K-MAX Helicopter With Two Crossing Rotors Is Lighter And More Efficient
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 жов 2024
- The K-MAX is unlike most helicopters you’ve seen. It uses a unique double-rotor system in which the two intermeshing rotors cross each other, eliminating the need for a tail rotor. These advantages are less costly to maintain than a regular helicopter and make for a lighter and more efficient helicopter.
-----------------------------------------------------
Tech Insider tells you all you need to know about tech: gadgets, how-to's, gaming, science, digital culture, and more.
Subscribe to our channel and visit us at: www.businessins...
TI on Facebook: / techinsider
TI on Instagram: / tech_insider
TI on Twitter: / techinsider
INSIDER on Snapchat: insder.co/2KJLtVo
For the people worried about the rotors kissing, gears exist for a reason. If they do kiss then you've got bigger problems in the gearbox.
Auto rotate?
Not a gear but a cam.
If the rotors do kiss, they definitely have bigger problems to worry about than the gearbox.
synchro gear does exist since WW1, when they put machine guns on their ww1 biplane nose and stopped firing when the propeller is in its way of firing.
I don’t know if that’s a ‘bigger’ problem
Neat. It’s a flying anxiety machine.
lol
Lol..
LOL....
thats exactly what i was thinking, the pilots needs super nerves of steel
I think it might later pan out to be the opposite for helicopter pilots :)
Talk about precision! A few inches off and it is game over.
Y r u everywhere
@@Hokunin This is the most obvious question people will have I think. Don't know why they didn't answer this in the video.
@@nitelite78 probably because the answer is also obvious, I guess. They used only 1 engine with gears to synchronize and transfer power to both wing, that's the only method, so overlapping is almost impossible.
It could be using brushless motors connected to a common esc and a chemical engine for power ^^
@@minckhoz What If The Gears Brake Down?
The video didn't talk about the unique control system. On most helicopters the controls are connected to a big swash plate underneath each rotor which can rotate the entire blade (changing its pitch angle) throughout each revolution of the rotor. On the K-max the rotor blade angle is fixed at the root of the blade, and control linkage runs up through a very small swash under the hub then linkage continues inside the blades out to the servo flaps. They work similarly to elevator and rudder trim tabs. When the flap goes up, the rear of the blade goes down, increasing the overall angle of attack of the blade and vise versa. But because the rotors are fixed at the root, the blade must twist to accomplish this this. That means the K-max blades are twisting and untwisting with every rotor revolution.
Yaw control: on a traditional non-intermeshed tandem rotor helicopter (Chinook) when you want to induce yaw, you can tilt one rotor right and the other left creating a large yaw moment. On a coaxial helicopter (various K-maxx) you increase the collective of one rotor and decrease it on the other. The rotor producing more lift produces a greater torque reaction and the aircraft rotates the opposite direction while net lift produces is about the same. The K-maxx does both of these at once. It increases the collective of one rotor and decreases the other, while also tilting one rotor forward and the other back with differential cyclic inputs. All of this is handled with mechanical linkages, with no hydraulics.
Holy crap, thank you for this. I came here trying to understand how these kinds of helicopters turn well when the blades can’t change their phase much. I still need to re-read this a few times get it to sink in better, but fantastic explanation.
Thank you so much for this information 🙏
Thanks for the info, but contra-rorating rotors, i have one question, how... How does it move one swash plate not both. Not enough data i can find on them to engineer one up
@@osmacar5331 it's just two little swashplates and some complicated linkage direct from the controls. Roll pitch and collective inputs all move everything the same direction, and rudder controls cause differential inputs to pitch and collective.
@@daemn42 i know that, but how does the rudder linkages work that's what i am talking about. am working on several designs for several vehicles. and am also wanting to see what rotor type will not be so harsh on helicopter pilots chests and contrarotation definitely looks to be the best, but the swashplates are gonna need to be known, for obvious reasons.
"Chinooks rotors give me anxiety"
K-Max : Let me introduce myself
Nikolai Kamov : "hold my vodka"
Hahaha 🤣
V-22 Osprey called and says you don't have enough anxiety.
