russian English French German italian spanish
How was he did there - helicopter from the past
Author's articles
How was he did there - helicopter from the past

How was he did there - helicopter from the past



February 15 2017, at AEX.RU "This year, plans to open development activities (R & D) to develop the project of the modernized Mi-26T2V Terms of Reference of the Ministry of Defence has already been received.", - Said the source.
According to him, it is expected that the ongoing R & D will not be funded by the Ministry of Defence, and the holding company "Russian Helicopters" and compensation costs by the selling price of the helicopters when they are followed by the purchase of air and space forces (VKS).
"End state joint tests of Mi-26T2V planned in the fourth quarter of the year 2018" - Said the source.
According to him, Mi-26T2V will be capable of taking off and landing from unprepared sites. It will be equipped with an autopilot and a new avionics allowing to operate at any time of the day.
"Also on the Mi-26T2V establish a modernized digital complex communications and onboard defense system for enhancing the survival of the helicopter. The helicopter is able to perform combat tasks in any, even the most adverse climatic and weather conditions, day and night" - The spokesman said. AEX.RU

How was he did there - helicopter from proshlogo1

"The more we delve further into the forest, the more increases the energy resources of the forest."
** According to a peasant: "Next to the forest - more wood."

"With the subsequent reimbursement of costs by the selling price of helicopters at their subsequent purchase of aerospace forces."
** According to a peasant, "to raise the price!"
"According to him, Mi-26T2V will be capable of taking off and landing from unprepared sites."
** Helicopter and coined to fly "from unprepared sites," this is a case where "size does not matter." It is strange that the holding heads before it was unknown and "allowed" to operate with the selection of sites with air only through 30-odd years of its operation.

And how he upgraded Mil helicopter Mi-6?
He set him on the wings, increasing cruising speed to 50k / h. Than increased productivity by helicopter 25%.

How was he did there - helicopter from proshlogo2

As a modernized Ka-32 in the "Kamov"?

As a helicopter from the past has a very high drag, so S.V.Miheev designed a new modern fuselage commensurate with the volume of the fuselage Mi-8, but with engines, gearbox and rotors on Ka-32Ie the most expensive units left serial. Due to the smaller frontal resistance of the helicopter speed performance will be significantly increased, and the interior - much more comfortable.

As a modernized IL-76?
In the first series he was carrying 28t. cargo, and the last modifications - 52t. cargo.

And in this regard, it upgraded Mi-26?
Yes way! He has to date only two unquestionable superiority:
1. The biggest.
2. Dearest.

Useful loading speed and the same as that 35let ago. Bólshego and will not work, because in this helicopter from the classical scheme taken everything to the maximum.
I have no doubt that whether today Mil General Designer is using the unique capabilities of the engines and the rotor Mi-26He would have designed it on the basis of something new. For example, a helicopter similar in-12, but with a modern edge. And would such a helicopter is much more productive and profitable Mi-26. In the meantime, there is no novelty: as he was, he is - a helicopter from the past!

Remembering The 12-lateral scheme, is not superfluous to recall a review on this Sergei Sikorsky helicopter after watching his flight at Le Bourget: "Before the engineering achievement, as is the helicopter in-12, can only take my hat ... This helicopter is the only its kind and will be used to perform unique operations. I am referring to the expedition in the Arctic regions or search for oil deposits. The helicopter will replace the railway, where is still untouched by human hands. " ( "Science and Life", №8, 1998)
And ahead of expected modernized Mi-12M in 2raza Hoisting Mi-26 and not expensive. Do not go away Mil prematurely from life, and now giant Mi-12M It would bring enormous benefits to our state in the national economy and, in particular - in the reconstruction of airfields in the Arctic.
General Designer MN Tishchenko, replacing Mil, remained faithful to the classical scheme and designed by its more compact Mi-26 capacity up to 20t. To give it a "green light", with its "path" have been removed at the demand while Mi-6; to the same and in-12.
Mi-26 compared to MI-6 transporting cargo twice as much, with the cost to 4raza more expensive, but its general designers MVZ upgrade! However, for some reason to increase the cost rather than performance.

