Why is there hate for the Mi-8 / Mi-17 Helicopter?

he Mil Mi-8 (Russian: Ми-8, NATO reporting name: Hip) is a medium twin-turbine helicopter, originally designed by the Soviet Union in the 1960s and introduced into the Soviet Air Force in 1968. It is now produced by Russia.In addition to its most common role as a transport helicopter, the Mi-8 is also used as an airborne command post, armed gunship, and reconnaissance platform.
Along with the related, more powerful Mil Mi-17, the Mi-8 is among the world's most-produced helicopters, used by over 50 countries. As of 2015, when combined the two helicopters are the third most common operational military aircraft in the world.
Hope you enjoy!!
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforef... 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: # attire_for_effect
💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page! www.patreon.co...
💰PayPal: paypal.me/Mats...
Matt’s DREAM: www.gofundme.c...
👕 Check out my Merch: teespring.com/...
📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: Matthew James 210A - 12A Street N Suite No. 135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J
📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch: / matsimus_9033
👋DISCORD: / discord
📘 Facebook: www.facebook.c...
🐦Twitter: / matsimusgaming

[@Crimsonking741]

Personally, I’ve always thought this helicopter is awesome. It’s the workhouse transport helicopter for countless miltitaries, and it is mighty fine at its job. Nothing but respect for this machine. This vehicle wasn’t designed to be able to just shrug off MANPADs like its nothing, that’s not what it’s designed for. To claim this as an disadvantage would be completely ignoring its purpose: to act as a vehicle to carry whatever the hell you need it to. And for that job, it’s damn good at what it does.

[@andyfriederichsen]

Helicopters designed for carrying tons of shit are usually meant to not be used in firefights, so...

[@Crimsonking741]

@@andyfriederichsen exactly! Idk how people are dumb enough to not realize that a helicopter not being able to tank hits from A MISSILE is not the helicopter's fault. What did you think it was made of, vibranium?!

[@andyfriederichsen]

@@Crimsonking741 It's like how James Burton in his book "Pentagon Wars" (and the movie based off of said book) thought the Bradley IFV was bad because it couldn't survive a hit from a missile designed to destroy fucking TANKS!

[@newguy954]

80 countries and counting en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mil_Mi-8/17_operators

[@newguy954]

@@andyfriederichsen I'd like to know which ifv can.

[@nickgadsen4029]

The original battle bus

[@Revivethefallen]

It does have a big bus look to it😀

[@KSmithwick1989]

😆

[@indraotsutsuki7681]

I very visually cringed while reading this. Why are you fortnight kids fucking EVERYWHERE

[@brianmead7556]

Ну, парни, куда спригаемся?

[@FujiLeeTheAmerican]

Mi4v: screw you

[@Raptor747]

I wasn't aware that it had any hate at all beyond the fact that it's Russian. Sure, it may not be the most agile, maneuverable, durable, or fast combat helicopter out there, but it was always designed to be a versatile workhorse, and it excels at that.

[@cfranko1860]

Incredibly durable machines. Other than that I agree with what you said

[@ztunelover]

Dunno where the not durable is coming from, it’s pretty damn sturdy. The things that are downing these in ukraine will put pretty much any other helicopter down.

[@Rrgr5]

Same goes for pretty much every Soviet/Russian equipment, people seems to forget that most of what Ukraine is using is not that different from what Russia is using, most of the weapons packs are refurbished Warsaw Pact stuff, so yep, both sides are using those helicopters, most of the AA is almost the same too, even a Blackhawk would survive that, is not like they also wasn't downed in service and that doesn't make the Blackhawk a bad chopper (even tho I don't think is being used in the right way but that's another topic)

[@Castragroup]

Whats wrong with russia?

[@BrokenCurtain]

@@Castragroup Apart from it being a fascist state with imperialistic ambitions and genocidal tendencies that constantly threatens its neighbours?

[@jspec-vz3mc]

The AK47 of helicopter aviation.

[@omaral-maitah181]

I see a lot of people thinking if something as old as an AK47 or Mi-8 it means it's not good in todays world they can't understand that something can be old but still very efficient and good

[@verdikulk6193]

Or a Swiss knife....

[@waltonsimons9082]

@@omaral-maitah181 Well it comes from the fact that newer equipment is usually (in rare exceptions not) superior in pretty much every way. A Ford Model T would still be better than no transportation, but it's certainly not as fast or crash resistant as a modern car.

[@jspec-vz3mc]

@@omaral-maitah181 you're absolutely right. Men in pajamas and sandals with AK 47s we're able to resist against the most powerful military the world has ever seen.

[@sasmac1829]

Indeed

[@dannyzero692]

The Mi-8/Mi-17 is exactly the kind of helicopter that comes to my mind when you tell me the 2 words "utility helicopter" due to its shape and role

[@chrisbostwick4250]

Living and working in Russia in the mid-2000's, I've flown in the MI-8 many times. Never had an issue. My Russian co-workers used to say the MI-8 was "A million parts flying in unison".

[@TheBKnight3]

Not the "Working Parts Union"?

[@SteelbeastsCavalry]

That helo can operate in serious arctic conditions. Way advanced for it's time. Thanks for covering it!

[@_Matsimus_]

You bet!

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Arctic capabilities is pretty much a requirement for Russian gear. Russian made diesel engines were found to suffer unusual wear and tear in sandy environments.

[@debdeepmukherjee1373]

It also operate world Highest battle field In Siachen.. India Altitude 15,632 feet and upto -40°C temperature.

[@docogg50]

You've got a lot of DCS videos for a dude with Steal Beasts in their screenname, lol. Sorry, had to page-creep >

[@ivanivanov1579]

​@@samsonsoturian6013 Tell this to the Indians who have tested the T-90 diesel tank for several years in the desert and bought several thousand pieces.

