Russia Leaks Schematics Of New High-Speed Helicopter Concept
Meet the 435 mph semi-stealthy Raiderski ...
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- ... helicopter
https://defence-blog.com/news/russia-ac ... opter.html
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- ... helicopter
https://defence-blog.com/news/russia-ac ... opter.html
The Kamov Design Bureau appears to have leaked the details of future high-speed helicopter it is about to develop for Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
In Russian social media were posted the images from the helicopter project defense shows of a new concept that could provide increased speed and less drag.
The concept feature a ‘delta’ fixed-wing, co-axial rotor system, a side-by-side cockpit, and pusher engines in the rear similar to what is utilized on the Sikorsky S-97 Raider and Bell V-280 Valor. The co-axial rotor system will be driven by two engines.
Also, a concept of the high-speed helicopter will eqquiped infrared (IR) heat suppressing systems and various fuselage contour constructions with internal weapons bays as a stealth technology to avoid detection.
According to a presentation, Kamov believes new technologies will provide more speed and range and better fuel efficiency. It is expected that the new helicopter will reach speeds of more than 435 mph (700 kph), nearly three times the speed of a conventional helicopter.
The project of future Russian high-speed helicopter was displayed by Sergei Mikheyev, General Designer of the Kamov Design Bureau. Sergei Mikheev is an academic, researcher and helicopter designer. He has served as General Designer of Kamov Design Bureau since 1987.
Wut?
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
That wing seems huge, wonder how much that would effect vertical performance.
Why is a huge chunk of the wing underneath the Main Propeller Wash area?
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1154
- Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16
A Helicopter works in the same way as a vacuum cleaner.
It is NOT pushed upwards by the rotors. => What is below the rotors is far less important as one might think.
It is SUCKED UP by the rotors.
Just like a normal wing, 2/3 of the lift comes from the SUCTION above the blades.
VACUUM is what lifts a Helicopter into the air.
It is NOT pushed upwards by the rotors. => What is below the rotors is far less important as one might think.
It is SUCKED UP by the rotors.
Just like a normal wing, 2/3 of the lift comes from the SUCTION above the blades.
VACUUM is what lifts a Helicopter into the air.
vilters wrote:A Helicopter works in the same way as a vacuum cleaner.
It is NOT pushed upwards by the rotors. => What is below the rotors is far less important as one might think.
It is SUCKED UP by the rotors.
Just like a normal wing, 2/3 of the lift comes from the SUCTION above the blades.
VACUUM is what lifts a Helicopter into the air.
I thought I remembered reading that the S-67's wing affected the take off and landing performance.
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 83
- Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47
They need to fund this yesterday. Be operation in 2489. 3 of them. Ok, 1.
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 67
- Joined: 05 Nov 2014, 08:25
vilters wrote:A Helicopter works in the same way as a vacuum cleaner.
It is NOT pushed upwards by the rotors. => What is below the rotors is far less important as one might think.
It is SUCKED UP by the rotors.
Well, the rotor pushes the air down, accelerates it, and this causes the uplift. F=m*a, and Newtons third law (as the rotor pushes the air down, the air pushes the rotor up). If you hinder this movement of air, it reduces the lift considerably. How do you get rid of the air you "suck" up with the rotor otherwise? By pushing it sideways, which would need more energy?
Or to stay with the vacuum cleaner: how big is the suction, if you close the air outlet port?
alex_f wrote:vilters wrote:A Helicopter works in the same way as a vacuum cleaner.
It is NOT pushed upwards by the rotors. => What is below the rotors is far less important as one might think.
It is SUCKED UP by the rotors.
Well, the rotor pushes the air down, accelerates it, and this causes the uplift. F=m*a, and Newtons third law (as the rotor pushes the air down, the air pushes the rotor up). If you hinder this movement of air, it reduces the lift considerably. How do you get rid of the air you "suck" up with the rotor otherwise? By pushing it sideways, which would need more energy?
Or to stay with the vacuum cleaner: how big is the suction, if you close the air outlet port?
What he said.
Lift is all about transferring the downward momentum that the weight of the aircraft generates via gravity to a moving mass of air. If you put a big wing in the path of that air, that momentum gets transferred to the wing and thus back to the aircraft. That’s why tiltrotors hav such big wing flaps, and still have hover efficiently issues.
You would probably be better off building the aircraft around a shrouded fan.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.
Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
14 posts
|Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest