Mi-38. A story of forty years


Previously, this was not



To be precise, in 2020, the idea and concept of the Mi-38 marks 39 years. On June 30, 1981, the CPSU Central Committee and the Council of Ministers decided to begin work on a new rotary-wing aircraft, which received the original name Mi-8M. Until now, opinions about which replacement helicopter a new helicopter was planned vary. Some sources write that the Mi-38 was to become a new, more advanced Mi-8. Others say that the machine covered the market gap between the average "magnificent eight" and the heavy Mi-26. Indeed, the world's largest 26th Mile takes 20 tons on board at once, while the Mi-8 takes no more than 3 tons. It turns out that cargoes weighing from 4 to 10-12 tons have to either be transported by a giant Mi-26, or by several Mi-8 flights. Both that, and another, naturally, economically unprofitable. In addition, they planned to install the TV7-117 engine on the new helicopter, which was both more powerful and more economical than the predecessor TV2-117. The new engine was to be developed by the Leningrad Engine-Building Design Bureau, which is now called the Klimov Design Bureau. The special hopes for the Mi-8M, which later became the Mi-38, were with the civilian carrier Aeroflot: it required a highly profitable cargo and passenger helicopter. In particular, it was planned that with a greater carrying capacity, the cost of a flight hour on the Mi-38 will be comparable to the younger Mi-8.


Mi-38 at MAKS-2005. CJSC Euromil is still alive

In addition to the new engine, the Mi-38 was supposed to get an aerodynamically more advanced fuselage than the Mi-8. Firstly, the tanks were removed under the floor of the cargo compartment. This saved the car from protruding hips in the manner of the G15. Such a solution both reduced the drag of the helicopter and also reduced the resistance of the rotor. Elastic fuel tanks guaranteed the safety of emergency landing (actually falling) from a height of 38 meters - kerosene did not spread and did not ignite. The car was initially considered as a passenger or transport, therefore, wings were not provided for possible weapons. This decision also had a positive effect on the traction capabilities of the rotor. Secondly, the engines on the Mi-8 were located behind the main gearbox, so the car received such a profile uncharacteristic for Mil helicopters. Now the helicopter began to resemble some kind of Agusta Westland. This layout solution has reduced vibration in the cockpit, as well as reduced drag. In total, the harmful resistance of the helicopter compared to the Mi-20 decreased by XNUMX%, which, coupled with more powerful engines, immediately brought the helicopter to a completely different league.


The Mi-38 in terms of load capacity is located between the medium Mi-8 and the heavy (or superheavy, as it is called in NATO) Mi-26

The next innovation for the early 80s was the use of a four-blade X-shaped tail rotor. The design was worked out simultaneously for the combat Mi-28 and civil Mi-38. In 1981, at the screw stand of the MVZ them. M. L. Mila, under the direction of A. S. Braverman, conducted comparative tests of the classic three-blade tail rotor from the Mi-8 and Mi-24 with the new X-shaped, confirming the high efficiency of the X circuit. The Mi-8M design headquarters in the early 80's In addition to the above, he also provided for the helicopter with an elastomeric rotor hub (does not require lubrication), a retractable landing gear, as well as the most advanced aerobatic complex for its time, which allowed two people to remain in the crew. When in 1983 we looked at how much work remains to be done, we decided to rename the project to Mi-38. And the Mi-8 line continued its career in the form of various modifications and minor improvements, because, as they say in Mil Design Bureau, the potential laid down in the “magnificent eight” has not yet been exhausted.

The thorny path of the 90s


When the approximate appearance of the Mi-38 in the form of a preliminary design developed by the beginning of the 90s, it turned out that the payload was 5 tons, the normal weight was 13 tons, and the maximum weight was about 14,5 tons. Compared to the Mi-8, the novelty exceeded the well-deserved helicopter in terms of carrying capacity by 1,8 times, by productivity by 2 times and by efficiency by 1,7 times. In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, they decided to mass-produce the Mi-38 and even started re-equipping the Kazan Helicopter Plant. A year earlier, a helicopter model was shown at the Paris Aerospace Salon. In the USSR, they hoped for the car to enter the markets of developed countries, for this certification was provided for according to foreign airworthiness standards. The mock-up commission for the Mi-38 machine was held in August 1991, where the decision was made to launch production, and the full-scale mock-up of the helicopter was first demonstrated at the Moscow Air Show. Like many other domestic projects of the turn of the 1992-80s, the new helicopter was the victim of a lack of funding, as well as the loss of some of the allies - many were abroad.