[@nikkity5491]

Well if its 60 years old, and 70 or so countries use it, and continues to be a workhorse of eastern air logistics, then it cant be all that bad

[@Bob_Betker]

Exactly. All those that say it is a piece of junk are armchair generals who have never been in a helicopter or a hot spot. According to their vast knowledge, UH-1s must also be junk.

[@mowtow90]

Not only that. Quite a few Nato members as well use them (not only former Eastern block nations). This thing is one of the best , most versetile and cheap to maintain helicopter ever made. Whoever thinks its useless , has no clue what this thing can do. Yes , its not an Apatchi or KA-52 but it was ment to be that.

[@augustuslunasol10thapostle]

@@mowtow90 theirs always going to be better stuff then the mi-17 but for what it is it’s pretty good

[@kevinstrade2752]

They hate it because it's not ours. I've been defending Soviet/ Russian equipment for decades. I get sick of the "junk" comments! People who have not studied Soviet wweapon and manufacturing doctrine will never understand. The Soviet military learned hard lessons of modern mechanized warfare during WW2. They learned the hard lessons to not have your defense industry within range or vulnerable to an enemy attack or capture. Being landlocked with Europe, there are no oceans or fast distances from threats to the motherland. An attack along the front would give little time to react let alone move industry. The Soviet Union had to literal pack up factories and industry and head Eastward,this obviously lead to shortages, poor contruction and standards or equipment and military gear. How do you avoid such a disaster in future conflicts??? Simple, you manufacture and stockpile your supplies,hardware and equipment beforehand.....Soviet doctrine required everything to be easy to manufacture and stockpile ,this lead to simpler designs that often gets dogged by western analysts. This doctrine held up when the atomic age, especially. Cities and factories wiped out in minutes. Even if so, the Soviets would have had vast amounts of supplies and hardware to continue fighting in a nuclear environment. It's a very very wise doctrine as the world has become much smaller in the last 100 years with long distance travel a reality. The very fact that such designs are still flying and still reliable tells you how robust of a design it is. If it was junk, it would have been replaced long ago. Simple and reliable enough were design doctrines of the Soviet Union. They could make good quality hardware when they needed to and did far more often than we give them credit.

[@kooshan25]

Most people talk trash about the weapons because of Ukraine and you can see that in the comments

[@kwharrison6668]

Surprised you didn’t mention that during the war in Afghanistan, Canada and other western countries leased Mi-17s. While most were leased civilian aircraft, at least four were given RCAF markings and designated CH-178 in Canadian service. They handled the altitudes in Afghanistan far better than the Griffon, and served as a stopgap as Canada didn’t initially have enough Chinook’s to fulfill Canada’s helicopter transport needs.

[@DennisMartinezCalifornia]

Canada and Russia seem really similar lol

[@goed1adit]

Mi-17 is the go to transport helicopter for high altitude countries like Afghanistan.

[@youtubeuser_custom_1]

@@DennisMartinezCalifornia yeah, like USA and Russia

[@Dushmann_]

@@youtubeuser_custom_1 Or Ukraine and Russia

[@dogetothemoon223]

I believe Canada still uses Russian Mi-26 when they need to do heavy lifting in the northern territories.

[@AviTheWolf]

I never expected this beautiful bird to be anything but loved. Surprised there's hate for it.

[@prfwrx2497]

Like most other Soviet era equipment, it's quickly becoming underrated due to being severely misused by the Russians - to predictable results.

[@massimechoub3343]

@@prfwrx2497 It wasn’t really misused so far…they didn’t loose that much since the beginning of the conflict.

[@toastedbuns9]

@@prfwrx2497 ​Yeah, I mean when you're facing a modern military that's been beefed up by years of intelligence, support and equipment from some very powerful players then taking losses shouldn't come as a surprise. Let's not conveniently forget the high losses the US airforce suffered during the Vietnam war which was supposedly facing off against an army of "poor rice farmers" with outdated equipment. Of course, the exact opposite was true thanks to massive support from China and the Soviet Union at the time but hopefully you get the idea.

[@joshandkorinna]

That's precisely the reason I don't like it. I just think it's hideous looking.

[@projectmungo]

It's War, the world is black and white again. That's why.

[@anthonyinzerillo2804]

Because it's Russian. That's enough for many people (especially Western).

[@pyeitme508]

Er the CIA used them before...

[@CochinKerala]

@@pyeitme508 the CIA also creates the mass hysteria against Rus.

[@cheese5331]

Even Canada

[@schrodingersgat4344]

Fair point. Personal/National pride has no place in determining the usefulness of a piece of kit

[@anthonyinzerillo2804]

@@schrodingersgat4344 exactly mate

[@stephenwhittle6864]

No matter how many times the Russians try to replace it the Mil Mi-8/17 just keeps getting better and better. Either through upgrades or new builds this helicopters ruggedness and simplicity ( in a very good way ) just shines through. If it ain't broke why fix it.

[@brianmead7556]

This reminds me of the Huey the Chinook the B-52 - every time someone tries to come up with a supposedly better alternative it turns out all they needed was an overhaul and some upgrades to stay competitive.

[@UltraTotenkopf]

*The Mi-8 has a son, his name is Mi-38 and the Mi-8 has a huge number of modifications that cover the entire spectrum of needs for helicopters of this class!*

[@evo3s75]

@@UltraTotenkopf Ngl, the Mi-38 does look nicer, but how does it perform compared to the Mi-8/17?

[@OperatorMax1993]

​@@UltraTotenkopf *there's also the Mi-6 Hook and the Mi-26 Halo which are basically the Mi-8 but if it was gigantic*

[@TheCloudhopper]

She might not be the most modern and flashy helicopter and probably won't win a beauty award. But she is called "The mighty 8" for a whole range of reasons. It is one of the most versatile helicopters ever produced, a piece of engineering artwork.

[@nonamesplease6288]

I live in the States. Someone near by owns one of these. It's in civilian colors and it flies over from time to time. Seeing it fly over is an experience because it looks and sounds so much different from the civil and military choppers that usually fly over. It's really pretty cool.

