Ka-50N or Mi-28N?

Which is better? Opinions? Here’s mine:

– Ka-50 won the competition originally based on better agility, longer missile range (Vikhr-M 10km over Ataka 8km), greater ammunition load (for the cannon), heavier armor and more accurate weapons delivery (superior attack systems?).

– Ka-50 airframe has reduced vulnerability (no tail rotor, the primary reason for attack helo combat losses), compact airframe, benign handling characteristics, lack of rpm limitations, ability to take off and land regardless of wind speed and direction, lower power losses.

– Ka-50 cannon placement near the center of gravity with limited traverse compared to a chin mount has proven greater accuracy.

– Mi-28N can carry 16 Atakas in comparison to the 12 Vikhr-Ms on the Ka-50.

– Mi-28N is a conventional tandem two-seater which is an advantage for bad weather/ night missions which would require use of the FLIR/ LLTV etc, and is probably necessary for use of the mast mounted millimeter wave radar.

– Ka-50N, though originally equipped with a mast mounted Arbalet (Crossbow- a Longbow reference?) radar as on the Ka-52 Alligator, doesn’t have one anymore.

– Superior sighting systems on Ka-50N? UOMZ (Urals Optical Mechanical Plant) are the sighting system producers of choice in Russia; and the latest Ka-50N prototype (Yellow 014) sees the replacement of the earlier fixed UOMZ Shkval sighting system with a GOES-520 sighting system turret on a reprofiled nose, that is almost certainly superior to the Shkval, along with a new GOES FLIR turret mounted on the chin as on the earlier White 018 Ka-50 prototype. I have no idea who makes the FLIR on the Mi-28N, or the other sighting systems.