Military Review

High-speed helicopter SB-1 Defiant: in the United States showed a video of a U-turn and maneuvers

65

The Sikorsky Aircraft and Boeing team continues to test the SB-1 Defiant helicopter. Now, a little over a year after the first flight, a new video from the tests of this interesting machine has been presented.


Recall that the first flight of the prototype high-speed Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant helicopter took place on March 21, 2019. Tests of the aircraft, as well as a number of other helicopters and convertiplanes, are carried out as part of the US Department of Defense's Future Vertical Lift program for creating vertical take-off aircraft.

After the announcement and subsequent testing of the SB-1 Defiant, the media talked about a promising new American helicopter, which can change the face of modern world helicopter engineering, differing in impressive technical characteristics.

The combination of the ability to take off and land at high speed was very interesting for the US military. The proposed Defiant helicopter uses an innovative scheme with a coaxial arrangement of rotors of a special design. The helicopter is highly maneuverable and capable of developing a cruising speed of 460 km / h, which is very much for a helicopter.


Such characteristics make the machine indispensable for special operations, landing, evacuation of the wounded from the battlefield. So far, the prototype is an exclusively transport helicopter designed to transport personnel, but in the future it is possible that the helicopter will be equipped with machine-gun or grenade launchers to support airborne combat groups that will land with Defiant.

The developers expect that he will be able to replace the UH-60 "Black Hawk". True, the helicopter also has a serious competitor - the V-280 Valor tiltrotor, which is being developed by Bell Helicopter and Lockheed Martin. However, given the complexity of the convertiplanes in operation, it is far from the fact that the V-280 Valor will be able to win the competition with the SB-1 Defiant helicopter.

Video maneuvering in the air:



Ongoing tests were devoted to further testing the flight qualities and technical characteristics of the helicopter. Senior guests — Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Senator Tammy Duckworth, a retired lieutenant colonel, watched the helicopter fly. It is worth mentioning specifically about the latter: this woman in the past served as a helicopter pilot in the US National Guard, participated in hostilities in Iraq and lost both legs due to a helicopter accident.

Before the distinguished guests of the test, Defiant helicopter demonstrated the ability to perform maneuvers at low altitudes. The video shows how the helicopter makes a U-turn and also maneuvers above the ground.

As emphasized in the official statement regarding the maneuvers, the ability to operate at low altitudes will become crucial in the future for assault missions of the American army. In local conflicts, including at great distances from the United States border, the new helicopter can play a very important role for airborne and reconnaissance units.
Author:
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The Little Humpbacked Horse
      The Little Humpbacked Horse 13 May 2020 17: 42 New
      +9
      Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
      But what am I interested in they are innovative?


      You didn’t see an additional screw at the stern, or what?
      1. Vasily Ponomarev
        Vasily Ponomarev 13 May 2020 17: 45 New
        +1
        Well, as well as on experienced past demonstrators, such as x2
  2. Whirlwind
    Whirlwind 13 May 2020 17: 44 New
    +6
    To whom, who showed? No maneuvers are visible ...
  3. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 13 May 2020 17: 50 New
    +3
    technical thought is on the alert ...
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 13 May 2020 19: 45 New
      +4
      Quote: Pvi1206
      technical thought is on the alert ...

      You're right. She has been sleeping since the end of the 20th century.
  4. Alex_You
    Alex_You 13 May 2020 17: 56 New
    -4
    Something I doubt that awaits his success as a black hawk.
  5. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 13 May 2020 18: 34 New
    0
    What massive bushings of the blades (or how are they right there) in comparison with Ka

    Really because of the increased horizontal speed?
    1. igor67
      igor67 13 May 2020 19: 09 New
      +1
      Rotor hub, right
      1. John22
        John22 14 May 2020 19: 24 New
        0
        Axial joint of the rotor blade.
    2. venik
      venik 13 May 2020 21: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      What massive bushings of the blades (or how they are right there) compared to Ka.

      =======
      So their experience in creating coaxial machines will be less than that of "Kamovtsy" in the development of coaxial propellers! And no one else - too! After all, coaxial machines have been riveting for 70 years ...
      -------
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Really because of the increased horizontal speed?

