I do really like this helo but I'm a sucker for CACR designs.
I don't know whether it's better or worse than western helos but it is cool in its own right.
Hopefully Ukraine can paperclip the designers and make their own after the war.
they probably did, but I wouldnt fly it. who knows how much stress the rest of the fuse suffered during the hit and return flight without a tear down at a depot. It'll probably come apart somewhere else under some decent loading.
>Can you just slap a new tail on?
if you want to die in it sure.
the airframe is 100% fricked and needs to be thoroughly checked and repaired, maybe it's even completely done.
helicopter accident rates are way above anything else. That's because, 1, they generally fly lower and are much more difficult to land in an emergency and your reaction time is literally seconds to get the collective situation under control. 2, I believe they basically have half the FAA visibility requirements. They can basically take off VFR in a fog that a normal plane wouldn't be allowed to without IFR clearance. And 3, for whatever reason most small helicopters don't have TCAS or synthetic vision, so if they do fly into weather they're fricked. And 4, settling under power seems way easier to perform than a stall in a plane
I believe it's because it has two main rotors that can make up for each other's torque, a normal helicopter would spin into the ground if the tail rotor was broken
not that guy, but one thing russian helicopters have going for them is those wings, which produce a significant amount of lift. IIRC, the US Army helicopters never got wings because of chair force homosexualry, they started whining about them. But it looks like with the new attack helicopters the US army is looking at, wings are back on the menu
have you seriously never wondered why they're so fricking stubby in comparison to like pic related?
11 months ago
Anonymous
Because the hind is a fat and slow frick and needs all the help it can get
11 months ago
Anonymous
It's the second fastest helicopter in the world moron
11 months ago
Anonymous
The reason is not lift, but Russian's obsession with MOAR HARDPOINTS.
The Kamov has been getting progressively worse over each successive model because they keep trying to add MOAR HARDPOINTS at the cost of lift, range, ruggedness, endurance, armor and even sensors.
>the US army helicopters never got wings because of chair force homosexualry
The Air Force actually let it go. The Cheyenne project just collapsed under its own problems.
implying the Apache would fair any better against modern SAMs and MANPADs
The Apache was actually used in the first night of Desert Storm. F-117s used stealth, Apaches flew under the radar.
lmao it's literally that retarted design, that made it the most shot down ''att-ACK'' helicopter around - even older soviet shitboxes have a better performance in ukraine
The prpblem is when even a single rotor blade is damaged the helicopter loses control and goes into a spin because its control hoinges on the balance between the two countra rotating rotors.
>I believe it's because it has two main rotors that can make up for each other's torque
That is how CACR rotors work, yes.
The tail is still a part of the flight regime though, that heli isn't flying like it used to any more, it's just not fatal like it would be normally which is one of the advantages of CACR.
The flip-side is that there's extra shit that can go wrong on the main rotor and minor damage can mean total loss of control, it's a trade-off.
Normally, a broken off tail on an aircraft would be considered fricked. In the 21st century Russian Federation, this is considered a point of pride, especially when it happens while operating the aircraft as designed.
Not at all, everybody knows russian superior logistics, production possibilities and soviets engineering. If changing t72 engine takie like 24 hours, we'll how long take to rebuild helicopter? my bet its like one hour. Especially when everyone who can do this was drafted like year ago. That's was 4d chess, make your engineers and mechanics ready in first line, well if they still alive
Let me explain. First, look up Kabbalahic sorcery. You won't find results easily, but you might get a feel for it if you read enough of what is easy to find and sift the details. Antique bookstores are a good place to look as well.
Second, bear in mind that an Israeli pilots once landed and F-15 without wings and that they somehow managed to operate 5,000+ sorties a year into dense AA in Syria, for years on end, without losing a pilot, using 4th gen stuff.
Sorcery, conscious selection of quantum futures, actualizing ideal collapse parameters, this is all possible. When ~~*they*~~ get involved sometimes they show too much with their audacious moves.
If we were to do a 1:1 swap and give the Russians a cobras, the cobras would get fricked.
However, if they were used by the country that owns them. The cobras wouldn't expose themselves to threat as often as the Russians use the gator. A lot more shoot and scoot and less URAA. Also Apaches wouldn't be relied on for fire support nearly as often as the KA52 since Americans have a lot of options for CAS- whereas Russians really only have artillery and hovering missile buses right now.
Any video of it flying in this state? If not, I'm going to assume the following happened: >bad news, NATO is saying they repaired tank >we must one up them... let us say we repaired helicopter since we lost more of those than they lost tanks this week
>It’s just a good, solid helicopter.
But honestly, probably just taking it slow and limping home. Can you just slap a new tail on?
>Can you just slap a new tail on?
they claim to have fixed it, but haven't seen proof
I do really like this helo but I'm a sucker for CACR designs.
I don't know whether it's better or worse than western helos but it is cool in its own right.
Hopefully Ukraine can paperclip the designers and make their own after the war.
they probably did, but I wouldnt fly it. who knows how much stress the rest of the fuse suffered during the hit and return flight without a tear down at a depot. It'll probably come apart somewhere else under some decent loading.
>Can you just slap a new tail on?
if you want to die in it sure.
the airframe is 100% fricked and needs to be thoroughly checked and repaired, maybe it's even completely done.
t. worked on commercial helicopters.
Just out of interest, how safe are commercial helicopters?
