Sikorsky X2 coaxial heli developments.
Dave, in his own style, has captured the essence of what I was saying. Flight dates have been published before, and have not happened. It's not just a sikorsky thing, not just an experimental aircraft thing. Look at the headlines for the Boeing dreamliner slips. Look at the eclipse jet. It would seem to me to make more sense to quietly chug along, fly or certify whatever it is you are working on, then announce it to the world. Maybe that works better for experimental stuff, as there is no customer waiting for an airframe.
-- IFMU
-- IFMU
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick & co. will have better insight, but I'd hazard a guess that the 'depriorization' of the X2 demo in late 2006 - officially attributed to the demands of SAC's bread & butter (H-60/H-53) programs - was in reality driven by early intel coming out of the JHL CDAs confirming the Army's preference for a tilt solution. Post-JHL, the X2 focus now appears - going on SAC's representation at Quad-A etc - to be on a 6K UCAR (coincidentally sized around the demo ship! 
).
(As for tempus fugit, let's just hope that Mr. tempus regularly checks for TFRs, otherwise he'll soon discover he has company!)
).(As for tempus fugit, let's just hope that Mr. tempus regularly checks for TFRs, otherwise he'll soon discover he has company!
)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: On the Rump of Pendle Hill Lancashi
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About 1945/7 Avro of Manchester started to manufacture and build the Avro Shackleton Long rang Maritime aircraft, so good was this aeroplane that it only left service about 1989, what might you be asking has this got to do with the current disscusion regarding the contra prop Sikorsky X2 hybrid Helicopter, well my twopen'th is this. the Shackleton was powered by 4 Roll Royce Griffon 58 V12 piston engs mated to a very strong almost agricultural gearbox with a huge siamesed propshaft that drove Two Contra rotating props, originally with the early marques of the Griffon both props were equal in diameter, but as the engine was powered up through the years the design guys realise that the propellor tips were comming perilously close to each other at certian power settings and in fact had in some case acutually hit each other, the clever guys at a local factory to me here in Lancashire realised that the tips passing each other were causing supersonic shock waves this had the effect of bending the tip of both front and rear blades inwards towards each other, after much testing they decided that the rear prop would be longer than the front prop and the cord of the rear one would be altered to take out this possiblity of inward bending when under certain power conditions, it worked and from about the early 50's the props fitted to the Griffon 58 had a greater diameter at the rear.
Is/ or could this have any bearing on the two different diameter rotors on the Sikorsky X2 hybrid ?
Peter R-B
Vfrpilotpb
Is/ or could this have any bearing on the two different diameter rotors on the Sikorsky X2 hybrid ?
Peter R-B
Vfrpilotpb
Is/ or could this have any bearing on the two different diameter rotors on the Sikorsky X2 hybrid ?
Peter R-B
Vfrpilotpb
Peter R-B
Vfrpilotpb
Peter R-B,
covered earlier in the thread:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...61&postcount=3
IFMU
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peter, this was my error in looking at the profile CAD rendering. The rotors on X2 are, to the best of my knowledge, the same diameter. I believe that same thread cleared that up.
However you have given the nail a glancing blow on the head. Any project of this nature is going to encounter things which set it back. Is that because the engineer's don't know what they're doing? Is that because the timing dates have not been sufficiently agreed. A resounding "NO!!" to both of those questions. This project is pushing the boundaries of what has been done before. Like the NASA space program it has setbacks, of either technical or financial nature, which alter the timing.
Actually, i agree with IFMU that Sikorsky have taken a responsible approach to this project (since there are no waiting customers). Don't forget there are shareholders, and the mightly United Technologies, to satisfy - often these folk do not have an appreciation of the technical difficulties but can understand targets. The compromise is that the project rolls on at a responsible pace, while arbitrary deadlines are set.
We will all be singing the praises of X2 soon enough - let 'em get on with it at a pace which gets it right...
However you have given the nail a glancing blow on the head. Any project of this nature is going to encounter things which set it back. Is that because the engineer's don't know what they're doing? Is that because the timing dates have not been sufficiently agreed. A resounding "NO!!" to both of those questions. This project is pushing the boundaries of what has been done before. Like the NASA space program it has setbacks, of either technical or financial nature, which alter the timing.
