Tandem & Tilt-Rotor Aircraft development

the V-22B is 72 million dollars an aircraft... that is ridiculous... you could buy two Su-30s for that price...

in the case of the Ka-102 there is no value in such an aircraft for Russia... an aircraft that size is better off being a fixed wing aircraft...

The US seems happy with no equivalent to the Mi-26, why do you think Russia needs a Chinook?

GarryB wrote:The replacement for the Helix will be a Helix sized helicopter with a pusher propeller...

If size was the only issue, there would be no need for the Mi-6/26.

They don't want to spend extra $ on completely new heavier helos, & the CH-53D /47 F can still be upgraded

More of them can be built to make up for less payload.

Besides, they have more airfields for planes than Russia.

It'll be a high speed tandem helo with comparable max speed of the V-22B .

It's less risky & costly than a tilt-rotor & has a bigger cabin than coaxials.

It's possible to build large cargo tilt-rotors as well:

According to Flateric that is the case... remember the picture f the mock-up we saw some time ago? He says there are propellers on a rack next to it

I had hopes for that but had not seen the evidence or rather didn't have the background to interpret it correctly...

GarryB wrote:The fact that you talk about the Mi-6 and the Mi-26 like they are the same aircraft is amusing because the Mi-26 has twice the weight capacity of the Mi-6...- the Mi-6 was the largest (& fastest) helo before Mi-26 came out.
there is no point in now funding the Ka-102 which will have less payload capacity to replace something that is already working. -the Mi-6 has no modern counterpart in Russian service, & they need it-we discussed it before. The Ka-102 is its replacement.
They are working with China on a 10-12 ton capacity helicopter... if anything useful comes out of that it would make more sense to use that...-as mentioned a while ago, they won't trust a Chinese helo to replace the Mi-6. 
If they need to move 10 tons they could rig up the Mi-26 to carry the 10 tons but also to carry an extra 10 ton fuel bladder to extend flight range... but they don't even seem to want to bother doing that.-for a good reason: it has 800km range, enough for any mission with 10Ts payload; an Mi-6 size helo is cheaper to operate; just like it's better to use IL-76s than An-22/124s to haul 40-60Ts even if refueling stops r needed.
They print their own money... if they don't want to spend money on heavier helos and would rather upgrade ones they already have for any job then why on earth would Russia be pissing away money it has to earn and can't just print willy nilly on tilt rotors and shit when they have decided to invest in high speed helicopters?-they developed the V-22 as it offered more flexibility & capability unheard off before; u said many times it's not worth restarting the An-22 as there r new IL-106/Slon designs- high speed helos & tilt-rotors would complement each other. Besides, there must be competing designs to choose from.
Big helicopters are expensive to buy and expensive to operate... you don't just buy a few extra on a whim.-as u said: "They print their own money.", & also they needed something to replace the CH-53/47 earlier models fast.
Siberia is flat open territory...-true, but only in the W. part; E. of the Yenissei river it's mostly hilly & mountainous, with permafrost, forests, glaciers, swamps, & lakes. 
75 million dollar tiltrotors would never become commercially viable even if maintenance was free...-they won't be developed & sold for as much in Russia. Even existing helo/plane fuselages now in production can be modified for straight wings, H-tails & movable engine nacelles. IL-112 airframes would make nice tilt/quad-rotors.
Of all the new designs they are suggesting it is the one I like least...-perhaps that's why u r so biased!
A coaxial helicopter can have any sized cabin, but even a tandem design will need tandem coaxials if you want it to be fast because of retreating blade stall issues.- they'll have puller props for faster horizontal flight. I'm sure they considered a large coaxial but rejected it, not w/o a reason.
it would be possible to make it the most expensive aircraft project ever, but that does not make it a good idea.- if the cost-benefit analysis is to it's favor, we may see it fly some day. Time (is $) will tell!

And my point is that wasting time and money on such money pits would have delayed other work they are doing in new helicopters like Minoga, ..

