Members Login
Post Info TOPIC: S-67 "Blackhawk" (AAFSS)


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 157
Date: Apr 25, 2012
S-67 "Blackhawk" (AAFSS)
Permalink  
 


I want a topic for this one and AH WUNT IT NAOOO!!

So here we go, a brief history on it and some pics... please continue.

 


Sikorsky, who may rightly be considered one of the giants of the helicopter industry, has taken part in all the design competitions for combat helicopters held by the American armed forces. In 1964, it submitted the S-66 project to the US Army for the AAFSS specification, calling for an aircraft with a maximum speed of approximately 418km/h and ten minutes' hovering capability.

The S-66 looked very much like the Lockheed AH-56A Cheyenne (which won the contest), but had a Rotorprop tail rotor which could rotate its axis through 90° to act both as a conventional anti-torque rotor in horizontal flight and as a pusher propeller, thereby transforming the S-66 into a compound aircraft in cruising flight. When the AH-56A failed to live up to expectations, Sikorsky first offered an intermediate aircraft, consisting of an armed version of the S-61, then designed a simplified AAFSS using the maximum number of components from the S-61. The result was the S-67 Blackhawk which appeared in 1970.

The Blackhawk looked like a helicopter with conventional rotors (those of the S-61) and had the now typical lines and features of a combat helicopter: two stub wings with a 8.33m span and an all-moving tail plane. The main-wheels were retractable, while the tailwheel was not. One of the most interesting features of this aircraft was the presence of speed brakes on the wing trailing edges, which could be used both as airbrakes and to improve manoeuvrability. In addition the main rotor blade tips were modified and given a sweep-back of 20°, to reduce vibration, stall speed and noise.

The Blackhawk was put through a long series of tests from 1970 to 1974 but judged unsatisfactory. It nonetheless established an E-1 class world speed record on 14 December 1970 by flying at 348.971km/h over 3km, beating this on 19 December with a new record of 335.485km/h over a 15/25km circuit. In the final stages of testing, the S-67 was fitted with night vision systems, a TAT-140 turret with a 30mm cannon and an insulated and soundproof compartment for troop transport. The S-67 was also designed to carry an armament of 16 TOW antitank missiles, 2.75 in rockets or Sidewinder air-to-air missiles.

The Blackhawk demonstrated excellent manoeuvrability, weapon carrying capacity and versatility. At the end of the test cycle, the US Army asked for the aircraft to be modified by substituting a ducted fan for the tail unit, and in this configuration it reached a speed of 370km/h in a test dive in 1974.


 

  • G.Apostolo "The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Helicopters", 1984


Attachments
__________________

Dear Princess Celestia,

Today I learned that nopony kicks ass without tanker gas. Nopony!

Your faithful student,
Fluttercopter



Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 157
Date: Apr 25, 2012
Permalink  
 

More pics.



Attachments
__________________

Dear Princess Celestia,

Today I learned that nopony kicks ass without tanker gas. Nopony!

Your faithful student,
Fluttercopter



Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Apr 25, 2012
Permalink  
 

We kinda got all the dirt on this heli over in the Sikorsky thread already. :/



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Veteran Member - Level 3

Posts: 305
Date: Apr 26, 2012
Permalink  
 

I love this design. Would be a perfect match against the Mi-24, don't you think? smile



__________________

Vince Johnson - A merciless enemy but a powerful ally.

                           dragonfire1.gif

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 121
Date: Apr 27, 2012
Permalink  
 

Rare footage of it with the FANTAIL attached...



__________________

Flyboy's Site



Veteran Member - Level 3

Posts: 305
Date: Jun 11, 2012
Permalink  
 

smile

http://alanqua.deviantart.com/art/S-67-2-profiles-179929673?q=gallery%3Aalanqua%20randomize%3A1&qo=2



-- Edited by Leela25 on Friday 4th of December 2015 10:58:59 PM

Attachments
__________________

Vince Johnson - A merciless enemy but a powerful ally.

                           dragonfire1.gif

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Administrator

Posts: 3381
Date: Oct 9, 2012
Permalink  
 

From Donald:

http://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S-67%20BLACKHAWK.php



Attachments
__________________
Brony rotorhead
--------------------------
               ζ  
--------------------------
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Jan 28, 2013
Permalink  
 

rare shots of S-67 to the address http://imageevent.com/okbueno/mopic;jsessionid=0enu5z2rt4.goose_s?p=137&n=1&m=-1&c=10&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=2



__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Mar 4, 2013
Permalink  
 

One of the rare S-67 staff



Attachments
__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Mar 23, 2013
Permalink  
 

The Blackhawk in its original, handsome all-black scheme.



Attachments
__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Mar 23, 2013
Permalink  
 

Picture shows the one and only Sikorsky S-67 Blackhawk rolling into a split-S turn in 1974, shortly after repainting in a camouflage finish. The world speed record for helicopters in its class is still credited to the S-67.



Attachments
__________________


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 121
Date: Mar 24, 2013
Permalink  
 

Really nice pics, thanks for posting!

__________________

Flyboy's Site

mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Nov 13, 2013
Permalink  
 

One more video S-67, disembarkation of soldiers from the cargo compartment S-67 is interesting.www.youtube.com/watch

__________________


Senior Member - Level 1

Posts: 500
Date: Nov 18, 2013
Permalink  
 

VinceJ wrote:

I love this design. Would be a perfect match against the Mi-24, don't you think? smile


 I certainly think so. It was the most likely answer to the versatility of the Soviet counterpart (air-to-surface anti-tank capability, troop and cargo carrying capacity, etc.) and boasted better maneuverability, IIRC.