      ======
      And because of this - too!
    3. Klingon
      Klingon 13 May 2020 23: 03 New
      +3
      not for this, it’s just that the swashplate is more compact because it’s simpler — Defiant, unlike the Shark, don’t need to twist the rotor blades to fly forward. To do this, he has a pushing screw on the back
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 02: 52 New
        0
        Quote: Klingon
        Rosto swashplate is more compact because it's easier
        But simpler means more compact, in most cases, with equal strength, isn't it?
      2. vzmsemvi
        vzmsemvi 14 May 2020 09: 33 New
        +4
        It is necessary to skew the rotor blades (swash plate) for maneuvers and helicopter flight - forward, backward, right, left with a simultaneous climb or descent. A pushing propeller is a kind of "whip", since the maximum speed of the helicopter is limited by the subsonic linear speed (flutter) of the carrying blades
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 16: 48 New
          -3
          Thank you for the educational program, only I do not need it, in this question, we are talking about a clearly more massive bushings, do you have an answer to this?
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 14 May 2020 21: 56 New
            +3
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            we are talking about a clearly greater massive bushings

            apparently, the whole point is that the blades are controlled by electric drives built into the hubs of the hinged rotors.
            You can read about ABC technology (Advancing Blade Concept) and the Sikorsky X2 prototype, much of the Defiant is taken from it. The American is much more different from the usual helicopter than it seems at first glance
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 15 May 2020 02: 42 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              the blades are controlled by electric drives built into the hubs of the hingeless rotors
              Thank you, this is a really informative answer. Plus sign from me.
      3. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 14 May 2020 21: 39 New
        +2
        Quote: Klingon
        not for this, it’s just that the swashplate is more compact because it’s simpler — Defiant, unlike the Shark, don’t need to twist the rotor blades to fly forward

        I’m sorry, any normally flying helicopter needs a swashplate. Sikorsky (and indeed everyone who built rotorcraft) could not build a normal helicopter until the Russian engineer Professor Yuryev invented the swashplate. It allows you to change the plane of inclination of the screws, change the angle of attack of each of the blades, and thereby change the magnitude and vector of the lifting force and carry out maneuvers. I assure you, the American will fly forward with a plunged pushing screw. And without it at all. It is only needed in order to increase max. speed.
      4. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 14 May 2020 23: 20 New
        0
        Quote: Klingon
        Defiant, unlike Sharks, does not need to twist the rotor blades to fly forward.

        And what does it change, if left and right - it should remain, because the device does this. I am sure that even without a rear screw, it will be able to turn it back and forth only at the expense of the main rotors. Speed ​​will not develop, but can maneuver.
    4. alien308
      alien308 14 May 2020 15: 48 New
      +1
      The greater the distance between the screws, the less the mutual influence. In particular, a characteristic sound with a coaxial circuit. Tu-95 flies. The earth is shaking. Ka-52 did not hear. But they say the sound is also strong.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 16: 45 New
        0
        Quote: alien308
        The greater the distance between the screws, the less the mutual influence
        Is it about the distance between the screws ?!
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        What massive bushings blades
        The sizes of bushings were discussed.
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 14 May 2020 20: 52 New
          0
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          The sizes of bushings were discussed.

          I read somewhere that the propeller of this helicopter is simpler (there is no swashplate, as at the dawn of helicopter construction). For example, there are no hinges for the horizontal stroke of the blade relative to the shaft of the screw (they reduce the load on the blade that goes against the air flow and load when it moves in the stream), which means that at high speeds large differences in load will occur on the rotor blades, therefore bushings
          By the way, that's why there are two screws with the opposite collision.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 14 May 2020 21: 50 New
            +2
            Quote: Bad_gr
            I read somewhere that the screw of this helicopter is simpler (there is no swashplate, as at the dawn of helicopter construction)

            he is more complicated. It is, as it were, not in the classical concept, but in principle it remained. The control of the angle of attack of the rotor blades was made electro-remote (just like on the Sikorsky-X2 - the rotor migrated from it almost one to one) - this drives the computer using special steering mechanisms depending on the flight situation.
            The fact that the blades are controlled is clearly visible in the photo:
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 16 May 2020 08: 19 New
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              he is more complicated. It is, as it were, not in the classical concept, but in principle it has remained.

