Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
of Soviet
of Designs
Associates,
Ltd.
Prepared for Aeromechanics Laboratory AVRADCOM Research and Technology Ames Research Center under Contract NAS2-10062
Laboratories
N/LSA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Scientific and Technical Information Branch 1983
observation
would indicate
that there
philosophies
of rotary-wing
not be surprised
and operational
In view of this anticipated duality similarities dissimilarities, of and itbecomes especially interesting to developa deeperunderstanding the subject.hiscan bc done by showing not onlyWHAT of T is
either varianceor in agreementinthe Soviet at design and operationalhilosophyof helicopters p with thoseintheWest, but also WHY. The need forsuch a comparative study of Soviet vs.Western helicoptersas recognized the w by Researchand Technology Laboratoriesf the U.S.Army AviationR&D o Command, cspcciaUyby Dr.
Richard M. Carlson, Director the Labs.Consequently, contract conduct this of a to taskwas awarded through NASA to International TechnicalAssociates, Ltd.,and Mr. Ronald A. Shinn was designated
by the Labs as monitor of the project for PartI,"GeneralComparison of Designs." Mr. Wayne D. Mosher monitored the preparation Part If,"Evaluation Weight,Maintainability, Design of of and Aspectsof Major Components." The results the tasksperformed arc presentedin thistwo-partreportas outlinedbelow: of PART I. General Comparison of Designs. Here basicdesignaspects existing of Sovietheli-
copters,as wellas hypothetical helicopters representing optimum configurationsescribedin the d Sovietbook, "Helicopters-Selection DesignParameters" M.N. Tishchcnkoct allarccornparcd of by with selected estern representatives. W PART If. Evaluation Weight,Maintainability Design Aspectsof Major Components. In of and
thistask,a deeper comparativeinsight intodesignand operational philosophiessgained by exami ining (a) weight-prediction methods and weight trends, (b) maintainability, (c)overall merits of component designs, and (d) classification ranking of helicopter and configurations transport for
operations. In preparation forPartI, nineproductionand fourSoviethypothetical helicopters, a total and of fourteen Western helicoptersepresentingross-weight r g classes rangingfrom under 12,000 to over 100,000 pounds were includedin thestudy.Thisphaseof thework represented look intothe overa alldesignphilosophy of Soviet vs.Wcstcm helicopters. Also includedwas a comparison of sixproduction and two hypothetical Sovietengines, nd thirteen esternengines, epresenting a W r powcrplants installed thecompared helicopters. in Upon completion of the above work, review copiesof the reportwere printed(courtesyof in February 1981, and distributed the manufacturersof the Western to
helicopters containedin the study,along with a request thatthey reviewand correct thematerial related theirproducts, to whilethematerial related toRussianhelicopters engines and was submitted to the U.S. Army ForeignScienceand Technology Centerfor their comrncntsand suggestions. The responsewas very good, and valuableadditional nformation, well as basic i as up-to-date data was obtainedand incorporated intothefinal eport. r
iii
In production
for
Part
I of
the
Study and
of
Soviet
nine
a total
representing study. Western thirteen included. Upon Boeing helicopters related to the response obtained, This
included
helicopters. Western
comparison representing
production
powerplants
completion Company)
of
the in
review and
copies distributed
of
the
report
were
printed
of
Vertol
to the they
contained products,
in the while
with
a request
that
to their
material
related
and engines
Foreign good,
comments
as well as basic
and incorporated meantime, was the unveiled corresponding aspects of regarding data (referred turboshaft along Soviet the with the
transport in June,
helicopter 1981,
with
the
Lotarev
D-136
machine book
postulated
hypothetical generation
actually Taking
engines.
D-136
turboshaft,
undersigned
prototype' 52-SR),
in this
work
while
to date
is contained of Part I of
in the 'A
comparison. Study of Soviet vs. Western helicopters Helicopters' as represented was by made AeroGmbH, served as a
contributions
of the Textron,
of Western Company,
Helicopter Aircraft.
Boeing
Sikorsky
Other and
contributors
valuable greatly
and
monitor, editors
R. D. Semple
of the sugges-
Technology
thanks set
by Mrs.
W. L. Metz
aspects.
Upper July
Pa., USA
W. Z. Stepniewski
iv
List of Syrnbols
Introductory
Considerations 1 2 4 4 8 19 20 26
Objectives ................................................. Helicopter Groups ............................................ Selection of Gross Weight ........................................ Design Effectiveness Criteria for Hovering and Vertical Climb ................... Design Effectiveness Criteria for Forward Flight ........................... Some Aspects of Design Philosophy .................................. Configurational Aspects ......................................... Concluding Remarks ...........................................
Powerplants 29 30 33 40 46 48
Introduction ................................................ Auxiliary Relationships ......................................... Comparison of Engines Installed in Helicopters of up to 12,000-1b Gross Weight Class ..... Comparison of Engines Installed in 12,000 to 30,000-1b Gross Weight Class Helicopters .... Comparison of Engines Installed in the 30,000 to lO0,O00-1b and Over 100,000-1b Gross Weight Class Helicopters .................................... Concluding Remarks ............................................
Helicopters
of the
Up-to-12,000-lb
Basic Data ................................................. Hovering and Vertical Climb Aspects .................................. Energy Aspects in Hover ......................................... SHP Required Aspects in Level Flight at SL, ISA ........................... Energy Aspects in Forward Flight ................................... Productivity ............................................... General Discussion and Concluding Remarks ............................
Helicopters
of the
12,000
to 30,000-1b
Gross
Weight
Energy Aspects in Hover ....................................... SHP Required Aspects in Level Flight at SL, ISA ......................... Energy Aspects in Level Flight, SL, ISA .............................. Productivity .............................................. General Discussion and Concluding Remarks ........................... Appendix - Chapter 4 ........................................
30,000
to lO0,000-1b
Hypothetical Helicopters ....................................... Basic Data ............................................... Hovering and Vertical Climb Aspects ................................ Energy Aspects in Hover ....................................... SHP Required Aspects in Level Flight at SL, ISA ......................... Energy Aspects in Level Flight, SL, ISA .............................. Productivity .............................................. General Discussion and Concluding Remarks ...........................
Over
lO0,O00-1b
Gross
Weight
Helicopters 210 218 225 235 235 242 249 253 255
Compared Helicopters ........................................ Basic Data ............................................... Hover and Vertical Climb Aspects ................................. Energy Aspects in Hover ....................................... SHP Required Aspects in Level Flight at SL ............................ Energy Aspects in Level Flight, SL, ISA .............................. Productivity .............................................. General Discussion and Concluding Remarks ........................... Append/:< - Chapter 6 ........................................
Overview
of Design
Parameters
and
..............................................
Principal Design Parameters ..................................... Weight Aspects ............................................ Hovering Aspects ........................................... Forward Flight Aspects ....................................... Energy Aspects ............................................
References
.....................................................
287
vi
Evena superficial
and Western should not design be surprised problems. of this
observation
would
indicate
that
there
differences
in the
and operational
philosophies
of rotary-wing
hand,
in the approach
technical
operational
anticipated a deeper
duality
of similarities
and dissimilarities,
it becomes
especially
to develop
understanding or in agreement
This can be done by showing not only design and operational philosophy of
is either
at variance
helicopters
with those in the West, but also WHY. evaluation and analysis was recognized especially by the Research by Dr. Richard and M.
Aviation
Director
a contract
through by the
of the project. is divided into several separate below. tasks, and the results are presented in this report
which consists of the three parts outlined Part 1. General Comparison Here, representing selected of Designs
of existing
as well as hypothetical
helicopters with
as set forth
representatives
Part II. Evaluation In this task, examining (a) (b) (c) Part III. The
approach and maintainability. Transport vs. Western of various Helicopters approaches to helicopter design using
method
of ranking cargo
configurations
with respect
to a few
missions.
and minimal
performance
indicated
in Part II.
vii
In themeantime, theMil Mi-26heavy-lift transport helicopter withtheLotarev -136 D turboshaftengine unveiled at the Paris Air Show in June 1981. A comparison of this helicopter and was
engine the with the corresponding aspects of Soviet hypothetical machine postulated by Tishchenko milestones et al I indicated that hypothetical contained helicopters in his book and engines. actually Taking represented and goals for the additional the extra inheli-
and D-136
turboshaft,
the undersigned
data along
prototype'
- the hypothetical
helicopter
The revision of Part I of "A Comparative possible spatiale, by the contributions Bell Helicopter Aircraft.
Textron, Other
Company,
contributors
of inspiration
administrative
of the study
The editors
are grateful to Mr. R.D. Semple Labs, and Mr. E.R. Mclnturff review and valuable
of Boeing Vertol,
for their
expert
Our appreciation
and sincere
are extended
W. Z. Stepniewski
viii
b Co
of blades
wing drag coefficient wing lift coefficient power coefficient: thrust coefficient: Cp - 550 HP/A p Vt 3 C r =- T/A p V_ C w =- Wgr/A p V_
CL Cp
CT Cw
C
-ca
0
average blade profile drag coefficient average blade-lift diameter; ft drag; lb coefficient: "cQ ---6CT/O
equivalent
helicopter
drag:
D e =- 32551-P/V;
lb
equivalent flat-plate area; sq.ft fuel flow; lb/unit of time fuel required fuel required per lb of gross weight & 100 n.mi per lb of zero-range payload & 100 n.mi
gross weight; lb altitude; ft height; ft hourly fuel flow; Ib/hr horizontal horsepower; blocking engine weight rotor induced climb efficiency download distance; lift; lb length; ft distance; n.mi ft hinge hp coefficient power coefficient: factor k v = Tmr/War kin d =- RPind/RPid
effect coefficient
kv L
coefficient:
M NGW
n
Much number normal gross weight; number out-of-ground payload; lb housing effect lb
OGE PL PH
pitch-bearing
ix
PI R RP RHP
productivity
index:
P/=
Vcr Wpl/W e
rotor horsepower;
R/C
S SP SHP sfc T t V
rate of climb; fps, or fpm area; sq.ft shaft power; ft-lb/sec, hp lb/hr-hp or hp shaft horsepower;
specific fuel consumption; rotor thrust; lb time; sec, min, or hr speed of flight; kn rate of climb; fps or fpm
e
total rate of ideal flow through rotor tip speed; fps cabin volume; cu.ft vertical induced weight; tail-rotor relative tail-rotor relative hinge velocity; lb or kg psf distance tail-rotor elevation tail-rotor fps
Vt
Vcab
VII
V
W
W X X
Y Y
_ ==-y/R
O_
relative fuel flow at idle angle-of-attack; slope of relative deg or rad fuel flow vs partial power setting transmission efficiency: rloa =- RP/SP
A
770 a 17xm
efficiency
to total-lift slugs/cu.ft
rotor solidity;
a = bc/rrR
Subscripts:
act av c
cont cr e
eng
cnginc forward flat plate fuel gross altitude hovering hovering ideal induced main normal initial rotor rated value ceiling
f fp fu gr H h hc id ind mr NR
0
tab
blade
tf
tr
VTO
V W
of flight
weight
xm e
transmission
e =-(wa,/o_)_ _
xi
Chapter Introductory
Considerations
1.1
Objectives The principal aim of this chapter is to make a general comparison of the state of the art of Soviet and differ-
helicopter
design vs. that of the West (U.S. in particular), design philosophies existing
and geographically
different groups.
There are two basic aspects of the comparison: (1) Presentation ness according of important design parameters, and (2) evaluation of the overall design effective-
With respect to the first of these tasks, it is performed graphically, loading, of the flight*, such input parameters (d) number as: (a) disc loading,
(b) installed
of blades, blade aspect ratios, and rotor solidities, radii ratio, (f) Cr/o and/or
and tall-rotor
to main-rotor
Fz in the considered
and (g) cabin dimensions. again simple listing and suitable graphical presentation of performance
would, by itself, provide some clues regarding the success of design. Here, the following mind: (a) hovering with all engines ceiling, OGE vs. gross weight; (b) rate of vertical (d) service ceiling with all engines and corresponding
climb; (c) forward flight rate of climb, and one engine out; (e) maximum
operating;
operating, range.
and cruise speeds of flight i and (f) payload, This dependent cursory design evaluation
improved
by graphically
presenting
such
power-
performance
of installed
in order to gain a still deeper insight into the overall design effectiveness more detailed criteria are established and discussed,
(aerodynamics, helicopters
and particular
*Items (a), (c), (d), and (f) refer to both lifting and tail rotors.
important
contribution important
or failure
of rotorcraft,
one
of both Soviet and Western for further helicopter weight; specific evaluafuel concom-
of engine
information power
Consequently,
as various
sumption, parisons
and external
However,
the powerplant
are not as indepth as those for the rotorcraft as a whole. these general introductory remarks, it should designs, supplemental be emphasized benefits that in addition to the be
of Soviet through
should
of numerical should
be of significant courses
craft as well as to those who teach academic 1.2 Helicopter Groups the significance
on helicopter
of the comparative
process,
all examined
helicopters
are grouped
(1) Up to 12,000-1b gross weight class (2) (3) 12,000 to 30,000-1b gross weight class 30,000 to 100,000-1b 100,000-1b gross weight class gross weight class. was accepted, it was not difficult Also it was possible gross weight to properly group existing Soviet
classification
to incorporate classes.
the hypothetical
in Tishchenko's
As far as Western designs rotorcraft and, in that process, As a result of this approach,
are concerned,
desirable to include
1. Up to 12,000-1b Gross Weight Class A. Soviet: Mil Mi-2 (original version as produced Mil Mi-2-A (with 2 Allison 250-C20B Kamov Ka-26 by PZL, Swidnik, engines (PZL)) Poland)
Bell Model
2.
12,000
to 30,000-1b
Gross
Weight
Class
A. Soviet: Mil Mi-8 Mil Mi-24D Kamov B. Western: Aerospafiale Boeing Boeing Sikorsky Sikorsky Vertol Verrol CH-3E UH-60A SA330J CH-46E YUH-61A (S-61R) Black Hawk (UTTAS) Puma Sea Knight (UTTAS) Ka-25
3.
30,000 A.
to 100,000-Ib
Gross
Weight
Class
Soviet: Mil Mi-6 Mil Mi-lO Hypothetical Hypothetical 15 metric-ton 24 metric-ton S.R. helicopter S.R. helicopter t 1
B.
CH-53D CH-53E
4.
Over A.
Gross
Weight
Class
52 metric-ton 52 metric-ton
B.
1.3
Selection Absolute
of
Gross Weight of helicopters as well as their relative it becomes important study. since performance are often specific figures quoted missions, published in such rating can be strongly to establish a common affected ground by their for the
performance weight
flying
gross
values. Consequendy,
selection
texts as Jane's 2, Blue Book 3 and manufacturers this weight helicopters evaluation. flying weight as specified brochures, maximum is often determined
gross weight
a truly common
operational
and usually
quoted
in such
better
gross weight
load-carrying
of the rotorcraft.
flying gross weight in this study. object to this approach on the ground that helicopters and/or are,first of all, VTO airspecified
However, craft,
should
hover
OGE under
pressure
and ambient
to satisfy
these aspects,
the following
is proposed: VTO gross weight Should the so-defined will be defined as a gross weight corresponding to hovering OGE at 3000 operational ft, ISA.
value, then
to the others. Criteria for Hovering and Vertical Climb effectiveness of design in hover as a ratio of the ideal
through
the Overall
of Merit (FMoa)
can be defined
in hovering (liPid
= WgrVr-'_h/550)
delivered
by the engines in
that regime of flight OGE. FMoa The ideal power in hovering cases, flight directly, this is easily determined, = HPidlSHPre q (w) of lifting rotor(s) and air density (1.1) (p_)
As to the total engine S/-/P required which either give the such
in some
or in a coefficient
as Cp = f(Cr). by assuming
Should that
difficulty
can be surmounted
the hovering
ceiling is associated
lapse-rate
the SHPTo
their knowledge
of the VTO gross weight: the FMoa value remains variation limits, approximately constant within possible gross weight (main
the shaft as
horsepower
required
by a single-rotor
Wgr4Wgr/_'KR2mr
where
Rmr
is the main rotor radius and air density other available hand, knowing the lapse becomes SHPav h =
P3000
On the horsepower
rate (;ka000)
of the takeoff
at that altitude
where
SHPTo
is the takeoff
is
(Wgr)vT
16.05[(SHPTO)okaOO
Rm
FMoa ] 2/3
(1.2)
The Overall
gross weight)
and, when
use as litde
those shortcomings,
the following
hourly
to zero and ending at one hour of hover time. and crew number as
a con=tent coefficient of 20.22 would replace the 16.05 in Eq (1.2).
weight
empty
are known
being compared,
can be determined
and Ilde-by-llde
configuration=,
Wcr,w-
wt_
i.e, either (Wgr)ma x or (Wgr)vTO; fluids. also represents should
(1.3)
We
be noted
to the
We/Wg r ratio, the (Wpl)t=o/Wg r ratio of design and thus both relationships
an
criterion
effectiveness
be shown
and graphical
hourly uniform
it is suggested should
that
the HFF/Wpl
be computed
flying weight,
should
the
Once the FMoa values are known, HFF However, in order to complete
the calculations
as given by the expression to find the partial power The needed the payload
in the parenthesis
for time
(hours)
in hovering
t > 0,
is calculated
(Wpl)t=
--
HFFt
= f(t)
can be graphically
as in Fig. 1.1.
o
a. (/3 Z
SOVIET
(BOLD)
WESTERN (THIN)
G.
o
...]
tr-
rv
o -1-
0 TIME IN HOURS
Figure
1.1
Relative
hourly
fuel flow
vs. hover
time
helicopters
Rate but
of
Climb
Values
R/C
always
given various
knowledge knowledge
be desirable facilitate
comparing estimates
again,
can greatly
of the vertical
As indicated
rate
of the
ideal flow
through
the
disc
V' in fps is
V' but
550
RHPid/Wg
(1.6)
RHPid and
SHPFMoa
550FMoa/(Wgr/SHP) to the sum of the ideal induced velocity vial and rate
(1.6a) of vertical
equal
In turn,
Vial Can be
expressed as follows:
Vid = w/2p V' (].S)
or, in light
of Eq (1.6a) Via = for w(Wgr/SHP)/I100pFMoa V' and Vid respectively, into Eq (1.7a), and expressing (1.8a) the rate
Eqs the
(1.6a) following
and
(1.8a)
is obtained:
Vcv
60{
[550FMoa/(Wgr/SHP)]
[w(Wgr/SHP)/llOOpFmoa]
(1.9)
from case,
this
equation
that
knowing
the overall
figure
of merit vertical
(FMoa)
and power
loading be
at the T.O or transmission-limited tabulated Hovering on the how graphical for the purpose ceiling abscissa well the (OGE of and
rating-the
rate of climb
can readily
of comparison. IGE) in itself represents it may utilized for an important be considered for the achieving performance as a design various item. effihover is
the T.O
power power
loading, is actually
available of
presentation
the
hovering
ceilings
purpose
of comparison
WEST (THIN)
Fit Z
--I
SOV I ET (BOLD)
o tw > O
i.u
,-" I
T.O SHP LOADING, LB/HP
I
helicopters vs Flight ISA) and Speed. gross criterion grid the Shaft weight horsepower values (in per pound our case, of gross
computed
altitude can
(say, be taken
presented
as a valuable An auxiliary
aerodynamic to the
figurational
effectiveness lines
various permit
equivalent compared
at a glance
of the
of the
Soviet
helicopters, machines
graphical will
of the while
referring lines;
machines
in thin, ---'---"
a background
helicopters
SOVIET
.....
<
ii
OF FLIGHT,
KN
Establishment
of the (SliPWar)
-- f(V) Relationship.
helicopters, However,
actual
flight
test data on SHP vs. flying speed, or manufacturers' tion Soviet could be for a different rotorcraft, gross weight
and/or altitude than required for this comparative are not available as a rule. Consequently, from one altitude there
relationships
is a need
to another,
on flying speed at various gross weights and altitudes, cruise, economic cruise). Additional information maximum
can be provided
by the (usually
rate of climb at SL, ISA and presumably, basis for accomplishment and (3.107)
continuous
An analytical
of Ref. 4.
(SHP/Wg r)
2.413p
-- + 0.296 Wfp
+ pV _ Vt 550Tloa (1.10)
V is the flight speed in kn; hvf is the download in psf; wfp = Wgr/f is the equivalent flat-plate
factor;
hindf
is
the induced
in psf;/a = 1.69V/V
Vt is the tip speed in fps; p is the flight air density drag to the average representing Actually, lift coefficient
to shaft power. (wfp, kvf, hindf, (fa/'fQ), and r/oa). It is evident should be known. However, hence,
unknowns
instance, of kvf _
an assumption
the overall
transmission
efficiency
coefficient represent
can be estimated.
regime, 0.88 < Too < 0.93 would probably It appears unknowns. can usually corresponding (see below); the maximum hence that it would
be desirable that
the values of the Wfp, (_-d/Fg), needed to work the 3 necessary (see Page 5);
the information
(2) SHPmin,
to the maximum
rate of climb in forward flight at a speed Vo whose value can be estimated Vma x or maximum cruising speed (Vcr.max), to the transmission both limit. Consequendy, representing the usually quoted for
power setting,
or that corresponding
in hover and in forward flight may be considerably point doubtful. in conjunction with the two remaining
different. points
forward
that
if one
wants
to use
the
equations
should
be
at the may
V e <_ V<_ Vma x. An actual values the and of the induced power
approach
instance,
kin d _ available
a decision required
was
made
to use
approach, assuming
Vet.max
and solving
flown and
at Wg r = (V e = 128 and
8560 kn,
lb and SHP
= I000
while
for
the
unknowns
following
values
assumed:
Boa = 0.89
hindf = 1.12. Introducing tained, were and the whose the solution into above values into Eq (1.10), psf with a set of two linear (f = 30.3 the equations in wfp and ('_d/_) the values; above was obvalues r)
yielded Eq
When hindf
previously
(SHP/Wg
SHP = (SHP/Wgr)Wg points (see Fig. 1.4). unknowns with weights with some (say,
calculated
for several
thus
resulting
in a perfect
fit of
Once for
all the
in Eq
(1.10)
either
found,
or assumed, curves
determining, gross
(SL, ISA).
Wfp
be recalled
Wfp =
at this
dealing an example
different
should was
(SHP/Wg the
r) = f(V)
curve
in Fig
aboveappears
of recalculating
(SHP/Wor)
for other
weights
and
satisfactory. of the the (SHP/Wg of r) = f(V) the high point relationship speed point from published performance or data by the
coordinates
(Vmax,SHP) n) is concerned,
be directly coordinate
(Ve,StlPmi
neither
r) values
from convention
usually
published x is related
maximum
rate
of
climb
accepted
(R/C)ma
to the known
maximum
setting the
(see Sect.
5, Ch.
Ill,
Ref.
7) can
be taken
as
(Vcf)ma
x is in fpm,
(SHPmin/Wor)
can
be expressed
as follows:
(SHPmin/Wgr)
(SHPmax.cont/Wgr)
--
[(Vcf)ma/33,000#pc
(1.11)
10
DATA SOURCE: USAASTA FINAL REPORT PROJECT No. 66-04 November 1970
I
AIRFOIL DATA: NACA 0012 120(] V mQ m 1000
w
m
Cdo = 0.007
I
FLIGHT TESTS FROM EQ (1.10), APPROXIMATION / t COMPUTED TWO-POINT
0
w /3
0 z <
v
60O
7/
z Z
w
Wgr : 8560
120
140
160
TRUE AIRSPEED
Figure 1.4 Two-point approximation
of measured UH-1H s
11
COMPUTED 0.12
FROM
DATA
IN FIG.
1.4 USING
EQ. (1.10)
0
\
"
I
BASED
ON FIG.
67, REF.
P
/ /
0.10
\
\ \ UH-1H, \ 0.08 \ \ / Wgr = 9500 LB SL, ISA / /
2
\ \ /
U-
0 a
Z
1. trILl O-
o.
"1-
0.06
0.0_0
"
SPEED
'
Jo '
OF FLIGHT, KN
"
120
Figure
1.5
of gross
(SHP/Wg weight
r) with
= f(V) flight
from for
flight
tests
at
higher SL,
altitude ISA.
Wg r = 9500
and
Eq
<1.11)
the
of
the
[Ve, can
(SHPmin/Wgr)] be remedied
point through
can the
be
obtained, first
but
the
abscissa
missing. based
However, single
so-called
approximation in Eq (1.10)
on the
say [Vmax,
In this case, for Wfp only. last value term of in that the speed
values
(1.10) the
with result
equation V e corre-
is
equating
approximate
to (SHPmin/Wg
r) can be obtained
in knots
Ve
0.448"_/'k2v
kindWWfp/p
2'
(1.12)
1.6
and
Table
in order the
to find V e value.
extent
the
assumed based on
rloa
the parameters
were
taken
maximum
values
12
SHAFT
WEIGHT
COMPUTED =
kindf kindf
= 1. IS; "Ca/_
1/45
hindf = 1.20;
0.12
0"101
SPEED OF FLIGHT,
KN
Figure 1.6
Example of approximating a given (SHP/VVg = #(V) curve through r) and various assumed values of noa; kin d and _d/_
the single-point
approach
'
13
be seen
o
eq
from
this figure and the table from minor the "good variation
that
even result
large excursions
II
z
,d
o o
Ve value, in
greater differences
r) for levels. the However, two-point
can be noted
this method fact of
is of the since
<
Z
o _q
Ll
little
< z_
o o o
(SHP/Wgr) the
(SHPmin/Wor) rate of
the
c .-r [
maximum Small
climb
considerations. of assumed as because the V e values results of the far Ve with values as it the permits computed "first rather of the two-point one to large pa-
variations of is the
o fluctuations
<
>
rameters approach
encouraging
4.1
use Eq
with (1.12)
from approx-
<
the
E
z <
r_
El
E Although in the
o ii ._,
< >
r_
and comparison
namic designs,
and configurational
effectiveness
q
o
to one's knowledge
>
regarding plant
< a. o ii
combination. consumption
fuel
o
and pound
of gross
weight can be quite instructive. Knowing setting and the sfc variation having = f(V) the curves, versus engine power established fuel flow be
(SHP/Wor)
H U H H
(HFF)
computed
per pound
for the
of gross weight
whole speed range
can readily
as
><
(HFF/Wgr) = (SHP/Wor)Sfc (1.13)
and r_
the As
plotted. study the above in bold is concerned, curves lines, in thin for the while lines,
"i
it
is again
suggested
Soviet those
helicopters of Western
plotted
rotorcraft,
presented
14
SPEED
OF FLIGHT,
KN
Figure 1.7 Scheme for comparing would SL/ISA An gross form the background (Fig. 1.7). As in the
hourly fuel consumption. preceding case, this comparison is also limited to the
conditions. auxiliary grid of straight 100 n.mi, lines would a means separate expressing permit various one to judge precise constant values of fuel those of the (Fig. consumed per pound machines. levels of
weight
and say,
at a glance comparison
values
for various
However,
in order
to provide helicopters,
FF = (HFF/WgrV)IO0
FF = f(V)
are provided
1.8).
SOVIET
illlll I m e
zz
WESTERN
ts
tw
J
Q. _Z wO
ii
SPEED
OF FLIGHT,
KN
Figure t.8
Scheme for comparing fuel required per lb of gross weight and 100 n.mi of Soviet and Western Helicopters
15
Related
to Payload. for
The fuel
utilization of design
aspects
in the respect
preceding to the
sub-
as a criterion
a comparison design
effectiveness to obtain
aerodycomplete
for a more
and
pound
can be used.
