Landroger:
I take it then, that unlike a 'straight through turbojet' or even a fan jet, where a lot of energy is taken out of core engine ehaust to drive the fan, that helo turbine waste gas is too 'soft' to provide torque counter reaction?
Landroger, the problem is that most of the helo turbine "waste" gas already goes to driving a fan- a big fan- the one on top of the helicopter (or, in the case of an airplane, the propellor). That's how turbo
shaft engines work.
I was aware that there were other elements to NOTAR - even the 'laminar flow' effect around the tube - but not to the extent you suggest. Does this mean that for all its external simplicity, NOTAR is complicated internally and thus provides less of the benefit I imagined?
The NOTAR is *no* less complicated than a conventional tail rotor, and maybe even more so since, if I'm not mistaken, the pedals have to not only control the bucket at the end of the tailboom but at least one of the vertical fins as well in some models. I believe at least one NOTAR ship has already been lost to a failure of this cable system.
The NOTAR is quieter than a conventional tail rotor, and "safer" in that there is no fragile, vertical prop out back that can run into things (and have people run into it).