              If you look at this device not as a helicopter with a pushing propeller (which is perceived as a novelty in this business), but as an ordinary gyroplane with full take-off and landing (instead of autorotation modes), then it becomes clear what kind of animal it is.
              After all, what is a gyroplane: an airplane in which the lifting force is realized not with the help of wings, but with a rotating rotor. Most of them have the regime for the rotor only from the oncoming flow (the engine is not provided for this). More advanced ones have the opportunity to unscrew the screw on the ground, and then increase the pitch of the screw to bounce, going into horizontal flight with the help of a pushing (or pulling) propeller with an engine. On the same device, take-off and landing were fully implemented, like a helicopter. If in horizontal flight it flies like a gyroplane (the rotor is used for autorotation, and the engine is not used for this), then it should have a much longer flight range, with the same amount of fuel and other things equal, compared to a helicopter. He also has a higher speed.
              This is my introduction to the topic with a swashplate. In a gyroplane with a rollover at speed, they are fought in the same way as in single-rotor helicopters (horizontal hinge and angle of attack of the blade). They immediately used 2 screws with stiffer blades, which made it possible to do without horizontal hinges in the swashplate - it should be easier. Yes, and quieter too, because the lifting force of the blade that is flowing is not used.
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 16 May 2020 14: 29 New
                0
                Quote: Bad_gr
                If in horizontal flight it flies like a gyroplane (main rotor for autorotation, and the engine is not used for this)

                the fact of the matter is that no. In Defiant, the main rotor is used in all modes (hovering, sideways, backward, forward), and it is used as the main rotor - i.e. this is a helicopter. It does not go into autorotation mode. At high speeds, only half of the propeller works for him - the one that runs onto the stream, the second (downstream) is turned off by the angle of the blades. At normal speeds - everything is like a regular helicopter. If the American loses the propeller, it does not critically affect his flight data - only the loss of the ability to develop max. speed. In all other respects, it retains all the capabilities of a helicopter.
                The Defiant has control over the general step, which gyroscopes do not have.

                If you throw away from your head the usual scheme of an automatic machine with rods, then everything becomes clear.
    5. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 15 May 2020 11: 04 New
      +2
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      What massive bushings of the blades (or how are they right there) in comparison with Ka

      Really because of the increased horizontal speed?

      The use of short and rigid rotor blades allows increasing the rotational speed and avoiding "overlapping" of the blades, which made it possible to reduce the height of the rotor hub.
      Of course, a high rotational speed leads to the need to increase the strength of the rotor hub.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 15 May 2020 11: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        Of course, a high rotational speed leads to the need to increase the strength of the rotor hub.
        Indeed, the bushings are more massive but their height is less, thanks, plus.
  6. Zeev Zeev
    Zeev Zeev 13 May 2020 18: 36 New
    0
    An interesting machine, but in my unprofessional opinion, there are additional screws that are on top and behind greatly increase the profile of the machine and its vulnerability to fire from small arms and anti-aircraft artillery. Of course, the tail rotors of modern helicopters are also a weak spot, but they are at least smaller in size than the thrusters in this rotorcraft.
    1. Prapor-527
      Prapor-527 13 May 2020 19: 22 New
      +5
      There must be at least two screws to compensate for the reactive moment (either from above or from the rear), if one of them is damaged by the crank ... In the event of damage to the pushing screw, the helicopter will not lose controllability, since the rotors rotating in opposite directions, and ensure the normal flight of this machine ... So, according to the worker-peasant ... The rear propeller in this machine is not steering, but the pusher (Gives extra speed) does not take part in the control ...
      1. Zeev Zeev
        Zeev Zeev 13 May 2020 20: 57 New
        +1
        Well, I know a little the theory of helicopters. And for what a coaxial circuit, and what kind of propeller is there in the tail. I say that the tail rotors of most helicopters are vulnerable, like the pushing screw in this machine, but they will be smaller in size.
        1. helmi8
          helmi8 13 May 2020 22: 40 New
          0
          Quote: Zeev Zeev
          I say that the tail rotors of most helicopters are vulnerable, as is the pushing screw in this machine

