Search results

Yes, the term 'Skycrane' is generic. I used it to differentiate a workhorse (another generic term) with a tactical combat platform. Erickson was possibly the first that produced a heavy lift helicopter. It was called Erickson Flying crane. Sikorsky bought the rights and produced the famous...

That's right. A skycrane is different from a tactical heavy utility helicopter.

Spasibo, gaspadin!

Kak vashe dzaroviye, gaspadin maitra? Ya gavaroo pa russki nyemnogo. Now, which helicopter is the better one?

I will not say anything since I am not going to be labelled an interested arms agent. :taunt1: Without mentioning the combat environment and the AD umbrella that India is capable of putting up out there, one really cannot say which is the best on mere technical specifications.

Below, we will demonstrate a method to calculate the theoretical thrust that that a propeller or rotor can generate. Of course in a helicopter, the rotor disk is oriented such that we call its force "lift" rather than thrust, "thrust" would be used in the case of an airplane. On a helicopter...

Lifting a heavy helicopter in HAA is a task by itself. The air is so rarefied that the 'lift' that is essential (as per aerodynamics) is not there as is required.

Can't say there were successful in Kargil. They were extensively used for as the Gurez hopper.

In a full fledged war what would be the environment? I am neither for nor against any of the alternatives given. The survivability should be factored in when considering other factors.

And what would be the tactical situation when C 130 is to be used?

I wouldn't know.

The difference?

The airstrips have been upgraded. The C17 can handle unpaved and rough airstrips or ALGs. So, there is no problem anywhere in the northern areas. Helicopters would be an asset where there is NO airstrip and yet have landing space with clear fly in and fly out tunnels.

The world has changed. The Russians are no longer the USSR mentality people. They have become pragmatic and understand the value of money and are no longer keen to give a free lunch. Therefore, whatever is the best for us, we should buy.

I wonder how many have seen the two helicopters and their operability to become experts. I have seen all Russian helicopters in service with the IAF. They are good and they have their issues.

C 17s are being bought for precisely this reason.

Any report on how the helicopters on trial have done in the High Altitude? Mi 26 that we have was a bit of a lemon out there. Spare was also a great problem.