-- Edited by Gunship on Tuesday 19th of November 2013 04:53:20 AM

__________________
Alan Dallas
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Mar 17, 2014
Permalink  
 

S-67 http://s721.photobucket.com/user/bwellmaker/library/S-67?sort=3&page=1



Attachments
__________________


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 168
Date: Mar 19, 2014
Permalink  
 

No troops came out of that helicopter. A little ol maintenance door over the left wing. Ha Ha Ha

__________________


Senior Member - Level 1

Posts: 500
Date: Mar 21, 2014
Permalink  
 

Well then, I consider myself corrected (especially on closer inspection of the diagrams). I've always thought those were windows to a troop compartment and the door was its access. Though, I suppose you could fit one or more in there if there is room, like the avionics compartment of the Mi-28...



__________________
Alan Dallas


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 168
Date: Mar 24, 2014
Permalink  
 

It would of been nice if the project was developed further,(Doors on either side) It was one sleek design.

__________________


Senior Member - Level 1

Posts: 500
Date: Mar 24, 2014
Permalink  
 

Definitely could not agree more.



__________________
Alan Dallas


Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Mar 24, 2014
Permalink  
 

Talk about one big missed opportunity. Remind me, why was the design reverted from having a fantail back to a standard configuration? It improved the aircraft's performance significantly. I forget waht caused the Farnborough crash, but it seems to me as if it couldve been prevented if they had kept the alternate configuration.



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 168
Date: Mar 25, 2014
Permalink  
 

Pilor error in the end of a two roll pass, Aft cyclic caused the roll to become a barrol roll & it didn't have the altitude to recover, The ducted fan might increase forward speed but it limits point & shoot manuvres,

__________________


Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Apr 16, 2014
Permalink  
 

Not true, the fantail (or French Fenestron) is way more efficient than a normal tail rotor. Better anti-torque and maneuverability. You must be thinking of the ducted pusher-propeller e.g. Piasecki X-49.



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 168
Date: Apr 18, 2014
Permalink  
 

Nope. unless it's the R-66 The French "little window" has flow problems & the coanda effect causes a wondering headind. Look at the normal civil Dauphin & a Coast guard machine, the fan was built larger to meet a mil spec on manuvering. A tail rotor has less parts & is better in controling headng. The Fenestron is nice for the looks but it falls short in performance.
Even the later EC helicopters have a lack luster in the heading & manuvering department.( for the few times I flew a fenestron equiped machine 25 years ago)

__________________


Veteran Member - Level 3

Posts: 427
Date: Jun 1, 2014
Permalink  
 

Well, this is an interesting conflict of statistics vs. first-person experience. I've aleways heard of the Fenestron as more efficient over standard rotors too, but if your experience with them says otherwise then that makes it tough to argue.



__________________

We have here the latest in primitive technology.

Internet + Opinions = OMG we are SCREWED!



Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Jun 1, 2014
Permalink  
 

OK so lets get to the bottom of this contradiction. What was the fantail machine's type and what conditions were you in while flying it, and how would you compare /contrast it to that of a normal tail rotor equipped machine? Could it have been defective or not maintained properly? (No offense to your capabilities if you were the one doing so, I'm only curious)

I'm also open to the possibility that I've been deluded by misinformation from marketing and bureaucrats, but it seems that other experienced pilots agree with the increased efficiency of fantails. Some additional insight would be appreciated.



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Veteran Member - Level 3

Posts: 305
Date: Jun 1, 2014
Permalink  
 

Misinformation through marketing is plausible. I've heard stories that EC-130 pilots have trouble with the fenestron, probably because of drag.

But it sure is a lot safer than a standard tail... especially for ground personnel!!



__________________

Vince Johnson - A merciless enemy but a powerful ally.

                           dragonfire1.gif

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



New User

Posts: 1
Date: Jun 1, 2014
Permalink  
 

Helicopters have changed since a few decades ago and so have the Fenestrons. They are more effective now than they were before due to a variety of factors including changes in aircraft design, upgraded engines, adjustments in the fan itself, etc. At the time it was still relatively new and though it helped with the performance of the S-67 during tests, it was not ready for official use on the aircraft. While it can be proven that the Fenestron old or new is a substantial improvement over standard tail rotor types, both designs have their advantages and their pitfalls. This of course depends on a variety of factors such as explained above, as well as sufficient engine power. The EC-120 and 130 models for example suffered overtorque problems in high winds due to underpowered engines. This problem does not occur as often on later types such as the CG MH-65s because of upgraded engine power.



__________________


Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Jun 4, 2014
Permalink  
 

This is the info I'm looking for, thank you! I've concluded that Hillberg's machine probably had insufficient engines because it was an older type (he said 25 years ago after all) which caused the aforementioned maneavarability issues. 

This makes me think abit more clearly about the S-67's fantail. It was more efficient with speed due to the streamlined shape, but not maneavarability, likely NOT due to the fantail itself but because of the engine power and main rotor force not matching up. It was also a pretty large machine to be using it so I suppose that would have been a problem with yaw control. If you think about it its like putting a fantail on a Hind (which they did), which does not work with the weight class.

Thanks for the insight.



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 168
Date: Jun 5, 2014
Permalink  
 

The Little window is good for speed but not so good at the low speed or cross wind, It's not the lack of power, but wetted area & coanda effect with the ducting. the MH 65 has a larger fan area than a standard Dalphin to meet mil spec in manuverability. Now what is real good is the strakes & cutout mod for the Bell 205/212/214 (Damn forgot the company that made it.)
The design in helicopters are all compramizes, Some are cost, performance, maintenance issues.

__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Mar 2, 2015
Permalink  
 

very beautiful streamlined, but very large.



Attachments
__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard