Italy's AW249 Fenice

[Dawes]

Kind of looks like an Apache from the Marvel Universe. Wonder if Leonardo will score any export sales? The 48 that the Italian Army wants wouldn't appear to sustain the production line for very long.

https://helicopters.leonardo.com/en/products/aw249

[Burncycle360]

Neat, but I don't understand why any new attack helicopters are coming into existence without ejection seats.  This is low hanging fruit.

 

[Mr King]

On 4/28/2025 at 9:12 AM, Burncycle360 said:

Neat, but I don't understand why any new attack helicopters are coming into existence without ejection seats.  This is low hanging fruit.

 

I know there have been KA-52's shot down in Ukraine war, but are there any documented instances of their ejection seats being used successfully or even used at all?

[Burncycle360]

1 hour ago, Mr King said:

I know there have been KA-52's shot down in Ukraine war, but are there any documented instances of their ejection seats being used successfully or even used at all?

The first two both claim "first ever ejection" so I have no idea about the validity or authenticity of any of this.

Mid-March 2022: Pilots Major Roman Kobts and Captain Ivan Boldyrev from the 319th Separate Helicopter Regiment successfully ejected from a Ka-52 shot down by ground fire during a mission to cover ground troops in Ukraine. They landed safely, engaged in combat with enemy forces, and were rescued by an evacuation group. This was reported as the first-ever combat use of the Ka-52’s ejection system.

June 2022: Russian pilots Ivan Boldyrev and Roman Kobets were again cited for successfully ejecting from a Ka-52 during an incident in Ukraine, marking a historic event as the first recorded ejection from a helicopter in combat. The helicopter was hit, became uncontrollable, and began disintegrating, but both pilots remained conscious, ejected, and evaded Ukrainian artillery fire before being rescued.

 

September 2023: A Ka-52 crashed during a combat sortie, likely due to technical issues such as severe vibrations. Both pilots ejected successfully and were rescued, as confirmed by a Russian military channel

Additional Reports: Posts on X and other sources indicate at least three confirmed Ka-52 ejections during the conflict by February 2023, with one fully successful and two partially successful (one pilot reportedly died from landing on wreckage). Videos from early 2022 near Gostomel airport and other incidents in 2023 show pilots ejecting, though not all outcomes are clear.


A 2023 video of a Ka-52 shot down by Wagner PMC forces during their rebellion showed the rotor blades being jettisoned, but the pilots did not have enough altitude to complete the ejection, resulting in their deaths. (no idea if these are zero zero seats, or even if they were, weren't able to overcome the momentum of the helicopter as it was falling too close to the ground). 

Testing Phase: The K-37-800M system was successfully tested during the Ka-50/52’s development in the 1980s and 1990s. Zvezda, the manufacturer, confirmed the system’s functionality in controlled drops from cranes and flight tests, but these were non-combat scenarios. Historical tests showed the system could work at altitudes above 100 meters, with parachute deployment taking about 8 seconds, but no real-world combat ejections were recorded pre-2022.

Apparently something like 61 KA-52 helicopters were lost according to various sources, so it could be that many didn't eject, ejection failed, or they decided to autorotate instead.  The point is, autorotation isn't going to work when you're not structurally intact and your controls aren't responsive, which can and does happen in shoot downs.

While it doesn't make sense in transport helicopters as the crew isn't going to leave the passengers, for attack helicopters it seems pretty straightforward; explosive bolts shed the rotors, which naturally fly outward due to the centripetal force, and a fraction of a second later the seats eject. Sequenced ejections are common and matured technology, I can't think of any viable technical reason they couldn't be incorporated except for tradition and institutional inertia.

Edited April 29 by Burncycle360

[Mr King]

5 minutes ago, Burncycle360 said:

The first two both claim "first ever ejection" so I have no idea about the validity or authenticity of any of this.

Mid-March 2022: Pilots Major Roman Kobts and Captain Ivan Boldyrev from the 319th Separate Helicopter Regiment successfully ejected from a Ka-52 shot down by ground fire during a mission to cover ground troops in Ukraine. They landed safely, engaged in combat with enemy forces, and were rescued by an evacuation group. This was reported as the first-ever combat use of the Ka-52’s ejection system.