Just looks like a helicopter dabbing really fast
An underrated comment
😂😂😂
😂
Imao, people in the comments reacting irrationally like a plumber designed it
@@andrewfilipowitz3154
Make a wooden elipse, place its flat surface on top of a nail.
Glue a stick, flat on top of it.
Coil a rope around the elipse side, and pull to see the stick move like these blades.
Done. And I am a simple IT.
To think that they can collide is to think that a steam train could explode because it plays with pressure.
Doran Martell I know but it’s just one little inconsistency like a one of the rotors slows down just a tiny bit because of some weird ass malfunction.
@@andrewfilipowitz3154 Those blades are physically connected with one gear and (I think) 1 engine.
How do I explain this.
One of many few smart people I've seen so far in the comment section
You're more likely to die in that helicopter on the ground than on the air.
Go on your computer and put in Kaman huskie H43 B . My dad flew them in the Air Force . Intermeshed counter rotating rotors . Used in Vietnam they were the pedro,s . Then came the alpha slick , bravo slick and then charley slick . Charley slick had two jet engines ,and if you ever look at the back side of a huey , you will either see one or two exhaust ports . Two , that is the charley slick . The marines used huskie but was using a Lycoming radial . Then they were retrofitted w/ jets . You would really have to hear a huskie in flight ,unforgettable .
Damn that's cool. You are lucky you are the son of a helicopter pilot. Must be fun :)
@@HB-jf6yq I know right
I figured someone would have to mention the Kaman Huskie which used Intermeshed rotors. I worked with the Kaman SH-2F in the Navy. One interesting thing about Kaman helo's is that they all use these servo-flaps which I understand Kaman holds the patent on and no other helo uses them, but I could be wrong on that.
Its the same kind of technology used in WW1 by the germans. They engineered their airplane's front blades and machine guns in a way that when it fires the bullets, they would never hit the blades of their own plane.
Bullets hit one of the propeller blades and you would probably still okay. One of those things hit each other and it's pretty much game over.
@@casekocsk they wont hit. That is why we have engineering
Yeah, I'm pretty sure they are designed not to hit each other... just like every other vehicles/devices that catastrophically failed (and most often killed almost all, if not entirely, passengers/users).
Caseko CSK , "Bullets hit one of the propeller blades and you would probably still be okay" , have you lost your mind, at those rpms the amount of centrifugal force that will come into action because of the disbalance created due absence of one blade will be around 100 KiloNewtons, thats more than enough to deform the crank shafts of those rotary engines they used back then. Once thats done there is no way you can prevent a crash.
@@shekharmishra2788 ealier design of war planes do hit the propeller when they fire their guns, the simply reinforced the rotor to take the hit when it happens. I watched it on discovery I think.
I just saw one of these at my work and that's what prompted me to go on UA-cam and look this shit up. Badass!
3:10 F35 flyby
Mr. Mayonnaise Man I was gonna comment the same :)
u sure thats an f-35
yep that's an f35.
Yep, that is at Yuma, and at the time, they were flying under VMU-2, who entered the record books for first unmanned resupply under fire using the far KMAX. Now the Marine Corps has a dedicated command in MCAS Yuma for developing these types of tech, but it used to fall under VMU-2 to do that
This is not a new design. The German kolibri helicopter in ww2 had the same basic design.
If you follow the historyof Anton Flettner(the designer of the Kolibri) you'll know why they are so similar😉
Jesus dude
@@dffndjdjd
It isn't impractical to the standard design. It has many advantages over the one rotor design. The only real issue are the people that have to buy it. These idiots all think the same: What if one rotor stops working. The answer is the same as for every single rotor helicopter, you are screwed (don't argue, nobody can control a helicopter after losing the tail rotor). So really, it comes down to wich design is mpre intuitive or easier to understand for people with no technical knowledge. So the one rotor design was already astablished in the common sectors, the only place that were left were the most dangerous and technically challenging places (firefighting, logging, high load transport into dangerous areas).
"So how do want to film this video?"
"I want you to get 100 different shots of the blades start-up, but not it actually off the ground that much."
"You got it."
