DCS: Mi-8MTV-2

[RagnarDa]

Hey PilotMi8, could you tell us if your Mi-8 will carry the Shturm ATGM? Radar? Sorry if this has been answered somewhere else.

[ФрогФут]

Hey PilotMi8, could you tell us if your Mi-8 will carry the Shturm ATGM? Radar? Sorry if this has been answered somewhere else.

No, it won't. Rockets, bombs, different gunpods.

[Rogue Trooper]

I think this will be my utility helicopter of choice..... I think....

Don't get me wrong, The Huey is nice!

But I am sure this will be my utility helicopter of choice.

Huey is good on the bank and yank though.

um..

I am 100% sure this is the utility helicopter of choice 60% of the time!

[Avimimus]

No, it won't. Rockets, bombs, different gunpods.

 

What about door/window gunners? Any word on these? There should be at least two lateral 7.62mm stations if I recall (and possibly a heavy machine gun firing through the main door).

[BaD CrC]

Guys,

 

Don't know if this link has been posted before, but time to study!

 

http://www.ulozto.cz/xxAApQp/tsmo-dash-10-tm-1-1520-mi-17-10-apr-07-pdf

 

Hey Belsimtek devs! I hope your Mi8 will stick so much to the real thing that the only doc you need to attach with this module is this one! Saved you a lot of time :smilewink:

[YoYo]

Nice find. Ok, mirror: https://hotfile.com/dl/224745375/d477ebc/TSMO-Dash-10-(TM-1-1520-Mi-17-10-Apr-07).pdf.html

[AlphaOneSix]

Hey Belsimtek devs! I hope your Mi8 will stick so much to the real thing that the only doc you need to attach with this module is this one! Saved you a lot of time :smilewink:

 

Same helicopter, but a ton of different systems.

 

The TSMO manual is for a Mi-17-1V (Mi-8MTV-1) that has been extensively modified for the U.S. military. Well, maybe not that extensive, but a lot of avionics differences.

 

The actual mechanics are the same.

 

Basically what I'm saying is that the TSMO manual would be good enough to just fly, but it leaves out a lot of stuff that will be in the sim, and includes a lot that won't be in the sim.

 

EDIT: Oh and there ARE errors in the TSMO manual. Where I work, we tend to just use the TSMO manuals for some of the pictures and basic system descriptions, but all maintenance is done with the Russian manuals. The Flight Manuals are written in-house or are the Russian versions, we outlawed the TSMO flight manual long ago. It's a good start, however.

Edited May 28, 2013 by AlphaOneSix

[Sundowner.pl]

Is your parts catalog also in 9 volumes, each as big and heavy as manhole cover, or is that only the Mi-14 thing ? :smilewink:

[SimFreak]

VtsA4A0tL04

 

 

When your hilo overloaded or altitude is too high to hover, there is nice way to get into transitional lift. :P

[AlphaOneSix]

Is your parts catalog also in 9 volumes, each as big and heavy as manhole cover, or is that only the Mi-14 thing ? :smilewink:

 

Well the airframe itself has only two parts manuals.

 

But that doesn't include the gines, APU, or a bunch of other systems. There are so many manuals, it's kind of ridiculous. Mostly because there are so many components with their own manual.

 

I think a complete set of our Mi-17V-5 manuals is 80 or 90 books. Some big, some small.

[Luzifer]

VtsA4A0tL04

 

 

When your hilo overloaded or altitude is too high to hover, there is nice way to get into transitional lift. :P

 

In some video about the Ka-50 I saw a short clip of it doing the same. But then, that kind of take off is even listed in the manual, so meh, just standard procedures :P

[YoYo]

 

And Mi-14 as expension ;). Two my pictures from Today small Air Show in Płock City of Polish Navy.

 

[Cowboy10uk]

Managed to blag entry into the MI8, at the Weston Helicopter museum today while visiting the flight sim convention, Photos to follow. :)

 

Must say it looks a rather interesting helicopter to fly.

