Military Review

Eurocopter's high-speed hybrid helicopter demonstrator X3 has developed a speed of 470 km / h

71
Eurocopter's high-speed hybrid helicopter demonstrator X3 has developed a speed of 470 km / hThe Eurocopter's high-speed hybrid helicopter X3 (Eurocopter) has developed 472 km / h in horizontal flight. Previously, this helicopter developed an 487 km / h speed when descending. Both of these results are unofficial speed records for rotary-wing machines. This was reported by the company Eurocopter.


Record speed in horizontal flight was reached at an altitude of 3050 meters during the 40-minute test flight over southern France near the Flight Test Center (FAC) Istres.

The concept of the X3 helicopter combines the excellent characteristics of vertical take-off and landing with high cruising horizontal flight speed exceeding 400 km / h in the design of the rotorcraft.

The X3 demonstrator is based on the airframe of the Dauphin helicopter and is equipped with two gas turbine engines (GTE) RTM 322, providing rotation of the 5-blade rotor, as well as two screws mounted on the wing of a small span on the sides of the vehicle body. This scheme allows you to create a promising rotary-wing transport system with the speed of a turboprop aircraft and the helicopter take-off and landing characteristics.

The GTM version of the RTM 322 for the X-3 demonstrator is based on the RTX 322 engine of the NH90 helicopter. The engine has a FADEC system adapted to the requirements of a high-speed demonstrator.

The hybrid helicopter X3 is created to perform both civil and military tasks, in particular, missions to search for people in large territories, provide coast guard and surveillance, patrol the borders, evacuate the wounded from the battlefield. The helicopter will also be able to carry out tasks for the transportation of passengers, including on long-distance lines. The machine is also intended for the transfer of military units.

Eurocopter began flight tests of the X3 demonstrator in September 2010 at the Ist Flight Test Center in southern France. During the flight test program, the rotary-wing machine demonstrates excellent flight performance, maneuverability, high acceleration and deceleration characteristics, ascent and descent, has low vibration levels, which eliminates the need for passive or active anti-vibration systems.
Originator:
http://www.arms-tass.su/
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mikhado
    Mikhado 12 June 2013 10: 14
    +3
    Yes, this topic is hard on, to see a bunch of pitfalls with external simplicity. But in Russia, there’s nothing to hear about this, at least openly. Not to be outdone again.
    1. T-100
      T-100 12 June 2013 10: 22
      30
      Yes, this topic is hard on, to see a bunch of pitfalls with external simplicity. But in Russia, there’s nothing to hear about this, at least openly. Not to be outdone again.

      Most people on the forum still have this Soviet formula (which I think is wrong), they have this, we should have better. So you know how many ideas and achievements in the world you can’t keep up with. I think the correct formula: They have it, but for us how to make scrap metal out of it quickly and cheaply)))
      They’ve got a plane flying fast, but the Igla MANPADS missile is faster, you see, and cheaper.
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 12 June 2013 10: 37
        18
        so Yes. But helicopter engineering is a terribly high-tech field. Developing it automatically develops a lot of other things. One material science is worth it. so - DON'T LESS !! Definitely!
        1. Atlon
          Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 03
          16
          Quote: retired
          aye yes. But helicopter engineering is a terribly high-tech field

          To begin with, this is NOT a HELICOPTER! When I started reading, ofigel at first, such speeds ... So far no one has broken Soviet records. And then I read it, and it turned out that this is a non-helicopter with an under-airplane crossed. Call it whatever you like, but to write that a record for helicopters is broken is cunning ...
          1. shinobi
            shinobi 12 June 2013 12: 10
            +2
            Autogyro is only in modern design.
          2. pensioner
            pensioner 12 June 2013 13: 16
            +1
            op-pa! I read it right now too! Well, so many records can be made. You can think about powder boosters ... Thanks, opened my eyes!
          3. djon77
            djon77 12 June 2013 16: 08
            +3
            In principle, in 1986, the former Lynx demonstrator company, registered with G-LYNX, specifically modified the Gem 60 engines and BERP blades. [10] On August 11, 1986, a helicopter was piloted by Trevor Egginton when he set an absolute speed record for helicopters over 15 and 25 km of course, reaching 400,87 km / h (249,09 mph), [1] is an official document with the FAI
          4. Revolver
            Revolver 13 June 2013 03: 31
            +2
            Quote: Atlon

            To begin with, this is NOT a HELICOPTER! When I started reading, ofigel at first, such speeds ... So far no one has broken Soviet records. And then I read it, and it turned out that this is a non-helicopter with an under-airplane crossed. Call it whatever you like, but to write that a record for helicopters is broken is cunning ...

