And even the Airborne Forces will be equipped with antediluvian Mi-8 / Mi-35
Author's articles
And even the Airborne Forces will be equipped with antediluvian Mi-8 / Mi-35

And even the Airborne Forces will be equipped with antediluvian Mi-8 / Mi-35

"As part of the Airborne Forces, an army aviation brigade will be created for the first time, which will include 4 helicopter squadrons"- say News.

The part is planned to form in 2020-2021. New helicopters will be ordered for it. One of the squadrons will be equipped with Mi-35M helicopters. According to experts, the helicopter part will help the paratroopers to act more diversely and more efficiently. Do not forget that the helicopter for paratroopers is not only a transfer, but also fire support ”( 19 February 2019).

It is clear that the landing troops with their aircraft will be more mobile and more successful, which is what is required of them. The only trouble is that they are going to be staffed with new-old Mi-8, Mi-35 and Mi-26, which are obsolete for modern warfare in maneuverability (especially near the ground), power supply and compactness!

Military expert Alexei Leonkov believes that the Mi-38 helicopter is the best option instead of the Mi-8: “This helicopter (Mi-38) is much faster than our traditional helicopter samples. It is this helicopter that is currently awaited by airborne troops, as well as special forces, ”summarizes Leonkov.

Seer AV Suvorov as about our Airborne Forces: "Eye, speed, onslaught!"

The Mi-38 helicopter, though newer than the eight, will not add “quickness” to the paratroopers because of the same tail rotor.

And without speed there will be no onslaught! The coaxial Ka-32-10AG helicopter has the same speed characteristics with the Mi-38, but fears of “falling under the tail rotor” when landing troops with working propellers will be excluded. And without problems, there will be simultaneous landing through a side door and open rear doors, which will speed up the landing process, then it really will be: surprise, speed and onslaught!

I deliberately dwell on these truisms, assuming that the ministerial generals do not have helicopter technology consultants, otherwise they would not have put into service the outdated Mi-8, yes Mi-24 / 35, instead of modern Ka-50 / 52 and Ka- 32-10AG.

But after all, helicopters with a tail rotor have another flaw that they never talk about. During the Georgian “Star” aggression, they showed the landing of Abkhazian reservists (260 people on 4's Mi-8 helicopters) on boulders in the Kodori Gorge, and so that the helicopter would not be hooked on any boulder, the soldiers had to jump out him from a height of hovering ~ 1,5, so it is very doubtful that one of the soldiers was not injured after landing on boulders?

And this is how a landing from a helicopter without a tail rotor lands!

For “effective” managers and general designers of the cost centers, the safety of soldiers landing on boulders is an empty sound, so they are strikingly manic to impose their outdated helicopters on the armament of our VKS, but the ministerial generals are responsible for choosing the type of helicopter for their subordinates and staffing VKS modern, i.e. more high-speed, safe and reliable helicopters, and not to drive junk on the conveyor just because it is from the general designers of the cost centers. In the meantime, in my opinion, the ministerial generals chose helicopters for the pilots of the VKS for combat operations on the principle: “Money does not smell”:

"07 March 2018. Kadyrov: The Mi-8 helicopter crashed in Chechnya due to a sharp gust of wind 07 March 2018.

The Mi-8 helicopter fell in Chechnya due to a sudden gust of wind, ”wrote the head of the republic, Ramzan Kadyrov, in his telegram channel. According to him, the aircraft was supposed to deliver border guards to the outpost in the Itum-Kalinsky district.

The helicopter sank to land frontier guards. When it hovered two meters from the ground, due to the strong gust of wind it drifted. Two border guards managed to jump out.

Seven people left inside. The aircraft fell into the abyss from a height of 150 meters. It was reported that at least six people died. Another survivor found at the site of the fall " (

The case is tragic and shameful, unfortunately - not a single case, and this is our time when the Kamov people, even in 2001, offered to the series a Ka-32-10 helicopter coaxially, equal in internal fuselage volume with the Mi-8, but superior to all flight characteristics.

The first version of the Ka-32-10 helicopter

Behavior of the helicopter coaxial scheme with gusty wind steadily!

About the difference in the behavior of the Mi and Ka helicopters, the pilot very clearly tells about their reaction to the wind:

“I met this helicopter at the end of distant 80s, when I served in the Syzran Air Force Academy. Our 484 training and helicopter regiment had a mixed squad, and included three squadrons of the Mi-24 and one Ka-27 PL. Kamov machines were used to train future pilots of naval aviation. In flight, the Kamov machine was strikingly different from the single-screw Mi ‑ 8 and Mi ‑ 24 I was used to. Helicopters differed not only constructively, but also by their behavior in the air, especially at low speeds.