[@stalewater5571]

Where would you happen to be located? I remember once seeing what I swore was an Mi-8.

[@nonamesplease6288]

Not saying where I live, but publicly available information is available that states where all of the Mi8s in the US are, and there aren't very many.

[@konradhenrykowicz1859]

As a person born and bred in soviet satellite state I can easy distinguish the sound of former eastern block choppers from western ones. Post soviet helicopters especially of Mil construction bureau have high pitch, whistling sound of noisy turbine and gear. Western choppers have quieter, kinda bassy sound with distinguish sharp blade strokes. Needless to say I like them more :)

[@youtubeuser_custom_1]

@@stalewater5571 In my location near Solnechnogorsk I see them really often, maybe 2 times a day

[@505NI]

Where I live we still use them, we have a large fleet of MI-8/17. Sometimes I have the luck to see those flying over my house and they sound so heavy, loud. We used them In combat against guerrillas, we also paired those with MI24s, it proved effective. Now we use them whenever a natural disaster happens, floods, hurricanes. It's a flying bus.

[@greycorbie224]

I've worked for 25 years on the Mi-8 and I liked it very well. As you said, it is very rugged, very reliable. It is not the fastest one nor the most comfortable helicopter. But it's quite easy to fly and it worked under any conditions, in harsh winter as in desert summertime. The Mi-8 has a huge hold and an underbelly load hook, in short: a real workhorse for many purposes, meanwhile for over half a century! 👍

[@randomcoyote8807]

The Russians really knocked it out of the park with this design; rugged and simple (as much as a helicopter can be "simple"), and there's no real direct analogue for its weight class in the US. Bigger than the Huey or the 'Hawk, yet much smaller than the CH-53, it's big enough to get the job done but small enough to be practical. An admirable bird.

[@vermas4654]

I didn't realise that there was hate against it? It's literally the definition of versatility and multi purpose

[@al_caponeh6185]

As an aerospace engineering student I have much respect ofr this aircraft, since it is the workhorse of the armed forces of my country, Peru. I have an anecdote of my colleagues telling me that when they were sent to do maintenance while doing practice, there was a russian technician working alongisde them and they always told that the russian will sho you away kinda like this: first he will ask you to pass some wrench in a suitcase and you go for it. Once you are looking for the wrench, the russian inmediately scarmbles for nuts, bolts and a hammer and 1 or two kicks with the hammer and the bolts will be in place by the time you came back.

[@silvesby]

I remember seeing one fly overhead when I visited, which was really neat. And if I remember correctly, Peru's Air Force operates Antonovs as well, right?

[@al_caponeh6185]

@@silvesby Or well they used to, now the Antonovs are decomissioned iirc and now they operate the new C27 J in its place.

[@maxiona714]

Why does the Mi-17 get hate? Ukraine-Stans. That's it. I see these comments absolutely everytime I enter the comment section of a post about anything remotely related to Russia, and it's so dumb.

[@Misakimori_NM]

well you know, everything related to Russian is ''bad'' especially for the western

[@anthonyinzerillo2804]

Couldn't agree more

[@jugganaut33]

Yep. When hating Jews is bad. But wishing every Russian to be exterminated and raped and every piece of Russian technology, history, food to be destroyed or renamed as ukranian… very odd times we live in. Where we’re the Nazis this time

[@Misakimori_NM]

@@jugganaut33 thats how irony and hypocrite they are, no wonder many nations especially from third world are against the sanctions and western pressure including ours. Qatar world cup and conflict in UKR have completely exposing their true colour

[@OperatorMax1993]

I have noticed how quick people tend to judge equipment and gear. Same goes for Israeli equipment, gear or assets For me personally, it doesn't matter who makes them or uses them if they're effective, efficient, and functional. That's all I need to know

[@texasabbott]

Hate because this gives off the "Evil Bad Guy Helicopter" vibe. Excellent machine because its cockpit visibility, and it can do everything: helicopter gunship, troop transport, deliver cargo and humanitarian aid. Some of them might eat a MANPAD and occasionally keep flying. Others were destroyed by pilots who landed too hard and snapped off the tail/collapsed the landing gear/fractured the fuselage. It has enough hardpoints for six S-8 rocket pods (in that way more heavily armed than the Hind), and I would hate to be on the receiving end of all of those.

[@mowtow90]

Yes and those are only the base miliraty uses. In civilian role , this thing is the swiss army knife of helicopter aviation. Just name a job and this thing can do it. We use them for everything - transport , VIP transport, cargo, medevacs , obervation units, turists transports , construction (my uncle as pilot one that installed pilonts for cable cars in the mountains). Also firefighters , because of the large carring capacity this thing has no problem carring hudge amout of watter to be dumped on forest fires.

[@cloroxbleach9222]

It's only the big bad guy Helo because of Hollywood. Glad you're not letting that affect your admiration of nice machines

[@texasabbott]

@@cloroxbleach9222 The Mi-8 Hip is an admirable do-everything chopper, but Hollywood's "Good Guy" utility helicopter, the latest variation of the classic Huey, has an absolutely villainous name: UH-1Y Venom.

[@John-mf6ky]

I'm no Russian simp but Soviet era gear has never screamed "bad guy" to me. Maybe its the fact I was born after the end of the Cold War. I'm sure this thing would be a total workhorse in nonmilitary applications.

[@ShadowFalcon]

To me, the Hip never gave off "Bad Guy Helicopter". Rich guy helicopter maybe, but then again I grew up in the 90s and 00s, so Russia was mostly selling these off to billionaires, rather than being a massive arse like now. The true "bad guy" helicopter for me has always been the Hind. And that's nothing to do with it being Russian, and everything to do with how truly mean it looks 😅

[@UkraineWarAwareness]

I think the most important version you left out is the Russian Mi-8AMTSh version. This version was used during the initial Gostomel Airport capture and we got to see both its interior and exterior. It has a female voice early MANPAD warning system (forgot its name) including the direction an attack is coming from. Allegedly it also has KRET jamming systems, and it has heat sinks on the sides of its exhausts as standard issue instead of being a separate add-on.