            In general, MI-24 also has a supporting wing giving up to 28% of additional lifting force.
            Источник: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8-24
            So, will it also be classified as under-aircraft or under-helicopter? What matters is not compliance with any artificial canons, but functionality.
            1. Edward
              Edward 13 June 2013 05: 17
              0
              .as well as two screwsmounted on the wing of a small wingspan on the sides of the car body ...
      2. the polar
        the polar 12 June 2013 11: 15
        +5
        Quote: T-100
        Yes, this topic is hard on, to see a bunch of pitfalls with external simplicity. But in Russia, there’s nothing to hear about this, at least openly. Not to be outdone again.

        Most people on the forum still have this Soviet formula (which I think is wrong), they have this, we should have better. So you know how many ideas and achievements in the world you can’t keep up with. I think the correct formula: They have it, but for us how to make scrap metal out of it quickly and cheaply)))
        They’ve got a plane flying fast, but the Igla MANPADS missile is faster, you see, and cheaper.

        Support.
        For a civilian helicopter, cruising speed is not so important as carrying capacity, reliability and all-weather performance, long working life and low cost of maintenance.
        And for the military, armor protection, survival, maneuverability in three planes, low noise, all-weather performance, superior quality of weapons and avionics, and cheaper maintenance.
        And material science in any case will develop, when developing new generations
        1. baton140105
          baton140105 12 June 2013 22: 01
          0
          So I say, what for do we need this?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. sashka
        sashka 12 June 2013 18: 41
        0
        Quote: T-100
        They’ve got a plane flying fast, but the Igla MANPADS missile is faster, you see, and cheaper.

        One workplace in mechanical engineering creates a dozen related .. How many places will the PZRK give? Nonsense, my friend. The people somehow need to be fed. Not all oil is sold.
        1. Aljavad
          Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 23
          0
          So let the ekranoplanes build. And as for helicopters, we (pah-pah-pah) are still tolerant. There are also "how-know" and their own priorities. Mi-26, for example. Have you heard about its analogues? I think Westerners have counted and decided that one manufacturer covers the needs of the entire world market. Catching up and pushing back is more expensive.
          And it is wise. You need to invest in breakthrough sectors, and not climb into long-divided markets.
      5. Aljavad
        Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 15
        0
        Quite right. The union broke down, trying to overtake "the whole world." Moreover, on all counts.
    2. avt
      avt 12 June 2013 10: 36
      0
      Quote: Mikhado
      Yes, this topic is hard on, to see a bunch of pitfalls with external simplicity

      This topic comes from the contest that Apache won, if memory does not change then Lockheed Cheyenne with a pushing screw offered. So the Jews suddenly realized something.
      1. Aljavad
        Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 28
        0
        rotorcraft YAH-56A 1965
    3. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 12 June 2013 11: 03
      +5
      The problem is not the development of helicopter speed, but that everything would be in harmony, speed-fuel consumption, carrying capacity, high-speed helicopters have done before, piece by piece ...
    4. lucidlook
      lucidlook 12 June 2013 12: 41
      +4
      There is a development of Ka-92
      1. experienced
        experienced 12 June 2013 12: 44
        +3
        Am I the only one confused by the name of this demonstrator? Somehow on the Internet, running into these "magic" letters "HZ" too often in almost all forums have winked
    5. Genady1976
      Genady1976 12 June 2013 13: 40
      -3
      yes why do you need such a helicopter there is a plane
    6. vlrosch
      vlrosch 12 June 2013 17: 44
      -2
      We were engaged in gyroplanes in the 30s of the last century.
      1. Aljavad
        Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 32
        0
        Kamov also worked after the war - there was no state order. There was a topic, even convert the Ka-26 into a gyroplane. But nobody needs it. And it will not be necessary until the sky is opened for the private trader. And it’s hard to open - to break the whole System.
    7. Army1
      Army1 12 June 2013 18: 02
      0
      Quote: Mikhado
      Yes, this topic is hard on, to see a bunch of pitfalls with external simplicity. But in Russia, there’s nothing to hear about this, at least openly. Not to be outdone again.


