fun fact, if you have a 50-tooth gear with a 3-blade rotor meshing with a 75-tooth gear with a 2-blade rotor, it's also a completely safe setup but will look 10 times more scary.
Thanks! I'm doing this for fun, so that's a nice compliment to get from a professional. Kaman is awesome... one-stop shopping for helicopters, guitars and guide dogs. After I made this video, I learned that Anton Flettner, who first invented intermeshing rotors, actually worked for Kaman after he came to the US post WW II. Interesting history.
"Twinblade" - a fictional aircraft front the video game Command & Conquer, also has a tail rotor that a real helicopter with intermeshed or coaxial main rotors would not have. The Hammerhead wouldn't work very well in the real world because the two rotors are too far apart to use differential collective control for yaw (it would cause unwanted roll as a side effect), and yet not far enough apart for differential pitch action to provide effective yaw control.
@@brianb-p6586 I don't really care much about how much it would be feasible in real life. I was making a call back to an amazing game series. And all you have to do is look at pretty much anything from the C&C series to know that the majority of the equipment don't really work in the real world. Take for example the Orcas, Sonic emitters, hover MLRS, StrikerVX
@@Ulfur8574 I understand that fictional craft don't need to be viable in reality, but you commented that this illustration shows how those fictional aircraft could work. Fictional machines can be good examples to discuss how real machines work.
@@pyrotechnicalbirdman5356 But that's the beauty of gears, they turn continuous circumferences to discrete teeth numbers. Even if circumferences are off by millimeters, teeth will prevent timing to wander off too far.
can you give an example of a real helicopter using this setup? I would love to see it in action (especially the starting sequence; when the rotors are still bent downwards so their interference planes are a bit different)
The HH-43 Huskie (and its variants) probably account for most of the intermeshing rotor helicopters ever built. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermeshing_rotors
I understood that, but I don't understand how that type of helicopter turns left or right, since there is no tail rotor. Can the lift on each rotor be independently controlled? Does changing the lift on the blades on one set cause the helicopter to rotate one way and doing the opposite on the other rotor cause it to rotate the other way?
Yaw can be controlled by a combination of differential collective pitch, this applies higher torque to one of the rotor masts, and differential longitudinal cyclic tilt of the rotor disks... Fwd tilt on one disk and aft tilt on the other. These two control actions allow yaw control.
Or another way of looking at it is if you have two offset axis you can created torque it two directions. A sort of coordinate system translation effect
It seems like there's always a loss of efficiency when adding more mechanical parts to an otherwise-simple design. I'm no fluid dynamics professor, but splitting the airflow and rotor forces into multiple non-parallel/perpendicular components which then interact with the other's oblique airflow and rotor forces tends to introduce inefficiency in the form of interference and instability.
It's not a big problem. Stacked or overlapping counter-rotating rotors or propellers are not the most common configuration, but they've been successfully used many times.
I'm not sure if it will apply here but having two blades work in opposite directions can help increase their efficiency. However, the main advantage to this system as far as efficiency is concerned is with regards to how basically all of the power is used for lift rather than having a tail rotor which does not contribute to lift.
In WWI or 2 they did this sort of thing with the guns and propellers. The gun was tied to the propeller transmission and timed to fire through it. Having the gun in line with the pilot made aiming easier.
In a more direct example, tandem-rotor helicopters (such as the CH-47 Chinook) also synchronize the front and rear rotors so they can overlap without interference.
I watched a k-max do logging..it was strange not swing tail rotor..also noticed lower rotor speed which I think would mean longer life.sounded like bigger engine lower rpm which I feel would mean longer blade life and Ujoint life as well as longer engine life..the two single blade supply a lot of lift..anothe odd feature I thought was it only comes in one seat models.this means instruction is done on ground.also has main gauges so when you lean out and look down to see what you are working over you can see main gauges like rotor speed this way you don't have to turn head and focus on dash to see that info you can view while looking down out either side..body is narrow and side windows. Bubble out to give room to lean out and look down..the hook up point moves on rollers so weight is always at bottom of aircraft even if you are banking for turn..really neat design but isn't made with more then one seat..as much as it lifts it should gave two seats to carry someone at some point..
nice. will a double tri-blade work? or is there enough room to avoid collision between lead and lag during intermeshing of the rotors? It would be a fun experiment nonetheless..........if for anything, the lift capacity.