 

Cowboy10uk

 

 

Ok as promised, if not a little late. Ive uploaded the photos here.

 

http://s779.photobucket.com/user/Cowboy10uk/slideshow/MI8

 

Enjoy.

 

Cowboy10uk

[press]

Ok as promised, if not a little late. Ive uploaded the photos here.

 

http://s779.photobucket.com/user/Cowboy10uk/slideshow/MI8

 

Enjoy.

 

Cowboy10uk

 

That's Mi-8, not Mi-8MTV. These are two different helicopters with different cockpit panels.

[Avimimus]

In some video about the Ka-50 I saw a short clip of it doing the same. But then, that kind of take off is even listed in the manual, so meh, just standard procedures :P

 

Yes, I remember reading a story of one that accidentally took off with twice the listed maximum payload... :)

[AlphaOneSix]

Ok Roger, so i guess they use a similar construction as the AW139 then regarding the non-rotational swashplate?

 

ie, flat faces on the inner diameter that the swashplate can slide over vertically?

 

Sorry for the delay. We have a bird taken apart for an inspection, so I took a swashplate picture for you!

 

[159th_Falcon]

Thank you very much.

 

Interesting approach on the swashplate construction though.

And lots of grease nipples to....

 

It seems to have the collective input separate from the pitch an roll input?

Or are there some input rods removed that would connect to the stationary swashplate?

 

Cause if i see it right, the lever on the lower right of the picture controls collective, raising and lowering the entire swashplate assembly

To the left there seems to be an input rod connected to the inner (stationary) swashplate that would tilt the swashplate resulting in either an pitch or roll action?

 

Thank's for the picture, wish i could get my hands on one (mi-8 that is) and see how the Russians construct things.

(KA-50 or MI-26 would do to though:D)

[AlphaOneSix]

And lots of grease nipples to....

 

It seems to have the collective input separate from the pitch an roll input?

Or are there some input rods removed that would connect to the stationary swashplate?

 

There are 30 grease points on the rotor hub and another 30 grease points on the swashplate assembly. So I guess you could say that the rotor system has 60 grease points. Not counting the tail rotor. That's another 10 grease points. Lots of grease. Some aviators like to say "Keep the greasy side down!" as a way to wish a pilot a safe flight, but on this helicopter the greasy side is on top!

 

Anyway, this picture better illustrates the flight controls. The servos are on the bottom and are, from left to right: pitch, yaw, collective, and roll.

 

The pitch and roll work exactly the same way, just 90 degrees out from each other on the swashplate. The collective moves an arm which slides the whole swashplate assembly up and down, which should be more obvious in this photo. The yaw is a bit different, as the push-pull tubes end at the servo, and the servo uses cables down the length of the tail boom to control the tail rotor. Most western designs just put the servo on the tail. So in this case, instead of hydraulic lines going down the tail boom, you have the tail rotor control cables.

 

Edited June 4, 2013 by AlphaOneSix

[159th_Falcon]

Awesome, and quite interesting setup.

How is the Pitch, Roll ofset achieved?

entirely on the swashplate and rotor system or is there some kind of mixing unit preceding the hydraulic servo's as well?

 

Also interesting to see that on the castle nuts of the collective lever arm support cotter pins are used to secure them.

 

Where as on the lower pitch link bearing lockwire is used to lock the castle nuts.

Any specific reason for this?

 

BTW, you don't happen to do this kind of work somewhere close to The Netherlands?

Would be nice to be able to see an Mi-8 up close whit all maintenance doors opened up.

 

Once again, thank's for the info and the picture.

No pressure on the 3D modellers to get things right.............:D

[AlphaOneSix]

Awesome, and quite interesting setup.

How is the Pitch, Roll ofset achieved?

entirely on the swashplate and rotor system or is there some kind of mixing unit preceding the hydraulic servo's as well?

 

Also interesting to see that on the castle nuts of the collective lever arm support cotter pins are used to secure them.

 

Where as on the lower pitch link bearing lockwire is used to lock the castle nuts.

Any specific reason for this?

