Why Are Russian Helicopters Shooting Up at the Sky? 

I bet the comments below this would be worth reading! Prove me right 😉

When I flew helicopters in the US Army, we lofted rockets. There are several reasons, if you have airburst rockets you can get good dispersion, wide area coverage, and there is also a possibility of guided rockets. The US now has 2.75” guided rockets.

in fact, at the beginning of the war in Ukraine, a Russian helicopter pilot explained that the computer in the helicopters has information about the target, that everything is automated, so that at a certain angle it receives a sound to fire rockets.. of course he said that it is not precise, but that the goal is to hit a certain quadrant. .. it is about a large number of rockets fired that will hit the same quadrant where the enemy soldiers are.. and usually there are 2 helicopters in a pair

Not sure if somebody mentioned it before as I don't have time to read all the comments, Russians have developed pretty good outomatic launch for this kind of maneuver, with newest being able to calculate with wind and weather to further enhance precision, and when you combine good calculation with accuracy by volume, it can suppress enemy, either stopping their advance or shells shocking and than push their position.

Pilots on Russian side confirmed the targeting computers are updated for rocket "loft" and they say it is much more accurate then you would think. Pilot seemed to note high accuracy is only relevant for heavier rockets (?). Should note I had to use Google translate so I might get some of the details wrong. US heli pilot noted they've known of this heli "artillery" support tactic of the Soviets for a long time.

I dont think the mission of these rockets is to blow up something specific. Its to inflict area damage , make the enemy force lay low and allow your own troops to advance. While still keep the helicopter in a safe distance away from AA's way. If it didnt work , it wouldnt be used.

Actually, LOFT bombing is quite common still. The F/A-18 even has a LOFT mode I think. This is probably because (if I'm wrong tell me) SAM sites like S-400s on flat land can wipe out anything above the horizon, including HARMs. So non-stealth aircraft without Mavericks or JSOWs and such in a pinch have to fly low up to it and pop up before running away in a 180°. That's why stealth is so desirable, because it makes it harder to lock you, especially because large radars can probably see you (but not make you undetectable.).

Loft bombing can be surprisingly accurate. As long as the pilot deploys the weapon at the correct Speed, Angle, Altitude and direction. They will come racing down on the desired enemy position, ammo dump, headquarters, equipment concentration or troop concentration. And According to reports, they have managed to do just that more often than one might think.

The South African Air Force Mirages perfected the toss bombing techniques during the Angolan bush war in the 80’s. There were no guided weapons but plenty of SAM, both radar guided and MANPADS. This was the only way to hit enemy targets. Skim in at tree top level, toss the bombs, turn and run before the SAMs could lock onto you.

4:58 wow! An inverted B-47? So it wasn't just a Boeing pilot doing loops with a 707 then. That's insane!

I saw a toss-bombing maneuver on board the USS Enterprise in 1996. It was the last deployment of the A-6 and they were doing a demonstration

Back in the late 80s (as a kid) I read that the UK Sea Harriers also employed toss bombing in 1982 during the Falklands War.

I'd say technique is to harass positions rather than damage / target specific objects. Maybe trying to overwhelm enemy radar & AA systems Parrallel to other munitions to clutter up the airspace or give false alarms or simply to test the depth & locations of enemy AA

I'd rather assume that this technique is simply used to supress the enemy and stress them mentally because there are random explosions everywhere

Loved seeing the A-4 loft bombing video! I used to work on A-4 avionics, which included the LABS system. With the LABS timer and an identification point, the pilot could complete the bombing run with a nuclear flash shield over the cockpit. The needles on the AJB3 "meatball" would provide the guidance on when and how to pull up. The accuracy was good enough for nukes... not sure you'd want to do it for conventional ordnance.

Just so you know, its not that lofting bombs is an outdated practice now, in fact, guided modern munitions have made lobbing or lofting bombs even more accurate than before from high up and fast. The reason why its not done is because you rarely need to in the modern battlefield, where if a site is too well defended, a complex multi mission system to deal with the threats first is used, or stealth bombers are used. But technically modern planes can still do it.

Lobbing bombs is built into modern targeting chip ccrp systems. It was used by the Tornados in Desert Storm to get some kind of stand off because there it was not able to use guided munitions without a ground laser until the Buccaneer arrived.