Graphs in Figs.
these
by dividing
the zero
(_) payload
0 is as defined interesting
by Eq (1.3). to see how purposes, as (Wpl)o; as the fuel weight to payload as follows: (neglecting reserves and fuel for ratio would vary with the dis-
for distance
and maneuvers)
can be expressed
(wp_)_ =
where (Wfu)1 is the weight Dividing both sides of fuel required
(win) o _.
(Wfu)_
of the above
equation
and rearranging,
one obtains
(Wf_)_
(Wpl)_ Further HFF _ const; assuming the that for short distances,
(Wot )o
1 (Wpl)2 _ the hourly fuel flow at a given speed remains (1.14) constant,
(Wpl)o
and
Eq (1.14)
can
be rewritten
as
(Wfu )e
(wpl)o
= (Wp/) -(HFF/V)fZ -I (1.14a)
(wo,)e
Dividing one obtains the numerator and denominator
of the
first
term
on
the
right
side of Eq (1.14a)
by (Wpt) o,
(Wfu)_
(Wpl)
I 100 HFF f_
(1.15)
(WOt)oV
In analogy the relative fuel to the FF quantity per discussed one pound Eq (1.14) in the preceding of the zero-range
100
subsection, payload as I00 and HFF/(Wol) one hundred o V can be called nautical miles,
and designated
(FFpl)o,
can now
be written
16
=
(wpl)e
Using the optimal values of the
-1
1 - (_1)o_11oo
(FFpl)o quantity (which is readily obtainable as (FFpl)oop
(1.16)
t =
a z D 0
SOVIET
O.
WESTERN 0 <
uJ m 0 ,,,
U-
FLIGHT
DISTANCE,
N.MI
of flight distance.
the
presently the
described important
methods energy
flight, and
plus
those
discussed helicopters
case,
Soviet
Western
compared. Productivity not also only how the fast cost this index Index_ in fuel task (PI)t can PI. In a comparative a unit evaluation weight To of various can helicopters be delivered in that it is of importance over a given the to know but of the
at which
distance, notion
be accomplished.
yardstick as follows:
respect,
productivity
is introduced
by defining (PI)j =
quantity ] V
[(Wpl)g/We
where flight
is the and
maximum
theoretical empty
payload
W e is the weight
w_ = (w_) - _(_/mo)%,
17
and Eq (1.17)
can be rewritten
as follows: {[(Wpl)o/Wgrl per pound -(_t21100)_ weight Vl(We/Wg and 100 r) nautical miles, and (1.17a) distance
(PI)I " = where FF is (as before) miles. (1.17a), O, 100, can the 2O0, (PI)I and the fuel
required
of gross
is in nautical
Using Eq
distances result (say,
values 300
first the
compared range
helicopters from
for 0 to
several
flight
of speeds
Vma x. The
of this phase
be graphically
presented
as in Fig.
1.10.
x
ua Z
O.
O.
_,_
SPEED OF FLIGHT, KN
_
SPEED OF FLIGHT, KN
productivity
flight distances
Now
values
of the
productivity indicated
index
corresponding
to various
selected
flight
distances
can be plotted
as schematically
in Fig. 1.11.
e_
<
FLIGHT
DISTANCE,
N.MI
productivity
scheme
1.6
Some
Aspects of Design Philosophy and graphically presenting the most important the design philosophy design parameters of Soviet
may be indicated. Aspects. It appears that helicopters designed in the West generally than their have much better
conditions
shaft takeoff
per pound
of gross weight
per pound =
of gross'weight X/_o/SSO
in hover at SL/1SA.
(HP/Wgr)id h
NORM GW
flo .J t,, "1-
(.9
LL
O O grO"
o 13 z o
n," a. "1"
J
i/"
j.-
o I"1" _1
, / t
<
uJ 13
I ,,
DISC LOADING,
Figure 1.12 Comparison of takeoff and ideal specific
PSF
powers for Soviet and Western helicopters.
Lifting
as important
on the helicopter
ties are listed hence in the comparative 'Average to maximum ophy. Lift (or CT/O) Coefficient. flight and normal values
in graphical
Values of the average lift _e) or CF/O coefficients also represent an important means that aspect greater
If these
conditions,
it obviously
19
would stall
be available aspects
for
under speeds
high and
altitude
altitudes
hand, levels.
low _ This
lead
for hovering
capabilities
of the
takeoff the
purposes,
lift coefficient
in hovering
will be defined
here as
_._ where #v is the download Using helicopters two scales, the factor. magnitudes shown in Fig.
6Cr/a
6kvw/aPo
Vt 2
of both 1.13.
and
CT/o
will
be presented
for the
Soviet
and Western
in the manner
}-
u___.
-J z
UJ UJ
Q'B (9"
NGW _I MAX. V GW SOVIET
t-_ c9
5,T
nn
O"
ULU
_o
<
WESTERN
DISC
LOADING,
PSF
Figure
1.13
A scheme
for
comparingE
and
CT/a
of
Soviet
and
Western
helicopters.
and skill-level
Producibility manufacturing
and
personnel, desirable
design statistical
be hence or,
available of this
rotorcraft. discussion
to limit
main trends
instance, cases
those wherein
in Tishchenko's data
work,
comparisons
to those
is available.
philosophies.
Obviously,
of them
is the selection
20
theoverall helicopter configuration (single-rotor, tandem, coaxial, andside-by-side). However, aspect this
will only be thoroughly to some considered in Part topics tail III of this study. single-rotor management power/main-rotor as one such of the tail topic. can be defined by two coordinates forms. (x and y) Consequently, scheme, of in this part, attention affect will be called aircraft perwith selection configurational of the of the rotor tail-rotor be cited especially the main-rotor ratio those which torque through
and
power
related As shown
parameters, 1.14,
in Fig. should
location in absolute
rotor
whose
values
be registered
as well as relative
(_ = x/R),
(if=y/R)
Figure 1.14
With design
respect
to the have
torque important
it would
be of interest
parameters
tail-rotor of that
a simple
be needed
the following
approximate
relationships at SL/ISA.
Main-Rotor
in Hover
to compensate Trr
the main-rotor =
can be expressed
as follows: (1.18)
(RPmr/Vrrnr)(Rrnr/Xtr)
or denoting
x tr/Rmr
where
Vtrnr
and
Rmr,
respectively, center
tip
speed
(fps), shaft
and
radius
(ft) while
of
the
main
rotor,
and
Xtr
is the distance
of the
tail rotor
the main-rotor
axis (ft),
RPrn r is in ft-lb/sec.
21
the
open-airscrew
type
at SL/ISA
can,
in turn,
be written
RPtr
(Ttr
3/2
/_trPo
FMtr)kblo
(1.19)
where
Rtr
is the
tail-rotor effect -
radius
(ft),
FMtr
figure
of merit
account-
blocking
For the
Fenestron
there
is no contraction
3(2
(RPtr)
F = ,Ttr
/_
FMtr
(1.19a)
In turn,
RPmr
appearing
in Eq (1.18)
can
De presented
as follows:
where
download
factor
in hover;
Wor is the
helicopter
gross
weight;
and FMmr
is the
main-rotor
Substituting expressions
into
Eq (1.18a)
in turn,
into
Eqs (1.19)
and (1.19a),
the
follow-
open-airscrew
is obtained:
RPtr
(lev3h`z WgrX/Wmrl2Po'll/tm
r FMmr
FMtr
(1.21)
(RPtr)F
(kVh
Wgr_/Vtrnr
FMmr
Xtr)
/x/TrRtrP
o FMtr
(1.21a)
Writing modified
Wgr/rrR2mr
instead
of power
Wmr ratio
in Eq
(1.20) open
and
then
dividing becomes
Eq
(1.21)
and
(1.21a)
by
the
so-
Eq (1.20),
the sought
for the
airscrew
(RPtr/RPmr)
hVh - 3/2
blo
(_/Vtm
r _
tr)
3/2
(Rrnr/Rtr)/FMtrX/FMmr
(1.22)
one,
(RPtr/RPrnr)F
(kvh_/Vtmr
Xtr)
3/2
(0. 707Rmr/Rtr)/FMtr
(1.22a)
It
can
be
from are:
Eqs the
(1.22) ratio of
and the
(1.22a) ideal
that
the
most
influencing
the
(RPtr/RPmr) and the the One the 3/2 first can ratio power; power).
induced main-rotor
distance
to the
(Xtr), and of
next Of
figure
significance
merit
as it appears it may
1/2
power. to
see hence
in comparing
of various
helicopters,
be of interest
22
aspects
as the
(_tr/Rrnr) induced
and vdocity
ratios rotor.
as well
as to
indicate
the
as well as graphical and on (Viamr/Vtm various the values described There T (lb) static
form. r) ratios can readily be computed to complete They from the data usually
published (1.22)
in order
calculations or
are required.
can be assumed,
approximated of Rotor
in the FM =
available rotor
results power RP
of
many
tower for
and/or full-scale
stand lifting
tests and
between
thrust
(ft-lb/sec)
or Cp = (C 7) under in terms
conditions average
can be expressed
of the
(I/6)oTrR2pVr
2_
(1.23)
while
the rotor
power
can be given
in terms
of the total
blade
drag coefficient
(_D):
RP
(I/8)olrR2
pVt 3 E D
(1.24)
respect rotor
to the solidity
ideal ratio.
rotor
power,
as a function
of the
blade
average
lift coeffi-
Remembering
Rpi , =
and substituting it into the above equation (1.23) for T, and simplifying, one obtains
RPia
O.048(c;-_
)3/2nR2
p Vt 3
(1.25)
Dividing
Eq (1.25)
by Eq (1.24),
the expression
of merit
becomes:
Fm
0.385X/_(_
3/21Co)
(1.26)
RP blade
= f(T)
or
Cp
= f(C T)
tip
Reynolds
FM tower results
solidities. 1.16).
of
the
UH-61A
were
question
to other
of various blade
solidity and
of rotor E value, t
distribution) constant:
difference
the actual
coefficients
ACol_l=eonst
CD
--
C--Did
const
23
Oo = 0.0996
_-'-_i
" FOR
0.6
......... 'j f_'"' ' ............. 't .... .... '
0.5'
;_dl_*_"t
,t"
I-
E
I.,I.I
0.4
Ii
:i
_:
__'_
;i!:l?:
_t :_.:
',1_?'_': iii,tZit!:i:i:?i:
O
LI.I
. , , ]
, ] _ , ,
] t ] _
, ?i i
_ _t ;
r; ; ,
i ,
, .
. ;
h _, i
_ *! ,
p,
, d
_ ,
, 0.2
'.11_ II
';'.;.
I..
'i _....
'11.1.11:';1: , .......
::'.::I;.'.._
:':
'!
/ [
. ..........
'
:,
;:
_i _4+ _+
; ' -_
! .,_,
::
,." .T_*
' ,-++.
' t
i_; _-+-,
: .
........... 0.1
..
.I
....
t,
:El:: D,
#' ,:;:_l,
..... ....... "
N !
,_ _.H[_i, It,,
" "_
r
l_,
_-_'_,
: .
'.l
_+-_
t: !
J|Ll.,i_I
+_ _ 7 r'_ '-
I t
l',lll,;q
_,*
',t
'i"
,
+
l
........" '+-
I
r
......
"-"_
' *_
0.1
0.2 AVERAGE
0.3 BLADE
0.4 LIFT
0.5 COEFFICIENT,
0.6 _'I_
0.7
0.8
Figure 1.16
Example
In turn,
making
FM = ] in Eq (1.26),
as follows:
O.385-_t
3,2 X/r_ and but 1, 2, 3 .... with to those _, representing can be written
to the drag
available coefficient
_O
= f(_
o values,
at this new;
the same
_0,
"CDid,
A_O
0.385g_anx/-d_
CD o --0.385_'/_X/'_o
Substituting
the above
into
Eq
(1.26),
the following
is obtained:
0.385"_ 3_
FM 1 =
coo +
of the value above (o_)
- V o)
equation by C'--D while o, as multiplying by _/-_o,
the
and rotor
of merit
can be expressed
24
Rotor-Power by the
Once then
the the
values
of the transas
computed
efficiency
(r?oa -= RHP/SHP
= RP/SP)
in hover
be determined
rtoa
_Xmtot/[
(RPtr/RPmr)]
(1.27)
total
mechanical for
accounting rlxmto
for
the
actual
transmission a good
utilized
t = 0.96
would
represent
of the
Overall
Figure
of Merit.
Knowing
r/oa,
the overall
figure
of merit
FMoa and the so-obtained described Ratio rotor (f) hub and values in Section may 1. to Main-Rotor is accounted main-rotor Power for be used
1?oaFM m r/kvh/2 those resulting from the OGE hovering data, as pre-
for checking
viously
in Forward in the
Flight
that flat
the plate
tailarea
drag in the
estimates
there
torque in that
in forward at SL/ISA
a fixed
vertical
empennage;
becomes
r
while Ttr is given by the Eq (1.18a) right-hand
Tt,
Jr
3 (, + 4.Z_%,)(Z_/ae),, v,,,]
in fps. the following expression
(1.28)
as in hovering side of Eq
(1.18a)
for the
is obtained:
e__,, _ e,.r/,
Further assuming that
3(i 4
Eq (1.29) becomes
(1.29)
Idtr =//,
RPtr
), =
RPm r
vt3), t.
25
+ -4
4. 71a2
(1.29a) tr
It should benotedthattheexpressiontheparentheses in in thedenominator thefirsttermof of Eq(1.29a) represents ahypothetical which power remains constant forunvaryingand V rp
In the order of to get the some idea regarding t ratio the may be magnitude calculated engine power of at the Ve setting. they may be used in the (SHP/Wor) = f(V) detail-rotor power losses in forward n and flight, Vcrrnax values (RPrr/RPmr) corresponding to 5HPmi
continuous flight
_?oa values
are estimated,
procedure by using
by
the
fact
that the
SHP
corresponding RPmr
to
Vcrrnax
is usually
directly as
_?oa values,
approximate
can
be readily
calculated
RPmr
550
SHPma
x conrrloa
into
Eq (1.29a). (RPtr/RPmr) Cabin Floor i values, Area into Tloa in forward With aspects aspects flight to can be computed from aspects Eq of (1.27). design
so-refined and
Volume it may
Loading. such
respect as volume
configurational
be of interest one
to look
In order figures
to permit regarding
to investigate b and
these
on where
a common
(Wpl)o/Vca volume
(Wo/)o/Scab
in cu.ft;
helicopters.
design
parameters of the
mance
as special to the
procedure.
for each
considered a way
gross-weight
classes,
of principal information
and performance
constructed
as to include
26
Z [,,.
el) r_
z [.-
t _4
Z Z
,,,J
,-1
e_
Z _u b, ;>
uO
Z z 0
o
Z 0 _ ..a o
r_
Z, 0
z zo_ r-.
27
_.,,
Z Z
,-
" _.
ee
28
Chapter Powerplants
2.1
Introduction A comprehensive comparison the present of the study. state of the art of the are Soviet some helicopter engine powerplants with about those which
of
the
West
is outside
However, in order
there
characteristics
some
approximate
knowledge in the
to perform
the general
comparison
of the two
helicopter
chapter. characteristics lapse rate and with for that comparison and are (1) variation Both these of the sfc with
power not
altitude
characteristics a method-
usually
Soviet
Consequently,
can
ture. Although, there are some as mentioned additional to the above, this study is not directed toward comparison about which may specific of engine some shed weight technologies, knowledge some light may on the
characteristics comparative
rotorcraft
presentation
Two
items
(Weng/SHPTo)
proceedings to the
classes.
Consequently
following 1.
of engines installed
lsotov/PZL Vedeneev
Western (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Allison Allison 250-C20B 250-C30 Arriel T53-L-13 LTS 101-650C-2 1C
29
2.
Engines
installed
in 12,000
to 30,O00-1b
gross weight
helicopters
(2) Glushenkov
Western (1) (2) Turbomeca General Turmo Electric 1VC & Makila 1.A (3) (4) General General Electric Electric T58-GE-16 T700-GE-700
T58-GE-5
3.
installed
in 30,000
to 100,000-1b
gross
weight
helicopters
Soloviev
D-25V
(TV-2BM)
Hypothetical
Western (1) (2) (3) Lycoming General General T55-L-712 Electric Electric T64-GE-415 T64-GE-413
4.
installed
in the over
100,000-1b
gross
weight
helicopters
Soloviev
D-25VF
Hypothetical
of
the
principal Graphs
engine
prepared power
of the
above rate
groups vs lSA
(for
ex-
2.1).
power separately.
lapse
altitude,
and TO power
are presented
2.2
Auxiliary Estimates
Relationships of sfc Variation characteristics can the for vs Partial where Power Setting. Even in the at two case SHP of levels rather only, incomplete a relationship inforof
mation
on engine
values
be established. engine the fuel flow power is linear setting), with SHP, and at least two points (FF/FFTo) of (sfc, SHP) are given
takeoff
a relationship
between
-- f(SHP/SHPTo),
30
1.0
---y
// J it o I/ f it kk f / _ (FF/FFTo) 0 SHP/SHPTo ! 1.0 o
between
in Fig.
2.1
can
be developed
and
the
(FF/FFTo)
ratio
for idle,
(FF/FFTo)
o, can
be estab-
the
relative
fuel
flow
at idle ratio
(FF/FFTo)
of the
straight
line/3,
the relative
as a function
of the power
can be expressed
a +
[3(SHP/SHPTo)
FFTO[a
IJ(SHP/SHPTo)]/SHP
(2.1)
the
numerator
and
denominator
in the = sfcTo
right-hand following
side
of Eq (2.1)
by SHPTo
and
remem-
t3 = I - t_, while
FFTo/SHPTo
, the
is obtained:
sfc =
sfcro
[I +
c_(SHP/SHPTo I
1)]
(2.2)
Using be prepared
comparative of the
graphs
of
sfc and
Soviet (Soviet
and
Western
engines
can
engine
groups
as in Fig.
in bold,
Western
in thin
lines). Relative be interesting since in the Lapse Rate in ISA. the For lapse a detailed rate with comparison both pressure under of the altitude powerplant technology levels, it would However, rate aspects
is compared
standard
will be limited
at ISA only. 31
,_.......
SOVIET WESTERN
'11
Whenever
SHP 8000 1 I_..SHP're f \!
manufacturers'
data on SHPTo
= f(H)
is available,
present altitude the
and graphically
of the ISA
_, =-- (SHPTo)H/(SHPTO)o
f(H)
the 2.621 on
trends
in
X = f(H) here
deduced as Fig.
from 2.3)
Fig.
Fig. case,
2.3) the
that D-25V
at
s_
_ " \
\
2.",,,
least installed
the
this
, I /
SH_PN.R 40OO
capacity. their
material
temperature Should there increase line rate also be data shown based in Fig. based
fuel
\
power the 0 1 2 3 4 5 H, km
limitations, altitudes
as indicated
3000
curve Figure Mi-6 rated power 2.62, 2.3 helicopter power: required Ref. 1). (1) for Power variation and with altitude of in = 4500 of the When they trend engines power flight values referred (2) (Fig.
required at H
hover; m.
be
curves
Fig.
2.3.
32
1.o
,,
T " .J _
lu o
m--,, " _
--,. -
TRENDS ACTUAL
BASED SOVIET
ON FIG.
2.3
rrua _
WESTE R N
20,000
engines.
Western
turboshafts
will
be plotted
in thin
lines
(Fig.
2.4).
2.3
of The
Engines principal
Installed
in
Helicopter and
of up to
12,000-1b at SL/ISA of
Gross the
Class Western
performance
engines The
utilized
helicopter setting at
in Table in Fig.
variation
power
in Fig. 2.7. the external to the principal the relative volume an exception is taken dimensions helicopter engine bulk of an designer. dimensions of the engine and its power-producing in every width, and case height) by capacity of a particular is required, their
takeoff
Although, (length,
examination idea
comparing
external
ratios.
Where
is defined a distinctly
overall overall
dimensions; volume
is made
powerplants These
as (7rD2/4)
length.
volume)
are shown
in Fig. 2.8. The of up to that fuel 2.5). engine Isotov PZL GTD-350 gross engine is the sole representative from the of Soviet turboshafts that (Fig. of installed the specific 2.7). Also powerthe
12,000-1b
weights. twice
presented
specific (Fig.
inferior
to that per
of
Western
plants GTD-350
power
extraction those
unit
volume,
where
engine
to be on a lower
level than
of the West
33
While
rate slope
of the of the
engine is quite
is somesimilar
counterpart;
replacement in the
improvement TBO
helicopter. while
hours,
is 3500
operators and
that
"rugged"
conditions
abrasive maintenance of
it does
personnel
to perform
be deemed
Utilization is definitely copters. The and 2.17. Some in the 2.5). Another parative data case contrast
the
M-14V-26 trend
an exception
turboshafts
contemporary
multiengine
in specific
weights
of
these
two
types
of
powerplants
is quite
evident
from
Figs.
2.7
compensation of M-14V-26
of that engines
high
engine
weight low,
can
be
obtained
a more Western
favorable
is indeed
even
in comparison
turboshafts
argument on that
for subject
the
utilization Vedeneev
of reciprocating engine
engines
may
be cost.
Unfortunately,
no
com-
for the
is available.
34
_.a
u o 00
1= I v o
_vv
j ",o
OO
E,.3
8,4
",O o..
oo_
O_vv
,
A A
7--,
g
u'_ "o I I . 0
_<
Z =
,_
m.o
.<
<6
U Z q _
z_
_
H_7,6
e4
u-_ ,_
_01
_'_ O0
t_ ,,.-i
O E'-, Z
_.
_ _ .__,_
',,O
,,,_
-4
e,i
<_
Z _-.
#,
--o
e4
-_
0
R_
o_
_"
+-__
[.,
35
I
CC
Z
.J
t_
0.8
Z 0
I-Q.. rj
0,6
0
0 ..J LU 14. C..) L/.
LU {tJ
Figure 2.5
Variation of sfc vs power setting for Soviet and Western engines installed in the up to 12,000-1b gross weight class helicopters.
36
"ISCHENKO z
% T53-L-13
O
LTS
250-C20B
0. -w
6
m
ee _e w
0.4
O
0.
0.3
0_
0.1
0 0
......
10
12 1000 FT
14
16
18
20
ALTITUDE:
Figure 2.6
37
qp_
I .J I
o o i.o
e-
"l
e-.
,=,
,=_
('4
P_
II
II
II
IJ
II
II
i 0
v-
0 01=110=ldS
dH/8"l
:IHOI3M
38
,yu
(= ql
_=
i,i
,-r,
O
'N
u.
P= E
0
C'_
O0
:3Wf13OA
L%I
S
"N'no/dq
"I'IYEI3AO/J['dH
39
2.4
Comparison Class
of
Engines
Installed
in the
12,000
to 30,O00-1b
Gross
Weight
Helicopters
Basic Data. turboshafts The is given engine utilized variation in Fig. volume Discussion. to the GTD-350 power
The
principal
and
of the are
Soviet shown
and
in the
12,000
gross
partial weights
setting, 2.11,
at SL/ISA, ratio
the
of the
power
to overall
in Fig. 2.12. respect its (Fig. to the Isotov TV-2-117A and is on turboshaft, the level one of the should older note that in contrast powerplants
lower
Western
be seen than
from
Fig.
showing
capacity
is higher leads
its fuel
flow-restricted lapse
limit the
to a more
favorable
counter-
due the
to material Western
the It can
specific be seen
weight from
weight
thermodynamic appears
capacity relatively
(singlethan
in Fig.
Soviet
engine
much
its Western
counterparts
point
that
all the
above-discussed
aspects
of
the
TV-2-117A
the
absolute in 1978,
record
was rating
by
the
Mil A-10
version is
Mi-24) not
TV3-117 but
engine the
turboshaft
probably
Mi-24
powerplant
of
Aerospatiale
1A engine appropriate
powering graphs.
the
AS332L
Super-Puma
helicopter
to Table
as well as to the
4O
cli
IE ,-_ O0 o
a.i
--
_i"
0 O0 CO 0 _1 _ _ 0,1 I.O 0 04
o_>
o r" ILl Z
0 0
O0 P_
z
I.U
nI.I.I
e-
z__
o z
O0 _ li3 l"O
,,,__
_ _ ne 0
C_ LU --I m
w m 0 a:
,_, _I
0 0
tO
<_
E_
o0
t_ 0
--
I-0 0 O_
_g
I-_ z
"I'- ,j _ J J _
_ 0 qD
I-
O.
O.
-1I.i,I
_,.
I--
_ m
z o
j 0
I-i_
,(
rr
--I
-- _c
u. "T 0
14.1
_.-
_:__
E E _8 u o-_
_.
"_
-8=.
'
o
_.
'"
_ "r _ _"
_
E
_-_
'3
__
O"l I"_, (.0
_uO
41
1.2
1.0
T58-GE-5
0.8
'
_ " "_
TV-2-117A
\ 0.6
"" ,_
,."_'_"'_--
TURMO
IVC
MAKILAIA/
"--,__
8
T700-GE-700 / f -
,,_
0
0.4
,"r
0.2
Figure 2.9 Variation of sfc vs power setting for Soviet and Western engines installed in the 12,000 to 30,0004b gross weight class helicopters.
42
e_ "I-
"Te, /)
6
m
tw tw LU
T700-GE-700
0 0 2 4 6 8 ALTITUDE, 10 12 14 16 20
1000 FT
Figure 2.10
Relative lapse rate in ISA for takeoff and military powers for Soviet and Western engines installed in the 12,000 to 30,O00-1b gross weight class helicopters.
43
CIVILIAN 0.8
TO SHP RATING
a.
9"
=0
0.6 TV'2-117A
uJ
0.4
D
g=
m
TURMO
Ivc,._
MAKILA
1A TV3-117
uJ o. O
0.2
\
L
T58-GE-16
0 800
II
10'00
"
1:;;00
'
1400
"
16"00
'
1800
_'
2d00
2200
Figure 2.11
44
O 0,, 150
CIVILIAN
T700-G E-70.0
100
3
O MAKILA 1A TV3-117
1600
'
2000
"
" 2;oo
Figure 2.12
Takeoff
45
2.5
of Engines Class
Installed
in the
30,000
to
100,000-1b
and
over
100,000-1b
Helicopters
of Two
Engine
Groups. engine
Since, (T701)
in the that
gross the
weight 30,000
class to
helicopters, gross
does
100,000
categories to the
study
In addition the characteristics study. there that Soviet design engine 1 that 44 that (i.e., to The is no
turboshafts,
on are
the
basis
of in
included complete;
present
regarding
the
incorporation projected
sketchy the
"hypothetical of the
desires for
designers)
regard
turboshafts
rotary-wing
of these stated in
as follows: ton gross weight helicopters may here are of the twinor sobe
that stated
weight
twin, the
configuration, available
power
at 500 m)
kg of gross
weight
should
to SL,
(SHPTO)o/Wgr
0"45/_50o
rn
hp/kg
Xb00m
is the
takeoff
power with
rate
corresponding and
to
500m
= 1640
of X = f(H) X500m
for engines
mechanical theSl*
thermodynamic (75
capacities
= 0.965.