[@evo3s75]

goddamn that thing looks cool, the Mi-8AMTSh-VN looks pretty sick as well

[@igormitrovic9285]

I have to say it's hard to imagine how massive this helicopter is. My country uses them, and I live in an area that the military uses for practice flights, so I've witnessed the Mi-24 attack variant, NATO reporting name "Hind", flying very low above my house. When fully armed, with a main rotor diameter of 17.3 meters, this thing is an absolute beast, and it's very hard to stay indifferent.

[@Lomnjac007]

Mislim da si to video Mi-35 koje smo kupili pre par godina, 6 valjda, jer Mi-24 nemamo još od NATO agresije, tad su neki specijalci imali samo 2.

[@igormitrovic9285]

@@Lomnjac007 a ne znam tačno koja je varijanta, znam da ih ima više tih izvoznih, al je zverina teška

[@mrobocop1666]

If it's massive for you then you didn't see Mi-26, which is able to carry other cargo helicopters and even passenger planes

[@mihajlovucinic011]

@@Lomnjac007 JSO je imao jedan MI-24 ali nakon rata na Kosovu i bombardovanja sedi negde i raspada se nisam siguran gde tacno ali ima slika i tuga kad vidis, mogao je makar za muzej da se sredi

[@Iosis07]

Mi-8 is 1st helicopter I saw, it was used durin Yugoslav civil war. Mostly for medical transport. In town where I live there is hospital which received a lot of wounded soldiers and some of them were transported further by air. For most transport was used Gazelle, but also Mi-8 was used a lot. Also I remember when I was about 5 years old, Mi-8 flew very low above me, maybe 50 m above. It was fantastic feeling, I can't rembember a lot of things from that period, but I can rembember that. Latter around 2003. I get opportunity to fly with Mi-8. It was great experience, rear dors were dismounted and I was sitting maybe 2-3 m from rear dors. Flight was maybe 10 minutes at 300 m, but very nice experience. What I found most impressive is it's size and sound. I saw Black Hawk, AH-64 and Chinook in real, but they didn't give me that impression like Mi-8. Mi-8 design is old, but being produced for this long and being used by many countries all over the world, we can't say it is bad. Being easy target in war, well, that helicopter isn't combat, so no armor, it is fantastic transport helicopter. And when we mention war time, I think every helicopter is easy target, it can be shot down with infantry weapons. We heard about Black Hawks shot down in Mogadishu. Helicopters are for surprise attack and run, at least I see them like that.

[@brinsonharris9816]

I saw an Mi-17 on static display at an airshow in Tampa, FL, (Airfest at MacDill AFB) and the pilots had nothing but praise for it. Rugged, plenty of power, and very capable. It was painted all white and civil registered, but the flight crew were all former US Army aviators. High praise all the way.

[@markpengell23]

I worked on these in Sierra Leone and Afghanistan. The rear clamshell doors were a pain. In regards to working on it only the sea king was smoother and quieter. That little tweet tweet that comes of the rotors was always nice to hear. The one in Sierra Leone was named Winston Churchill the spirit of London. I miss the old cab, she looked after me and my patients very well.

[@pottasium7117]

As someone who had to serve military (and used m-8) . We called them "flying unimogues" (aka battlebus) Its a troop transport foremost, and everything goes secondary, hence the poor reputation from people who expect a battle machine

[@dickmelsonlupot7697]

it's the same as those who complain about the Toyota Hilux being too slow, bulky, chunky, can roll-over and "ugly" for their taste especially since the ones complaining are too biased for sports cars. the ones who complain are just idiots who don't know the difference between a logistical helicopter and an attack helicopter.

[@frankhassle9366]

#BangBus

[@TheNicestPig]

Hating the Mi-8 for not having high combat capability is like hating a Mi-24 for not having high cargo capacity.

[@kenneththynes4761]

The CIA has used them prolifically, from the very first insert into Afghanistan to the end, and during Iraq. I believe the DEA used them for poppy field eradication missions. They're dirt simple, cheap to maintain, pretty versatile. The crews and passengers tend to love them.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

They gave it the tail number 9-11.

[@JAnx01]

It's a complex flying machine. "Dirt simple" may fly with Kalashnikovs, but it's very much out of place here.

[@Anamnesis-Apotheosis89]

Never knew there was hate for it, personally I like them. They are a great multi-purpose helicopter. I'd love to have one, especially the cargo variant.

[@pyeitme508]

Welp if the MI- series 'bad', how come the CIA used one of those choppers known as Jawbreaker right after 9/11?

[@manofcultura]

Because the northern alliance had spare parts and some knowledge of how to maintain it. So if push comes to shove they can fix any problems. People forget the kit won’t do anything is it’s not supplied by a logistical tail. That said it’s not a bad helicopter for what it does, but if I had a choice I’d rather be in a black hawk or uh1, because I can trust that US designers had survivability in mind.

[@pyeitme508]

@@manofcultura ok

[@CAP198462]

Found on base, you use what you’ve got and can support.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Because that's what was available and that's wouldn't arise suspicion if seen in the sky.

[@thegenericguy8309]

@@manofcultura If given a choice, the UH-1 carries a fraction of the cargo cap and is significantly less advanced, redundant, and safe than the Hip. The UH-60 is safer, but lower capacity and the price of the thing puts it in a different category.

[@hughbeein1265]

Interesting how a 'conflict' can obscure ones vision about things.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Cowards think they can bullshit their way to victory.

[@hughbeein1265]

@@samsonsoturian6013 who, and for what 'side'? and what does the latter look like and for whom?