I do this tactic in DCS in my Russian Mi-24 and KA-50, it works pretty well, surprisingly. safe from SAM systems, quick, rtb and rearm... rinse repeat I should specify. in the Ka-50 for example, you have a Navigation target point that you can set. your hud displays direction and distance. when you come within 10.5km, you angle up to 45 degrees. 10.5 in DCS was about the max effective for the S-8OFP, while 9.5 you can get accurate hits within 100m of target, firing at a 35 degree incline. im certain Russian and Ukrainian manuals have mentioned this, as Ukrainian Mi-8's have been seen doing the same. but it would obviously be easier with a system that has Satellite navigation, like KA-52, Mi-35 and Mi-28NM

When you see the impact of those rockets, it all starts to make sense. Great suppression tactic.

bomb tossing is still a technique used today for lofting ordnance. Specifically, JDAMs, CBU-97/107 WCMDs, and in some cases GBU-2* family laser guided bombs if the launch aircraft isnt lasing but a buddy lase on the ground. Even walleye glide bombs can be tossed and get a decent extended range. Theoretically possible to loft a GPS guided bomb over 30 miles in certain conditions.

The techinque can be pretty effective and accurate with enough practice agains soft targets like infantry, trucks ets(kamovs have datalink, so the pilot knows the range to the marked target, knows exact direction, and then its just a simple calculation that can be done by head when to toss the amunition in to the air). In addition lofting rockets like this gets pretty interesting when paired with US APKWS kit, especially with jtac around.

I think it just help extend the range from the ballistic calculation computer so the rocket hit what you want just with longer distance

"its not what you think" Its exactly what I thought!

More or less it's trading accuracy for range with unguided rockets. But if you're basically using proximity fused fragmentation rockets to put shrapnel over an area bigger than some sports playing field, having a shotgun type approach doesn't need too much accuracy anyways. Those are an area weapon, so a direct hit on something isn't the goal anyways.

let me quote "FighterBomber" - famous Russian military aviation blogger 1) the Ka-52 sighting system automatically calculates all the parameters of the combat use of unguided missiles with a pitch-up, taking into account wind, ballistic characteristics of missiles, angles, speeds, and other things, which makes it possible to lay most of the 40 S-8 missiles in a circle with a radius of 50 meters. 2) A little more about cabling. Unfortunately, I could not find for you either a drone operator, or an ordinary infantryman, or a military correspondent, or a tiktoker, or even a photographer to tell you about the effectiveness of this method of combat use, so listen to a combat helicopter pilot who is directly involved in these very cabrios. Published with minimal editing. "Good morning FB! They periodically write about the inefficiency of firing from a roll-up. Say, by, do not fall into the sky and so on. In a number of cases, this was the case in the early days. Still, this type of shooting was not practiced at the training grounds during training flights and exercises. So, we looked at what it was and forgot about it. A large amount of ammunition is needed, and even when four missiles are flying, it is very difficult to assess the hit. And there are no mavics at the landfills. We trained at half a block per attack, but at 40 NAR per takeoff. That is, we can’t plan many sorties for training, we get out of the missile limit for a shift.And in the exercises, the bosses are generally not interested if missiles just fly in from nowhere or, conversely, if a helicopter attacks a target that is beyond the horizon for them. But in Ukraine, after three or four sorties, the pilots got their hands full and are now covering the center of the dispersion ellipse with a calculation of plus or minus 50 meters. And after the on-board computers of helicopters were supplied with software for calculating pitch-up firing for all types of NAR, the deviation results are close to zero. Heavy rockets fly more accurately and are less affected by wind and other external conditions in flight. I have individuals who, in one attack, use the S-13 from a nose-up, then dive again and fire the C-8 from a new nose-up at an adjacent target. And after all, they fall according to the data of the drone. It is a pity that not all helicopters can use heavy unguided rockets yet. But we are working on it. So, ... on September 2 S-13s out of 6 launched from Mi-28s hit a building converted into a warehouse. The explosion turned out like an atomic one, it burned for another day after that. A direct hit from seven (!!!) kilometers by an unguided rocket is, of course, an element of luck, but there will be no luck without skill. So with the cabling, we are doing very well. In vain they write about the low efficiency of this method. It is not inferior to use from a horizontal flight from two kilometers, because even from two kilometers you will not see a target like people in the trenches in the landing. And all the same, you will work stupidly along the coordinates, as well as from the cabling. Then what's the difference how to shoot if the results are comparable. Only taking into account the large number of MANPADS from the enemy, when firing from 2 km, we would have run out of helicopters and crews by the time this comment was written. 3) Once again, I will explain about the work of unguided rockets helicopters and attack aircraft from a pitch-up. This is the only way to work with cheap (and therefore massive) weapons without entering the enemy’s MANPADS operation zone, of which the enemy has thousands. Yes, this method is only suitable for working on area targets. Big. Well, fucking scary, Grads, TOSs, Smerchs, Tornadoes also work in areas and no one complains about their accuracy and usefulness. Though of course he's complaining. There will always be someone who will complain about something. It's an immutable law of existence. Understand and forgive. The principle of working with cabling is simple. On those machines on which the sighting system is not able to read the parameters of the work of NARs from the pitch-up, a plate is drawn up in which the speeds, altitudes, pitch angles and ballistic characteristics of the NAR are written. Then the coordinates of the target are hammered into the car and at the distance calculated from this plate to the target they fire. Tactical aviation is still hitting with long-range guided and homing missiles and ballistic missiles. Everyone in a row. And cunning modifications of the Kh-59 and Iskanders and other ammunition unknown to the general public with nowhere documented capabilities. They were made, as it turns out, in the dark, but it’s clear to hell they are spent very carefully, because their production cycle is relatively large, there are many goals, and tomorrow the SVO will definitely not end. Therefore, the goals for them are chosen very carefully. Strategists and rangers are firing cruise missiles at everything that is further away. Scouts - reconnaissance. Fighters - exterminate. Electronic warfare aircraft and helicopters interfere. A-50, to the best of their ability, control the airspace. Nobody sits idle. All work.

