Kamov Ka-50

[Smack]

I am not enjoying the war in Ukraine and am quite concerned about it, but I note that the Ka-50 is getting a lot of coverage in the news.
One was shot down yesterday/day before in a spectacular video.
My interest is in the coaxial rotor system.
I know Sikorsky has used a coaxial system for the X2, but is Kamov the most successful with the concept?

 

[Gyro28866]

what about the Kaman K-Max

 

[XXavier]

what about the Kaman K-Max

The Kaman isn't coaxial, but intermeshing.

 

[Gyro28866]

The Kaman isn't coaxial, but intermeshing.

Just tossing out other options

 

[Vance]

A list of Coaxial helicopters from Wikipedia..

Kamov has long been a Coaxial enthusiast.

Bensen B-9 (1958)

Brantly B-1 (1946)

Bréguet G.111 (1949)

Bréguet-Dorand Gyroplane Laboratoire (1936)

Chu Hummingbird (1948)

Cierva CR Twin (1969)

Eagle's Perch (1998)

EDM Aerotec CoAX 2D/2R

Gyrodyne QH-50 DASH

Gyrodyne GCA-2 (1949)

HTM Skytrac

Kamov Ka-8

Kamov Ka-10

Kamov Ka-15

Kamov Ka-18

Kamov Ka-25

Kamov Ka-26

Kamov Ka-27

Kamov Ka-31

Kamov Ka-32

Kamov Ka-50

Kamov Ka-52

Kamov Ka-92

Kamov Ka-126

Kamov Ka-137

Kamov Ka-226

Manzolini Libellula (1952)

Phoenix Skyblazer (2011)

Sikorsky S-69 (1973)

Sikorsky X2 (2008)

Sikorsky S-97

Sikorsky/Boeing SB-1 Defiant

VRT 300

VRT 500

Wagner Aerocar

Mars helicopter Ingenuity

 

[btd1982]

I do love coaxials, I know they have some drawbacks but a tail rotor is a pretty big drawback too, would like to see more manufactures going in this direction.

Rotorschmiede have built some very nice machines.

Wonder how coaxials compare control wise, must be easier surely.

 

[Lawsfamily]

The Ka26 is my favorite. Wondering how much it would cost to operate

 

[ultracruiser41]

I’ve been trying to get one into the US for some time now….. not an easy task…. But I’m not quitting!!!!

 

[Smack]

Wow, is that right (the Ka-26 is powered by M-14P radial engines) !?

 

[ultracruiser41]

Yes

 

[Tyger]

The [Ka-26's] reciprocating engines are more responsive than turboshaft engines, but require more maintenance. It runs mostly at 95% power in crop dusting with usually excess payload, leaving little reserve power for emergencies. Due to frequent overloads, the interconnect shaft joining the two engines is prone to breakage and requires frequent inspection. –Wikipedia

Sounds like a nightmare for maintenance.

 

[ultracruiser41]

That sounds like Wikipedia!

 

[WaspAir]

Wonder how coaxials compare control wise, must be easier surely.

How would it be easier?

Without a tail rotor, you still need to control yaw, so you will need pedals. They just achieve the effect through different mechanisms (e.g., differential collective action on the two rotors).

(Pet peeve department tangential comment: the Ka-26 has two coaxial rotors and six blades, so it makes a good example for something that truly bugs me. Many of the gyronauts on this forum think they have two rotors on their gyro but I've never seen such a beast. They're BLADES, not "rotors". My three-bladed J-2 had only one rotor, and your Cavalon, ELA, Barnett, Bensen, or whatever likewise has only ONE rotor. )

 

[martin-av8r]

The sounds !

 

[Smack]

Side benefit: no mosquitoes..........

 

[ultracruiser41]

It’s a pretty amazing machine.
There are 2 in the US….. One is in a helicopter Museum someplace out west….. owner will not part with it.
The other one is somewhere in the NE….. not registered. I know the owner took a few lessons in it but I don’t know if it was actually in flyable condition.
I had one arranged to come in from Hungary and the company was going to disassemble it….container it ….set it up and test fly it here……. Could never find an importing broker to want to do any of the work
I have enough spare parts in my hanger to build two of those engines!!
The great Chuck Aaron (RedBull) was gonna help me with some training.

 

[WaspAir]

Planning to register as Experimental - Exhibition?

Wouldn't seem to fit anywhere else...

 

[Tyger]

Approach only from the rear! Did you notice how the guy on the outside was practically hugging the cabin area in that video?

 

[FlintHelo]

It’s a pretty amazing machine.
There are 2 in the US….. One is in a helicopter Museum someplace out west….. owner will not part with it.
The other one is somewhere in the NE….. not registered. I know the owner took a few lessons in it but I don’t know if it was actually in flyable condition.
I had one arranged to come in from Hungary and the company was going to disassemble it….container it ….set it up and test fly it here……. Could never find an importing broker to want to do any of the work
I have enough spare parts in my hanger to build two of those engines!!
The great Chuck Aaron (RedBull) was gonna help me with some training.
View attachment 1154330

I'll teach ya! Got lots of time in a BO-105 like Mr. Aaron, but it was mostly NORMAL flying! And I've operated and maintained an M14PF since 2008.

 

[btd1982]

How would it be easier?

Without a tail rotor, you still need to control yaw, so you will need pedals. They just achieve the effect through different mechanisms (e.g., differential collective action on the two rotors).

(Pet peeve department tangential comment: the Ka-26 has two coaxial rotors and six blades, so it makes a good example for something that truly bugs me. Many of the gyronauts on this forum think they have two rotors on their gyro but I've never seen such a beast. They're BLADES, not "rotors". My three-bladed J-2 had only one rotor, and your Cavalon, ELA, Barnett, Bensen, or whatever likewise has only ONE rotor. )

I would imagine it's easier because there's no torque to balance when altering collective. There's also no tail rotor causing a sideways drift to counteract. I've read that coaxial's are more stable but less manoeuvrable. I used to think that the coaxial configuration gave gyroscopic stability but I'm not so sure now as the gyroscopic forces cancel each other out with twin opposing rotors. I will soon find out if it's easier or not.