AlphaOneSix

I do have one for the electrical system but it has quite a few differences from the aircraft represented in the game. Specifically, my presentation is based on an Mi-17V-5 (Mi-8MTV-5) but it's the same as an Mi-171 (Mi-8AMT). I used to have info for the Mi-17-1V (Mi-8MTV-1) which is (as far as I can tell) the same as on the Mi-8MTV-2, but since we no longer have those where I work, I removed all of that from my presentation.

I just realized I never posted my Powerplant Powerpoint here. The file format is PPSX and it's around 33MB. I would have made it a PDF but a lot of the slides contain animations which get compressed together when I make it a PDF. There is probably a better way to do it. But anyway if you have access to Powerpoint (it seems to work in Google Slides as well, probably others), here's a link to the file: Mi-17/TV3-117VM Presentation

You guys have already figured this out, but just to add the raw numbers, the tail rotor pitch minimum (full left pedal) is -6°20' and the maximum (full right pedal) is 23°20'.

The TSMO manuals are pretty good, but the only thing you can trust 100% are the pictures. We have copies of the TSMO flight and maintenance manuals at work, and my coworkers and I have found several inaccuracies and contradictions in those manuals, albeit mostly in the maintenance manuals. While I wouldn't rule out the possibility, I have never seen and Mi-8/17 where putting your feet on the microswitches disengages the force trim. Nor have I ever seen that referenced in any Russian-produced document.

I know I'm a month late to the game, and I don't mean to be nitpicky, but I just wanted to post a couple of clarifications. Older Mi-8's don't have a speed stabilization mode. I'm assuming that you're referring to the KZSP indicated airspeed controller. This was never installed on any V1's I ever saw (I know the game is modelling the V2), and I also only occasionally saw it installed in V5's. I'm pretty sure it was optionally installed based on customer requirements, since not even all brand new aircraft I'm seeing have it installed (Mi-171E). So it seems fairly likely, and certainly consistent within the game, that the airspeed controller is not installed. Note that it would have its own separate cockpit switch labeled "V HOLD". Also, placing the feet on the pedals and engaging the pedal microswitches does override the yaw channel of the autopilot, but it does not disconnect the force trim. You'd still need to disengage the force trim with the cyclic button to do that. Thanks!

Just to help visualize things, the fuel shutoff levers above the pilot shut off the fuel supply from the fuel control unit on the engine to the fuel nozzles in the combustion chamber. With those levers moved to the off position, the engine shuts down pretty much instantly, but fuel is still being delivered to the engine compartment. The fuel fire shutoff valves are located in the main gearbox compartment and will prevent fuel from being delivered to anywhere near the engine compartment. The levers are a direct physical connection to the valve in the fuel control unit, while the fire shutoff valves are electrically powered.

I was in the 404th! I think I went by "Ghostrider" back then since that was my unit name in the Army. Anyway Flex always called me the "Pig Farmer" because I preferred to fly the Black Hawk.

Sorry, I've been away from the forums for a long time. The batteries are always turned on, even when starting with ground power. It is true that they do not need to be turned on if you have a DC ground power source, since the APU generator and eventually the rectifiers will power all of the DC electrical buses. However, the batteries are just a backup/emergency power source in case of a problem in-flight that causes both rectifiers to go offline, to give you power to start the APU in flight so that you can use the APU generator for DC power. And of course, the batteries are also to start the APU on the ground when DC external power is not available. My understanding is that most "Russian-like" operators of the Mi-8 use external power as much as possible for the APU start, just to go easy on the batteries. My organization has replaced all of the default NiCad batteries with Concorde SLABs (Sealed Lead-Acid Batteries), and we never use external power unless we're testing something on the ground for a prolonged period of time.

The SO-121 detector works by vibrating. The more ice that builds up on the detector, the frequency of vibration decreases, and at some point it triggers the ICING signal and starts the automatic processes for ice removal. The RIO-3 uses a small about of radioactive material, with a sensor that detects that radioactivity. The buildup of ice blocks the radioisotopes from being detected by the sensor, and once the amount of detected radiation drops to a certain level, it sends the ICING signal. Regardless of which detector is in use, once an ICING signal is generated, the detector itself is heated to remove the ice buildup. Once the cycle is completed, ice can start building up again, which would start the cycle all over again.

