In Russia, ready to create a multi-helicopter. According to the drawings Mi-32?

Russian developers are ready to start creating a helicopter with a multi-screw modification. It is reported that we are talking about a helicopter with a hybrid engine. Reports about it RIA News with reference to an informed industry source.

It is noted that the base in this case are still Soviet developments. These are several variants of multi-rotor helicopters, which at one time did not go into production due to the complexity of the design. In this scheme and drawings remain at the disposal of engineers of today. The main task: to use the scheme to create a helicopter with increased payload and greater speed.

To implement the machine without the bulkiness of the structures can allow a hybrid power plant, which will be involved and the electric motor. The layout of the electric motor, as stated, will increase the range and duration of the flight and increase the efficiency of the helicopter systems.

Prototypes of aircraft with hybrid engines are already available in a number of foreign countries of the world.

For reference: in the USSR, as an experiment to implement the principle of a multi-rotor helicopter, work was carried out on the Mi-32 project.

The helicopter according to the plan should have a three-screw design. The scheme of the helicopter assumed 4-support chassis. The dimensions of the machine itself are more than impressive: over 40 m. Transportation of goods was assumed on the external sling with a system of cables. This mega-helicopter had to service 6 D-136 type engines with shafts for synchronization.

Comments

[Thrall]

Soviet developments for another 200 years in store

[Tiksi-3]

Quote: Thrall

Soviet developments for another 200 years in store

yes, but it would be better if their young brains worked - and developed !!

[venik]

Quote: Tiksi-3

Quote: Thrall

Soviet developments for another 200 years in store

yes, but it would be better if their young brains worked - and developed !!

==============
WHAT (??) Do you think these very "young brains" DO ???

[maxim947]

Interesting gizmo, but too complicated, IMHO. It’s better to start with the development of a tiltrotor, they will still soon occupy their niche.

[Brother]

Hmm ... where to get them "their young brains" .. while "brains" are only enough for "Dom2"
Well, or thoughts are mastered - how to become rich ... and dump over a hill.

[AUL]

So I recall the Soviet development of the rotorcraft. I collected all the cons from a helicopter and from an airplane. And most importantly, it turned out to be useless to anyone.

[Sweetheart]

Quote from AUL

So I recall the Soviet development of the rotorcraft. I collected all the cons from a helicopter and from an airplane. And most importantly, it turned out to be useless to anyone.

Well ... you remember badly.
The main disadvantages, at that time, for the Ka-22 were large losses of power on the drive of the pulling screws and large losses of traction from blowing the wing with the flow of rotors. With modern developments, everything is surmountable.
In addition, if you want to get a serious improvement in performance (for example, speed), you can’t do without an adequate improvement in the characteristics of the components included in the design and, above all, engines, at this time, now, other structural materials and engines are much more compact and powerful. The progress of aircraft has always been under the powerful influence of progress in engine building.

It can be added that two serial rotorcraft stood for many years at the factory airfield, but not one of the unique devices got into the aviation museum.

[Sergey39]

Such a helicopter only as a crane?

[dauria]

Soviet developments for another 200 years in store

We and fools have 100 years in store, do not worry.
"A hybrid power plant, in which an electric motor will also be involved, can allow the machine to be realized without the bulkiness of its structures." A person simply cannot imagine what an electric motor is in some unfortunate 2000 horsepower. A helicopter needs no more, no less, no more than 2,5 kilograms per horsepower to fly decently. And compare the weight of the TV3-117 pair plus the weight of the swashplate and the KAU-30 pair with that "hybrid" fantasy.

[Simargl]

Quote: dauria

A person simply does not imagine what an electric motor is in some unfortunate 2000 horses.

And to this electric motor there’s also a generator ...
And that - a couple of tons per MW ...

[BAI]

Only one list from "The Broken Sword of the Empire" is worth it.

[vkl.47]

It seems to me that all the money is wasted. No one will need it. We can’t cope with the 5th generation and here such a miracle is yudo fish whale

[Ivan Ivanov]

Quote: Thrall

Soviet developments for another 200 years in store

The union was ineffective, and therefore it was enough for social programs to develop 200 years

[22 dmdc]

The main thing is that cunning robots do not sell all this.

[Berkut24]

Russian developers are ready to start creating a multi-rotor helicopter.

