hesham said:Hi,
the Mil Mi-22 originally was a project for light utility
helicopter of 1965,has anyone more informations
Apophenia said:Exactly right. The Mi-22 was indeed to have been a single-engined Mi-2. But notice too that the Mi-22 finally got rid of the Mi-1 dynamics and had a new four-bladed rotor. A pit that we can't see the tail rotor in that image.
"At the same time [as design work was done on Mi-24], Mil was working on the Mi-22 lighter helicopter project on its own initiative. It was to be powered by a single 1,250 HPGTD-10 engine and was to have a take-off weight of 4.3 tons. Work on this project proceeded until the first Mi-24 was flown. Then the "Mi-22" designation was reassigned to an airborne command post based on the Mi-6 heavy helicopter ["Hook C"]."
Just call me Ray said:Huh, that's interesting. IMHO, they would've been better off with something like the Mi-22, since a pure troop transport slotting below the Mi-8 (like our own Huey) was something they sorely lacked.
Apophenia said:"The Mi-2 was the USSR's answer to the US Bell UH-1 Huey."
http://www.vectorsite.net/avmil4.html
Just call me Ray said:Yeah, not really. I'd dare to say that the Mi-2 is more a LongRanger analogue, two engines or not.
Petrus said:Just as a footnote to the history of Mil desings, a project of a two-rotor (!) helicopter whose designation was M-3. It was to have a M-226GR engine (derived from the ASh-62 engine). Its all-up weight was to be 4100 kg.
A drawing (unfortunately very small) of the desing attached.
(Perhaps somebody knows more about it?)
Best regards,
Piotr
hesham said:here is the Mil ZG-1 project of 1945,which led to developed Mi-1.
athpilot said:I only use this drawing etc. from the mentioned site than I´m sure that they are not fictional. I made it clear above. Look at the graphics posted by Jemiba and hesham. This is just an artwork of it. No need to cry. We had this talk so much often before here. Do you speak russian?
PaulMM (Overscan) said:athpilot said:I only use this drawing etc. from the mentioned site than I´m sure that they are not fictional. I made it clear above. Look at the graphics posted by Jemiba and hesham. This is just an artwork of it. No need to cry. We had this talk so much often before here. Do you speak russian?
Sorry but, no, you are wrong.
Any artwork not created by the manufacturer or a reputable artist for a magazine or book is a "User Artwork" and we have a section for that. You should not pollute the main Projects sections with artwork of dubious provenance.
If you don't like this answer, please note it is my forum and the rules are quite clearly stated.