Moderators, perhaps merge this thread with the 'other' thread?

Silent Hawk anyone?

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...hmentid=155097

No idea of provenance mind...

Looks like the beast in question - good pickup. :ok:

A photoshop mockup based on the pictoral evidence (from Militaryphotos.net). Very well done though! - Some astonishing tripe being written about it (the mystery helecopter) too... Makes my 'night before' speedhawk conjecture almost plausible...

Yup.. that's the machine.. well spotted.

No it's NOT the machine...:ugh:

'Silent Hawk'. The clue is in the name. :hmm:

Would that size of TR be enough to control the Blackhawk?speedhawk or something of similar size...?

PeterR-B

BBC report that White House is now saying there was a deliberate 25 minute video feed blackout during the operation. No one, unless they were there, saw what went on inside the compound.

Whatever next? :hmm:

"The crashed helicopter's tail rotor bears more than a passing resemblance to that of the cancelled Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche "

Except for the fact that that it is in no way a fenestron?

Hmmm, not a fenestron but in terms of the configuration of the individual tail rotor blades, their chord and length there is certainly a similarity with those of the Comanche.

This would tie in with the reoprted aspects of acoustic LO propoerties with the helicopter also....

"The crashed helicopter's tail rotor bears more than a passing resemblance to that of the cancelled Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche "

Actually, what you are referring to looks a bit like the Main Rotor Hub (five bladed) of the Comanche.

I am trying to understand who is seeing a forward sweep of the horizontal stab. In a hover, stab is typically 40 degrees down from the horizontal, in the S-70 class. I think perhaps the horizontal stab being in hover configuration is being seen in these photos as "sweep" of the horizontal stab.

Or am I missing a few photos that show a real sweep? :confused:

Nope, it definately has a forward sweep.

And fenestrons are totally different, and certainly in the case of the gazelle, not quiet!


Is it just me that would love this to be an elaborate hoax from the yanks to throw everybody into a tiz and have the chinese/russions frantically trying to work out why you would have a forward swept stabiliser?

- hrm - based on what we know, I would think that is close to the truth.:)

I think he was probably referring to the Sikorsky system in particular BOAC as opposed to other such systems in general.
As for fenestrons being universally noisy - not true ( Comanche being a case in point).
Perhaps more interestingly, did anyone else note that the fuselage seems to extend into an aerodynamic fairing that protrudes beyond the vertical stabiliser?

I thought the whole point of the fenestron was to reduce the noise (and make it safer for those on the ground)

That's what I thought zondaracer. Did this aircraft have a fenestron? I haven't seen all the pics.

Hmm, certainly I was under the impression that the purpose of the fenestron was efficiency. ie good thrust from a ducted fan when required in the hover coupled with very effectively offloading in forward flight due to the shroud and tail

Here are 2 views of the 2nd Comanche prototype I took at on the first day of Farnborough 98

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...er/0001478.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...er/0001479.jpg

Admittedly whats the MRH may resemble the crashed helo's tail rotor design, how about this X2 tech up front (as below from my visit to Heli Expo a few months ago)

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...r/P3080898.jpg

Unless X2 tech has already gone to war :) :cool::mad:

????

http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/mh-x3.jpg