[@samsonsoturian6013]

@hughbeein1265 doesn't matter what side, it's cowards bullshitting that distorts the facts in wartime. A lot of people don't even realize major fighting stalled within a couple months of the start of the war because every new minor battle is depicted as the start of wwiii

[@hughbeein1265]

@@samsonsoturian6013 The distortion of facts by government can be seen today displayed on walls in Egypt and they are thousands of years old. Nothing new. The current and all previous wars are about the control of/value of natural resources as well as who shall get to benefit from that value/resource. There is an abundance of "stuff" and a limited number of people to buy it. How can the "money" idea last? IDK

[@samsonsoturian6013]

@hughbeein1265 men will fight over anything worth money, yes. But men will just as often fight over women and power. Also, it is not necessary for all combatants to be sinners, they simply have to believe the other guy intends to screw them over (and sometimes they're right).

[@GeorgeSemel]

The MI-17 is a good aircraft. I am retired now, spent my working life flying both airplanes and helicopters. The MI-17 is one of the machines I would have traded my left nut to fly. Like all helicopters is only as good as the ground support you have, maintenance matters. Well-trained competent and current pilots along with flying within the design limits and its all good. The US Army operated a bunch of them because they performed well in the mountains of Afghanistan. Just because it's old does not make it junk. Yeah, the Russians have been having some "Problems" in a neighboring country, that are more a problem of the General Staff and leadership in general than the equipment they have. Gee's we still fly UH-1 in the civil utility world. MI-17 would work well in fire suppression here in the States, The Feds will never allow them to be certified airworthy here so that you can go make some money flying one. It's a shame really with a few upgrades- radios and such, it could be a very useful machine to have operating here in the States. Maybe someday the Russians will be forgiven and become more or less the kind of relationship we Americans had with them in the Pre World War One era. It would be good for us and better for them.

[@biamboibifuro817]

I love the Hip. It's one of the best helicopters in it's class. Very reliable.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... in its* class (it's = it is)

[@johnkrieg9368]

This chopper is like an age less boxer, it fought everywhere, it win some and lose some and still soldiers on..

[@DruidicMender]

It's a transport / utility Helo primarily. Use it as such. A UH-1 or UH-60 can carry guns, but that is not their primary role. The Mi-8 is amazing. If i had the funds it'd be a helicopter I would even consider owning. Highly customizable and newer versions have modern Avionics.

[@danmack111]

Always thought they seemed pretty versatile and reliable, the Soviets designed some pretty successful helicopters. The Mi-8 reminds me a flying dinner roll though, they're very round.

[@johnpolk8230]

Matsimus, if you fly an Mi-8/17 with loudspeakers, play Queen's We Will Rock You or We Are The Champions, Top Gun Anthem, or Ride of the Valkyries.

[@R.Sole88109]

ACDC Thunderstruck😎🤘🏻

[@OperatorMax1993]

For Whom The Bell Tolls, Riders On The Storm, Hit and Run Holiday

[@duckman12569]

If people are bad-mouthing it it's probably just because it's the enemy's MIC producing something instead of the 'friendly' MICs getting said contract.

[@williamzk9083]

The question is, would you fly one into a combat zone over the front lines. I wouldn't. Mi 24 or Blackhawk for that.

[@duckman12569]

Have you seen blackhawk down?

[@whitepony8443]

Hate me if you want, but I do like USSR aerospace engineering and aircraft a lot.

[@jugganaut33]

There’s going to be Mi-8’s flying long after we’re all dead. Just remember that. You can laugh at it all you want. It will dance on your grave

[@davidty2006]

at minimum in civilian use that it would do quite well.

[@jasiubezreki7987]

There was also a MI-14 - heavily modernized naval version of MI-8. Great video. Kind regards from Poland.

[@lordisback1947]

Not 7300 rather there are 17,000+ helicopters made of this kind and in service with 68 countries including US, NATO nations and even UN peace keeping troops. One of the most produced helicopters in the world. This is really good that's why so many were made

[@mareksamel5334]

Similar views as on KA-52 helicopter. It is a very good attack chopper I think. But flying over vast flat areas with lot of manpads around, there will be plenty of AH-64 shot down as well in that scenario, no question about it.

[@Sveta7]

It's not just helicopters, basically any western weaponry wouldn't fare much better in the same scenarios Russian/Ukranian were. I especially find amusing how most people think leopard 2 and abrams are indestructible because of good results in the gulf war.

[@brianmead7556]

I think people get ideas about the leopard tank because it’s German and certain ideas about German hardware from a while ago have memetically worked their way into public opinion. The reputation of Germany as a warrior country in modern times is baffling when you remember they haven’t won a serious conflict since before the birth of united Germany. WW1 was a loss, WW2 was a loss, their contingents elsewhere have been minimal. The Abrams is a fearsome beast but it’s real super power is the American defense budget is enormous which means its crewmen get tons of time for high quality training. The amount of practical experience they get not only during their initial training on it but also the intensity of continuation training establishes a very high level of skill. The US Army is almost unique in the sense that its soldiers are professional warriors; their job every day they get up on duty is to do their military job. The only other military I can think of with such a high emphasis on training is the military of the United Kingdom. America has a massive defense complex propaganda industry. Growing up I loved watching the military channel and one of the series it had was called Top Tens, where it broke down the top 10 best of whatever category. Fair attention was given to systems from around the world but you could bet it would heavily be littered with whatever flagship systems the US had, and every list featured an American weapon ad number one or number two. We also have the reality of the department of defense taking active roles in the creation of various fictional media where they get to decide the depiction of not just military personnel, behavior, and objectives but also of the hardware involved. You can bet they’re not going to make a movie where failures of American equipment and doctrine are on full display. And before anyone brings up Blackhawk down the movie does a fantastic job of downplaying assistance from other nations and showcasing the spectacular individual valor of the American soldiers. The reason for the propaganda speech was saying is no Abrams has ever been lost in combat which is somewhat true with a ton of provisos namely one has never been lost in combat and a direct one on one confrontation against an enemy tank while fielded by US forces where it was knocked out catastrophically at the time of the engagement. Over the course of the Iraq war 500 Abrams tanks were knocked out cumulatively by enemy action, primarily from rocket attacks and bomb ambushes. Furthermore there is an abundance of evidence showing the performances of the M1 tank in Iraq and Syria and Yemen by local forces performing very badly. The secret ingredient isn’t depleted rhenium armor or an active protection system it’s staggering fire superiority and the high standards of American armored crew training.