      If open, then:
      http://www.km.ru/node/3141 Мы первые разрабатываем боевые вертолеты 5 поколения.
      Yes, and civilian high-speed: http://www.plam.ru/transportavi/vzlyot_2009_06/p22.php
    8. baton140105
      baton140105 12 June 2013 21: 49
      0
      But what for do we need this?
  2. Konsmo
    Konsmo 12 June 2013 10: 15
    +3
    This is something like the Formula 1. On Monaco ride. Not a car for every day. There are no suspensions. The load is at a minimum.
    1. Algor73
      Algor73 12 June 2013 10: 32
      +4
      This is only a demonstrator. Nodes and assemblies are being worked out, so to speak. T-50 also flies without weapons. But the new is always the new. I am inclined to the fact that humanity in the development of technology, especially aircraft, has come to a standstill - a tiny step forward takes a lot of time and resources (including money). Some kind of technical revolution is coming. There is no way without it.
      1. Thomas A. Anderson
        Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 10: 49
        10
        Techrevolution will be only in the space field, but on the earth it doesn’t make sense to squeeze something out ... The T-50 is different in its characteristics ... Right now they started talking about hypersound, but what for it is needed on the planet ... Earth is small, but hypersound it’s more nonsense ... It doesn’t give much to the development of technology, the same thing just flies higher and faster ... In general, it’s time to take up space already, new engines, bases on the moon, orbital bases, you need to enter the military area there, not rats on the ISS grow....
        1. the polar
          the polar 12 June 2013 11: 18
          0
          Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
          you need to enter the military area there, and not to grow rats on the ISS ....

          Military systems in space must be banned unequivocally and forever
          1. Gato
            Gato 12 June 2013 11: 45
            +8
            Military systems in space must be banned unequivocally and forever

            You yourself are not funny? With the same success, they can be prohibited on Earth.
            1. No_more
              No_more 12 June 2013 14: 14
              +1
              In fact, the withdrawal of weapons into space has been prohibited by international treaties for quite some time.
              1. GP
                GP 12 June 2013 21: 50
                +1
                Quote: No_more
                In fact, the withdrawal of weapons into space has been prohibited by international treaties for quite some time.


                Exactly until banned until a critical mass of countries capable of mastering the launch of weapons into space accumulate. The more countries, the less important these treaties are. The need for technical excellence will automatically force prohibitive countries to ignore treaties.
            2. Thomas A. Anderson
              Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 14: 16
              0
              fool then go ahead take the stone ax and knock down the mammoths
              1. Aljavad
                Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 42
                0
                From the beginning, they must clone them successfully. Then find what to feed - This is another question. And then a mona and an ax. Do you like stone? Original!
          2. Phantom Revolution
            Phantom Revolution 12 June 2013 11: 47
            +3
            Quote: Polar
            Military systems in space must be banned unequivocally and forever

            I don’t agree here, war is the engine of progress, without it we would live in the Stone Age. Military technology finds its place in peaceful life, only a kick in the ass and the threat of destruction makes humanity not relax.
            1. Atlon
              Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 06
              +3
              Quote: Phantom Revolution
              I don’t agree here, war is the engine of progress, without it we would live in the Stone Age

              I also do not agree. The main engine of progress, not war, but Laziness. Even in war. Too lazy to wave a sword, here is a machine gun. Too lazy to run, but exoskeleton. And in the civilian sphere, laziness is the only MAIN engine of progress! wink
              1. Thomas A. Anderson
                Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 14: 20
                0
                No. no, in the war the development of weapons is not due to the fact that they are tired of swinging the sword .... The main goal, as efficiently as possible, faster, better .... In general, it’s clear and so ..
              2. pensioner
                pensioner 12 June 2013 14: 34
                0
                Exactly !! Laziness is the main engine of n / t progress !. I remember when I was young I worked at one scientific installation. Thanks to one homemade product, it was automated. He came, turned on everything and smoked. And the rest sat for hours overwriting the readings of the devices, there was no time to piss. I came somehow "after yesterday", turned it on, made up chairs, lay down with A. Weil's book "Group Theory and Quantum Mechanics" (I don’t understand what is the main thing, I don’t understand. Neither of these is almost a boom). Asleep. I wake up from some roar! There is one tough boss standing on top of me, as red as a watermelon. Like I'm not sleeping at the workplace. I do not rewrite instrument readings. Well, I tell him "Wait 5min". Here the "Consul" spanked my point. He says "Schedule build!" Then my plotter purred and put a dot on the graph. "Clean up" says. "Yesterday" I say. Well, I couldn't find what to ... "Don't sleep anyway!" and left.
              3. Phantom Revolution
                Phantom Revolution 12 June 2013 19: 53
                0
                Quote: Atlon
                I also do not agree. The main engine of progress, not war, but Laziness. Even in war. Too lazy to wave a sword, here is a machine gun. Too lazy to run, but exoskeleton. And in the civilian sphere, laziness is the only MAIN engine of progress! wink