It's funny how everyone he says: "It's not what you think", It's exactly what I was thinking ^^

You always gotta love a NWYT video

Excellent video!!

"Trying to shoot down Star Link?" With those tiny little rockets.... Man don't play with me like that. 😂

They're just shooting off some expensive fireworks.

It turned out to be exactly what I thought. Still an awesome video though 👍

You missed the fact; the US Air Force used this exact technique during the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003 to lob conventional bombs. I know because I was on the ground calling in airstrikes on Iraqi Army units for the initial combat phase of the operation in northern Iraq. Even when providing support to US Special Operations units engaged in combat operations, the Air Force would not risk aircraft and pilots by flying over the target area because of the threat of anti-aircraft fire, even when there were no AA weapon systems in the area. Instead, when we called for air support, F-16s, F-1s, and even the last F-14s ever flown ( I couldn't believe it when they checked in with us on the radio), would program the target coordinates into GPS-guided JDAM bombs, then pull up into a step climb and lob the bomb toward the target. We never heard the aircraft unless/until they turned away and increased power while exiting the area. After the pilots announced releasing the bomb, we always asked for the "fall time", which is the time from release to impact. It was often well over 1 minute, which is a relatively long time. In my experience, the bombs frequently missed the target by a wide enough margin to be ineffective. The F-14s allocated to us for one mission missed by a very wide margin, and one bomb (I can't remember the aircraft type) struck behind my team. For numerous reasons that go beyond the use of this tactic, I was left with a very negative view of importance that the US Air Force as an organization placed on providing air support to ground forces.

On the simulator games you strafe at a distance, the hud shows where it’s going to land, accounts for your angle, distance to the point as you pull the trigger. Reck a column. Pull up diagonally if your not inline with the column. Shoot from a distance

Ukrainian Air Force / Army does the same not to get into the "hot" range.

Helicopters are extremely vulnerable to aircraft and AA, so I guess the only non-suicidal way to get any value from them and those rockets is to do THIS - extremely mobile low accuracy artillery. How would you use helicopters if every enemy platoon had a Stinger or two?

как я понимаю, информация о цели вводиться в бортовой компьютер, и он тебе говорит когда и на какой угол нужно задрать нос, а ракеты уже уходят сами при достижении нужного угла. Такой метод довольно практичный и точность довольно высока.

Man watching a tiny A-4 drop a bomb half the size of it will never get old😂

Been watching this channel for awhile and I am impressed with the accuracy of each video. Off the topic my dad was one of the engineers that developed the X-15 project. I believe it was in California way before I was born. I've always been into aviation technology.