The first intermesher helicopter was a three-blade design. The Kellet XR-10. The XR-10 flew, and there are videos of it flying on youtube, but it was never placed into operational service. I also did an animation of 3-blade intermeshers and that's on my channel.
Most helicopters that use this configuration have been made by the US Kaman Corporation. It offer s great lift and great dependability, maintenance wise. However, they are slow in forward flight.
k-max rotor. nice! On the real helicopter control is achieved through small flaps about in the middle of the rotor blades. How are that flaps controlled? pushrods through the blades? Novthey would fail ti fatigue very soon
Yes, the servo tabs (flaps) are controlled by pushrods inside the hollow blades, and the those rods are controlled by a relatively conventional swashplate mechanism mounted below each mast and connected through the hollow mast.
@@dordagiovex9989 the pitch of the servo flaps does need to change cyclically - those flaps are controlled by swashplate systems, just like the blade pitch in any helicopter.
I modeled this in Fusion 360... Fusion has some analysis tools, but I didn't use them. The purpose of the video was just to show them basic working of intermesher rotor system. I rendered the animation with Blender using an Eevee render
@@DougieBarclay really not that big of an issue, it's really easy to just overbuild the gears. The blades will prolly snap far before there's enough force going through the rotors to break any gear teeth.
An advantage of an intermesher over a tandem rotor design is that overall size of the aircraft is smaller. Consider the size of a k-max (intermesher) with that of a ch-46 (tandem) and the k-max is smaller with about the same lift capacity. Tandems also have some issues with the tips of the blades drooping into the fuselage during low-rpm (so only an issue during start up and shut down) particularly in high winds. There's probably no single answer as to why customers pick one design over another. Cost and how much weight it lifts are big considerations.
@@brianb-p6586 yes thats what i meant, sorry, not an engineer, just curious. It seems to me that something like Kamov 52 would outperform this in every way, thats why i asked.
@@djocharablaikan8601 the swashplate arrangement for an intermeshing rotor system is just two normal swashplates, but a coaxial needs to stack the swashplates for each rotor and add a system of rotating linkages between them - that's the advantage in lower complexity for this intermeshing design.
I am a layman. I just saw the kmax video. So the left and right movement is done just like air planes? These rotors are only for lift and descent? Just trying to understand. 😅
Left and right is done by adding more collective blade pitch to one rotor and less to the other. This creates more lift on the side of more collective pitch and causes the aircraft to roll and turn.
absolutely... some intermesher helicopters you can see in youtube are the H-43 Huskie and the K-1200 Kmax, both made by Kaman. Also the Flettner 282 or the Kellet XR-10. These aircraft don't have tail rotors. They control yaw in a hover by applying more, or less, torque to the individual masts. This torque imbalance causes a yawing moment.
@Dave Bieleveld not to belabor the point, but, The original machine had a base plate of pre-famulated amulite surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panametric fan. The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzlevanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented
No. I was just trying to show how it's possible for the blades to intermesh. Those gears would not be practical; a 1:1 ratio would lead to premature wear.
On the CH-47 the forward and aft rotors turn in opposite directions so the torque effect is cancelled. There are at least three types of helicopters that do not use an anti-torque tail-rotor. These are tandems (CH-46, CH-47), Intermeshers (K-1200, H-43) and coaxials (KA-32, KA-52 and early Hiller designs)
I'm not a gear-ologist, but gears have backlash (play, slop, whatever you want to call it) I imagine they account for thermal expansion when designing in the backlash. As a side note, the CAD software I used to make this has a gear generator that lets me enter a custom backlash value. Stay curious!
Each rotor has a typical swashplate assembly under the rotor hub; they're just not shown. They might be hard to spot on the actual helicopter, because the only common intermeshing rotor designs are from Kaman, and they tend to use a swashplate mounted below the mast with control rods coming up inside the hollow mast; they also tend to use servo tabs on the blades run by control links hidden inside the blades instead of the usual visible links operating levers to change the blade pitch.
I suggest you contact the Kaman Corporation, the Pedro Husky association and the end of the wiki page of the HH 43 Husky , it lists some references. My experience was personal. The max forward speed was a tad under 120 mph, cruising speed just a little over 100 mph. Aviator USN retired a long time ago. Also, search the K Max, and I think the US Navy is operating a Drone based off the K max currently.