Mi-38 at MAKS 2011

Since initially the Milevians did not particularly count on the contracts of the Ministry of Defense, their views turned to their Western partners. The first to respond and independently choose the Mi-38 managers from Eurocopter as a partnership project, who concluded in December 1992 with the cost center named after M. L. Milya a preliminary agreement on cooperation, and two years later even created a joint CJSC Euromil. A company was formed, which directly included the Mil office, Eurocopter, Kazan Helicopter Plant (serial production manufacturer) and FSUE Zavod im. V. I Klimova ”(motor production). Klimovtsy were responsible for the development and refinement of the very TV7-117V, which was discussed in the early 80s. This turboshaft power unit was to develop 2500 liters. sec., while in emergency mode, in case of failure of the second motor, it could give out 30 liters within 3750 seconds. from. In addition, an important parameter of the operation of the TV7-117B was the ability to function with an idle oil system for half an hour. All this allowed us to talk about the high reliability and safety of the power plant of two engines of the Klimov plant, as well as about high chances to take a place in the army aviation Russian army. What did Eurocopter do at this company? On his shoulders were airborne flight and navigation equipment, the interior of the cockpit and control systems. Also, the Europeans promised some kind of assistance in the promotion and certification of the car in the markets of foreign countries. A strange decision, since the portfolio of Eurocopter development already then included a similar EC-225 SuperPuma. Looking ahead, we say that, to no avail, Euromopter CJSC Euromil lasted until 2017. By the way, when the Klimovites refused further cooperation and actually left the helicopter without a motor, I had to turn to Canadian Pratt & Whitney for help. In 1997, the Milevtsy were then given two PW-127T / S engines in fact - in Canada, it was hoped that if the Mi-38 entered the series, the power plant would be exclusively Pratt & Whitney. Indeed, the first flight of the Mi-38 made with Canadian engines, but only much later than planned - December 22, 2003. After several years, Canadians will generally be prohibited from cooperating with the Mil factory in order not to supply equipment for Russian dual-use products.


Photo: Ronnie Robertson
One of the competitors of the Mi-38 - S-92 from SikorskyAircraft


Photo: Gary Watt
Another one with similar parameters - EC-225 SuperPuma


AW-101UT by AgustaWestland

If we compare the Mi-38 with potential competitors, which were born much earlier and have already managed to conquer sales markets, it turns out that the Russian machine looks at least aerodynamically perfect. Among the classmates, the EC-225 SuperPuma from Eurocopter, the S-92 from SikorskyAircraft and the AW-101UT from AgustaWestland, which lose the Mi-38 both in maximum load capacity and speed with a flight range, stand out. Declared by the developers, the parameters of the helicopter in terms of price, economic and technical indicators at one time put it generally out of competition. True, this largely related to the Mi-38 with PW-127T / S engines, which now, for obvious reasons, will never appear on the machine.

If we compare the Mi-38 with the younger brother (if we are talking about the class of the car, and not about the age) of the Mi-8, then the cost of a ton-kilometer when flying to a range of 800 kilometers on the 38th car is seven times lower than that of the well-deserved eight even in the latest version. In addition, on helicopters of the Mi-8 family, the replacement of rotor blades is required once every seven to eight years: the developers of the Mi-38 claim that the composite plane of the rotors will serve throughout the life of the machine. The rotor blades are made according to the technology by the method of winding a “prepreg” of carbon fiber onto a rotating snap. Now in the domestic aviation industry, the use of composites is becoming a kind of rule of good form.

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
militaryarms.ru, ru.wikipedia.org, rg.ru, airwar.ru
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir_2U 25 January 2020 06: 27 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Something "partners" aerodynamics do not really bother.
    Now in the domestic aviation industry, the use of composites is becoming a kind of rule of good taste
    Is that such subtle humor? I understand, of course, that the proportion of composites has grown since the 80s of the last century, but they were also used then.
    1. Lexus 25 January 2020 07: 13 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Something "partners" aerodynamics do not really bother.