Remembering SL,
kg-m/s).amounts
of the units as
horsepower,
the nominal
ISA takeoff
can be expressed
(SHPTo)
0.21
Wgr/neng
(2.3)
where
*International
System
46
WEIGHT lb. 26,460 35,280 44,100 52,920 97,020 114,660 114,660 132,300 No. OF ENGINES
T.O PER
SHP;
SL, ISA HP
engines to be
are
selected
from
this hp
table: (same
(1)
A with (2)
takeoff
power
at SL,
ISA
(SHPTo)
o = 5500 as that
as for
hypothetical (in
engine SI units)
o = 8080 would
hp (same
horsepower
be 5383
hp and 7908
weights
of the engines
in kilograms
to Eq (2.57)
1 can be expressed
as
Weng
keng(SHPref)
0"7
an average B, 1170
value lb.
weight
of hypothetical rating
engine (p.
A would
be 901.8
lb and be
Specific
at takeoff H Ol Pref)max
1231)
in gr/hp-hr
would
SfCro
Ce/(S
Taking lb/hp-hr,
an average
value
is obtained:
for engine
A, sfcro
= 0.462
is given
by
the
following
formula
(Eq
(2.1611)),
where
is given -
O.16[ l -- (SHPISHPTo)
47
is assumed
as
SHPN. R _
0.92SHPTo
(p.119 x)
Basic Data.
The principal
characteristics
and performance
as a function weights
in Fig. 2.13; lapse rate in Fig. 2.14; specific by its external dimensions) that
is shown similar
for real engines in Fig. 2.16. previously discussed engine classes, coun-
to the
fuel consumption
turboshaft
is higher
than that
of its Western
However,
for Tishchenko's
engines,
it is practically
powerplants
and is even better for the new D-136 disclosed the previously
As can be seen from Fig. 2.14, thermodynamic fuel flow shafts. than mechanical is even more the so-called
mentioned
at low altitudes
limitation
By contrast,
hypothetical
capabilities; turboshafts.
in this respect,
is no available
data in regard
However,
specific weights
the D-136 turboshaft. Fig. 2.16 clearly shows that, as may be expected, the D-25V (TV-2BM) engine is much more bulky
2.6
Concluding
Remarks material powerplants presented in this chapter, it appears that from the performance point Whether ease of
inferior
and weight
deficiencies reliability,
maintenance,
study. to those
It appears
Soviet helicopter
realize that
are inferior
as depicted
performance
goals of the
48
tO
oooo
_ I_ _" 0
_%
_ 0
o
I_
co o o o
0
_
II 0_1
13
_o
w w
IN
",.0 t..O 00
',.0 _.
CO t.O
CO
"7.
0 ol
_
II
0o
CO
,:sZ
O.
s_
t.O
00
_ U m
o'J _r
g_s
',_, _ _
Z Z_.
_o 00_
W
_
OOc_d
o t"r
<
O --
e.iZ.1
g_
o
7-
I.,0
Illl c_ ,5
._ ._ o_
gg_,
--
o
"I"
go
t,.O
_5
_g
5;
em
00
<
O O
mmm_
I,.0 0
,.4 < Z
eL
6
N N
ii
_
w
rr Z
_1
I--r"
o >
nill
.i=
.._. " -_ 0
_ _ o _
<%
+_ .
>" rr _
..
o
CO
E
Z-"
ILl
o
.
O
__. o u. i,-
"
8_._
E
* ___ o
_ ,,,
W '_ "_
E "6 o
._- ..z
_=_ ._o,_
m. z * **
49
1.0
0.8
HYPOTHETICAL
,.
..
_
/
_'
......
A _"t
HYPOTHETICAL .T64-GE-415
, .
_ "_
_
4
Q u
,,-I,
u_
0
m m
0
ul Q,.
0.2
0 0
| J _ vt9
0.2
0.4
0.6 SHP/SHPTo
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Figure
2.13
power and
setting over
of Western 100,OOO-]b
and gross
Soviet weight
turboshafts class
for
helicopters.
50
I 1.0 D-25V(TV-2BM)
iO
4GI
.. "..........
0.6 o
f ......
........
__
0
m
' T6,_-o_-4,_, /
0.4 "- !
......
I
i
'
; ;."
I,-
<C
ee LU 0
:
_.L !
i
i
I
!
0.2
i
i
i
i 1 i
i i
t
.... i i i
i ! ......... _.......... ,+
f
i
1 r
I :
8 ALTITUDE,
10
12
14
16
18
20
1000 FT
Figure 2.14 Relative lapse rate for TO SHP, ISA of Soviet and Western turboshafts for 30,000 to 100,000, and over 100,000-1b gross weight class helicopters.
51
-!..I
_" -r"
IJ.I
0.4
T5_ L-712
D-136 u.
J I,IJ Q.
0.2
(_
T64-G
E-415
T 701
A 0 3 5
|
CTHETICAL
Figure 2.15
Specific
for helicopters
of 30,000
52
O 3OO
T55_L-712
200
o
(_T.64-GE-413 _> 1.00
0 I0 3
gl w
Figure 2.16
SHP to overall engine volume for Soviet and Western turboshafts and over lO0,O00-1b gross weight helicopters
for
30,000 to 100,000,
53
M-14V-26 [RECIPROCATING]
0.8
-_r
(3TU-3bU
0.7
0.3
0.6
O. '1"
D-25V (TV-2BM
0.5
m -r rn .-I
O
V I _jr_Astilzou
TV-2-117A
III
I_Gazelll}
,.,
V_."'._
_/./_:
,v
C4 E'6 (Puml) T_4
Un.)
_ "1'
0.3
'
%',_I///,'_ _TT_(AGs:EAA2H) _
Ill
( H'53A -GE-3
A I .
(U _._
$ :A A H |///'_l)_
-,om'_ O o
0.2
1400
"
"
, /
-.,
,
b L T-SS-L-7C(CH47B) T.6,4-GE-I(CH-53C)
/r
T'7OI(HLH}I
0 ENGINE
5 000 REFERREDSHP
10 000
Figure
2.17
General
comparison
of
specific
weights
of
Soviet
and
Western
helicopter
engines.
54
Chapter Helicopters
3.1 Basic Data drawings of the are given 3.7. From this figure weight but it class can compared in Table helicopters 3.1. Some
3 Class
of the Up-to-12,000-Ib
in Figs. contained
3.1a
3.1h,
while
their
are graphically
be seen only
that much
the
disc
of
gross class,
is not
lower
helicopters
is also lower
than the
disc loading
of the older
represented
In contrast on the
to the
rotorcraft than
is much
higher
takeoff
power
power Rotor
associated (Fig.
with 3.4).
Speed 600
Soviet
helicopters
are usually
fps class,
Bell helicopters
exceeding,
Relative Soviet
Tail-Rotor helicopters
3.5). higher
be
seen correradii
is only
slightly to this
the the
sponding ratio
counterparts.
represents
an exception
rule,
helicopters. Weight figure and time) indicate maximum payload Cabin respect range While way tion to Empty that and the Zero-Range weight gross empty Payload to gross than of to Gross weight Wei[ht Ratios (Fig. 3.6). Trends are higher visible from this
helicopters
normal (or
weights ratios
weight
of Western this
be seen payload
from
figure
with zeroclass.
the
provision there
by the
in the volume
loading excep-
design
is more
consistent
with
Western
trend,
of the BO-105.
55
O CO M') 0 _- )
O _1
_o
.',n
,,5
c5_. z
'1"
E.3
C)
oomm
o_ _ _
_CC
o _
_0
0..
lr
""
,,-.l
I'-
"E
2P= 8
c._
80
m ,._o"
#:,._"
ii
es_
#<
< >co _"r, o o
C)
.q
m d
_,
m_
x m.
_'
co
_00
E _o.
e_ o
r"_
P'-.
O)
u_
00cm
N<
.iJ
.-/
er
_SZs
Z
rZ_e4 _r _ e_ I _ c5 c5 _
Z 0
a.
a_:=
= E .,-; E O
{c
o 0
"O O
.a
_"
_.
-0
,,
Z 0
._,_ _.,!
.
""
,.._-,,._ mrO
e-
, _
"s_
.o ,.
_ =_'
'_
'_
_,,
_- _ _=_z_<_'_
56
CO ',.0 _" ,,_4 ('%1 _J eO
b-
E
('9 UO ,_" C'4
_5_o
0
o6
0 Z
bE
O
E
"q ('%1 _1 "_. C,I O_ C,4 i-,. 00 O
"5 @ b-
r-
E
IX) _J (_9 U_
I o @ A
b-
_
("9
('%1
m
O F00 O_
("4
>
_ N66_ _ mm.
o me4ddo_
o_ D
_- c6d o bee-
"_
Z O Jl UJ (.9 Z _ * ,'_ .. _
,.J
'-
_'.
Z
n"
< z
n-
__ _, ,_'_ z _ _:___
_ '_,
,,.,,_
z g
,,,.[._-
E
O
q_-_ -e
<
e-
_=EE
u -, :m _"
,,,
,-. E E E
_
57
,,o.._-_:._
z_
_ _._
66
U.I I-O Z
-- o_>
(a)
PZL-Swidnik
(Mil)
Mi-2
twin-turbine
general-purpose
light
helicopter
(Pilot
Press)
(b)
Taurus: 250C-20B
Mi-2 engines
with
Figure
3.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the
up to
12,000-1b
GW class.
58
(c) Kamov
Ka-26
twin-engined
flight
general-purpose
helicopter
in passenger-carrying
form
(Pilot
Press).
Aerospatiale of Soviet
Dauphin
helicopters
59
(f) Bell Model (two Lycoming 101 222 Avco LTS turboshaft (Pilot engines)
Press).
Figure
3.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the
up to 12,000-1b
GW class
(Cont'd).
60
(g)
Bo
105
CB five-seat
light
helicopter
(two
Allison
250-C2OB
turboshaft
engines)
(Pilot
Press).
(h)
Sikorsky
S-76
eight/twelve-passenger
commercial
transport
helicopter
(Pilot
Press).
Figure
3.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the up
to 12,000-1b
GW class
(Cont'd).
61
u.I
CO ,.J o o o
e_ 0
143
-ISd :gNIElVO"I
62
OSI(]
dHS/9"I
:ONlaVO'I
Id3MOd
63
_J
,.Q "r' 0
i
e_
-I o o o I
0
u u
"I"
m
ILl
O 0: r_ <C
.E E
E 0 u
Sd"l
:CFI3dS
dll
64.
EI/X = x '30NVISIO
Q _'I__ _ I
I:10101:1--IlVl
i) d , , I
3AIIV'13EI
,,=, ,>
0 e-rE
TM FLU
O0 0
e., 0
IX)
0o
'-J 0 C_ 0
,I(.0 UJ
0
GO
LO
co
X
0 0
oo
"_, _
I) O _
e_
I 0
SNIQVH
EIO.LOI:I NIVIN/SNIQVI:i
t:IO.LOU--IIV/
65
1HOI3M C]VO'IAVd
O , I I
SSOI:I O :IONVI=[
O i I
OId=lZ
O
z=
o. C3
S_o_
W
I
_-x,l_(_l i _
cb _1_ _l
cr_
.=
nn _1 0 C3 C3 00 _'o
-r" (.0
U.I
2:
o 0 o
o
o
I,D
i
I
! I I 0
1.0
It
o ',q. e_ |
m 0 z z c_
x '<
ot>
IJJ
o z
LU
6
0
o o (,y,) o3
eL
(v)
l=3 ..J 00 o
0
"I" 3 uJ I_ /) /)
o
n..
e-
(D
,>
143
"0
e_
I
N
e O
J.=l'l'lO/t]-I
:qeA/'ld
:_)NIQVO'I
67
=IINN'IOA NIt]V:)
3.2
and was
Aspects data of contained hovering in Table and vertical 3.1. This was done by selecting terms could those gross
weights
for which
number
climb
performance
be found
in published
documentation. from this aspects rotor table that, following Once the the the approaches figure outlined of merit in Ch. of the 1; first, rotor the and main-rotor the overall power heli-
tail-rotor to main
main
the tail
overall
transmission
efficiency,
as well
as the
figure Next,
is computed. values of the overall OGE compared 3.2. overall published from Eq figures of merit OGE the are more data, so-called the nearly vertical gross correct rate than either the estiISA from data figure of merit of the helicopter are compared the power means with lapse those rate.
from
characteristics, values,
including and
estimated
arithmetic
of both
or those rating
computed
of climb
at S/L,
power
is computed
VTO
weight
determined
Eq (1.2). Some presented Power figure power for that than those of the items either directly 3.I4. GW in Comparison in general counterparts. which power exhibit This with the Ideal ratio Power (Fig. 3.8). specific It can power gross fiat-rated helicopters. The trend in hover indicated at SL, in this ISA at be seen to ideal weights. engines from this appearing in, or easily obtainable from, Table 3.2 are graphically
helicopters Western
a lower
of takeoff
is true
at both
normal limits,
transmission similar
symbols),
Coefficient
Soviet
helicopters
GW ones.
operate aspect
blade two
(CT/O)
than
of their
design
reflects
concern
regarding values
operations as close
at high as possible
ambient
to the power
latter reflect
aspect
because exhibit
of their much
the fact
higher
specific
counterparts. values and/or may elevated be detrimental ambient as far as controllability margins are concerned,
These especially
at higher
temperatures.
68
of Merit estimated,
(Fig.
3.10).
Except
for the
365N,
sections, test
the
investigated
rotorcraft This
rotors;
FM o = f('_)
relationships.
was then
corrected
solidity
ratios
Eq (1.26a). It can be seen from the Fig. (3.10) as those The that the so-estimated machines of the Mi-2 helicopter same was figure vintage of merit (UH-1H), as being values but on in hover than
same
of the Ka-26
lower the
helicopters.
estimated
modern
rotors. and Power to Rotor-Power ratios power than Ratios of the ratios that of (Fig. 3.11). A glance are quite lower than at Fig. similar those 365N
indicate
tail-rotor (about
to those of
of Western
helicopters
conventional
Western
helicopters
considerably
Fenestron-equipped
helicopter. Overall the overall Figures figures the test of Merit (Fig. of merit published data were 3.12). computed ceiling For the compared as an average OGE data. between gross :weight of Boeing value and shaft horsepower (Fig. 3.13). required This in helicopters between those (excluding estimated the BO-105 and UH-1H), and those
independently
deduced
from
hovering showing
courtesy
Vertol
enabled overall
Eq (1.1),
so-obtained
was taken
as the
"actual"
made
possible
the
plot
of FMoa close
as shown obtained
which
value
derived
in Table
in hover
weight CPE = as
in Fig. A-9
of
Ref. those
8, in the
power SlIP
f(Cw), follows:
coefficient.
Using
coefficients,
can
be
expressed
Wgr =
and SHP =
C.,
(3.1)
rtR2 p V_ CPE/550
(3.2)
Using
Eq
(3.1),
the ideal
power
can be expressed
as
RHeid
(3.3)
Dividing
Eq (3.3)
by Eq
(3.2),
the sought
overall
figure
of merit
is obtained:
69
_o
_ d
_d
o_g_ _d
d_d
_ _ o
LO
o __o _d
_ g d_d
_d
-r
_)
_d
d_
_ d_d
m o
<
c_ nt.I.J
o.
_dd_d_
O_omd
_d_
Oo
_._
0 --1
,_ _. ,g_0_.o
_
_,_
0 "
_R_
_d
_o
_
_
d
<
nn
c._
<
F-o
>6
0 0 0
zo
;> 0
..= 0 _ C, I_
._
_o
_Odd
c_
_" _
c5 o
c:5
Q; 0
o
Z Lt.J U_ .--I _1 1.1_ n" .-I
-r
_r
_.-
__
nr0
o
I--
""
I-. 0
n-.I
70
o
c_
t_ co o c_
oo
odd
.M
,, _dd
oo
0
._=
0
c9
Ill
0 -
J -_
E -_o
_._ _- E ._
.,_
_
.E_
'__
n" "r _ ,w" 0
_ _- _-_68
-r -r
0
Z * +44-
71
{3
i3
-1-
-1-
-1-
,_
./
'_
tq
,-:
, ,
, I
_D
.o
LO
',
._90
N--
Q.
_
if)
,
I
Z t_ 0
,-I
c
0
(.I
.'2.
_J
_ _ X
z -
, , \
"\' \
\
o
"C,
,
\
_ "J I-W 0
\\
\
_o_
L_ _ _ "
',,,\, ,\
_,
I l I | l _ I I
0 e_
ql/dq
:M'9:10
(]NnOcl
U3a 72
U3MOd
e_
,<
<
1N3101-I:1300
1-117 :IOV18
30VI:I::IAV
*--
73
,o1>
ILl Z ,,, _LU
o
e", 0 0
o
r4 ,.q
o
crJ
c_
|
o
al .-I o o o ,e"II
j
co
ILl
<
i
r_ 0
CC
0
D E
}
0
II
LO I_
0 _
LO _0
0 CO
LO LO
c_
c_
c_
c_
c_
m.
o
1:10101:1 031VI_IIS3
74
.I.HDI3M
1.0 I,!
SSOEID/.I.SI')EIHJ. _10.1.01:1"IIV.I.
0 t,.II It') 0 I
e-,
C3
o t"" P4
m., ,..i
O_
e-.
.=
IZ) -.I 00 C_ C_
0
0 e-,
n,-
E ,?
n.. X 0 z =E z
n," u.I cO
0 lz.
oD
W
,?o
I.q
0
PP_
I:l:lMOd
IdO.LOl:l NIVIN/Id=IMOd
I:lO.LOId "IlV.L
75
_-01_
I.u Z Li.I I-ILl
_1 _,L _
,-I 0 o
"I"
w
ILl
_a
0
_a
_a
t_
TIV_I3^O
76
5,600
4,800
tu
tJ
4,400
ee
4.000
o_
0
400
/
Correlation
/
Q TEST DATA, 600 700 800 900 1,000
500
SHAFT
Figure 3.13
HORSEPOWER:
LB
of Boeing Vertol Co.)
(3.4) Eq (3.1) as
lift coefficient
_
Using results all figure In the data presented 3.14. in Fig. Here, in Table A.9 s,
= kvh 6Cw/O
the FM o = f('3_, ) curve as in the to those curve was calculated for the UH-1H,
(3.5)
and the
in Fig.
of the over-
resulting as SL,
helicopter,
= f(V)
is shown Eq (1.1).
5 of Ref.
9 for =
Taking
FMoa value
from
FMoa be expected
3.2; but
corresponds cases
while degree
above
the
helicopters. can be seen BO-105 is concerned, that the FMoa values lower figure for the than Mi-2 helicopters S-76 and are approxi222, but higher
mately than
on
same 365N.
as those
of the
for the
of merit
to the counter-rotating
configuration)
is higher
of Western
helicopters.
77
r_ i.u
let) ILl
O
nr I1 u.I I-_) a.
ann
0C
IL Z 0 a
U_
O
C.)
I I I I
IlEI3W
40:11:11"1014 -I'IVI=I3AO
78
Weight.
(defined
OGE at
for Soviet Mi-2 and Ka-26 helicopters and are below the maximum
the so-called
gross weights,
helicopter. weights
Bell 222,
and SA-365N)
are almost
weight values (S-76). Vertical Rates of Climb. from Eq (1.9) are listed Vertical rates of climb at SL, ISA and T.O engine power setting as computed row from the bottom in Fig. 3.15. on of Table 3.2. These values refer to the gross
in the third
rates of climb were also calculated for the VTO gross weights and indicated to note that engines for helicopters having transmission-limited power inputs
It is interesting
(BO-105,
and UH-1H)
(Mi-2), the vertical rate of climb at (Wgr)Vr decrease of power with altitude,
while for powerplants the VTO gross weight 3.3 Table numerical Energy 3.3. values
a continuous
500 fpm.
Aspects in Hover The most important of hourly inputs required in the study of energy aspects in hover, as well as payload are in-
fuel consumption
per pound
of gross weight
and zero-time
dicated in Table 3.3. The results Hourly to note fuel Fuel Consumption
presented
of GW in Hover, OGE, SL, ISA (Fig. 3.16). the Mi-2 helicopter Through installation has one of the highest of the Allison
engine,
consumption
helicopters.
250-C20B
this consumption
counterparts.
One's attention
also be called to the low relative from the utilization Hourly of reciprocating
of the Ka-26-resulting
per Pound of Payload in Hover, Mi-2 helicopter helicopter. placing that exhibits much
OGE, larger
related
Installation machine
of the Allison
remains
representatives,
in spite of its
79
:_z
>
0
_Do,q
g')
t
._ _o4
B
i..,
_-
.=_
a\+ .e+.
_=.=
t_
<_
--
+L
s i ii ii | i iii |
_._
,,ml"
Q 0 1.0
laid-.! :glNI'lO
dO 31VU
-IVOIIEI3A
8O
_. _, _, o
o
o
=_.,
8
,-I
aS
_ ._"z
_a
o_ _
_ _
_ _
,_ ,_
_ .
_ _, _ - . _
.<
_S z _B
00 ,_. _.. _ _
.,I
_ _
,-_ "
.__
_ o
_ '_,
_'_, o_
__ _ _ _ _ _
__
-_.
_
_ _
_ "_
- _
._.
_
-_
_
"_
81
<
Z OC LU w _
o
Z o
r_
-T" O
"DO
,,,
1.1,1 ,.,,.I 0
o')
..c
a2 -J o
00
8
O
3:: C,.0 LU
.<
O r_
O c-
_O
o
Tm i,o
I 0 rn
14")
E
e,
CO
t_D
_1"
{%1
c_
dl'HH/8"I :MO dO 81
o
U3d
o
NOIIdlI_NSNO0
o
-13Nd A1UNOH
.__
rr.
82
en -/ "r .J
_o
0.40
.j
o.
ai
.J
Z 0 i
kQ,,
UH-1H 0.20
_
Z 0 .J w
u.
.J e_
0.10
'
'|
20 HOVER TIME:
40 MINUTES
60
Figure 3.17
Variation with time of hourly fuel consumption per pound of maximum payload in hover OGE at SL, ISA for Soviet & Western helicopters of up to 12,000-1b gross weights.
performance
figures
(e.g.,
of the
(SHP/Wg
for the
helicopter
at Wgr = in columns
Sikorsky
lb. These
inputs
are shown
helicopter at the
under desired
the gross
form weight
graphs altitude
from
(SHP/_r)
(SL,
can be directly
83
80O
Q.
"I" 5O0
f
60 80 TRUE 100 AIRSPEED 20 KNOTS 140 160 in level flight at air density P = 0.00199 slugs/cu.ft, the BO-105 curve SA-365N helicopter is given for (courtesy Wgr = 5005 using inputs of Boeing lb, and from for Vertol air Fig. Company) are shown in Fig.
3OO
Figure 3.18 SHP = f(I/) for the BO-105 helicopter and average Wgr = 5005 lb.
test the
for
density/9 3.18, wf
= 0.00199 and-Cd/_
Wg r = 5114
lb and SL,
procedure
Vma x or (Vcr)max
of climb Various
as outlined
leading be seen
are
clearly
visible the
in
Table
3.4.
procedures maximum
overall of the
(rloa) Check
Vma , or the
basis
speeds. those
performed
speed
conditions,
remained for
Vma x and
Consequently, = f(V)
Vma x and
Vcrma were
the subsequent
calculations.
84
CN
"T
_0
_ r_
.O_o_O. o _- _
_ o
uJ
--
k-
be)
E- u_
o _ _
o_= _o_O-_K
_o_._o_
_._. ._;_
ILl
l-
5 ,_ 2 ,_ o
_
-_ _
o o o o o_
c_ rr rr n" rr rr
:_
_ _ _ _o
85
00000 0000000
o
d
,,
_o_ o _5
= 6
_00_ 0 _0000_ 0
dddddd
0000000
,,
o_
d
___ o d
00000
ddddd
00000_
_o
6dddod
"D co
c_
__o_ qqqqq_
e0 o 000000
E
<
A C 0 0
_o -oOOO_ o
-_
. o=
_6
This
_oa
estimate
was
done
the
so-called values
"first
based Here,
on
a single
data
point for
of kvf,
kindf,
Eq (1.10)
was solved
Ve was
computed
from
Eq (1.12),
corresponding
SHPmi
n obtained
again
Eq (1.10). "second of climb next approximation", at SL, ISA, with Table and those 3.4 the latter SHPmi assuming from that for n was climb estimated efficiency approximation. both results are close. and It should be noted helicopters, in Jane's for by calculating = 0.85. the excess SLIP, using the
known values
_7 climb
The
so-obtained
SHProin
compared from
be seen that
point
because Ka-26
respect
investigation
rate
at SL, tive
ISA.
gross
is given
at its takeoff
e = 0.045
overall had
transmission to power be
engine
accounted losses),
Further
transmission
and accessory
is obtained: = of the in Eq 0.89 rotors (1.10). (3.83 This ft), the slipstream cross-
rloa It should section loading area (w) also loading becomes the above be noted that of the
= due disc
instead w'=
be used
slipstream
cross-section
4.5 psf. additional in Table results, using inputs, further calculations approximation. assumption appear loading too (wtp that the Ka-26 _d/ff! This can be flown = 1/86), means that 6615 in horizontal and somewhat the published for for in the the of the wfpand _-d/gp values follow the
With two-point
procedure the
weight
of 7165 the
plate
be related
to a lower rating
weight than
lb, given
at an emergency differences
helicopter
and
"second" = f(V)
the
averages
relationship data
of Table
and shown
graphically figure.
in Fig. 3.19.
manufacturer's
and S-76
helicopters
is also shown
in this
87
0.12 ,_
365N 8488 Ib
/ / / S-76 10,000
(3 EL
O Z 0
a,, n,, n
0.02
140
Figure 3.19 Comparison of shaft horsepower per pound of gross weight vs speed of level flight at SL, ISA of Soviet and Western helicopters of up to 12,000-1b gross weight class.
88
Because weight However, large average The the UH-1H With a maximum for about the in the
of the low-speed
lower
disc
the
power
per
pound
of gross
flight
Western
as shown because
in Fig. 3.19.
at high
speeds,
flat-plate
area
loading
of wfp _ 200
approximations. values of the those Mi-2 helicopters 365N, figure of are approximately especially, indicate that on the same level as for
BO-105, to
are above
S-76 helicopters. the Mi-2 helicopters which is one the of the lowest achieve highest level of
(Wgr/De)max, to the
weight
ratio
x _. 4.5, Ka-26
gross-weight Western at
represents
helicopters, High
a level the
Velocities.
SHP/Wg the
third-degree in this
representing
are
approximately
between by the
parabolas.
reflects
as given
wfp
values
approximately
at one-half
3.5
Energy
Aspects
in Forward
Flight
Requirements per
of
Gross
Weight. and
inputs nautical
needed miles,
for are
of gross
weight weights of
prepared in the
of Table weights
(SHP/Wgr) in Tables
as listed
rows
gross
weights. pound of gross figure utilization fuel weight and hour for the compared how and weight helicopters those distance and helicopters flown 100 n.mi is shown com(selected is shown
3.21.
permits per
at a glance weight
from as 100
point
view
gross
n.mi). of flying
In addition, speed
pound
of gross
as a function
in a separate
89
-J
c,)
0
.=o
" Z _
O
i
"1
'-.\)
e-,
.0
O
o_
": _
_--_ I-w
e-, o
,,,
,,_
o
o e_
0
o
r,r.
.I.HOI=IM
SSOIdO
dO C]NNOd
_l::ld dHS
90
o000oo0
oo000o
_o
ooooooo
ooooooo
......