          Damage to the pushing screw will not affect handling. Only the speed will decrease, and even then it is not critical.
          1. Zeev Zeev
            Zeev Zeev 13 May 2020 22: 56 New
            +1
            In case of damage to the blades, the screw will blow it apart by centrifugal force. And what structural elements will fall into these fragments, not even Allah knows.
        2. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 14 May 2020 22: 05 New
          +1
          Quote: Zeev Zeev
          the tail rotors of most helicopters are vulnerable, as is the pushing screw in this machine

          only without the tail rotor the helicopter straight to the ground (since the car loses the reactive moment compensator and becomes uncontrollable), and the loss of the pushing one does not lead to anything critical
    2. Private-K
      Private-K 14 May 2020 08: 29 New
      0
      So the main rotors are so constantly making holes if the helicopter comes under fire from a fire-fighting station, fire-fighting station and riflemen. But these screws are by no means a fragile thing - they will fly to the base, patch up, and again on the road.
  7. yfast
    yfast 13 May 2020 19: 15 New
    -9
    460 km per hour is probably before the first good gust of wind.
    1. Zeev Zeev
      Zeev Zeev 13 May 2020 21: 01 New
      +1
      And 260 km / h Ka-52 is what a gust of wind?
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 14 May 2020 22: 07 New
      0
      Quote: yfast
      460 km per hour is probably before the first good gust of wind.

      the higher the speed of the machine, the less it is influenced by wind (with a reasonable mass, of course), because it has higher kinetic energy (remember the formula from the school physics course - um-ve squared)
  8. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 13 May 2020 19: 21 New
    +6
    Damn attractive car. Both externally and potentially!
    1. Prapor-527
      Prapor-527 13 May 2020 19: 38 New
      +5
      Yes, beautiful...
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 13 May 2020 20: 22 New
        +2
        ANT also noticed that a beautiful car flies well ... Unfortunately, this handsome man, apparently, will break his way. And ours will have to catch up, maybe the alligator will be finalized ...
        Coaxiality is needed in order to avoid overturning due to asymmetric lift. At high speeds the blade "downstream" loses its lifting force, this is compensated by the angle of attack of the blade, but ... the speed increases, and this is not enough.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 14 May 2020 22: 11 New
          +2
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          At high speeds the blade "downstream" loses its lifting force, this is compensated by the angle of attack of the blade, but ... the speed increases, and this is not enough.

          and on this machine it was done - at high speed, in fact, the lifting force is created only by the opposite halves of the two coaxial rotors. That part of the main rotor disk, on which the backflow zone occurs, is "turned off" from the process of creating a lift - a zero angle of attack is set on the retreating blade. All this is monitored by EDSU
          This technology is called the "advancing blade concept", or ABC (Advancing Blade Concept)
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 14 May 2020 23: 31 New
            0
            Quote: Gregory_45
            on the retreating blade, a zero angle of attack is set. ..........

            But why reduce the angle of attack if the retreating blade of this helicopter does not have any lifting force (low speed relative to the air flow).
            1. Mountain shooter
              Mountain shooter 15 May 2020 09: 55 New
              +1
              Quote: Bad_gr
              But why reduce the angle of attack if the retreating blade of this helicopter does not have any lifting force (low speed relative to the air flow).

              In order not to create excess resistance. Why is it?
            2. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 15 May 2020 20: 43 New
              0
              Quote: Bad_gr
              Why reduce the angle of attack if the retreating blade of this helicopter does not have any lifting force

              so that that blade has as little negative consequences as possible. To "turn it off" from the process of generating lift
  9. APASUS
    APASUS 13 May 2020 21: 14 New
    +2
    Well done, Americans, ours would invest in R&D so much, Russians would be ahead of the rest! In the meantime, it turns out to be a good investment in yachts, clubs, houses on the Cote d'Azur .............
    1. Svetlana
      Svetlana 14 May 2020 14: 27 New
      +1
      Boeing selling civilian aircraft around the world has more money than ours. And therefore, he can invest more in Russian research and development more than Russian airlines. It’s bitter, but that’s selvage.
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 14 May 2020 21: 01 New
        +4
        Quote: Svetlana
        Boeing selling civilian aircraft around the world has more money than ours. And therefore, he can invest more in Russian research and development more than Russian airlines. It’s bitter, but that’s selvage.

        Just don’t need about the lack of money from Russia, $ 50 billion was found for the Olympics in Sochi
        1. Svetlana
          Svetlana 14 May 2020 21: 26 New
          -1
          "Found" is a one-time concept. They rummaged in my wallet and found it. But statistically investing in all the latest developments is another story. The economy of Russia is, in fact, weaker than the US economy.
          1. APASUS
            APASUS 14 May 2020 21: 31 New
            +3
            Quote: Svetlana
            But to invest money statistically in all the latest developments, this is another story. The economy of Russia, in fact, is weaker than the US economy.