Using helicopter as artillery may not be accurate but the idea is interesting In future we may see more accurate drone which fly low and shots artillery to replace artillery vehicles as artillery vehicles need to relocate fast after firing to prevent counters attack on firing locations

we used this technique in the angolan bush war in the 80s , we used this because of sam missiles locking on if we just dropped them . speed was increased then nose up and release when prompted by bombing computer and laser range finder. F1AZ

- "Real reason is not what you think" - *is exactly what I think*

I knew that one, yet still I came to hear Not What You Think explain it😁😁🥰

Wow Not What You Think this might be my favorite video of yours yet. You're a total inspiration and actually because of seeing your success I've decided to start making videos too! Keep grinding, your hard work clearly pays off!"

Dive bombing was super dangerous due to the presence of AA gun fire. Unless you are in World of Warships where your plane has a mechanic hanging outside the cockpit who fixes the plane when hit and the plane itself goes immune to AA fire where conducting an attack.

I have seen one impact video of these attacks. they mostly show firing but if anyone saw the impact it might make sense to fire onto a forest areas like dibrova, Lyman or cities like bukmut where hitting anywhere can consider good fire, because it's mostly about putting pressure and giving no time to rest more than killing them. mostly these could be routine attacks for example artillery shell enemy for few hours then Su 25 duos fire rockets while artillery crew take some rest, do maintenance and resupply ammo. after them MLRS start firing for sometime then helicopters take the job. which give different units time to resupply and organise while constantly putting pressure on the enemy.

This technique is actually quite accurate. The pilot follows a preset flight path. The setting of the angle is done with the assistance of a computer which calculates everything real time and allows accurate rocket placement even with deviations from the flight path. The most difficult part is target designation. The computer needs to know what it is shooting that. Primarily GLONAS (Russian GPS) is used. This grants limited accuracy as GPS is relatively innacurate and slow compared to a target designator. Target designators are usually carried by recon groups and allow for very close front line fire support, which a regular mrls cannot do. This is why the helicopters and attack planes shoot out flares and turn sharply out of the way as soon as they fire a salvo. MANPADS are a real threat. Also, the practical range is about 5km max. Shots past that are rarely used unless it is a Su-25 firing at an artillery position.

A weird diversion in the end since this technique is used mostly in open land; I wouldn't wonder if air support is where the artillery is abscent. Let alone the Kh-22 rockets presented simultaneously are intrinsically hella imprecise (pretty much to the point of incomparability). Not to defend the moskals but why introduce an impractical topic?

Finally my warthunder calculation is actually useful

CCRP (Continually Computed Release Point) is a mode that is used by bomber fighters, with one resource, to deliver a bell-shaped military charge at a safe distance from close air defenses. This is one of the modes commonly used with GBUs to avoid entering the AAA range, just like the first fighter in your video does. So it doesn't date from the 50s, it's still used, at least on the F-16 block 50/52...

I always assumed that if they went back to base with rockets left over they would know they didn't even try to fight

It's definitely not the same as actual aircraft, but in VTOL vr i do this with the helicopter to get more range on the gps guided rocket boosted glide bombs.

No, people actually simulated rocket lofting in DCS:World and that could be very precise against soft targets, if you make careful calculations for trajectory, the final coverage for a 10km loft from a Ka-50, could get you a 200m x 40m kill zone at the target side. Which is not very big deviation against a big free fall bomb. If performed by modern avionics which regulates fire control and flight control at the same time you could get a more precise kill zone.

So like always, it's exactly as I thought.

I like the fact that its taken as a given than these attacks are completely inprecise and never hit the target. From the impact footage shown the precision seems to be very good. Accuracy can also be good (meaning that the tightly packed shots are delivered on the intended location) since these are most likely aimed at the target by the computer. This probably works like the cannon on fighter jets, the pilot only has to point to the right direction (which is shown on the hud) and then the computer automaticaly fires. Russia is ofc not going to use such a strike on a location with civilians, lets say a city for multiple reasons, one of them being that the buildings provide coverage. Another reason Russia will not do that is because these are short range strikes and are delivered on the line of conduct, not deep in the enemy mainland, Russia cannot fly a KA52 5km outside Kiev to strike. These rockets are most likely used in open fields against known enemy locations, for example enemy howitzers. The idea that all unguided weapons are useless because there are guided ones is not true for me. In an era were major powers still operate towed artillery with no protection for the operators in a ww1 like trench battlefield, rocket strikes from helicopters can be a very big threat to anyone on the ground and you will have to hide in your trench when the strike takes place. The fact the the strike has such a small but intense duration means the enemy will have close to no time to hide. To sum up, the burn duration can be very finely adjusted is modern manufacturing, and Russia-Ukraine both have long experience with rocket artillery.

