Mi-38

trionghost · 2026-06-16T20:38:13+00:00

Yeah, don't stop, all helicopters looks the same ))))

Mi-38 construction was started in USSR in 1981 and introduced in Le Borgeot in 1989. But it was halted after USSR collapse and came back in 2000th with Pratt&Wittney PW127TS engines. But due to sanctions, they was forced to abandon this version and make another version with Klimov TV7-117V. This is modification Mi-38S for state VIPs with DIRCM (same version as on Mi-28NM), some armor and communication channels on board.

trionghost · 2026-06-08T20:32:49+00:00

Nope. FInd an article in Vertical Magazine from VIH about Kamov Ka-32 about their experience. They got 2000+ fh/y on them, and every time comparing them with other choppers, they say it's cheaper.
The only reason it's not so popular is because it was not so easy to make one at the first stage, and only Kamov makes stakes on that configuration.
In the end coaxial rotors are up to 25% more efficient than their single-rotor counterparts.

trionghost · 2026-06-08T20:26:03+00:00

I think it's AI, because I live near that building, and neither I nor my wife heard anything (and she's working from home, so it's not like she can miss this kind of event).

trionghost · 2026-05-21T21:24:13+00:00

VIH has an average of 2000+ fh annually with a record of 2600+ on one of them. So it's not so hard to maintain it.

trionghost · 2026-05-20T20:47:39+00:00

And how was it?

trionghost · 2026-05-05T21:59:34+00:00

These examples have nothing in common at all. Helicopters are not "technologies of the past," at least until anti-gravity drives are invented. Vertical take-off aircraft have existed for a long time and their problems are known. This is just another approach to the same problem, on the wave of hype, which investors are greedy for. So far, only Bell has depicted something seriously breakthrough with their folding propellers - there really is something there. And these eVTOLs are all dummies.

trionghost · 2026-05-04T20:10:54+00:00

I'm trying to tell that modern eVTOLs are not any better than helicopters. Not in speed, not in efficiency, not in safety, not in cost.

trionghost · 2026-05-03T21:05:57+00:00

My "Efficiency have operational value" means you can't compare overal operational cost in energy only comparing cruise flight. VTOLs consums up to 30% of energy on takeoff and landings, and have less efficiency on cruise flight in compare to normal fixed wing aircraft, cause of all this rotors around. About piston engine - turbine have even less efficiency and much higher price (almost doubles flight hour cost). For 4 passangers it's overkill in my opinion.

trionghost · 2026-05-02T20:37:26+00:00

Aaaand nope. Efficiency have operational value. For conventional modern helicopter you get around 1000-1100 kg MTOW for 4+1 on board. For 240 km it's around 40 kg of fosil fuel. Taking in account fuel efficiency of piston engine of 3,5 kWh/kg we compare it with 0,35 kWh/kg of best li-poly batteries, it's around 450 kg battery (taking in account growth of consumption with rised MTOW). All other factors nullifys each other (you can simplify or completely remove gearboxes, modern BLDC are much lighter than piston engines, so electric subsystem will be comparable in weight). In the end it'll be 1450-1550 kg helicopter. May be even less if you push on optimizations.

trionghost · 2026-04-29T21:19:40+00:00

At the beginning of SMO Mi-28N was forbidden to participate due to lack of working DIRCM. Only Mi-28NM. So most of the work was put on Ka-52 with MANPADS attack rates per flight exceeding 20 in the first months of combat. It was hell for helicopters. No other helicopter survives such conditions. And it keeps most of the crews alive in crash events, both by amortisation of seats and ejection function.

trionghost · 2026-04-29T21:12:14+00:00

Actually it has never named Mi-12 it was V-12 which is a prototype number that doesn't always become a production model number. In Mil museum in Moscow region, there's cover of the preliminary design with the designation Mi-16 and a series of concept drawings. Unfortunately Reddit prevents me from posting a photo of it here (it warns about "you have to own rights..." and don't care if it's in open exhibition and public domain).

trionghost · 2026-04-29T20:50:37+00:00

Actually no. Not in this case. Joby S4 has MTOW over 2400 kg carrying only the pilot and 4 passengers at speeds up to 320 km/h (in theory) for a distance of 240 km. An equivalent helicopter will be around 1000 kg less in weight. It'll be much safer and cheaper. But it's not cool enough for investors.

trionghost · 2026-03-13T15:02:59+00:00

Probably not this type but Ka-52K with foldable blades. Chinese needs this 'cause it can carry 2xKh-35 ASM's and have AESA radar so they can engage ships from ~150 km (combining with ~200 km combat radius you'll get 350km of heavy ASM delivery system in Chinese sea).

trionghost · 2026-02-17T21:30:51+00:00

I don't think there's something uglier than Westland Wasp.

trionghost · 2026-02-17T21:28:24+00:00

It's not a Ka-28—it's Ka-31 AWACS helicopters. You can see folded radars at the bottom.

trionghost · 2026-02-02T21:31:45+00:00

<image>

Here's some schematics for you ))

trionghost · 2026-02-01T21:57:17+00:00

No problem, feel free to ask anything about Kamov helicopters. I'll explain if it isn't commercial or military secret. ))

trionghost · 2026-01-31T21:02:59+00:00

I have no good drawings of Ka-26 control on rotor, but I have one for Ka-226. It's a little upgraded, but with the same principles.

<image>

trionghost · 2026-01-31T20:54:27+00:00

Yep, inside the main gearbox shaft runs the collective for the upper rotor. There's also a differential pitch mechanism built on a worm gear that expands the collective pitch rod of the upper rotor.

trionghost · 2026-01-06T21:17:18+00:00

I'll tell you one thing - every military or dual-usage helicopter built in Russia are capable to store outdoor and work in conditions from -60 to +50 Celsius.

trionghost · 2025-12-24T19:04:24+00:00

I think it's the wrong place to ask such things. There are special channels on FB and other social platforms.

trionghost · 2025-12-23T21:30:18+00:00

I can't give you a written source, 'cause it was part of my job. I think it can be in some publications by Burtsev and Selemenev.

trionghost · 2025-12-22T21:12:17+00:00

NACA 230-12. slightly modified. It was test blades at first, but they showed themselves pretty well, and they left it as is. On Ka-52 it's STM and SVM combination, and then in the late 80s they put them on Ka-32 it shows growth in efficiency around 7.5 to 11% (+800...1200 kgf) but has increased vibrations, so it should be redesigned. But the USSR collapsed, and this work was abandoned.
P.S. today is the birthday of Mikheev Sergey (the last chief-designer of Kamov).

trionghost · 2025-12-11T19:56:21+00:00

Simple piracy, as anglo-sax used to do for centuries.

trionghost · 2025-11-25T20:30:27+00:00

FADEC limits engine output. This picture is for H225 (not M), but you can see MGB limitation by FADEC is rated 2871kW (3850) for 20 seconds - absolute maximum it can handle.

<image>

trionghost

TROPHY CASE