@@anonymoose1898 Yes, that is my impression too... it was depicting the missile warning system on the later Ka-50 prototypes that they hesitated about and put on indefinite hold. The Mi-24 systems are much older.
One thing I've noticed with movies and other games apart from Dcs is that they usually dont model their helicopters with the forward tilt of the main rotor, and their helicopters dont hover in a tail-low position. Im glad dcs took all of this into account with their models.
This is a wonderful video. Thank you so much for putting it together and I can't wait for part 2 :) I'm still sort of in disbelief that we're actually getting the Hind in DCS. Definitely a good year for rotorheads.
Really great - I love the extra research into the aerodynamics and bits of historical origins! It'd be really interesting to see what information can be gathered on the intended and actual use historically as well.
Ngl I was expecting some boring wikipasted video but oh boy I was wrong! This video is so good, I learned a lot of useful informations about Russian designs and got really hyped for Hind coming to Dcs 😃
Wow, really good information here, never knew about the asymmetry, even less the reasoning for it, which was a really cool thing to know why it exists. Thanks for the content man.
awesome technical video! wonder if the mi24 will be as vulnerable to vrs as the mi8? it was the hardest thing to get used to on the mi8. After a year of flying it, i find a hover descend pretty stressful
Hi Energia. Thank you! The Mi-24 will probably be similar to the Mi-8 when it comes to VRS. I fly approaches "by the numbers" and very rarely get into VRS. Descending from a hover just keep it at 1-2 m/s vertical speed and you will be fine!
Great video! I like the comparison, lets me know what to expect! Perhaps a video on weapons and capabilities would be nice as well!(or maybe someone can direct me to a video on it)
A couple points: Rotor speed in revolutions per minute is not really a valid comparison for rotors of different radius. Instead, tip speed is used. Using your numbers I get tip speed of 214 and 217 meters per second for the Mi-8MTV-2 and Mi-24P respectively, which is very similar. For those of use used to working in freedom units, this is about 705 ft/s, which is very typical. The UH-60 Blackhawk, for instance, has a tip speed of 725 ft/s (220 m/s) which represents the high-end for most helicopters when considering advancing tip compressibility effects and acoustics (though there are exceptions). You also point out the rotor chord differences, and indeed, this is a point where the helicopters differ significantly. A better way to view chord is as a solidity ratio, which is a ratio of the blade area to the rotor disk area. I get 0.078 and 0.107 for the Mi-8 and Mi-24 respectively (ignoring root cutout, which is the convention). The added solidity should assist the Hind at higher speeds. As for the fact that they have similar weights with different disk areas? It's inevitable that the Hind will suffer here relative to the Hip. Larger rotors are inherently more efficient (The most efficient rotor is very large, with many long, high-aspect ratio blades spinning very slowly). Comparing the disk loadings (thrust divided by disk area) we find the Hind is about 38% higher (36.5 kg/m^2 vs 50.2 kg/m^2). The smaller radius will increase required induced power, and the increased solidity should increase profile power (though in the case of profile power, this is more than offset by the smaller radius). That's reflected by the difference in max takeoff weights; the Mi-24 can only lift about 90% of what the Mi-8 can. Using basic momentum theory equations at the max takeoff weights, I get estimates for total main rotor powers of 2200 kW and 2300 kW for the Mi-8 and Mi-24, respectively. So, the Mi-24 requires more power to lift less weight. This can be expressed by the main rotor power loading, which is the thrust divided by the power required. The Mi-8 has a power loading of about 5.94 kg/kW (or 0.0583 N/W), while the Mi-24 only gets about 5.17 kg/kW (or 0.0507 N/W). The numbers would look even worse for the Hind if I were to evaluate them at the same gross weights (6.05 vs 5.17 if both were lifting 11800 kg) Of course, the aircraft are designed for very different missions. The Hip, being a transport/cargo helicopter, requires an efficient lifting rotor. Lower induced velocities also benefit those operating around the aircraft with the rotors turning. Evaluating forward flight performance is more detailed, and I don't have the time to do it now. The modest lift compounding of the Mi-24 would definitely permit some additional power margin at high speed. The smaller radius also provides some operational benefits in the form of a reduced footprint. In short, the Hind would probably benefit form a larger rotor in terms of lifting capability, but obviously the designers didn't feel this was necessary for its mission.