 

BTW, you don't happen to do this kind of work somewhere close to The Netherlands?

Would be nice to be able to see an Mi-8 up close whit all maintenance doors opened up.

 

Once again, thank's for the info and the picture.

No pressure on the 3D modellers to get things right.............:D

 

Re: pitch and roll... No mixing. So for example roll cyclic input goes directly to the roll servo (only) and then directly to the swashplate at a single point.

 

Re: cotter pins vs. lock wire... I have no clue why it's done that way, although I feel certain there is a very logical reason.

 

I wish I was in the Netherlands. I bet the weather is nicer there than it is here! I'm in the U.S.

[Sundowner.pl]

Also interesting to see that on the castle nuts of the collective lever arm support cotter pins are used to secure them.

 

Where as on the lower pitch link bearing lockwire is used to lock the castle nuts.

Any specific reason for this?

On the collective levers those are single nuts that vibrate and go up and down, any technician would start doing voodoo dolls of engineer who would think to secure each single bolt separately with a lockwire. Where with the pitch links you don't really have a choice, the whole assembly rotates so the lockwire is more secure way of locking those in place, you shouldn't use cotter pins on parts that spin.

[159th_Falcon]

Re: pitch and roll... No mixing. So for example roll cyclic input goes directly to the roll servo (only) and then directly to the swashplate at a single point.

 

Re: cotter pins vs. lock wire... I have no clue why it's done that way, although I feel certain there is a very logical reason.

 

I wish I was in the Netherlands. I bet the weather is nicer there than it is here! I'm in the U.S.

Well, it's not THAT great over here either. Spring was like winter, but the WITH snow. And we only had one week yet whit temps at or above 20 Deg C.

(which would have been the normal for time of year.)

Seems to be becoming summer slowly though. Currently is about 19C and predictions are it will be getting better.

 

Only logical reason i could think of in the cotter pins vs lock wire case.

Cotter pins you need many different size's where as locking wire can be tensioned against the castle nuts castle's regardless of size.

Making an wartime supply chain simpler..........

Then again, why not use it everywhere.

 

Maybe one side of the locking holes is obstructed making the use of cotter pins (almost) impossible?

 

 

On the collective levers those are single nuts that vibrate and go up and down, any technician would start doing voodoo dolls of engineer who would think to secure each single bolt separately with a lockwire. Where with the pitch links you don't really have a choice, the whole assembly rotates so the lockwire is more secure way of locking those in place, you shouldn't use cotter pins on parts that spin.

:megalol: and there goes my coffee........

 

Lol, no disrespect mate, but didn't they tell you after your internship that was a joke?

 

Never seen lockwire being used on castlenuts, only cotter pins.

Regardless on whether or not it was a moving part or not.

 

Lockwire is for bolt heads etc etc

Cotter pins is for castle nuts.

At least that's the only way i have seen them being used.

 

In the end i don't really think it matters anyway though, both methods will prevent the parts coming lose.

Edited June 5, 2013 by 159th_Falcon

[Sundowner.pl]

Don't know what's so funny :noexpression:

Never seen lockwire being used on castlenuts, only cotter pins.(...)

Lockwire is for bolt heads etc etc

Cotter pins is for castle nuts.

:huh:

 

 

NASA Reference Publication 1228 page #8.

 

PS. Also look inside heavy duty differentials.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Sundowner.pl

[159th_Falcon]

Note, Castle nuts on undrilled studs. Meaning you can't use a cotter pin.

Also image clearly shows a hole drilled trough the flanks of the castle.

 

Not the wire going inbetween the castles, trough a hole in the stud and back out the other way as in the pictures.

 

But really, no need to prove yourself right.

If that's the way you and your colleagues do it that's fine.

 

Just found it funny i was thought and explicitly told not to do it, for reasons that are unclear to me.

 

As i said, no intend to offend you.

[Sundowner.pl]

No problem, but here's something we both can laugh at:

 

 

The instruction do say to safetywire those... but as you can see someone don't really know how to perform that operation ;)