IKR; I'm just trying to find even one video of it in flight, & nothing in all that Google surveys. . . Just a concept machine at this point?
I got to see one of these in action a few years ago dropping water on a wildfire. Amazing vehicle.
They only have to hit once for total disaster tho
yeah but so does a chinook
Noob Attempts no, Chinook's wings are little apart
yes but they can still hit each other if something goes wrong
Noob Attempts no, how can a well fixed rotor move from its place. They can collide only in complete breakdown of chinnok, which is obvious
ok this applies to these rotors as well as long as they dont move where they are not suppose to they will not fail
I have always wondered if this rotor system is more efficient than a coaxial counter rotating rotor system that also does not need a tail rotor.
For all the naysayers , in the 50's , it was the most efficient helicopter made , was not made for speed , but made for lifting . I just knew we were not done w/ huskie and Charles Kaman is a genius, long live the Pedro . It may be the only one not named after an indian tribe
No one doubts it. It just induces severe anxiety to anyone looking at it lmao. Despite it being physically impossible to hit eachother, it still makes me anxious
The servo flap does not act like the flap on an airplane. An airplane flaps increase lift and drag to allow for slower steeper approaches. Also helps reduce takeoff distance. The K-Max servo flap is used to eliminate hydraulic flight controls. The servo flap, moved by the pilot's flight control inputs, changes the pitch of the blades. If the servo flap moves down the blade pitch is reduced and if the flap moves up the blade pitch is increased.
You can thank Anton Flettner for this engineering design, going as far back as before WW2
Flettner was a rotorcraft pioneer and Kaman's servo-flap perfected the already good idea.
Flettner was an employee of Kaman.
Just Wait For The Blades To Kiss !!!!
Muah 😘 🚁💥
@@jlewsd Great Storyline 🤣
@@MG-zc7os yeah i know that but if a gear fails they can kiss easily !!!
so, you know better than US military or the marines right?
how can US military rank 1 in global power index if youre smarter than them?
you must be their general or ministry of defense right?
no, their general nor ministry of defense is suck since they do not understanding these!
so if youre know better than them, i guess you came from another planet. mars? definitely!
A tilt of the blade as a operating as a point as a method of a rotation as a non connect of a blade on to a blade as a rotation.
what happens when 1 rotor fails
Omg you're so smart! Good for you!! :)
Live’nt
Fire Phoenix
They are connected with gears, so they always insure that the distance between the blades is kept. So if one fails the other stops at the same time, preventing them from colliding..
A operational as a two blade a bring a airframe to a ground or a fail of a airframe as to a non able to land as the airframe.
Both the rotors must be driven with same power plant, both are simply powered through an gearbox in opposite direction powered by same engine shaft. So it will be virtually impossible for them to touch one another, just like two seats of seesaw never touches ground together until its broken from mid.
The reality is the K-Max (which entered production in 1991, was produced until 2003 and re-entered production in 2015) is actually more mechanically complex than traditional designs, and more expensive to maintain. That's why Kaman's designs have never been commercially successful, although the US military operated a couple of them.
38 K-Max helicopters were built in the initial run, 11 of them have crashed and 5 are in storage. An additional 3 have been built since production restarted (with 7 more on order).
That's not exactly lighting the world on fire.
No. It isn’t, is it?
11 crashed out of 38?
Okay I have to be nitpicky here. Any and all helicopters can lift more than its own weight! Otherwise it would never get off the ground.
What is meant here is that it can lift more than twice the weight of the helicopter or that it can carry an additional load heavier than its own weight
Yes though there are already helicopters that can do that....
I think what they meant is double its weight?
Well of course they meant external lift capacity. They worded it fine, you never include the weight of a truck when you state the tow rating. :P
+Brian Foote I suggest acknowledging the qeury in hand.
The problem is not with the wording, but with the potential scam the helicopter can be. It can either mean its external lift capacity is its own weight or it can mean the prop can provide more than the planes weight in lift
@Brian Foote when talking about wings or wing-like structures, as is the case with a helicopter, lift is the force created by that structure perpendicular to the flow of the fluid (air).