Developers for good money are everywhere and always ready to do anything. The only question is whether there is a customer willing to pay money for it. The USSR, scattering money by the decision of the Central Committee, left and right, has long ended.

[bessmertniy]

In addition to the customer, it would be good to imagine what such a helicopter will perform, what are its advantages over other aviation models. If they are only in three screws, then this is not enough today. It is necessary to somehow imagine - in what way it will be profitable.

[parusnik]

It is noted that the basis in this case are still Soviet developments.

... And if still in the archives, only one R. Bartini to rummage around ...

[Sadko88]

All this is not reliable. There is practically no chance of escape in the event of engine failure. When will they take airships?

[Simargl]

Quote: Sadko88

There is practically no chance of escape in the event of engine failure.

Why so? Autorotation and synchronization shafts will create miracle.

[Faceless]

I highly doubt this design. I suppose there will be a very large loss of efficiency due to the location of the screws above the case. Including because of this, the American "flying carriage" lifts much less cargo than the Mi-26.

We already had a mega-helicopter from Mil - V-12 (unofficially Mi-12). He flew. It turned out that it was expensive and irrational + they found the best solution for the tasks for which it was originally designed (airlifting missile systems). By the way, pay attention to its layout: it was not just that the screws were taken out to the ends of the "wings".

In addition, in the original article by RIA Novosti, the photograph is precisely B-12 (Mi-12), and not this miracle.

+ helicopters have another megaproblem - vibration. This plane can be increased "to infinity": master the glider more impressively (the main thing is that the hull can withstand), but the engines are more powerful / bigger. With a helicopter, everything is more complicated.

In general, I suppose that such monsters will not go beyond projects. It is very expensive, irrationally difficult, and there are a lot of other tasks. In addition, we already have the largest helicopters in the world (serial). The fact that we have a middle class of carrying capacity is considered heavy throughout the world. I don't think it's rational to make our heavy class "heavier" even more.

However, the layout is aesthetically beautiful (for my taste).

[helmi8]

Quote: Faceless

I suppose there will be a very large loss of efficiency due to the location of the screws above the case. Including because of this, the American "flying car" lifts much less cargo than the Mi-26

Stunned ... Do not make people laugh with your assumptions. And where is the Mi-26 main rotor? And where did you see the helicopter, whose HB is not above the fuselage (body, in your opinion)? Yes, for general development ... The greatest loss of power occurs in the main gearbox when the speed is reduced.

It is possible to increase this plane "to infinity": master the glider more impressively (the main thing is that the hull can withstand), but the engines are more powerful / bigger

.
Should this statement be taken seriously? Can you move to another area of ​​construction?

[Faceless]

You bastard, if you so want. Think whatever you want - I don’t care at all, to be honest.
For a more correct perception, take a look at the history of the Mi-26, B-12 and Boeing CH-47, as well as a physics textbook. If you do not see the difference between the layout of the Mi-26 and CH-47 - take a look again.

I don’t have the mood today to smear anyone, responding to personality.

I give free advice: since there is so much mind that it doesn’t cling to your head or teeth, take and write down your assumptions. You see, they will raise both me and someone else's mood even more than your previous comment.

To perfect your verbal rhetoric, you made a mistake both with the site and the opponent. The site - because it is interesting to read comments that somehow supplement the article and are constructive, rather than trying to assert themselves at the expense of others, posing as an expert, and the rest as mediocrity. Why the opponent made a mistake - think for yourself. I believe that for your subtle and keen mind this task will not be overwhelming.

On this, I propose to complete the transition to personalities, although I feel that it is unlikely that my reasonable proposal will be adequately received.

[helmi8]

You know, having a diploma from a military school in the specialty "Helicopters and aircraft engines", I no longer want to discuss this topic with you. If you wanted to prove that you own the material better than me, you failed. I have the honor!

[Faceless]

A diploma - a diploma, and the Russian language - in itself.
He did not prove anything to anyone and did not even intend to. Read one more time more attentively - assumed and expressed the opinion.
If your regalia is not your invention, then write something sensibly, which would be interesting to read. I suppose that this could cause more interest than your expressive emotions and attempts to increase your own significance.
With deep respect for the graduate who managed to get a higher education.

[ZVO]

Quote: Faceless

I don’t have the mood today to smear anyone, responding to personality.

On this, I propose to complete the transition to personalities, although I feel that it is unlikely that my reasonable proposal will be adequately received.