                Laziness also plays a role, but not as much as fear.
              4. Aljavad
                Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 46
                0
                Laziness gave rise to war. And the war left the parent far behind as an engine of breakthrough technology. But laziness takes breadth.
              5. smile
                smile 13 June 2013 02: 41
                0
                Atlon
                Vo-in ... oia, oia ... the same opinion ... that's just how to convince some dissenting people around :)))) by the way, the monument of laziness already exists - the Leaning Tower of Pisa ... it all falls ... falls ..and everyone is waiting ... waiting ... and everyone is too lazy to fix it !!!!!
              6. Revolver
                Revolver 13 June 2013 03: 27
                0
                Quote: Atlon
                Quote: Phantom Revolution
                I don’t agree here, war is the engine of progress, without it we would live in the Stone Age

                I also do not agree. The main engine of progress, not war, but Laziness. Even in war. Too lazy to wave a sword, here is a machine gun. Too lazy to run, but exoskeleton. And in the civilian sphere, laziness is the only MAIN engine of progress! wink

                10500 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
          3. Metlik
            Metlik 12 June 2013 22: 13
            -1
            Quote: Polar
            Military systems in space must be banned unequivocally and forever

            But why?
            The advantages of space wars:
            1 Civilians do not suffer
            2 Industry and settlements are not destroyed
            3 Nature does not suffer
            Isn't it better to ban weapons on earth?
            1. Aljavad
              Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 49
              0
              The main goals will still be on Earth.
          4. Aljavad
            Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 40
            0
            Crossbows were forbidden, buckshot was forbidden, etc., etc. Who complied - where are they? Pali.
        2. Phantom Revolution
          Phantom Revolution 12 June 2013 11: 49
          +2
          Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
          In general, it’s time to take up space already, new engines, bases on the moon, orbital bases, you need to enter the military area there, and not raise rats on the ISS ....

          Of course, but you probably don’t understand why rats are raised, experiments are carried out on them like living organisms, in order to find out how weightlessness acts on the body and then apply to other organisms, including humans.
          1. No_more
            No_more 12 June 2013 14: 18
            +2
            Rats have been raised there for a long time, because it is more convenient to make money out of money on the ground. Here Elon Musk - well done, a man of the future. He and his Space Dragon stirred up this "space world politburo" on which a bunch of parasites feed and lie to everyone that space is still a long time, expensive and unprofitable.
          2. Thomas A. Anderson
            Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 14: 25
            -2
            Have been experiencing for 40 years fool You don’t understand how it affects? belay If all this is shown to scientists of the USSR, how many years have passed, what technologies and capabilities, and then to show what the current space industry is doing .... They will discard skates from this ...
        3. poquello
          poquello 12 June 2013 13: 02
          +3
          "Techrevolution will only be in the space field, but on earth there is no point in squeezing out something .."

          This is when everything on Earth will be quietly peaceful, and now the use of completely new solutions is quite possible and necessary for the same personal security.
          1. Thomas A. Anderson
            Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 14: 26
            -2
            If everything is calm on earth, then in general everything will degrade into temporary dinosaurs
        4. Gato
          Gato 12 June 2013 13: 21
          -1
          "Whatever our physicists do, in the end we get a bomb anyway"
        5. Aljavad
          Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 37
          0
          The philosophy is sweet but romantic. Locomotive - defense, and on the moon from whom? Have not understood yet. In addition, "they are always preparing for the last war." And what was there? "Further, higher, faster." Life makes adjustments, but the principle is unshakable.
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 13 June 2013 09: 27
        0
        Quote: Algor73
        T-50 also flies without weapons.

