Russian GOSTs vs. Ukrainian Army: Why Two Combat Helicopters Risk Returning from Repair Without Weapons

In the midst of a full-scale war, when every combat unit of equipment is critical for the front, two helicopters risk returning to service after major overhaul without armaments. A situation that should have remained within the scope of technical coordination has escalated into a criminal investigation against the company that was the sole bidder to equip the aircraft with combat equipment, as well as an arrest of state property. UNN tried to understand why, in wartime, when the country appeals to partners for assistance, such destructive issues arise within the state oversight system for the defense industry.

Beginning: Helicopter modernization within MTF

In defense against Russian aggression, Ukraine uses all available resources. In the context of the domestic aviation fleet, we are left with aircraft of Soviet heritage — despite their age, they continue to perform tasks and require regular maintenance and repair, as they cannot yet be fully replaced with new ones. Three main companies are involved in the repair of aircraft and combat helicopters in particular: "Motor Sich", "MS Avia Grade", and "Aviakon".

At the beginning of 2024, the task arose to install special equipment on two Mi-8MT helicopters, which Ukraine received as part of international technical assistance. A contractor was hard to find — it concerned an outdated model of aircraft, whose combat equipment required specialized knowledge, experience, and technical capabilities. Ultimately, the Ukrainian enterprise "MS Avia Grade" took on the state contract.

In March-April, we fulfilled the state contract — we installed 12 systems on each helicopter, including armament systems, protection, onboard electronics, pylon adapters, ADROS KT and KUV systems – this is helicopter protection against air decoys. The equipment was purchased through Prozorro, all actions complied with the law

Some parts installed on the Mi-8 were purchased abroad. These include models of Soviet production, as well as Russian ones produced before the full-scale invasion. They were practically no longer available in Ukraine at that time, and they could not be purchased from Russia or Belarus, so the remaining spare parts had to be searched for all over the world.

Military expert Pavlo Narozhny explained in a comment to UNN that not only aviation faces such a problem. According to him, it is formally possible to purchase Soviet spare parts from partner countries, but in practice, this procedure is complicated by certification barriers, restrictions at the interstate cooperation level, and the need to obtain a series of permits.

Certain equipment – optics, sights – requires official confirmation of use specifically for the army. Without such documents, even private suppliers do not risk making a sale

Moreover, according to him, Ukrainian companies involved in repair and re-equipment are often forced to buy expensive components in batches, even if the need is for a single unit.

After purchasing all the necessary equipment, "MS Avia Grade" modernized two helicopters into combat machines capable of performing combat missions.

The installed equipment underwent inspection by both the company's internal quality service and representatives of military acceptance, which is confirmed by relevant documents, including acceptance certificates. In addition, the combat machines passed flight tests during acceptance of work by military units and flights to their base units for combat missions. After that, the helicopters were accepted by the military units to which they belonged. One remained on combat duty, the other accumulated 82 flight hours in combat conditions without any remarks.

Transfer for overhaul and equipment dismantling

Due to the exhaustion of the inter-repair resource, i.e., reaching the maximum operational limit of the equipment, both helicopters were transferred for major overhaul.

They were transferred for major overhaul to obtain a new inter-repair resource: 2,000 hours or 8 years of operation. According to the contract, we bear warranty obligations for our equipment

Up to this point, the story looked like a positive example of effective cooperation for the development of Ukraine's defense sector, but events then unfolded unexpectedly.

During the major overhaul, the company that first took on the complex task and successfully implemented the modernization was not involved in further technical maintenance after successful operation. Thus, it was effectively made impossible for "MS Avia Grade" to fulfill its warranty obligations. Of particular concern, according to the company's experts, was the dismantling and disassembly of the pylon adapters – key armament elements – without the involvement of "MS Avia Grade". Furthermore, questions arise regarding the availability of technical documentation and adherence to approval procedures during the work.

"We do not dispute the right to dismantle – this is provided for by the repair conditions. But our engineers should have been involved in the disassembly of combat equipment, as we bear the warranty obligations. Without our participation, any intervention is not only risky but also technically incompetent," the company representatives emphasize. In accordance with Aviation regulations and contract terms, a claim procedure with the customer should have been followed, which was not done at all according to the regulations.