Hi Erik! Thank you very much for your input. I lack the engineering knowledge and highly appreciate it, when I get this kind of feedback! It's invaluable for the community.
@@virtualflighttraining9694 No problem. I'm glad you appreciated it. It's not obvious how to talk about and compare helicopters, so I felt this might help people.
They say, "Never smile at the crocodile." but I am sure smiling right now. Cannot wait for this. Have loved the Hind forever now and has always been my favorite helicopter.
no mi 24v or vm model... but the P... so its a lesser ka50... real shame that they didn't make the more popular and well known 24 with a trainable gun.
The "P" is more popular than the "V" amongst real Mi-24 pilots. It has more punch and it's more precise. Additionally the "P" has a set of flight and navigation instruments on the front dash - which is great for multicrew training! And contrary to the "VM" it fits into most DCS scenarios. I think the creators of this module have thought about this well and I respect their decision.
@@TheGranicd they also found the 30mm to be impractical so they switched to the initial prototype planed version which called for the gsh 23 2 . the yak b offers something for the gunner to do instead of just being a atgm gunner, extra set of eyes and backup pilot. the yakb is still the most common type used today and the most iconic compared to the hundred or so made with the gsh 30 2. gameplay wise this is just a mix between the ka 50 and mi 8 with no advantage. rather disappointing. the funny thing is that the gsh 23 2 could have just been a weapon selected option in game instead of the yak b, but with the 30mm it has significant changes and the 3d model would have to be designed from the start to accommodate such. watch them in a year or two release the V or D model for full price...
@@mitri5389 I also feel like we're comparing two different attack helicopter intentions. The ka-50 works much like the Apache and will stay at range as far as it can to make use of the powerful and accurate auto cannon with a range of armaments that are exceptional with guidance, and their own dumb fire rocket options. The mi-24 would be at least initially more used for attack runs, especially with their great compliments towards dumb fire rockets and also their own ATGMs, the P would compliment the play style more and allows the cannon do damage APCs reliably, with the accuracy at least somewhat mitigated by how close it runs into the targets. If they need to stay away though, for AAA or otherwise, they still have atgms available to them.
Hi Ryan. Yes, it is indeed interesting. We've had this discussion already here in the comments. The way Soviet types are pronounced in the west seems to be a bit random. A "Yak" remains a "Yak" and so does the "MiG". But when it comes to "Tu", "An", "Mi" and "Su", then it's for some reason "Te-Yu", "Ai-En", "Em-eye" and "Es-Yu".
ED are developing it themselves for DCS yes.. And have been for a while : ua-cam.com/video/jTcv0SQ3i7Q/v-deo.html Release estimated to be Q2 this year.
@@bend1483 Mi-24 planned for Q2 2021, Apache planned for Q3 2021. We're also getting the Kiowa Warrior. It'll be a good year for us chopper fans in DCS. I absolutely cannot wait for the Hind.
Not really good for dropping troops into combat... Yeah you can just tell players are going to load it up with troops, drop them off then fly over to some target and strafe it for all they're worth!
And yet, in all my years working on helicopters, I have never heard it called the me-24. The industry calls it the "em-eye" M-i 24. If only there was a correct term for "negative dihedral" oh wait there is...it's called ANHEDRAL.
In the Russian speaking part of the world, Soviet aircraft are called "An", "Il", "Ka" "Mi", "Su", "Tu" and "Yak", because the heads of their design bureaus were Antonov, Ilyushin, Mil, Kamov, Sukhoi, Tupolev and Yakovlev. They are simply short versions of their names. And it makes no sense to say "M-I", because it's not an abbreviation for two words that start with "M" and "I". But thank you for participating in the conversation - that's what makes the comment section interesting!