With this configuration, you don't have the weight of a tail rotor nor its directional out of wind problems nor the additional gearing off the engine to power the tail rotor nor the maintenance required of a tail rotor.
All helicopter rotor blades can flex (and even "flap" on hinges). The design accounts for that, so in real helicopters using this design the blades do not touch.
क्या बात है यार ये दिमाग किसने लगाया जाता एक बार? In Google translate this translates as "What's the matter friend, who would have used this mind once?" भाई मुझे आपका comment समझ नहीं आ रही है।
Because it gets two rotor systems in a much smaller footprint. The 15 deg mast angle means 96% of the lift is directed upwards. 2 rotors discs dont give twice the lift, but it's still much more than the lift produced by one rotor. This configuration is used for heavy lift helicopters.
similar to tandem helicopters, intermeshers send more of the available power to vertical thrust when compared to tailrotor helos. Here is the wiki article... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermeshing_rotors
If it skips a tooth thats bad news. Two intermediate gears would allow the main gears to rotate in the same direction. From there a redundant mechanism such as a belt could be attached in the event of tooth damage
you don't want that its already stable counter rotating. won't yaw unctonrtrollably. and a belt is a horrible idea to put in addition to gears. cars with timing belts they break all the time while trucks with TIMING GEARS never skip a tooth. for millions of miles thousands of hours. Belts can slip and belts can jump teeth if its a toothed pully. lets put it this way the only time gears will skip a tooth is if the rest of the vehicle is a big hole in the ground.
@@Awesomelord101 valid points. I was thinking more in terms of a brittle tooth dislocation or severe plastic deformation but that doesnt sound like it would be a concern here.
Any failure of the coordinating drive gears would be critical. Fortunately, although every helicopter has at least one similarly critical gear, failures are rare.
how confident you really are? imma build a god damn twin blade rotor,with just 50cm apart,some slightly angle,high revolution from turboprop engine,and yess we place it on top of our head...
Does anyone have the link to this day I couldn't find a photo or video what the rotor blade looks like inside if you're crazy what sheet metal is it made if it has a spar inside what is it like material specifications numberings like
This is what anxiety must look like
yes, it is.
I love how we learn
100%
Pure Anxiety
You should look at propeller/gun synchronization system
Before they invented that pilots literally shot their own propellers
"You got the 56 toothed gear installed, right?"
"Wait, I thought you said 58!"
"uhoh"
*hears crash in the distance
Ha ha... but of course a gear with the wrong number of teeth wouldn't even fit in the transmission; it's not an error that could happen in reality.
@@brianb-p6586 take care when u say "of course", Brian.
@@professorlegasov692 you think a gear with a different number of teeth would fit? Maybe you haven't seen gears before...
The mechanism in free space would work with any 2 gears with same number of teeth however i doubt it would fly cuz the equations would be off ofc
fun fact, if you have a 50-tooth gear with a 3-blade rotor meshing with a 75-tooth gear with a 2-blade rotor, it's also a completely safe setup but will look 10 times more scary.
Fantastic animation. I animated some pilots training for Kaman earlier this year.
Thanks! I'm doing this for fun, so that's a nice compliment to get from a professional. Kaman is awesome... one-stop shopping for helicopters, guitars and guide dogs. After I made this video, I learned that Anton Flettner, who first invented intermeshing rotors, actually worked for Kaman after he came to the US post WW II. Interesting history.
Not sure why this was recommended, but cool video!
Now I know how the twinblade and hammerhead works.
"Twinblade" - a fictional aircraft front the video game Command & Conquer, also has a tail rotor that a real helicopter with intermeshed or coaxial main rotors would not have.
The Hammerhead wouldn't work very well in the real world because the two rotors are too far apart to use differential collective control for yaw (it would cause unwanted roll as a side effect), and yet not far enough apart for differential pitch action to provide effective yaw control.
@@brianb-p6586 I don't really care much about how much it would be feasible in real life. I was making a call back to an amazing game series. And all you have to do is look at pretty much anything from the C&C series to know that the majority of the equipment don't really work in the real world. Take for example the Orcas, Sonic emitters, hover MLRS, StrikerVX
@@Ulfur8574 I understand that fictional craft don't need to be viable in reality, but you commented that this illustration shows how those fictional aircraft could work. Fictional machines can be good examples to discuss how real machines work.