            Yes, because they run around the summits and ask for investments from the West, but they don’t invest their own money. All Olympiads, summits, rallies, world championships
  10. Dart
    Dart 13 May 2020 21: 20 New
    -7
    all this is a demonstrator, and our "superaligator" will soon be in production ... and there are no special benefits from the propeller in the stern, except for the complication of mechanisms, and as a result, a decrease in survivability, I don't see ..
    speed? far from the fact that when working out already in the armed version, it will be like that ..
    1. Slon1978
      Slon1978 14 May 2020 03: 58 New
      +2
      In general, the need for such a machine, its place in the armed forces, is doubtful. Why is it and what are the benefits? The survivability of a helicopter on the battlefield depends on the tactics of use (low flight profile, techniques for attacking targets), machine security (booking, protection systems against air defense systems / MANPADS). Speed ​​does not really affect the security of the machine, as the rocket will easily catch up with that 260, that 460 km / h. For the same reason, the continued existence of attack aircraft is called into question - attack aircraft fly low and slowly during a classic attack of enemy positions (but much faster than 460 km / h). I do not understand why this development is, in principle, necessary. Faster ammunition delivery and evacuation of the wounded from the battlefield? Yes ... but somehow it is far-fetched. Since the time difference will be noticeable only at distances of several hundred km, but there are no such distances for helicopters - field hospitals are deployed much closer.
      1. Private-K
        Private-K 14 May 2020 08: 34 New
        +3
        A high speed will make it possible, for example, to move the helicopter aerodromes farther in depth from the LBS - to remove them from under the air and missile defense.
        High speed reduces the time the helicopter spends in the fire zone, it’s faster to fly to the place of the combat mission and leave it faster.
        1. Slon1978
          Slon1978 14 May 2020 12: 11 New
          +1
          There is no such thing as a heliport. Helicopters are based at airfields in peacetime, along with aircraft solely for the convenience of logistics. In wartime, helicopters can be deployed in any field, forest meadow, valley - the main availability of a road for the delivery of fuels and lubricants and ammunition. And then, what does the range of the "heliport" have to do with the speed of the new vehicle? A classic helicopter from a remote "heliport" will not reach the LBS, but a new one will fly? So this is combat radius, not speed. The combat radius depends on the amount of fuel on board and the fuel efficiency of the engines. And it is not a fact that a high-speed helicopter has a combat radius greater than that of a classic helicopter. Faster to fly to the place of the combat mission? So a fighter-bomber or attack aircraft will fly even faster :) The new concept of a helicopter, perhaps, should be developed so far only as a demonstrator of technologies .... a reasonable place in the troops of this machine is not visible. Something like the Osprey tiltrotor or the eaglet eaglet is like an interesting contraption, but you can't really stick it anywhere.
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 14 May 2020 22: 15 New
        +1
        speed is needed for one purpose - it’s faster to be in the place where the helicopter is needed, and faster to rush from the place where it is no longer desirable
        It’s one thing to wait for air support for 15 minutes, the second is half as much. In the same way evacuated.
        Speed ​​- time, time - life
  11. 7,62h54
    7,62h54 13 May 2020 22: 40 New
    +5
    Having competition is still useful. The chance of interesting developments is increasing. Here, Kamov and Mil are crossed.
  12. Pavlik K.
    Pavlik K. 13 May 2020 22: 50 New
    -1
    I don’t understand why such a speed is needed for a helicopter. All helicopter use — landing, cargo, assault combat use — are low speeds, and it is vulnerable to them. Who is interested in landing speed? Only the business option remains?
    1. Finn
      Finn 13 May 2020 23: 28 New
      -10
      Helicopter handling at this speed I think is bad. One thing remains for which all the weapons are made by the Americans. Dragging fast. Shit and drape. And preferably imperceptibly.
    2. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 14 May 2020 01: 50 New
      +2
      Speed ​​is Time
      Time is everything