Strong, gusty side winds on landing approach “feel skin”, especially on the Mi-24. The helicopter constantly wants to turn to the wind, resists control. Keeping a hovering point in side winds is difficult, Mi ‑ 24, “rears” with every gust. As for Ka-27, that is the feeling that he simply does not notice the wind. In the mode of hovering with strong gusts, it spins like a whirligig on its tip, but does not leave a given point. Moreover, the pilot’s onboard flight-navigation complex (PNK), and of course, the helicopter’s design scheme itself plays a big role in helping the pilot ”(› 49713-morskoy-strazh).

Ka-32-10AG helicopters for paratroopers!

Coaxial helicopters invented as specially for the Airborne Forces! Landing can be very difficult not only in the mountains, but also in cities with high-rise buildings, or in the taiga with tall pines when taking out special forces or wounded, where only coaxial helicopters with their unique maneuverability near the ground and high energy efficiency can be reliable and safe for landing sites in the war does not happen, because war does not provide for scheduled flights.

Supercrocodile Mi-35

“How many do not repeat halva will not become sweeter in the mouth,” and as liberal journalists, under the guidance of general designers of the cost centers, do not try to praise the Mi-28 / 35 helicopters, they still were unsuitable for a modern war, and will remain so! In reference books, their static ceiling is exaggerated to disgrace: Mi-35 to 3150. (Wikipedia, and others.), And in Mi-28H - even higher than 3600, almost like the level of "Black Shark". Is not it? Of course not! Recall the formula HB:

"The thrust of the rotor is proportional to the density of air, swept area HB and inductive speed (rotational speed HB)" (Features of the aerodynamics of the rotor (HB) Poznayka.Org). The radius of the rotor and the peripheral speed - already in the square!

So let's estimate: aren't the references to Mi helicopter gunships lying at all?

The diameter of the rotor Mi-35 / 28 = 17,2. The diameter of the rotor of the helicopter Mi-8 = 21,3. Static ceiling Mi-8 = 1900. (Multi-purpose transport helicopter Mi-8T. Aviarou.rf).

It is clear that the static ceiling of the Mi-35 / 28 will only be less than that of the Mi-8, but no more.

And only in one directory I found a fair figure for the static ceiling of the Mi-35: Nst. = 1750. (Corner of the sky).

Is it possible in real life to make sure: how does the difference in diameters of curlers affect their cravings?


The diameter of the HB helicopter Mi-6 = 35. and 5lap.

The diameter of the HB helicopter Mi-26 = 32. and 8 blades.

The total power of the engines of the helicopter Mi-6 = 11000l.s.

The total power of the engines of the helicopter Mi-26 = 22800l.s.,

those. Mi-26 in 2 times more powerful and the estimated thrust of the screw should be respectively in 2 times more? In fact, the HB of the Mi-26 helicopter produces thrust only on 30% more than the thrust of the HB of the Mi-6 helicopter!

According to the army test pilot Colonel A. Rudykh, who was testing him in the war in Chechnya, the “black shark” hangs at full height = 4000м.

This is a real attack helicopter, and not Mi-24, which with a combat load in Afghanistan was forced even from its airfield to take off from the nose wheel, because it lacked engine power to take off in a helicopter.

As for the fact that the Mi-35 is capable of carrying 7 people - the reason is significant, but not convincing: in Afghanistan, in Chechnya and in Syria, the Mi-24 / 35 helicopters were used only as attack helicopters, and the landing forces were transferred by Mi-8 helicopters. Therefore, here is the conclusion: the Airborne Forces should be equipped only with Ka-50 / 52 and Ka-32-XNUMHAG helicopters, and ahead: "The new Kamov is being developed in at least two military versions - strike and airborne combat" ( and it’s time to stop marking time and “writing out” circles around the Stone Age helicopters from the cost centers, because their tuning helicopters are no longer decent!

“We have the means. We do not have enough mind "(Matroskin the cat)

Of the heavy helicopters today, other than the fabulously expensive Mi-26 is not, therefore, for a start, and they are suitable, and then you should think about restoring faster and more economical Ka-22. I objected: what are you ??? And the engines D-25V power = 5500l.s. no longer available, and 2 disasters he had! What is true is true! It was only calculated for engines with 5900l.s power. and this is his big “+”. And it can be used with success not only in the Airborne Forces, but also in the Arctic, the Arctic and the Far East, where reliability and safety are especially in demand. Klimov has remarkable modern TV7-117В engines with take-off power of 3000л.с. The D-25B engine can be successfully replaced by two TV7-117В and in total the helicopter will receive the power that it was calculated on, and most importantly, with four engines, it will receive unsurpassed reliability, which is the main advantage in the conditions of hostilities and when flying in the North our country! It should be added that four TV7-117 engines are half a ton lighter than two D-25В engines, and in flight they consume less fuel than two D-25В. For what high reliability in case of failure of one engine in flight!

