Latest Thread
Its slowly growing on me, I still don't understand the reasoning behind the wing design TAI has choosen to go with both for the T929 and T629 but I'm not an engineer.
Kamov type is old Russian tech, Sikorsky type is a new tech being introduced. It is still kept secret and they even didn't want to share visuals of the rotor hub. Kamov uses a swash plate with mechanical linkages between the blade roots and the transmission to feather the blades around the rotation path while Sikorsky does not use classic linkages and changes the pitch angle of individual blades separately which allows more fine control of lift generation around the rotation path resulting in a more efficient rotor. It also employs a separate pusher propeller and thus it is way faster. It can maneuver with better agility and can accelerate and stop more quickly like it has brakes.What is the difference between Kamov and Sikorsky type?
They can simply update the design for more power or even run the hp 3k engine underrated to match the designs. Many helicopters are powered by several different engines along their life-cycles. This is better than not having the helicopter on hand and being out of the game for that class. Turkey is now considered a contender among helicopter makers and we need to fortify our standing to be considered by possible buyers.I don't think T929 is an urgent need, what if everything changes in 5 year and domestic engine for this size becomes viable.
Maybe a further UAV integration like MUM-TX, Atak Phase II can already link up to an UAV, Phase III might be able to launch UAS.
I thought the fuselage was already at its limit with FAZ-II.
Maybe a new E/O, helmet and as well as better countermeasure systems?