The further development of the situation looked so destructive and illogical that one involuntarily assumes: could this be the result of a scenario that might have been beneficial to someone? Under strange circumstances, the assessment of the installed equipment during dismantling was not carried out according to the norms of the Ukrainian regulatory framework, but was compared with the technical characteristics of old Soviet and Russian GOST standards.

Our equipment was compared not with current documentation, but with old Russian GOSTs. For example, to explain in simple terms, a hypothetical nut from the assembly kit with a height of 5 mm is provided for in our current technical documentation and DSTU, approved in 2023. But in theirs – a nut with a height of 10 mm, because it is a Soviet and Russian standard. This led to the conclusion that the parts are "inauthentic". If we follow such criteria, almost any modern modernization can be questioned

That is, to summarize, the situation looks like this: helicopters needed to be equipped with combat equipment, but a contractor was hard to find for a long time. Eventually, one of the Ukrainian companies successfully completed the task – the equipment was modernized, passed tests, and worked its inter-repair resource under combat conditions. After that, the helicopters were sent for major overhaul, where the equipment was assessed according to outdated Soviet-Russian standards, declared "inauthentic" – and it was from this moment that a serious problem arose.

Involvement of the SSU, blocking access, property arrest, and threat to defense capability

Based on the "detected discrepancies" with Soviet-Russian standards, despite the full compliance of the equipment with current Ukrainian technical specifications and DSTU, the Security Service of Ukraine obtained a court order for its arrest. This refers specifically to the systems that made the helicopters in question full-fledged combat vehicles.

According to "MS Avia Grade," the company repeatedly tried to gain access for their specialists to the equipment to conduct claim work, but these attempts received no response.

"We were ready to explain, show documentation, participate in the commission's work. But we were simply not allowed in. We were not given access to the equipment that we installed and for which we are responsible. This means that the helicopters will come out of major overhaul without armament pylons. That is, after major overhaul, the helicopter will have characteristics worse than before the major overhaul. Before the repair, they were combat vehicles, and now, figuratively speaking, they have become "doves of peace" and will be returned to the army without armaments," emphasized "MS Avia Grade," explaining that the combat equipment was never reinstalled on the helicopters.

In this regard, logical questions arise: how did it happen that combat equipment, instead of being reinforced, lost its key capabilities? Why are the contractors who were the first to volunteer for a task that others refused, and successfully implemented it in Ukraine's interests, not allowed to carry out the work or at least clarify all circumstances? And most importantly – is this situation, knowingly or unknowingly, playing into the enemy's hands?

Representatives of "MS Avia Grade" appealed to the court with a motion to lift the arrest of the equipment to allow participation in the claim procedure. However, the court denied them on May 26.

The property was sent for expertise. But no one asked us for technical documentation. Then, on what basis is the expertise being conducted?

Specialists note that anyone, after reviewing the documentation and inspecting the armaments, would see that everything complies with Ukrainian state standards.

Conclusion: bureaucracy, confusion, risks

There are less than two weeks left until the deadline for the two helicopters to return to service after major overhaul. Everything indicates that the situation will not change significantly during this time, and there is a serious risk that the helicopters will return without combat equipment.

This story vividly demonstrates how vulnerable the technological chain in the defense industry can be: technical confusion, lack of coordination, and absence of clear interaction procedures between enterprises create difficulties that could have been avoided and directly impact the army's combat capability.

Instead of constructive interaction – criminalization of the sole contractor who undertook a complex technical task when others refused. Instead of working solutions to disagreements – courts, arrests, blocking access to equipment, and, as a result, the risk of losing the combat effectiveness of the equipment.

This is not just an unfortunate precedent. It is a symptom of a deeper problem: the existence of systemic management and regulatory gaps, which, if left unattended, can nullify even the best technical solutions. Against the backdrop of a constant need for weapons and equipment, such a loss is a blow to defense capability.

What is happening is a game to the detriment of the army. And while we are writing letters, helicopters without armaments are in conservation, and the army will be returned "naked" machines

The question remains open: can Ukraine and its institutions afford such situations when every combat unit is awaited at the front? One wants to believe that public disclosure will help move the matter forward, involve responsible specialists, and return the helicopters what makes them combat vehicles. After all, every such case is not about papers. It's about life and safety at the front.

The editorial office has sent a request to the Main Directorate of State Aviation and the Ministry of Defense asking for comments on the situation.