• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Mil Mi-20 project of 1966

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
26,508
Reaction score
3,365
Hi,

I quote from Aviastar site and also from my dear Stingray site;

http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/mi-20.php
http://sites.google.com/site/stingrayslistofrotorcraft/mil-mi-20
 

Attachments

  • mi-20_1.jpg
    mi-20_1.jpg
    30.7 KB · Views: 120
  • mi-20_2.jpg
    mi-20_2.jpg
    33.3 KB · Views: 122
  • mi-20_3.jpg
    mi-20_3.jpg
    61.9 KB · Views: 111
  • mi-20_4.jpg
    mi-20_4.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 125
  • mi-20_5.jpg
    mi-20_5.jpg
    45.1 KB · Views: 147

Stingray

Resident retro rainbow rotorhead nerdy girl, uwu
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
415
Reaction score
89
Website
sites.google.com
There was a version of the Mi-20 that could take out tanks and other armored vehicles with machine guns and rockets.

To be specific it was planned that the gunship variant's armament would include two UB-16-57 rocket pods or 3M11 Falanga / 9M14 Malyutka anti-tank rockets on 4-6 outboard pylons (a typical layout similar to that of armed Mi-1/Mi-2 helicopters of that era, which makes sense as the V-20/Mi-20 was specifically designed to be a replacement to the former) but an example of an armed type was not built.

Only two mockups were built: one in the Summer of 1966 with tricycle-type undercarriage and the 355hp Turbomeca Oredon-III single-turboshaft engine (the layout was changed in Winter to accommodate the Turbomeca Astazou-XII when foreign trade plans changed), and another in 1972 with skids and provisions for the projected 350-400hp GTD-11 engine designed by V.A. Glushenkov/Omsk Engine Design Bureau (OMKB). The original type was the result of several designs proposed to use various Turbomeca powerplants, including the Astazou-II and Oredon-XX among others. The negotiations with Turbomeca fell through, however, resulting in a proposal to use the GTD-350, but it was considered to be underpowered. Then it was planned to use a projected GTD-550 engine variant designed by S.P. Izotov, but the design was deemed oversized and closer to the Mi-2's design class, so it was never built. The GTD-3 and GTD-10 were some other considerations, but the V-20 project was temporarily halted. It was revived in 1972 when Omsk unveiled their projected GTD-11 engine, planned to be a more cost-effective alternative, only to be halted again in 1975 when Omsk turned their attention to other engine types and the V-20 failed to attract further support, resulting in its eventual cancellation.

Some context behind the usage of Turbomeca engines: there was a brief time when French-USSR relations were warming up to the point of a possible cooperation in joint technological developments and other foreign affairs thanks in part to an agreement signed in 1966, in which Mil saw an opportunity for favorable cooperation with Turbomeca to supply and develop engines for their 1960s-era designs. The failed negotiations were, IIRC, due to the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, which caused major political friction again until the USSR's collapse in 1991.

By the way, I have a theory that I want to run by you guys. It seems to me that the V-22/Mi-22 project was also underway within the 1965-1970s timeframe (a successor to the V-3/Mi-3 project to upgrade the Mi-2), its genesis involving the basis of the "Flying IFV" program that spawned the V-24/Mi-24. The V-22 was planned with a very similar layout to the V-20 and its development also ended in the early/mid-70s, leading me to believe that it was an offshoot of the V-20 project, perhaps the very same military proposal of this type. What do you think? Is there any info available to support this theory, or am I making nonexistent connections?
 
Last edited:

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,056
Reaction score
1,596
Yep, De Gaulle tried his own take at a "non aligned" movement, centered on France, in the mid-60's. And aerospace was at the forefront, notably rocketry (rocket scientist Jacques Blamont shuttled between NASA on one side, and the Soviet Academy of Sciences, on the other. notably for Venus missions - Venera and Pioneer-Venus in the late 70's).
So I'm not surprised by this.
 

Similar threads

Top