A question regarding helicopter design

U653748

Hello all I've been on the polycount forms for a little while now and from the description this would appear to be the best place to post this, apologies if i am in error.

I am planning to attempt to mesh a helicopter design inspired by the UH-60 Black Hawk. While reading up on a little on helicopter design i came across 3 types of tail rotor systems, one being the traditional exposed rotor, the 2nd being the NOTOR where thrust is used to stabilize the craft and the last being the fenestron or tail fan design. Personally i find the fenestron design to be rather appealing visually so i am planning on incorporating it's design into the mesh i am about to attempt.

While reading about the pros and cons on the fenestron design, it stated that along with the increased drag it also required additional power especially when crosswinds were involved. The Black hawk is a powerful aircraft and the question(s) that i have is thus:

Would the extra power required by a fenestron design and increased drag have a negative affect on a black hawk design or would it balance out because the Black Hawk is as stated before a powerful aircraft?

Is there anyone familiar with helicopter design and or operation here in the poly count community that could assist me with my question?

ghaztehschmexeh

I don't think it matters? As long as it LOOKS like it should fly... you aren't actually building a helicopter.

Equanim

It's awesome that you're thinking about this!

Like any decision, it would carry pros and cons, but look at your overall objective. In terms of art, you've clearly done your research. Now consider context. If, in a given scene, this is a "hero" asset, go with a design that engages the viewer more, especially if this helicopter is entering combat vs just transport. Otherwise, tone it back and perhapse use a less interesting, albeit accurate tail so that attention isn't shifted away from the focal point of the scene.

U653748

Equanim wrote: »

It's awesome that you're thinking about this!

Like any decision, it would carry pros and cons, but look at your overall objective. In terms of art, you've clearly done your research. Now consider context. If, in a given scene, this is a "hero" asset, go with a design that engages the viewer more, especially if this helicopter is entering combat vs just transport. Otherwise, tone it back and perhapse use a less interesting, albeit accurate tail so that attention isn't shifted away from the focal point of the scene.

I Imagine the tail fan would engage the viewer more since it's not what they would expect when seeing this design. One thing i like to do, depending on what i am looking to design is attempt to make something that looks cool and could possibly function in reality, or at the very least make a plausible design. I find that when an asset has some basis in reality and is not something that could only exist in fiction it tends to give the image or scene it's used in more credibility or makes the scene more believable. But before having to resort to a more traditional tail rotor i want to exhaust other possibilities first . :poly121:

lamb

It is partly up to you to make the design believable. You could have a flock of pigeons instead of a tail rotor and it would still work in many contexts.

As for realism, at the moment I would say no. The fenestron design is way too weak at the moment to be feasible for such a large aircraft. I found the Kamov Ka-60 which is a bit smaller than the black hawk and uses a fenestron rotor. It is capable of lifting about 60% of what the Blackhawk can do. the gap seems a tad too big. However, with future improvements I guess it is quite possible to make even larger aircraft work with a fenestron rotor.

Just pay attention to the overall tail design. Notice how the Kamov has a straight tail with the wings on top - inverse to the Black hawk design. I think this is the key component in making the design believable.

So yeah, a Black Hawk with a Kamov tail would seem pretty believable. Helicopter enthusiasts may object, but for the general public it would be more than bulletproof.

U653748

lamb wrote: »

It is partly up to you to make the design believable. You could have a flock of pigeons instead of a tail rotor and it would still work in many contexts.

As for realism, at the moment I would say no. The fenestron design is way too weak at the moment to be feasible for such a large aircraft. I found the Kamov Ka-60 which is a bit smaller than the black hawk and uses a fenestron rotor. It is capable of lifting about 60% of what the Blackhawk can do. the gap seems a tad too big. However, with future improvements I guess it is quite possible to make even larger aircraft work with a fenestron rotor.

Just pay attention to the overall tail design. Notice how the Kamov has a straight tail with the wings on top - inverse to the Black hawk design. I think this is the key component in making the design believable.

So yeah, a Black Hawk with a Kamov tail would seem pretty believable. Helicopter enthusiasts may object, but for the general public it would be more than bulletproof.

I'm beginning to like this pigeon idea more the the tail fan idea all of the sudden :thumbup: The dawn of the pigeon copter has come!

On a more serious note this is most definitely the type of answer i was looking for. :poly121: