletproof windscreen at extreme nose.
Mission: Undernose pods for electro-optics (starboard) and Raduga-F semi-automatic missile guidance (port). Many small antennae and blisters, including SRO-2 Khrom (NATO 'Odd Rods') IFF transponder.
Self-defence: Sirena-3M radar warning antennae on each side of front fuselage and on trailing-edge of tail rotor pylon. Infra-red jammer (L-166V-11E Jspanka microwave pulse lamp: 'Hot Brick') in 'flower pot' container above forward end of tailboom. ASO-2V flare dispensers under tailboom forward of tailskid assembly initially; later triple racks (total of 192 flares) on sides of centre-fuselage.

EQUIPMENT: Gun camera on port wingtip. Colour-coded identification flare system.

ARMAMENT: One remotely controlled YakB-12.7 four-barrel Gatling-type 12.7mm machine gun, with 1,470 rounds, in VSPU-24 undernose turret with field of fire 60° to each side, 20° up, 60° down; gun slaved to KPS-53AV undernose sighting system with reflector sight in front cockpit; four 9M17P Skorpion (NATO AT-2 'Swatter') anti-tank missiles on 2P32M twin rails under endplate pylons at wingtips; four underwing pylons for UB-32 rocket pods (each 32 S-5 type 57mm rockets), B-8V-20 pods each containing 20 80mm S-8 rockets, 130 mm S-13 and 250mm S-24 rockets, UPK-23-250 pods each containing a GSh-23L twin-barrel 23mm gun, GUV pods each containing either one four-barrel 12.7mm YakB-12.7 machine gun with 750 rounds and two four-barrel 7.62mm 9-A-622 machine guns with total 1,100 rounds or an AGS-17 Plamia 30mm grenade launcher, up to 1,500kg of conventional bombs, mine dispensers, night flares or other stores. R-60 (AA-8 'Aphid'), R-73 (AA-11 'Archer') and Igla air-to-air missiles fitted experimentally. Helicopter can be landed to install reload weapons carried in cabin. PKV reflector gunsight for pilot. Provisions for firing AKMS guns from cabin windows.

Jane's Helicopter Markets and Systems

Mil Mi-24

Technical data for Mi-24

Crew: 2, engine: 2 x Klimov TV3-117 turboshaft, rated at 1620kW, main rotor diameter: 18.8m, height: 4.17m, take-off weight: 11500kg, empty weight: 8200kg, max speed: 330km/h, cruising speed: 217-270km/h, rate of climb: 12.5m/s, service ceiling: 5000m, hovering ceiling, OGE: 1500m, range: 500km, payload: 2500kg

Comments 
John Totty, e-mail, 19.07.2016

Interesting comments on this site and some great and passionate discussions! I flew AH-64s in the US Army back in the 80s and 90s and have flown the Mi-24 since 2002. We now provide adversary training to DoD in the Mi-24 and I fly it regularly. Both aircraft are great at what they were designed to do. If anyone is interested in receiving training in the Mi-24 in the United States, please contact me. Another thing...both the AH-64 and the Mi-24 have good air conditioners...thank God for that!

Joe, e-mail, 22.04.2016

Please be advised , currently there are two Mi24's available for purchase.

Aircraft are ready for delivery and inspection.

A EUC / End User Certificate is required for purchasing of aircraft
and inspection.

No TireKickers.. Serious buyers only.

jtbd556 at gmail dot com

kyaw, e-mail, 19.04.2016

I want to see this helicopter`s electrical diagram

kyaw, e-mail, 19.04.2016

I want to see this helicopter`s electrical diagram

kyaw, e-mail, 19.04.2016

This helicopter is good performance and i like it

carlos, e-mail, 28.07.2015

Anyone who thinks the AH-64 has problems and is a "nightmare in the field to work on" is a fool until you have had hands on with either airframe You come across as a ARMCHAIR WARRIOR and need to keep your uninformed views to your self,, I work for Boeing on the AH-64

Kamal Johari, e-mail, 24.05.2015

I am looking to purchase 6 Hinds. Please contact me. Thank you.

TORBJÖRN KAMPE, e-mail, 12.04.2015

Thanks mil and ticeko for a great warrior who is even today a nightmare for fenden to meet. A nightmare in Afganestan and Kurdistan and elsewhere it has drawn fram.till and the United States have anyone to practice with.
It's such a machine to create fear.

