Design Nit Picking
HC,
Hiding behind the " Waffle " term to express displeasure with a non Eurocopter design just leads to endless debate regarding design choices that individual OEM's make based upon their own trade-offs.
Thus we have such differences as a wider landing gear tread on the S-92 for easier taxi and resistance to rollover. Fairly significant larger flapping hinge offset which results in higher hinge moment, thus a better slope landing capability and higher main rotor control power ( slightly higher gust sensitivity but that is easily handled by the AFCS) for better manuevering. And the differences go on. I notice the newest AW machine looks like it has a canted tail rotor-I bet that decision came after some interesting internal meetings at AW. Some are hardly esoteric, as in what the president of the company likes!
At the 1991 Paris Airshow Guy Dabadie gave Nick Lappos and I demo rides in the prototype Super Puma MkII and I gave him and extended ride in a new UH-60 ( had to make up for the two rides he gave us ). Nick and I were very impressed with what Eurocopter had come up with and I know that Guy was similarly impressed with the Blackhawk. Different machines with different basic missions, but one could still evaluate the underlying technology, and the different design choices. ( Suffice to say we didn't see anywhere near 193 KIAS or +3.5 G in the Puma but Guy certainly did in the Hawk. I had an old fashioned G-meter installed in the blank space below the blade de-ice panel. ).
After the flight I asked Guy what he thought of the Hawk and he said " C'est formidable". That about sums up our report on his new Super Puma as well.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Last edited by JohnDixson; 20th November 2011 at 16:39.
Reason: Added typo correction