Well anyone who went to school(atleast the basic) could understand this...

Rockets are not unpredictable. They use the SPV-24 via Glonass to calculations, getting the effect of an aerial artilery over the target.

Dude..... the reason why they're doing this is because, 1: they have computer assisted aim to keep the rockets on target and 2: this gives them greater range and keeps them out of the threat of MANPADS. This video could've been 30 seconds long had you taken 2mins to Google it.

The Russians do this in order to increase the range of those Rockets And surprisingly those are very accurate I saw a video of those rockets falling. It is impossible for the soldiers to survive in the area where those rockets fell

8:41 have never thought I would see my city in vid like that Мої спічуття сім'ям всіх загибших в Амсторі

I feel like we're watching The History Channel with this antiquated technology.

the explanation of unguided rockets ballistics on example of free fall bombs was brilliant)))) make more videos, may be CNN will note you

The more I see of Russian weapons systems, the less impressed I am by them. Such an inaccurate technique is inefficient unless one considers the ground itself a useful target.

Lofting is fairly common especially for post-Soviet nations militaries. It's all thanks to the SVP-24 multi data combination ballistic computer. This computer gathers data from multiple sources including forward scouts and calculates multiple veriables including altitude, humidity, etc to give the pilot the angle at which he needs to shoot the rockets to launch a fairly accurate barrage of rockets from a long distance. Basically, the pilot doesn't need to see the target himself, the ballistic computer handles all that.

If you watch the helicopter vids, they have a tone that tells them to go to 30-35deg, and then a tone that tells them when to launch. The targeting computer knows where the target is, and calculates the fire point to hit the target. The unguided rocket is an area suppression weapon, not a point target anyways, so they are not gonna be accurate even on straight line firing. They are used on light armored vehicles and troops in the open. This is an effective method to hit the same area target from outside of MANPADS range. It is the same as MLRS, just smaller rockets, smaller warheads, so smaller area of effect.

The equivalent of blind firing your weapon over the wall 😂

In WWll some British pilots didn’t want to engage in combat, so they emptied their guns in to the countryside. Maybe the Russians are also doing this?

Old man -yells- shoots at cloud.

The S-8 80mm rockets are fired from a fixed pod which means the gunner has to align the helicopters vertical axis to the impact point of the rockets using the ballistic computer. The maximum range for these 80mm rockets is around 4km but lobbing them like this can extend the range to about 6km. This is done on purpose for area effect on multiple soft targets and personnel but if they need to engage a tank, they would use the Vikhr laser guided missile which has a range of 10km.

I seem to remember an AF school that called this FOBS for Fractional Orbital Bomb System. A computer would release the bomb and the AC would invert and lite the AB to get away.

I feel like you dont really have to aim a nuke...

Yea, lets gloss over the fact that some kamov-s or Mi-24's from russia do this while having ATGM capable heli's that do ranged attacks. While EVERY SINGLE Ukranian helicopter that has footage is seen doing this. Russia bad amirite?

Fireing over horizon is a good tactic tho. Anti air fire in straight line and if they are behind the hill, they cant shut you down if you fire the rockets into air at range and simply wait for them to fall down randomly. Its kinda extended artilery for to risky areas.

This reminded me of the physics puzzle: Suppose you can throw a ball at some constant speed v off the ground. At which angle (alpha) do you need to throw the ball to maximize the distance at which the ball hits the ground. Answer: 45 degrees, as the ball will be able to travel the distance x=v^2*sin(2*alpha)/g (g being the Earth acceleration (constant)). Maximum is attained at 2*alpha=pi/2=90degrees. If you're already moving at some height, then the angle will change, but the idea stays the same.