@@brianb-p6586 agreed! ^
"Twinblade inspection complete"
Imagine if the gear ratios were ever so slightly off 1:1 meaning that after 30 minutes of operation they would start to collide with each other...
They are, the gears are different sizes in circumference by tiny amounts, probably microscopic tho
Gear teeth is prime number to prevent what you saying the worse situation.
Nightmare creating.... as if you've a car and say when you drive 120 the gear goes in the reverse.....
@@pyrotechnicalbirdman5356 But that's the beauty of gears, they turn continuous circumferences to discrete teeth numbers. Even if circumferences are off by millimeters, teeth will prevent timing to wander off too far.
A hilarious thought, but at 500 RPM (at a rough guess), even one tooth different in gear tooth count would lead to rotor clash in seconds.
can you give an example of a real helicopter using this setup? I would love to see it in action (especially the starting sequence; when the rotors are still bent downwards so their interference planes are a bit different)
Kaman K-Max. They're a heavy hauler. There are a few good start up vids about.
@@dave98765 thank you!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flettner_Fl_282
@@dave98765 i never saw a helicpter like that thanks for the name
The HH-43 Huskie (and its variants) probably account for most of the intermeshing rotor helicopters ever built.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermeshing_rotors
I understood that, but I don't understand how that type of helicopter turns left or right, since there is no tail rotor. Can the lift on each rotor be independently controlled? Does changing the lift on the blades on one set cause the helicopter to rotate one way and doing the opposite on the other rotor cause it to rotate the other way?
Yaw can be controlled by a combination of differential collective pitch, this applies higher torque to one of the rotor masts, and differential longitudinal cyclic tilt of the rotor disks... Fwd tilt on one disk and aft tilt on the other. These two control actions allow yaw control.
Does that look like a fully completed helicopter to you?
Or another way of looking at it is if you have two offset axis you can created torque it two directions. A sort of coordinate system translation effect
@@fendtclaas8689 top notch crappy reply.
@@alastairward2774 The joys of a Grumpy Internet 😉
What is the total gering ratio bt the first gear and propeller axles?
Is there a loss of efficiency because half of each rotor's downwash is the air that the other rotor is pushing against?
It seems like there's always a loss of efficiency when adding more mechanical parts to an otherwise-simple design. I'm no fluid dynamics professor, but splitting the airflow and rotor forces into multiple non-parallel/perpendicular components which then interact with the other's oblique airflow and rotor forces tends to introduce inefficiency in the form of interference and instability.
It's not a big problem. Stacked or overlapping counter-rotating rotors or propellers are not the most common configuration, but they've been successfully used many times.
I'm not sure if it will apply here but having two blades work in opposite directions can help increase their efficiency. However, the main advantage to this system as far as efficiency is concerned is with regards to how basically all of the power is used for lift rather than having a tail rotor which does not contribute to lift.
It is a different design but the Ingenuity helicopter uses two rotors spinning in opposite directions, with one directly over the other.
@@sroku7673 isn't that what he just said?
In WWI or 2 they did this sort of thing with the guns and propellers. The gun was tied to the propeller transmission and timed to fire through it. Having the gun in line with the pilot made aiming easier.
Yes, this is called a synchronization gear developed by August Euler in 1913
In a more direct example, tandem-rotor helicopters (such as the CH-47 Chinook) also synchronize the front and rear rotors so they can overlap without interference.
ooohhhhh my god this is amazing
C'est un bon calcule, une tête bien faite en travailler pour aboutir a un bon calcule.
Félicitation mon reuf
အားလုံးကောင်းပါတယ်
I watched a k-max do logging..it was strange not swing tail rotor..also noticed lower rotor speed which I think would mean longer life.sounded like bigger engine lower rpm which I feel would mean longer blade life and Ujoint life as well as longer engine life..the two single blade supply a lot of lift..anothe odd feature I thought was it only comes in one seat models.this means instruction is done on ground.also has main gauges so when you lean out and look down to see what you are working over you can see main gauges like rotor speed this way you don't have to turn head and focus on dash to see that info you can view while looking down out either side..body is narrow and side windows. Bubble out to give room to lean out and look down..the hook up point moves on rollers so weight is always at bottom of aircraft even if you are banking for turn..really neat design but isn't made with more then one seat..as much as it lifts it should gave two seats to carry someone at some point..
nice. will a double tri-blade work? or is there enough room to avoid collision between lead and lag during intermeshing of the rotors? It would be a fun experiment nonetheless..........if for anything, the lift capacity.
