I am curious why this was thought necessary at the time. Harrier Carriers weren't yet a thing.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Little known / experimental aircraft
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
I am curious why this was thought necessary at the time. Harrier Carriers weren't yet a thing.
Found this the other day while looking for the end of the Internet: Sikorsky HR2S-1W. Prototype HR2S (aka H-37) converted for AEW. Didn't work so well - piston engine helo shaking the hell out of 1950's electronics. Good example of the idea outrunning the technology.
I am curious why this was thought necessary at the time. Harrier Carriers weren't yet a thing.
The Brits thought it was a good enough idea. This thing still flies.
The Brits thought it was a good enough idea. This thing still flies.
Oh I know, and the new SKASaC birds are pretty cool too, but it's an idea born of necessity; i.e., how to get AEW on a Harrier Carrier when those are the only carriers you've got. What I was curious about was why the Navy was interested in an AEW helo back in the '50s when there were more than enough conventional carriers to go around.
I found the replacement for the TH-57.
Have there been any recent attempts at designing a helicopter with rotor tip engines?
I found the replacement for the TH-57.
Have there been any recent attempts at designing a helicopter with rotor tip engines?
You mean this?
http://www.gizmag.com/dragonfly-df1-helicopter/14539/
Tip drive is the Holy Grail of helicopter wishes - no weighty transmission.
GroundPounder
Well-Known Member
Was I the only one that thought that the guy kneeling was experiencing his last minutes intact?
And no anti torque requirements just a tail rotor for directional control.
Because it was the 50s and money and good idea fairies were plentiful?Found this the other day while looking for the end of the Internet: Sikorsky HR2S-1W. Prototype HR2S (aka H-37) converted for AEW. Didn't work so well - piston engine helo shaking the hell out of 1950's electronics. Good example of the idea outrunning the technology.
I am curious why this was thought necessary at the time. Harrier Carriers weren't yet a thing.
Sikorsky archive said Navy testing resulted in the decision to use FW AEW aircraft vice a RW due to better performance.
http://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S+56 HR2S-1H-37.php
Last edited:
I thought it was going to go total yard-sale about 6 times. Pretty solid flapping visible at 4:30, too... nifty.
It was John Young in an interview for Playboy. Only reason I remember was that I did my Senior High research paper on Columbia's first flight and my teacher failed me because she didn't consider Playboy to be an appropriate source. The head of the English Department felt otherwise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_Firefly
Maybe the way to beat a heat-seeking manpad is to have an electric aircraft? After watching that Cobra take a missile last week, you start to wonder about every alternative.
Maybe the way to beat a heat-seeking manpad is to have an electric aircraft? After watching that Cobra take a missile last week, you start to wonder about every alternative.
Cool (no pun intended). Electric motors still get hot, but probably not near as hot as an internal combustion or turbine engine. FWIW, I was looking at a LongEZ on the FLIR today. Having the exhaust go through the prop at the back diffused a LOT of IR signature! A small 100-ish hp engine probably contributed as well. I know UES have a lot less contrast on the FLIR than HIRSS, which have less contrast than straight exhaust on the H-60.
Engines aren't the only heat source on an aircraft and modern 'imagining IR' SAM's take advantage of it.