Actually, i agree with IFMU that Sikorsky have taken a responsible approach to this project (since there are no waiting customers). Don't forget there are shareholders, and the mightly United Technologies, to satisfy - often these folk do not have an appreciation of the technical difficulties but can understand targets. The compromise is that the project rolls on at a responsible pace, while arbitrary deadlines are set.
We will all be singing the praises of X2 soon enough - let 'em get on with it at a pace which gets it right...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
If Sikorsky is unwilling to rectify it's erroneous statements about the past why should anyone believe its present statements about the future?
.
If Sikorsky is unwilling to rectify it's erroneous statements about the past why should anyone believe its present statements about the future?
.
Last edited by Dave_Jackson; 17th Dec 2007 at 01:44. Reason: The initial posting was too hard on poor little Sikorsky. This is much softer.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of drivel about schedule written here, much of it by folks who never built a flying machine in their lives.
The schedule is what it is, driven by money and luck, especially when new technology is being developed. No helo will fly before it is ready, and maybe not even then!
If you don't like the statements made by well-intentioned people whose crystal balls are not as shiny as yours, too bad. I happen to know the people involved in the various statements, they would probably resent the nefarious reasons drummed up by folks with too little to do. Sikorsky spent less than they wanted last year, because they had to produce enough profit to make their shareholders happy. Remember, money is what buys schedule, and all R&D cash for a real company (one owned by its shareholders and not by its government) comes off the bottom line. For companies owned by their national governments, all that is needed to fund some more R&D is to run the printing presses at the mint for a few hours longer.
The schedule is what it is, driven by money and luck, especially when new technology is being developed. No helo will fly before it is ready, and maybe not even then!
If you don't like the statements made by well-intentioned people whose crystal balls are not as shiny as yours, too bad. I happen to know the people involved in the various statements, they would probably resent the nefarious reasons drummed up by folks with too little to do. Sikorsky spent less than they wanted last year, because they had to produce enough profit to make their shareholders happy. Remember, money is what buys schedule, and all R&D cash for a real company (one owned by its shareholders and not by its government) comes off the bottom line. For companies owned by their national governments, all that is needed to fund some more R&D is to run the printing presses at the mint for a few hours longer.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A short deviation from helicopters.
Nick,
There is much truth in what you say. However, I would politely ask that you consider what you have said and the words that you have used. Considered your comments, not in the context of helicopters, but in a socio-economic context. You have felt it necessary to use the words; "money", "spent", "profit", "shareholders", "money", "buys", "cash", "bottom line", "fund", and "mint".
Remember back when the vast majority of immigrants to the United States came from Europe. Many were of Germanic and Anglo-Saxon origin and they brought with them the technological knowledge that they had learnt in the 'old country'. Many of them became entrepreneurs who took pride in their company, its products and its services. They tended to respect and serve the customers, the employees, the suppliers and of course the owner.
Today the vast majority of the immigrants are coming from the south and unfortunately they are unable to bring much in the way of formal training. Today the so-called prestigious positions are that of lawyers, marketers and stock promoters, plus the 'kings of the hill', the CEOs of large impersonal corporations. The Anglo-Germanic philosophy has been replaced by the Jewish philosophy. The United States has acquired a preoccupation with money.
Regrettably, this Neo-Con 'Need for Greed' has now started to undermine the once almighty dollar and thereby the purchasing power of the vast majority of Americans.
Dave
There is much truth in what you say. However, I would politely ask that you consider what you have said and the words that you have used. Considered your comments, not in the context of helicopters, but in a socio-economic context. You have felt it necessary to use the words; "money", "spent", "profit", "shareholders", "money", "buys", "cash", "bottom line", "fund", and "mint".
Remember back when the vast majority of immigrants to the United States came from Europe. Many were of Germanic and Anglo-Saxon origin and they brought with them the technological knowledge that they had learnt in the 'old country'. Many of them became entrepreneurs who took pride in their company, its products and its services. They tended to respect and serve the customers, the employees, the suppliers and of course the owner.
Today the vast majority of the immigrants are coming from the south and unfortunately they are unable to bring much in the way of formal training. Today the so-called prestigious positions are that of lawyers, marketers and stock promoters, plus the 'kings of the hill', the CEOs of large impersonal corporations. The Anglo-Germanic philosophy has been replaced by the Jewish philosophy. The United States has acquired a preoccupation with money.