        Your information is out of date. Weapons have long been tested on the t-50. And on the Internet there are videos on this topic.
  3. USNik
    USNik 12 June 2013 10: 30
    +1
    providing rotation of the 5-blade rotor, as well as two screws mounted on a wing of a small scale on the sides of the machine

    I can’t understand why two screws, two gears and two shafts are better than a configuration with a pushing screw on the tail boom?
    1. Perforator
      Perforator 12 June 2013 10: 44
      +2
      I support. When speeding, the compensating screw could probably deviate up to 90 degrees backward, giving even greater speed, and the rotation compensation could be aerodynamic due to the tail unit. Helicopter with OBT so to speak. However, I am an amateur in aviation.
      1. Atlon
        Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 08
        0
        Quote: Perforator
        and rotation compensation could be aerodynamic due to the tail.

        Could ... The moment is too big.
        1. Aljavad
          Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 52
          0
          And if coaxial?
    2. Aljavad
      Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 51
      0
      So they look ... than. And is it better.
    3. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 13 June 2013 09: 40
      +1
      Quote: USNik
      I can’t understand why two screws, two gears and two shafts are better than a configuration with a pushing screw on the tail boom?

      It is better that they replace the tail rotor, which serves to compensate for the reactive moment of the helicopter, and at the same time reduces the overall efficiency of the helicopter. When the propellers are arranged like in an X3 helicopter at low speeds, it acts as a compensating screw, while at high speeds it mainly serves for forward thrust, and the developed vertical tail unit is quite enough to compensate for the reactive moment.
      A variant of a helicopter with a pushing propeller is more or less developed with two rotors, which is not easy to do.

      X3 has little in common with a gyroplane: a gyroplane is a plane whose rotational force is replaced by a propeller, which is spun by an incoming air stream (it does not have a drive from the engine, or it is temporary for initial spin-up).
  4. pensioner
    pensioner 12 June 2013 10: 33
    +1
    It will be a pity if not our helicopters overcome the border of 5 okm / hour ...
    1. Atlon
      Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 09
      0
      Quote: retired
      It will be a pity if not our helicopters overcome the border of 5 okm / hour ...

      These are not helicopters. Helicopters will never overcome such a line. Drawn.
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 12 June 2013 13: 25
        0
        I read that a huge prize was assigned for overcoming 500 km / h of the line (some eccentric from England is ready to give). Clean helicopter. is it possible to select a flight mode, perhaps, for a short-term overcoming this milestone? talked with military helicopter pilots in Torzhok on this topic. They didn’t seem to faint, but they strongly disbelieve in this possibility. But they did not deny ...
        That is not too lazy to search http://www.russianhelicopters.aero/ru/press/publications/2347.html Also, like 500 are going to fly.
  5. Yeraz
    Yeraz 12 June 2013 10: 46
    +3
    A cool photo picked up for the article)
  6. Makarov
    Makarov 12 June 2013 10: 50
    +1
    One question - why? I doubt that at this speed the car will be maneuverable, definitely not more maneuverable than "rooks", it will not fly away from the missiles .... I also understand the climb rate - this is important, but quickly get to the point and then work at speeds like everyone else, and at the same time create super-complicated and, accordingly, expensive cars .... maybe I missed something?
    1. Atlon
      Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 10
      +2
      Quote: Makarov
      One question - why?

      What do you mean why?! belay Wunderwaffle for cutting dough! fellow
  7. tarks
    tarks 12 June 2013 11: 16
    +1
    uh negative ... said the harsh Russian men.
  8. crambol
    crambol 12 June 2013 11: 32
    +2
    Quote: Mikhado
    But in Russia you don’t hear anything about this ...

    Error! Work is underway and messages were with photographs from some exhibition. Models of high-speed cars were either presented, either Mil, or Kamov, I do not remember.
    1. El13
      El13 12 June 2013 12: 48
      +1
      topwar.ru/27923-rossiyskiy-skorostnoy-vertolet-poyavitsya-v-2018-godu.html
  9. pinecone
    pinecone 12 June 2013 11: 43
    0
    "Demonstrator". Never heard such a word. Experienced, experienced, ostentatious, or ostentatious - forge knows him.
    1. GP
      GP 12 June 2013 21: 57
      -1
      Quote: pinecone
      "Demonstrator". Never heard such a word. Experienced, experienced, ostentatious or ostentatious- forge knows.