Those. you are so honed in your pathos. that you don’t even notice the person’s nickname and his avatar ???
The man is a helicopter pilot and says the right things ... And if you go away even a little bit in real questions. and not abstract general phrases - then self-smear. and you are manly if you have to self-cut out of the forum.

But who are you? another wise guy from HERE?

[Faceless]

Apparently, I need to change my nickname to "professor", and an appropriate avatar to mumble. There will surely be irrefutable proof.

You are right, I do not notice either the nickname or the avatar. I’ll say more - I don’t care about other people's fantasies about who and how he decided to call himself: even the Pope, even a small schoolboy. I'm more interested in what a person writes. If I am in the mood, I write something back. In order not to offend anyone, in principle, I don’t get personal first. If someone has both intelligence and impudence at the same time on a person in my attitude to go over, I answer in the same way (if there is a mood) and I do not care deeply who this person is. The reason for the transition to personalities in this context is always the same - the desire to assert itself at someone else's expense. Try it. I do not mind)) How much this is, as you put it "like a man" - evaluate for yourself, and at the same time about self-sawing in this context.

As for who I am: the same as you are the forum commentator. Regarding the hierarchy, everything is simple here: there are supreme gods - owners and editors, gods - moderators and administrators, and the rest of the plebs - we are with you. The plebs have 3 options for action: write articles yourself, enlightening others; write comments, supplementing in any way, constructively arguing, offering their own constructive options on the merits of the article; write comments, becoming personal in the style of "I am smart, and the rest are not." About my attitude to the latter - see above.

[ZVO]

The bottom line is that an intelligent person, having been on the forums for a long time, analyzes messages, structures them, remembers messages and their authors. Makes selection in one word.
Separates the grain from the chaff.
There are dreamers with an alternative universe, there are 2 of them here.
There are experienced sailors and pilots.
There are a couple of hundred hired patriots, who come on command on a specific topic, this is also evident. There are several other types of division.
You nod, like Don Quixote dropping his visor down, not understanding who and what you are writing. And to put it mildly, let's say unprofessionally, but boldly, pathos and spitting down.
Get on in this field. For these are indicators of self-realization at the expense of others. Trying to rise in your own FAC.

[Faceless]

Firstly, I agree with you everything except the first two lines. An intelligent person writes scientific works, creates inventions, creates with a concrete result and directs his energy there. The purpose of journalistic media forums like this is leisure and educational program, no more (unless someone gets paid for articles) and the attitude to this is appropriate. Anyone who writes comments for free, firstly, enjoys it, and secondly, tries to assert himself in the eyes of others. Otherwise I would not write here.
You are right, I am a professional in another field, but this does not prevent me from expressing my assumptions at my leisure wherever I please. With respect and gratitude I am when they supplement or correct me.
I’m also used to arrivals, and being scandalous by nature, I enjoy responding to them, just like those who publicly write taunts to me, because if they don’t get this pleasure, then why do they do it for free? )) In fact, what kind of reaction did they expect when they first came to personalities? .. So, unlike many, I simply and soberly look at simple things.

[gridasov]

The only question for a person is how long and hard he will prove to himself that the screws are the only correct device and method for converting the hydro-gas-dynamic flow. Of course, we will install more and more propellers on the aircraft and not notice the increase in mass and all other negatives.

[Non liberoid Russian]

yeah, where to get the engines from? conquer Zaporozhye? or have you already come up with odk?

[kakvastam]

Russian developers are ready to start creating a helicopter multi-screw modification.

When you meet a similar pearl at the beginning of the article, it’s better not to read further.
However, in the original article there is something funny - about the fact that the hybrid engine will reduce take-off weight.

[2329 Carpenter]

Be that as it may, the scheme is still interesting. If there really is a need, they will do it and the problems will be solved. As for technical brains, we have no shortage.

[Faceless]

I agree completely. Especially with the phrase "If you really need the edge."

[igor67]

Quote: Carpenter 2329

Be that as it may, the scheme is still interesting. If there really is a need, they will do it and the problems will be solved. As for technical brains, we have no shortage.

I don’t know about an interesting scheme, in my opinion a MI10K-style turntable would be much more in demand.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Carpenter 2329

As for technical brains, we have no shortage.

Yeah. That's all the know-how comes to us from the West and the USA comes.