This force has to to be big enough to get the body of the helicopter of the ground and in this case carry an additional load.
Therefore, when talking about aeroplanes or helicopters it's standard practice to include the vehicles weight in the maximum lift capacity.
So it's not about me learning the English language but more about you knowing your physics
Spectacular heli. For heavy lift it would be nice to have two engines of course. But being an aerial truck you want to control the cost. Two engines and a heavier, more complex transmission would probably not be practical. It's a niche market, but this thing is unmatched at what it does.
This is an absolutely brilliant design and bmy absolute favorite helicopter!
Is it possible to make these with more than two blades on each rotor? Or was two chosen because it is the most optimal lift/dry-weight ratio?
Check out Kellett XR-8 and 10.
The one who explains how rotors are rotating without colliding gets a COOKIE.
They are connected with a gear system.
So theoretically, if everything works fine, they can't collide because the rotation of one blade belongs to the other one.
You may run out of cookies my friend
I hop you have prepared
The blades intermesh just like an egg beater, no mystery there. The real mystery is how the flight controls work without swash plates. Even after seeing it, and having pilots explain it to me I’m convinced it’s all done with mirrors.
*_If it’s not one bladed, I’m not buying it_*
Lol
A one blade is kind of possible tho...
A single blade running the whole length of the Heli with a rotor attached in between...
I doubt you could find one though, even planes has multiple blades.
And global warming is fake news
@@Scarletraven87 r/woooosh......
Brilliant invention 👌🚁👌
Designers: ok so we have a new plan: [Shows blueprints]
K-MAX: ARE YOU HIGH? No shit let's do it.
Did not know there is drone versions - that's mental!
All it takes is a gust of wind and you're taking a dirt nap 😂😂😂
Do the rotors come closer to the ground than other helicopters?
Классная идея
Like all the best ideas, simple.
Somebody asked "what the hell is that thing!!??" I said, a "disaster waiting to happen!!" 😂
Wonderful machine.
Kamov helicopters have a 2 level rotors does that count?
Anyways we are really discovering ways to maximize energy. And it looks cute too. Nice job
Coaxial rotors are very complex compared to the simplicity of the synchropter design
Osprey plus photoshop equals engineering.
jk
...but can it land on Everest?
only one helicopter did land on everest: was a Aerospatiale Ecureuil AS350 B3 helicopter , but the older Aerospatiale Lama SA315B (basicaly a Alouette 2 with a alouette 3 engine) was able to take it, was not made because such thing is always very risky...altitude record from a Lama: 12 442m in 1972!...
It is potentially revolutionary, although -- as many have pointed out -- it is a concept dating back to WW2. That said, if it is safe and comercially viable, I can see the idea taking off for good this time.
It already failed in the market. The K-Max was introduced in 1991, production ended in 2003 with 38 built. Production restarted in 2015 due to an order for 10, and will end soon once that run is complete.
Yards is most spectacular things that I've ever been seen.... In India I want to learn like this thank you.
Twinblade inspection complete!
This is something out of anime and sci-fi.
It feels surreal.
I think you're on the wrong video...
How use useful would this be in an autogyro?
I live in surrey British Columbia Canada and had the opportunity to see one of rhese in action putting air conditioning unit's on the roof of cental city mall and i have to say it was one of the coolest things i ever saw
But does it work as a blender?
but not for ice drinks.
I can't believe how many people don't realise the rotors are physically connected, like with a chinook or a v-22.
Ancestor of the twinblade... the bane of the allies lol
is this better than counter rotating coaxle rotor?
does autorotation works with this one as well?
Tech Insider: 'Look at this unconventional helicopter that's being put to work in a variety of ways.'
People who have never built or flown a helicopter: 'I know better than the engineers behind this helicopter. It will most definitely NOT work, despite the fact that's exactly what it's been doing for years already'
What do you expect from idiotic trolls, they are to stupid to admit their selfishness
Darn satisfying
Now lets everybody try do do it with our arms at home. It is funny :)
Wonder how practical of a attack helicopter this(or a similar design) could be. Obviously the rotors are mechanically linked so there's not going to be concern over blade collision. If it were to sport standard armaments would the balance be thrown off?