      They all have retractable landing gear - the worst enemy of aerodynamic quality is securely locked. In contrast ... Helicopters have a slightly different distribution of streamlined oncoming flows, so that the "licked" forms do not give a special advantage in aerodynamics.
      1. Vladimir_2U 25 January 2020 07: 24 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: lexus
        so that "licked" forms do not give a special advantage in aerodynamics

        Exactly so, and against the background of all ears and gear boxes, the landing gears are not particularly playing, but the developed lateral protrusions, it seems to me, "obscure" the lifting capacity of the rotor, which is much more important for a helicopter, especially when taking off.
        1. Lexus 25 January 2020 07: 36 New
          • 11
          • 2
          +9
          but the developed lateral protrusions, as it seems to me, "obscure" the lifting capacity of the rotor, which is much more important for a helicopter, especially when taking off

          How hard it is to argue with a thinking person in comparison with the catalog "lunatic." good
          The fact is that take-off / landing are scanty time intervals in the total duration of the departure. The take-off power of the engines is much more cruising / economical, enough with a margin. Saving in horizontal flight is still preferable.
          1. Old Michael 25 January 2020 08: 27 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            I apologize for a departure from the topic.
            It was thought that the main rotor can be replaced by a design of a different kind. for example, two "drums" on the sides, like the first steamboats. Rotate the design of 2-4 blades so that they move forward at the lower point, and backward at the upper point. Management is reduced to setting the desired angle of attack of the blade at each point of the trajectory. The problem of supersonic speeds at the ends disappears.
            What are the fundamental shortcomings of such an engine?
            1. Aviator_ 25 January 2020 10: 27 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Are you talking about rowing wheels on ships? Compared to propeller thrusters, even for ships, paddle wheels are less efficient. The fact was established in the middle of the 1843th century when testing two ships with the same steam engines and different propulsion devices - a screw on one and a propeller on the other. It was in 2, the screw “Ratler” was driven down with the wheel “Alekto”, the screw pulled the wheel and towed it at a speed of XNUMX knots. The thing is that the flow around the plate of the wheel mover is detachable, therefore, in principle, it is impossible to obtain a large force on it. The rotor blade during continuous flow provides a much greater lifting force.
              1. Old Michael 25 January 2020 10: 39 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                And here the blade will work almost like a helicopter, only the trajectory is different and equal linear speed along the entire length.
                1. Aviator_ 25 January 2020 17: 09 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Draw a diagram of the movement, without this you can’t understand anything.
            2. Bad_gr 25 January 2020 14: 17 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: OldMichael
              It was thought that the main rotor can be replaced by a design of a different kind. for example, two "drums" on the sides, like the first steamboats.



              1. Old Michael 25 January 2020 18: 09 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Like the one in the second picture.
                What are the disadvantages of such a design?
                1. Bad_gr 25 January 2020 19: 26 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: OldMichael
                  What are the disadvantages of such a design?

                  He has lifting power only due to the blade that goes down, from the other two at this time only harm. And in a helicopter, each propeller blade gives a stable lifting force throughout the flight.
                  1. Old Michael 25 January 2020 19: 44 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    The lifting force is created by a blade moving towards the flow, and (to a lesser extent) - moving backward. When hanging, both in the upper sector and in the lower sector, almost the same lifting force will be created. It is clear that the angle of rotation of the blade around its own longitudinal axis should change according to its position on the trajectory.
                    It is also clear that the bicycle pedal drive is not considered.
                    1. Bad_gr 25 January 2020 22: 58 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: OldMichael
                      The lifting force is created by a blade moving towards the flow, and (to a lesser extent) - moving backward.

                      As I understand it, this is a helicopter.
                      If by helicopter, then you are mistaken. If the rotor lifting power in flight would be only from the blade that goes into the front, the helicopter would roll over, which was at the beginning, until they came up with a swashplate. The fact is that to the shaft to which the blades are attached, they are not fixed tightly, but through the hinge and that blade that moves towards the stream lags behind the shaft, and the one that is ahead of the shaft in the stream. In general, the lifting force is the same for both.
                      1. Old Michael 26 January 2020 00: 12 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So that's the point!
                        In the design under discussion, the swashplate is simplified three times, because controls only the angle of attack.
                      2. Bad_gr 26 January 2020 10: 45 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: OldMichael
                        So that's the point!
                        In the design under discussion, the swashplate is simplified three times, because controls only the angle of attack.

