4th Nov 2003, 00:11
Check out what the Kamov team have been to while no one was looking. I saw a version of this in the late 90's where Sikorsky were looking at putting the fenestron on the 76.
The K60 definately looks like a coalition between Kamov and Sikorsky.
4th Nov 2003, 09:04
The fantail that we flew in the early 1990's (first flew in June of 1990) was an experimental S-76B with a fan grafted on as a test bed for the fan that was finally flown on the Comanche. The 76 was a convenient platform for the test flights, and production of a 76 fan was never considered.
That was the aircraft where we invented the "snap turn" where we can pivot at speeds up to 120 knots and point independent of the direction of flight.
Here is a picture of it taken at Paris the next year:
4th Nov 2003, 12:34
Is there a reason they never looked at puting this a/c on the production line?Does the fan tail/fennestrom not have atvantages over the conventional tail rotor?:}
4th Nov 2003, 19:01
Lots of reasons why it was not produced on a 76:
It never went into production because we didn't want it to, it wasn't designed to do so, it was a flying wind tunnel for Comanche.
It was much heavier, at least 50 lbs, than a tail rotor
It has more drag, about 2 square feet total, which reduced speed and range
The Fan had to be on the tail shaft centerline, or the weight would be even higher with an intermediate gear box. That meant that the nose up angle for touching the tail went from 15 degrees to 6 degrees. That would have required the tail bumper be qualified as a normal landing point, making the weight even more once the tail cone was stiffened.
It wasn't needed, unless S-76 people needed to go sideways ay 100 mph!
5th Nov 2003, 04:00
QUOTE]It wasn't needed, unless S-76 people needed to go sideways ay 100 mph![/QUOTE]
I wouldn't need to worry about the cross wind then :D