Another interesting example would be "Mig-29". Nobody calls the aircraft "M - I - G - 29". It would make sense to call it "Me-Ge" because the heads of the design bureau were Mikojan and Gurevitch and the correct way of writing it is "MiG" / "МиГ".
Good stuff!
So it's still on? I was worried with the announcement regarding the laws changing.
@@anonymoose1898 As far as I know only the KA-50 Black Shark 3 upgrade was the issue with that.
@@anonymoose1898 Yes, that is my impression too... it was depicting the missile warning system on the later Ka-50 prototypes that they hesitated about and put on indefinite hold. The Mi-24 systems are much older.
One thing I've noticed with movies and other games apart from Dcs is that they usually dont model their helicopters with the forward tilt of the main rotor, and their helicopters dont hover in a tail-low position. Im glad dcs took all of this into account with their models.
Very well researched and presented. Thanks for the effort.
Now I cant unsee the asymmetry, Thanks. Great video!
Same with me :D
I’m crying right now... I can’t unsee it
This is a wonderful video. Thank you so much for putting it together and I can't wait for part 2 :)
I'm still sort of in disbelief that we're actually getting the Hind in DCS. Definitely a good year for rotorheads.
This is great, Viktor! And a beautiful presentation, superbly researched and put together, with wonderful graphics. Just WOW!
Really great - I love the extra research into the aerodynamics and bits of historical origins! It'd be really interesting to see what information can be gathered on the intended and actual use historically as well.
Very nice comparison! Can't wait for the next part! Thanks
Can't wait for this aircraft! Great video!
I saw your excellent posts on the forum, awesome video too !
Other than the tilt of the rotor I knew none of that. Thanks! Looking forward to the next one.
Great video, thanks!
Hello Viktor! Thanks for doing this! Guess it's time to dive into the Hind!
Good stuff man. Will be looking forward to your future vids on the subject.
Thank you very much. Part two is released now.
Ngl I was expecting some boring wikipasted video but oh boy I was wrong! This video is so good, I learned a lot of useful informations about Russian designs and got really hyped for Hind coming to Dcs 😃
Wow, really good information here, never knew about the asymmetry, even less the reasoning for it, which was a really cool thing to know why it exists. Thanks for the content man.
Very well made video, looking forward to part 2
Very interesting, thank you.
Really well explained, thanks! Subscribed for your next vid :)
Excellent introduction ... you've just got a new subscriptor, looking forward to more content about the Hind, thanks a lot. :)
Subscribed! Very nicely presented. Love it.
Wow, I am glad I found you!
Very interesting info. Thanks for sharing this.
Now all we need is the ka-52, and all the other best wishes to DCS
Thanks for this very informative
Yes, that would be great I'll buy it with the Siryah map. Also, to have a small campaign would be great!
awesome technical video!
wonder if the mi24 will be as vulnerable to vrs as the mi8? it was the hardest thing to get used to on the mi8. After a year of flying it, i find a hover descend pretty stressful
Hi Energia. Thank you! The Mi-24 will probably be similar to the Mi-8 when it comes to VRS. I fly approaches "by the numbers" and very rarely get into VRS. Descending from a hover just keep it at 1-2 m/s vertical speed and you will be fine!
Great video! I like the comparison, lets me know what to expect! Perhaps a video on weapons and capabilities would be nice as well!(or maybe someone can direct me to a video on it)
Part 2 will be about the flightdeck and the capabilities.
@@virtualflighttraining9694 МИ - 24 в России называют " КРОКОДИЛ " ... ! 🚁
Great video 👍
A couple points:
Rotor speed in revolutions per minute is not really a valid comparison for rotors of different radius. Instead, tip speed is used. Using your numbers I get tip speed of 214 and 217 meters per second for the Mi-8MTV-2 and Mi-24P respectively, which is very similar. For those of use used to working in freedom units, this is about 705 ft/s, which is very typical. The UH-60 Blackhawk, for instance, has a tip speed of 725 ft/s (220 m/s) which represents the high-end for most helicopters when considering advancing tip compressibility effects and acoustics (though there are exceptions).