0000000
_oooo_
000000
= z
o0oo0o
o0o0oo
0 =
b9 _. 0
_ooooo z < o =
S5
_u
8
_o
_ z D 0 m Z o
_
oN6N6oN
_ o _
666NNo
0000000
_00000
__
_000_
' '
__,
00000
,
_ 00000
_
N _.i ,. 0
z o u M N
_ D _
0000
__1
000000
Ooo_oO
......
000000
_q_
00_00
< M t_
o
_oooo_ oo_
91
X-
.,.o
o o
e-,
Z v,
e-
:
"1.J u. u. O C_
"F,
iO
t,j f
O
Q eL
g
o
"l::lNd
92
Z
O
O
"T
O
O
r-
Z v
8
,-I U.
o
uJ W O.
O N
J"
!W'N
d 00L-8"1/81
93
at Figs. fuel
3.21
and
3.22, per
one pound
would
note
the with
original
shows
one
of the
of gross these
reference
turboshafts,
requirements
one of the lowest. appears be seen as especially from these interesting figures that with thanks fuel respect to the to energy reciprocating per that may pound the optima aspects related to pound installed weight atlow in with flying
becomes
as far
as low
It should which,
be noted, in some
70 knots,
represent
drawback
per required
Pound per
of
Zero-Range of zero-range
The and
inputs
required
for
the
de-
pound 3.6.
and a hypothetical are performed indicate that shows installation rotorcraft. It should are but
distance maxi-
shown The
As in the
preceding 3.23
mum
weight.
in Figs.
3.24.
is related characteristics
zero-range
payload,
decisively
compared
However, level
approximately utilization
remains at this
point
maximum the gross looked. Fuel one of pound the hovering weight
flying gross of
weight,
importance to energy
of the aspects
of increasing to payload
a given
with
respect
related
should
Required of
per
Pound over
of various Using
Even an
approximate important
values insight
of fuel regarding
payload
compared evaluation
approach
in Section
1.5,
the
numerical
in that
be
represents
of a unit
weight
Installation practically
improvements,
requirement
BO-105 It should
and 222. be remembered, to the so-called however, VTO that gross a change weight) This discrepancy will may in the ground rules affect true for selecting gross position the flying Ka-26, gross weight (say,
it equal
considerably
vs their mentioned
Western reasons
counterparts. of a large
be especially between 94
in the and
its VTO
maximum
weight.
000000
e_ o ,..1 < z, o
< 0
--1
o N
o <
>. <
;,a.1
_:
_;
,,, _.,
Z
z_
e_
0
N
I 0
N
o _
M
.._ Z
0 b.,
_
<
-2: D
eL
e_
ua
<
gg
Z b.,
e_
g--
0 ,1 la..I
o' c_ o
c_ d
"_a o ,.I D t=
U M
=--gg
,2. _
,.., ,.,
,.., ,..,
.8 .
a::
g, 0
t_
E <
I-
o z
95
0.10
"\
/"
20
40 SPEED
60 OF FLIGHT:
80 KN
100
120
140
Figure
3.23
Fuel
required up to
per
hour
and gross
pound weight
of zero-range class
payload
of Soviet
& Western
Helicopters
of the
12,000-1b
96
C_ e,l
O N
-i
z
) CO
O
"r" C9
.J u.
e_ O O
1.1=
O r_
U.I I.U
O
O ,'r
O N
..i
-I
97
ooooo
0 m
,.0
c_
_ ooooo
=z < [-
"1"
g
m c_
0 0 0 0 0
o_,!
>
D
D
>U <
g
._Z
--1 r._
_ o< _
_oo 66666
,-1
<
D u_
zg
Od
v 00000
5
_ c
.-_',.-1
"=.
,__
00000
r,
=_,
_
o
o__._
0000_
_._
Z ooooo o <
98
) N
r_
o ) N
i_
"_
_J
.)
o 1.0
m _1 m ._1
OVOIAVd
er_
99
3.6
Productivity Productivity Index. from Productivity 40 knots maximum to index values were computed plots speed, made which from Eq (1.17a) for various that distances maximum cruise PI values This figure
and
flying
speeds occurs
of PI = f(V) is assumed
indicated
productivity speed
at the
as listed
in published to
helicopters. graphically
Verma x were
in Table
in Fig. of their
3.26. Western
is below engines
counterimprovehelicopter
Installation to make
index,
to an even
3.7
and
Remarks to have well-selected fuel ratio, basic consumption the design parameters. GTD-350 of the Figs. 3.23 aspects Mi-2, and with However, turboshaft when chiefly plus referred
helicopter weight
because higher
specific
high to gross
specific weight
of the
Western much
weight inferior
empty
performance (e.g.,
to payload,
becomes
to that
of Allison
250-C20B and
engines makes
the energy
requirements Nevertheless,
to that
of Western
helicopters.
to weight
the values
productivity
index,
including
those of the
BO-105 design
may be of special (e.g., disc loading in the Mi-2-A slower than the
interest,
as both
have
but
flying heavier,
vs 6.25
psf
capacity
BO-105.
of the
of a higher vs 273,240
[ ( Wp/)o productivity
X Verma x] at zero-range index tion respect The of the Mi-2-A per pound
be 303,857 than
is much
(Fig. both
fuel is also
consumptrue with
of zero-range consumed
in hover
pound
flight
an interesting weights of up
from
the
general only
design
range but
lb; not
because
of its coaxial
of the
of reciprocating
engines.
100
140,
91
120
__
365N
..I
Ka-26 P" o (3 O 2O 40
_"
"_' "_
Mi-2
0 0
i " I_ | ' II
ii I
50 DISTANCE:
100 N.Mi.
150
200
Figure
3.26
Productivity of the
index
at maximum weight
cruise class.
speed
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
12,0004b
gross
101
first
one have
may no
expect chance
that at
such all
a in
because respect
favorable But at
applications and/or
c_ _c_ altitudes
relative
advantage
Ka-26
may
dis-
appear.
LC) oq rr tad CO 0
At sized that
this
it
should
again ground
be
comparisons
i,i
at gross to compared
bo0
L_
-r
0 O0
either flying
equal, gross
equal,
maximum Soviet
helicopters
.a ee_
altitude_elevated to that of
<
temperature
inferior
>_..a
C2
altitudes weight
e_ e_
in the
study of to
down;
resulting position
comparative rotorcraft.
ooo
h.l
102
4 to 30,O00-1b GW Class
4.1
Basic
Data
Three-view principal
drawings
of
the
helicopters
are
shown
in
Figs
4.1a
through
4.1b,
while
their
are given
helicopters, represents
least
is known
about
the
Mi-24-D.
However, having
there similar
are
indica-
having root
appear 4.lb.
differences many
comparing
uncertainties 4.1.
regarding
Mi-24-D,
are listed
in the last
of Table
contained 4.2).
(Fig.
lower CH-3E.
2 appears weights
as that
normal of
compared. single-rotor
much
loading here
contemporary CH-46E
helicopters. that
tandem on the
- represented is quite Loading of Since, whether as discussed It is also 2200 the low
by
of 23,300 up to
As in
12,000 the
weight
class,
the
loading
on the little
appears
highest
at this the
writing,
is known capabilities
of GTD-3F
TV2-117A under
turboshafts
at
cv (metric
horsepower), capabilities
loading level
of
the
would
be closer machines.
to its Western
that
of the
Mi-24-D
would
be on the
of the U.S.
UTTAS
103
(a)
twin-turbine
helicopter,
with
additional
side
view
(bottom)
of
(b)
Mil
Mi-24
assault
helicopter,
in the form
known
to NATO
as 'Hind-A',
with
original
tail rotor
(Pilot
Press).
Figure
4.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of
12,000
to
30,O00-1b
GW class.
104
(c) 'Hormone-A'
at base
Ka-25
helicopter.
Scrap
view
shows
option
of
blisters
(d)
Aerospatiale
SA 330
Puma
transport
helicopter
(Pilot
Press).
Figure
4.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and
Western
helicopters
of
12,000
to 30,000-1b
GW class.
(Cont'd).
105
_,
,
(e) Sikorsky CH-3E twin-turbine engine transport helicopter.
(f)
Boeing
Vertol
CH46E
(Sea
Knight)
combat
assault
helicopter.
Figure
4.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and
Western
helicopters
of 12,000
to 30,O00-1b
GW
class.
(Cont'd)
106
YUH-61A
System
(UTTAS)
(Pilot Press).
(h) Sikorsky
assault helicopter
(Pilot Press).
Figure 4.1
Three-view drawings
of 12,000 to 30,O00-lb
GW class
107
o o
=4-
o Z
o o
R
I.-
-6
8
b
ku 0 0
82_
.ED 130
Z_
#
El
_5_
r_
co
<
ill
d
-,.m
_m
-_,
o
o
=a?
_
F-
OoOoOo
.E
e,i co o _.o co
z 0 lz _J o
i,M _E
_1
"N
E
0 u. 0
o_
108
0 o
o.
_'
@
88
_'_
O_ 0_o_
,.2
r-.
r, @
x_
o
8_
@
CO
CO
Z 0
J_
uJ
r_
'" 9 uJ o
.-_
'_
"
-.I
_ _
--
E E
N
_ _
W
..
,,
_
w I0 Z
0
_
109
,'7
r. e! _
_n
o {0
..J
,e
(J
J
_m
_,
r_
w pZ
E 0 z w
11o
C_ 0 0
0 0
.=
\
\ \
\
\ \
\
\
\ \
\
0 :/3
_o
'd-
-ISd :E)NIQV01
OSIQ
111
(N
\\
__ o_ _I> o _
_j ,-I ii
__o.--_
"T' 0 0
_,_-----_
_1
O;, _ o
_--_,
,_, _1
\ _\ =1
CO
\
o
E:
.__
0 ffl
\
\
\%
\
0
_0
_.l _ '_
| I II | |
_',
_ E)
I
&
0o
(.D
dHS/g'l
:E)NI(]V01
ld:lMOd
112
Rotor
Tip
Speed
(Fig.
4.4).
rotor
tip speed
appears There
on the
same availthus
close
to that
V t = 650 fps is postulated. Tail-Rotor and their ratio: appear Distance Western (Rtr/Rmr) to quite highest 4.6). (Fig. 4.5). In general, the
Ratio
to
of the the
helicopters values
are of similar
with relative
of that
helicopters
within
the limits
(Fig.
4.6 and
weight.
A glance
indicates represent
an average
Western
designs
in spite The
of the
considered the
CH-46E
to
exhibit to only
favorable weight
(Wpl)o/Wg it should
r ratios
of all the
12,000 is the
gross
However, that
at this blade
CH-46E special
compared
equipment and
is counted r = 0.413.
as weight
empty.
(We/War)
Zero-Range to have
Payload provisions
(Fig.
4.7).
Similar cabin
to volume
the
gross
weight
appears design.
with
than Ka-25
Kamov
helicopters, cabin
UTTAS weight
class, than
spacious than
payload
the
CH-3E
spacious
UTTAS
helicopters.
4.2
and
Vertical to the
Aspects established to maximum using the best except in Ch. 3, the first weights data estimates contained available and factors computed of FMoa in Table related were sections in Table 4.1. 4.2 were
Similar the
related
gross
performed for
hovering the
to gross estimated
YUH-61A
as a basis, were
and Reynolds
influence
Y UH-61A,
obviously figure
the tower-tested
and established
while
the manufacturer's
113
GO N
u_
..o
N
C_ e_
00 .-I O O
e_
8
I.U
F O
re
C_
CO
00
0 0 r_
0 (D
O O I.O
Sd-I
:0:13d8
dll
1:10101:1
114
=.q.
I
l:I/X X 33NVJ.SIO = q
|
EIO.LOEI-"IIV.I. "-131::1 m.
I00 N
_J
e_
.o N
o
O
o o o
O
"13
t_
o
re
co
=.
O :=
T
I | | | |
,D E
-g
'd"
LO
I.o
v,--
o
_
I.O
0
d Snl0VEI
o I:IOIOEI--IIV1
tlOIOEI-NIVIN/SnlOVI:I
115
BONVU-OUBZ
0 I I O CO
,O (N
C_ C_
C_
o
(.q
..g
-r" (,O
I,,I.I
O r_
O
n,,, (.9
.o
00
>.
|
(,o
,q. u.
| 1
c_ O O
IHOI3M
SSOUO/AId_3
IHOI3M
116
8
.
8 E
_r
1,1,1
Q m
g
'v
a
N
.g
z4"no/a_
:E)NlaVO-I
31/_13-1OA NISYO
117
to
dg_o6_
_, i3
-,D
g F._
o _
_.
_g
-8
_gogggg&
d_qg6_
.-
g>
X?
_g=_gggg
o
...I
o
,.-1 0
,..a
_ oo_
r,.) _
<
o_ z_
Z o
_,<
__o_OO
"3
o
g
5-
=co
__o_
_o_O_o
o_ ._.1
-r
rr 0
-_
u_
o
rr _9 .-LL
rr
j _ _" o _
i:
0 Z
118
(5
o
_
_
0
_
Q
_ _
_ o
_ o
Cr_
_6
(5
_
0
tr uJ 0 Z u_ u.
o_
._
'_
119
Since wasdifficultto establish it values f all theparameters couldinfluence o which thetail-rotor figures f meritlevels, wasdecided assume o it to a common of FMtr value
copters. assumed helicopters The Eq. the (1.27), coaxial It is believed figures studied. overall power transmission = 0.96, efficiency which (Boa) for the the single-rotor actual helicopters was computed losses. from For of that merit this level approach would is justified have little by the fact influence on that the possible results = 0.6 for all single-rotor deviations rating from helithe practical
of the
comparative
of the
assuming configuration
rlxrntot
would
Ka-25,
assumed, (Bop
by the
CH-46E,
included figure
= 0.95). by the step-by-step from procedure flight in Table assumed flight test 4.2 are compared results. In the
of merit hovering
values ceiling
computed data
deduced of
from the
the
obtained
average In the
step-by-step case,
ceiling from
as "official" to be correct,
values. the
second of the
the values
were from
closeness one's
step-by-step
obtained
FMoa'S
resulting UH-60A,
tests
seems
to
strengthen
confidence be added
It should of the CH-46 Having vertical R/C Power called gross the The of all civilian weights power
relationship
established, from
at SL,
Eq. (1.9). with the Ideal the Power ratio (Fig. of the 4.9). Based on and the so-
Weight of
1500
SHP
maximum
normal
Mi-8 the
helicopter with
appears TV3-117
for its Western at 2170 Ka-25 1.5). known. as the SA330J, on hp would
ratio
Mi-24D
[(SHPTo) the
helicopter Whether
to be the rating
compared
assumed
GTO-3
engine It should
designs 2.5
UH-60A,
and
YUH-61A and
exhibit, about
at normal
(based
transmission-limited
power),
weight. CTIO) majority in Hover of the OGE Soviet blade-lift and those at SL_ ISA helicopters coefficients assumed (Fig. 4.10). Similar here their also to the appear counterto be closer developed preto
class,
depicted then
average
Western
Ii"t = 700
those
the older
of the UTTAS
and Puma
the so-called
European
120
SSOUe O_uua:13U
o "r
I,D
m
.!
_! /
C_ //
/,.
O')
p /
_ \
/ I/
IL
O..
._.
L_
Z
0
.J
\
\
o \,
_O
ea
e_
Z W
__
_oD_
UJ
I_ I.O
_ _o t_,_
\
\
e, 0
\
! I
\
i i
e_
U'J
'B'I/dH
:IHOI::IM
.__
122
"('_1
ill
,--O_
ILl
o
,,D
'
_ _- I_
"r" nil
I=
o re
ID <:
to
,,,D
V' I"" _
1 '_ q O O O o
123
Main of the
Rotor
of Merit was
(Fig. computed
As
previously test
main value
rotor was
of merit by the
tower
for
the level
Mi-24D would
FMmr
of the
below
the UTTAS
Power
to Rotor-Power
(Fig.
4.12).
from invesr
at SL,
single-rotor thrust
helicopters to gross
tigated 0.076.
gross
weight
class
exhibit
surprisingly
weight
of Ttr/Wg
With respect Western lowest gross helicopters power weight Overall CH-46E pared overall UTTAS Mi-24D ratio and Figure
to the having
power the
ratios, same
RPtr/RPmr gross
_ weight.
0.12
level
as the
to exhibit assumed
normal
writing)
highly
YUH-61A,
obtained values
8 and that
for the
FMoa
merit the
because next
UTTAS appear
represent
FMoa
CH-3E
on the
VTO and with from was which weights, VTO the the
rate
of takeoff altitude
power was
altitide, obtained
ISA,
at that the
computed. powers
values
transmission
lower
gross
tandem
shows while
that
and CH-46E,
gross
their weights
gross
weights
Mi-8 and
gross
weights. gross
contrast
to the
Mi-24-D
where
gross (Fig.
higher VTO
normal
weight.
Vertical flying
Rates
and normal
vertical 4.2,
rates
of climb
ISA were
compared
helicopters. at this
results
in Fig. 4.14. climb character of the TV2-117A-equipped lapse-rate curve Mi-8 of this
A glance helicopter
figure gross
indicates weight
at its VTO
is very
to the
of the
124
co
co ('41
,.O '7"
C_
,-4
"-e
(_1
0O -I
.,...
"Ira I.LI
(/)
O
E: 3 I-uJ L_ O co
O .1=
,<
i,
f.o
I--
O
Z
I i
LO
If) CD
o r,O
LO I.O
NIVIN
125
IHOI3M
tO
SSOI:IO/ISflklH.L
_
I:IO..LO_I-'I
If)
IV.I.
c_
I
o
i
o
I
0 0o N
e_
<
O
t_ O
111 .J O O O (N
.o
/:
-v
N
UJ
o
C/)
O e_
O e_
co
T'--
{/)
,-I
I0 Z
11
0 N O
I._
1.0
d l:::l:lMOd
d I::IOIOI::I-NlVl/_/I:I:IMOd
126
o I:10101::1--IlVl
CD
,q.
8
I:0 --I
e,
O
n,,.
CD
o
'7 \\
cD g o 4
6
w
"I" tDCD
z***
ID fD Lo o
c5
IlEI31N
-IO 3EIngl=l
-I"IVU3AO
127
_t>o<q
o
-J
b b / ./ c_
/ / /
S
e_
..(3
/ / d o
o
.'
<r.-o
d,
I/ f/
(-_
6
[-,
<
128
engine
- showing
an takeoff
increase power,
of power the
with
altitude rates of
(up climb
to about at the
4000 VTO
ft). gross
For
rotorcraft are
trans(Vvc m.
vertical
weight
to Soviet
that
the
Ka-25
at SL,
ISA the
have TV3-117-
no
capability
gross have
Mi-24D UTTAS
a vertical
similar
to that
types
normal
weights. all of the The compared UTTAS-type Western helicopters show show some vertical climb at
the
exception
of the
CH-3E,
at their gross
maximum weights.
flying
weights.
helicopters
very high
rates
of climb
4.3
Energy Table
in Hover most important fuel inputs required per in the study of weight energy and aspects zero-time in hover, payload as well as are indi-
numerical cated
values 4.3.
of hourly
consumption
pound
of gross
in Table For
with
the
exception weights,
were
flying VTO
capabilities
at 3000-ft
of the Ka-26
gross weight). at their maximum engines). gross weights can not hover at
helicopters ratings
at the two
accepted helicopters
of the TV2-117A
gross
4.3.
For gross
Mi-24-D,
of gross
and
weight,
assuming
as for the TV2-117A and OGE 4.16. at SL_ ISA SA330J of flight. of the
engine.
of these
studies
Weight Ka-25,
(Fig.
4.15).
Soviet unit
highest
in the of the
hover
be present no
lb/hr-lb
since, were
writing,
"official"
data
consumption
of the GTD-3F
and TV3-117
engine,
the
Mi-8 appears
to have
a good
fuel
T700-GE-700-equipped
helicopters
exhibit
the
lowest
lb/hr-lb
values
of the entire
group.
129
o .._
: m
0_
,d
-8 < *
._ __ _
_n
o _ _ o o
o. _ o
c_ o o o
'_ _
m 0
_'E.
_o
LU
>
o_
zo
[-
00
L
m
o
o 6
_ _o
_ o
_ ooo
,v
0 [.
0
.=_.
_ _
_-
d _ o o
_,
. _. _.
_
.__
E
N
o
g
k-
-_
_ =
o_
u__
__p0_
E _o ._ _:
UJ I-0 Z
._ _ _: = -_,: _.
oo
_,_
"1"
130
d 00 t'N
.o
,.Q ) (D
_N
o.
) e_
o
o
tN
eL
_n --I O
2:
r.
CN (N "1T,
O
(.9
u.I _) (/) C_ tN
O
nr
J
c/)
(.9
b_
eD
e_ 0
0 v-0 0 0 _ 4
BI-UH/BI
-131"1::1 AII:IFIOH
.._
131
Unfortunately,
there
Soviet helicopters
fuel consumption
payload (based on the assumed sfc) than its Western counterparts, Mi-8 also shows slightly higher fuel requirements SA330J helicopters. aspects, The UTTAS-type exhibit helicopters,
per unit weight of payload than those of the CH-46E and due to the low sfc of their engines and favorable strucof all the comfor land opera-
tural weight
out that should the CH-46 be configured its relative fuel consumption
be lower.
0.40
CH-3E 0.30
..- i
_/"
CH-46E 0 0.20
_.
YUH.61.Ak_
oo
D u. >. ..J fl: 0 -I0 0.10
..........
Iw
0 HOVER
20 TIME:
40 MINUTES
60
Figure 4.16 Variation with time of hourly fuel consumption per pound of maximum payload in hover OGE, SL, ISA for Soviet and Western helicopters of the 12,000 to 30,O00-1bgross weight class.
132
4.4
SHP
Required
Aspects
in Level
Flight
at SL,
ISA
= f(V)
Flight
test
results
(Fig.
4.17)
were
directly
used
relationship
helicopter (Fig.
available
helicopter lower
5); but
at SL, these
modified
(RHP/Wgr)
to find
wfp,
in Fig. A-8 s . calculations ISA and and the average values assumed 4.4. from the Cp = F(CT) curves in Ref. 12, for establishment of the SHP/Wg r =
of those at SL,
relationship The
in Table computed
(SHP/Wgr)
= f(V)
for the
by the manufacturer
VALUES
OF
VARIOUS
PARAMETERS
COMPUTED
War: lb
p, slug/cu.ft
va
1/51.5 1/43 1/50 0.513 0.413 0.50 0.010 0.0096 0.010
*See
Fig. A-8 s
For
the
helicopters 3.4) was used. at this for the f and and point Mi-8
(both
Soviet
and
Western),
an approach
based
on
performance
figures
be noted
that
no reliable
data
regarding
the maximum
rate
of climb
in forward was
helicopter
at this writing.
approach so-established
Fd values average
equivalent
blade
the (SHP/Wg
r) --
lb at SL, ISA. of climb Could be found for the Ka-25 helicopter at this writing; hence,
the single-point
133
2800
2600 VNR
2400
2200
2000
W
0
W
1800
1600
1400
1200
TRUE AIRSPEED:
Figure
4.17
SHP
= f(V)
relationship
in level
flight
at SL, ISA
for
the
CH-46E
helicopter.
(Courtesy
of Boeing
Vertol
Co.)
134
computations
in
Table
4.5
as the required
1st
performed advantage
for
the
manufacturer's relationship,
regarding
of the
two-point
was
used
f, and _d
values
shown
2rid Approximation. In tionship 155 knots, the very 1st Approximation close to those based for the UH-60A, the single-point Then results produced a (SHP/Wg figures t, and_ r) = f(V) relaat
on flight
tests 12.
and SHPmin,
the two-point
technique
was used
in the
2nd Approximation. In the case of the lb, and CH-3E the helicopter, results were the used two-point to establish approach the was applied r) = f(V) in the curve calculations of fand C-d lb at
at Wg r = 21,247 SL, ISA. All of in Fig. 4.18. Fig. helicopter flight begin 4.18. shows ISA. the
(SHP/Wg
at Wgr = 22,050
above-described
calculations
are indicated
in Table
4.5,
and
the
results
are graphically
shown
A glance the
that
similar
weight low-speed
class,
the
Kamov of level
lowest
of gross becomes
range
at SL,
SHP/(Wgr)ma
x requirements
helicopter It also
appears appears
to exhibit that
generally
good
with SA330J
respect
to the
= f(V) gross
relationship. weight
this helicopter,
together 4.4).
and CH-3E
It is also in this gross UH-60A, f(V) values ance curve shown figures;
SHP/(Wgr)ma narrow
curves
for
the
compared that
helicopters
weight
be recalled on flight
and for
YUH-61A the
were
tests.
into
SHP/Wg published
r and performspeed
curves
all of the
uncertainties in forward
as to a precise flight.
of engine
at the quoted
of flight,
and the
values
Values The
at
Vma x .
the
SHP/Wgr
values
at Vma x or cubic
Vcrma x are
shown
vs correon speed
law of power
It is interesting Another
parabola. close
passes
It should
that, smaller
12,000
weight
class appears
previously
class of up to 12,000
135
--
Q "_t
0 0
_2
o_
m
z '8 r_
0 o
oo
Oo
<
"r
<
m_
e
IO
r,
gm
o!. o
ddff
"
o 0
o E
"
_ _ _ ,e,_,_
_- _ ,.uJ
0 Z
o _
_
_ _ = _- _ _ _ _ _ _
=_ooooo
_ o .....
136
o
0
o.
._.
_
0
c_
c_
_
"_. 0
_. 0
o.... o
0 0
o
0
o
0
"_. 0
_c_
_00_
__o_o _o6
.
0000000
___'
0000000
00000000
000000
0000000
A "0
E
o " "
q. h0 Z
.,
I--
137
0.16
_v
//
0.14
SA330J YUH-61A
CH-46E UH-60A
0.02
SPEED OF FLIGHT:
Figure 4.18
Comparison of shaft horsepower per pound of gross weight vs speed of level flight at SL, ISA of Soviet and Western helicopters of the 12.000 to 30,000-1b gross weight class. 138
_l.
\.
o
_a_ 6
o
0 t_ c o 0
o
D
8
c
,-4
c/)
:E w z _lw Z _
o
L_
o c_l
ffl
e,
o o
o o
c; 81/dH
,--
o.
L_
139
4.5
Energy
Aspects
in Level
Flight
at SL,
ISA
Required of
per fuel
Pound
of
Gross per
Weight pound
in Level of gross
Flight
The
numerical
inputs
weight 4.6.
or pound that
weight
flight
are shown
in Table the
be noted
to the
regarding necessary
sfc of
GTD-3 of the
engines
helicopter, Mi-24D
performance Consequently,
these
two
requirements
at this time. also be emphasized maximum flow per that flying pound all considerations weight. of gross permits per pound weight one and hour for the compared how helicopters these helicopters flown is shown compare here in of energy aspects of all the compared helicopters
at their fuel
figure
to judge
utilization
of their
gross of gross
(selected
this fuel
consumption
per pound
is shown
as a func-
speed at
in Fig. 4.21. Figs. 4.20 and 4.21, one and would pound note that the weight better fuel and consumption 100 n.mi. that of the Mi-8 similar helicopter to that of
of gross and
weight
and hour,
of gross
is very
CH-3E U.S.
than
of the also
to the
latest
It should
Super-Puma
equipped better
consumption
are approxi-
mately
for the
SA330J. Payload. payload case, The and numerical hour, inputs and are required for the determinadistance for the of 100
of fuel are
one
a hypothetical performed
shown
in Table
preceding
all calculations
maximum
weight. A glance
and 4.23. when of the the fuel best consumption energy is related to the hypothetical of all the compared
zero-range helicopters,
payload, and
one types.
characteristics
is surpassed it should be
recalled
at this
that Mi-8
the
present
is carried weights
out
on have
basis
of
maximum (Fig.
flying
weight,
CH-3E
at their the
do not
capabilities
4.14). say,
a better weight.
picture, case
gross
of the
helicopters, r ratios.
special again,
equipment a revision of
the values
weight of these
empty, two
helicopters
140
"F _
"i. o
0000000
OOOOOOO
ooqqqqq
OOOOOOO
_OOOOO
Ooo_oo
-8
I--
ooooooo
.o
ooooooo
O
o o
_
7 I-(5
e_ _, _0,_ _ o o o
_ o
_ o
L9
e
OOO OOO O
o_
'_
.1
_0 or
O_
_
o
O
_
O
Z O
OOO
OOOO
e0
00
_D
I/'_
1,0 ID !