THANKS MIL MIL-24D

Joe, e-mail, 30.10.2014

Currently have Qnty 6 , Mi24's Available for Sale
All will be AirWorthy in 90 Days Time .

EUC no exceptions to inspect aircraft.

Asking price per aircraft is $9.3 Million USD

We own the Aircraft, No idiot broker involved.

You will have to add on to cover yourself.

joe, e-mail, 02.10.2014

Have Mi24's for Sale

---
MI-24-D-B, 1983 GV, kapremont 1991, 1340 hrs

MI-24-D-B, 1983 GV, kapremont 1988, 1110 hrs

MI-24-D-B, 1984 GV, kapremont 1993, 1416 hrs

MI-24-D-B, 1984 GV, kapremont 1995, 1200 hrs

MI-24-D-B, 1984 GV, 1995 kapremont, 1150 hrs

-- price approx $2.5 million USD per Helicopter , prices Qnty Subjected to change at anytime , have other airframes available required overhauls

cheslav, e-mail, 20.04.2014

Can supply up to ten units MI 24 (P and V) after complete overhaul and modernization. Crews rental and ground equipment, etc.

robert tunlin, e-mail, 20.07.2013

this gunship discover the new fighting technique.many diffrence trend
with ah64 gunship role i think.hinds are apt with compact commando
operation squad.this gunship is leader of special task force operation
(eg:sas,uk).this idea must be used in us military ; must be considefed.

robert tunlin, e-mail, 20.07.2013

this gunship discover the new fighting technique.many diffrence trend
with ah64 gunship role i think.hinds are apt with compact commando
operation squad.this gunship is leader of special task force operation
(eg:sas,uk).this idea must be used in us military ; must be considefed.

k span machine, e-mail, 20.04.2013

ddd

Bell, e-mail, 22.01.2013

Hi All

I am based in london and want to get MI (Russian) chopper training, can anyone tell me how I can do this? Does anyone know a good place (reasonable) in EU or other countries that I can do this?

marc, e-mail, 10.12.2012

You can't fairly compare an Mi-24 to an AH-64... they have different roles.... The apache is a dedicated ground attack platform....The apache is a specialist.. The Hind is a generalist... The apache would fail if moving a squad was the task.... but the hind would fail if attacking several heavy armor targets was the task... but one thing is certain.... the logistics necessary to keep an Apache airborne is huge compared to the Hind.... this is why only the richest forces use Ah-64.... the unit cost on the AH-64 D is about $38 Million USD... the Unit cost on the Mi-24 is about $5 million USD.... new... you can prob get an old airframe for about 1-2 million ..... So for the cost of one Apache airframe you could buy several Hinds, and set up the program with training and maint tools and parts.....

Benedict Nike, e-mail, 15.08.2012

i wish i can just join this crew its fantastic

Marco, e-mail, 26.07.2012

You can't just look at the airframe to compare these two. The Apache is a battlefield logistics nightmare. Especially in Middleast environments. I can't even imagine how many maintenance manhours are needed per flight hour for the Ah-64. Soviet Aircraft have always had the edge here. Gas arm and go... Gas arm and go... Rarely you will ever get into a chopper on chopper duel... the ancillary battlefield elements always come into play as do the fighting doctrine of the rival forces. Add the fact that these two aircraft fill completely different niches... It would be more appropriate to compare a Havoc to an Apache... THere is really no NATO equivalent to the Hind... maybe the blackhawk can fill some of the ground support roles using the DAP penetrator package... but still those blackhawks require a jhell of alot more maintainance hours than the Hind... The Hind is an amazing airframe... It fills its niche perfectly and is one of the greatest contributions the Soviet designers have come up with.

francis mazhandu, e-mail, 05.06.2012

What is the defference between CII Y 8 AA3 and AA4?

Siddiq, e-mail, 01.06.2012

My Dear Friends,

I am looking to Purchase Qty : 8 MI-24 used HC. If you know any direct contacts please inform me . Since We are dealing Directly with the End User and there is no middle Men.

As well as I am looking for the Experienced Person's or Institute who can Provide Training to the Pilots at Our required Destination. Any of you friends know, kindly inform to me.

Thanks & Regards,

Siddiq.
aacoemfze@gmail.com
M:+971 566 715 761.

jalil, e-mail, 26.04.2012

i want information

Pilot Mirwais khan, e-mail, 10.01.2012

I m an Afghan pilot of Mi24...i like Mi24...?

Pilot Mirwais khan, e-mail, 10.01.2012

I m an Afghan pilot of Mi24...i like Mi24...?

HERY TENANG, e-mail, 30.09.2011

we need tyre main and nose gear MI35 for our costumer, please contact me if there is supplier for that stuff, thanks

Rohan Kanungo, e-mail, 13.09.2011

Can anyone tell me the reason for naming this aircraft as 'Hind'.
Also the significance of that

polo, e-mail, 17.06.2011

yes ilike more data in this airtank
tanks

AREF, e-mail, 29.04.2011

PLEASE SEND TO ME THE LIST OF MI-24 MAIN PARTS AND HARDWARE

Kiril, e-mail, 24.11.2010

TV3-117 engines available for sale.
We are able to offer different versions.
Serious buyers only!
Contact: chochkov@aero-x.eu

matt, e-mail, 29.10.2010

i have been in the army for a min and i have used the longbow for cca a few times but that was on ground targets, the ah64 is one mean mofo when it comes to cca, i only have one mem with a hind and it was on my first deployment to the middle east, when my platoon and i were following some smugglers into another country that country got pist and sent 2 hinds to push us out, and let me say that damn hind is no joke. the sound of it, and look is deff something i wont forget...didnt stop us from goin back in there again...assholes aint so tough with out there hind lol

Arjuna, e-mail, 07.08.2010

I must say that this is one of the most formidable and most powerful multi-role attack gunship the world has ever witnessed.

It has really come to tell us how well the Russians are.

Kiril, e-mail, 27.07.2010

2 x Mi-24R available for sale. LOI (containing the company letterhead) is required for the submission of technical information and conditions. Contact me for more information.
E-mail: chochkov@aero-x.eu

sevedsky soyuz, e-mail, 04.07.2010

Mil Mi-24's were used in the Soviet involvement in afganistan as convoy escorts and searched for guerrilla activity. hinds were the primary close air support weapon.
many mi 24's were shot down by stinger missiles.

Ganzorig, e-mail, 15.06.2010

It`s very good helicopter whit powerfull engines!!! I had been training on it last month! I am a student...

Aeroflex Integrated Resources, e-mail, 27.05.2010

Dear Sir,

I’m looking for immediate Mi-24 Simulator Training.


Kindly provide information as follows:
Considering all pilot are experience,


1. Duration of the course
2. What is the Number of hours allocated for the training? Subject to be though?
3. What is the number of hours allocated for the technical subject? Subject to be though?
4. Training Syllabus and time table
5. Accommodation and messing
6. Distance from Airport to Hotel
7. Distance from Hotel to Training Center
8. Training Center certifications
9. Name of your International Airport?
10. Which Airport should we land?
11. Any certificate given?
12. Isn’t located in the College or at Repair center?
13. What is the minimum number of crew allow for each training?
14. Please send me more information/photos about your training center.
15. Please provide me the price quotation for each crew to include all the above.


Air ticket to be borne by our Company.

Thank you and we need this as soon as possible.

vlv, e-mail, 06.04.2010

To Capt Jean Bizot.
Soory, who are you to define what is better, single engine Gazelle or Mi-24 and AH-64? Did you fly on them or did you fight with Mi-24 on a Mistral and other way? I flew on AS-350 and EC-120 and I fly on Mi-24/35, Mi-8/17. But I do not take liberties with comparison of Mi-24/35 with AH-64. Let AH-64 pilot tries to compare AH-64 with Mi-28 and Ka-50 of the same period of development.
One should not show by words like some computer gamers on this site if you are the Captain that something is better or worst of it, especially if you have no combat practical experience to prove that you can bring down a helicopter. Respect other pilots who can fly on this helicopter even if they are not Russian. Bullet is fool (in combat). I do not understand when someone thinks that he can do aerobatics better and thinks about a dog-fight. It likes a dog thinks that he is fast against a bear. But who let him to bite a back???
If you are the French, remember Normandy-Neman squadron flown on our fighters. With great polite to French herous from thankful citizens of USSR!