As for his two catastrophes, I am deeply convinced that these were sabotage catastrophes and I very much doubt that someone will prove me to the contrary.

Just do not think that it will be a copy of the Ka-22, because it will only resemble the Ka-22 in size and appearance, but in fact it will be a completely different rotorcraft: the blades instead of the trapezoid will install rectangular with higher efficiency; the bow, I suppose, is also redesigned, because it does not correspond to the time of frontal resistance; pulling screws are also likely to be of a different design, etc. But what I have no doubt is that the cruising speed of the modern Ka-22 will be more than 320k / h, and the price will be many times cheaper than the Mi-26 and only slightly inferior in payload, especially when flying over long distances.

“Catch fish big and small” (from a fairy tale).

It is time to finance the Kamov design bureau on high-speed Ka-92, Ka-102 and modern attack helicopters instead of enrichment with Alla Pugacheva:

“Rostec” gave a Pugacheva 40 million concert ... ( At the concert dedicated to the 70 anniversary of the singer, which will be held in the State Kremlin Palace in April of this year, "Helicopters of Russia" decided to allocate as many 40 million rubles. "

Balance: on fine-tuning the Ka-52!

Sergey Viktorovich Mikheev, back in 2007, said that "with proper funding, the Ka-92 can be lifted into the air and even prepared for mass production in five years."

Since then, 11 has passed, during this time, false projects Mi-X1, Rachel and other research and development works of the Milevsky Design Bureau have been financed, from which not a single modern helicopter has emerged, and the Mi-24LL has not been high-speed and will never be because of its old age !

“To carry out work on the Ka-52“ Alligator ”, Kamovians requested 2004 million rubles for 120 year - received 8 million. Milevtsy, received 145 million rubles for the revision of the Mi-28H, almost, as requested. We must assume that there is no money only for the Kamov OKB helicopters ”(

And it’s a pity that the Supreme Commander and the Minister of Defense overlook this financial trick from the general designers of the cost centers.

Another tuning for the Airborne Forces

*** “A part is planned to be formed in 2020-2021. New helicopters will be ordered for it. One of the squadrons will be equipped with Mi-35M helicopters. ”

Let's see what this "new" combat beast has left the gate of the cost center: "An interview with an army aviation pilot who has experience flying helicopters Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-35М and Mi-28Н".

We have a saying: “You fly lower and live longer”. It is necessary to minimize the time spent by the machine in the enemy's sight, for this purpose they fly at low altitudes. The lower you fly, the more options to slip and hide behind the terrain, behind artificial obstacles, behind the same trees. A small flight altitude provides a stealth approach to the goal, and this is the key to successful assignment.

Yes, at the bottom, too, you can grab a stray bullet and even catch one bullet, the engine can fail, but the chances of such an outcome are much less.

In terms of design (Mi-35M), yes. We say: "crossed the hedgehog with a snake, got the wire." Because in this car the part from "28 th" is taken, the part from "24-ki" remained. What kind of Frankenstein.

According to my feelings, it is less stable in flight. If the Mi-24 flies like an iron, and you don’t need to touch it, this one constantly wants to tilt, make a pitch, as if trying to leave somewhere. He must constantly be kept, to interfere in management more often. On complex aerobatics, this is my personal opinion, it is more pleasant to fly on the "24-ke." Again, the Berkuts abandoned group flights on 35's in favor of 28's.

- Has the speed dropped because of the non-retractable landing gear?

- Fell. Now the maximum speed of his 300 km / h, while the Mi-24 335 km / h was. In horizontal flight, this is not so noticeable, because they fly there at a speed of 200-250 km / h, and the maximum is needed for output from a dive. The greater the range of the speed of the withdrawal from the dive, the longer you can keep the target in sight, carry out shooting, and later bring the car out of the dive.

I would not say that all these flaws are somehow clearly felt, but all together they make themselves felt.

(“I am a helicopter pilot.” Part One - Denis Mokrushin 28 November 2015).

This is the next “outstanding” combat helicopter from the cost center design bureau that our airborne troops will be arming instead of the real outstanding Black Shark Ka-50 and Alligator Ka-52.

