You also bring any technical knowledge to the table or just your usual russian bias diarrhea ?
3 Likes
Hopefully he reads my speil on how it works. :D
1 Like
Depends on your forward airspeed and if your vertical stab is intact.
In the process of getting one along with a part 107.
So thats the thing, if a aircraft is as stable without it’s empanage as it is without, there is no need for the empanage to exist, loosing bits of your aircraft is never beneficial.
Are you sure about that? Surely you know that if you no longer have your empanage you loose control of all of your attitude and yaw control, usually with the aircraft departing in a violent way. Such wont occur with a KA-50/52 but it wont remain the exact same as it was.
To that same end, removing the entire rear section of a helicopter like this shifts the COG forward of the COL, and would in this case increase now down attitude.
This, said clutch is not an inherently precise system, meaning that without something “governing” the torque in a sense, being the vertical stab, the pointing ability of the aircraft should be quite touchy if not jittery. In theory this should smooth out a bit with enough forward velocity, but without said stab it should not be able to be as smooth as it is.
Which still wouldn’t matter, as the targeting systems are housed in the Nose, not the tail, which both the gun and guidance/targeting system are stabilized, and with missiles like the Vikhr wouldn’t matter anyway, only for rockets.
On this bit:
No, because you have a magical tool called Trim/Trimmer. You can use your stick to pull back at the point of equilibrium, or close enough, and set rotor trim. This wouldn’t have any effect on altitude, only the direction your aircraft wants to pitch because of the Center of Gravity changing.
As for if the clutch is a precise system or not, none of us can be the judge of that, as I have never flown the Ka-50/2 outside of a simulator, and I assume you haven’t either. If it is as snappy in game as it is in real life, which Id have to assume it is, then it most likely would be, but also, yet again, being a mechanic, depending on the strength of the clutch purely will eventually burn it out, so essentially, give the Ka-50/2 a “bleed out” system where after so much use of the clutch your yaw is eventually gone, or at least very minimal.
Edit:
It uses a Sprag clutch, so it won’t ever burn out, it would only be destroyed if shot, hit hard enough, or the tourqe off the engine shears the sprags off.
Also considering that the clutch is never being fully dis-engaged, only slightly loosening to allow slippage, it wouldn’t wear down.
1 Like
Trimming a aircraft does not remove the inherent instability created by a off kilter COG to COL, it corrects for it.
If this was not the case releasing heavy ordinance from one wing and not another would be a non-issue, yet, doing so heavily degrades performance and imparts roll until the weight distribution is equalized, the same can occur on all axies.
Yes, which would, in flight, the flight computer, or mostly just in game doing it for us, auto-correct for it; seeing as this is a helicopter and not a fixed wing craft, it doesn’t have this issue. The Computer can correct for it, or if it isn’t working, the pilot can. Correction is the entire point, specifically to correct without constant human interaction.
1 Like
Correction or not, it does not remove the instability caused though, if you impart a maneuver or otherwise you should still feel the effects of the now changed COG.
Same applies with ordinance on wings as I said prior, you can trim it out, but it wont correct the list the offset causes.
And for the most part, you do. Simply because of how helicopters are flown in Ground RB, with point aim, you don’t personally change the flight trajectory, the pilots doing it for you.
Not to mention, most of the tail is hollow, and carries not enough weight to change anything.
It’s irrelevant, make a topic if you want to talk about bombs and release order.
In all seriousness, it’s not at all a fair comparison. There is no asymmetric weight variance, the center of gravity is moved forward ever so slightly while aerodynamic devises for stability are lost.
If you want a comparison to what you would believe would happen, having an asymmetric weight variance would cause the plane to uncontrollably roll towards the heavy wing while in level flight.
It can easily be trimmed out and dealt with that way.
Which in game, funnily enough, the exact opposite happens, usually the lift from your wing rolls you in the direction of your missing wing.
so you want to say that all the electronics there have no purpose ? ;)
do i know that what they are for ? NO
Do you ? No
Nobody except the maintenance crew’s or manufacturer Really know what the electronics towards the tail do or rather for what they are, because if they would not be needed they would not be there in the first place.
And having a “bit” missing or the entire tail with said electronics is pretty sure a different story :)
I’m talking about bombs and payload weight as per his statement of “releasing heavy ordinance from one wing and not another”, not missing wings.
2 Likes
Woah man, no need to get aggressive.
Its loadout capacity is irrelevant. Aircraft behavior with asymmetrical loadouts was the topic, not the viability of equipping loadouts with asymmetric loads.
And pray tell what is present here, oh wait I know what you are doing, are you trying to goalpost shift again to try and move the conversation away from the KA-50’s weight imbalance to instead asymmetric loadouts not imparting instability.
Ah I should have picked up on it sooner, it was really obvious in the first return post focusing on a relevant example rather than the actual presented material.
Almost got me there.
I’m not, if you had any semblence of reading comprehension you could see me pointing out the inaccuracies of your comparison.
Losing the tail of a Ka-50 is in no way comparable to pitching upwards in a fixed-wing aircraft with an asymmetric load.
Do you know what happens as an aircraft travels through its ranges of speed?
It needs to be trimmed!
Just as with the Ka-50, a fixed wing aircraft’s CoL will change with speed, and its CoG will be ever changing. Fuel burn can move it forwards, backwards, and shift the CoG around due to that.
I can tell you for a fact that the Ka-50’s tail (aft of the APU exhaust port), with its heaviest weight being a 50kg ballast, will not shift forward to an uncontrollable state.
No more than an aircraft dropping bombs or bleeding through fuel, at least.
And no, losing 40% of the length of a helicopter does not mean the mass has decreased by 40%. Almost all of the weight of the Ka-50 is in the nose and the powerplant section, whereas the only weights on the tail are a mechanical counterbalance and electronic components that are directly behind the auxiliary firewall.
What?
1 Like
It’s really the counter-rotational (Pitching) moments(A force at a distance) that the rear aerodynamic surface(s) impart, which is why they are so important. After all if they were unneeded or could be provided by the Co-Axial rotor setup (since they are both on the same side of the Center of Mass, they can’t counteract each other, since you would need to be perfectly predict and counteract a chaotic system to maintain nose authority with rapid adjustments) they would simply not be included to save weight and improve secondary characteristics.
I personally like to fly them in/with a simulator setup, I get more control over the proformance. I think they handle better in sim control, but ease of use in point aim is easy. (This is from test flight experience, not combat although I might buy it when the next sale goes on)
That is a picture of a videogame.
And those are clearly not crucial electronics.
Indeed, I feel the same way with the F-14 and 16 in SIM, while they preform well with mouse aim, in the right moments, dumping the SAS and going full manual allows them to preform some seriously crazy things that normal mouse aim would never permit. Sadly I do not have much time with helis in SIM as I seldom play GRB now.
This better? Downed KA-52 in the nation that cant be mentioned.
And I’d need a source for the statement that the components inside the tail do not provide critical systems, since, as far as I know, this is the primary avionics bay of the KA-50/52.
The stab doesn’t matter, it doesn’t work like on a fixed wing. And at some point you also have to slow down and you also start spinning…
How far are you and what is 107 ? Just wondering
I guess when you say aircraft you are talking about a heli.
Of course it’s not beneficial and it will fly worse. From a technical aspect though, it should be possible for the KA50 to at least land somewhat safe.
Could be, would be interesting to see a weight chart of the KA50.