The first intermesher helicopter was a three-blade design. The Kellet XR-10. The XR-10 flew, and there are videos of it flying on youtube, but it was never placed into operational service. I also did an animation of 3-blade intermeshers and that's on my channel.
There was an old Cobra (from GI Joe) toy that had these... Looked cool
Nice idea
Most helicopters that use this configuration have been made by the US Kaman Corporation. It offer s great lift and great dependability, maintenance wise. However, they are slow in forward flight.
They are also really, really quiet. They fly over our office all the time and if you are not outside, you do not even know.
@@drwheycooler8423 Sounded pretty loud to me when one was scooping water out of the river and coming right over my house to drop his load.
but what about the rotors flexibility?
they would wobble around no? wouldnt that be a problem?
how did they handle that issue?
they need to be stiff yes...
i always wonder how The Bat in TDKR works. Now I know. Thanks.
This gives me high levels of anxiety
same
Ngl was kinda hoping for world's most intensive swordfight ever
If they rotate in the same direction, will they crash?
k-max rotor. nice! On the real helicopter control is achieved through small flaps about in the middle of the rotor blades. How are that flaps controlled? pushrods through the blades? Novthey would fail ti fatigue very soon
Yes, the servo tabs (flaps) are controlled by pushrods inside the hollow blades, and the those rods are controlled by a relatively conventional swashplate mechanism mounted below each mast and connected through the hollow mast.
ah just relized that the pitch of the flaps does not need to be controlled during each revolution.. so very simple mechanically
@@dordagiovex9989 the pitch of the servo flaps does need to change cyclically - those flaps are controlled by swashplate systems, just like the blade pitch in any helicopter.
lekker bezig, Bzig. somehow i think the downwind generated by the top rotor nullifies the usefulness of the bottom rotor
true, but it's still useful and provides heavy lift capability
А зачем так усложнять ?)))
Which software makes this video ? Is it possible to test through the soft ?
I modeled this in Fusion 360... Fusion has some analysis tools, but I didn't use them. The purpose of the video was just to show them basic working of intermesher rotor system. I rendered the animation with Blender using an Eevee render
I'd like to see a gyrocopter with blades like that
This would be great if it had some sort of mechanical checksum incorporated
Unless the person putting it together is unbelievably stupid there's no way the gears are gonna slip and cause rotor crash
@@xavierrodriguez2463 teeth do break.
@@DougieBarclay really not that big of an issue, it's really easy to just overbuild the gears. The blades will prolly snap far before there's enough force going through the rotors to break any gear teeth.
I love how this seems so impossible
Ya know, there is a hell of alot riding on that. Lives.
does this create super lift?
Сумрачный Тевтонский гений
I would be concerned that fast manoeuvring would cause them to flex into each other.
Hay quá giờ mới biết🎉
Awesome
cool idea to compensate for the negative effect of the convergence of the blades with a coaxial arrangement
High Risk , High Reward~
I expected free bird in the background
Does it fly?
this makes me more anxious than looking at people knifing between fingers...
good~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Flettner - Doppelrotor
Quá tuyệt vời một phát minh vĩ đại quá tuyệt hay
Nice
What are the advantages of this design compared to twin vertical rotors?
An advantage of an intermesher over a tandem rotor design is that overall size of the aircraft is smaller. Consider the size of a k-max (intermesher) with that of a ch-46 (tandem) and the k-max is smaller with about the same lift capacity. Tandems also have some issues with the tips of the blades drooping into the fuselage during low-rpm (so only an issue during start up and shut down) particularly in high winds. There's probably no single answer as to why customers pick one design over another. Cost and how much weight it lifts are big considerations.
@@bzig4929 "twin vertical rotors" was probably intended to mean coaxial, rather than tandem.
simplicity. oh wait do you mean coaxial or something else? if coaxial its simplicity if something else read other answers.
