Canadian MI-17s [Archive]

piggybank

28th Oct 2010, 00:53

Rick1128

The Mil 8 has proven to be an excellent machine. I was on logging in PNG with them. If you want them to keep them flying, employ Russians. They do a fine job but need rather a large maintenance crew.

A worry I have brought up in the past is the continuing quality (or lack there of) of spares parts and rotables.

With the Russian Federation going through growing pains and lawlessness in general, just who is ensuring the Quality Control is up to scratch or watching out for bogus parts?

rick1128

28th Oct 2010, 01:59

PB, the ones the UN had were operated by Russians and Ukrainians. It appears the standard operating policy in Russian was run till it breaks. Unfortunately, when it breaks in Afghanistan, it a nasty spot. The operations and safety folks at the UN hate Russian helicopters, but the UN accountants love them because they are so cheap. Until they see the fuel and crew costs.

9Aplus

28th Oct 2010, 14:21

Mi 8MTV/17/171 is safe, if you run it safe with experienced pilots and flight engineers.

It is true that for 100 h check, you need week and 6-8 engineers,
but on the other hand, that helicopter is capable to sustain heavy
malpractice on flight and maintenance.
Usually that is the case in XXXstan.

New units can fly up to 4500 h on airframe before MOH (MGB and TV3 still 1500h)
which also improves price/performance ratio....

moscovite

28th Oct 2010, 15:08

The Mi-8/17 is one of most reliable and successful helicopter in history with large number of flight hours.

9Aplus dont mind about those people because they only want the western helicopter - let htem have. We will take india, china, africa and other areas (with growing economy).

Which is you prefer to be in UH1 or Mi-8 in war zone? Which his surivie better? Every place for war they want helicopter which is capale for surviving. We know next year fighting will start in sudan because of refendum and already they ask for more helicopter and they tell us that even if they could buy the western - they dont want it.

Also, we are working with Euroscopter and the Mi-38 has gain very much interest from nearly all our Mi-17 customers. Mi-38 will become next best helicopter for utility in china, india, africa, part of south americas and so on.

http://mi-helicopter.ru/rus/img/user/43E8E879.jpg

Mi-38 Helicopters

Darkhorse30

28th Oct 2010, 15:09

In my experience with Mil products their quality is not very good and requires some diligence when critical parts come in. There seems to be an after market that sells less than quality parts and this is a serious problem when dealing with gearboxes, blades, engines, in fact all flight safety parts.

moscovite

28th Oct 2010, 15:25

9Aplus you see the americans comments all of them cannot accept the beenfits of Mil aircraft.

They do not understand our history from 1905 russian revolution, Lenin, USSR and what we have challenge as a region. When u see what we face over the past century, our changes, our governemnt our economy you can be proud for what we produce, in size and in numbers.

The spare parts if order directly from Mil factory we are supplying guarantee (this is normal) and all government using Mil know this.

We know that our products in past have not had the same as americans in being so fine but ours has others benefits and the work they do in many countries and under many flight hours is a strong achievement.

What I beleeve is that in the future our products they are becoming more improved and they will continue to do this and is reason that Euroscopter and Agustas are working in Russia today.

[I know my english is not so good that is my problem - we are not using english everyday in my office]

iorgasilviubogdan

28th Oct 2010, 16:45

what is the status of the Mi-38?

grizzled

28th Oct 2010, 17:17

Rick1128,

With respect… Your comments about the MI-8 / MI-17, and the US and UN view of them, are simply untrue. Either you don’t have direct experience with them, or you’re exhibiting a bias based on old (1980s/90’s information).

I have direct and current experience with the UN, NATO (ISAF) and US Forces in Afghanistan. I also have years of experience with the UN (DPKO) in other parts of the world. (And I’m a born and brought up “Westerner”.)

First off, US Forces are still using MI8’s in Afghanistan (and elsewhere). As are Canadians, Brits, and NATO itself. And most UN DPKO Field Officers (and Mission aviation personnel) prefer MI8’s (especially MTV’s) to Western machines for the vast majority of tasks (excluding in most missions such things as SAR and night-ops – because of aircraft equipment and specific training). I would be most happy to engage in PM exchanges with you on the specifics of any part of what I assert.