[@Sveta7]

@@brianmead7556 Very well said, the power of Hollywood is often downplayed when it comes to propaganda, also the thing is that America hasn't faced an equal foe since maybe Vietnam, they are usually much much superior in every aspect, the Gulf was no different and even tho Iraq had a big army it was kind of like North Korea now big but poorly equipped and even worse was the morale of Iraqi army. And naturaly when you are more advanced all your tech will perform exceptionally and gain such reputation..

[@mareksamel5334]

@@Sveta7 Yes, lets ask ISIS what they think about Turkish Leopards 2. Turrets were flying also and they dont even have carousel magazine of ammo at the turrets floor...

[@_indig0]

Really the biggest reason for the Ka-52's ineffectiveness in Ukraine is that Russia: 1. Doesn't know how to use attack helicopters 2. Does not put advanced avionics (most importantly a Longbow-style radar) on it's aircraft Russia only uses attack helis like the Ka-52 to throw rockets roughly at the position on the enemy and send the heli back to base. That is incredibly stupid. Also they don't put advanced avionics on them. This makes them vulnerable as the heli has less situational awareness. In good hands the Russian machines currently in service could be great aircraft.

[@edmoran869]

Many people hate because they have been told to, and good little sheep always want to please their masters. No matter the cost or absurdity.

[@someoneinthecaucasus3232]

I know right? So good to see some youtubers who haven't sold their soul to please that crowd.

[@rikulappi9664]

MI-8 is a good heliopter. However, despising anything Russian by default (regardless of facts) is the norm inside many information bubbles. Hence, factual experience based knowledge from experts is invaluable (thanks Matt!). Even today Soviet origin tanks, armour and artillery are absolutely magnificent machines. Even more so considering how much bang they provide for your buck.

[@philipmartin708]

I simply want to acknowledge the respect you paid to the Mi-8. Great video. Thanks.

[@frog382]

When i was a kid- 5yo, i was at the vacation with my family. We got there with Antonov an 26 for free, thanks to my dad being in military and when we wanted to go back home, my dad asked the central for lift and they said they have Mi 8 coming tomorrow and it can take us back- 200miles-320 kilometers. It came to pick us and we flown for 30 miles until it received a call and had to land to go to put out the forest fire that broke out. It was such a capturing moment, i still have many memories of that day, even tho im 30 now. The loud sound, cotton in our ears, the lift like a crane and then flying very fast very low above some rocks, beaches and water. I thought id share an adventure 🙂

[@lazar_kiwi]

Here in New Zealand we have used a mi8 for Transporting logs it retired Now but you can see it near taupo at Heli adventure flights

[@AO-ow6tt]

Compared to other helicopters of the same size and utility, the Mi-8/Mi-17 is simply unmatched.

[@reinisrunkulis2547]

The UN World Food Program operates mostly Mi-8/17 helicopters since their cargo capacity in both weight and volume is excelent, with only a fraction of the maintenance cost of a comparable western helicopter. Their entire hydraulic system can literally be pulled out and replaced as a single module. The older Mi-8T from 1960s is still being operated, but the russians have decided they will no longer issue SLL extensions, which is understendable given its age. US bought Mi-17 for the now owerthrown afgan government, since they have very effective DPDs, for operation in a desert.

[@Raul_Menendez]

People hate weapons who are used agains't them. A reverse nightingale effect.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... against* (no apostrophe. Seriously, WTF?)

[@northcoastdyna]

Absolute beast of a helicopter! The definition of “been there, done that”!

[@bluesword20]

Mexico wanted more mi 17 but usa was against it

[@ssww3]

The usa dosen't own Mexican so they can get whatever they want unless we. ( US tax payers ) buy them for them

[@bluesword20]

@ssww3 they say they don't care but then threatens to sanction if they do get them. So I say they do care.

[@alexnderrrthewoke4479]

Tells you how badass this copter is

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Mexico buys mostly American, but they get some gear from all over because they don't want to be US dependent. That goes for a lot of Latin American countries and it's how a lot of odd weapons end up in some places.

[@larryfoulke1596]

@@bluesword20 my country have the same problem, we want to buy Russian aircraft but the US will use CAATSA to my country.

[@jurassicarkjordanisgreat1778]

This thing is iconic for me because of COD. Its such a cool helicopter shown in the games and irl

[@kerrynball2734]

10+ years ago in Russia I saw them chain a shipping container to the bottom of a helicopter. They were scooping up water from a local lake and using it to fight forest fires. Which was a bit mind blowing.

[@vladimirmihnev9702]

It's old and some are not really being taken care of and it's a wonder that they are still flying. Actually that is a great sign about how great the design is, a normal aircraft with so little care would be in pieces long ago.

[@mattbeebe1288]

the only problem with these birds is not technical but political. people hate it because its a soviet/russian vehicle, so it carries that stigma

[@lmyrski8385]

I've never had an issue with the Mi-8. It is just a transport helicopter so I'm not sure what people want from it.

[@petesheppard1709]

A great aircraft, simple and tough. I wish it could get certificated in the US; I bet there would also be a huge market for them in Canada, for use in the far north. After all, that's the environment it was conceived in.

[@rogerhudson2814]

The Mi17 is a great helicopter. On the Croatian islands near Split they are the 'ambulance '. Last summer I was in the Split hospital complex and every night there would be at least two landings at the helipad near the terrace room I was in. A real life saving machine.