You also point out the rotor chord differences, and indeed, this is a point where the helicopters differ significantly. A better way to view chord is as a solidity ratio, which is a ratio of the blade area to the rotor disk area. I get 0.078 and 0.107 for the Mi-8 and Mi-24 respectively (ignoring root cutout, which is the convention). The added solidity should assist the Hind at higher speeds.
As for the fact that they have similar weights with different disk areas? It's inevitable that the Hind will suffer here relative to the Hip. Larger rotors are inherently more efficient (The most efficient rotor is very large, with many long, high-aspect ratio blades spinning very slowly). Comparing the disk loadings (thrust divided by disk area) we find the Hind is about 38% higher (36.5 kg/m^2 vs 50.2 kg/m^2). The smaller radius will increase required induced power, and the increased solidity should increase profile power (though in the case of profile power, this is more than offset by the smaller radius). That's reflected by the difference in max takeoff weights; the Mi-24 can only lift about 90% of what the Mi-8 can. Using basic momentum theory equations at the max takeoff weights, I get estimates for total main rotor powers of 2200 kW and 2300 kW for the Mi-8 and Mi-24, respectively. So, the Mi-24 requires more power to lift less weight. This can be expressed by the main rotor power loading, which is the thrust divided by the power required. The Mi-8 has a power loading of about 5.94 kg/kW (or 0.0583 N/W), while the Mi-24 only gets about 5.17 kg/kW (or 0.0507 N/W). The numbers would look even worse for the Hind if I were to evaluate them at the same gross weights (6.05 vs 5.17 if both were lifting 11800 kg)
Of course, the aircraft are designed for very different missions. The Hip, being a transport/cargo helicopter, requires an efficient lifting rotor. Lower induced velocities also benefit those operating around the aircraft with the rotors turning. Evaluating forward flight performance is more detailed, and I don't have the time to do it now. The modest lift compounding of the Mi-24 would definitely permit some additional power margin at high speed. The smaller radius also provides some operational benefits in the form of a reduced footprint. In short, the Hind would probably benefit form a larger rotor in terms of lifting capability, but obviously the designers didn't feel this was necessary for its mission.
Hi Erik! Thank you very much for your input. I lack the engineering knowledge and highly appreciate it, when I get this kind of feedback! It's invaluable for the community.
@@virtualflighttraining9694 No problem. I'm glad you appreciated it. It's not obvious how to talk about and compare helicopters, so I felt this might help people.
Thx for this very nice video. When will come the second part?
Love this Helicopter I have it in War Thunder and it’s amazing
Ery nice.
Thanks!
Thanks from france
Excellent! Sometimes, still images make great videos ;-)
Question, do you wished to ride on Mi-24 Hind on Passenger Seat?
I surely would love that!
They say, "Never smile at the crocodile." but I am sure smiling right now. Cannot wait for this. Have loved the Hind forever now and has always been my favorite helicopter.
That Gsh-30-2 cannon... Maximum dakka
Nice video and graphics.
What font did you use for the Cyrillic Mi-24 text?
Thank you! Search for "шрифт Lenya69".
@@virtualflighttraining9694
Great, thank you. 🙏🏼
Cheers from Denmark 🇩🇰
Where is Vne for Mi-8 taken from?
Hey Seal. Straight from the manual.
@@virtualflighttraining9694 DCS one or IRL РЛЭ?
@@LazzySeal I stick to real flight manuals, whenever that is possible, yes. РЛЭ and the operator's manuals in English.
when is the next video?
It is now online. Thank you for waiting!
no mi 24v or vm model... but the P... so its a lesser ka50... real shame that they didn't make the more popular and well known 24 with a trainable gun.
12.7mm wont do much damage to anything in game except troops or trucks. 30mm is beter option as in real life.
The "P" is more popular than the "V" amongst real Mi-24 pilots. It has more punch and it's more precise. Additionally the "P" has a set of flight and navigation instruments on the front dash - which is great for multicrew training! And contrary to the "VM" it fits into most DCS scenarios. I think the creators of this module have thought about this well and I respect their decision.