4_0
"_ mm
03
_-
NodNd_
_:
NNN_Nd
B
_
_
o
m 7 (j
dg6_gd_
_q
,,,
[-,
M
_,,_
_OOOOO
_OOOOO_ o
OOOOOOO
qq oo
qqqqq ooooo
_qqo_q oooo
oO
g0
_F
I,I. ILl I"-
I'O
141
o .,D "T' O
\\
n_
e.:
<
r._
,J
_u
.=.
_J
o
a o
MO
:10 Bq
"1::11")-I
142
LI.J UJ
O q
q I I ! ! I I o c'_
/
I
o o Z
8
E
/ I I / /
I
"I> 0
/ /
/ /
I,.I., 1,4.
o
/ I.IJ crJ
<
o N
0
II
o o
143
_d
< o >.
o666ddd
000000
Z 0 0
_6
m
__
Z < 0000000
< o <
000000
< 0
,.4
o
ft. w N
>, <
oddoodo
0
, o
N
6ddddd
6_
o
J
if2 <
_w
g
Q
-1" ff. _J
oododd
u m < _
Z 0
.5
o
_6
0 .J
0000000
E.- z b., _ q
<
o000oo
U _
M
r,,.
_6
dd6dd6d
Z v
Z v
P.
0
#
"r ..J ooo -r .J U-
o
I.U LLI LU
E < I.0
Z
144
0
\
\ \ ..o O O
ff_
.=
O 3
<
I.U U.I a.
O
o 'S
C # 0
8"1-1:1H/8"I
:ld
3ONVI:I-OH3Z
dO (]NrlOd
145
e.,
r,!l l
o
C, e_
o
o (%1
C, 0
o.
o o
.C
o= -,u
-I LL LL
0
l.IJ uJ o.,
<
r_
f/2
C_
o N
:2 0
o o
!IN'N 00L-8"1/8"1
146
per Pound
approach class,
outlined
in Sect. inputs
in the 4.8,
the numerical
presented
in Fig. 4.24. 3.25), the Mi-8 represents over any distance; one sur-
this figure
of payload
in the
preceding
the
gross of the
weight type
(WOrma x vs of
as well
as observations helicopters
unfavorable
results
bookkeeping
and CH-3E
also apply
to the comparison
shown
in Fig. 4.24.
Productivity Productivity Index. 4.9. to the The However, specified inputs necessary of to calculate the experience speed only. at this and the the productivity in Sect. so-obtained would but index 3.6, the from Eq (1.17a) are
in this in Table
cruise
A glance types
productivity and
of the
UTTAS
SA-330J;
of the CH-46E
4.7
General At this
and
Concluding discussion
Remarks of design be limited aspects to the of Soviet Mi-8 helicopters only, of the since 12,000 there to 30,000is a lack of
an indepth must,
weight
unfortunately, engine,
helicopter
characteristics
and incomplete
data
on weights
and performance
of the Mi-24D
presently two
available
limited
information,
the following
general
remarks
can
rotorcraft. discussed in the preceding chapter, the climb Ka-25 appears to be underConsequently, similar coaxial to the con-
Similar powered its VTO Ka-26, figuration Therefore, hover, tudes one by gross the
helicopter resulting
Western weight
in limited
hovering
lb is below is visible
of 16,100 take
same
design
performance blade
as possible
power
lift coefficient
for a high
to be too
a comfortable required
at elevated flight
appears
region unfortunately
speeds,
due to low of
any discussion
in all regimes
,._
o_ -r
o
o
do6od
-6
>,_ g>
Ld Z <
_
00000 _3 .< 0 .J >. <
= "r
< < 0 .,J < < ao _d a_ < h, Z o o _D 0 b3 -_m
O z
._m_ 00000
o_2
00000
0 0
-1
00000
00 z LU (J Z 1-00 _3
_
c_
_o
u.
N _
:_ o
148
..o _5 o o I.o N
C_
\ \
o O N I.I.I
e_
o I.O
0
.<
G,i
?.n
m
r_
o I.O
O o
149
_D
-5
m
_.1
z _w
_.1
<
_
o
'_
I-X
__ <
Ill
, 4 < 0
o.
I.> 0 0 0
>
e 8
_,_
_,_
_s _
00 . _I" O.
Ill I-
s
u_
0 Z
150
150
___
U H 60A
Mi-8
-_--
_ CH-46E/
"_CH-3E
V-.
J a
O
ele P,
0 0
ii
50
150 N.Mi
200
Figure 4.25
Productivity index at Vcrmax, SL, ISA vs flight distance for Soviet & Western helicopters of the 12,000 to 30,O00-1b gross weight class.
the
limited
available, as reflected
that
the
design types.
of the
Mi-24D
UTTAS w -- 6.39
at normal
a departure Mi-24D
rotor
of the
(o _ 0.09)
becomes
UTTAS
types
(o = 0.0821
to 0.101). the than tip speed the blade of the Mi-24D fps is not known to these investigators, but it is probably tip speed those at
V t = 692.1 lift
of the
Mi-8.
solidity disc
should Mi-8
average
coefficients
(in spite
of the
loading)
of the
or Ka-25. The higher should TV3-117 the turboshaft = 1480 of the installed rating UTTAS in the Mi-24D helicopters has a rating of 2170 hp, which is much
than
SHPTo to that
Consequently,
the power
loading
of the Mi-24D
appears
quite
similar
to the
loading
(based x = f(V)
"civilian" helicopters
higher of the
CH-3E.
disc loading
differences.
with
respect
of gross
and hour,
and pound
of gross weight
151
aspects payload
of
the
two
helicopters, helicopters
note
that
fuel
conflight,
of both
However, aspects
of
the
of zero-
payload In general,
comparing Soviet
design
respects inferior
appears
to be on the
as its Western
to the
UTTAS
types. OGE be noted of the and vertical that TV2-117A aspects this climb capabilities stems Should would a
where even
inferior
inferiority engines.
the be
high
power in
loading some
permitted
operations,
then
performance
of the
Mi-8
152
APPENDIXCHAPTER -Mr. W. Coffee, the Mil-8. helicopter with Test Pilot, is being Boeing Vertol Company, gave the to the His evaluation its Western included as a supplement
counterparts.
MIL-8
FLIGHT 4, 1971,
EVALUATION Mr. Coffee has been was seen given a 30-minute years flight except in the that Mil-8 it was aircraft. fitted out This aircraft with a VIP did not differ His
that
in previous
interior.
with
Mr. seats
Pelevin
who
had flown
Chinook do not
Mr.
Coffee
at the
1967
Paris
Air
Show.
pedals switch
operated
when
a hover
or in the
of a hard-over
A similar
is installed
in the Mil B-12. sticks position each have centering and does springs not that appear function like those as the
earlier, in the
Chinook.
However,
is strange
as practical
E.
forces
with
the centering
springs
engaged
are estimated
feature is very
"sloppy."
Russian
agreed
Coffee F
on all the Mil helicopters. was not annoying even though the engines are located
The cockpit was very quiet and engine directly above the aft of the cockpit. A six-inch The blade between days of aircraft tip diameter flown damage the the C-5 fan had from Galaxy, panel to hover speed. The is provided a strong a parking the In cruise above 1 per
noise
G.
H.
each
pilot's
head. in hover verify while and but this the pilot stated there aircraft knots that was on this was due to collision early low
because the
a minor one
Mil-8 cruised
parking high
Air Show.
rev vibration
frequency at 120
aircraft
strong panel
vibrations on the
last
10 knots
of forward pit showed J. The pilots the engine The ment L The high wide M.
N.
instrument
little
autopilot
of the cock-
movement. are separated by about and other switches. Most panel with is not extended forward sides 3 feet of open of the switches across space. A flight engineer are located overhead. The pilot sits between and operates
K.
the cockpit.
and copilot
have
individual
instru-
a clear
in between. was very good in straight in the in the and level flight, but the pilot This on the
of a bank
cross
vision
to clear such
himself
direction Chinook.
of a turn.
is due to the
windshield
as is provided
Power
movements
was very positive. bicycle handle 153 bar type brake grip located on the forward side
by a long
5 GW Helicopters
5.1
Hypothetical
Helicopters
for
Comparison.
An
analysis insight
of the into
discussed
by
provide
philosophy and
of what
as being serve
as conceptual
"prototypes"
or near-future
Mil group. Within a study of the 12 to 24 and tandem ground indicates only rules, the this metric-ton gross weight helicopters presented in pp. 129 to 134 was reached the tandems.
decision
preference type of
of
design selected
Consequently,
configuration
represent
study. advantageous limit included in the of the that of the to select gross weight two helicopters; scale. makes For one being close to the
another
a 15 metric-ton especially
is a detailed the
in Ref. current
1, which comparative
study.
as another
weight
5.1a),
of their
2 X 2 X 8 m. requirements for all the considered helicopters at their nominal gross weights
are (p. 1171): Hovering Service Range At 500m, Vma x = 250 are compared, helicopters. kn. to 300 ceiling ceiling Hh = Hs = _ km/h cruise this = 1500m 4500m 370km _ 135 speed _ _ _ 4900 14,750 200n.mi. Later in Ref. 140 that 1 when kn) the various rotary-wing for the is ft. ft.
a fast On
km/hr assumed
(about here
is mentioned speed
basis,
it will
requirement
Vcrma x = 140
154
x'b
(a) MIIRary version of Mil Mi-6 heavy
Q
general-I_arpose hollcoplw' (!_I!ol Pr_._)
oooee
(b)
NIII Mi-lO
additional
of MblOK
(Pilot IJ_ru)
Figure
5.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the
30,000
to 1OO,000-1b
GW class
155
(d)
Boeing-Vertol
CH-47D
(Chinook)
Figure
5.1 Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the 30,000
156
MAIN OISC SL.AOE I_.AOE _,----0 5 10 1,_IFT ---It BLAOE MAml ARF.A AREA(I"OI"AL.) S_CT_ON Cm_ORD ROTO_
ROTOR
OEAM
RAT_0
SCALE
72 23FT
,
I
"" ' ' 56i_l'r (llVi.ONilBLAOIEiJ,'#OI.IDIO) \/// . _:;_04 eT'( OVEmkLL L[NOtM ) U ._ "''I .
,/
W'
(..
_->
iT"
_',"
01IIUITIVl
IlIANCIMINT
Marine Helicopter
Figure 5.1
Three-view
drawings
157
o_-A
i
i
(f)
Figure
5.1
Three-view
drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the 30,000
to lOO,O00-1b GW class
In view 24 m.ton) of
of the the
above
given
high
performance should
requirements, be considered
the
specified
gross rather
weights than
hypothetical
helicopters
as normal
flying
weights. Other important Tip speed Blade Crew The weight thrust coefficient (SL, ISA) characteristics of the hypothetical Vr = tvo= 198.5 helicopters 220m/s 0.155, lb each. are: -_ orE_o= 720fps. 0.465
of 3 at 90 kg and powerplant Helicopter. text, was aspects A detailed that of the weight
two
hypothetical for
later. in Table
15 Metric-Ton 2.81 ; but in structural ton load 11,245 18040 18,040 helicopter for later in the
it is stated
weight
becomes range
of 7490 kg _ given
lb to 2.731 becomes
lb is entered 595.5 -
the resulting
zero-range
(Wo/) o = 33,075
= 14,400 2.71,
basis
of Figs.
rotor
----
of
Rmr
--- 10.25
m = 33.63 SL,
ft ISA ft,
as assuring
a maximum
payload the
Wpl 370
5100
the assumed
lift coefficient
of T0 o = 0.465,
main-rotor
blade
would
be Cmr = 1.47
158
(TO and
power a weight
at
500m coefficient
ISA) of
can
be estimated kg/hpref:
from
the
0.140
SHPre = hp per
to (SHPTO)o
= 5880,
or (SHPTo)o
= 2940
and 2900
weight
empty
of the
24
an optimal
of fuel Wu
= 2320
taking
be D = 24.8 would
ft); chord
as before,
at SL, ratio
at "co = 0.465,
require
in a solidity that
of Orn r -- 0.1065. engines so-interpreted result in the hp; (with constant installed total takeoff power power up per to 2000 kg m altitude) weight =
visualized
of gross
amounts 0.39
to Neng
power
installed:
SHPTo units.
in SI units,
_ 9230 92
in British i.e.,
Normal 8490
is estimated
to amount
percent
takeoff
SHPn.rat.
5.2
Basic
Data drawings point to most that of the compared 5.1c the the helicopters three-view base are drawing shown of the of the in Fig. 5.1a through 5.1f. since and It should this be
in Fig.
aircraft
closely
represent
configuration
24 metric-ton
principal
of the
compared
are
given
in Table
5.1,
while
some
of the
contained Disc
therein (Fig.
5.7. that the real no Soviet higher process next helicopters than about (Mi-6 and
Loading
It can weight
Mi-10) design
of the trend
have
a maximum by the in
loading
9 psf. The
as is probably only
evidenced
helicopters, single-rotor
moderate
increases
class. CH-53E of is much all presently higher, flying as it reaches transport w = heli-
of the
(probably
highest
value
copters).
159
_.o
"1" o.
e-
_s_
"I-
_.o
Z
q
0")
_._
I_ _1
'a
0 u-
0 0
__oO_
"r
Z
g_
_z__ _.
_
. o
Z
o
_ r_ ,_
_0
c_
_x 0
M_ m
_> _
r-
m.
c_ _
..{3
Z _4 <
rr
"I" 0
_8
"1"
I"
I"
112
<o
--_0 rr _ ko O
"1" n
_S
A 00 ' o o
rC o Lo
_ _
> E
-r n _4 o 00 3::"
_n
>
"1"
Z 0 Z o_ "r
Z 0
E
a. _ rr 0
Z nO I'0 re ,,,.,.I
rr
us D i, Z 0 0
< _J
,,, .__ ._
,,,{
_
Z
o_
.9
0
"o
_g
121
s8
_
0
_
'_
I-
'S t.g
'S_ -
.-
o g
I-: _
I.I--
==oS_
"
160
00_
d_g
_o
Z
8o
_
Z
ze
_m
8oo_o
o.r.,--._
rr" Z
o.
o d _ M_
0 0_, to "o o. 0
o
Pl
_
o
r_
"_
O
.oo
Z
('N
<_ r,. t_
0 _I" 113
0 r,. t_ P_ L_ LO
O 0_ 0_
r_
II
_ g
M m
-m
_o
ff._
4
Z O
--
__o
z 0
..I 0 0
rr 0
_ IT
_..
z3
_" e__.-
,< Ld I-
_o
_o_-,
-= .
161
Lf_
,o _'_ C_ '_ 0
-6
_o
>_
0
_o _0 I 0 0
_o_
_d
"_
0q
| "1" !
o_
"I-
0 0q _
_"
m_
_o
P_
<
--
v 0
.=o
O_oo
_'. e0 ,A
_o_
o r- _ _c_ _ 00
. o"
e_
o
IW
%
--
>
.a
z_
162
Z I--
o
t'-
,.,.,_
LU o 03
.-I o 0 m .-I o o o \ \ 2
e_
g
0
/.:
e_
\
\
N
O
e_
-_/
,/
o Lo
_o
+,l+, +
| |
o 1"
o 03 o OSIC]
o dSd :9NI(]VO'!
I,o
163
As may that
for a tandem
configuration,
the
disc
loading
of the
CH-47D
is lower
than
5.3). of the
at this weight
figure class
would
indicate than
that that
the
power
loading
of the counter-
helicopters power
is higher of the
of their helicopters
Western is on
loading and
on TO
power)
hypothetical
the
same
of the
CH-47D
It should
also
that
helicopters hypothetical
are flat
engines 5.1.
would These
power those
and listed
in Table
of the CH-47D
and CH-53E.
Tip
Speed
(Fig. Soviet
5.4).
It can
be seen
from
5.1B
that
the actual,
V t ._ 720 fps-while
to 740 fps (CH-53E). Tail-Rotor radii the ratio relative Distance of existing (Fig. Soviet location 5.5). It can be is the
and
tail-rotor and
main-rotor However,
helicopters (x-)of
CH-53E.
longitudinal
in the present
as follows:
Rt, + (Rm, + aJR_, where assumed 6 is the gap separating that _ = 0.25 as (MO)mr the the main-rotor ft.) (Mo)mr
[(MO),,,I_%,]
from the
= 0
tail-rotor which, tip radius. in turn, (In Ref.
(5.1)
1, it is may
tip radius
m = 0.82
torque
in hovering
= Rrnr(k3v_
above-outlined hypothetical
procedure helicopters
tail-rotor
values,
the
tail-
of the
were
as shown
in T_ble
x and x-values
are also given in this table. It can also between distances the Mil be seen from and the Table 5.1A and the and Fig. 5.5 that the and so-determined CH-53E of the Rtr/Rmr helicopters; same class; ratios while i.e., the are _"
Mi-6
Mi-10, same
Sikorsky
CH-53D
are practically
as for
all single-rotor
helicopters
_ _
1.2.
164
o o
o 00
v-q
[,I.I
ILl
E>o
6
o L_
0
o .J
o
| I | I I en e J |
dH/81
:gNl(3'q'01
_13MOd
165
0 0
_0
nLn
__o
e'_ 0
?,
0 L.O
1
0
0
"t.
.._
0
|
0 0
0 0
_ 0
0 0
Sd-.I
:C]:I::IdS
dll
I:10101d
166
.=
._
J_
?,
==
0 _
'r
F-, 'q,
SNIQVEI
EIO/OEI'NIVIN/SnlQVEI
EIO/OEI"IW.L
167
Empty
to Gross
Weight gross
Ratios
(Figs.
5.6 and
to maximum helicopters
weight, than
weight
of the
and
are higher
and CH-53 D. Contrary the so-called ratios to the trend represented helicopters generation by existing reflect of Soviet Soviet helicopters of the that be equal the to, considered weight weight empty class,
at least
a possibility can
weight Western
helicopters
or better
counterparts. 5.6A supplements from this figure and are Fig. that 5.6 by showing zero-range Soviet payload to normal gross weight lower helicopters their Western ratios. than at
Fig.
the ratio
CH-53E, weights
gross
to have
counterparts. Cabin previously gross weight Volume discussed class but Loadinl_ gross have (Fig. weight relatively space fact 5.7). classes, more to that that A glance the existing cargo at this Soviet cabins figure would indicate of the the CH-47D, that 30,000 and similar to the
helicopters than
spacious
similar
roominess
present cargo
in spite
of the
primarily
designed
of the
in that the
respect
is not
since
the
same weight
cabin class.
X 2 X 8 m) obviously gross
entire
12 m.ton with
gross
assumption
cabin
volume
to the maximum
possible
payload
of a 15-ton
a 24-ton
helicopter.
5.3
Hovering
and
Vertical
Climb
Aspects
of OGE,
was the
for
the
CH-53D
z 3, as was
data
giving
Company). were
calculation helicopters
of FMoa discussed
values in this
computed used
chapter
previously
in Table
were of climb
determined, at that,
VTO gross
gross
weights were
were
computed from
from
Eq
weights,
computed
Eq (1.9).
168
P
cd
/ ..= I /
C3
.=
,.
=.
> O r_
r_
N. J.HOI3M
169
o o
o 03
O O
) co
e_
nm ,J o
u
"luJ
\ \
o
n-
o u3
o ,
r_
t_
<
o o
.LHOI::IM
SSO_lO/-Id
39NVI:I-O_I:IZ
170
..=
:5
.=
r_
nn
--I 0 C_ C_
.=.
'
"r"
u.I
=.
0
0 n-
=.
_r
7 o
3
u 0 v) N N 0
_l|||ll||llll|llll||ll|
.t_'no/81
:gNIOVO'I
:l_fl'lOA
NIBY3
171
0.7
0.6
o. "Io
ira nuJ
0.5
M.
/
uJ
O
I,M
/
m
a. uJ 03 nO kg.
4 SHP
0.4
LL ..I ..I
<:
I,IJ
<_
"I" 03
> O 3 0.3
0.2 50
10
20
30 GROSS WEIGHT:
40 1000 LB
Figure 5.8 SHP required in hover OGE, SL, ISA (courtesv of Boeing-Vertol Co.) and overall figure of merit of the CH-47D & CH-53D helicopter=.
172
cn "1"
o o
_.oo
_ _
0.8 _
_ _ _,-:o
_0_
0 0
0 0
_o=
>_
Q
0 0
q
0 tO
<
_o__=.
<_ I -'r
_<_
_o''_'_=_'_ _
_o
>o Zo
V _
z
>o 0 _
__o_
"
_0
66__66
" qD
0 0
qD _
, CO ID
. 0
0 0
m ._1
"r
nO I0
n'Z
"6
n" 0 I0 rr _1
.=
u.I
_-
_
_ _"
_
_" .o_
o
I1:
.--
LL
I..-
'-i
173
00
CO LO _
Or- o
, 1.0 I..0 O_
oO
,:0 o
'1
o T _ _.,_ _
d d _ c_ d c_
o
_"
"o o
_o_
A
0'}
_o
0 0 '0
0 ,_'
p. oo _
GO 1.0 _
('0
GO
1.0 00
0 0
,to cO
0 0
_q'-''C_, o _ _
W (D 0
8
E
'"
.B(,J
E o :
A
r_
-" = = d,
_- ':q" .c_ to
E _ ._d, "6
0 (J
wg
_ .___-_.
," _3
ILl 0
__o
tO
F-
174
per
Pound
of Gross
Weight from
with
Ideal to
(SHP/GW) the
Values
in conper
5.9). the
It can ratio
be seen of the
similar
previously
classes, to the
installed
power
(at a rating
of 5500
of gross Western
ideal Only
of the Mi-6 and Mi-10K CH-53E to that at its maximum of the Mi-IOK. power to that OGE gross
is lower
counterparts.
of 73,600
(SHPro/Wg3/(SI-m/W_,)
By contrast, called Soviet Average Fig. 5.10 the
w
ratio
_ 1.75 of the
flat-rated to be similar
loading
to the
ideal
values
of the
so-
Cr/o)
in Hover considered
would
indicate
average
(Mi-6 same
helicopters gross
counterparts seems
type
of _perational
The
to be true
garding
helicopters. of Merit and in Hover hypothetical) to the proper_ present notation, OGE at SL, ISA determined (Fig. 5.11). from using the Figures curve of merit marked equation of Soviet "Tests" given in on
Main helicopters
were
corrected using
= 3 X t v values becomes:
the following
1 which,
FM 1
FM o --
o.3(,l=ee
c1 ' and
o.zs5)
where
sought
figure
of merit
at a given
FM o represents
the
FM value
shown
in
CH-47D
by the
For values
helifigure final
as a starting consideration
estimated, were
taking
airfoils, solidities
and Math
calculated from
be seen The
to 0.7. gross
CH-53E which
is similar Weight,
manufacturer's Power
given
to Gross ratios,
being
slightly
higher
than
considered
shown tail-rotor
in Fig. 5.12. to main-rotor power ratios are also approximately the same, amounting to
to 0.116.
175
.D
/P
"
z_
z _ _
_ ,-. _ _l",'-n_i
_. z t
O C3
C3 C3
.=
\,
& i
Ii o. Z
.=
r./3
< o
.J C3 o0
c:
/\_
_,
21
I
o')
db,-
\_,1 .
/ _ .. _
oo
O
f_
a-
'
',
\"
,l, \.,
176
_o '
'Bq/dH
:/HOI:IM
o o
O
'7" O O
8
o 00 q
O m
e,
"N
<
.i
m
e
e_
"'
d, <
o
_4
39VU3AV
N
177
) o
'
_ !> o<1
0 t_ 0
0o
__o4
Q
o
o t
_
_
-,-
._
a
0 e,
c::;
IIEI::IIN 40
o ::11:11"191-11:10101:1NIVlN
178
1HOI:IM
SSO_IO/1SFII:IH1
I:1010_1"1
IV1
e.,
.=
<
cy)
,J
__
,:
O e..
_o
e..
I,.,
i o od EI:IMOd
o ,o. o
c5
c5
o
EIOIOEI-'IlVl
EIOIOEI-NlVlAi/Id3MOd
179
Figure (Fig.
(Fig. FMoa
5.13). values
The for
FMoo
of the other
CH-47D
is based
on SlIP
shown
estimates
outlined
5.2.
and
hovering
OGE
ISA while
CH_53D values
information
hovering levels-
hypothetical
Soviet
helicopters be seen
through
only.
As can
of the
to somewhat helicopters
optimistic shown
of the Soviet
lower
than
ones VTO
indicated. weights computed vertical from rates Eq. (1.2), of climb 5.2 and at are
(Fig. gross
5.14). weights,
as maximum computed
normal compared
corresponding results
ISA were
for the
helicopters.
are shown
in Table
plotted
in Fig. 5.14. A glance at this figure winged, would indicate that the short vertical rates of climb versions) value latter maximum of existing at their Soviet heliflying
(Mi-6
in the
in the
landing-gear
maximum
low,
or have
Without would
weight
at which
some
to 85,000
lb - still below
(93,700
weights. is different at their with respect flying to Western weights and, helicopters in the which case have some vertical the climb to
maximum
of the
CH-53E,
ability
respect
hypothetical similar
it appears Western
that
their
designers
would
like to
vertical
counterparts.
5.4
Energy
Aspects
in Hover
The
most
important fuel
inputs
in the
study
of energy and
aspects zero-time
in hover, payload,
and are
of hourly 5.3.
consumption
of gross
weight
to perform CH-47D,
on a common helicopters,
basis,
maximum (Wgr)rnax
gross
weights
were than
used
for to
CH-53D,
as their
is lower
or equal
180
o o
o o_
e_
o 00
o.
I.M
..I O ) o )
8
e-
O
n
"1-
uJ
=0 O re
<
r_
o I.O
o
I
.g
m.
o
1,0 0 o 0
11EI3_
40 S.=l_nOl=l "I'IVEI3AO
181
Do<]
g
0
-"
J 1 f / f j,
>
5 -_
1 t / / t t / / t t / / i t / J e_ /
_4__-t
o
J
<
-d
>
_- .... 4
o o Q
0 I.O
0 0 I._
182
o o
o
o r_
66
o. o
666
n" uJ
o _
_ _
<
<
_ _
_.6_3
.q _ o_6oooo
--
_
_
o
_00000
.....
._m
a_ _J 0 3: (.9 LU u_ u_ :. 0 ._
o 5 J
_..