Tiltrotor platforms are a niche area that would create very expensive to buy and operate aircraft that could only be used by the military, the commercial value would be very low.

The only model I could see being of any real world use would be a V-44 type with four engines in four corners of a large Mi-26 or Mi-38 like helicopter body, but even then I don't think it would be worth it.

In August 2016, General Designer of Kamov JSC Sergey Mikheev said that it would take about 10 years for the development work on the Minoga (Ka-65).
https://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2022-09-29/8_1208_helicopter.html
So it won't be ready for prototype production before 2026, at best.

Information about the development of "Lamprey" first appeared in August 2015. On the sidelines of the International Aerospace Salon in Zhukovsky, the head of naval aviation of the Russian Navy, Major General Igor Kozhin, said that JSC Kamov should introduce a new helicopter by 2020.

even so, they would pay for themselvs many x over & in military/MChS/police/FSB service.

I'm sure that eventually they'll jump on this band wagon & produce V-22/280 counterparts that might be even better designs with superior performance & safer to fly, given the size of the RF with her long borders/coastlines, many remote islands, frequent inclement weather, & lack of modern airfields/ports.

Minoga is one of the most exciting projects for helis out there. Are they still going with the pusher prop in the back?

The twin rotors and pusher propeller layout seems much more promising, efficient, and flexible than the tilt rotor nonsense.

Also the marines were talking about using tilt rotors for stealthy, quick insurgency? Maybe fast but damn I would have thought tilt rotors would light up like christmas trees on radar or IR optical equipment. Am I wrong on this?

Yes, he did say that, but what he didn't say was when the development work on the Minoga actually started... from the exact same article which you seem to have ignored:

Information about the development of "Lamprey" first appeared in August 2015. On the sidelines of the International Aerospace Salon in Zhukovsky, the head of naval aviation of the Russian Navy, Major General Igor Kozhin, said that JSC Kamov should introduce a new helicopter by 2020.

They would pay for themselves by being commercial successes, which they wont... they would pay for themselves by never crashing and not killing any military personnel and looking at US experience I would have to say no they wouldn't.

V-22 types don't make sense.... the four engine models like the V-44 at least look stable, but they really don't look like a good idea.

even so, the start date isn't much earlier than the 1st mention of it;

if it occured in 2014-15, it means a prototype won't be ready to fly till 2024-25, & it'll take a few more years before they begin serial production, if ever.

In time, all their bugs will be eliminated & they'll have improved safety record; even with all the crashes so far, the USN/MC/AF put them to good use & I'm sure they'll be better than C-2 CODs, not to mention Yak-44 type for the VMF.

They could have 1-2 extra such AEW craft to fill radar coverage gaps & perhaps an ASW/SAR variant would be a lot more potent than their Ka-27 & on a par with the American S-3. In time, all their bugs will be eliminated & they'll have improved safety record.

Three-wing, six tilt-propulsion unit, VTOL aircraft would be even more stable:

A C-2 can't land vertically or take off vertically, but otherwise it is a useful aircraft.

The American tiltrotor didn't fail as the US MIC had more $ & percieved need after the disasterous Iranian hostage rescue mission.

Even those with coaxial rotors+props for extra speed would still give less speed & range than tiltrotors, so a time may come when the benefits > the costs of developing & using them, even in Russia & her armed forces.

Despite all their problems, the Military Can't Resist using them!

The advantages of tucking away the huge prop-rotors of a tilt-rotor and switching to jet propulsion are obvious, you frontal cross-section is massively reduced and you can potentially break the 540mph barrier that has long limited propeller-powered aeroplanes.

This is US technology, why do you keep posting it in the Russian Air Force section?

What they don't admit is the fact that the combination of a helicopter from where they need to be picked up vertically, and a conventional aircraft at a nearby airstrip, is by far the cheapest and simplest solution to the problem.

The far north and far east of Russia is getting more and more rail lines and roads and airstrips, meaning a helicopter plane is not really that useful.