Regrettably, this Neo-Con 'Need for Greed' has now started to undermine the once almighty dollar and thereby the purchasing power of the vast majority of Americans.
Dave
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK guys enough Sky bashing for now, please! 
I started this thread to discuss, and keep pace with, X2 developments as they happened. Lets keep it friendly.
Until X2 flies the market place, and it's criticism, is wide open for any of us..
I started this thread to discuss, and keep pace with, X2 developments as they happened. Lets keep it friendly.
Until X2 flies the market place, and it's criticism, is wide open for any of us..
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave, I think you have it backwards. Edison, Ford, Tesla all worked, thought, dreamed of building "things" because they could sell them. The exchange of money is the way the world works, we must recognize that essential truth. This does not mean we must dump our values, because the ethical balance must also be fully considered, but the profit is the thing. If true accounting of issues were actually done (a rare thing) the ethical/environmental issues would automatically be covered, because they would be valued appropriately.
I admit to tossing in a bit of red herring about national investments, to stir the pot. It is true that the US are facing an extremely difficult challenge: The new communism, where state owned enterprises enable vast not-for-profit investment that sways the balance of competition. European companies that have their state as their largest shareholders and China where the state is everything are awesome competitors, IMHO. There are European "newspeak" counterclaims of US Gove investment, but that is hogwash that placates the reporters. If I could get the free loans that Airbus has gotten, for example, I could run a team that could make London Bridge hover.
svenestron talks about the NH-90 success story, but doesn't know that Finland had selected the S92 as their choice over the NH-90, until EADS (or should I say the French government) bought the largest Finnish aviation house. The day after they were bought, the Sikorsky phone calls were not answered. Period. The Swiss selected the Black Hawk as their mountain rescue helicopter back in the 1980's until Mitterand visited the Swiss president, upon which a completed turnaround occurred! I could go on, but it has all been said before (and countered by folks who think a billion dollars of free subsidy is a Government's right and duty - which it is, as long as we don't call it free market!)
I admit to tossing in a bit of red herring about national investments, to stir the pot. It is true that the US are facing an extremely difficult challenge: The new communism, where state owned enterprises enable vast not-for-profit investment that sways the balance of competition. European companies that have their state as their largest shareholders and China where the state is everything are awesome competitors, IMHO. There are European "newspeak" counterclaims of US Gove investment, but that is hogwash that placates the reporters. If I could get the free loans that Airbus has gotten, for example, I could run a team that could make London Bridge hover.
svenestron talks about the NH-90 success story, but doesn't know that Finland had selected the S92 as their choice over the NH-90, until EADS (or should I say the French government) bought the largest Finnish aviation house. The day after they were bought, the Sikorsky phone calls were not answered. Period. The Swiss selected the Black Hawk as their mountain rescue helicopter back in the 1980's until Mitterand visited the Swiss president, upon which a completed turnaround occurred! I could go on, but it has all been said before (and countered by folks who think a billion dollars of free subsidy is a Government's right and duty - which it is, as long as we don't call it free market!)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boo hoo, poor little Americans, they would never make political decsions to feather their own pork barrel (so to speak) and the rest of the world is just gangs up and is plain nasty to them when every American knows their products and (foreign) policies are always the best and that FAA, DOD & NASA don't subsidise their industry, mearly place research contracts and US industry never puts work out to foreign suppliers simply to curry favour.
Good to see you sticking to your ethics that the (foreign) customer is always wrong and probably corrupt. BTW You don't have Francois' presentation there do you Nick?
I guess the old Francophonic or Commenwealth influences are neats way to explain any sales Gulfstream loses to Bombardier eh?
Good to see you sticking to your ethics that the (foreign) customer is always wrong and probably corrupt. BTW You don't have Francois' presentation there do you Nick?
I guess the old Francophonic or Commenwealth influences are neats way to explain any sales Gulfstream loses to Bombardier eh?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Svenestron
Nick. The prediction must be a lie. In reality, I understand that recent Sikorsky profits have been the highest ever.
In addition, I understand that many of the components in the X2 were loaned/gifted to the project by potential Subs. It is fair to speculate that Sikorsky's development costs of the X2 are less than the renumeration package to the CEO, over the same time frame.
Last punch.
It is unfair to consider Tesla and Edison in the same breath. Tesla was a humble unassuming inventor where as Edison was ........
.........
Dave
Cant’s say I see any point in what you’re writing.. sorry..
Hell, neither can I. It was simply a plagiarization of the great futurist, Mr. Chicken Licken.
Mart (affectionately known to his friends as Graviman) brought Mr. Licken to my attention many years ago. Mart believes very strongly in the predictions of Mr. Licken. In fact, his previous post;
OK guys enough Sky bashing for now, please!
In addition, I understand that many of the components in the X2 were loaned/gifted to the project by potential Subs. It is fair to speculate that Sikorsky's development costs of the X2 are less than the renumeration package to the CEO, over the same time frame.
Last punch.
It is unfair to consider Tesla and Edison in the same breath. Tesla was a humble unassuming inventor where as Edison was ................. Dave
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: great north wet
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man, I have to watch a steady stream of "I hate America" crap on the news every night and now we have to paste it all over a discussion of my favorite topic of future helicopters, too.
All future helicopter designs will be paid for with money. To decry profit and earnings makes no sense. CEO wages are set by the board, balanced by performance. As a guy at the bottom of the ladder, my goal is to climb closer to that level. My best, fairest chance, to ever do that is in America. When Canada starts great advances in helicopter design maybe I will move there, but I doubt that will happen soon.
If Canada has some great disaster, who is going to be giving millions of charity dollars to help? Those dollars come from "earnings" "profit" etc. every time. Sure there are scumbag Americans but there are many,many more that work hard and give to charity needs.
Can we go back to the topic?
All future helicopter designs will be paid for with money. To decry profit and earnings makes no sense. CEO wages are set by the board, balanced by performance. As a guy at the bottom of the ladder, my goal is to climb closer to that level. My best, fairest chance, to ever do that is in America. When Canada starts great advances in helicopter design maybe I will move there, but I doubt that will happen soon.
If Canada has some great disaster, who is going to be giving millions of charity dollars to help? Those dollars come from "earnings" "profit" etc. every time. Sure there are scumbag Americans but there are many,many more that work hard and give to charity needs.
Can we go back to the topic?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cross-land, that video has really got my spirits up!
That is one serious looking machine - if it looks that good in a powertrain run-up, i can't wait to see those rotors whirling. This is regardless of any political b*llsh*t.
A good design is a good design, no matter who makes it...
That is one serious looking machine - if it looks that good in a powertrain run-up, i can't wait to see those rotors whirling. This is regardless of any political b*llsh*t.
A good design is a good design, no matter who makes it...
Last edited by Graviman; 19th Dec 2007 at 11:37. Reason: Wording altered to capture the disdain i have for political showboating on this thread...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
160thfan,
I think that was a sneak preview for us fans who have the vision to see beyond the immediate political horizon.
Good luck on the test flight program X2 team.
I think that was a sneak preview for us fans who have the vision to see beyond the immediate political horizon.
Good luck on the test flight program X2 team.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mart,
Here is some information on the X2 rotors.
The 2 interrelated patent applications are;
In addition, the upper blades have a different twist from that of the lower blades. Because a coaxial is not bilaterally symmetrical they are attempting to compensate by making the two rotors vertically unsymmetrical. Time will tell if two wrongs make a right.
__________________
We were talking about disk loading and specifically the unevenness of the loading over the area of the disk, on another thread.
The coaxial disk(s) on the drawing below is based on information in the above patents. Identical intermeshing and interleaving disks have been add for comparative purposes.
Dave
Here is some information on the X2 rotors.
The 2 interrelated patent applications are;
- 20060269418 ~ Rotor blade for a high speed rotary-wing aircraft
- 20070110582 ~ Rotor blade twist distribution for a high speed rotary-wing aircraft
In addition, the upper blades have a different twist from that of the lower blades. Because a coaxial is not bilaterally symmetrical they are attempting to compensate by making the two rotors vertically unsymmetrical. Time will tell if two wrongs make a right.
__________________
We were talking about disk loading and specifically the unevenness of the loading over the area of the disk, on another thread.
The coaxial disk(s) on the drawing below is based on information in the above patents. Identical intermeshing and interleaving disks have been add for comparative purposes.
Dave
Last edited by Dave_Jackson; 21st Dec 2007 at 07:12. Reason: Added intermeshing disk