                        If this design had at least some advantage over the screw, it would have been used. And so, even in advanced devices, this design is not considered, only variations with a screw.
                      3. Old Michael 26 January 2020 11: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        That is why the question arose - what is wrong with this scheme.
                      4. Flyer_64 26 January 2020 12: 34 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        New carrier systems for fenestron-type helicopters are being developed as on the tail rotor. These are complex designs and so far only suitable for light helicopters.
                      5. Bad_gr 26 January 2020 12: 50 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Kamovtsy want to try this scheme:

                        Kaman K-Max
                        http://vk34.ru/kamov-razrabotal-eskiznyj-proekt-perspektivnogo-skorostnogo-vertoleta-shemy-sinhropter
                      6. Vladimir_2U 26 January 2020 13: 32 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        There were Kamanovtsy, and Kamovtsy will become. )))
                      7. Flyer_64 26 January 2020 18: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        For light helicopters, it can and will do, for helicopters with a take-off weight of 10 tons. The design of the supporting system will be very complex and heavy.
                      8. Bad_gr 26 January 2020 19: 54 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Letun_64
                        For light helicopters, it can and will do, for helicopters with a take-off weight of 10 tons. The design of the supporting system will be very complex and heavy.

                        And why is that?
                        According to this scheme, installing 6 blades instead of 4 is not a problem; increasing the size of the blades is also not a problem. And if you look at the characteristics of K-Max
                        "...- Curb weight: 2334 kg
                        - Maximum take-off weight: 2948 kg
                        - with suspension: 5443 kg ... "
                        then, in my opinion, a very promising scheme.
                      9. Alexey LK 27 January 2020 02: 10 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        According to this scheme, installing 6 blades instead of 4 is not a problem,

                        Are you sure?
                      10. Bad_gr 27 January 2020 09: 55 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: Alexey LK
                        Are you sure?



                        "..... A striking representative of the longitudinal 45% synchropper circuit is the Boeing CH-47 Chinook. Many do not even suspect that it is a synchropper - nevertheless, its screws overlap and their rotation is synchronized to avoid collision and overlap of the blades. the propeller’s height is insufficient to prevent overlap of the blades, and serves a completely different purpose - attempts to reduce the drop in efficiency of the rear propeller during horizontal flight due to air entering into the flow swirling by the front propeller ..... "
                        http://topru.org/15636/chto-takoe-sinxrokopter/
  • malyvalv 25 January 2020 09: 30 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    When the helicopter takes off, those who remain on the site usually get as close to the helicopter as possible. At 5 -8 meters from the helicopter when taking off from the wind it knocks down. There is no wind near the fuel tank.
    1. Vladimir_2U 25 January 2020 13: 39 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Yes? Frankly, I did not fly, and it’s logical, actually. But by the way, he wrote
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      as it seems to me, "obscure"
      so I will not argue, and perhaps I agree.
    2. John22 27 January 2020 18: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      This phenomenon confirms that the largest lifting force of the rotor is closer to the free edge of the blade. And the discarded airflow is bigger. Because of this effect, in the B-12 helicopter, the engine trusses were made tapering towards the fuselage - where there was a swing. airflow from the end of the blade. That is why, when designing a helicopter, a transverse arrangement of propellers was adopted - so as not to lose some of the lift when applying it to the fuselage.
  • Flyer_64 26 January 2020 12: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    but the developed lateral protrusions, it seems to me, "obscure" the lifting capacity of the rotor, which is much more important for a helicopter, especially when taking off.

    And it is possible in more detail how the lateral protrusions obscure the lifting force of the HB.
    1. Bad_gr 26 January 2020 13: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Letun_64
      And it is possible in more detail how the lateral protrusions obscure the lifting force of the HB.

      During take-off and landing, the air flow from the screw goes along the hull and all sorts of protruding boxes are just in its path
      1. Flyer_64 26 January 2020 18: 20 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        If you look at the picture, then the creation of the thrust of the screw is strongly influenced by the tail boom and tail rotor. And in figure b, the entire helicopter fuselage. By the way, in figure b, the initial stage of the vortex ring is already visible. Not yet convincing.
        1. Bad_gr 26 January 2020 20: 02 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Letun_64
          If you look at the picture, then the creation of the thrust of the screw is strongly influenced by the tail boom and tail rotor. And in figure b, the entire helicopter fuselage. By the way, in figure b, the initial stage of the vortex ring is already visible. Not yet convincing.