_ _ _ _
__ _
_
_...
o r
uJ t9
o _ t_
-" E
r_ (D
_ 0
_ s
_ u._
_o __ _:
_e_o
oo ,,,,
183
weight
were performed
0 =
of the Mi-6 can not hover OGE at SL, to hovering OGE at SL, ISA Therefore, these
corresponding
and arbitrarily
Houri},
Fuel Consumption
per Pound of Gross Wei[_ht in Hover OGE_ SL r ISA (Fig. appearing in Fig. 5.15 exhibit
5.15).
of gross weight in this regime of flight. The highest for the hypothetical 24-ton helicopter (0.0723
CH-47D
(0.0734
lb/hr-lh). Hourly picture Fuel Consumption per Pound of Payload in Hover OGE, in hover SL, ISA (Fig. of payload existing 5.16). instead The of
changes
fuel consumption
per pound
is calculated.
Soviet heli-
(especially
counterparts. By contrast, pound of payloadthe Soviet comparable hypothetical with that helicopters exhibit a low hourly fuel consumption per in that
of the CH-47D,
representing
respect of all considered 5.5 SHP Required Establishment data on SlIP = f(V) Company). maximum
Western helicopters
Aspects in Level Flight at SL, ISA of the (SHP/W_r) = f(V) Relationship. Flight-test substantiated manufacturers' of Boeing-Vertol = f(V) at the
for the CH-47D (Fig. 5.17, courtesy directly used to calculate (SHP/Wgr)
Consequently,
flying gross weight of 50,000 lb. The "two-point to determine the equivalent
technique"
and 33,000
lb was employed
plate area (f) and the average blade profile drag coeffi-
cient (_d). The results of the calculations In this table the Td values obtained
are shown in Table 5.4. for the two area differ different considered by about gross weights 10 percent. are quite similar, can an
fiat-plate
gross weights,
and could
drag coefficient
184
.O
O C,
O 03
O 0
;C
O I.O
nf_
;> O
<
r,/3
===o n-
> O
..=
.o
0 w
E
e_
O Oq O
N _4
q
0 0 0 0
91-UHIBq
"1:11"I-.I A'IEIriOH
185
0.50
Mi-6 0.40
.J
aa .J
0.30
Mi-10K
2J
o. .-I
z O m
o.
CH-53E 0.20
0.10
>.
..=I
20 HOVER TIME:
40 MINUTES
60
Figure 5.16
Variation with time of hourly fuel consumption per pound of maximum payload in hover OGE, SL, ISA for Soviet and Western helicopters of the 30,000 to lO0,O00-1b gross weight class.
186
S L/ISA
I I
7O0O
6000
5OOO
4000
uJ
O
uJ 03 n-'
O
'II'M.
,
'I" 03
2000
1000
GUIDE 0 0
40
80 TRUE AIRSPEED:
by the CH-47D
120 KNOTS
ISA with
160
200
Figure
5.17
required Company).
at SL,
no external
load
187
WEIGHT:
LB 33,000
ASSUMED 1.8 1.7 1.03 1.04 0.96 COMPUTED 487.2 103.7 1/58.5 0.55 5d 0.0094
VALUES 1.8 1.7 1.03 1.04 0.96 VALUES 353.2 93.42 1/39.0 0.362 0.0093
kindf kindf
at Vma x at Ve
Wfp: f:
psf
sq.ft
Table
5.4.
average 5.17.
blade-profile gross-weight
drag coefficients
computed from
for two
assumed as being correct, and is shown in Table 5.5 with the corresponding equivalent flat-plate area loading level of wfp = 507.1 psf. The (SHP/Wgr) = f(V) curves for gross weights of 50,000 and 33,000 lb, computed directly from the data in Fig. 5.17, are plotted in Fig. 5.18. Published performance figures for the CH-53E and CH-53D helicopters permitted one to first for the original estimation of Wfp and hence f values, and then to and c-o values were obtained.
In the case of the CH-53E, where performance figures are known, and SHPmi n is given by the manufacturer for Wg = 56,000 lb, both the single and two-point approaches were used at that gross r
weight as shown in Table 5.5. It can be seen from this table that through the single-point approach, f = 124 sq.ft; and through the two-point approach, f = 140 sq.ft. For calculations of (SHP/Wgr) = f(V) at Wg = 73,500 lb, the single-point f value was judged as more representative; r
wfp = 592.7 With approximation 0.0067. average 1/56 In of order the psf. respect and to to the that reduce two "Ed levels, a relative from errors drag the in difference two-point calculations was between approach of assumed; calculations for the War single the assumed Ed (_d f(V) _d = 0.083, in at = 0.0098 = 0.0098 Wg r = 73,500 resulting Fig. 5.18. as a basis showed of the in in the vs first _d lb, = an
thus resulting in
above The
coefficients
-Ed/E _ =
results the
plotted
CH-53D, In
f and
_a
estimates.
this
of
two-point
some
188
CH-47D
/"
0.18
CH-47D
5q.oOO.LB /
0.16
0.14
/
0.12
-I a.
.am
,, .i/
/
Mi-6 NO
,///
-r w
L_ 0.10 m
O L_
IL
0.08
O z O 0.06
eL tW eL O. "r
0.04
0.02
SPEED OF FLIGHT:
Figure _.18
Comparison of shaft horsepower per pound of gross weight vs speed of level flight at SL, ISA of Soviet and Western helicopters of the 30,000 to lO0,O00-1b gross weight class. 189
_ _o_
_;o_
....
00_0
q_
._n
bO
--1
.0_
."_.
r.L
.[j
-i-r
_zz L_ --
zz
[" <
sg
r_
'-r
_--z
,-.l
<,SO o"
._
,E
. o o
E
tn
__
0 .c
i--
Z _
E <
_ o _ .._ c CE _ o rr o n" o tr o rr o _
E <
, _.__ _.._ ga
"
a a a
_._
/4
I0 Z
190
oo
o
0
tO 0 0
_ o 0
GO 0 0
o 0
_ 0
t') Q
_c_
_-
oooooooo
....
A o r
00000000
o
o"
co _000000
66666666
00000000
. CO 0 0
LD Z
_c0
0_
00000000
_z
ffl
._J
== _
A
"r
.0
.J _/)
_0
_m
F,-
191
in the resulting
f (82.6 from
sq.ft)
and _a
(0.01
vs 0.0127)
values. the
Consequently, (SHP/Wg
mean
values for
of
approaches
were
used
to calculate
r) = f(V)
War =
in Fig. 5.18. of the 15-m.ton hypothetical 50 sq.ft. that At helicopter, the VTO gross the the equivalent of flat plate area is given on to
p. 132 wo
of Ref.
1 as f = 4.5m 2 _ In addition,
weight
Wg r = 38,760 relationships
= 775.2
psf.
assuming
Fd = 0.01,
(SHP/Wor)
= f(V)
gross
weight
in Fig. 5.18. helicopter, helicopter in wto the assumed by 15 percent, = 1045.2 other psf. flat-plate resulting area was obtained sq.ft by arbitrarily which, at the
in f = 57.5
weight
case, 5.5,
Using were
values
computed
and plotted
(SHP/Wgr) to that
Mi-10K wing.
(short
configuration) in that
similar
Should since
to ascertain to evaluate
at this
writing,
the
available
performance
data
is not
suffi-
Sw _ about
area ratio
According
20 percent analysis
lift in cruising
to account
for this
simplified X the
is made. gross weight times the download assuming factor that value; which the is carried wing by
by
of the
the
wing
Wgr); where
assumptions; velocity
further is equal
is located the
in the
rotor
influence axes,
of the
equations,
vertical
can be written
Fig. 5.19a):
Wgrkvf
:_)+
and
wg_kvf(l-X).y-
D _, + Wgr#v_Xr
-
_df V
+ _
(L/D)w
[1.69 V, in knots:
where
induced
velocity
at speed
Vid f
0.296#_f (I - X)w/p V
192
(w being,
the
nominal
at the
considered
gross
weight)
and (LID)w
Wgr load. that power the total SHP by required a wingless by the heli-
note of
in
horizontal
!
required
helicopter
at Wg r = (I -- X)Wg r
horsepower
which
can be expressed
(51)
(ASHPw/Wg
r)
1.69kvfXV{O.296kvf(l-?_)w/pV
2 +
[I/(LID)w
] }/550rlo
(5.1a)
equation
for the
total
power
required
per
pound
of gross
weight
in a steady-state
level
flight
becomes:
k2vfkindf(] p V
_k)W
+ o.zs(l+ .
4 7" _'/Ca\
'tT) v, +
(5.2)
1.69hvf_,
.296kvf(l
- X) --p 2 V
(LTD)w
50rio a
to Eq knowledge taking
(1.10),
Eq (5.2) (L/D)w
can
be used
in the
single For
as well as in the two-point the Mi-6 wing ofAR 5.19b). is available L/D = f(_)
approach. characteristics
In
of the this
values as the
is required.
= 4.5 as given
in Fig. 2.1011
, and
helicopter rate
of climb
is carried
projected = 0.54
wing at SL,
ISA. From
Fig. 5.19b,
main-rotor would
in this
case
would that"
X w = 7.24, _/_
blade
average was
coefficient
Assuming w = 902.5
Eq (5.2)
solved
total
equivalent through
flat
plate
area
were
calculated
a single-point
carries
no load.
193
(a)
NOTE:
D-forces
2O
--
10
z
E
0 4 I 4 _' 8
0.8 g 12
1.2
CL
(b)
J 0 16 (0_0W)6_3
Figure
5.19
helicopter, 1) and _
wing
lift-to-drag
ratio
194-
The 122.3
00000
figures that
were the
765.9
psf
and
ftot about
sq.ft.
wing X 0.01),
4 sq.ft
of parasite
area
of the helicopter
be f--w
= 118.3
oo_
oo
obtained
through to f-w
and was
relationship
Mi-6 heli-
without The
5.5 and Fig. 5.18. version was computed the main incremental rather than using thrust differto try to to in the
mqqq_
00000
(SHP/Wgr) Because
Eq of Z <
(5.2). the
of accuracy, was
their
values.
procedure
performed assumptions
in steps were
'9,
Table wing
In addition, apparently no
made: adjusting
mecharemains at
(3
nism, constant
that
as a whole
<
.v
_d
O Z < Z ooo1_
main
rotor.
of incidence flight
respect
it provides
of the the
Values _L 9
O0
total
paring one
curve the
differences
curves
e_ -
"o
SL,
and
the
considered of
gross forward
weight) flight
are aspects,
small. no
in further be made
v "o
two versions. Fig. 5.18. The impression of flight their one gets from this
IIIII figure
SHP/Wg is that
per their
pound (W/De)
Western
of the Western
helicopters
195
be
emphasized, 2 regarding
however, gross
that weight
the
Mi-6
curves
are
on
the
(93,700 accepting
engine errors
power in that
correstill be
But even
some
represents which,
a case
parameters of those
to forward
characteristics
probably,
of the
corresponding
seen
from low
Fig.
5.18
that values
the
so-called
or at 100)
to achieve
(SHP/Wor)
at both
moderate
of flight. With respect the the case to the (SHP/Wgr) CH-47D and CH-53E, are = f(V) those curves of Western based indirect helicopters, on it should be pointed SHP= using out f(V) that data,
only while
in for
of the
relationships discussed
previously data.
published
performance
and manufacturer's
Values and
at
Figure
5.20
supports in Ref.
the
previous the
statement
that cleanness
if one of the
engine than
as given
2, then
be better
With
to the the
future Soviet
design designers
as reflected
in the
to maintain,
or improve,
the degree
of aerodynamic
transport
helicopters.
5.6
Energy Fuel
in Level Pound
SL,
ISA The numerical 5.7, inputs while required the results for determination of the calculations of the are
fuel shown
required in Figs.
of gross
in Table
and 5.22. these figures that to those per pound the Mi-6 helicopter appears to have same an hourly gross fuel consumption The same
from
weight
similar required
of Western of gross
of the
weight
class.
is true
regarding By contrast,
hypothetical a better
one
can than
to
develop
machines
with
economy
of their
own
existing
as well as Western
helicopters. Fuel of the Requirements higher fuel per Pound structural requirements of weight per Zero-Range (as expressed pound of Payload by the (Table 5.8 and Figs. ratios) one hour 5.23 and 5.24. Because
of the or 100
payload here
(and with
of Western a desire
helicopters. rotorcraft
However, with
again fuel
to the
hypothetical related
helicopters, to payload.
detect
to create
superior
economy
characteristics
196
,, 00 co
o
o
O
"7" 0 0
+0+I \ \
iii iii
0 0
o
0 C:,
o
0
\ \
\
\
O.
.o
=m+
\
2
" iii iii O.. t,,/')
: c0
0 c./J
c_
.J
C/)
w-
X <
> X
>
_I>o
'_ _
+.+
EJ mo
0 CN
o
"0 e-.
Q.
,,+, i_ o ,.;.< _ +=
I I I
0 Q.
0 J=
c!.
L._
O O
I._ ,e-
O se.-
I.O O
It
8"lldH
:1HgI3M
8801:10
197
.-10 ONf'IOd
t:13cl dH8
o.+
o__.
_0000000 00000000
QQQqqqqQ
OOOOOOOO
_oqq_qq
OOOOOOO
_0_
+1,-:
o
00000000
ooOOOOOO
OOOOOOO
Z LU
[_o o "
0000000 00 _ o o o 0 v -J Z O 0"1" OOOOOOO LL 09 U')
O O
o .qqqqqql
OOOOOOO
o -: o. o. o. o. o.
I-"1O O O O O O
o o
Z
U_ 09 09
< O_
rr
0
o.
I-
0_
o
O__ OOOOOOOO
o
nO
_
m_
"r r'-
o
o
(2 --I LU -r
-ooooo 1
Z 0 o.
0
"1"
D
LL C.) UZ 0
n" I,LI a.
8
dddddddd
,r.O ,Z O (.2 ._1 00000000 n_OOOOOO
tT
,%
5
0
LU n" _1 LU D U-
_Z
=o r_
r_
>
<
QQQQQQQQ
OOOOOOOO
_OOOOOO_ 0
'OOOOOOOO
_QQQQQo
0000000
Z v
z x/
"I_D
Z v
..
#
"1" -r (_9 I 0
o_8888_8
u.
o_8_
LL
o_888_8
o o
LLI LU
_888_88
o
o
LU LU CO
0 n
I.U
,%
198
O ,,,-i
8
E
< I
.__
.__
o ,q,
e,
0 N
o o 0
"l:lNd
199
o
O
e_
o N
e_
e-
o o
z
o -1m
.<
,-I in I.,I,.
.,..:
a
nn0 nnn Q.. 0
0 N
"!IN'N 00L-8"i/8"1
200
Ro
_qqqq
00000000 0000000
8_
-r
_.._.._ 00000000
.2'
z
0 0
a < o
.J
><
O_ W
< 0
O
,70
00
,7
00
.,-:. ,7
0
.-I
_000 _0_
z < O
N u_
>. <
o. W L9 Z <
<
_w
Z <
<
O
m:
0
g
N
'_5_,_
_.
0
6
N O
_.
0
o.
0
o. o.
0 0
o.
0
o.
0
O
7-
I z o
"r
"1-
n" a. O I
i
u"} 0 _ 0 0'} r'... r'.co (D
'_
o30 _
CO 0
r_ 0
I',.. 0
(_00'_ 0 0
0'} 0
,5 O
7..J W u_
,5
c_ (5
c_ ,5 c_ I
I
_. _.
o.
0
o.
0
o.
0
o.
0
o.
0 I 0 _0
ffl O !
I
__0_
Z _ co o
0000000
_
000000 O
.... I
"5
.1
_0__ _0__ D
_o
00000000
z v
0 .r
7-
0 0000000 _0_
..1 u.
0000000 0_0_
_.1
o o
W o.
O 121
W w o_ I'-
O z
201
.o
,.o '7"
o 0
1-(
r,
z
v'
=.
0
,-I U. ii
<
0_
=.
0
"0 0
0 N
=.
0 r,
/
if) _
/
I._ 0 It) 0
o 8-1-_1H/8-1
c:;
c:;
f,n t4 i,n
202
qd
o _D
0 e_ 0 0 0 0
q 0
0 0
q
0 e_
. ..C
0 0
I-"r
0
o-
1. IJ=
<
r_
0 r_
IJJ
cO 0
o
C 0
e_
I. w 0
&
| 0
I 0
! 0
m.
o
"!IN'N 001,-8"1/8"1
203
vs Distance
5.9).
The
trend
in fuel
computations distances is
in Table
presented helicopter,
in Fig. the
5.25. lowest
again,
the highest,
and the
requirements.
Productivity Productivity Index. 5.10. The Similar inputs necessary 4.6, to the calculate the productivity index from Eq (1.17a) are
in Table results
are graphically
relative
productivity
of the hypothetical
gross relative
weight
PI values helicopter
are prewould
helicopter.
productivity
as that
and CH-53E. Remarks of aircraft Soviet of reliable quoted in both helicopters performance maximum flight, for military in the and civilian use, the Mi-6 helicopter gross weight, weight engine lack
and large
important
30,000
altitude the
to the of climb
forward
to the
precise
level
would only
important relationship,
is present,
not
in the the
r) = f(V) helicopter.
the Mi-6
design,
limited
data, when
_ 800
the
Mi-6 at its
maximum
gross both it
compared gear
with version)
to 600
its Western
shortqanding
solidity
to be well advance
operational numbers
average regimes
blade-lift of flight,
coefficients similar
being,
in various
are
areas the
where
the
design
of the but
Mi-IOK that
from
that
of
For
power
loading lb,
of both and an
rating
= 5500 vertical
American
CH- types.
in inferior
especially still
lb is quoted probably
in Ref. refers
maximum
gross
weight,
_ _m,
_o
o 0 m
r-
co r_ q
00000
o o , . . 00000
Z < D
_,0
a <
.
o
q
00000 @
O<
'_
O,
Q z D 0_0_0
8
<
Ox "1" -r
:_
_.
n"
r_ uJ r_ D 0 ,,,
oqqqm_
00000
0
,-1 "_
,.-
rr
r
__0
< [-, Zq
"1-
_.
6o6oo
s
[ 1
00000 .(3
.E M =_ _4 6
00000 0 o) 0o
g
. , .
o
00000 0_0_0_
O3
o 00_
6J
0 Z
20S
,.o '7" 0
_S
r,
"S
<
"S
0
8"1/8"1
:I,4 40
81
l:13d O31:llNO3kl
"1:1114
u_
&
206
_0
I.O
_z
o.
n"
z
._l _ 1.0
o
II1 _.1
en
>
".
_r
o. X U.l
-i-
I Z
,--1 _D
I--
.< [-,
Z -- o" >o
_1""
'
,... -
_r
i,,0
,.0
_
m
0 0
_.
.-: o
_"
_66
"0
CO
=_
o5
eO
_.
0
cq.
ill I--
oo
ii
0 0
0 0
I::
0 Z
207
200 1
HYPO-24
- _---'-_
...=- =_
z,
IXl ..I
CH-53D 100
u.I
50 FLIGHT
150
200
Figure 5.26
Productivity index at Vcrma x at SL, ISA vs flight distance of Soviet and Western helicopters of the 30,000 to 100,000-1b gross weight class.
208
and limited
vertical
effect only.
Remarks
in Ref.
1 seem to support
this
as on p. 118 it is stated
operations
either
or with a ground
of using a wing having a fixed angle of incidence, climb, the wing produces a download
and vertical
amounting
and standard
temperatures,
provides
However, elevated
be present
or even intermediate
altitudes,
of maneuver
factors higher than for the wingless configuration. In general, gross weight, American it may be stated that when performance exhibit effectiveness criteria is referred to units of
both
design effectiveness
levels similar
to those of the
helicopters
of the same gross weight class. because of the higher structural helicopters, weights and inferior specific fuel consumption criteria refrom those
By contrast, characteristics
effectiveness differences
ferred to units of payload of the American With respect and, probably, CH-wpes.
to the hypothetical
helicopters,
it is interesting
to note that
=This value checks very well with SHPreq = 13,118 hp resultingfrom (SHP/t4/gr)v=0 = 0.14 as shown in Fig. 5.18 for the winged version, and with Wgr = 93,700 lb.
209
6 Class Helicopters
6.1
Compared Composition
Helicopters of the Group. In the class of helicopters with gross weights exceeding 100,000 pounds, service.
the Mi-12 (Mil V-12; Fig. 6.1a) represents the helicopter The Boeing Vertol heavy-lift type (HI, H) helicopter
type
that has been in limited operational Fig. 6.1b) was developed through
(XCH-62A,
the proto-
ceased several years ago. The two other helicopters (Fig. 6.1c) (normal) and another
of the side-by-side
and, similar
to the Hypo-15
of the preceding
chapter,
provided
in Ref.
hypothetical
may be considered
as forerunners
designs of new heavy-lift This assumption the Mi-26 helicopter characteristics therefore
Soviet helicopters. to be correct unveiled strong since, after completion of the review copies of this report,
appears
was officially
suggest
to the Hypothetical
appeared
to include
performed
in this chapter,
on the limited basis of the available It should be noted heavy-lift because operations, their studies
technical
for
is no hypothetical
among
This is
of the 44 to 60-re.ton
class helicopters
preference
as a close competitor. of the 44 to 60-re.ton of the information Consequently, gross weight range were
helicopters most
in Section
of Ref.
1. However,
applied
to the 52-m.ton
study.
for comparative be
remembered, become
of Ref.
1, the rotor-radius
of blades
the baseline values of Table 6.1. With respect to the configuration, similarly it is stated in Ref. 1 that the single-rotor types have non-intermeshing helicopters are configured by the truss-type
rotors supported
210
(a)
Mil V-12
four-turboshaft
heavy-duty
freight-carrying
helicopter
(Pilot
Press).
(b)
Boeing
Vertol
XCH-62A
heavy-lift
helicopter
Figure
6.1
Drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the over
100,000-1b
gross
weight
class.
211
ROTOR
AXIS
(c)
Side-view
drawing
of the hypothetical
$2-m.ton
single-rotor
helicopter
(similar
to the
Mi-6)
(d)
Two-view
drawing
heavy-lift
helicopter
212
_Helicop
fer c.g.
(e)
Three-view
drawing
of the
hypothetical
$2-m.ton
side-by-side
helicopter
(similar
Figure
6.1
Drawings
of Soviet
and Western
helicopters
of the over
lO0,O00-1b
gross
weight
class
(Concluded)
213
HYPOTHETICAL
HELICOPTER BASIC PARAMETER USED IN CALCULATIONS SINGLE Main-Rotor Radius of Baseline Variant: ft ROTOR 52.5 SIDE-BY-SIDE* 36.1
Rotor:
Hh Vc,
Average Airframe Version Blade Lift Coefficient; Coefficient #Vh _'Jo for Baseline Download
0.465 1.030
of Configuration: Rotor
at H = H h and
o o = 0.217 of Power of Power between L: ft in the Original Utilization Utilization Shafts in Hover; at Vcr; l"lOah l"loacr
Rotor
in the Original
3443
2542
Area:
ft 2
80.7
133.4
*No overlap.
outriggers,
as in the
case
of the
Mi-12.
The
cargo
cabin ).
volume
was
assessed
as 41
X 10
X 10 ft-similar
(Hypothetical
52-SR).
in Figs.
2.86
and
number
of blades
of the main rotor 52-re.ton single-rotor 2.76 through for SI units) (in English
as the
side-by-side
hypothetical from
blades
Figs.
rotor = hp
a good engine
flight
distances
from
referred SL,
total
is SHPro f units),
= 22,500
This
corre-
ISA SHPTo
= 23,250
which
is assumed
to be delivered
by three
The weight
empty
as follows:
we = %, -(wp/
+ w:. + wo,. +
214
the Wtu
distance kg (Fig. as
as 800 2.791
km,
the
payload
Wp/=
12,800
kg (Fig.
H/crow
2.781
=
); the
weight
270
H/t.fluid$
We = 29,710 here
previously is assumed
discussed
of
Hypo-24, lb].
nominal to be able
[(Wgr)norm
in order with
a meaningful XCH-62A
comparison maximum
performance gross
that
of the
at their
weights,
also be determined
or assumed
machines. if the quoted maximum flying gross weight of the Mi-12 but (Wgrmax both factors =
ib) 2 was
established on this
basis of performance
or on structural
considerations,
determination. the selection instead higher to 17,700 regarding flying gross of W.qrma = 148,000 of 2.5 than hp. maneuvering weight would load factors of the to the hypothetical hovering helicopters, ability OGE at at the the design lb was solely based on structural established OGE at
XCH-62A, factor 10
maneuver
(normal)
gross
weight.
This hovering
Wg r = 134,300
lb, permitting
there
information maximum
correspond
same formula
approach (analogous
as in the to Eq.
case
when for
establishing the
the
VTO OGE
gross hovering
weight
in Section at SL,
1.4, ISA,
(1.2))
maximum
weight
(H/grJmaxh
, is obtained
for single-rotor
helicopters:
16.54 takeoff
[(SHPTo)a power
v Rmr FMoa
] 2/3
(6.1) restric-
of all engines
configurations,
(Wer,)maxh
20.84
[(SHPTo,)av
(6.2)
that
is no the
transmission flying
limit,
as seems of
to be implied
by
Table on
2.101
, and
FMoa ability
maximum
weight
based
the hovering
would the
-- (WUr),,a to w =
weight
brings
14.26
kg/m z, which
is slightly
less
constraining
The helicopter
215
Boeing Vertol XCH-62A Tandem Allison T701 -AD-700 3 11,500 24,240 21,915 17,700
CONFIGURATION
SBS Soloviev
Hypothetical 7750 3 hp
Hypothetical 5000 4
m
POWERPLANT
D-25V 4
hp
T.O or Mil. SHP Max. Continuous Limit, MAIN HP ROTOR R,ft SHP
22,480
[ oooo]
18,5ooj
39.37 [CW Right] 175.1
Transmission
52.50 CW
of Rotation
of Blades Chord, ft
2X5 3.28
8 [2.73]
2X8 1.72
VH, PH
HH,
HH,
VH, PH
Elastomeric
"11.26-
5 [1.56]
DIMENSIONS 219.83 (span} [127.14] 130.8 [158.0 (span}] 162.25 89.25 26.43* 38.625
Fuselage, Overall
121.375 41.00 DIMENSIONS 92.33 14.42 14.42 [ 19,000] CREW 41.0 10.0 10.0 i.4100_ [3] -40.0" 10.8 10.0 1.4320 -41.0" 10.0 10.0 14100_ [3]
Height,
Volume,
216
Table
6.2A
(Cont'd)
WEIGHTS Max. Gross Weight, Ib Ib 231,500 213_50 131,375 114,660 65,510 65,210 Normal GW 123,480 109,148 62,181 60,270 Normal 159.2 140 137.6 140 GW 129,210 114,660 69,480 59,080 Normal GW 148_00 118_00 64_80 82,470 Normal 147 130 GW
Normal Weight
Payload at Zero
Ib 1"
[1842 ooo ]
8,2ooJ
Normal 140 130 GW
1390 2300 4920 11,500 14,760 5900 15,090 4920 14,760 8630
Out,
ft Ib/hr
Avg. Fuel Consumption, Normal Range, Fuel, n.mi DISC Normal Maximum Gross Weight, Ib
1,515 LOADING psf psf 10.32 11.18 12.45 14.26 12.61 14.26 11.78 13.27
(ferry)
8.88 11.13
T.O
Normal Maximum
Gross Weight,
Gross Weight,
NOTES:
*SL,
ISA
**ISA
tBased on maximum
gross weight
TABLE ADDITIONAL
I
6.2B CHARACTERISTICS
HELICOPTER
Tip
Speed,
fps Solidity
721.4 0.0909
721.8 0.1111
750 0.0923
MAX'
GROSS
WEIGHT,
Ib - 0.6130.381 .4.640. r 0.499 0.496 15.90 0.504 0.488 [13.95] 0.538 0.457 14.10 O.438 0.557 27.49
We/(Wg r)max
(WP I) O/ (Wg r) max (WplJo/Cabin Vol. Ib/ft 3 OR VTO GW, Ib
nOrm Vol,
217
52-m.ton
Side-by-Side
Helicopter
(Hypothetical
52-SBS).
