clarification, thanks
CRAB, thankyou for clarifying with your analogy what you were trying to say in your earlier post. Obviously in the scenario you postulate the supplier has broken the contract agreed on (ie not supplied what was agreed) and you should quite rightly be agrieved (no argument there).
I find it difficult to believe that with MoD contracts this happens without the supplier incurring penalties as legally they will be in breach of the contract (hardly good business sense). It may appear from your position that doesn't happen but I remain to be convinced.
Back to engine control....
Engine governing systems have different 'priorities' when it comes to control. The prime (but not the only) one should be to maintain rotor speed at all times within an agreed tolerance, and if the propulsion system uses more than 1 engine a secondary consideration (for obvious reasons) should be to share the power evenly whilst maintaining adequate rotor control, I believe that is what current mechanical or digital control systems do as well as other clever things like temp and speed limiting.
I have never stated that when 'power off' rotor speed control on the Lynx is anything but challenging and I agree that an increase in AUM can only make things worse in that case, however until that point is reached (ie autorotation is entered) a more modern engine governing system WILL control Nr more tightly and reduce the tendency for the rotor speed to increase as power demand is reduced and may well prevent a split off being achieved.
Thanks for the input from Penny Pincher regarding FADEC control and piloting techniques, his points are well made.
PP: to clarify if the engines are required to supply power at any level they also have the capabilty to throttle that power and control the Nr, newer (Digital) system have a higher reaction time and higher fidelity than legacy systems and that is why the governing laws are tighter. A rotor will slow down any pitch angle otherwise it would require no power at all to get the thing to rotate in the first place (profile and induced drag plus inherent friction within the drive train have to be overcome if nothing else)
I am not saying that rotor control at high AUM will be perfect but it will be better than now and I can only assume that the MAUM number arrived at for the Lynx rotor system with T800s driving it has been modelled and assessed as suitable for service otherwise that AUM would never have been agreed, surely.
GND: The bathroom analogy is a bit harsh in this case, AW (to the best of my knowledge) havent changed the contracted design and then demanded more cash, they are contractually obliged to deliver what was agreed, yes you are right you might not get what YOU want but you will get what was ordered and that won't be AWs fault.
I dont have access to the design deatils but from the CGI pictures it looks like the undercarriage is common between RN and AAc aircraft and I am sure the RN will mandate a castoring nosewheel so you will get one as well.
It is likely we won't see eye to eye on all points in this discussion but where I know things are wrong I will continue to correct them. I wish you well and keep your head down and yourself safe wherever you are.
DM