[@lemob182]

This thing was a lifeline for Iraqi troops on the frontlines in the 1980's Iran-Iraq war, delivering ammo and supplies.

[@mychannel3774]

A very balanced, objective and non-partisan view. If only other journalists could offer such integrity, maybe the rest of us could make more _informed_ assessments…

[@hughbeein1265]

After a further bit of thought, perhaps you could do a series of videos about how one nations views of another nation influenced its thinking around military equipment/tech that ended with bad/disastrous results. I am sure the subject matter is also a very big topic for discussion.

[@gilde915]

i know a pilot that was evaluating the MI-8 from the east german army after the reunification and those were in a poor mechanical state...it took of in a inspected state and came back after 45 minutes leaking like a kitchen sink. It needed a complete rework of the hydraulic system. As a transport it is a rugged machine which can handle alot of abuse and still flys on prayers and ductape.

[@starsjosephfrost]

i don’t hate the Mi-8 i see it as a classic helicopter, perfect for carrying people. Those who hate it are mostly westerners (those who hate anything russian made)

[@Fergusius]

I love this helicopter!!! It's rugged, reliable and capable of performing so many different roles with relative ease.

[@Ordoabchao-x9k]

They still use it in my country, I've been on board one. They still kiss the ground less often than the crashawks

[@xfar666x]

"If you're designing a helicopter which should carry 5 tons to 500 km, you will design Mi-8, otherwise it will be worse then Mi-8" - russian aviation design-engineers

[@prithwijitkb4305]

Absolutely right........Apart from it's usual transport duties we even used this huge Machine to give close air support for the ground troops ... It's mainly used for heavy transportation but it can be used as Helicopter Gunship.......

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... its* usual duties (it's = it is). And you separate sentences with a single fullstop only.*

[@RTmadnesstoo]

I saw someone recently gave Ukraine 5 of these and apologized for them. The Ukrainians didn't seem to be disappointed.

[@wanderschlosser1857]

Well, it's a Soviet heli, the Ukrainians know them inside out for operation and maintenance. No training needed. And it does its job pretty well.

[@stitchjones7134]

Travelled on them before. It's an effective transport helicopter, not much to dislike about them.

[@hmong_keeb_kwm]

People don't hate the Mi8-Mi17 people just hate that it's from Russia. But if the Mi8-Mi17 was made by the U.S.A while the Black Hawk was made by Russia these same people would all of a sudden would hate the black hawk. These people hatred is pretty straight forward and it has noting to do with the Mi8-Mi17 at all.

[@steffenjachnow8176]

I love this helicopter since I saw its civil version as a boy in the mid-eighties in action. Helping massively with the electrification of our train network by setting the poles for the overhead wire. This is, as you said, an immensely versatile craft!

[@aidanacebo9529]

I love this helicopter, always have. I remember it from Battlefield Vietnam, was a CAS beast. also one of the two aircraft you could pack like the entire team into and still take off, as you could walk around in the back.

[@asovietplaytpus5828]

The MI-24 and the MI-8 are my two favorite Eastern bloc helicopters. They just look so cool.

[@JohnWick-lh9gn]

Philippines wanted this and already paid partial but because of the US warning for sanctions, deal was off. Sad because this could help a lot especially in times of calamity. We are prone to typhoons, earthquakes, floods etc.

[@surrealtom]

God bless America lol. Seems like not many poor countries have benefited much from its influence/presence.

[@kentershackle1329]

Did the US compensate .. or lets see force the Philippine government to buy overly expensive complicated watered down US made ?

[@jasonirwin4631]

@@kentershackle1329 the US didn't "force" the Philippines to do jack shit. The US government didn't care if the Philippines operated Mi-8 helicopters the issue with the helicopters is that they were newly made in Russia, and that only became a issue because of us laws that placed sanctions on any nation that purchased Russian weapons after the invasion of Ukraine. The Philippines could have then purchased Mi-8's from any number of the long list of operators after the deal feel through. They are now purchasing polish made S70 helicopters. The US did offer to sell at a equal cost surplus CH-47 helicopters and offered to assist the Polish manufacturer in setting up CH-47 production for the Philippines. All that aside the Philippines is now getting 38 S70 helicopters from PZL Mielec. The original deal with Russia was only getting them 16 helicopters. The US really doesn't care if a country use Russian equipment just don't purchase Said equipment until the Ukraine war is over. I mean holy fuck mexico operates the Mi-8 and they even fly us troops around on it during joint training exercises.

[@dergunter1237]

@@kentershackle1329 why should the US compensate for that tho? Other nations do what they say or suddenly regime change riots happen and leaders get liquidated

[@RuiRuichi]

@@kentershackle1329 Russians only offered the mi8 but not the more impressive mi26. Russians were the one who offered a watered down deal when the US offered both Chinooks at Blackhawks.

[@asimoford4994]

Mi-8/Mi-17 is the backbone for lot of countries still today....

[@jameson1239]

Keep in mind the MI-17 was used by Canadian forces in Afghanistan

[@MrScar88]

I can only talk about the Mi-8 from DCS perspective, where i fly it. And i absolutely love it.

[@greenyoshi777]

I don't hate the Mi-8 or the Mi-17..... once you get it started in DCS (the hard way instead of using the easy method). However, the Mi-38 is much newer and I think the Mi-8/17 has done its service well and I will boldly say the helicopter has served even better than the poor third world militaries that use them. It has survived where western built machines need constant maintenance that third world militaries simply can't afford. It is old and long in the tooth but still flying. 12,000 Mi-17's (as of 2007) so they will be around for awhile yet. Funnily enough these helicopters might be the ONLY aerial assets in the entire military of *_some nations_* very poor militaries. The Mi-8/Mi-17 is a mule. As long as you feed it? It will keep going. Sadly the Mi-38 isn't getting the attention it deserves but that's because most customers are happy with their Mi-8's and Mi-17's still soldiering onwards. What also kind of hurt the Mi-38 is of course all of the updates and modernization options/packages for it. Mi-171 for example (yes there is an extra "1" in there intentionally) has a glass cockpit and more modern features. They just keep updating the Mi-8 and Mi-17's which hurts the Mi-38's market prospects for what I think could be a very phenomenal helicopter once it finally takes over the market. I really was hoping the Mi-38 would take off but sadly too many militaries are pinching pennies. Even the Canadian military had 10 of these (ret'd in 2011) in their air force.