      As the Amer general noted, the convertiplane reduced the size of the region (state) to the size of the city
  13. Whirlwind
    Whirlwind 14 May 2020 05: 51 New
    +1
    Swashplate is not visible. Throughout there are adjustable pitch screws. Therefore, the unique maneuverability of the coaxial helicopter and rate of climb is not close.
    But then the speed ...
  14. Evil 55
    Evil 55 14 May 2020 09: 27 New
    +2
    Exactly one hundred years have passed since the invention of the gyroplane, and here it is again in its glory .. And again the same problems - high fuel consumption, small radius of action, technical complexity, structural unreliability ... Conclusion - you should not reinvent the wheel ..
  15. Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 14 May 2020 12: 05 New
    0
    [img=|Ка25]https://yandex.ru/images/touch/search?text=%D0%BA%D0%B025&source=tabbar&pos=2&img_url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F3CHdjWm.jpg&rpt=simage[/img]
    Plagiarism. Copied from the Soviet Ka25
  16. alien308
    alien308 14 May 2020 16: 01 New
    0
    Stability at high speed provides a developed tail. It is generally huge on this machine. There would still be wings to this device. Provide lifting force at speed, and install the screw almost in the weather vane. Then the fuel consumption will approach the aircraft and the speed can be increased and with stability at speed it will probably be easier.
  17. pytar
    pytar 14 May 2020 19: 18 New
    +2
    Sikorsky and Boeing's SB-1 Defiant

    Video and Concepts of the Defiant (Defiant)

    and ego competitor Bell V-280 Valor
  18. Cyril G ...
    Cyril G ... 14 May 2020 21: 23 New
    +1
    An amazing scheme, certainly organically combines the shortcomings of the coaxial scheme and the classical
  19. eklmn
    eklmn 14 May 2020 22: 48 New
    +2
    About the engine (first Google):
    The new engine, the Future Affordable Turbine Engine (FATE), must meet the requirements of a range of 229 knots (264 miles; 424 km). Compared to conventional helicopters, coaxial rotors with opposite rotation and push electric screw provide an increase in speed of 100 knots (115 mph; 185 km / h), an increase in the combat radius of 60% and an increase in productivity of 50% when working in conditions of strong heating,
    Sikorsky said the X2's design is not suitable for heavy helicopters, and instead offers the CH-53K for heavy loads and a tiltrotor for the ultra-class. However, Sikorsky plans to build a 30000 pound (14 kg) JMR-TD class (with a cab 000% more than the Black Hawk) on a full scale to clear doubts about the scalability of the X-50 technology.
    Sikorsky-Boeing says the SB-1 will be fast and agile, with fast acceleration and deceleration, fast side-to-side movement and the ability to soar with the tail up and nose down. The Defiant demo will run on the Honeywell T55, which powers the CH-47 Chinook. It will be slightly modified to work better at slower propeller speeds, up to 85% rpm.
    The pushing screw is not mechanical, but electric.
    Test pilot opinion:
    “The lack of hydraulics in the tail boom is a huge deal,” Henderscheid said. “I had hydraulic malfunctions when they were caused by a hydraulic line burst ... and it's scary when you have to keep the tail rotor where you want it. No need to worry about leakage ... or some kind of mechanical failure - that's a really great idea. "
    According to Bill Fell, a former army pilot and senior pilot pilot at Raider and Defiant, the push propeller can reverse very quickly to provide negative traction for quick braking, and then turn it off for a quieter sound signature.
    “Coming to this goal, I use all efforts from support. And when I’m close enough where I want to lower the acoustic signature, because I don’t want them to know that I’m going, I can turn it off and fly in a helicopter, as at speeds, ”said Fell.
    The ability to slow down over a very short distance - within half a mile - to be able to switch from 200 to zero is amazing. ”
    “According to Malia, in addition to speed, Defiant X2 technology has a rigid rotor system that provides significantly greater maneuverability and maneuverability for a helicopter than conventional helicopters today.
    “A conventional rotor system has much more impact, think of it as a trip to the Cadillac, it is less responsive,” said Malia. "When you get a system with a hard rotor, it is more like what you say about Porsche or Ferrari at the level of responsiveness."
    According to Fell, a hard-propeller system “looks more like a fighter’s reaction than a helicopter’s reaction - it’s so clear.”
  20. yfast
    yfast 16 May 2020 18: 54 New
    0
    Quote: Zeev Zeev
    And 260 km / h Ka-52 is what a gust of wind?

    "The speed record recorded on the Crimean bridge was 243 kilometers per hour."
    Well this is not even speed for Russia,