So you're telling us that being shot by the missle is better than loosing some flares to avoid LOOSING AN EXPENCIVE PIECE OF ARMY-ISSUE EQUIPMENT. And most of all KA choppers are glass cannons and Mi's are flying boulders

I've done that in war thunder to hit targets without being hit by AA or getting into the enemy spawn zones.

If a mad dog bites you, you do not bite the dog back

F111 Aircrews were trained in and used Toss Mode bombing in Vietnam and up through the 90's when the birds were retired from service. Hate to tell you, but the technique is still used, especially if you are delivering GBU unthrusted ordinance.

Precision is easy when your target is a whole city.

Ukraine bombed Donetsk and Lugansk with civilians and children long before the war. And none of you bothered to condemn it.

Yay my question is finally answered 🙌

As for the question at the end. No. Just because your opponent is doing war crimes don't justify you following the same path, and I don't believe Ukraine would get the help they are getting from the world if they started doing war crimes.

By international law it does not justify retaliation by the same means but since Ukraine is a defending force with support of majority of western world no one will actually charge them for doing whatever they need even if it is in direct violation of international laws.

That's why you need MAWRs (Missile approach warning receivers) on your attack choppers and Attack choppers should compliment the ground Armor which in turn compliments the Infantry. But since this is a "Special Operation" That won't happen.

Yeah this is a strat I liked using in battlefield games too where you just spray and spray and hope you hit something

Since when america too followed geniva convention,shop shoving down buzz words

This manoeuvre was developed in order to be able to toss a nuclear weapon on a target without the aircraft overflying the target and so it could fly away as quickly as possible, and get as far away as possible

About the question of "If Russia is firing indiscriminate, should Ukrain be allow to do it 2?" IMO it's a fairly simple answer to a complex situation. "That someone else does something bad, doesn't mean your justified to do that bad thing yourself, it wouldn't make you any better then them" I know War's are written by the victors, but that doesn't mean we can be inhumane (Even tough starting a war is a inhumane fact for itself, let's not forget that!)

The Geneva suggestion has only been thrown around but not used or put in practice.

If american or nato avation do the same exact thing like ukraine and russian do western Media and the people will said wow its precision 100% accurate

Hello from Germany

I mean we definitely have used toss bombing fairly recently from the US side. One notable report was during desert storm. And I'm sure it's still a practiced maneuver even with more advanced tech on the horizon and in deployment. The desert Storm example I know was using a laser guided bomb and the loft maneuver was used intentionally to keep the aircraft further away from what remained of the anti-air defense systems in the area. It would not surprise me if the f-35 has a mode switch for loft bombing considering the US has historically used it with most of our modern fighter bombers

Greetings from Russia. These are NURSs (Unguided Rocket). They do not have guidance and therefore are released over the area in the event of a shot from "cabrer" (the method shown in the video, when the helicopter's nose is raised). It is necessary for them to fly further, that's all. It is more dangerous to fly closer, since there is a risk that you will be shot down by MANPADS.

that destroyed apartment block shown at the end was a result of Ukraine shooting down a precision guided weapon which then fell on the apartment block - this is the result of placing military hardware in civilian areas - aka using human shields

This is a hard-core propaganda channel unfortunately. Still interested in the technical information but this guy is about as balanced as the cia.

Confucius say: Woman who fly airplane upside-down have hairy crack up.

Toss bombing was practiced by the 7th fleet in 1956-57. One of the pilots managed to "toss himself in the drink". All we found was his helmet. As for indiscriminate bombing.... what? That is exactly what the Allies did so unsuccessfully over Germany in WWII. Nobody was charged with war crimes for that, nor since.

Everything before 5:20 is why an aircraft would have an actually meaningful reasons to shoot or drop their bombs at a high angle. The take-away is that Russian helicopters are doing *none* of those and instead just firing blindly and hoping to hit something, anything, no matter what it is. They are terrified (justifiably) of getting remotely near the frontlines and are just dumping their missiles indiscriminately, which is just one more war-crime.

Ukraine is justified in using the tactic because I doubt they would use the tactic in an area where collateral damage is possible, for russia they dont care if they hit a civilian structures as we all have seen with their attacks using guided munitions on civilian targets. So they wouldnt use careful consideration with unguided munitions.

They're trying to shoot down the Oppressor MK2

Ukraine is using the same technique. In russia it's called shooting from pitching (стрельба с кабрирования). It was first used in Afghan war as the Mujahedins had already man pads