A
rare occasion when Wikipedia is less than reliable (
). According to test pilot
Hervé Jammayrac and
Av Week's flight test of the aircraft, low speed torque is actually provided by differential pitch:
At low speed, rotor anti-torque compensation is provided by differential pitch angle between the left and right propellers, directly controlled by the pilot putting in the appropriate foot pedal movement. At high speed, anti-torque is provided by computer-controlled fin flaps.
Vertical's flight test provided additional insight into how the system works in the hover:
The hover attitude was dead level. As [Jammayrac] pulled on the collective, he also set the [thrust control levers] to the hover setting, which provided roughly equal anti-torque thrust from each propeller: forward thrust on the left and reverse thrust on the right. Although, while the propeller’s thrusts were equal, the torques required were not, owing to the different efficiencies inherent in producing forward thrust on the left and reverse thrust on the right. The propeller torque gauges averaged at about 12 percent and 35 percent, respectively.
The 'successor to the X³' is one of two research projects being part-funded under the EU's Clean Sky 2
Fast Rotorcraft Innovative Aircraft Demonstrator Platform (IADP) effort, the other being AgustaWestland's NextGenCTR (civil tilt rotor):
Shame to hear that the X4’s innovative 'heads up' avionics architecture has been dropped. It'd be interesting to see one of the helicopter OEMs integrate something akin to the F-35’s ‘magic helmet’
HMDS/
DAS combination in order to allow pilots to see 'through' their aircraft, e.g. during utility/long-line operations.
I/C