Capt Jean Bizot, e-mail, 05.04.2010

Hi,

The Gazelle mil version of real world is a very good combat helicopter, small and furtive.
Out of it technical problems the Apache is a very good machine , but it does not like to much negative Gs. Therefore the specific rule of engagement and combat procedure. More it was designed to be a Tank killer only..
The Mi-24 is an assault helicopter designed originally to carry a squad and to serve a ground support.
Modern time make armies to change duties of helicopters witout changing design, then the only solution is to upgrade aircraft..!!
All three are excellent if you keep them flying in their flight envelop, and not pushing them out of their limits. Then combat strategy and crew ability make the difference in combat, but I am sure a Gazelle can shot an Apache or a Mi-24 of the sky is they lock on a Mistral...!!!
In a fight nothing is really absolute. Remember, cocktail molotov stopped a lot of german tanks (the best at the time) during W.W. II

Bryan, e-mail, 01.03.2010

I have seen a photo of a MIL 24 with an amazing paint job. I believe it to have been a Canadian aircraft (?) painted to resemble an Eagle. Can anyone e-mail a copy of this picture.

Kriegerdammerung, e-mail, 23.02.2010

I got a few questions...
the Mi-24V uses the YakB or the Gsh-23?
the Mi-24 in general versions can carry 4 pods of 32 rockets S-5 of 57mm 128 in total... in a Discovery Channel documental I notice the S-8 rockets of 80mm can carry 20!? Is that true?
The last one, how thick is the armour of the Mi-24?

blow, e-mail, 16.02.2010

i av operated on the Mi24 &Mi35p helicopter.............i tell authoritatively................there is yet no substitute 4 the Mi series!

vlv, e-mail, 19.11.2009

Mi-24/35 Pilot-Instructor of all modifications and Mi-8/17(upto Mi-171/172) with combat and NVG experience, ATPL(H), English knowledge (spoken, technical, flight training, ground school, lectures) and training ads (documentation) looks for a contract job for training pilots on a customer base. The only serious offers are acceptable. Guys, sorry, NO discussions, secret data, diagrams, tables. I have no time for that. In a class-room only if you are pilots.

everbob, e-mail, 12.10.2009

HI,I want to get more information about the HIND,could u give me something more about the main/tail rotor system,please mail me,thank u!!

the technician, e-mail, 15.05.2009

reply to RI-Q;
anyway I want to say congratulations to our neighbor Indonesians for successfully procuring non-American armaments, even though with the so called "defense treaties" you have with America. of the Malays(Malay Race), the Filipinos are the most torbid among Malaysians & Indonesians. Im proud being a Filipino but I hate & jeer down some of my country's and my countryman's principles. their the common factor of our country's slow advancement in defense systems.

Tanker Mike, 23.04.2009

The Mi-24 is an all around excellent weapons platform, it is intended as a battlefield transport/support gunship. It was intended as a transport for ground troops, drop off the troops, take off and loiter and support the ground troops by engaging armoured vehicles and enemy troops (its the ground pounder that captures enemy territory). The apache is used for ground attack only, it has a shorter loiter time and needs more ground support and maintenance from a forward base (the Mi-24 can be resupplied from basicly a truck on a road).The rare occasion that both would be engaged in flight I think the Mi-24 would be the first shot as the soviet air to air weapons have a longer range but the apache has a better electronics suite (and the US has AWACS which is far more advanced than Soviet)and counter measures.