@@TheGranicd they also found the 30mm to be impractical so they switched to the initial prototype planed version which called for the gsh 23 2 . the yak b offers something for the gunner to do instead of just being a atgm gunner, extra set of eyes and backup pilot. the yakb is still the most common type used today and the most iconic compared to the hundred or so made with the gsh 30 2. gameplay wise this is just a mix between the ka 50 and mi 8 with no advantage. rather disappointing. the funny thing is that the gsh 23 2 could have just been a weapon selected option in game instead of the yak b, but with the 30mm it has significant changes and the 3d model would have to be designed from the start to accommodate such. watch them in a year or two release the V or D model for full price...
@@mitri5389 I also feel like we're comparing two different attack helicopter intentions. The ka-50 works much like the Apache and will stay at range as far as it can to make use of the powerful and accurate auto cannon with a range of armaments that are exceptional with guidance, and their own dumb fire rocket options. The mi-24 would be at least initially more used for attack runs, especially with their great compliments towards dumb fire rockets and also their own ATGMs, the P would compliment the play style more and allows the cannon do damage APCs reliably, with the accuracy at least somewhat mitigated by how close it runs into the targets. If they need to stay away though, for AAA or otherwise, they still have atgms available to them.
it was a good video.
It's strange how different parts of the world pronounce things differently- here in America the MIL airframes are pronounced "em-eye" instead of "me".
Hi Ryan. Yes, it is indeed interesting. We've had this discussion already here in the comments. The way Soviet types are pronounced in the west seems to be a bit random. A "Yak" remains a "Yak" and so does the "MiG". But when it comes to "Tu", "An", "Mi" and "Su", then it's for some reason "Te-Yu", "Ai-En", "Em-eye" and "Es-Yu".
I hope they have a chin turret variant of the hind in game. I don't like the side mounted cannon.
I prefer the turret as well, but at least it was replaced with dual barrel 30mm. That's pretty badass.
I hope dcs adds the 8 door gunners
Woah woah! What is this? Are you guys adding the Hind to DCS?
ED are developing it themselves for DCS yes.. And have been for a while : ua-cam.com/video/jTcv0SQ3i7Q/v-deo.html
Release estimated to be Q2 this year.
@@bend1483 That's great news. I've been away for quite some time, I'm going to start keeping an eye on this one
@@dimitrist3561 Agreed!!! They have just announced an AH-64D Apache Longbow as well. Although I expect that’ll be a bit further into the future.
@@bend1483 Mi-24 planned for Q2 2021, Apache planned for Q3 2021. We're also getting the Kiowa Warrior.
It'll be a good year for us chopper fans in DCS. I absolutely cannot wait for the Hind.
Hmn i see thats awsome
now that you pointed it out that it isnt symetrical some OCD person is gonna have an issue with it in dcs. lol
Hind?
More like an armed assault helicopter than an attack helicopter, in my opinion...
Not really good for dropping troops into combat...
Yeah you can just tell players are going to load it up with troops, drop them off then fly over to some target and strafe it for all they're worth!
And yet, in all my years working on helicopters, I have never heard it called the me-24. The industry calls it the "em-eye" M-i 24. If only there was a correct term for "negative dihedral" oh wait there is...it's called ANHEDRAL.
In the Russian speaking part of the world, Soviet aircraft are called "An", "Il", "Ka" "Mi", "Su", "Tu" and "Yak", because the heads of their design bureaus were Antonov, Ilyushin, Mil, Kamov, Sukhoi, Tupolev and Yakovlev. They are simply short versions of their names. And it makes no sense to say "M-I", because it's not an abbreviation for two words that start with "M" and "I". But thank you for participating in the conversation - that's what makes the comment section interesting!
Мил-24 = Mil-24
Or, as an abbreviation: Ми with "и" making the "e" sound in English, hence "Me-24"
Another interesting example would be "Mig-29". Nobody calls the aircraft "M - I - G - 29". It would make sense to call it "Me-Ge" because the heads of the design bureau were Mikojan and Gurevitch and the correct way of writing it is "MiG" / "МиГ".