          And you read the link given Private-K (Oleg) link (http://авиару.рф/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/sssr/vertolety/vertolety-kb-milya/mnogotselevoj-vertolet-mi-18/) What was the difference between the Mi-18 and the Mi-8. In short: protruding tanks were removed into the hull and the chassis removed. We got: "... speed increased by 11-12% (up to 270 km / h cruising), range increased by 10-15% and fuel consumption decreased by 10-12% (0,25 kg / h.p.) ... " And this despite the fact that the meter was lengthened by a meter.
  • 2Albert 25 January 2020 17: 41 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Well, this is how to say, for example, the EPR is noticeably influenced at any speed, but aerodynamics for flight speeds up to 350 km / h with the actually large frontal profile of the helicopter are not so relevant. Fixed gear for passenger sides is clearly a plus for survival.
  • Bar2 25 January 2020 08: 01 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Well, here is a vivid example of progress in this capitalist Russia, not only is the development of the times of the USSR nothing has been done.
    1. L-39NG 25 January 2020 13: 02 New
      • 5
      • 7
      -2
      Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Airbus Helicopters and AgustaWestland are capitalist companies. States do not fully control these enterprises. Enterprises quickly respond to the needs of customers of their products, quickly design and quickly produce the set. Enterprises do not produce what is not needed at the warehouse in order to preserve jobs. Customers pay for the products received on time. Employees of enterprises fully and on time receive a prestigious salary and interest, if employees own shares of enterprises.
      Conclusion: Russia is not a capitalistic state.
      1. Bar2 25 January 2020 14: 39 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: L-39NG
        Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Airbus Helicopters and AgustaWestland are capitalist companies.


        you don’t say what’s going on in Putin’s Russia. Everyone snaps, then lies, that they do everything for the benefit of the people, when all the property is there, industry is in the corral, Putin generally tries not to talk about the economy, he is interested in other things.
        a country under external control, a colony is called.
        There’s nothing to write about fuel in profile, the production of new weapons has been stopped, military commissars are turning into political scientists, there’s no feed. Have you noticed?
  • Mountain shooter 25 January 2020 07: 56 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    God forbid, we will master the issue. A good helicopter will find its niche abroad, no matter what. Looks like 8/17 has spread ... Everywhere flies, around the world. And in all forms ... We need, we need one with a reduced cost of operation and a "ton of an hour" in the vastness of such a huge country.
    1. The leader of the Redskins 25 January 2020 09: 03 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      I agree, but the series will stretch for many years and as large as the GXNUMX is unlikely to become ...
    2. Private-K 25 January 2020 09: 56 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      The Mi-38 will not find any niche in the international market. The niche is reliably covered by Eurocopter and Augusta-Westland.
      The Russian military does not need the Mi-38. They need a new high-speed car with 400 km / h cruising. And not that.
      Russian civilians are more likely to buy French or Italian cars - ready-made, tested, with developed service.
      The Mi-38 project must be urgently closed and stopped wasted because the patient is dead.
      1. Mountain shooter 25 January 2020 10: 25 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Private-K
        Russian military Mi-38 is not needed

        The military has already ordered a pair of Mi-38T ... Probably just kidding ... wassat
        A 6-ton helicopter is also needed by the oil industry, and civil aviation in general. Wangyu, there will still be 10 to 12 toner developments. This is also needed.
        1. Private-K 25 January 2020 10: 46 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          Already 2. On a piece per year. And no more orders were received. And what is the duration of the production cycle?
          Do not make fun, but imposed on them. Unification with the Mi-8 family of modern release they do not need to fuck. One additional hassle with the same useful properties as on the extreme Mi-8 / -17.
          But they need a 10-12 toner. Like narchosis. But this is not the Mi-38. It should be a smaller Mi-26 - i.e., as planned before. What I pointed out.
        2. Free wind 25 January 2020 12: 46 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          There is MI-10 and MI-10K flying crane, just 10-12 tons of lifting capacity.
          1. Private-K 25 January 2020 22: 48 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Mi-10s released a series of 44 units. in the 1960s. All of them have long gone to metal, and those who are lucky - in museums. In general, this is a highly specialized machine, but we are talking about station wagon.
            1. sgrabik 26 January 2020 11: 01 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              The Mi-10 is a truly highly specialized helicopter designed for specific purposes, and the Mi-38 is simply necessary; it can take on board up to 6 tons when installing more powerful and economical engines.
              1. Private-K 26 January 2020 12: 41 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Once again: who will buy the civilian Mi-38 if it has competitors such mega monsters as Boeing Sikorsky (American industrial aristocracy), Augusta Westland (old European aristocracy) and Airbus Eurocopter (another block of the European financial and industrial aristocracy) ??? ??????
                Moreover, the listed competitors have already had helicopters of a similar class for many years. Those. worked out and under construction. With a developed range of services.
                Moreover, AW and EC helicopters can be produced in both civilian and military versions, and the Mi-38 is only a civilian helicopter - it cannot be used in helicopter-assault operations (conditionally, the military Mi-38T for the Russian Air Force is, in fact, a passenger locomotive) .
                ....
                Understand such a thing ... Mi-38 was originally conceived in 1986 as a JOINT WEST project and was actively promoted as such at the highest authority level, namely, the Gorbachov group that finally went on a direct course of joining the West with the aim of entering the world elites . Needless to say that t.s. will the “internal content” of such a project be “with a catch”? Further more. Than a joint venture with Eurocopter, all the late Soviet developments including the West went to the West. used on the Mi-18; but what was received in return could not be used due to lack of funding and was losing its meaning ....