Wolfie, e-mail, 18.04.2009

In response to Rotor Mike's commentary on the Apache:
I just kinda had to point out your comment about the Iraq-Iran War is insanely inaccurate.
The total count of helicopters lost was 10 Cobras, 6 Hinds. So, first of all, the kill rate favours the HIND, not the Cobra. You got that one completely wrong.
Second, the engagements were almost all sneak attacks, with helicopters getting shot under complete surprise. The outcome was dependent more on crew skill and who got the initiative than on the merits of the machine itself, so the statistics still aren't usable.
An overall comparison leaves me thinking a Hind/Apache engagement would play out the same way. Given the power of the weapons they can carry, it's in large part a question of who sees who first. Despite my love of the Hind, though, I suspect the Apache would have the edge, if it turns into a maneuver game. The Hind has more overall speed, but the Apache's higher power-weight ratio would make it more agile.
On the other hand, Mike, you got your weapons comparison the wrong way around too.
First of all, GUNS? Why the hell are they engaging with GUNS? When'd they ever get that close? You're not liable to see that unless they BOTH snuck up on each other in an extremely cramped environment. They're engaging with MISSILES.
So, missile comparison. Let's presume both are carrying their respective nation's most advanced AA missile - it's not likely that they'd be firing anti-tank ones at a helicopter unless they had nothing else, after all. AIM-9X Sidewinder versus... let's say an R-73 Archer, it's the closest Russian equivalent and of similar weight. The 9X has a wider claimed seeker angle, so again, if it turns into a maneuver game, Apache has the edge. On the OTHER hand, the Sidewinder has a stated range of 18km, versus the R-73's 30km. Which means that if we had a 'showdown', it's quite likely the Hind would simply pluck off the Apache before the Apache ever entered weapons range.
And, to address the gun point again - even IF it were a gun engagement, it's not quite as clear as stated.
First of all, there are three options for Hind gun armament - the Yak-B 12.7mm machine gun, the GSh-23 (which isn't exactly that rare, given that it's the armament of the new standard for the Hind), or the GSh-30-2.
Now, the GSh-30-2 is, in some respects, superiour to the M230 - namely, firepower. It fires at something like quadruple the rate, so it has just a bit of an edge there. On the other hand, the Hind-P mounts it in a FIXED mount, leaving it a lot more difficult to bring on target. So, if it's a GSh-30-2, the Hind loses the gun battle.
Now, the Yak-B. It... has more ammo. Otherwise, yeah, you're right, it has a LOT less firepower, though it's just as maneuverable. A Hind wouldn't even notice getting shot with that. (The PKT door guns are pretty much in the same boat, at best they can distract the Apache pilot and make him zig when he should have zagged)
Now, however, we move into what the Hind would actually be equipped with - modern marks of the Hind mount the GSh-23. Your evaluation on the GSh-23 was both right and wrong. Now, yup, the M230 has more firepower per shot. On the other hand, the GSh-23 fires at almost six times the rate. So while each shot is less destructive, the overall firepower is (for the time it can fire, since it packs less ammunition) greater than the M230.
In conclusion? It depends. It all comes down to which situation they may be facing off against each other in, the quality of the crew, and a little luck for flavour.
But you CERTAINLY can't say that the Apache 'pwns' the Hind. In a duel, it depends on what range they're fighting at, and pilot skill more than anything else. For carrying soldiers into battle, the Hind is infinitely superiour since it's non-zero. For destroying ground targets, it's an interesting comparison between the Hind's greater ordnance and the Apache's agility.

RI-Q, e-mail, 28.02.2009

NOW, INDONESIAN ARMY having two Mi-35P and another six Mi-35P will come again on this year

RI-Q, e-mail, 28.02.2009

NOW, INDONESIAN ARMY having two Mi-35P and another six Mi-35P will come again on this year

the technician, e-mail, 25.02.2009

the MI24 is perfect replacement or good companions to UH-1's. parts, weapons and equipment are expandable and upgradable..The problem is we Filipinos underestimate Russian made equipment; that's our big problem, we look at equipments from America in awe, so much we forget that US equipments are difficult to maintain; open your eyes bastard pinoy! its time to look things in another way....

step, e-mail, 24.02.2009

you said apache pawns a hind & u said it isnt a hind by comparison

Bernie, 16.02.2009

Hi,

AH-64 Apache and MI-24 Hind shouldn't be compared - they are used in different roles. The Hind was built for a different task and used following special russian doctrine.
An Apache is a "pure" gunship, while a Hind can bring in 8 armed to the teeth soldiers to the battlefield and cover them. The Hind is used this way: Very fast in, take by surprise and kill with enormous firepower, then fast out.

chamara, e-mail, 06.02.2009

yes ilike more data in this airtank
tanks

Peti, e-mail, 14.01.2009

I understand now, why the americans were so happy, when they could take one from Chad (or Sudan?). the Afghan mujahedins in the 80's says: "We don't fear the soviets! We fear the russian helicopters..."

it's like a flying fortress.

S.Dani, e-mail, 05.01.2009

just as ihave seen mi 24 it does alot of work as a student learning iwant to study all its basic intoduction,engine,fram work,and its Radio system.

