Mil Mi-80 Multirole Helicopter

[overscan (PaulMM)]

https://defence-blog.com/russia-develops-mi-80-to-replace-iconic-hip-helicopter/https://armyrecognition.com/news/ae...-to-replace-legendary-mi-8-17-transport-fleet

Based on the Mi-171A3 offshore platform, the Mi-80 introduces crucial upgrades including advanced composite rotor blades, a crash-resistant fuel system repositioned beneath the cabin floor, and a redesigned X-shaped tail rotor for higher efficiency. Its modern avionics suite will enable all-weather operations, day or night, over diverse terrain, enhancing mission flexibility for both military and civilian operators. The plan is to increase maximum takeoff weight to 14 tons while consolidating production at Kazan Helicopter Plant and Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant, two factories long divided by technical discrepancies and political competition.

The Mi-8 has served reliably across the world for over five decades, earning a reputation as one of the most versatile helicopters in history. Yet since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kazan and Ulan-Ude have produced significantly different variants, making spare parts logistics and maintenance costly and inefficient. The Mi-80 resurrects ideas first proposed under the “Gaston” project in the late 1990s, a radical modernization that failed due to underfunding and lack of industrial cohesion.

Technically, the Mi-80’s composite materials, upgraded gearbox, and reinforced fuselage promise substantial gains in durability, efficiency and cost. Compared to Western equivalents like the UH-60 Black Hawk, the Mi-80’s goal of unified production could lower maintenance burdens for operators. Still, similar modernization ambitions for the Mi-171A3 exposed major flaws: it was too heavy, twice as expensive, and lacked range for its intended offshore missions. Without resolving the historic challenge of modernizing the main rotor hub, the Mi-80 risks repeating these pitfalls.

At a strategic level, a single standardized Mi-80 fleet would help Russian forces simplify logistics at a time when sanctions and battlefield attrition strain supply lines. Politically, it could sustain both Kazan and Ulan-Ude plants, preserving critical industrial capacity. However, the project remains at the technical specification stage with unresolved funding issues, and no large-scale defense contract has yet been signed. The only related contract so far, a tranche for six Mi-171A3 units to be delivered by 2026, illustrates the financial pressure, with each airframe costing more than 1.1 billion rubles ($12 million).

Wasn't the Mi-38 supposed to be the Mi-8/17 replacement? Instead the Mi-8 is replacing itself.

 

[yasotay]

A guess from a complete outsider is that Mi-80 = Mi-36 with newer technology. It might be as simple as a marketing ploy to represent a "new" design vice an update to a design that has been waiting over a decade to come to fruition.
It seems to me that is what should be done for an unfunded plan; keep the design updated for when funding is made available, vice chucking it and starting all over again.

 

[DWG]

Wasn't the Mi-38 supposed to be the Mi-8/17 replacement? Instead the Mi-8 is replacing itself.

If Mi-38 was a Kazan Helicopters design, maybe that was a step too far for Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant. They're both part of Russian Helicopters JSC, but having the same parent doesn't seem to have stopped the politicking around other Russian aircraft plants. If they go for something with a clearer Mi-8 derivation, then they can claim they're not being forced to build the other guy's design.

 

[helmutkohl]

A guess from a complete outsider is that Mi-80 = Mi-36 with newer technology. It might be as simple as a marketing ploy to represent a "new" design vice an update to a design that has been waiting over a decade to come to fruition.
It seems to me that is what should be done for an unfunded plan; keep the design updated for when funding is made available, vice chucking it and starting all over again.

This article and a few others on it all state that its a variant of the Mi-171A3, which in itself is basically a "Hip" with Mi-36 tech incorporated to it.
Would not be surprised its basically an "Mi-171A4" that's just rebranded.

 

[H_K]

https://defence-blog.com/russia-develops-mi-80-to-replace-iconic-hip-helicopter/https://armyrecognition.com/news/ae...-to-replace-legendary-mi-8-17-transport-fleet
Wasn't the Mi-38 supposed to be the Mi-8/17 replacement? Instead the Mi-8 is replacing itself.

The Mi-38 is too much helicopter for most missions apparently.

Air International had a good Mi-38 vs Mi-171 comparison here (page 25):
https://www.yuzro.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/@yuzro-Air_International_September.pdf.pdf

Years ago, the Mi-38 was intended as a direct successor to the mass-produced Mi-8/Mi-17 family. It was estimated that, although the helicopter itself would be more expensive than the Mi-8, its operation would be much cheaper. The service life of the basic components will also be four to six times longer than that in the Mi-8. Thanks to modern helicopter avionics, only one pilot is required (the second is only for passenger transportation); and, unlike the Mi-8, there will also be no need for a technician on board. The extensive range of control equipment will reduce the time and cost of servicing the helicopter. In addition, the Mi-38 was supposed to be faster and fly further, while carrying a greater load.

This is all true when you compare the Mi-38 with the original Mi-8 that existed 30 years earlier. However, the modernisation potential of the Mi-8 was underestimated. Uprated engines and construction improvements allowed an increase in the Mi-8’s lifting capacity from 3 to 4 tons. The same Transas avionics as found on the Mi-38 are also installed on the latest Mi-8s. The Mi-171A2helicopter, the latest production version of the Mi-8 family, also features composite blades and the X-type tail rotor. Moreover, the proposed next-generation Mi-171A3 version will have fuel tanks built into the floor like the Mi-38. This will reduce aerodynamic drag and increase the speed and range of the helicopter. Up to now, all Mi-8s have carried fuel in cylinders on the fuselage sides.

Thus, the Mi-38’s biggest competitor was found in its own camp. The main advantage of the Mi-38, compared with the latest Mi-8, is its cargo hold, which is 1.6m (5ft 3in) longer (width and height differ very slightly), plus an additional ton of lifting capacity. Furthermore, it flies 27kts (50km/h) faster and has approximately 25% greater range. However, these advantages may not be enough when it costs roughly twice as much as the Mi-8.

The manufacturer is working on the future development of the Mi-38, including increasing its take-offweight to 16,200kg (35,715lb) and boosting its lifting capacity to 6 tons inside the hold or 7 tons on external suspension.