I – along with most “Westerners” – was not a fan of Eastern European (mostly former Soviet Bloc) aircraft for a long time. What most of us in these difficult environments (like Afghanistan, Africa and the Middle East) now acknowledge is that the old view is no longer valid. And the reason is simple: Once those aircraft manufacturers, operators, and maintenance organizations were made to meet ICAO and “Western” standards of maintenance, training and safety culture, the operations began to equal western companies in both reliability and safety. Indeed, in some types of operations, the MI-8’s (and of course MI-26’s in heavy roles) exceed the capability – and even sometimes the reliability – of similar Western machines.

grizz

9Aplus

28th Oct 2010, 18:33

iorgasilviubogdan what is the status of the Mi-38?
Small scale serial production in Kazan, with Russ engines, no PW, blame
of high political reasons :E

moscovite

28th Oct 2010, 18:50

iorgasilviubogdan - Mi-38 we are prepare to make test flight program on number 2 prototype and this testing is taking place here in moscow at mil plant after delivery from Kazanstev. With prototype number 1 we fly nearly 100 flight and this is using PW127/5. on prototype 2 the TVY-117V engine will be used.

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/mil-mi-38/images/9-mi-38-helicopter.jpg

You can expect at least some more 12 months of development for mi-38 before we give final approval for full manufacture to begin (if all going well).

Please see our Mi-38 here:

4sJBeqtG5Rk&feature=related

Grizzled - we thank you for support and understanding.

Some peoples outside of countries not using Mil equipment do not understand the jobds htese aircraft are requiring to perform. I have pilot around me with very many experience which if you do not see it with your eyes you cannot believe it.

Also many western helicopter persons do not understand developing nation situation especially africa - defence force having little money but still need defend border, we have case of mi-8 with no maintainence performed for more than 2 years but still flying. This one we dont recommend but sometimes our helicopters are put into this situations.

iorgasilviubogdan

28th Oct 2010, 19:01

I think this thread should be split by a moderator

how does the 38 fly compared to the 17?
why did Eurocopter leave the program?

moscovite

28th Oct 2010, 19:18

I cannot say everyhting here but euroscopter is still provides consulting and we also look for another project coming.

38 has complete new system and newer technolohy for all dynamic systems it is much larger than mi-8/17 but handling is better it fly as if for much smaller helicopter for moving finely. Of course initeria when you try to stop it fast from high speed because helicopter heavier but if you fly 38 then you do not want to go to fly 8/17.

iorgasilviubogdan

28th Oct 2010, 19:41

nice!
how about orders?

rick1128

28th Oct 2010, 21:55

grizzled, I was there during the 2004 time period supporting the UN. So I do know what I am talking about. When I got there the UN had 5 on contract and before I left, only one was operating, even though the operator's contract still had over a year to go. On two occasions we were alerted to conduct a search for one of the UN Mi8's. The UN operations and safety people that I dealt with were not Westerners. There were from Latin and South America and the Middle East. A majority of them were from military services that operated Russian helicopters. And they still don't like them. The UN accounts love them because the operators are bidding them at 1/2 to 1/3 of what a western helicopter will go for. I know this because I have been shown the bid results after the contracts were awarded. However, the UN generally pays for the fuel and crew accommodations.

Each person's experience may be different. I have dealt with Russian aircraft in many parts of the world, all with Russian, Ukraine and Belarus crews and maintenance. Plus I have flown on some these aircraft. I saw and heard nothing that gave me the warm and fuzzys. The guys over at Dyncorp that operates a MI8 and a MI17 in Afghanistan have had no maintenance problems over all. But they use their own mechanics and maintain it to their standards. What they told me was that they change a component the instant they start having problems with it. Their comments were that the machine was a maintenance and fuel hog. And that it was designed to maintained with a sledgehammer. The machine was designed to Russian military standards, in that components were not designed to be overhauled, just pulled and replaced.

Shawn Coyle

29th Oct 2010, 15:37

Part of the problem has to be the culture of the operators. VIH Logging in Canada now has the high time Russian built helicopters, and after a few years of teething problems, now appears to have a nearly trouble free-operation.
But it took a lot of learning on the part of both sides.
From a design point, Russian machines are much more robustly built, and are Russian solutions to Russian problems. The lack of hangars, for example, drives many often overlooked things. The disposable payload fraction is less than on western machines and the fuel consumption is higher.
On a comparison to Western machines - it's interesting to see the KA-32 in the hangar (with little maintenance being needed) alongside another well-used Western helicopter that is stripped to the bones and undergoing structural repair as it does every year. The Ka-32 was originally lifed at 6,000 hours (I believe) and is now passing 13,000 with no airframe fatigue issues.
So, in the right hands, the Russian machines are just fine.

moscovite

29th Oct 2010, 15:56

Спасибо (thank you) shawn coylve;

It is require understaning as you say.