Vitaly Belyaev, especially for

Participating in the shooting of the advertising film "Black Shark", its main minus should be known. In his demonstration, by the way, Kvachkov took part - Ka-50 needed to "highlight" the target. In the mountains, the method shown in the film is not applicable. And in the x ... I'm a fuss?

For its time, the Mi-24 was a unique helicopter, and the Mi-8 is a good and reliable helicopter, but there is no eternal hardware and today there are incomparably better helicopters, so you should not dwell on the long-obsolete technology.

And secondly, to take off in difficult places, as we say in Afghanistan, it is not the flight engineer who takes off and sits down, but the helicopter commander and flight mechanic does not always feel the characteristics of takeoff and landing.

And the fact that the pilots were forced to fly up on the Mi-24 in Afghanistan from the nose wheel was a proven fact!

Listen to what I tell you, before you write such a "smart" article, learn how to match the hardware, I taught her 3 of the year and 20 for years, then I exploited the flight engineer and fought on it in one very hot country, so I know very well the possibilities and Mi-24 and Mi-8 all modifications

It is not clear: why my comments are not printed again?

And things, dear Igor - Oleg, should be called by their names and do not fall into hysterics from this!

Nobody gets hysterical, they were my colleagues, and I’d better know what happened there, and not what the Kadyrov and the crap author wrote there (about the “disgraceful” case)

Oleg, Chinok, only you called the attack aircraft, this is a purely transport helicopter.

Oleg 05 Apr 2019: “24-ku was raised on an aircraft, not because the engines do not pull, but because of the height”.
What was there with him there wasn’t any pressure — it didn’t matter to the pilots! But it wasn’t: “It was the ceiling that sharply limited the possibility of using the Mi-24 in Afghanistan - the static ceiling of the“ twenty-fours ”of the latest modifications was just 1300 meters,
The scheme that most fully meets the requirement of achieving high flight characteristics was Kamov's "branded" coaxial. It eliminated the loss of power on the tail rotor, giving the 12% more traction, was compact, had no cross-links in the control channels and, with aerodynamic symmetry, allowed to perform such maneuvers that are not too tough for regular helicopters. In flight from the ground, especially in the forest, in the mountains or among buildings, the pilot was not afraid to hurt anything with the tail rotor (it is very difficult to control because of its location and distance from the pilot's seat). All this was subsequently confirmed during the testing of the Ka-29 airborne helicopter in Afghanistan — the static ceiling of the new machine was 3700 m. ( Ka-24 multipurpose attack helicopter).
Those. Under these conditions, the “black shark” would fly up like a helicopter!

To the formula: if you have another formula, write a reference to the textbook or the author.
I'll try to write and I, if it passes, but from it you will not be easier: Tn.v. = (33,25 DNη◦ξ) ²⁄ ³
If you are not satisfied, I will write another one!

You probably do not know, but the Ka-29, Mi-24 and Mi-8 MTV are identical engines.

Pilot with a bluff. A coaxial system is the best friend of a vortex ring. In the mountains, the Kashki are practically unsuitable because of the unpredictability of the air flow. 8 - one and a half (the practice of Afgan). The coaxial system works disgustingly at the bottom, because the earth pushes away and when the pitch changes, the overlap helps a lot. .In favor of d lu it doesn’t go, because everyone has his own nisha. Well, we don’t have helicopters right now, so you don’t have to push Kamov machines to where they aren’t good. So far, Mi-24 and Mi-8 are better not. I will add another option - all your formulas will devour real combat, weather conditions and crew training.

Another helicopter “specialist” with “facts” thought up on a sore head.

It is you, young man, who take the facts from the Internet, and we - from practice. It was necessary to work with the Milevsky machines and with the Kamovskys. I communicated a lot with the pilots "on the glass", and this is what they don’t write about and what they don’t learn in school. Somehow I heard the phrase: "They teach, everyone ...., in fact, the aerodynamics of the flight of a helicopter has not yet been studied," was a good pilot - the coaxial system failed.

Completely illiterate, you only tell tales to teenagers what moral right you have to discuss what is better and what is antediluvian, when you do not exploit it and you do not know all the possibilities of technology. And it’s not for you to comment on the catastrophe that occurred in Chechnya, if you do not know all the causes and conditions !!!! Such hacks need to drive! with with

24-ku raised on an aircraft, not because the engines do not pull, but because of the altitude. The mountains are high above sea level and the air density is low. Although with the 1700, it can take off on a helicopter, but it will devour more fuel in takeoff mode. And Chinok, whom you like so much, is firstly not a ground attack aircraft, and secondly, from the same altitude it takes off only by plane. The formula that you gave will not give you a real lift force of the Screw. It is generally not considered so ...