June 2022: Russian pilots Ivan Boldyrev and Roman Kobets were again cited for successfully ejecting from a Ka-52 during an incident in Ukraine, marking a historic event as the first recorded ejection from a helicopter in combat. The helicopter was hit, became uncontrollable, and began disintegrating, but both pilots remained conscious, ejected, and evaded Ukrainian artillery fire before being rescued.

 

September 2023: A Ka-52 crashed during a combat sortie, likely due to technical issues such as severe vibrations. Both pilots ejected successfully and were rescued, as confirmed by a Russian military channel

Additional Reports: Posts on X and other sources indicate at least three confirmed Ka-52 ejections during the conflict by February 2023, with one fully successful and two partially successful (one pilot reportedly died from landing on wreckage). Videos from early 2022 near Gostomel airport and other incidents in 2023 show pilots ejecting, though not all outcomes are clear.


A 2023 video of a Ka-52 shot down by Wagner PMC forces during their rebellion showed the rotor blades being jettisoned, but the pilots did not have enough altitude to complete the ejection, resulting in their deaths. (no idea if these are zero zero seats, or even if they were, weren't able to overcome the momentum of the helicopter as it was falling too close to the ground). 

Testing Phase: The K-37-800M system was successfully tested during the Ka-50/52’s development in the 1980s and 1990s. Zvezda, the manufacturer, confirmed the system’s functionality in controlled drops from cranes and flight tests, but these were non-combat scenarios. Historical tests showed the system could work at altitudes above 100 meters, with parachute deployment taking about 8 seconds, but no real-world combat ejections were recorded pre-2022.

Apparently something like 61 KA-52 helicopters were lost according to various sources, so it could be that many didn't eject, ejection failed, or they decided to autorotate instead.  The point is, autorotation isn't going to work when you're not structurally intact and your controls aren't responsive, which can and does happen in shoot downs.

While it doesn't make sense in transport helicopters as the crew isn't going to leave the passengers, for attack helicopters it seems pretty straightforward; explosive bolts shed the rotors, which naturally fly outward due to the centripetal force, and a fraction of a second later the seats eject. Sequenced ejections are common and matured technology, I can't think of any viable technical reason they couldn't be incorporated except for tradition and institutional inertia.

Thanks for that summery. It is an interesting read. I had no idea they have lost 62 KA-52's alone.

[Dawes]

Seems like the ejection system has to work 100% for this to be successful, and it seemingly has so far. If the explosive bolts (?) fail to function and separate the rotor blades it would seem to result in an unhappy ending. 

[seahawk]

On 4/28/2025 at 4:12 PM, Burncycle360 said:

Neat, but I don't understand why any new attack helicopters are coming into existence without ejection seats.  This is low hanging fruit.

 

That depends on how you plan to operate. Italy and the A129 operate at very low level, so the time to remove the rotors and eject is not sufficient.

[Burncycle360]

3 hours ago, seahawk said:

That depends on how you plan to operate. Italy and the A129 operate at very low level, so the time to remove the rotors and eject is not sufficient.

 

This is too broad a statement, one cannot predict the circumstances generally enough to make such a declaration. 
 

[seahawk]

Well, you can. There is a doctrinal difference between Russia and the West on how to operate attack helicopters. In the end you can make the craft more crash resistant with cushioning seats and structure or you can add ejection seats. The basic parameter for the decision is the flying height. A crash resistant craft is preferable, when you expect to fly so low that the time for removing the rotor blades and ejecting the crew is considered insufficient in most cases. 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Arguably the only real solution is to take the crew out of the cockpit entirely.

[Ivanhoe]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Arguably the only real solution is to take the crew out of the cockpit entirely.

There's a much sexier solution;

 

[Burncycle360]

4 hours ago, seahawk said:

Well, you can. There is a doctrinal difference between Russia and the West on how to operate attack helicopters. In the end you can make the craft more crash resistant with cushioning seats and structure or you can add ejection seats. The basic parameter for the decision is the flying height. A crash resistant craft is preferable, when you expect to fly so low that the time for removing the rotor blades and ejecting the crew is considered insufficient in most cases. 