You czeck our news here==

"Russian Helicopters, the Russian helicopter engineering holding company, a part of United Industrial Corporation Oboronprom, and the Russian Center for Scientific and Technical Services Dinamika (CSTS Dinamika) have signed a cooperation agreement in the marketing, development, production, and delivery of technical training means for flight and engineering personnel operating Russian-made rotorcraft.

Under this agreement the parties are planning to jointly create, certify, and run technical training units (TTU) for flight and engineering personnel operating helicopter complexes of various roles.

The agreement also envisions joint marketing and the promotion of modern TTU for rotorcraft manufactured by Russian Helicopters on local and international markets within integrated delivery contracts."

moscovite

29th Oct 2010, 15:58

Also Mr Sahwn Coyle please you give explain for this comments:

"The disposable payload fraction is less than on western machines" is mean exactly what?

grizzled

29th Oct 2010, 19:02

rick1128...

Again – with respect – I stick by what I said in my last posting.

I know most (if not all) the UN Air Ops people you mention – I worked with them in the year you refer to (2004). I have worked within the UN (DPKO and WFP) and with the UN continuously since then, and I spent most of 2007 in Kabul, along with a few months of last year (and I have another gig there starting in January. Sigh…). I have also worked in the Middle East, South East Asia, and Africa with American, Canadian, South African, Australian, Ukrainian, Russian, Moldovan, and various other operators. And crews from all those places plus more.

Of course there are biases among us all; indeed I certainly had my own “anti-Russian aircraft bias” for a long time. My point is simply this: The UN’s own statistics – and those of the CAA’s of other countries where both Western made helicopters and Russian made helicopters are abundantly represented – show that in the past 10 years helicopter losses, AOG time, injuries and fatalities, all show that the Mil machines (MI-8, MI-17, and MI-26) have a better record (per flight hours) than (for instance) Bell 212’s in the same missions doing the same tasks.

BTW, the most recent contracts being signed by the UN (by that I mean the past two years) show the contract costs of the Mil helicopters creeping much closer to those of the “equivalent” Western machines (i.e./ no longer the 1/3 to ½ you mentioned). The free market always finds its level…

You mentioned having to look for a missing MI-8 (in Afghanistan, in 2004 I presume). In Afghanistan specifically, since 2003 there have been approximately 3 times as many Western helos lost or substantially damaged as MI’s. (I’m referring to civil rotary wing ops, with “shoot-downs” excluded) This despite the fact the Mils have put in far more hours (combined).

All types have their advantages and disadvantages. What we “from the West” have been finding out in the past few years is that when KA’s and Mil’s (for example) are operated to ICAO standards – including maintenance, training and, most importantly, safety culture – they are reliable safe machines.

As was mentioned earlier, perhaps this thread should be split, as it’s evolved into a “Western Helos v/s Eastern Helos” thread.

Again I offer a PM exchange if you or anyone else wishes.

Cheers,
grizz

Shell Management

30th Oct 2010, 19:04

Russian aircraft have their place. Shell use Mil 8 MTVs in Sakhalin, but they are fitted with HUMS, secondary survival features and used within sight of shore, all part of a detailed Shell Aircraft safety case.

ARRAKIS

30th Oct 2010, 20:14

Mi 8MTV/17/171 is safe, if you run it safe with experienced pilots and flight engineers.
Second that. :ok:
You just have to maintain it by the book (like any other machine).
The Poles are buying now 5 Mi-17 for Afghanistan, finally directly from Rosoboronexport (AFAIK).

Regarding the Mi-38, does the project has really a chance? When it started long time ago there was a big gap between it's capabilities and the good old Mi-8T but since then, the machine evolved into, for example MTV-5.

Arrakis

Shawn Coyle

31st Oct 2010, 12:39

Muscovite:
The disposable payload (fuel plus cargo/passengers) as a fraction of the total maximum weight of the helicopter is smaller for most Russian civil helicopters than it is for most Western civil helicopters.
At least for the Russian helicopters that I knew - that may have changed.
On the other hand, Russian helicopters with metal construction have a much more rugged airframe than most Western helicopters.

squib66

31st Oct 2010, 12:48

The Mi-17 / Mi-8-MTV-1 (as endorsed by Shell Management) does have some funny features like the 'collector tank' above the APU. Not only a single point failure in the fuel system but a great way to spread a fire. So much for Shell's so called standards!

