Mil 17

[wyvern]

Anyone out there who can tell me the normal operating Nr for the Mi17? Max and min would also be helpful.


Wyvern

[Genghis the Engineer]

Does it use the same powerplant as the Mi-8? If so, you could drop Whirlybird an Email, she's done a little flying in one (or for that matter might know some Mi-17 crews who can help you).

G

[wyvern]

Many thanks. I've flown the beast a couple of times, but a long time ago, and the old memory hasn't retained that info.

Wyvern

[tecpilot]

safe ranges should be:

normal operating range 92-96%, means round about 192 rpm
min. autorotation 89% :ok: :ok: :ok:

[Dave Anderson]

The Mi-17 and Mi-8 operate at the same Nr i.e. 192 as the norm. The Mi-8 has engines of 1500 shp each while the Mi-17 has 2225 shp each. Also the Mi-17 has an APU for starting and a tractor tail rotor with slightly wider(10%) TR blades.

[wyvern]

Thank you all for the info on the Mi17.


Wyvern

[Flytest]

Have just flown in Mil 17 last week, can confirm all of the above.

[tecpilot]

Hi Flytest,

what's going on with the shaking ship in the land of the gnats?

Things stepping forward?

[Flytest]

TecPilot

Yes mate, got a result.

Hey would you believe I even ended up being privvy to the first Mil 8 MTV / Mil 17 HUMS system??

I thought the bird was pretty agricultural in design and operation, and you have to say the pilots are pampered with an FE to do everything for them.

Still, can't complain about it.. I stand corrected.. GOOD SHIP.

(There, I said it!!)

[tecpilot]

Good to hear! I said it some month ago, i feel a little enviousness. GOOD SHIP and interesting job. Hope i was able to give some tips. And goddammit why i couldn't be pampered with an FE??? Have to talk the boss...

HUMS on Mil helicopters could be interesting. They are selling a lot of it... and with the russian standards in helicopters it couldn't be so difficult to adapt the system on Kamov.

[Flytest]

Tec

The HUMS as it stands is no more than a bolt on set of accelerometers, and I would say that the locations of said accels could be better, however, at least someone has had the balls to go ahead and start the ball rolling with an introductory system.

Vibration monitoring is only part of HUMS, but thats better than nothing. I was shown the system, and I offered some constructive comments which were well received. Once we got over the initial "Them and us" thing (To be expected when an Engineer gets hauled out from the UK to Russia) I found our Eastern Friends very friendly and great to work with. I work daily with a sophisticated Integrated CVFDR / HUMS system, and as such I was in a position to cast a certain amount of judgement of what they have now, and where they are going in the next 12 months. I would say that the current system is basic, and lacks a couple of key elements, High Speed shaft vibration would be nice, Torques and / or T's & P's as well are a must. They also have a lovely cockpit display, which is pretty pointless and doesn't work in sub zero temps. That said though, its not a bad first attempt, and they will improve it significantly by year end.

As you correctly pointed out though, this particular system is retro fit and therefore easily adaptable to Kamovs.. we'll see what the next 12 - 24 months bring.

So you didn't have a flight engineer to start the APU and warm up the ship before you got in? He didn't get the aircraft turning and burning for you so all you had to do was a little stick work?

You'll be telling me you had to do your own re-fuelling next;)

Returning to the Mil 8 MTV / 17 in July, will keep you posted, and yes the tips received by you and others were very helpful. Thank you.

Regards

Flytest

Just been reading the Mi-17 down thread on Rotorheads.. Not suggesting HUMS would have prevented the accident, but surely any kind of safety improvement is worthwhile? As a friend at Shell said recently.. "If you think flight safety improvement is expensive, just wait til you kill somebody, then you'll find out what expensive really is.."