      And there is. In the literal sense and in essence, in Russian "demonstrator" is ostentatious. Experimental, experienced - this is from another opera, usually not shown until it is ready for production.
    2. Aljavad
      Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 57
      0
      "Technology Demonstrator" - All the air magazines have been complete for the past 25 years. And PAK-FA and XF-22 and X-35 and T-50.
  10. Gato
    Gato 12 June 2013 11: 50
    0
    And what they do not like convertoplan type V-22? The speed is also about 460 km / h (which, probably, is not the limit in airplane mode)
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 13 June 2013 01: 57
      0
      Hemorrhoids a lot.
  11. USNik
    USNik 12 June 2013 11: 51
    +4
    Quote: crambol
    Quote: Mikhado
    But in Russia you don’t hear anything about this ...

    Error! Work is underway and messages were with photographs from some exhibition. Models of high-speed cars were either presented, either Mil, or Kamov, I do not remember.

    Kamov, there are projects, but decided to saturate aviation with traditional, well-developed schemes
    1. arutun
      arutun 12 June 2013 14: 32
      +1
      This option would be very suitable first of all for small civil aviation, especially in difficult-to-reach regions, say, at a distance of 1000-1200 km, at a speed of just over 400 km / h. normal regional flight. We will wait, maybe the military will be satiated until 2020, then they will think about the citizen.
      1. Aljavad
        Aljavad 13 June 2013 02: 00
        0
        First, it is necessary to RISE this "small GA" itself, then to achieve its profitability and then it will order itself the equipment as needed.
        And it is unlikely that this scheme will become economical.
        Car.
  12. olegff68
    olegff68 12 June 2013 11: 57
    +3
    In pursuit of speed, they completely abandon maneuverability. The main screw does not have a skew mechanism and serves only for take-off and creating lift in flight, flight control is carried out by aircraft i.e. at speed. At zero and near zero speeds, only a turn around the axis, without a skew mechanism, no flights sideways, backward, funnel, etc.
    1. Atlon
      Atlon 12 June 2013 12: 13
      +1
      Quote: olegff68
      The main screw does not have a skew mechanism and is used only for take-off creating lift in flight, flight control is carried out by aircraft i.e. at speed. At zero and near zero speeds, only a turn around the axis, without a skew mechanism, no flights sideways, backward, funnel, etc.

      Here it is ... It’s easier and cheaper than an ordinary wing. The only plus is vertical takeoff / landing. As for the reliability and carrying capacity, an airplane with a bearing plane of the handicap will give ... It is inconvenient to even mention the cost.
      It reminded me of an old joke:
      A man comes to the patent office, with the completion of a pencil. The meaning is to make the stylus 2 cm shorter, since they still do not scribble to the end, they throw out the stub. Patented, awarded.
      A year later another man comes, also with a pencil. Since there is no stylus at the tip of the pencil, why translate wood? Cut two cm! They patented, awarded ... Result: The pencil became 2 cm shorter.
  13. anarh
    anarh 12 June 2013 12: 26
    +4
    Quote: Algor73
    T-50 also flies without weapons.

    Faq there.
    T 90 and with a weapon flies.
    Low.
    But these are insignificant details. smile
    1. sashka
      sashka 12 June 2013 13: 50
      0
      Quote: anarh
      Faq there.
      T 90 and with a weapon flies.
      Low.

      When it comes to high technology, the tanks here are not even near .. Until there is no production of its element base. All other conversations are just empty words, about nothing ...
  14. anarh
    anarh 12 June 2013 12: 32
    0
    Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
    you need to enter the military area there, and not to grow rats on the ISS ....