The UK military have used Mi-17s for Afghan related reasons:
Rick Ingham Photography - Project Curium - Boscombe Down Mi-17's (http://rickinghamphotography.co.uk/content/spta/curium.html)

9Aplus

31st Oct 2010, 14:30

Squib all flying machines have some sort of compromise within own construction,
Mi 8 family too....
FYI AI-9 can be replaced with Saphire (PBS, EASA certified) APU,
no need for "collector",
and no just 3 start limit,
and ability to start up to 6000 m
and in flight run of air condition heat/cool

All is just question of few $ more :E

squib66

31st Oct 2010, 14:48

Well oil companies are always broke!

Shell Management

31st Oct 2010, 16:56

So skint that Shell bought new brand new aircraft and added
HUMS, secondary survival features
Do I hear an echo?

moscovite

2nd Nov 2010, 07:35

If Mi-8/17 is so wrong then why everyday we receiving order and inquirey? :confused:

India Looking to Lease Mi-17s
New Delhi, 1st November 2010

http://www.intell.rtaf.mi.th/intellFilesUpload/intellnews/47760-01.jpg

The Indian government is seeking to lease 13 twin-engine, armour-plated helicopters from private operators on wet lease for movement of troops in Maoist-hit areas and surveillance purpose. Helicopters of either MI-17 series or of equivalent capability, which can fly both at day and night, will be deployed in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, possibly before the end of the year.

These choppers would be in addition to the existing fleet of about 20 Indian Air Force and BSF helicopters being deployed in Maoist-affected areas.

Six helicopter operators, including foreign companies, have showed interest to the Home Ministry's proposal under which choppers would be given on wet lease to the government for an initial period of one year extendable up to three years.

The helicopters would have a minimum airlift capability of 18-20 fully equipped, armed security personnel and fly to air destination at least for 400 km away or 200 km one way and return without refueling.

Govt to hire 13 private choppers for use in Naxal areas - Hindustan Times (http://www.hindustantimes.com/Govt-to-hire-13-private-choppers-for-use-in-Naxal-areas/Article1-620253.aspx)

moscovite

2nd Nov 2010, 07:46

This is what I tell you about Sudan. I can tell you exactly where in world there is waring going to happen according to orders for helicopters. I have told you next year they will begin to fight in the sudan south and also you expect increase to fighti in somali.

Now if you to use helicopter in war zone you need to have one strong to protect you and troop - the west helicopter can be big risk in this area.

Some you russian pilot if speak english you write here about the combat survive of our helicoptes!

"Moscow - Russia will sell to the Sudan until the end of the year, 10 x Mi-17 helicopters, said today (Monday) to the Interfax news agency a source in the sector of aviation.

Kazan Helicopters will provide equipment to Sudan nine Mi-17B-5 and one Mi-172 Hall, stated that source, saying that it is civilian versions of these devices."

Google Translate (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http://www.portalangop.co.ao/motix/pt_pt/noticias/africa/2010/8/36/Russia-vai-vender-dez-helicopteros-agencia,4fafb900-42e8-424d-8d32-cbe123c6819d.html)

9Aplus

2nd Nov 2010, 09:15

Can confirm that India,
We received request 3 weeks ago, offer is there already:ok:

moscovite

5th Nov 2010, 16:31

Nueva Zona De Aviacion General, Bogota, Colombia, is being awarded a $139,038,859 option year modification for rotary wing aircraft, personnel, equipment, tools, material, maintenance and supervision necessary to perform passenger and cargo air transportation services.

Work will be performed in Afghanistan, and the option will start Nov. 1, 2010, to be completed by Oct. 31, 2011. This contract was a competitive acquisition with 13 bids received.

Vertical de Aviacion (http://www.verticaldeaviacion.com/)

http://www.verticaldeaviacion.com/wp-content/themes/verticalDeAviacionDefault/images/pic1.jpg

There is also some things happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq which we cannot say here but it involve large number of Mil aircraft but you will be hearing about it in news in middle of 2011.

moscovite

9th Nov 2010, 14:22

News today!

Russian air company “Vertical-T” has begun air operations for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the annual contract. For many years USAID has been involved in Afghanistan’s rehabilitation and support programs to promote the country’s economic and social development.

