To: Dave Jackson
“It has been said that the tail rotor consumes between 6 and 12 percent of the engines power, and none of this power is producing lift or forward thrust. This loss of power still exists in fast forward flight because the vertical tail wants to swing out to the side and thereby it represents additional drag’.
I believe that the Blackhawk and the C H-53 tail rotors produce lift because they are canted. This provides a slight lift vector and it could be more that slight. Most helicopters have aerodynamic surfaces that will maintain the fuselage in a given direction with the loss of the tail rotor. Not being a “PILOT”
It is my understanding that in the stated conditions there is minimal if no pitch in the tail rotor. Now, if you slow down under the stated conditions you will have a problem and most likely have to auto rotate or make a very fast run-on landing.
Regarding your comment about tandem rotor helicopters I don’t know if I can agree with that. To design a second rotor with its’ own drive line and a second transmission doesn’t quit equate. On a single rotor helicopter you can survive a loss of a tail rotor especially under the stated conditions above. If you lose a rear rotor and that has happened when you open your eyes you are looking into the face of Saint Peter.
Tandem rotor helicopters despite their complexity offer superior lifting power and a wide CG range.
As a matter of interest my first helicopter ride was in an HRP-1 the first military tandem rotor helicopter.