Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Kamov 60 / S76?

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Kamov 60 / S76?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 4th Nov 2003, 00:11
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 1,051
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kamov 60 / S76?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/ka60.htm

Check out what the Kamov team have been to while no one was looking. I saw a version of this in the late 90's where Sikorsky were looking at putting the fenestron on the 76.
The K60 definately looks like a coalition between Kamov and Sikorsky.
Steve76 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2003, 09:04
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Steve76,

The fantail that we flew in the early 1990's (first flew in June of 1990) was an experimental S-76B with a fan grafted on as a test bed for the fan that was finally flown on the Comanche. The 76 was a convenient platform for the test flights, and production of a 76 fan was never considered.

That was the aircraft where we invented the "snap turn" where we can pivot at speeds up to 120 knots and point independent of the direction of flight.

Here is a picture of it taken at Paris the next year:

http://www.zap16.com/images/N3124G.jpg
NickLappos is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2003, 12:34
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here,there &everywhere
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nick,
Is there a reason they never looked at puting this a/c on the production line?Does the fan tail/fennestrom not have atvantages over the conventional tail rotor?
Dynamic Component is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2003, 19:01
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dynamic,

Lots of reasons why it was not produced on a 76:

It never went into production because we didn't want it to, it wasn't designed to do so, it was a flying wind tunnel for Comanche.

It was much heavier, at least 50 lbs, than a tail rotor

It has more drag, about 2 square feet total, which reduced speed and range

The Fan had to be on the tail shaft centerline, or the weight would be even higher with an intermediate gear box. That meant that the nose up angle for touching the tail went from 15 degrees to 6 degrees. That would have required the tail bumper be qualified as a normal landing point, making the weight even more once the tail cone was stiffened.

It wasn't needed, unless S-76 people needed to go sideways ay 100 mph!
NickLappos is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2003, 04:00
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
QUOTE]It wasn't needed, unless S-76 people needed to go sideways ay 100 mph![/QUOTE]

I wouldn't need to worry about the cross wind then
magbreak is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.