Helicopters Mi-8MTV-1 and Mi-8T of air company “Vertical-T” are taking part in the construction of Kajaki Dam Hydropower plant, providing power for 1,7 million residents of Helmand and Kandahar provinces. The dam is also intended for the irrigation in the Helmand River Valley.

http://vertical-t.ru/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Ми-8.jpg

Vertical T the Ми-8

Good lucks to our teams going to Afghanistans

9Aplus

9th Nov 2010, 16:29

@ ironchefflay :EHelicopter Floats

Aerazur is the inventor of the Emergency Flotation System and with over 50 years of experience has its equipment fitted on helicopters worldwide. Military, Civilian and Offshore users of European or Russian made helicopters rely on us for safety of their crew as well as maintenance of their equipment.
Helicopter Floats Range Agusta Eurocopter Kazan - AB204 - SA330 - Mi8 - Mi17 - Mi172 - AB205 - AS332 - Ansat - AB212 - AS350
- AB412 - AS355 - EC225 - NH90

Ian Corrigible

22nd Nov 2010, 15:52

Back to Trojan's original question:

"CF: Leased Mi-17s? We'd love to tell you, but it's a secret." (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2010/11/22/Canada-mum-on-helicopter-leases/UPI-89951290436172/)

Canadian military officials say information about helicopters leased for use in Afghanistan isn't being released because it could help insurgents. A Canadian Forces officer says the Department of Defense might release more information about the helicopters at a later date.
The Defense Department acquired the MI-17 helicopters for combat use in Afghanistan but has refused to provide details about how much the deal cost taxpayers or how many aircraft are operating, Postmedia News reported.
The military says the lease was the result of a competitive contract but the details were not published on the MERX Web site, which formally lists such information, the report said.
Military officials said releasing the helicopter information now could help Afghan insurgents.
The new helicopters have been used in Kandahar province since spring and are among tens of millions of dollars worth of equipment to be used in Afghanistan the Defense Department has kept secret, sources told Postmedia.
A spokeswoman for Canadian Forces, Navy Lt. Kelly Rozenberg-Payne, said the cost of the lease might be made public later. She said the helicopters were requested by commanders in Afghanistan.
"The (operational) tempo within the air wing became very great and it was just assessed by commanders on the ground that they needed additional platforms to help move troops around," she said.
Canada operates Chinook helicopters in Kandahar and leases helicopters from Toronto-based Skylink Aviation. It also operates its own Griffon helicopters.

Off-topic, interesting to see a new Mi-17 appear recently on one of the industry's most widely used aircraft sales websites, priced at $12M.

I/C

GeorgeMandes

22nd Nov 2010, 16:39

How Not to Buy a Russian Helicopter - By Sharon Weinberger | Foreign Policy (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/11/12/how_to_buy_a_russian_helicopter?wpisrc=xs_0002)

9Aplus

22nd Nov 2010, 18:21

Gov in Poland learned almost the same lesson.... :mad:

widgeon

25th Nov 2010, 11:17

CBC News - Politics - Tories mum on Russian choppers lease (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/11/24/helicopter-russian.html)

Finally some official info.

Oops I missed the earlier post sorry Ian. .

Trojan1981

25th Nov 2010, 23:00

Thanks very much. Ian, that is exactly what I was after:ok:.

Montrealguy

7th Dec 2010, 18:03

Canadian American Strategic Review has a recent article on the CF CH-178

Canadian Air Force - Mil CH-178 - Mil Mi-17-V5 - Leased Helicopter - MHLH Project - Air Command - CASR - Canadian American Strategic Review - Medium Lift Helicopter - Transport Helicopter - Russian Helicopter - Mil Mi-8 - Mil Mi-17(V5) - Mil Kazan - (http://www.casr.ca/101-af-ch178-mil.htm)

and here is a picture of one of them.

http://newimages.fotopic.net/?iid=12vhqx&outx=800&quality=80

Blackivan

9th Jun 2011, 21:34

I think I understand why some people complain about Mi-17 parts quality.
My company supply Mi-17 parts for Iraq Air Forces for the last 4 years already. And we receive a lot of complains on the parts produced (or overhauled) in Ukraine. I've heard about ukrainian vendors supplying fake passports and fake parts. If you don't deal with Ukrainian vendors and deal directly with manufacture plants (like Kazan Helicopters and Ulan-Ude), you will not have any complains from the customers. That's the lesson we had to learn.

cpt

13th Dec 2012, 10:48

We operated an MI8AMT (new from Ulan Ude) in early 90's and I don't think another "western" equivalent class of helicopter could have been operated in the same though conditions. We dealt with highly professional crews and engineers as well as a very good service from the factory.
This helicopter was certified for " cargo and service passengers" only, and in my point of view, the weak point was the low life time of the components....certification norms were obviously far away from FAR/JAR.

I only hope that its successor (the Mi 38?) is certified according to the FAR/JAR standards for passenger transport, still keeping the MI8AMT/MTV roughness and level of performance, with of course, a better life time on components to make it commercially profitable.

Dreaming to fly one....again :ok: