NOTAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Singapore
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAR
Could I ask what's is the state of development of the NOTAR? I understand it was first instroduced by MD more than 10 years ago.
How does it compare with the conventional tail rotor helicopters in terms of the power taken away from lift by the internal fan to generate the compressed air in order to generate the Coanda effect?
In forward flight where counter torque is achieved by the vertical stabilizers, can the compressed air be directed totally rearwards to generate forward thrust? I note in the present MD models, this cannot be done.
Is this techology be scalable upward? Why so far there have not be larger helicopters designed with this technology? Is it due to limitations in the technology or patent protection?
Thanks in advance for any insights you may share.
How does it compare with the conventional tail rotor helicopters in terms of the power taken away from lift by the internal fan to generate the compressed air in order to generate the Coanda effect?
In forward flight where counter torque is achieved by the vertical stabilizers, can the compressed air be directed totally rearwards to generate forward thrust? I note in the present MD models, this cannot be done.
Is this techology be scalable upward? Why so far there have not be larger helicopters designed with this technology? Is it due to limitations in the technology or patent protection?
Thanks in advance for any insights you may share.
HuH is there really such a thing as a NOTAR
Mr Hiller had a similar concept loooong before Howie Hughes did
The tail rotor/ anti torque device is hidden inside 520 boom doing the same jobie as the TR
Incoming
Mr Hiller had a similar concept loooong before Howie Hughes did
The tail rotor/ anti torque device is hidden inside 520 boom doing the same jobie as the TR
Incoming
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by horlick97
I understand it was first introduced by MD more than 10 years ago.
For its part MDHI still seems optimistic on the tech: there was a roadshow planned to "educate the masses" in 2012, while 2013 was apparently "the year of the NOTAR."
I/C
NOTAR
Hiller J-5 helicopter - development history, photos, technical data
sorry to disappoint You guys but Guruji Hiller had the NOTAR in the bag long before Guru Hughes did
sorry to disappoint You guys but Guruji Hiller had the NOTAR in the bag long before Guru Hughes did
Shhhnotar
Hey Helihub
Yep Your right the W9 (notar) first flew in 1945 but the Hiller J5 flew in 46 just one year later Well that's what this site claims Hiller helicopters
Anways all this was before Hughie did his NOTAR
Yep Your right the W9 (notar) first flew in 1945 but the Hiller J5 flew in 46 just one year later Well that's what this site claims Hiller helicopters
Anways all this was before Hughie did his NOTAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Singapore
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand in NOTAR, it employs the principle of Coanda effect to generate the lateral force in the tail boom. So far in the MD models, the tail boom are all circular in its cross section.
My question is, why not make the tail boom a vertical wing, and employ the bernoulli principle to generate the lateral force from the downwash from the main rotor?
My question is, why not make the tail boom a vertical wing, and employ the bernoulli principle to generate the lateral force from the downwash from the main rotor?
I remember having seen this in a picture. Can't find it tough. It was a huge wing mounted vertically. About one meter high.
First: Boy that was ugly.
Second: I can only imagine that this thing would be hell to controll in an autorotation, since that wing would fly backwards with a lot of undesirable aerodynamic effects. The forces on that wing could be higher than what the pilot is capable of holding, because the center of lift would be way out of the normal range. Even if the pilot would be able to control zero lift, the "wing" would be dynamically instable and one would have to fight every single moment to keep the helicopter from spinning.
Third: In forward flight, there would be very little to no effect at all and therefore almost no yaw control, hence the ship would need another thing out there to keep it fly straight. How about a tiny tail rotor?
Forth: If one tried some fancy maneuvers like flying sideways a bit too fast, interesting things could happen.
First: Boy that was ugly.
Second: I can only imagine that this thing would be hell to controll in an autorotation, since that wing would fly backwards with a lot of undesirable aerodynamic effects. The forces on that wing could be higher than what the pilot is capable of holding, because the center of lift would be way out of the normal range. Even if the pilot would be able to control zero lift, the "wing" would be dynamically instable and one would have to fight every single moment to keep the helicopter from spinning.
Third: In forward flight, there would be very little to no effect at all and therefore almost no yaw control, hence the ship would need another thing out there to keep it fly straight. How about a tiny tail rotor?
Forth: If one tried some fancy maneuvers like flying sideways a bit too fast, interesting things could happen.