How was he did there - helicopter from proshlogo3

Speaking of performance. When comparing the helicopter classical scheme with other schemes for the same engines, the difference in favor of others simply striking. For example, rotorcraft Ka-22 and Mi-6 helicopter - each with two engines D-25V but rotorcraft 1,4t turned on. easier Mi-6. This means that the rotorcraft to transporting payload almost 1,5t. more because they have the same maximum takeoff weight - 42,5t.
In Ka-22 trapezoidal blades, cruising speed = 270k / h.
"For in-ta Mi-6 trapezoidal blades with normal flight weight (40,5T) and less than the cruising speed on the instrument is set in the following ranges:
Height, m. Speed, km / hour.
06-8200 9807
2000 - 3000 200-190 »...
( "Practical Aerodynamics of the helicopter Mi-6» MS Yatsunovich. 1969g).

The difference in favor of the cruising speed rotorcraft impressionable, ie taking into account the duty bólshey productivity Ka-22 would be higher than the Mi-6 least 40%.
Now let's compare modern helicopters coaxial Ka-32-10AG and classic Mi-171A2 with the same engines VC-2500. Carrying capacity in Ka-32-10AG is 5,5t, while Mi-171A2 -.. 4t, or 1,5t. less.
In general, the Ka-32-10AG superior Mi-171AG at times, but in a series launched the Mi-171A2 helicopter with obviously worse characteristics.
Decrypts the word "several times."

Mi-171A2 inferior helicopter Ka-32-10AG:

1. On-duty.
2. According rates.
3. According maneuverability.
4. At the tail rotor will stop by themselves.
Failure of the tail rotor in flight, a rare case - a catastrophe.

In combat conditions xB. bar is a very vulnerable place and easily interrupted from a heavy machine gun, and if not the beam, control xB. screw, but in any case, to put it mildly - very hard landing! The same result, and after the missile gap xB area. screw.

It is very difficult at the landing, especially when loading commandos wounded from the battlefield - not to catch the tail rotor for anything when maneuvering in the forest, the mountains, near the buildings. For example, in Abkhazia during the Georgian-Ossetian war, Abkhaz soldiers were forced to jump out of the landing of Mi-8 from meter height on the rocks, as the landing of the helicopter threatened to catch the xB. screw for a boulder, where there is visible and invisible, probably in front of and behind the invisible, ie, under the tail rotor!

How was he did there - helicopter from proshlogo4

"At Ka-50, the damage to the tail unit does not lead to catastrophic consequences, since the controllability of the vehicle with the help of aerodynamic forces and moments on coaxial screws is completely preserved. At flight speeds up to 200 km / h, the helicopter can continue its flight even with the rudder removed, as confirmed by flight tests. During the tests, an unprecedented experiment was conducted - the shooting of the tail section of the B-80 with keel and horizontal tail in flight. The helicopter sustained this, demonstrating sufficient stability and controllability, as well as the ability to make a normal landing. " (The site of Russian military equipment, multi-purpose attack helicopter Ka-50).


Vitalii Belyaev.


This question is to determine whether you are a human automated spam submissions.


*** Mi and Ka-8-32 classmates, but different types, I repeat, everyone has their own task in Kamov not accommodate 22 people.
--- Aleksanrd, no one offers Ka-32 instead of Mi-8.

*** scale such as has previously not upgrade, it remains only for the army, and the army ordered, they are on a broomstick performing combat tasks.
--- The State is very expensive such "modernization", especially in the reduction of Arctic airfields. "The engine consumes up to 3100 kg of fuel per hour, and the cost of flight hour is about 600 thousand (April 7th, 2013.
The largest helicopter in the world. Mi-26).

Mi-26 carries payload 2raza larger Mi-6, then theoretically and should cost in 2 times more. The cost of flight hour Mi-6 = 1200rubley (on the suspension = 1600rub), then the value of Mi-26 gb 1200r.h2 = 2400rub. Lashed to 3000rub. for novelty, and he in the first issues of cost ~ 5000rub. (flight hour).

Here the value of its flight hour: "The engine consumes up to 3100 kg of fuel per hour, and the cost of flight hour is about 600 thousand (April 7th, 2013.
The largest helicopter in the world. Mi-26).