Unfortunately not great probably because it isnt very fast, but its great loitering time would probably make it a great drone helicopter
Ka-50 and Ka-52 did exist
Can it run on one rotor?....or ll it fail to fly
the future is bright
The same shit was made in the 40s by germans.
Flettner Fl 282 was its name.
Is it better to just use co-axial rotors?
One of those machines you'd like to study for a few days. Are there machines to be found nearby?
Cool helicopter. 2 just flew over my house. Lots of fallen trees from recent heavy snow so they are kept busy!
The German genius engineer Flettner developed the inter-meshing twin rotor technology in 1937, the way Sergei Sikorsky the son of Igor Sikorsky once put it.
I saw one today in the wild, Park City, Utah. Doing some sort of component (s) installation.
The Cobra Mamba had intermeshing rotors back in 1987 ;-)
It’s the Honda Fit of helicopters and its amazing
Lighter and more efficient meaning fuel wise or can carry a heavier load?
Both
Lol everyone so impressed by the timing on the blades. Have you ever seen a internal combustion engines valve train. Now that is some serious precision and timing. Especially if it’s a v12.
Wouldn't it lose usable energy with the diagonal thrust?
The horizontal components of thrust could be utilized for steering left and right, reclaiming the "lost sideways thrust"? Just guessing...
That thing looks like the Eugenia cooney of all helicopters 😂😂😂
Very interesting
Very interesting...
Mind blown
Very interesting, very smart. Dumb question: shouldn't the rotors be fore and aft, and not side by side?
Then you would have a scaled down chinook
No more shooting the tail to bring the heli down in movies heh
Wow. . Cool
Can it auto rotate in case of engine failure?
Yes
I like how the whole comment section ignorance has an astronomical scale
Why aren't this type of Helicopter are not popular
Because it was invented by the nazi germany
I'd love to test one of these.
*SATISFYING*
So... What happens if one of the motors stalls? Or does it use one engine for both? I mean, if one stopped I'd think the other would hit the stopped blade creating a hazard. I hope they have precautions in place.
uses 1 engine. and its an impossibility for both rotors to hit each other due to how the gears work
this is some extreme dual wielding
Brilliant,next level/gen choppers
Isn't this rotor configuration dangerous in windy situations & bad weather?
No? It's a very strong and stable configuration
Does that mean the cyclic controls the 'flaps' only?
The head choppa!
Looks more like a giant mosquito irritatingly more because of the twin blade setup 😂😂
What is the advantage of this versus a coaxial rotor design like what the Russian have?
I believe intermesh produces more lift and is less complex than coaxial.
Much less complex control linkage and thrust bearings for the rotors.
The interference caused by the wash of 1 rotor on the other is the same for both rotors.
Also the rotor heads in a synchropter need to adjust for the motion of the helicopter much less than normal separated rotors (tamdem, side by side or main & tail) to balance lift because of the different airspeeds of the blades of a moving rotor. Coaxial craft share this advantage.
Lift differences are hard to say because intermeshing rotors by design need their rotors on different axes reducing lift, but the simpler bearing and swash plates mean less power is lost.
My guess is coaxial rotors generate more lift but intermeshing rotors are easier to build.
The fear of every pilot
I want one now
Next up ...a helicopter without rotors ! XD
Just like the Cobra Momba toy helocopter in the GI Joe toyline.👍😎
It’s sooooo cool! That’s a millionaire dream
it's amazing and I know many people will say this too... "it looks dangerous" I'm not good when it comes to mechanics of vechicles but there must be somekind of cog in that HC from preventing those to collide... right?!?!
If they have made at least 3 of them then the assumption would be that they are actually safe
One engine - one driveshaft - two rotors. They physically can’t collide. That’s impossible.
*Confused Osprey Noises*
What is the advantage of using this system over a normal counter-rotating blade system?
Its explained in the video
I need one 😁
Impressive
Wow... I shocked because I never have seen helicopter like this..
i want a scaled down RC version annoy the neighbors
so its the lift that is powerful?
How does it turn around