S-97

Intriguing design to me. I had to look 2-3 times to make sure I wasn't seeing a traditional tail rotor. I'm not right?

David
 
flhrci said:
Intriguing design to me. I had to look 2-3 times to make sure I wasn't seeing a traditional tail rotor. I'm not right?

David
Click to expand...

Yeah coaxial uses increased torque in one rotor and decreased on another for yaw control. It would appear that the vertical stabs are used for turn coordination in forward flight as well.
 
Last edited:
I would go back for a transition...to fat and to old is my guess...Much needed replacement for the OH-58D. The KW just never had the station time but sure worked well on target. Wonder if they call it a thrust lever vs collective?
 
Warlock said:
I would go back for a transition...to fat and to old is my guess...Much needed replacement for the OH-58D. The KW just never had the station time but sure worked well on target. Wonder if they call it a thrust lever vs collective?
Click to expand...

Yeah I would too! Only problem that I can see with the design is the prop being so close to the ground. Unless they can shut that thing down on landing, it's gonna be a FOD magnet. I'd prefer the benefits of the pusher of a tilt rotor such as the V-280 though. Still, with all the red tape in the testing / acquisition process, it's gonna be a long time before this enters service.
 
Saw the X-2 at Quad-A a few years ago. I've been watching this thing since they announced it. I think it's a cool concept, but I hope they take their time developing it and do it right. Time will tell...
 
warthog1984 said:
Army's taking another crack at the AH-56.

Won't this violate the Johnson-McConnell agreement?
Click to expand...

Nah, the Johnson-McConnell agreement pertained to tactical fixed wing including airlift. Not that the Army ever followed it anyway because you have aircraft such as the OV-1. It being in line with the Key West accords but definitely not allowed under the Johnson-McConnell agreement. Even the fiasco of the C-27 was in violation but the Army was going to purchase that anyway.

As far as the AH-56, it was well ahead of its time and should have been put into service over the Cobra and the Apache. Both aircraft have had illustrious careers but when you read the test pilot reports on the Cheyenne, after the faults were corrected, you can understand the mistake that DOD made in canceling the program. Same goes for the Comanche for that matter. Now we're faced with tired aircraft with mostly 1970s technology that are in need of a replacement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top