Let us estimate: What costs money is a miracle of technology to our country?
2013god. 1dollar that year was = 31,62rub. We consider further: 600 000rub. : 31,62 = 19 354,8rub. The cost of flying hours MI-26 2013 for 19god is 354sovetskih rubles, or Mi-hour flight 26 16raz costs the state more than one hour of flight of the Mi-6. And the first was more expensive only in 4raza, and its flight characteristics remain at the initial level, that's what the conversation, rather than Ka-32 !!!

However, the author compares the tail rotor of the classical scheme (modification mi-8) with the coaxial scheme ka-32 without HV, they are incomparable types of VC, but does not compare the cost between them, each in its niche application. Further: "General Designer M. Tishchenko, who replaced ML Mil, remained true to the classical scheme and designed a more compact Mi-26 helicopter with a carrying capacity of up to 20.To give him a" green street ", from his" way "were The Mi-6 helicopters claimed for that time were removed, and there is also B-12. " Mi-26 entered the GA. At the end of 80x, and the army even earlier, and the last was developed for specific needs of the Amy, and the Mi-6 type after the disaster was banned from exploitation only in 2002.
The only thing that I do not like about Mi-8 is the weak tail boom and the blades with the spar and honeycomb core, so if the fuselage mi-8 was like a mi-10, i.e. One with two front main landing gear racks and one tail wheel, with no cargo doors, but with wide sliding doors on both sides, and blades made of composite material, then this could be called modernization, and so mi-8 and modifications surpass Foreign cars only, in terms of strength of power units, and the fact that mi-8 can stay in the open air in any climate zone for a month, and then start and fly away, foreign cars can not. This is thanks to Mil.

*** Aleksandr19 in March 2017 15: 27
Sidedly however, the author compares the tail rotor of the classical scheme (option E-8) with coaxial Ka-32 without HW is incomparable types of VS, but does not compare the costs between them

Helicopters --- one class, especially with the same engines, so comparisons - true! But their price:
"The main reason for the popularity of the Mi-8 MTV / Mi-17 the world market (especially in developing countries) is their low price. They cost less than 10 million dollars per car, depending on the configuration, which is two to three to four times cheaper than Western counterparts ...

In Kumertau produced and the civilian version of the Ka-27, designated Ka-32, which enjoys a steady (albeit small) in demand on the world market, mainly due to a combination of good performance with very low for a helicopter of this class (11-13 tonnes) price (4-6 million). In the year abroad shipped seven - ten cars Ka-32 ... »(Soviet helicopters will be enough for a quarter century 29avgusta 2011.)

*** In the army before that, and the last was developed to meet specific needs Ami, and the type of Mi-6 banned after the disaster operation only 2002 year.

--- Before all types of helicopters have been developed under the "specific needs of the army." Issue Mi-6 terminated 1981godu (Wikipedia), and further elaborated resource. At Mi-26 were also disaster. In particular it breaks off xB. bar in flight, but flying to this day!

*** E-8 month can stand in the open air in any climatic zone, and then run and fly, foreign cars of this breathtaking backdrop. It is for this thank Mile.

--- Our helicopters are all, without exception, can be arbitrarily "to stand in the open air field in any climatic zone," and as for the Mil - no one denies that this was an outstanding designer, including me!

Mi-8 and Ka-32 classmates, but different types, I repeat, each has its own task, in Kamov does not accommodate 22 people. But he will do the installation work more quickly. Mi-26 created, again I repeat, for the needs of the army, and the national economy, yes, no one purposefully built anything, only what is, hv. The beams fell off during the carriage of goods on the external suspension in the GA, for such purposes 26 was not "grounded", but they experienced and drove, after the disaster they strengthened the hb, and further into the work. Mi-8t has nothing to replace in the national economy for the same price for the customer, and what to say about Mi-26, which is younger than the veteran, and grandiose times, such a scale as before does not exist, modernize, it remains only for the army, and the army will be ordered, They and on a broom will carry out the combat mission.

Vitaly and where you live? The question is clear? waiting for an answer

With great pleasure I hear this voice of common sense, completely coinciding with my considerations on the helicopter theme. I am also outraged that, under the guise of modern achievements, the Russian helicopter-building holding is "mastering" old and long-obsolete models, nothing fundamentally new. In a commercial component The main reason: the new mastering is the costs that no one intends to pay ... So, the state needs to intervene, to have modern powerful helicopters in its interests! It is impossible to believe that there are really no promising developments.