It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by chinawhite
Originally posted by longbow
No. No helicopter can carry 100 people. The largest US helicopter is Sea Stallion with over 50 soldiers. Russians have bigger Mi-26, but it cannot carry 100 people too.
There are 40 fold-down seats along the cargo bay, and 60 more seats can be fitted in the center aisle of the cargo bay.
www.vectorsite.net...
This states 100 already in a sitting position. So It is already possible
But knowing the russians 100 troops is not their limit. The actual heicopter had 140 troops insdie with 115 being killed. I think the numbers actually stated are for longer missions while i think in that situation they were ferrying troops from one base to another on a short trip.
Article frm pravada
The number of lives lost in the August 19th helicopter crash in Chechnya has reached 115 as yet another crash survivor died at the hospital of the North Caucasian Military District. The helicopter, a Mi-26 troop-carrier, had been heading for the Russian military base in Khankala with 140 servicemen on board.
Pravada
Notice this is not the rumoured number its the offical number
Mi-26: Russia's airborne 'cow'
If this is true it is the largest stupidity I ever heard - squeezing 140 people into ONE helicopter? BTW proper load for Mi-26 is 85 troops. What they were thinking? One malfunction and entire company is dead.
Originally posted by longbow
Originally posted by chinawhite
Originally posted by longbow
No. No helicopter can carry 100 people. The largest US helicopter is Sea Stallion with over 50 soldiers. Russians have bigger Mi-26, but it cannot carry 100 people too.
There are 40 fold-down seats along the cargo bay, and 60 more seats can be fitted in the center aisle of the cargo bay.
www.vectorsite.net...
This states 100 already in a sitting position. So It is already possible
But knowing the russians 100 troops is not their limit. The actual heicopter had 140 troops insdie with 115 being killed. I think the numbers actually stated are for longer missions while i think in that situation they were ferrying troops from one base to another on a short trip.
Article frm pravada
The number of lives lost in the August 19th helicopter crash in Chechnya has reached 115 as yet another crash survivor died at the hospital of the North Caucasian Military District. The helicopter, a Mi-26 troop-carrier, had been heading for the Russian military base in Khankala with 140 servicemen on board.
Pravada
Notice this is not the rumoured number its the offical number
Mi-26: Russia's airborne 'cow'
If this is true it is the largest stupidity I ever heard - squeezing 140 people into ONE helicopter? BTW proper load for Mi-26 is 85 troops. What they were thinking? One malfunction and entire company is dead.
[edit on 29-12-2005 by longbow]
Originally posted by Senor Freebie
F-14 was retired in 2004. AIM-54 was retired in the 1990's. This leaves the AMRAAM-C with its 48km range as the longest range missile in the United States Navy. This is a Navy that faces threats from aircraft that can launch anti ship missiles at over 300km. With that sort of range they are screwed in an emergency situation. The R-77 only needs a data link and some custom software to work on US warplanes. Admittedly it could probably only work on an AESA radar equipped fighter but they are already in service. You'd have the choice of the following from what I've heard:
If you still think its BS ask yourself this; how does the US Navy plan on maintaining fleet defence when its maximum missile range on aircraft went from 185km to 48km with the retirement of the AIM-54 pheonix and if this is an acceptable hole in their defence umbrella why are they developing the AMRAAM-D with a range in excess of 100km solely for use by F/A18's?
Originally posted by mad scientist
Ahem numerous websites quote the R-77 as only having a range of 50km. So they have no range advantage over the AMRAAM.
Originally posted by chinawhite
You might have mis-read. It might be measured in miles instead of km. Because common range is 80km which equals 50miles(roughly)
Or check the seeker and the version
The most recent Russian R-77 medium-range missiles (AA-12 "AMRAAMSKI") is similar to and in some respects equal to the American AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. The R-77 missile has an active radar finder and a maximim range of 90-100 kilometers (50 km more than AMRAAM) and flies at four times the speed of sound.
The range of the R-77 is between 50km and 80km depending on the model
www.sinodefence.com...
The AA-12 has a range of up to 31 miles — about the same range as the AIM-120. The missile is guided by an active radar finder that helps it home in on flying aircraft.
taiwansecurity.org...
Originally posted by PaddyInf
I know that in 1982 the British shoved 86 paras into one chinook as most of the rotary fleet were lost when the main carrier was sunk. Often need out weighs app.arent common sense
Originally posted by mad scientist
Nope on the contrary it seems you may have misread your information, it only has a range of about 50 km not miles.
I guess it all depends wher you get your information from.