                And again: for the sake of the Mi-38 Schrödinger’s cat, the finished Mi-18 project (having close LTX to the Mi-38) was hacked.
                http://авиару.рф/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/sssr/vertolety/vertolety-kb-milya/mnogotselevoj-vertolet-mi-18/
      2. Private-K 25 January 2020 10: 49 New
        • 5
        • 5
        0
        For everyone who pierces the butt of my okhayivanie Mi-38 - look at how the Russian military and firms abandoned the Ka-60/61. At the same time, civilians preferred the excellent Italian AW. That's also with the Mi-38 - they will prefer the EC or AW.
      3. sgrabik 26 January 2020 10: 55 New
        • 0
        • 4
        -4
        Enough to carry this ridiculous nonsense, you can see with the naked eye that you are not in the subject, keep all this nonsense to yourself, it's even funny to read such nonsense !!!
      4. Flyer_64 26 January 2020 12: 39 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Quote: Private-K
        The Russian military does not need the Mi-38.

        Especially this helicopter is needed in the Navy. But the lobbyists of the Kama helicopters do not even consider it, as early as 90 the Mi-38 was considered to replace the Mi-14. It would make a good base anti-submarine helicopter.
        1. Private-K 26 January 2020 12: 49 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Letun_64
          as early as 90, the Mi-38 was considered to replace the Mi-14. It would make a good base anti-submarine helicopter.

          On the engines of the Anglo-Saxon international corporation PW? For the Russian military? Seriously? crying
          I have already given an example - for 1984 in the USSR, the Mi-18 was ready to possess close LTH to just starting out design Mi-38.

          Factory tests, which the machine passed in 1982, showed the following flight performance of the new helicopter: speed increased by 11-12% (up to 270 km / h cruising), range increased by 10-15% and fuel consumption decreased by 10-12% (0,25 kg / h.p. h). Subject to the refinement of the fiberglass blades, further improvement of the characteristics was assumed. By its weight indicators, the helicopter, in fact, moved to another class. At that time, when the Mi-8MT was transporting 4 tons inside the fuselage and 3 tons on the external load, the Mi-18 could transport 5 tons both inside and outside, and the designers were going to increase the payload on the external load even more - up to 6 - 6,5 tons

          http://авиару.рф/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/sssr/vertolety/vertolety-kb-milya/mnogotselevoj-vertolet-mi-18/
          1. Flyer_64 26 January 2020 18: 40 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Private-K
            On the engines of the Anglo-Saxon international corporation PW?

            Indeed, there were no engines for the Mi-38, or rather, the same TV3-17VM engine. Yes Mi-18 is a very good helicopter. It is unfortunate that he was not allowed to run in the series. But we all use the official information on the carrying capacity of Mi-8MT / MTV. So for simplicity, the data was saved by Mi-8T. Although during the tests, MT / MTV produced large values ​​of 5-5,5 tons inside, 6 tons on the outside. As well as in flight performance, so the maximum speed was 295-297 km / h, only cruising remained in the previous range 220-240 km / h. These capabilities were even unofficially confirmed during a database in the Caucasus. But with a strong-willed decision, all this was limited to well-known indicators. Mi-171 helicopters sold to Canada for trawling wood have a higher carrying capacity than those that are operated in Russia. The biggest drawback of the Mi-8 is the location of the fuel tanks. On the Mi-18, the placement gave great advantages when used in a transport version.
          2. Timx 31 January 2020 20: 38 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            On the engines of the Anglo-Saxon international corporation PW? For the Russian military? Seriously?