Nowadays people are taking Provigil. It works great compared to the drugs that we used to use. You can stay up for about 48 hours with no loss of alertness or focus, but it doesn't make you all jittery. And best of all, even after you take it, if you want to sleep, you don't need to take anything to bring you down, you can just go to sleep.

There is a distinction in the U.S. Army at least. Just as you mentioned, settling with power can be overcome if only you had more power available. Once you enter VRS, more power just makes it worse. They do tend to follow, however. That is, it is common for settling with power to develop rapidly into VRS, because you don't have enough power to keep the descent rate low enough.

I’ve been working on and flying in these helicopters for a little over 13 years and I’ve never had a pilot take his feet off of the micro switches. I understand that it’s because we’re Americans and taking our feet off of the pedals is just not something we ever do. But in all that time the only useful modes of flight to ever use the yaw channel have been in a hover or n straight and level cruise flight. I’ve done it a couple of times just to show a pilot that it actually works. But that’s about it.

Just like in real life!

Yes, as long as you could set it so that when the switches are depressed (i.e. feet on pedals) the yaw channel is off, and when the switches are not depressed (i.e. feet off pedals) the yaw channel turns on again. No, when you push the clutch release button on the collective, it turns off the altitude channel (unlike the yaw channel, where the pedal switches just temporarily disable the yaw channel, but the channel itself remains on, as indicated by the light on the autopilot control panel). If desired, the altitude channel must be turned on again manually by pressing the button on the autopilot control panel.

Kazan: Mi-8MT = Mi-17 Mi-8MTV-1 = Mi-17-1V Mi-8MTV-5 = Mi-17V-5 Ulan-Ude: Mi-8AMT = Mi-171 Mi-8AMTSh = Mi-171Sh

The Receiver/Transmitter for the ARC-210 holds the crypto now so there is no need for a KY-58.

This version of the Mi-8 has 100% control authority in the yaw axis. If you have your feet off the pedals and the yaw channel of the autopilot is engaged, the autopilot will attempt to hold your heading by applying tail rotor pitch as necessary, through the full movement of the pedals. If it's doing this, the pedals should be seen to move on their own even without you touching them.

It's an amazing photo, to be sure, but that's a 600 for tow line and the aircraft never had more than a 25 degree nose down attitude. It looks much closer to the ground and at a steeper pitch angle due to the use of a telephoto lens.

The M230 is rifled, yes. The warhead is classified as high explosive dual purpose. It has a shaped charge that can defeat light armor (around 50mm if my memory is correct) as well as a fragmentation effect. It’s definitely not as powerful as the GAU-8 or 2A42.

It's not without reason that the gun on the AH-64 is called the Area Weapon System. Meanwhile, I got to watch a USAF presentation by an A-10C pilot and they classify their gun as a precision weapon.

The flight manual should be the same as the real flight manual, I'd have to double check. But our procedure is to not use any collective at all unless required just to get it rolling but once it's rolling keep the collective bottomed out. Otherwise it just starts rolling too fast and you end up using a lot of brakes. EDIT: I looked it up. It does say to add 1 to 2 degrees of collective pitch to start to taxi. Then adjust taxi speed as necessary using cyclic, collective, and brakes. At work we do sometimes (not always) use collective to get rolling, but we never use it while taxiing.

The M230 barrel is significantly shorter than 2.2 meters. The entire gun system is less than 1.7 meters long.

I would expect that they are using the VM engines, same as the Mi-8 represented in the game. Some newer Mi-24s are getting the VMA engines, or so I've heard (same as Ka-50), but I would think we'd at least get the VM engines.

I don't know if this will help in-game but never taxi with any collective.

A much better comparison would be the UH-1C, which the Mi-24 concept seems to be a reaction to, more or less. Well, armed Hueys in general. In other words, the Cobra was a design that took an armed Huey and removed its ability to perform utility/cargo missions and instead made it into a pure armed helicopter without any other mission. The Mi-24 seems like they looked at armed Hueys and thought they'd just make it bigger and better, which I think they accomplished. I think the Cobra and Mi-24 can only be compared to the extent that they were in service around the same time, everything else about the Mi-24 seems more comparable to the "Huey Hog" concept.