@@brianb-p6586 yes thats what i meant, sorry, not an engineer, just curious. It seems to me that something like Kamov 52 would outperform this in every way, thats why i asked.
@@djocharablaikan8601 the swashplate arrangement for an intermeshing rotor system is just two normal swashplates, but a coaxial needs to stack the swashplates for each rotor and add a system of rotating linkages between them - that's the advantage in lower complexity for this intermeshing design.
I am a layman. I just saw the kmax video. So the left and right movement is done just like air planes? These rotors are only for lift and descent? Just trying to understand. 😅
Left and right is done by adding more collective blade pitch to one rotor and less to the other. This creates more lift on the side of more collective pitch and causes the aircraft to roll and turn.
The blade will have the tendency to wobble. Like in mast bumping
With a setup like this I imagine the helicopter doesn't need a tail rotor.
absolutely... some intermesher helicopters you can see in youtube are the H-43 Huskie and the K-1200 Kmax, both made by Kaman. Also the Flettner 282 or the Kellet XR-10. These aircraft don't have tail rotors. They control yaw in a hover by applying more, or less, torque to the individual masts. This torque imbalance causes a yawing moment.
Гениально
what if for 1sec it gets mis-match...does chopper will go up!
Works with the turbo Encabulator.
@Dave Bieleveld 😂
@Dave Bieleveld not to belabor the point, but, The original machine had a base plate of pre-famulated amulite surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panametric fan. The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzlevanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented
Is that the actual gear train used in a Kaman?
No. I was just trying to show how it's possible for the blades to intermesh. Those gears would not be practical; a 1:1 ratio would lead to premature wear.
I bet that would be reliable
Good equation for death under normal circumstances.
Why not put it on same axis
can you explain how ch47 overcome anti torque to the aircraft body
On the CH-47 the forward and aft rotors turn in opposite directions so the torque effect is cancelled. There are at least three types of helicopters that do not use an anti-torque tail-rotor. These are tandems (CH-46, CH-47), Intermeshers (K-1200, H-43) and coaxials (KA-32, KA-52 and early Hiller designs)
What if the gears expand due to heat, especially the one directly connected to the source?
(I'm no expert, just a curious kid)
I'm not a gear-ologist, but gears have backlash (play, slop, whatever you want to call it) I imagine they account for thermal expansion when designing in the backlash. As a side note, the CAD software I used to make this has a gear generator that lets me enter a custom backlash value. Stay curious!
they will hit each other if got strong wind or flew in high dynamic up and down maneuvers.
Cool! But where’s the swashplate?
Each rotor has a typical swashplate assembly under the rotor hub; they're just not shown.
They might be hard to spot on the actual helicopter, because the only common intermeshing rotor designs are from Kaman, and they tend to use a swashplate mounted below the mast with control rods coming up inside the hollow mast; they also tend to use servo tabs on the blades run by control links hidden inside the blades instead of the usual visible links operating levers to change the blade pitch.
Is there any risk to reward for this mechanism
1) no tail rotor - the biggest weakness for a traditional helo
2) no coaxial shafts
Nope
@@AKAtheA Bro that's false, since when does people began thinking tailrotor is the mayor weakness?? This design is garbo.
@@welcometoreality437 it was litterally on the USAF's flying firetruck, the HH-43. So much for garbage
@ yes that's right, you're talking about Vietnam time use of that aircraft. You're not proving a point, that design is garbage.
what is airflow?
What are the advantages of such a design? The airflow would seem to be turbulent, leading to reduced efficiency and increased loudness
Worrying about helicopters being loud, lmao.
Increase in lift, given power of engine. And, interestingly, very good mechanical dependability.
@@raywhitehead730 Do you have a source? You could be right, but my mind is having a hard time understanding why
I suggest you contact the Kaman Corporation, the Pedro Husky association and the end of the wiki page of the HH 43 Husky , it lists some references. My experience was personal. The max forward speed was a tad under 120 mph, cruising speed just a little over 100 mph. Aviator USN retired a long time ago. Also, search the K Max, and I think the US Navy is operating a Drone based off the K max currently.
With this configuration, you don't have the weight of a tail rotor nor its directional out of wind problems nor the additional gearing off the engine to power the tail rotor nor the maintenance required of a tail rotor.
แบบนี้นี่เอง...