Figures 2.83,
2.84,
and power to
ft appears
referred shaft
dictated
by hovering
OGE at 1500m,
assumed
by four engines
with a rating of
is established to rib/
by first finding
flight
WP/ma x values
Fig. 2.841),
This amounts
to Wpl = 11,300
lb. from
--
The maximum
weight,
is [grmax
assuming
no transmission
limit,
and
As in the case of the single rotor, Table 6.2. Mil Mb26 unveiled at the Heavy-Lift 1981 Transport
helicopter
characteristics
were entered
into
Helicopter.
As previously language
mentioned, brochure
the
Mi-26
helicopter
was and
a Russian
giving some
characteristics
brochure
incomplete,
evaluation.
In all tables,
hypothetical that
served as a "conceptual
prototype" of that
machine.
helicopters
class, as reported
in Ref. 1, have
in the Mi-26.
by the hypothetical
Basic Data The principal characteristics of the compared presented helicopters are given in Table 6.2, while some of the 6.6. of the Boeing outlined in
data contained
therein
are graphically
of the Mi-12 is on the same level as that process aimed at maximization helicopters,
HLH. However,
of the payload
be toward
higher
218
O -t' CN
IP
I
I O
Z
nLU
.,
LIJ
--I O O O
==
0 .O
C_ C) i-4
.0_
-Ira
LIJ r./) /)
D,.
o
J::
O
n3
.=.
..=
i | !
O O C_
Ln
dSd
:ONIQVO'I
OSIQ
219
disc loadings.
rotor helicopter
(maximum
of the hypothetical
single-
flying weightperfectly
the disc loading values of the Hypo 52-SR. Loading (Fig. 6.3). The trend exhibited in all previous loading Soviet helicopters; counterparts, i.e., the power has extended models,
Power
of the Western
It appears,
this design
philosophy
by the hypothetical
helicopters,
o is practically limit.
on the same level as for the XCH-62A, This trend toward lower power loadings
by the Wgr/SHPTo
of both
helicopters
in hover,
and slightly lower (V r _ 690 fps) in cruise I. This is amounting to 750 fps, is the highest
of the XCH-62A,
gross weight class. to Main-Rotor single-rotor Radii Ratio and Relative configuration Rtr/Rmr Tail-Rotor Distance. There are only two reprethere is
gross weight
values. It should
as the average
of the corresponding
in the preceding
chapter.
This resulted in Rrr = 11.26 ft and x = 1.223. and _= 1.250. Payload to Gross-Weight
values are Rtr/Rrn r = 0.238 Weight Empty it was not possible 1971
published
figures regarding
weight
Wgrrna x -- 231,500
lb. With a crew of six, and an assumed lb. as approximately correct, the
of 100 lb of trapped
in Figs. 6.5 and 6.5A, showing are appreciably hypothetical higher than
gross weight
for the
single-rotor
helicopters. is of the same configuration configurations as the Mi-12, the Soviet designers than in the past. This aspect
Although expect
to achieve structurally
side-by-side
in the future
220
o ,, N
o o N
=,
oo =o o
'!::
"lI.u
0
8 E
_ Do__
E_
_'_
.'_1 U3 _ 0
.__
_l_o
_
o
t,,==
dH/8-1
:E)NICIYO'I U::IMOd
221
"T' 0 0 0 0
E
u
,6
Sd-I
:033dS
,111 I:I010U
222
C_ eq
0
O O (N 00 --I O O O
C_ O C_
c0
LU
o co
O cfJ n
"O
__O
_o
_O
e
,
g R | |
.u
0 0
O0
223
O N
"-6 O N
_ I>0
O ,.D "T'
o O O nn -.I
O
0.,
8
"1" D ILl
O
0
8
0
O N
N
O O
I m I _ i
1HDI3M
33089/-Id
:IDNVI:I-OI::I:JZ
224.
is frequently
in the future. The weight-empty by the Hypo 52-SR figures. weight empty aspects
to gross-weight
by the zero-range
payload
to
ratios shown in Fig. 6.5A. Loading (Fig. 6.6). Although, at this point, the figures regarding that zero-range payload
Cabin Volume
of the Mi-12 may not be completely 4.4 X 4.4. m) is provided XCH-62A. As to the hypothetical to correspond to Scheme helicopters, for possible
accurate, payload.
that their cabin volume was only assumed prove to be correct, the cabin volume helicopter. The estimated cabin heli-
this assumption
be about
and volume
assumed
6.3
and Vertical
Climb
of the overall figure-of-merit manufacturer's configueations, In Prime stated 134,300 that lb. performance thus providing Item
values. In the case of the XCH-62A, data; supporated a high confidence Document, power by wind-tunnel tests
this can be done on the basis of the and flight figures. Code Ident. No. 77272, it is experience with similar
Description
Helicopter,
at a transmission-limited
the hovering
directly
is 0.635.
checking
of to
in Table 6.3,
out; leading
FMoa = 0.617,
data-based value. from Eq. (6.2), ceiling which is in complete The vertical
lb is computed
with the
Boeing-Vertol
- hovering
relationship.
with Boeing-Vertol
is no published so-called
hovering procedure
ceiling shown
or in
rate of climb.
Consequently,
speculative
any beneficial
aerodynamic
225
0 N
Z
I.I.I
IG_ I.I.I
o 0 ..o 0 0 0 0 s., 0
0 ,0
=.I
8
:=
.-
-It" E
i.l.l
Q
o
0
\ \
f_ 0
II
,,.#
@'}
.I..-rn::)/B-I
:9NIOVO-I
31/_N"IOA NIBV_)
226
100,000-LB
HELICOPTER ITEM Mil MS-12 GROSS MAIN Disc Loading, Ideal Induced Tip Speed, Vid/Vt Solidity, Download Average FM TAI Tail Rotor Thrust; L ROTOR Ib 9874.0 0.086 w; psf Velocity, fps rid; fps 24.79 9242.0 0.085 18.89 o Factor, Blade Lift kvh Coefficient, w; psf Velocity, Vid; fps WEIGHT, ROTOR 10.32 46.56 721.4 0.0645 0.0909 1.065 l 0.59 0.688 12.45 51.14 721.8 0.0709 0.130 1.03 ! 0.484 0.703 t 12.61 51.15 [721.8] 0.0709 [0.132] 1.03 0.476 [0.703] ] 11.78 49.75 721.8 0.0689 0.1111 1.065 t 0.513 0.6801 8.88 93.19 7500 0.0576 0.0923 1.055 0.467 0.725 LB 213,850 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SR 114,660 Mil Mi-26 109,148 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SBS Boeing-Vertol XCH-62A 118,000
114,660
Vt; fps
(RPtr/RPmr) 0.95 l 0.83 t 0.558 4920 hp/ib 0.2027 0.87 0.567 0.594 1.035 Ib GW; fpm GW; fpm fpm 195,500 _,, 80 0.562 0.920 120,600 800 1260 0 [0.83] 0.558 5900 0.2060 [0.82] 0.552 0.555 [0.920] 114,560 805 1240 105 t 0.951 0.610' 4920 0.1744 0.87 0.630 0.620 0.920 118,640 780 1060 0 0.635** 0.635** Xm= n Limit 130,300 260** 1390"* 0.95 0.617" 8630
FMoa
0.594
SHP/GW;
Estimate)
Average
FMo= _3000
NOTES: t Includes thrust * Including augmentation correction data coefficient factor; kT > 1.04 (Table 2.111).
overlap
** Baled on Boeing-Vertol
227
effects helicopter
configuration. thrust
However,
as indicated in hover,
in Ref.
side-by-side coefficient is
augmentation
given in Table 2.11 z as k r = 1.04. figure of merit for the Mi-12 would For the other = 0.610 (4920 obtained representative through the first ceiling
augmentation
effect,
the overall
configuration; against
52-SBS,
the FMoa
was checked
requirements
for all hypothetical from the previously the so-called close, thus
considered value.
so-obtained
helicopter, (0.567)
FMoa = 0.558
and that
re-
requirements
are quite
at least a consistency
in the
climb performance
estimates. in FMoa = 0.558. ceiling The second estimate lapse rate was based on a Russian engine. The
and assumed
of the D-136
- leading
to FMoa = 0.552.
(0.555)
the VTO gross weight and rates of climb. FMoa estimates, and those obtained at the intermediate steps, are
in Comparison
with
ISA (Fig.
in the need of using running and the Mi-26 helicopters of the XCH-62A
takeoffs
the hypothetical
at their normal
exhibit
gross weight
(with transmission
(or CF/O) in Hover OGE, ISA (Fig. 6.8L than for the XCH-62A,
helicopter that
is higher
machines.
also be noted
side-by-side
configuration. related
are the only ones having any significant one should coefficients, have no reason
experience
configurations,
to doubt
contained
2CT/O than for either the single-rotors the actual rotor coefficient, thrust coeffik r = 1.04 is
configurations
2.111 ). It is also shown in this table that in calculating helicopters at hovering ceiling, a thrust 4 percent.
of the side-by-side
augmentation
incorporated
o,
'_ _1
_o
I_
,
_,'
I)
"
l
=# i
o,.!
1_,' '
-_ .! _
'
'
'\
/
_, ID
:'
._
81/dH
:IHDI_M
S_30H9
H3d H:_MOd
o_
.=
.8
"O
O _3
<
.3
%
O ..C
".3 o_
.O
,<
1N3101-I-1300
1-11=I 30V-18
30VI:I3AV
,! o
u.
230
Figure of Merit in Hover OGE at SL, ISA (Fig. 6.9). were estimated, while those of the hypothetical
helicopters
the graphs
in the lifting-rotor
of the compared and VR-9) the highest. Tail-Rotor sentatives conducted Overall subsection here. Two
and proper
twist distribution,
helicopter
Thrust
to Gross Weight,
Ratios.
Since there are only two repreclass, no detailed ratios. was discussed in the studies were
configuration
gross weight
airframe-rotor Assuming
augmentation
approach is correct, the overall figure of merit of the Mi-12 would be quite similar vs FMoa = 0.620). appears to be about 2 percent configurations higher exhibit than for the side-by-side considerably higher FMoa
to that of the Hypo 52-SBS (FMoa = 0.618 The figure of merit configurations. values (about Vertical vertical ascent It should 11 percent) of the XCH-62A also be noted
Rates of Climb at SL, ISA (Fig. 6.11). at either its maximum gross weight
lb or normal
lb, corresponding
to hovering
OGE at 3000
Assuming
the lapse rate at this altitude shp, the VTO gross weight lapse rate
engine rated at
rate of climb (80 fpm) at (Wgr)vT O. It should be recalled at this point that the maximum to hovering flying weight of the hypothetical helicopters
as that corresponding
configurations.
0 ,,_,, N
_;
z
0
0
'
I.U
if) U.I
!>
0 0
o
0
W
0
"
(3 m
I,,U
0
E:
8 _
.<
0
0 qp
0 N
0
0 0
232
co
:5,: ..5:,,
O .o O O Q
_ _ _o =,
o o o
v-(
.=.
.8
"lI.U "6
,.=
n_
.=
o
Jr.
)
D < .3
o
O ..=
.El r,
O N
O
) _O
O O
m.
o o o
IlI:I:IIAI
233
i
E o.<1
8 _
o4_
._
0
<
,,_r
_,I
+I
.__
,_
""
_'_"
_I ,6
&
0 1,0 N Q 0 N
6
0
o
0 0
"lV01J.Id:IA
234
The vertical
climb
performance
identical
to that
of the Hypo
52-SR (Table 6.3 and Fig. 6.11). According below to Boeing Vertol data, the (War)hmax for the XCH-62A The helicopter is 134,300 lb. This is
the maximum
of the aircraft.
(Wgr)VT O = 130,300
corresponding
is about 260 fpm. This rate of climb is lower than for the hypoof the transmission limited power available up to the VTO
helicopters
because
is slightly
and the Mi-26 helicopters. at Fig. 6.11, Soviet one would get the impression actually improved that as far as vertical climb performance capabilities is conof their
helicopter them
designers comparable
the vertical
performance
models, making
to those expected
Energy
Aspects in Hover In order to provide a common basis for the compared OGE hovering helicopters, the investigation of
at their maximum
flying weight is lower than the SL, OGE hovering information required to compute of ideal maximum
chapters,
important hovering
of hourly
is indicated
in Table
It is evident of
Fig. 6.12
with respect
payload compared
in hover,
This is especially
visible when
comparisons, designers
as witnessed
52-SBS models,
it is also com-
that Soviet
have succeeded.
Flight at Sea Level = f(V) Relationship. Since comparison relationship of forward flight aspects is for all of
at maximum helicopters
the (SHP/War)
= f(V)
compared
at that
particular
gross weight.
were available
Using an approach
that applied
235
0.5
0.4
=" Z 0
ia.
0.3
z O
.) ,.I w I,I.
0.2
Hypo-52-SBS .._..R===.r___'_"_it_'_H
>.
..I
0.1
4'0 MINUTES
60
Figure 6.12 Variation with time of hourly fuel consumption per pound of ideal maximum payload SL, ISA for Soviet and Western helicopters of the over lO0,O00-1b gross weight class.
in hover OGE at
236
TABLE 6.4
ENERGY OVER ASPECTS 100,000-LB IN HOVER GROSS AT S/L, ISA WEIGHT CLASS
HELICOPTER ITEM Mil V-12 Mi-12 GROSS WEIGHT: Overall Figure of Merit SHP Required in Hover: hp T.O SHP Installed: hp SHPreq/SHPTO sfc: Ib/hp-hr Hourly Fuel Flow per Pound of GW: Ib/hr-lb Zero Time Payload: Ib Ratio of Zero Time PL to GW Hourly Fuel Flow per Lb of PL for t = 0: Ib/hr-lb t = 1/3 hr t = 2/3 hr t=lhr LB 197,600 0.618 26,000 26,O00 1.0 0.63 0.0831 54,300 0.275 0.302 0.336 0.378 0.432 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SR 131,375 0.562 23,250 23,25O 1.0 0.44 0.0779 65,200 0.496 0.157 0.166 0.175 0.186 Mil Mi-26 123,480 0.555 22,140 22,480 0.98 0.44 0.0782 60,270 0.488 0.160 0.171 0.181 0.193 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SBS 129,210 0.620 20,000 20,000 1.0 0.47 0.0727 59,050 0.457 0.159 0.168 0.178 0.188 Boeing Vertol XCH-62A 134,300 0.635 17,700 24,240 0.73 0.50 0.0659 68,750 0.512 0.129 0.135 0.141 0.148
AVERAGE
ON FIGURE
GROSS WEIGHT: ITEM 148,000 ASSUMED /indf kindf hvf hvf _oa
|1
LB 118,000
VALUES 1.8 1.7 1.03 1.04 0.96 VALUES 514.2 229.5 1/58.4 0.48 0.0082
8t at
Vine x Ve
1.8 1.7 1.03 1.04 0.96 COMPUTED 612.0 241.8 1/71.7 0.60 0.0084
at at
Vma x Vo
237
gross
weights
are close.
However,
instead
of taking
their
averages
in computing
(SHP/Wgr)
= f(V)
for
lb at SL, ISA, the figures obtained the gross weight shown in Fig. 6.13
of Table 6.5 were used. This was are now identical, while the
being of interest
ambient At sequently,
conditions
differ only slightly (SL, 95F vs SL, ISA). no data is available approach on the forward on rate of climb of the Mi-12 helicopter. Conof the
single-point
based
Vma x could
(SHP/Wg r) = f(V) relationship. In the case of the hypothetical dependence is reversed; helicopters, the normal process of establishing the (SHP/Wg r) = f(V)
flat plate
tions are given in Table 6.1. Since the main-rotor machines, the equivalent radii of the Hypo 52-SR and Hypo 52-SBS are larger than those of the baseline by 5 percent. Further-
flat plate area values in Table 6.1 were arbitrarily increased were assumed are not certain, as Ta = 0.0095
more, the average blade profile drag coefficients The input data for the Mi-26 helicopter
Vma x corresponds
to the maximum to
was postulated
indications
in Ref. 1) as amounting
SHPTo;
hp. There
as to the rate of climb in forward wtp and f at NGW. However, appear cleanness, missed, which too pessimistic. as represented
single-point
approach
values of wto = 352 psf and the corresponding it would mean that sq.ft the very ambitious of the Hypo
f = 310 sq.ft
52-SR
feasible,
of the photographs
suggests a relatively
design except for the landing Therefore, the equivalent the single-point
for determination
flat plate area value of 197 sq.ft was used (representing procedure and that of tile Hypo 52-SR). discussed inputs, In this estimate
of the compared
in Fig. 6.14. It can be seen from the lowest However, Fig. 6.14 that in the low-speed of maximum 90 kn, the
(SHP/Wgr)
range (10 < V < 90 kn), the Mi-12 helicopter gross weight of all five of the compared
exhibits
helicopters.
required
toward
configuration,
le0o00
_L_O
14,000
12,000"
10,000
UO0
e,o00
Figure
6.13
Shaft
horsepower with no
required external
vs speed load
at SL/95F
helicopter
(Courtesy
of Boeing
239
100,000-LB
GROSS
WEIGHT
CLASS
HELICOPTER ITEM
,m
GROSS rtoa Estimate Vma x or Vet; SHP; _Main hp Rotor RHP; Vt; fps
WEIGHT;
LB
213,860
131,375
129,210
at Vma x or Vcr kn 140.0 [22,200] hp 721.4 Thrust; psf Ib 690 [690] 690 750 [21,500] 159.2 [20,794] [ 18,500] 157.0 t 17,700
Compensating
Rotor
RHPtr/RHPmr _loa at Vma x or Vcrma x (SHP/VVg r) = f(V): 1 st Approximation 0.858 0.320 psf 11.18 0.595 [0.0095] 1/62.7 1.02 1.10 wf; psf f; sq,ft 5O8 420 81.4 hp WEIGHT; at F; kn SL/ISA 0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0.1426 0.0949 0.0739 0.0685 0.0729 0.0849 0.1056 0.1770 0.1268 0.0932 0.0785 0.0734 0.0759 0.0787 0.0878 0.1793 0.1296 0.0974 0.0864 0.0867 0.0954 0.1121 0.1367_
_4
[0.891
[0.95]
Mta b at Vma x or Vcrma x /_ at Vma x or Vcrmax; Main Rotor Disc Loading; Main Main Main kvf k/ndf Computed Equivalent Computed Computed MAX. (SHP/Wgr); Rotor Rotor Rotor ct Cd C,d/_
0.859 0.390 14.26 0.55 [0.0092] 1/60 1.02 1.15 15501 84.741 12.61 0.52 [0.0092] 1/56.5 1.02 1.15 352 t?) 310 (._) 13.27 0.60 0.0095] 1/63.4 1.02 1.10 922,91 140.11
12_80
123,480
129,210
148,000
r
I
**Based Assumed
or rough estimated
240
rn ..I r_ .'1=.
"I" UJ
O3 O CI: 14.
O
G] Z 0 nuJ "I"
SPEED OF FLIGHT:
KN
Figure 6.14
Comparison
of shaft horsepower
per pound of gross weight vs speed of level flight at SL/ISA of the over 100,000-1b gross weight class.
241
of flight.
in the (especially than
Also, very
their
x values of flying
appear
to flight, leads
be the the
for
the
considered of the
class.
low-speed at their
horizontal weights)
loading
hypothetical power
to more
per-unit-weight
helicopters. discussed should be has uncertainty considered probably of the not regarding the SHP required at Vma x for the the goal of Mi-26,
the
However,
aerodynamic
cleanness power
52-SR of gross
pound
Mi-26 of the
to deviate
to that the
(SHP/IVg of the
r) = f(I/)
of on
the
XCH-62A
and
Mi-12
helimanu-
be recalled that
curve was
XCH-62A from
based
while
reconstructed relationship
a single,
and
certain, to be
of SHP, as design
r) = f(V)
of the hypothetical
helicopters
characteristics
of actual
rotorcraft.
6.6
Energy
Aspects
in Level
Flight
at SL,
ISA
Fuel fuel
Required per
per pound
Pound of gross
of
Gross weight
The and
required in Table
for
of results
required
6.7,
in Figs. Fig.
6.15 6.15
and 6.16. that the high even specific fuel consumption region, speed per that at V > as those of the Mi-12 resulting in the engines highest overbalances hourly fuel
can see
advantages
requirements
6.16
of flight
distance of the
requirements seem
referred XCH-62A
to both model,
same
Mi-26,
U.S. HLH
Similar
to the
case,
the
6.8,
are graphically
and 6.18.
the first
ratio and
hour
others
becomes fuel
than per
XCH-62A
represents
the lowest
requirements
of zero-range
242
OVER
GROSS
HELICOPTER ITEM Mil V-12 Mi-12 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SR Mil M i-26 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SBS Boeing-Vertol XCH-62A 0.1638
(SHPTO/Wgr): SPEED OF FLIGHT: 0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 SPEED OF FLIGHT: 0 40 6O 8O 100 120 140 160 SPEED OF FLIGHT: 0 40 6O 80 100 120 140 160 SPEED OF FLIGHT: 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
i
hp/Ib KN
0.1123
0.1770 RATIO
0.1821 OF SHP REQUIRED "0.985" 0.712 0.535 0.474 0.476 0.524 0.616 _0.751. FUEL CONSUMPTION: 0.44 0.45 0.50 0.52 0.52 0.50 0.47 0.45
0.1548 TO T.O: 1.0 0.698 0.521 0.454 0.443 0.472 0.537 0.634 LB/SHP-HR 0.47 0.51 0.55 0.59 0.595 0.58 0.545 0.52 SHP
KN
SPECIFIC [0.62] 0.66 0.725 0.75 0.73 0.69 0.64 0.44 0.48 0.525 0.56 0.58 0.565 0.56 0.54
0.47 0.48 0.49 0.495 0.49 0.485 0.48 0,47 LB/HR-LB 0.0651 0.0516 0.0457 0.0436 0.0422 0.0456 0.0525 0.0620 100 N.Mi
KN
PER HOUR 0.0782 0.0583 0.0487 0.0451 0.0451 0.0477 0.0523 0.0615
AND
POUND
OFGW:
0.0728 0,0551 0.0414 0.0431 0.0408 0.0424 0.0453 0.0510 OF GW AND 0.1378 0.0739 0.0517 0.0408 0.0353 0.O324 0,0319
i I
KN
NOTE:
Assumed
or rough
estimated
[ ].
243
24.4.
i
I
ik
li.
I |_gwgwg||Igu||_Wwwl
"!tq'N
OOi-ltl/fll
:!W'N
OOi _i tl9
-iO ONl'lOd
ttgd
131"1=1
245
WEIGHT
HELICOPTER ITEM
Mil M i-26
Boeing-Vertol XCH-62A
MAX
IM UM GROSS
WEIGHT:
LB
231,500
131,375
123,480
129,210
148,000
PAYLOAD
ZERO
RANGE/GW
[0.381
[0.496]
0.488
[0.457]
0.557
SPEED
OF FLIGHT:
KN
FUEL
CONSUMPTION
PER HOUR
OF ZERO-RANGE
PAYLOAD
SPEED
OF FLIGHT:
KN
FUEL
CONSUMPTION
PER
LB OF ZERO-RANGE
PAYLOAD
NOTE:
Assumed
or rough
estimated
[ ].
246
,A
"r' o
o u
U
0
<
7-,
_' 11 / / l '/I
i/
_"='_
0 0 0
I
I p
t_
! I
,)
'l 0 '-, i i " I I.O 0 ' , , i 0
o
N 0 e_
/
I -., I.l"l i , i 0 N , , , . I,I'2 ,' II i
t
, 0
r_
8-1"ldH/8-1:'ld::IONVU'OEI3Z dO GNnOa
247
o 1,0
O O O
O O ,-4
o
_
-G
,J=
.J LI. U.
O
LU LJJ a. C/) O
_r_
C_
.o
O e_l
O
! r I | I e "| l I | e II g I 0
o
00
c_
helicopters
exhibit regimes
appreciably of flight;
higher payload-related
of payload
configuration,
fuel consumption
Hypo 52-SR, were closely met except The quirements Fuel respect above-mentioned referred Required
in the high cruise speed area. by the graphs of payload-related fuel re-
observations
shown
in Fig. 6.18. vs Distance payload (Table 6.9). The trend in fuel requirements presented with in
of Payload
to unit
of weight
is also confirmed
by the calculations
in Fig. 6.19. indicate that the energy requirements for transporting a pound of paythe
distances
helicopters,
6.7
Productivity Productivity Index. on either Similar specified to Sections 4.6 and 5.7, the productivity or assumed index, calculated from Eq.
(1.17a), maximum
is based cruising
(hypothetical
helicopters)
It can be seen from this figure that the PI values (at maximum are the highest, while those
of the XCH-62A
helicopter
of the Mi-12 are the lowest (about clearly however, superior to the Mi-12 in
helicopters,
although
this respect,
It should
be remembered,
importance
lb for the HLH was solely based on limit of 17,700 helicopters, hp, this helicopter
capability
established
as maximum
gross weights
corresponding
OGE
at SL, ISA. For this reason, the of 134,300 lb. It can be seen
PI values for the XCH-62A from Fig. 6.20 rotor hypothetical that
at its maximum
weight
the productivity
almost identical
helicopter. index of the Mi-26 at its maximum flying weight (which is lower than the SL, OGE
249
PAYLOAD GROSS
WEIGHT
HELICOPTER ITEM Mil V-12 Mi-12 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SR Mil Mi-26 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SBS Boeing-Vertol XCH-62A 148,000
GROSS
WEIGHT:
LB
231,500
131,375
123,480
129,210
Consumed
per Lb of Zero-
0.1267
[0.0595]
0.0766
[0.0698]
0.0696
Range PL and 100 N.Mi DISTANCE: 0 5O 100 150 2O0 250 N.Mi 0 0.0678 0.1456 0.2353 0.3405 0.4652 FUEL 0 0.0309 0.0638 0.0989 0.1364 0.1765 n REQUIRED PER POUND 0 0.0398 0.0829 0.1129 0.1809 0.2368 OF PAYLOAD 0 0.0363 0.0753 0.1173 0.1628 0.2121 0 0.0360 0.0748 0.1166 0.1617 0.2110
GROSS
CLASS
HELICOPTER ITEM Mil V-12 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SR Mil Mi-26 123,480 Hypothetical Hypo 52-SBS L MAXIMUM GROSS WEIGHT: LB 231,500 _613 0.381 130 N .M i) N.Mi 80.8 67.4 54.1 0.063 [131,375] "0.499_ [129,210] 148,000 _438 0.557 . 135 0.050 Mi-12 Boeing-Vertol XCH-62A
w_/wgr
(WpPolWgr
Vcrmax: kn FF at Vcrma x (Ib/Ib-100 FLIGHT DISTANCE: 0 100 200
_504
0.488 137.6 0.052 J
-0.538"
0.457 . 145 0.046
o.496 /
145 0.045
INDEX
AT
Vcrmax:
NOTE;
[ ].