[@shmeckle666]

Love it, especially the modern ones with the more pointed nose. Looks as good as it is effective.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Mat, keep in mind that a lot of the people you're referring to don't even know the difference between a tank and an APC, they're just cowards trying to win a war via insults.

[@imrekalman9044]

There was a flight test a few years ago of a new variant, Mi-171. They flew it to Oymyakon, coldest town on Earth, parked it down and went in to warm up. Next morning it was -50 ℃, the pilots hopped in, emergency start of engine and immediate take off, no checklists, no warm up. When they reached 1,000 m altitude they took out the checklists and went over them, everything worked, everything was fine. Then they started up the other engine, as all this was done using a single engine only. An excellent workhorse that just keeps getting better.

[@fretted4life]

In the 1971 war the Mi-4's were the backbone of the Meghna Heli Bridge used by General Sagat Singh to bypass Pakistan Army strongpoints in East Pakistan & race towards Dhaka. Them Russian birds are such great workhorses, such that the Taliban, The Panjshir Resistance finds them relatively easy to use & maintain. I think India has around 100+ of these Mi17's.

[@ludoop3822]

One of the reasons why older variants are sometimes hated is because it just vibrates so much, we used to say that the heli is just scared and thats why it shakes so much haha.

[@anthonykaiser974]

Flown in one in Afghanistan on an Embassy Air flight to Kabul. Not a bad ride, and the aircraft is easy to maintain and support.

[@timbrwolf1121]

Wait people hate on the mi8? Seriously one of the best helicopters ever made. It's a shame that recent production quality has decreased due to the war in ukraine

[@charlie15627]

Most of the loses on both sides have been due to poor maintenance, inadequate training and pilot errors not because of some recent low quality production. Russia has over 700 of these in military service and hundreds more in reserve. There hasn’t been any rush to produce them.

[@timbrwolf1121]

@@charlie15627 yes I am not saying losses are due to quality however recently they have been crashing straight off the production line. This is a clear indicator of a drop in quality

[@williamorr5335]

What stands out to me was the USA buying up 8s for the Afghans as it worked far better in higher altitudes than most western models. Glad to see you pop up in my feed, glad your back Mat

[@chr821]

I dont really like it. Mainly because of the "multirole" aspect. You want to transport troops, why not use the additional weight of the armament for protection of said troops? (Light armor, better ecm, etc...) You want to use it as a cheap(er) weapons platform, why bother with 80% volume of empty space? BUUUUUUT! I guess the multirole-aspect makes it a very affordable option for nations in need of helicopters. And the numbers, as you say, speak for themself. So I wouldnt dare calling it bad or obsolete. Like the SC-7 skyvans, An-2s, and UH-1s, the mi-8 is simply a workhorse. Not even hate-worthy xD

[@8itzer]

What hate is there for the 'Hip'? It continues to fill more roles than its big brother the 'Hind". I've had nothing but love and praise for this multi-role workhorse that continues on five decades after its conception.

[@armdengr83]

Ukraine is a unique conflict with both sides having a extensive layered air defense and especially on the ukrainian side a LOT of manpads and open terrain. Compare the losses in ukraine against the US helicopter losses in Vietnam. And please don't think that the Blackhawk would have done musch better in the ukraine airspace. Amazing how small minded people can be and how easily they are influenced by anti-russian propaganda which most western media are now spreading. I'm not pro-russian, but please people: try to peek through all the smokescreens. History has shown us how dangerous it is when we don't.

[@mr_beezlebub3985]

Even the US has flown these. There used to be a special operations squadron in the US Air Force that flew these. They deployed to allied countries to teach their pilots and aircrews how to best use their aircraft to support ground units.

[@tomriley5790]

It's a workhorse transport helicopter, large (very) powerful and good at what it does. I don't really think it should have a particularly bad rep. It's rugged and stands up to abuse and poor conditions pretty well. It's not an attack helicopter really though (although it can carry some weapons) and no transport helicopter (and few aircraft) will standup to being hit by a Manpad - that's just it being poorly used or AAA. It is also pretty inefficient in terms of its use of fuel which creates its own logistical issues and generally has high maintence requirements in terms of time, although relatively simple to do. Pretty much no aircraft is useful in Ukraine - Ground air defence is (currently) dominating that conflict. Most of the UN ones I saw in Somalia usually had their engine covers up and work going on, but with that work they kept flying.

[@thatsnodildo1974]

I love it. It's such a great work horse and is great for lifting in supplies to people in need. I'm sure tons of people hate it but those whole rely on aid love seeing it come in.

[@zahkam7322]

when your hated for doing your job so well , you know your doing something right .

[@The-Red-Baron]

Personally one of my favorite helicopter, I found the design very cool and nice and it’s very easily accessible to civilians and eventually I would love to fly one, one day.❤

[@michaeldenesyk3195]

What hate? It is a Russian helicopter that is being used around tke world. I don't get the "Why is there hate for the Mi-8/ Mi-17 Helicopter: title?

[@_Matsimus_]

Watch the video…. Then find out…. 🙄

[@TheSovietWombat]

Personally i think the MI-8 is a SEXY helicopter, let the haters hate, we got ourselves a beauty to gaze upon

[@Happythought774]

That north korean mi-8 has strong 40k vibe lol

[@starboy3735]

Aside from the military use, this airframe is used globally for many tasks including arctic uses.