Fighter Ivan, the author served in Syzran, and you - near Syzran, so you heard the bell, but did not understand - where did he come from! We have the same TV26-3 engines on all helicopters except Mi-117, and today VK-2500 went to the series! Be healthy fighter Ivan!

Vitali - You are a brazen liar and populist. "... The engines we have on all the helicopters, except for the Mi-26, are the same TV3-117 ..." - You have been brazenly lying about it. Mi-8T - TV2-117, Mi-8МТ (Mi-24) - TV3-117. Moreover, TV3-117 differ greatly in modifications and series. So there is a TV3-117В series (VM, VMA, VM2), these are high-altitude engines which, unlike other TV3-117, power drops start with 2000, etc. etc. They all have different characteristics and sometimes significant. Lied here - and lied on. There is no truth in your writing - for the ordinary people will go to eat. You kind of Navalny from aviation.

Yeah... The author is a complete layman! Mows under the "pro". I read Wikipedia, I heard a lot of "flight tales" ... Author-hack yourself on the nose: a single-rotor helicopter does not have a tail rotor. They have PB-steering screw! Only ignoramuses and profane say tail screw. This moveton, unworthy of a competent specialist. Many pilots sin with this. All helicopter gunships in the world are single-rotor. And, by the way, some of them twist all aerobatics (Apache, Ruivalk, Mi-28). Depends on the method of mounting the blades and the blades themselves. The world speed record for a very long time belonged to a single-rotor helicopter, specially modified by Linkx-408 km / h. Coaxial machines such speed and do not dream! It is because of the peculiarities of the coaxial scheme. The resistance of the rotor column is too high. A coaxial helicopter, indeed, doesn’t breeze: a / dynamically symmetric scheme. The circuit is compact, which is indispensable for ship-based, there is no power loss on the PB. The coaxial unit, of the MI-8 dimension, in no way will be more speedy, and the diameter HB of the order of 22 meters on the coaxial wall creates problems in the design of the HB column ... The advantages of the coaxial scheme are maximally realized in the Ka-27,29,32 family. And, the fact that the screw is behind it, you just need to be able to fly and not poke your “tail”, where it is not necessary. Take into account the direction and speed of the wind on the ground. All this is described in detail in the RLE type. By the mistakes of pilots in the technique of piloting, do not judge the scheme itself. By the way, the static ceiling of the Mi-8 MTV-3980 meters in SA, with a flight mass of less than 11,1, etc. Data from the RLE, and not Wikipedia. Dynamic, with the same mass-6000. Engines TV-3-117 VM (VMA). The letter "B" in the abbreviation is high-altitude. Max. vsl. weight-13 tons, loading-4 tons in the cargo compartment, 3 (5) tons on the external sling. What kind of Kama 4 t in the cargo compartment transports? Only on the suspension 5 (7) tons. On the MTV RLE allows vigorous turns with a roll of 45, at a speed of at least 120 km / h. In Afghanistan and 90 lomi. Mi-24 has exploded. a lot of 11 tons, there is only armor on it almost a ton. He and in Russia with a take-off take off, because, like his wings, obscure the flow from HB. And, in flight, on the contrary, they unload HB, therefore, his speed is so high and his maneuverability is good at speed. Due to the "shading" and with the Mi-6, in due time, the wings were taken off. In GA, at least. There, the 300 speed is not needed, and when working with the suspension, there is only harm from the wings. Which Kama roll stand and in what direction? Do you know the concept of "overlapping blades"? Co-axes have poor travel stability at low speeds, which is especially important when landing. You have to constantly "kick your feet." Each scheme is good in its own way. There are advantages, there are drawbacks. Something I have never heard that they would land 8-rock troops through cargo doors and cut down some ass RV into cabbage ... And, in general, there is a feeling that the authors of this site are some kind of “enthusiast” from aviation. What only crap do not write ..

I have not read a more illiterate article yet. If the author undertakes to compare such helicopters in such a volume, one should at least understand this, and not pull out from the context certain phrases that he would like to see. As I understood in Syzran, he served as a fighter as a conscript and has a little idea about aviation, but now he works somewhere on the Kamovskys, so he is trying to lobby for their interests.
It is simply illiterate to compare the Mi-8T helicopter with the Mi-24 and even more so with the Mi-28, if only because it uses completely different engines and, accordingly, different power.

Sadly, the Americans are so unceremoniously flying near our borders. The United States found that closer to 500-1000 km to the United States, no one will fly up or swim, and the Americans allow themselves everything. Why does the Russian Federation allow such arrogance towards itself?

Because the colony.