250
8
0 e_
o o
0
o
8
e_
I'4
g
m 0
Lii
o Z le'J
oo
t_ I"Ira
-J
0 0 0 0 0
8"1/0"1
"'Id
40
8"I l:Fld
011:1117011:113n4
251
v; u
.D 0 0 0
8 E
<
,4
>
:g
252
6.8
General It should
Discussion be emphasized
as of this writing,
characteristics
and performance
of the Mi-12 and Mi-26 still exist. empty of 142,000 lb was based on the statement gross weight (231,480 (see Appendix to
at 105 m.ton
value, computed
from
the record
with a crew of six and 88,633 at Wgrmax -- 105 m.ton that 6700
is somewhat
lower. This record flight was presumably takeoff (see Appendix to this chapter, con-
lb using a running
the amount
it is not
was loaded
advantage
of "something
day conditions"
Because
uncertainties,
of 142,000
Ib was assumed
for the Mi-12 in this study. that for the sake of simplicity, to be permissible values obtained the rotor unloading by the wing in highand relatively configura-
also remember
was neglected.
This appears
uncertainties
regarding 20 re.ton
Tishchenko
indicated
(see Appen-
is based on HOGE at 1000 m (3,280 fuel reserve." of 190,000 lb, the fuel
day conditions;
gross weight
ISA would
still be 205,150
lb, while the VTO gross weight (corresponding in Section 6 -amounts to 195,000
close to 1000
m) determined
(Table 6.3) be correct, It is obvious on all figures payload percent. would This, that
to only 125,200
of 142,000-
= 16,800
related
in general; 19 percent,
for instance,
of zero-range 35
would
be higher by about
with respect
to other helicopters
considered derived
it would not alter the overall conclusions lb. it appears that the overall design in spite of the fact that
From effectiveness
of the Soviet
counterpart,
253
aerodynamically,
in the approximate
over
the American HLH as witnessed However, 'official' practically further maximum order these advantages flying weight
of gross weight (Fig. 6.14). weight of the Mi-12. For instance, of the Mi-12 is 88,200 at its
by the higher
structural
maximum
of 231,500
payload
of the XCH-62A
lb) at a flying gross weight of only 148,000 aspects, the Mil helicopter installed to about when operating power
consequence
flying weight
of the total
takeoff 198,000
of 26,000
to hover OGE at SL, ISA, its gross weight must be reduced dropping to about 54,500 lb; while under
payload
its transmission-limited The consequences of this aircraft payload 6.20). Apparently, eliminate
power
74,800
(see corresponding
of the productivity
index (Fig.
realized
deficiencies
This trend is clearly visible in the so-called (very similar to the design gross weight of
of the 52-re.ton
in the manufacturer's
figures for
As previously quired
mentioned,
although
there
regarding
as well. Nevertheless,
performance, most
flight aspects,
be determined
of the weight
as represented
by the single-rotor
helicopter
have been met. with its Western-level factors in the success sfc and specific weight values, undoubtedly repre-
turboshaft, important
helicopters. and flying qualities aspects of the Mi-26 that could be as good as its weights prove highly competitive and perwith the
aspects, HLH.
the Soviets
254
APPENDIX
- CHAPTER
EXERPTS
FROM
BOEING-VERTOL
"A DESCRIPTION
INTRODUCTION The USSR brought Show which took a M1L B-12 helicopter place at Le Bourget (sometimes referred to as the Mil V-12) to the 1971 Paris Air between 27 May and 6 June. This report and from discussion
Airport,
Paris, France,
to summarize
of the helicopter
with various USSR personnel. Through Mr. Igor S. Gouriev who was the Director of the USSR Exposition at the Air Show, contact was plant
made with Mr. Marat Tishchenko MIL because he replaced Two extended sessions
Mr. Mil as Chief Designer upon Mr. Mil's death in January 1971. were held. The first consisted of a several hour long inspection of the aircraft
itself on 1 June 1971. A. From the USSR: Mr. Marat N. Tishchenko .................. Mr. B. A. Koloshenko ................................ Mr. Leonid Mr. Nicolay Mr. Anatoly Maslov .................................. ............................ ................................ Chief of the M.L. Mil Moscow Helicopter Plant Mil V-12 Chief Test Pilot Chief, Rotor Head Design Automatic Systems Designer Mil-8 Pilot
Drobroljubov A. Sokolov
B.
From Boeing and Agusta: Mr. Howard N. Stuverude ......................... Vice President Vertol Division, Mr. Bruno Lovera .................................... Construzioni Mr. Fred Doblhoff ................................... & General Manager
Boeing International Mr. William Coffee Mr. T. R. Pierpoint ..................................... ................................. Director
Boeing-Vertol Current
Programs
Boeing-Vertol 255
The with A.
second the
session
occurred persons
on
4 June
1971
and
consisted
of a three
to four
hour
technical
discussion
following
in attendance:
From
the USSR: N. Tishchenko Maslov .................. Chief of the M.L. Mil Moscow Chief, Helicopter Head Test Automatic Systems Plant Design Pilot
Mr. Marat Mr. Leonid Mr. Anatoly Mr. Nicolay Mrs. Nina
Rotor
Engineer Interpreter
B.
From
the USA: N. Stuverude ......................... Vice Vertol President The & General Boeing Vertol Current Vertol Manager Company Division Programs Division American
Mr. Howard
Division, Design
Mr. Tadeusz
Tarczynski
..........................
Specialist, Director
Mr. T. R. Pierpoint
.................................
The
Contents
have been
compiled has
from been
notes
provided herein
by each
of the
What and
written represent
by each
accuracy
and
therefore
a summary
of the
recollections
7 or 8 hours technical
spent aspects
the the
there
appeared
no
on future
their and
discuss
respect
aspects
of VTOL
have at the on
been
number or not
They market
were and
also
as to whether
would price.
would
not
of its selling
Mr. Bart
several herein.
design
described
DESCRIPTION helicopter
Mil V-12
an tons
gross
weight
of
105
metric
tons
(231,483 rotor
pounds). rotors.
approximately
8.5%
overlap
between
arrangement
struts
end of each
pylon-wing by two
a nacelle
and
rotor
is powered hp
Soloviev (approximately
turboshaft hp
engines
connected
to a 13,000+
transmission each
1500
additional
differential
purposes, to the
so it is probable rotor.
transmission
is capable
of transmitting
which
is directly
connected
256
are 35 meters
in diameter extending
(114.83
blades.
are conlocated
to a mixing
in the upper
fuselage.
This transmission
power
to be transmitted
to the other in the event of a loss of one or both engines on either side. The aft fuselage is equipped with large clam shell doors and ramp both of which are hydraulically operated. The internal clear fuselage cross section is 4.4 meters by 4.4 meters (14.44 ft X 14.44 ft) which is the same dimension as the Anatov 22 large turboprop be used in conjunction with the AN-22. Thus, the cabin is capable of clear straight in-loading transport. The Mil V-12 was specifically developed to
running
that is capable
of lifting
ten metric
Tie-down
are provided
generously
throughout
The landing
gear is of conventional
for both the nose and main aft fuselage just ahead of the Hydraulically operated was did
The nose wheel swivels 360 degrees. Located boggie wheels apparently in order installed
purposes.
down
when loading
demonstrated
and when
Russian
(Conflicting
information
was given to Mr. Coffee by the Mil V-12 pound) hook available.)
flight and flight under icing conditions. has been developed n.mi) from airports principally for the movement of military
up to 500 km (269.70
capable of accepting
aircraft to isolated
flight of approximately
(140.30
knots),
by rearward 10 minutes
15 knots.
It was flown twice during the Air Show for approximately to be several hours in length before
was observed
in the flight was that upon starting, the No. 3 engine had a tendency to torch for quite a period of time. It appeared to take about three minutes from the start for the rotors to come to their normal rotational speed of 120 rpm. Although flown at light gross weights, From the rotors appeared to have more coning slow down constant below. than would be expected the aircraft by
a close observation
of the second
a tendency
to porpoise
stick correction
257
A.
Published
USSR data given out freely at the Paris Air Show: Metric U.S. 231,483 213,846 114.8315 lbs lbs ft
Gross Weight
105 tons 87 tons 35 meters @ 6500 hp) 26,000 hp 37 meters 67 meters 12.5 meters
Gross Weight Diameter Power (4 turbines (less rotors) (with rotors turning) Tail
Height of Vertical Cabin Dimensions: Length (including Width (clear) Height (clear-w/o Maximum Speed Cruise Speed
28.15
meters
ft ft ft mph mph ft
4.4 meters 4.4 meters 260 km/hr 240 km/hr Altitude 35 O0 meters 6
a world-wide
helicopter
payload ft).
lifting record
by lifting
a 40,204
kilogram
B.
revealed: flight was accomplished was employed. is based on: day conditions. in something better than
Ibs) record
The nominal
lbs) payload
HOGE @ 1,000 meters (3,280.9 Fuel for 510 km (275.1979 5% Fuel Reserve 3. Specific fuel consumption 0.258 kilograms/hp/hour C. Discussions 1. between
feet), standard
n.mi)
of the Soloviev D-25DV engine is "approximately": which = 0.5688 Pilot, pounds/hp-hour. Koloshenko, 38,000 and Boeing-Vertol pilot, Coffee, 2 external revealed: auxiliary
Total ferry fuel load is approximately tanks and two internal auxiliary tanks. pounds),
2.
tons (231,483
the aircraft
has a useful
load of 40 metric
tons (88,184
258
WHY THE CONFIGURATION Mr. Tishchenko advised that the side by side configuration part for the following reasons: A. In order rotors payload B. to reduce development costs a decision payload pounds). their studies design. showed length Further, that 5-bladed rotors of the Mil-10 type from span this effect was selected after considerable study on their
was made at the highest level to mate two Mil-10 of 30 metric tons (66,138 pounds) with a normal
in order
to obtain
an overload
in fuselage
considerably
configuration
is, in their
opinion,
gains resulting
approximately
early in the first session when discussing power required for forward
arrangement,
We objected
be as high as 80% and he then admitted C. They also favored structures. rotor rpm, this configuration
it could be as low as 65%. because of the relative frequency they ease by which they could tune the pylon was close to one per to approximately to accomplish with
1.5 rotor
that
this would have been much more difficult aircraft. a tandem tandem configuration was that aircraft
payload
and range,
his reply
in the world
develop
aircraft,
and that
as examples
he feels there
employed
in the construction
helicopters however.
he and other
USSR designers
He also commented
on the fact that he felt that the Chinook would not employ more overlap to about than about
utilized
between
18 or 20 percent
with a 4-bladed
in the current
on the 4-bladed
347 helicopter. and probably was one of the principal reasons why the 347 8.5% overlap
He felt that was a step in the right direction is showing itself to have superior with its 5-bladed rotors.
flying characteristics.
approximately
259
7 and Performance
7.1
Introduction Objectives and Presentation. of design As the comparative trends study progressed, capabilities it became apparent that in order it
to obtain would
a clear picture
and performance
of the compared
helicopters,
be advantageous
to present
comparison
parameters
of each parameter
the investigated
gross-weight
range. parametric
gross-weight
as ordinates
to the usually linear and, in some cases, also logarithmic graphs, points representing symbols individual as shown
designated
easy recognizable
graphic
configuration, hypothetical,
(i.e., maximum,
normal,
or VTOL),
7.2
Principal
Design
Parameters The trends in disc loading helicopter, values shown in Fig. 7.1 increase with gross weight flying gross
and, for the largest Western single-rotor weight. The disc loadings
reaches a level of 15 psf at its maximum growth with gross weights production helicopters,
those
Soviet
are characterized
hypothetical
helicopters
is followed
whose disc loading goes up to 14.26 psf at its maximum A study in earlier of installed Soviet power loading
helicopters
helicopters.
260
ACTUAL HELICOPTERS
KAMOV
Ka-26
16,100 22,000
Mil Mi-24D Mil-8 Mil Mi-10K Mil Mi-6 W/Wings Mil Mi-26 Mil Mi-12
O
26,450 83,800 93,700 123,480 231,500
,&
-V"
GW MAX. GW SYMBOLS NORM. GW VTO GW
HYPOTHETICAL HELICOPTERS
NGW/MAX. (LB)
S.R S. R S.R
33,050/[ 52,900/[
37,800] 58,700]
S.B.S 52 M.Ton
261
TABLE 7.2
WESTERN HELICOPTERS
APPROX. HELICOPTERS
MAX. GW MAX. GW
SY M BO LS NORM. GW VTO GW
(LB)
MBB Bo-105CB BELL 222 AEROSPATIALE BELL UH-1H SIKORSKY S-76 SA-330J YUH-61A SA-365N
"_ ! I I
10,000 16,300 19,700 20,250 22,050 CH-46E 23,300 42,000 CH-47D 50,000 73,500 XCH-62A 148,000
'_, _'
J V
/k
UH-60A CH-3E
BOEING VERTOL
262
b,o
b_
_-ISd :gNIQVOI
OSI(]
263
to O y
0 tO
0 0 0 cO I-_,1 Z O O O
O
0'3 0 cO Z rr ILl
.:
"tO l,U
N
0
_o
0 eL
0
Z I,Ll r_ --J I,LI
0 t'y
& 0
El >0 UJ
0 0
J tl
[>.
"b
i ,,|, $ ,I
F-
"
i ,1 w
0
Z 1,1') O3 0
O')
CO
1'_
(,D
dHS/'a"l
:_NIGVO-I
EI'=IMOd
264
It appears that a tip speed of about 700 fps represents 7.3). However, for smaller helicopters,
designs (Fig.
higher than
seem to agree that tip speeds of 720 to 750 fps are most feasible. and Advance Ratios. It can be seen from Fig. 7.4 that the old MrabI_ barrier. conventional At fast cruise,
Advancing-Tip helicopters
Mach Numbers
national
..he advancing
does not usually go above hhe M = 0.9 level, while almost all of the advance within Loading. the 0.3 to 0.4 band. The absolute values of the equivalent flat plate reflect area loading
ratio values appear to be included Equivalent indicated bility Flat Plate Area
conservative under
and incipient
but the general trend should be correct, as well as the relative ranking of the compared their aerodynamic of the with cleanness. helicopters; As may be expected, this aerodynamic cleanness
helicopters
improves
disappointingly
machines
fixed-wing
aircraft
also be noted
the Soviet
designers
representing
state of the art. Unfortunately, cleanness at this time, it is impossible machines to evaluate the extent that those goals of aerodynamic represented by the regarding
mentioned
in Chapter
6, there is no reliable
available information
it appears that
52-SR has not been approached. Average lift coefficients the Western Blade Lift and Profile (CT/O) exhibited Drag Coefficients. by Soviet production It is apparent helicopters from Fig. 7.6 that the average blade higher than those of their _#'s
are, in general,
counterparts.
are concerned,
are more in line with those of the West. The c-o's were evaluated from the known g_ and (f/fro) values computed the so-obtained from the two-point approach.
It can be seen from the lower part of Fig. 7.6 that close to the 0.01 mark for all of the considered 7.3 Weight Weight maximum Aspects Empt F and Zero-Range flying gross weight Payload
helicopters.
to Gross-Weight
Ratios.
chapters, the of
(symbolized
by the inverted
triangle)
manufacturer
265
O uo 04
O uO
v,-
O O O m ..J o
ooO
'_,
6z
E>
O cO 0_ O9
O
too 04
co
O o 00
O o _,-
o o (D
0 o '_"
0 o (w
$d6
:GBBd$
dWl _O10_
266
0 0
0 t_
0 0 g
>
0 0
f
b b
0
.o
6 _
b
I w
?
|
d
OIIVI::I
:IONVACIV
267
o o C_l o Lo
O O O
,.d
_o
\\
\. \
o o
O..
Lu c_ 0_ co O O
o
dL_
:::s o*'
O O
,t=-
O O
_==
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
.-IScl :ONIOYO7
268
1.0
I
!
<
,...,
L\
0o
,q.
f.i.,
o I_
d d o IN3101=ld300 ' 6
-'
ci d d 1.117 3OVI_3AV 1
0 0 0
' d
0
c_
269
each
aircraft
was selected
whenever
possible
the weight
empty
payload
to gross-weight
ratios
to normal
gross weights
helicopters established
are generally by
counterparts.
But, judging
machines, Furthermore,
expect
boundary
of the Western
it is apparent
the rather
by the hypothetical
been achieved
Aspects of Merit. It can be seen from the highest Fig. 7.9 that all twin-rotor generally configurations (i.e., coaxial,
exhibit
show lower values of the overall figure of merit, and Western helicopters is concerned, there
with noticeable
of Soviet
seems to be no established
Figure
7.10 indicates
that
the
larger. Older Soviet and Western per unit of gross weight, of power becomes while
designs seem to form the lower boundary in more recent designs of both schools,
higher. Flying Gross Weights. It is interesting and maximum that definite in contrast than to take flying differto the
Ratio of Maximum a look at the relationships gross weights ences Soviet specified
to Maximum
production
Soviet
In the latter
is almost
always higher
flying weight.
machines,
as that corre-
OGE at SL, ISA, and for the Mi-26, it is close to one (1.007). be quite high; amounting to about 1.24.
Forward
this relationship
helicopters
would
Consequently,
is referred
gross-weight
270
i
0
8 E
,,=
t.,,
.._
l
o"
II _ .
I r
o 1HOI3M
o 880_O/lldlA13
c_
IHOI3M
271
O O 04 O
/ i
O O "IO
Z_o
_0
/
o=,
o
-r O
Z_
O0
.jO.
,/ /
/=
_N
a.O Oco
o
O
.09
r,_
zoo
-J rn
J
o rr
,,r
.o.
gO
L_ O
o_
cO
e_
i' '
c_
6
IHE)I3M
6
3ONVEI-OI=I3Z
SSOI::IE)I(]VO7,kVd
272
I 1.0 0 0 c_ 0 Lo
0 0 0 ,-I
o
0
0 0 0
0 ,_
O
o 0 0 c_
It)
cO
I.o
_.
,_
d _3AOFt
273
dH/8-t
,OhlIC]V07
_3MOd
0
I.
0 0
<
0 0 q,0
0
o en ,..,,.I 0 0 0
CO
0 o
0
iq
or,,
r_
O
p
0
-r
>
_--- ._ >
0
Z
.._
O_
871dH
:H_I:IM
880k:RD
-.10 ONl_Od
_:ld
dbl8
274
0 Lt) c_ 0 O c_
.
0
LUI, o. Z I,.., Z
oo
> [
rr .0
--
o
o oo
.:
0
co :_
"1-.
I.o
E>
,'l,W
cO
0
0 c_
o_ 0
./
| i
cO
tD
_"
O_
aO
(J.HOI3M 8801=I0)/(78
c_
'=!00
c5
:MD
cJ
_)NI,_I3AOH)
275
Looking weighing
at rotary-wing to 30,000
aircraft pounds
having
gross weights
of up to 12,000
pounds
12,000
lower power
counterparts.
e) =
the following
class (Fig.
to exhibit
a higher throughout
requirements
the whole range of flight speeds. The over those of the Mi-6, as exem-
Soviet designers
to improve
the high-speed
power
requirements
plified by the hypothetical The same expectation helicopters 6.14). having gross
15 and 25-ton helicopters. of improved weights aerodynamic pounds; presendy cleanness especially, available, is also visible for the Hypo it appears for Soviet hypothetical (Fig.
over 100,000
52-SR helicopter
However,
on the basis of the information that the Soviet their structural designers
from
in achieving goals.
aerodynamic
weight and hovering performance Drag Ratios. The maximum appearing would
at the design
parameters
included effect
one should
minimization
of maximum
to the equivalent
is concerned.
empty
dimen-
improved seems
cleanness
as represented
flat-plate Apparently,
area loadings-
profitable
way of improving
in the future. Fast Cruise. It can be seen from Fig. 7.13 that fast cruise is usually performed at about 140 kn for For the
is given as 255
kn. Small
helicopters,
the coaxial
configurations,
appear
to have fast cruise speeds much lower than their Western Assuming
counterparts.
Productivity.
the fast cruise values as shown in Fig. 7.13, the ideal absolute to the 100 n.mi range (Fig. 7.14). Soviet helicopters helicopters Here, it can be
was computed
276
277
0 I.o
o
0 0
0
r,:
0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N)i
:1H91"1-1:10
O:l:ld8
278
0 0
0 1,0
0 0
0 0 0
\
0
ILl
o _=
0 rr _
It)
Q_
_a. O0
I:IHI!_'N
- l_l'l
:,k.J.IAl.l.OIQCOl=Id
279
Productivit_).
productivity
in Fig. 7.15.
considerably helicopters
boundary
the so-called
hypothetical
boundary.
productivity
goals visualized
for the Hypo 52-SR were actually met in the Mi-26 helicopter. Ideal weight burned Ferry Range. Assuming for the sake of simplicity (FF w = const) change in spite that the fuel required per pound of gross
of the changing
gross weight
due to the
associated
as follows:
--ff
in the ideal case, fuel is equal to the zero-range expression (similar to Breguet's formula)
additional
the following
_id
I00 _ FFwopr
7
_J7 I -- (Wp/o/Wgrma x ) _"
The ideal ferry ranges flight Western expression payload duction (symbol aspects (Fig. 7.16).
helicopters note
are shown
to complete
the picture
of forward of
a considerable
gap between
the optimal
boundaries
and Soviet
production
at the
in Fig. 7.8 that the zero-range than those of the Soviet pro-
helicopters
are, in general,
counterparts.
It will be shown
later that
per pound
FF w in the formula) is also more favorable for Western the trend implied by the Soviet hypothetical and high fuel consumption
helicopters
will be eliminated
machines
the Mi-26 is slightly below that optimal 7.6 Energy Aspects ,Energ_,Consumption can be expressed as follows: in tIover.
Energy
consumption
and hour
in hover
280
h,
!
o c'_ o o
o &(}
"C,
.d
l:l C, 0 ,/ / I,(
/ ,/ / t
0 er
"0
./
\
/ o/
t_
[.t..,
-//
"
6
:X3ONI
B'I-blH/!IAI'N-IB'I
,L.LIAI.LC)FIOOI=Id
281
rr ILl I-
o
.J Ct; nUJ n-Q. Z _ Z-00 m .,jeL 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 "l0 0 0
,1
UJ
D,
_J
U,I
_>
"!I_'N
O00L
:39NV_I
A_I_3.,-I
7V301
282
-_-ffw h
(7.3)
and fuel
required
per pound
of payload
and hour
would sfcwx/r_p
FFpl h
= 550 Fgoa
at of gross with
Eq
(4.3),
one
would are:
realize
that
factors
contributing
to the
betterment
of fuel
required
this may fuel
weight other
(1) low sfc of the engines; and (3) high overall figure
and hour,
as shown
in Eq (7.4),
a new factor
payload
that
while
the
band
of fuel this
per pound
of gross
weight
and hour of
for highly
consumption Soviet
when
referred helicopters
scattered. of Mi-26
Western Soviet
grouped
the
in this weight
figure, and
transport
consumption be noted
of gross value
payload is close
to those
52-SR.
of the Mi-26
optimal
boundary
utilization
of payload
in hover.
Energy weight
Consumption
in Cruise. vehicles
Energy
consumption
referred
to, say,
100
n.mi
and
pound
of gross
of powered
is as follows:
FF--- f = w 3.25
(sfc)v (Wer/ O e )v
(7.5)
where
mean
engine
specific
fuel consumption,
and gross
weight
to the
reference
is changed
to pound
of payload
and
100
n.mi,
the
corresponding
fuel
con-
for cargo
vehicles
becomes:
FFp/f
(sfc )v 3.25(Wgr/Oe)v(Wp//Wvr
(7.6) )
at the a low
above high
expression gross
indicates to the
that
energy
consumption
is ratio
sfc,
weight
equivalent
to gross-weight
as possible.
283
Lo
LO
d
_IH-87187 :'_H
d
0 "_ (7ci)
d
ONV MO
d
__-I0 "87
d
i:::13d "031::I
o
73CI_-I
284
Optimal hypothetical
of gross weight,
of actual and
a picture
in hover.
Here,
to a unit
of gross weight
narrow
fuel consumption
representing a definite
actual helicopters
trend of this quaaatity, decreasing production helicopters concepts one would are quite appear
while Spotting
in cruise, concepts.
285
I:I 0
_.
0 0
t,,.
\
oll
Lt)
tD
d
_I&I'N
c_
001.-87187
6
:0=II=II170=I_ 7=117-I IAlrll/111dO
286
vybor
parametrov Moscow,
Press,
3.
Helicopter
Financial
Services,
Inc. Helicopter
Blue Book.
1979.
4-.
Stepniewski,
W.Z.
Rotary-Wing
Aerodynamics.
Vol. 1, NASA
CR 3082.
1979.
5.
Harris,
F.D.;
J. D. Kocurek, Textron.
T.T. 35rh
McLarty; National
Trept,
Performance 1979.
Methodology
at Bell Helicopter
Forum,
6.
Dominick, Project
F.,
and
E.E.
Nelson. 1970.
Engineering
Flight
Tests,
YUH-1H
Helicopter,
Phase
D. USAASTA
No. 66-04.
Nov.
7. 8.
Keys,
Vol. F.D.
CR 3083.
Kocurek, Textron.
Harris.
Performance 1980.
36th
National
Forum
Paper
80-3.
May
9. 10.
Green, Anon.
Remarkable Pezetel.
2. Rotor
pp.
54-59,
Feb.
1980.
11.
Anon.
CH-3E.
AGF,
Vol.
2, Addn.
50. Sept.
1971.
12.
Nagata,
Comparative U.S.
Tests, Army
Utility
TacticaI Engineering
Transport Flight
Aircraft Activity,
System Edwards
(UTTAS) Airforce
Sikorsky Base,
Aviation
Ca. 9352L
13.
Anon.
CH-53D Sept.
Standard 1971.
Aircraft
Characteristics,
pp.
235-239.
N_val
Air Systems
Command,
Navy
Dept.
287
1. Report
No.
NASA
CR-3579
2.
Government
Acce_ion
No.
3.
Recipient's
Catalog
No.
AVRADCOM
4. Title and
TR 82-A-9
Subtitle 5. Report Date
HELICOPTERS
March
6. Performing
1983
Organization Code
8.
Performing
Organization
Report
No.
W.
9.
Z.
Stepniewski
10. Work Unit No. Organi_tion Name and Addr_
_rforming
Associates,
Ltd.
11.
Contract
or
Grant
No.
NAS2-I0062,
13. Type of Report
Mod.
and Period
1
Covered
Darby,
Agency
PA
Name
19082
and Address
Sponsoring
Report
Agency Code
and
Development
Command
Point
of
Contact: R. Shinn
Reviewer
16. Abstract
W.D. Mosher, MS:207-5, Ames Research Moffett Field, CA 94035 FTS 448-5578 See CR - 3580:TH_4P6]
Center, or 415-965-5578
This Soviet
document
a general that of
of (U.S.
the in
state
of
the
art It
of
helicopter
particular).
includes both commalities and differences in conceptual design philosophies by addressing design parameters and design effectiveness according to accepted criteria. The baseline for comparison is by design gross weight which is presented in four categories: under 12,000 ib, 30-100,000 ib, greater than i00,000 lb.
17.
Key
Wor_
(Suggested
by
Author(s))
18.
Distributi_
Statement
Unclassified
- Unlimited
Subject
_) 21. No. of
Category
Pages 22. _ice
01
Unclassified
"For
Unclassified
sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia
300
22161
AI3
NASA-Langley,
1983