    All true.
    But in this context, the word rat needs to be quoted.
    So it will be more correct.
    However, perhaps this is a temporary and forced measure.
    I - about "rats" to feed.
  15. anarh
    anarh 12 June 2013 12: 38
    +1
    Quote: Polar
    Military systems in space must be banned unequivocally and forever

    And the winner is the one who first puts a bunch on these bans.
    As Vasily Ivanovich said - here I got a map and flooded. smile
  16. WS
    WS 12 June 2013 13: 03
    +1
    Scary to sit in X3 screws right at the door
  17. sashka
    sashka 12 June 2013 13: 07
    0
    We have just started talking about it. And there is already a Crowd of Proposers the same thing, but at a different price .. Who is "draining"? All other "conversations" are empty chatter .. Which does not commit to anything .. Look inside yourself and you will find. This is for the FSB and the SVR ..
  18. Thomas A. Anderson
    Thomas A. Anderson 12 June 2013 14: 32
    +1
    In general, I believe that the future will be in systems such as dukopters, quadrocopters and jet VTOL
    1. sashka
      sashka 12 June 2013 23: 03
      +1
      Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
      the future is for systems like dvukoptery, quadrocopters

      The Russian language is Great and Mighty. These phrases can cause so many options, and we actually have NANOcopters. They are simply not visible. Judging by the cost, they are simply huge. But they are NANO. So you will not see, but they are .. The rest of the world nervously smokes on the sidelines.
  19. svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 14: 57
    +1
    They are already flying, but we still have projects and models
    Mi-X1

    Ka 92


    Ka 102

    1. ayyildiz
      ayyildiz 12 June 2013 15: 12
      +1
      Ka-xnumx handsome.
    2. sashka
      sashka 12 June 2013 22: 23
      +2
      Still, in front, add a couple of propellers and from below. Well and of course a nuclear reactor. Then, for sure, everything will work for us and will fly ON MANUAL. The word is funny. So someone runs this mess ... And these .. what to take from them. just silly. They do what horrible and it flies with them. And we are all having fun with models ... We promise and build projects.
  20. svp67
    svp67 12 June 2013 15: 00
    +2
    But I really like it - purely externally and according to ideas ..
    Ka 90
  21. AIR-ZNAK
    AIR-ZNAK 12 June 2013 15: 50
    +2
    At first there was ballooning. To name a few balloons. Then the airships. Then the ICE and the wing were connected and the plane turned out. Then the piston engine ceased to give the required results from it to increase speed and load capacity. They came up with turbojet and turboprop engines. This very thing we come to that we are stuck in a ceiling of primary indicators. And that means it's time to think about the engine on slightly different principles of work. What? scientists know better. And whoever creates the new engine first will ride the white horse. A qualitative breakthrough is needed. And the refinement of what exists is all for tomorrow, and not for the day after tomorrow.
  22. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 12 June 2013 16: 50
    0
    Well, what are we looking forward to, what will the Russian aircraft designers surprise us with?
  23. crambol
    crambol 12 June 2013 17: 48
    0
    Quote: svp67
    They are already flying, but we still have projects and models

    If you went on a camping trip with a backpack, you should know that it is best to go last, as the leading flaws are leveled.
  24. uzer 13
    uzer 13 12 June 2013 21: 29
    0
    The demonstrator is not yet a serial device, but something like a concept car. You also have to look at the outstanding flight qualities. If there is no screw swashplate, this is, of course, a gyroplane. From similar designs of the 30s of the last century, it differs in the possibility of a drive of the rotor in take-off mode. Only if the pitch of the rotor is not adjustable, then the flight mode must be adapted to this screw. This means that the range of speeds at which the declared characteristics are fulfilled is narrow enough that can turn into large problems Mami in the operation of serial samples (if they appear) .Not only accidentally made a demo copy.
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 13 June 2013 02: 08
      0
      Cerva seemed to have a drive too. Otherwise, everything is correct.
  25. Semurg
    Semurg 12 June 2013 22: 03
    0
    Everything goes in a spiral gyro 30years and this unit is proof of this.
  26. gregor6549
    gregor6549 13 June 2013 18: 39
    0
    Again noise and again out of topic. This machine is still only a demonstrator of those technologies that interested firms would like to foist on the Customer, if he shells out and gives money for a full-scale development program and production of such a "miracle". True, as a result of the development and manufacture of the demonstrated technologies and "miracle" only a third will remain, and even that can go to the basket. So show and reality are two big differences. But in principle, a completely normal approach. Ordered because he also does not always know what he wants and what the industry can do, and such demonstrators are designed to reduce the risk of ordering something, I don't know what.