No, what I mean is that this is not a compelling argument. Doctrinal operational altitude and flying height at the time of the incident (and at time of ejection) may vary widely, you cannot see into the future.  Not to mention helicopters may be operating at differing heights depending on METT-TC and other factors (ie, training).  You cannot proclaim "we will always operate too low for an ejection seat to be useful, therefore it doesn't make sense to include one" and consider it a serious argument.

Doctrinal operational altitude is not a good metric in isolation, nor is flying height at time of incident alone a good metric for determining whether or not ejection is plausible.   What matters is a combination of factors that include altitude at loss of control (which, as mentioned, may vary widely from doctrinal altitude for a variety of reasons) and vertical velocity / sink rate at the decision time which, if excessive, may overcome the ability for even a zero-zero seat to get someone safely away.  There have been multiple instances in Ukraine of helicopters that were fatally hit at or even below treetop level that were able to trade speed for altitude (either intended or unintended) in which case ejection is entirely plausible even if autorotation were not due to partial or complete loss of control authority.  In other cases, the aircraft drops like a rock from treetop level, and there's not squat that could have been done about it no matter what. In the case of a prospective system, manual only or automatic initiation also plays a factor with regards to response time.

You can make a crashworthy aircraft with ejection seats, these are not mutually exclusive.  Precluding ejection as option to pilots at the conceptual stage, not knowing the circumstances of every future aircraft loss, certainly condemns crews that didn't have to die, particularly when there's no technical reason preventing integration of an ejection system.  That's what I'm balking at.  Integrating ejection seats is not high-risk from a development standpoint, it's moderate risk at worst, and can easily be reversed at any time during the development phase of a new attack helicopter without interrupting the rest of the development.
 

[seahawk]

It is a basic design decision. The original ka-50 was single seat and meant to be a pure attack helicopter with the planed KA-60 scout helicopter to provide targeting data. Ka-50 would then sweep in at high speeds and rather high for a helicopter fire and turn away, just like Soviet helicopters do in the Ukraine.

Mil-28 was more looking at the western design principles and got the full set of avionics and do the targeting itself and attack from treetop level. It also ha no ejection seats.

[Burncycle360]

Yep, I'm aware

[Olof Larsson]

6 hours ago, seahawk said:

Well, you can. There is a doctrinal difference between Russia and the West on how to operate attack helicopters. In the end you can make the craft more crash resistant with cushioning seats and structure or you can add ejection seats. The basic parameter for the decision is the flying height. A crash resistant craft is preferable, when you expect to fly so low that the time for removing the rotor blades and ejecting the crew is considered insufficient in most cases. 

Irrespecitve of how high you intend to fly, reality tends to change things. Look for instance at the altitudes that A-6's, F-111's, A-10's and Buccaneers operated in the Gulf. And AH's might be called upon to do such missions as ground convoy escort, anti UAV and so on, where they have to climb higher to be effecitve. Furthermore one can combine ejection seats, with a crashworthy aircraft. You can also have a autoejection system in case of fuselage disintegration, as well as shutting the ejection seats of, below a certain altitude, or under certain parameters (altitude and sink rate).

[bojan]

On 4/29/2025 at 7:53 PM, Mr King said:

I know there have been KA-52's shot down in Ukraine war, but are there any documented instances of their ejection seats being used successfully or even used at all?

Yes, at least two instances where both crew survived and at least one where single crew survived.

PS. There are 0-0 ejection seats, so even at very low levels ejection might be possible.

[DB]

On 4/29/2025 at 11:15 PM, Dawes said:

Seems like the ejection system has to work 100% for this to be successful, and it seemingly has so far. If the explosive bolts (?) fail to function and separate the rotor blades it would seem to result in an unhappy ending. 

At the risk of being obvious, ejection seats pretty much have to work perfectly every time they're used anyway. If the seats are similar in design to aircraft seats, then indeed the additional complexity for separating the rotors would likely increase the failure rate. And that's even without the additional failure modes related to making those systems safe on the ground. I wonder if it's guaranteed Cuisinart if the separation fails.