            If you don’t know, then under the Mi-38 project, even with a hunchback, the engine of the TVAD-3000 gas-dynamic scheme for that time was worked out at that time, its analogues in the west only began to appear at the turn of the 2000s and 2010s ... General Electric is now in All blades are brought up by their similar project for the US Ministry of Defense, to make it the main unified type of engine in the troops (similar to the Apache and Black Hawke engines earlier), of course, on the new technologies of today ...
  • Private-K 25 January 2020 09: 52 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    1. In 1981, the USSR had giant park light heavy Mi-6 helicopters! Just with a load capacity of 10-12 tons. Actually, due to the presence of this, I repeat, a giant fleet of almost 800 cars, the construction of the Mi-26 was inhibited.

    2. To replace the Mi-6, a helicopter called Mi-46 with the same load as the Mi-6. But the topic was closed ...

    3. Mi-38 can't do it qualify for the light heavy class due to the fact that he has not left the middle class - 5-7 tons of real load capacity.

    4. There was a wonderful project - Mi-18. It already had the entire improvement kit including rearrangement and lengthening of a cabin. And the helicopter was ready for implementation. But with a decision at the political top, this practical and ready-to-launch project was hacked in favor of the Mi-38. Which resulted in a decades-long bagpipe.
    Already in 1986, the army and the civilian sector could receive mass production of the fundamentally improved Mi-8 - the Mi-18 helicopter. In 1986 !!!
  • Operator 25 January 2020 11: 58 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    On the one hand, the Mi-38 still outperforms its competitors in aerodynamics, on the other hand, there is its even more advanced version with a retractable landing gear (to detach from them forever).

    The thrust-weight ratio of the Mi-38 (3 kg / hp) lags behind its competitors (2 kg / hp), it is necessary to tighten it due to more powerful engines or lightening the airframe by replacing duralumin with carbon fiber (which at the same time will increase efficiency).

    The result is a vertical take-off and landing aircraft with a cruising speed of> 300 km / h and a range of> 1000 km, which will allow the Mi-38 to compete with convertiplanes.
    1. Timx 1 February 2020 01: 36 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Some kind of unscientific fiction you did, excuse me smile If you apply all the above improvements to the Mi-38, you’ll get a completely new model - expensive, crude, respectively, low-demand, plus it will cost a pretty penny - there, for good, you have to build a new helicopter plant from scratch with all the ensuing ... us throughout the aircraft industry, such a dilemma has been standing for the last 20 years ..
  • karabass 25 January 2020 12: 01 New
    • 4
    • 6
    -2
    One knowledgeable person told me that mi38 MUST be with American engines (which I don’t remember) and with it he had every chance of success in the global helicopter market
    With our engines it turned into a suitcase without a handle
    1. Private-K 26 January 2020 12: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Mi-38 is a project initially jointly with western companies.
      1. Timx 1 February 2020 01: 45 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Nothing of the kind, you were incorrectly informed wink
  • svp67 25 January 2020 13: 17 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    To be continued ...
    I would be incredibly glad if it really will be in this helicopter ...
  • Petrol cutter 25 January 2020 19: 35 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Thanks. Informative.
  • Saxahorse 25 January 2020 20: 56 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    General meaning. We gathered for a long time but did nothing. But they leaked all the know-how to the partners. As a result, Agusta comes up with interesting offers, and Miles do not really need anyone anymore.
  • nikolai55soot April 20 2020 05: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    For 10 years I have been proposing the technology of electric flight: the airliner from Moscow to Khabarovsk flies at a supersonic speed of 1200 to 3200 km / h or more, above the direct high-voltage power line (0,4-10-110-220-330-500-750-1150 kV.); on heavy-duty high-voltage electric motors in 2000-20000 kW. (hybrid), contact and contactless along the laser beam. Military aviation flies up to 30 thousand km / h with a jump into space, with the launch of rockets, with the launch of spacecraft and with the use of combat lasers if necessary. From the left of the power transmission line (from the side), a helicopter flies from 300 to 900 km / h, from the right of the power transmission line (from the side) from 300 to 600 km / h a cargo robot train of twin 20-40 airships with a load capacity of hundreds of thousands . tons of cargo, which itself builds a mega highway along the swamps of Siberia (3-4 routes across Russia) or South America-Alaska-Moscow-Cairo-South Africa and much more ... but alas, in Russia for 10 years it has not progressed by a step, they don’t allow or patent, and in the West and in China they are pulling up electric power with might and main.