[ZVO]

Quote: Carpenter 2329

Be that as it may, the scheme is still interesting. If there really is a need, they will do it and the problems will be solved. As for technical brains, we have no shortage.

Well, the "edge" is already 5 years old with ship engines ...
Made?

Spare smuggling parts from Ukraine ...

[Nikolaevich I]

Why immediately rely on old projects? The fact that the projects were, but not implemented, also means something! Sometimes, the idea is important, and the design schemes may be different! It is not necessary to take the "triangular" scheme of the Mi-32 with helicopter propellers! Now there are "multicopters" of different schemes and configurations, incl. with "fans" ... (there used to be such a concept: a flying platform, an air platform ...) Maybe you should think: where to "shove" a CD with a nuclear power plant (or, nevertheless, a nuclear propulsion system?)? Now the schemes of double-hull aircraft are known ... This is conceived for the air transportation of bulky cargo. But the same scheme is well suited for creating air platforms for placing powerful radars, repeaters, a local radio navigation system, lasers, multi-charged missile launchers, etc. .... subject to equipping such platforms with YARD!

[Retvizan 8]

Is it like in the picture?
Damn yourself, damn it !!!

[gridasov]

Alas, the method when you can include a lot of propulsion in the work, and besides different power and efficiency, exists for a long time. You just need to know the theory. Therefore, the issue is not the synchronization of work, but the search for the possibility of maximum concentration of air flow, and not dispersion.
Moreover, not by searching, but by implementing methods. And the main thing is to get away from the proportionality of the applied forces for the flight and the growth of the mass and volume of fuel.

[Zaurbek]

This topic is promising ... even in lighter cars, for example, a high-speed helicopter. If the screws are driven by an electric motor, the transmission and torque control are facilitated. The gearbox is simplified. The same topic is useful on propeller aircraft. For example, two fuel assemblies and two screws on an e / motor.

[amateur2]

"6 engines of type D-136 with shafts for synchronization"
And motor-Sich will be able to make as many as 6 pcs.?

[Zaurbek]

God forbid that we could now synchronize the VK-2500.

[123456789]

In Russia, ready to create a multi-helicopter. According to the drawings Mi-32?

Is it not easier to put three Mi-26s on a rigid hitch, synchronizing the controls?

[Zaurbek]

I’m not at all sure that we need a helicopter more powerful than the Mi-26 (it can be more powerful, but not larger). First you need to understand what to carry, and then what .... and what will this machine do then !?

[faiver]

I’ll ask you only one question - what about goat horseradish? What is this device for? so as not to have analogues in the world?

[The Sparkle]

How much is "increased load capacity"? You could have said something like.

[Dikson]

This mood is very reminiscent of the pre-war victorious report about "the most cargo-lifting aircraft ..." This monster, as I understand it, does Gazprom need to carry oil rigs off-road?

[faiver]

The point is that the development, testing and construction of such a "monster" is more expensive than the transportation of cargoes necessary for the same Gazprom in parts by "smaller" Mi-26s, the game is not worth it, except for show-offs ...

[ZVO]

Quote: Dikson

This mood is very reminiscent of the pre-war victorious report about "the most cargo-lifting aircraft ..." This monster, as I understand it, does Gazprom need to carry oil rigs off-road?

Not needed...
Because to drag a tower into the swamp is only 1/1000 of everything that needs to be carried at all to the rig in general.

[Приговор]

I wonder what is the estimated load capacity of this bird? Fuel consumption? Range of flight? Takeoff weight? If anyone has, please share your friends. I just want to compare it with existing samples, both ours and American ones. I think the load capacity with a three-blade design should be higher. But how much?

[Hort]

why the hell is such a bandura needed?

[Aqr009]

why the hell is such a bandura needed?

Oversized cargo, for example, spent rocket stages to the launch site.

[not main]

I read all the comments, but could not find the answer to the question: How to deal with the main rotor torque? With a single-rotor circuit, a RV (tail or tail rotor) works, in coaxial, longitudinal, transverse circuits I work TWO HB OPPOSITIVE ROTATION! And how to make an apparatus with three screws and get rid of the reactive moment? Theoretically possible, but practically no one needs! By the way, the model in the photo, by definition, can’t fly! Three screws of the same diameter, this contraption will rotate around its axis! Look at the copters, they always have an even number of screws!

[sinnik80]

There are copters with three and five screws.