Lich_Kashey, 30.12.2008

In my opinion, Mi-24 - best helicopter for fire support. It's not sniper, it's assault weapon with BFG, pure firepower. This machine based on multipurpose cargo helicopter Mi-8 and can take off with more then 2t payload onboard. F.e., something like claster bombs dispenser. Mi-24 can be nightmare for infantry.
Someone can say "old and obsolete". What age of B-52? New weapon systems, new avionics can return Mi-24 in today's.

Hishan Mudith Deyalage, e-mail, 28.12.2008

i have to interest to collet some information the aircraft.please send the photos and details information the aricraft.

Tom Cruise, 25.11.2008

Amazing

krinvokik, 07.11.2008

this helicopter is a fabulous model...i have to egrie that the mi24 iz the best..i have flown for the soviet union. and i no the power of this helicoptur.forgive my english.

rasanga, e-mail, 30.06.2008

Mi 24 is a battele proven helicopter. can face to a heavy small arms fire. Apache is very good for simulated attack missions. In actual situations it is not a proven one.

Tucker, e-mail, 28.06.2008

I have been in the Army for 14 years, I have had this helicopter swarm my nightmares for years since first time it flew over my head in a training center about a decade ago. Changed my outlook and respect for the Soviets.

john, 15.05.2008

To state that either the Mi-24 or AH-64 is better than the other is a flawed argument. They are only about as comparable as a flathead and phillips screwdriver. Which one is better? Go ask the screw.

amir, e-mail, 28.04.2008

they can installtion the engines of mi 17 in mi 24

American Made, 01.02.2008

Damn Mexicans can go to hell.

Stingray, the Helicopter Guy, e-mail, 31.01.2008

Rotor Mike, the older production models of the Mil Mi-24 had only front armor. The new Mi-24 Mk.3 has full armor and can withstand sharp turns. So, the Apache is just outgunned now.

memo, 27.09.2007

it's a nice helicopter but i don't wish the mexican air force buy units of that kind of helicopters...
better buy aircraft of sukhoi...

memo, 27.09.2007

the mi-24 is a great helicopter, but as i know if it is fully loaded of weapons and passengers it makes an inestability to control it, making it vulnerable in battle, so to prevent this problem, it must go with another one of the mi-24 for protection. The technical problems generated the invention of the havoc (mil mi-28) as the equivalent for the ah-64 apache.

Rotor Mike, e-mail, 08.09.2007

Ok.. an Mi-24 isn't bad. But isn't an Apache. An Apache has better armour, while the Mi-24 is armoured only in the front to protect the pilot/WSO. The Apache fire control system (especially on the AH-64D)leaves any Hind for dead. The Apache has better weapons (Hellfire ATGW and a computer stabilised 30mm Cannon). Hinds have fixed cannon, turreted 50 cal or in some rare cases a turreted Gsh-23 - none of which are as effective as the M230 on the Apache. To say that an Mi-24 could take on an Apache is a bit childish; in the Iran-Iraq war of the 80s Iranian Cobras had a 10:1 kill ratio over the Iraqi (Mi-24D-model)Hinds. And as the latest Apaches are WAY better than the 1979 vintage Cobras that Iran had, I couldn't imagine it would be any different now. So.. Nice helicopter, but the Apache pwns it...

Dennis, e-mail, 06.09.2007

anyone got a vol 1 in english i could beg,borrow or steal

Dennis, e-mail, 06.09.2007

anyone got a vol 1 in english i could beg,borrow or steal

Fernando Guilhermo Visser Cedrola, e-mail, 30.08.2007

I wonder where is the Sikorsky ABC nowadays? Any news please write back.

Cedrola, 30.08.2007

Mil-Mi 24 is the best still today, all weaponry can be changed, just buy a new missile and install it. Apache is a problematic machine and stays a lot of time 'grounded' due to many basic engineering problems. Modern helos do loops and acrobatic manuvering, crazy up in the sky! Well, That is useless in combat. The success granted to Apache (AH-64) comes from the hellfire missiles. Gazelles, the name already tells(!) are fragile, they can be shot down too easily.

