CarterCopter in flight break up

[John Eacott]

Fairly graphic in flight pictures and summary available at http://www.cartercopters.com/pressrel30.html#index . Amazing that they got it back on the ground in one (relative) piece :eek:

[Vfrpilotpb]

Very lucky people, Awsome piccie's pilot must have been a little on the calm side though.
Might seem a silly question to some but would this have Auto'ed or have glided down to Terra Firma?

[Thomas coupling]

Why isn't anyone using these light a/c drogue parachutes that bring the aircraft down safely in the event of a catastrophic incident? :rolleyes:

[Flight Safety]

I don't know, that might be an issue with a gyroplane.

[swashplate]

As I understand it, these Ballistic Recovery System parachutes cannot be steered. :eek:

Also, you impact at about 30 f.p.s. :eek:

Lastly, as FlightSafety points out, para cables and rotors dont mix.... :rolleyes:

...pref freefall and own 'chute methinks....

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: swashplate

Some times, parachutes and helicopters do not mix. Many years ago a Sikorsky test pilot (Obie Blanchard) jumped from what I believe was an out of control CH-53 and when the chute opened the falling helicopter turned into him and the spinning blades caught the chute shrouds.

The first test vehicle for the Cheyenne had a downward firing ejection seat. The pilot was not sitting in that seat and even if he had been sitting in the ejection seat and had the time to fire it he was too close to the water and would have been killed during the ejection.

[widgeon]

didnt the tiger in one of the James Bond films have explosive bolts on the Main Blades so you could shed the blades before ejecting ?. You mean this is not standard equipment LOL . :p

[The Sultan]

Widgedon,

A test was done of a crew escape system with an AH-1G Cobra where they fired the aircraft down a rocket sled with dummies inside (stuffed, not actual pilots, sorry for any confusion). I saw the film. It was fantastic!!

Down the rail it went. First one blade was blown off, then the mast and hub/remaining blade were blown off, and finally the "crew" ejected using the "Yankee" system which was basically a rocket and bungee cord.

On the film, the mast and rotor blade flew down range a substantial distance right toward a camara. You should have seen the guys head for the ditch in slow motion. Classic! The mast/rotor is seen to fly over the now prostate observers and eventually crashed into the trees. When the rocket fired the effects on the dummies pretty well scrapped the idea.

The Sultan :eek:

[Thud_and_Blunder]

I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned that the Russians made it all work, though - Kamov Ka50 Werewolf/Hokum. Twice as many rotor systems for the ejectee to worry about, too.

Going back to the original subject of the thread, why does the Carter Copter need a spinner on a pusher prop anyway? Could it not just do without and save the weight? In posting this I'm probably opening myself to all sorts of criticism for my lack of aeronautical engineering knowledge, but I least I haven't mentioned Delta 3.. oh, beggar.

(edited 'cos I missed out a rather important word..)

[ 16 August 2001: Message edited by: Thud_and_Blunder ]

[Vfrpilotpb]

T&B,

Do you mean that the Rooshians actually wanted to save a life, especially one of their own?
Dont the pic's show the Prop as a tractor type (pulling)

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Vfr,

The Russians make arguably the best in-service ejection seats - see the piccies of the Mig 29/Su 27 crashes at various airshows, plus the Yak 38 whose pilot was picked up by an RN ship's boat, to see how effective they are. About the only piece of Russian kit the US have seriously tried to integrate into (trials) service through the technology exchange prog is the bang-seat used in fixed wing. They do look after their aircrew out east.

And having looked at the Carter Copter on its website I'm sure it's a pusher. Take a gander at the image at the top of the page John Eacott referred to and you'll see.

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: The Sultan

Welcome back.

If the system you described had ever been put into production helicopters and it worked the way you described the test the pilots would never be able to eject because they would most likely be dead.

If one blade came off even a fraction of a second before the other blade came off the imbalance condition would be so strong as to cause the helicopter to self-destruct.

[widgeon]

Talking of out of balance , anyone recall the Stars Calgary BK that lost an engine cowling ? , I believe the trailing edge portion of one of the main rotor blades was missing for a significant span of the blade.

Off topic I know but I had to see if my 100 th post did anything LOL.

[rotorfan]

Refering to the last post on-topic by Thud, you're correct, the CarterCopter is definitely a pusher. I spent close to three hours in their booth at Oshkosh a couple of weeks ago. They had a very nice non-motion simulator running on a new high-speed Mac with a 22-inch flat panel display that made for a gorgeous panel and view out the nose. There was a cyclic, pedals and a collective with a throttle. What is so interesting is that the machine is truly a hybrid: most like a gyroplane, but with fixed wings, too. Also, the rotor can be spun up for takeoff to a wide variey of speeds before takeoff. I only flew it for a large circuit (didn't want to monopolize it, although I easily could of, as it was fun, but also quite a challenge). By prerotating the rotor, you can pull, no yank, a huge armfull of collective, then shove the nose over for airspeed. Using this technique, a US Army pilot got quite good at popping straight up 200 feet before going into gyro mode. It is very sensitive at slower speeds. At higher speeds, the wings take over the lifting duties, unloading the rotor. You can see that at high airspeeds, RBS is no concern if the rotor isn't lifting in the first place. Because the rotor is in auto all the time, it doesn't have helicopter capabilities, save for the vertical takeoff. So, it acts more like a very wide speed-range airplane. Yes, I know I'm going on about flying a mere simulator, but it flies accurately according to the CC test pilot. The sim software is X-Plane, which I was already familiar with, having bought my first copy three years ago. X-Plane worked closely with the test pilot to make the simulator fly accurately. I managed to end my circuit with a landing a little right of the runway. I was chastized for not rolling it in a ball like most others that tried theiir hand. However, they claimed that a 10 or 11 year old boy came by and flew the hell out of it. I am skeptical. Either he was supremely lucky, or I've wasted thousands of dollars on flight training!

[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: rotorfan ]

[Vfrpilotpb]

Hi Rotorheads,
I may have missed it but has anyone answered my earlier question about whether the CC Auto's or glides back down in times of engine/propulsion system problems.