Eurocopter X3 flying death-trap?

[Electricleash 133]

Ok so I just saw this on the BBC news site, as it's supposedly debuting at the Paris Air show next week.

Now, who in their right mind would consider getting in as a passenger on one of these things.

How close are the blades to those passenger windows? You would have to wait until the engines are stopped before getting out... so surely that is a big problem for SAR and sea rescue missions no?

Eurocopter X3 Wiki

Thoughts?

[roberthammer 582]

I don't like those propellers on sides - they are badly placed , as you said - you can easy get hit by those

Those side propellers should be moved to rear side or they could use the fan style of propellers

That thing can be fast ,but it won't be used for SAR or in military

[soul_assassin 1750]

what is the big deal? Same design as on most turboprob high-wing transport aircraft. Also close to the cabin:

And as for waiting for props to stop to get out well same story for the planes as well. I wouldn't walk around a Fokker 50 while the props were running.

[Electricleash 133]

Well in the BBC piece the spokesman specifically mentions it's uses; getting out to the 'platforms' which I assume means oil platforms, which would be fine I guess, but then he mentions it's use as a sea rescue vehicle, and for military CSAR missions. Also Special Forces transport, I can' imagine special forces having to wait for the blades to stop before getting out at insertion point! The guy could mean though now I think about it just getting small teams from one country to another quickly.

As far as the blades are concerned, if you opened the passenger door when they were still spinning, they would surely get shredded?

Not sure if those outside the UK will be able to watch.

BBC Piece

[ricbar89 0]

No more then the V-22 and it turned out alright.

[roberthammer 582]

No more then the V-22 and it turned out alright.

Osprey can turn propellers into hover position and then there's no chance to hit you with it

but with that X3 - you must be careful to not go near those propellers otherwise you're are dead lol

[[aps]gnat 28]

what is the big deal? Same design as on most turboprob high-wing transport aircraft.

Yeh, agree.

And they'll be sure to add a feature on future versions where they can instantly disengage and brake the outer props.

Problem solved.

[Innomadic 10]

So....its an Osprey....without the tilt....

I do not understand this chopper...

[Daniel 0]

So....its an Osprey....without the tilt....

I do not understand this chopper...

And available to the civilian transport market and probably considerably less complex and cheaper. Makes sense to me.

[soul_assassin 1750]

but with that X3 - you must be careful to not go near those propellers otherwise you're are dead lol

not just with X3 :p on cessna too, and also in ATR42, in fact i think any propeller that goes more than 0.1 rpm will make you dead. There is nothing special about the X3's props or their position.

[max power 21]

I'm not sure what the big deal about the prop placement is, either. The props are a half a propeller disc width away from the fuselage. Getting out to the platforms doesn't necessarily mean SAR, I think it means commuter.

[jakerod 254]

I don't know all that much about aerodynamics or physics (other than things tend to fall) but couldn't they just turn off the two side engines before landing so that spec-ops/CSAR boys etc. could get in and out? Or are they required to be on? It seems to me that they are only required for high speed or is that not true? They could just shut them off when they're a minute or two out and by the time they landed they would be fully stopped.

[Daniel 0]

I imagine the side props are necessary to counter main rotor torque in a hover.

I'd love to see this helicopter feature in Take On. It'd make an excellent executive commuter choice.

Edited June 16, 2011 by Daniel

[max power 21]

I don't know all that much about aerodynamics or physics (other than things tend to fall) but couldn't they just turn off the two side engines before landing so that spec-ops/CSAR boys etc. could get in and out? Or are they required to be on? It seems to me that they are only required for high speed or is that not true? They could just shut them off when they're a minute or two out and by the time they landed they would be fully stopped.

I think that at least one must remain running.

[Mr. Charles 22]

If they both fail, the passengers must get their sickbags ready =)

Concept of operations? How will this transport troops with the two propellers spinning at the door? How will this perform ANY missions current undertaken by helicopters? This is the most impractical helicopter design I have ever seen.

jointstrike35STOVL vor 3 Monaten

@jointstrike35STOVL you must understand that it is a concept, a demonstrator to test new systems and technologies. It will not be put in production. No mission dedicated, no troops and no passenger.

EurocopterEADS vor 3 Monaten

[Dwarden 1125]

remember there is even possibility to make bigger copters than this one

e.g. longer main frame shape,

then you can have doors behind the engine and propelers

also design with blades being inside cover ring (outline shape) may increase safety

or imagine not just 1 wing but *<hull>* to ensure better stability

thus being able hold bigger propelers and heavier engine or jet engine :)

where i'm sure someone will sooner or later try replace the propelers with some type of jet engines

Edited June 16, 2011 by Dwarden

[Daniel 0]

where i'm sure someone will sooner or later try replace the propelers with some type of jet engines

Ducted fans?

[Dwarden 1125]

Ducted fans?

any, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_engine

imagination has no limit

for reality it's it's just matter of stability calcs and cost :)

[jakerod 254]

I imagine the side props are necessary to counter main rotor torque in a hover.

I'd love to see this helicopter feature in Take On. It'd make an excellent executive commuter choice.

I think that at least one must remain running.

I guess I was assuming that it had the same thing as the md500n that doesn't require an additional fan/blade/prop to counter it. Upon closer inspection though I guess the backs don't look anything a like.

[Daniel 0]

Ah, I hadn't really heard of NOTAR before, thanks for the heads up. I can see why you thought that now.

[jakerod 254]

Ah, I hadn't really heard of NOTAR before, thanks for the heads up. I can see why you thought that now.

I hadn't heard of it until it was mentioned a few times during or right after the Take On Helicopters ARG.

I think adding it to the helicopter if it were possible would be a good idea. That way you could just make it so that the door can't be opened if those rotors are on and that way you get good speed and safety. Not a mechanical engineer though so maybe there could be complications with that system when it comes to wear and tear or something.

[Tankbuster 1746]

Thoughts?

Rather average landing at 1minute 30. Always the way - nobody is around to see your best touchdowns. Your bumpy, slewed landings on the other hand.....

[max power 21]

They always talk about the tail rotor of a helicopter as being very noisy and dangerous to people on the ground. This is a helicopter with two of them. It seems like this helicopter would be more for remote areas and not ideal for flying over urban areas.

[Electricleash 133]

You'd think they would have tried experimenting with some sort of bladeless designs, something along the lines of the Dyson Air Multipier... of course they might need to get around the mighty patent that bad boy has.

[Rastavovich 0]

Complaining about the design of an experimental aircraft is rather pointless. How many X series vehicles have you actually seen/heard of being sold to end customers beside collectors/museums? I can't think of a single one where a experimental craft actually went into full production (which does not mean there might be not one or two)