FUCK!, 25.08.2007

i agree with tack; and did you know that this chopper can accedentally cut its tail off at sharp turns?!(also, its FFAR, not FEAR,lol)

hahaha blue thunder my arse!, e-mail, 07.08.2007

Blue thunder was just a modified gazelle! the mi-24 could fuck up an apache anyday!

HAIDER, e-mail, 06.08.2007

SIR
I WONT TO ASKE ABOUT THE CRASH HELMET TYPE USE IN MI-17 &MI-24

goudjal kader, e-mail, 04.07.2007

les aparéllie russ cent des formidable angun mai jé des disaine qui cent formidable comme machinne de guer si c'est unterecent pour vous voila man email

Tack, 30.06.2007

[BT THE U.S. MILITARY SAY THAT THE APACHE BEET THE MI-24. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?]

The Mi-24 is better than the Apache in certain feilds only, It can carry soldiers and carry supplies, it has a longer range and can carry drop tanks. The heavier weapons on the Hind are less acurate and shorter range the the apaches FEAR rocket and hellfire missile systems. The Hind is faster then the apache though the apache is alot more agile and has easier hover controls. The Hind makes up for this with heavy armor, two heavy gattling cannon. and close range AT and AI rockets.

Razor, 29.06.2007

[BT THE U.S. MILITARY SAY THAT THE APACHE BEET THE MI-24. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?]

DEBNTRAV, they say true. 'Apache' - newest then Mi-24, and it has many advantages. To replace old Mi-24 soviet engineers developed two helicopters - Mi-28 and Ka-50. But these two were not supplied to Soviet/Russian army, because of financial and political situation in the Russia Federation.

Razor, e-mail, 29.06.2007

[A military equipped 'Blue Thunder' Gazelle would blow one of these out of the sky in a dogfight]
JP,
First: 'Blue Thunder' - just a movie. There is no such helicopter in the world armies.
Second:'Blue Thunder' - sucks. As you can see from movie, it even doesn't have any heavy weapons.

maki, e-mail, 08.05.2007

IT iss the t attack helis.....i hope the philippine air force can hav this heavily armed gunship in the future...!!

J.A.Baloushi, e-mail, 05.05.2007

Thank you very much for your attention,Im studying the higher college of technology and i am more interested to know the Mi-24 Advanced Backgrounds.

JP, 02.03.2007

A military equipped 'Blue Thunder' Gazelle would blow one of these out of the sky in a dogfight

Fred Frith, e-mail, 03.12.2006

The American pig dogs lie. They lied about their stealth fighter and they lie about this.

DEBNTRAV@WEBTV.NET, 25.11.2006

I HAVE SEEN THIS HELO GUNSHIP IN A VIDIOGAME CALLED BATTLEFIELD 2: MODERN COMBAT. IT IS A VERY POWERFUL GUNSHIP. I HAVE SEEN THIIS HELO IN THE CHINESE ARMMED FORCES ALSO. I THOUGHT IT WAS ONLY IN THE SOVIATE UNION AND RUSSIAN ARMMED FORCES. PEOPLE SAY IT IS MORE POWERFUL THAN ANY OTHER GUNSHIP IN THE WORLD BECAUSE OF ITS FULL ARMAMENTS AND SPEED CAPABILITY. BT THE U.S. MILITARY SAY THAT THE APACHE BEET THE MI-24. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?

Do you have any comments concerning this aircraft ?

Name   E-mail

FACTS AND FIGURES

© The prototype for the Mt-24 series, fitted with a conventional cockpit, made its first fight in 1970.

© Iraqi Mi-24s were credited with downing Iranian Cobra helicopters and even F-4 fighter-bombers during the Iran-Iraq War.

© A 'Hind-A' was modified to test systems for the later 'Hind-D'.

© Pre-production Mi-24s were known as 'Hind-B' in the West as they were not identified until after production 'Hind-As'.

© During the conflict in Afghanistan, Mi-24s were flown by Soviet and Afghan forces.

© As well as carrying weapons, the stub wings provide some lift.

© An Mi-24 set a helicopter world speed record of 368.4km/h.

© Mi-24s fought against South African troops during the Angolan war.

© The 'Hind' is operated by more than two dozen countries.

© Two Mi-24s were flown to Pakistan by defecting Afghan air force pilots.



All the World's Rotorcraft


Virtual Aircraft Museum


Back AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com