Ask Kobe
his own fault for thinking not flying in poor weather conditions doesn't apply to him
helicopter accident rates are way above anything else. That's because, 1, they generally fly lower and are much more difficult to land in an emergency and your reaction time is literally seconds to get the collective situation under control. 2, I believe they basically have half the FAA visibility requirements. They can basically take off VFR in a fog that a normal plane wouldn't be allowed to without IFR clearance. And 3, for whatever reason most small helicopters don't have TCAS or synthetic vision, so if they do fly into weather they're fricked. And 4, settling under power seems way easier to perform than a stall in a plane
t. I watched a youtube video about this once
Competent pilot, luck and a prayer
I believe it's because it has two main rotors that can make up for each other's torque, a normal helicopter would spin into the ground if the tail rotor was broken
Unironically ka-52 may be slightly better than Western helicopters
haha no
Let's see Russia fly them at night 🙂
In some respects they are. The Russians have a massive fetish for autopilots so even their older choppers have limited-authority autopilots
This automatically wins the argument.
not that guy, but one thing russian helicopters have going for them is those wings, which produce a significant amount of lift. IIRC, the US Army helicopters never got wings because of chair force homosexualry, they started whining about them. But it looks like with the new attack helicopters the US army is looking at, wings are back on the menu
>the US army helicopters never got wings
??????
have you seriously never wondered why they're so fricking stubby in comparison to like pic related?
Because the hind is a fat and slow frick and needs all the help it can get
It's the second fastest helicopter in the world moron
The reason is not lift, but Russian's obsession with MOAR HARDPOINTS.
The Kamov has been getting progressively worse over each successive model because they keep trying to add MOAR HARDPOINTS at the cost of lift, range, ruggedness, endurance, armor and even sensors.
>the US army helicopters never got wings because of chair force homosexualry
The Air Force actually let it go. The Cheyenne project just collapsed under its own problems.
The Apache was actually used in the first night of Desert Storm. F-117s used stealth, Apaches flew under the radar.
lmao it's literally that retarted design, that made it the most shot down ''att-ACK'' helicopter around - even older soviet shitboxes have a better performance in ukraine
Not really, coaxial rotors have their own set of tradeoffs from a traditional rotor layout.
Also, the tail is still important because still has the control surfaces the helicopter needs to help steer itself or stabilize its flight.
this, they're counterrotating so the tail isn't even necessary.
The prpblem is when even a single rotor blade is damaged the helicopter loses control and goes into a spin because its control hoinges on the balance between the two countra rotating rotors.
that's why it has ejection seats
>I believe it's because it has two main rotors that can make up for each other's torque
That is how CACR rotors work, yes.
The tail is still a part of the flight regime though, that heli isn't flying like it used to any more, it's just not fatal like it would be normally which is one of the advantages of CACR.
The flip-side is that there's extra shit that can go wrong on the main rotor and minor damage can mean total loss of control, it's a trade-off.
There is two rotors at the top. There is no tail rotor.
Design, luck and good piloting.
because it's a coaxial design, the tail isn't as necessary to stability as an anti-torque
Pilot who paid attention in school.
/k/ told me it was fricked???
Normally, a broken off tail on an aircraft would be considered fricked. In the 21st century Russian Federation, this is considered a point of pride, especially when it happens while operating the aircraft as designed.
Not at all, everybody knows russian superior logistics, production possibilities and soviets engineering. If changing t72 engine takie like 24 hours, we'll how long take to rebuild helicopter? my bet its like one hour. Especially when everyone who can do this was drafted like year ago. That's was 4d chess, make your engineers and mechanics ready in first line, well if they still alive
The coaxial design and good piloting skills under pressure saved his ass.
I am more impressed by the fact it got hit by its own fuel tanks
Jews.
Let me explain. First, look up Kabbalahic sorcery. You won't find results easily, but you might get a feel for it if you read enough of what is easy to find and sift the details. Antique bookstores are a good place to look as well.
Second, bear in mind that an Israeli pilots once landed and F-15 without wings and that they somehow managed to operate 5,000+ sorties a year into dense AA in Syria, for years on end, without losing a pilot, using 4th gen stuff.
Sorcery, conscious selection of quantum futures, actualizing ideal collapse parameters, this is all possible. When ~~*they*~~ get involved sometimes they show too much with their audacious moves.
Why the frick do you schizos always equate shit to literal fricking magic
based schizo posters. Whatever you do don't take the pills they give you.
It’s Russian, they build shit to be cheap and durable
Flight-wise the tail is just a counterweight with some aerodynamic helpers.
The dropped outboard fuel tank hit the tail
cheaper than an Apache
more resilient than an Apache
more deadlier than an Apache
makes blue haired Twitter users seethe
I kneel Alligator sama
>a third of the fleet has been shot down
I kneel on the wreckage
implying the Apache would fair any better against modern SAMs and MANPADs
If we were to do a 1:1 swap and give the Russians a cobras, the cobras would get fricked.
However, if they were used by the country that owns them. The cobras wouldn't expose themselves to threat as often as the Russians use the gator. A lot more shoot and scoot and less URAA. Also Apaches wouldn't be relied on for fire support nearly as often as the KA52 since Americans have a lot of options for CAS- whereas Russians really only have artillery and hovering missile buses right now.
What did yhat?
*that
Any video of it flying in this state? If not, I'm going to assume the following happened:
>bad news, NATO is saying they repaired tank
>we must one up them... let us say we repaired helicopter since we lost more of those than they lost tanks this week