"hey he's getting awa-"
Anxiety: The movie.
Амплитуда колебания ни кто не отменял
How & which software used to make This CAD and animation
Fusion 360 for the CAD. Blender for the animation.
That just seems overly complicated. A minor failure would quickly escalate to catastrophic failure.
"Twinblade inspection complete"
You did not take into account that the blades of the helicopter are slightly bent and can touch each other.
the kaman k-max works fine.
All helicopter rotor blades can flex (and even "flap" on hinges). The design accounts for that, so in real helicopters using this design the blades do not touch.
HELI-COPTER HELI-COPTER
Kya bat hai yar ye dimag kisne lagaya jata ek bar reply de dena please
क्या बात है यार ये दिमाग किसने लगाया जाता एक बार? In Google translate this translates as "What's the matter friend, who would have used this mind once?"
भाई मुझे आपका comment समझ नहीं आ रही है।
Where is the ultralight kit version, come on
Cool, but why would you want those blades under such angle? 😂
Because it gets two rotor systems in a much smaller footprint. The 15 deg mast angle means 96% of the lift is directed upwards. 2 rotors discs dont give twice the lift, but it's still much more than the lift produced by one rotor. This configuration is used for heavy lift helicopters.
Man went to UK to study, now he's addicted to RUclips lol,
where are the disadvantages in this design? I can't see any
similar to tandem helicopters, intermeshers send more of the available power to vertical thrust when compared to tailrotor helos. Here is the wiki article... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermeshing_rotors
@@bzig4929 then, why aren't they more common?
Machanical losses, more failure points, harder control, ect.
@@Jo-rz6bs it would be easier to control at least in the sense there's no tail rotor
Probably cost.
Red Alert 3 Twinblades Chopper be like
Stress level: ♾️
I would choose to install 4 blades
진짜 똑똑하네 ㅋㅋㅋ
Imagine the possibilities, open your mind
looks cool; alas, not quite aerodynamically sound, lol.
Thanks, if I ever see this in any helicopter, I would prefer to walk.
you cant afford it anyway so its really no a problem for you
Как они обгоняют друг друга и тормозят за один круг? И как на этом поворачивать?
That's classified information andrey.
@@markk3652 😄😄😄😄
Andrey check out helicopters that already use intermeshing/coaxials in their rotors.
impractical
Proven practical.
I think it will cost lots of vibrations
now do 3 rotors!
I already did... check it out! It's the latest video on my channel.
oh... I did another animation with two 3-bladed rotors. I think you meant 3 rotor systems.
so you now have jesus bolts and jesus gears , makes sense
If it skips a tooth thats bad news. Two intermediate gears would allow the main gears to rotate in the same direction. From there a redundant mechanism such as a belt could be attached in the event of tooth damage
you don't want that its already stable counter rotating. won't yaw unctonrtrollably. and a belt is a horrible idea to put in addition to gears. cars with timing belts they break all the time while trucks with TIMING GEARS never skip a tooth. for millions of miles thousands of hours. Belts can slip and belts can jump teeth if its a toothed pully.
lets put it this way the only time gears will skip a tooth is if the rest of the vehicle is a big hole in the ground.
@@Awesomelord101 valid points. I was thinking more in terms of a brittle tooth dislocation or severe plastic deformation but that doesnt sound like it would be a concern here.
Any failure of the coordinating drive gears would be critical. Fortunately, although every helicopter has at least one similarly critical gear, failures are rare.
If it skips a tooth then that's a catastrophic failure either way.
if side rotor on normal helicopter breaks its bad news
:O
Confusion in my relationship😂😂😂😂
how confident you really are?
imma build a god damn twin blade rotor,with just 50cm apart,some slightly angle,high revolution from turboprop engine,and yess we place it on top of our head...
Wind turbulance has entered the chat:
You can just put four wings to one rotor instead of creating a intermeshing rotors system.
Imagine the noise and vibration, not to talk about blade kick
You don't have to imagine - just check out a real helicopter using this design.
it just give me anxiety
Does anyone have the link to this day I couldn't find a photo or video what the rotor blade looks like inside if you're crazy what sheet metal is it made if it has a spar inside what is it like material specifications numberings like
Here's a link to a kmax helicopter... ruclips.net/video/-WafHmoar80/видео.html
my brain hurts