Naval Helicopter thread

[Ambivalent]

That's true. For example, with 787, you have entire sections of the fuselage made in another country.
I was referring more to the case when someone point to something as general as 5 blades rotor. Just like pointing to different models of cars all having 4 wheels.
It's more of an indication to claim credit when none is due or to discredit than an indication of any knowledge involved in design of aircraft.

Look carefully at the WZ-10's rotor head. It is a spheriflex head just like the latest iteration of the Super Puma, the EC-225/EC-725. Same blade shape, same root, same clockwise rotation when viewed from above, standard French stuff. AVIC II and Eurocopter have been working on this for quite a few years, their cooperation is well documented in the helicopter community. If it isn't the same item it certainly owes it's design to the Super Puma just as that Z-8 owes it's rotor system to the CH-53 and CH-54, and just as Sikorsky designed that helo's gear box for the French.

 

[getready]

there are many weaknesses, but the ultimate one is that they just don't have enough naval helos. That's why Z-15 project and the 10 ton helo projects are so important right now.

many thanks. china needs to start building more helos then

 

[Schumacher]

Look carefully at the WZ-10's rotor head. It is a spheriflex head just like the latest iteration of the Super Puma, the EC-225/EC-725. Same blade shape, same root, same clockwise rotation when viewed from above, standard French stuff. AVIC II and Eurocopter have been working on this for quite a few years, their cooperation is well documented in the helicopter community. If it isn't the same item it certainly owes it's design to the Super Puma just as that Z-8 owes it's rotor system to the CH-53 and CH-54, and just as Sikorsky designed that helo's gear box for the French.

LOL, claiming credit based on some vague resemblance in shapes for something as complex as a helo ? Are you sure you're not talking about a piece of fashion ?
How about some real evidence of French involvement in WZ-10 ?

 

[tphuang]

Pictures of Z-8JH in a rescue exercise with 115. And then it shows a bunch of Z-8JH's tail, I'm guessing it's trying to show that the tails can be folded.

 

[Engineer]

I remember seeing one picture demonstrating that the tail can fold.

 

[asif iqbal]

WZ-9 and WZ-10 are the major ones. There is no question that turboshaft engine technology in China is still very weak, but I think they can also always get the engine they need from the Russians.

but this is mid-2009 and China really needs to stop asking Russia for hardware and make them itself

for a country the size of China and the technology and gene pool of talent that exists there its amazing why china has not suceeded in certain fields fundamental to aviation industry

 

[Ambivalent]

So, just because AVIC-II uses drive system and rotor head that it worked on with Eurocopter, that means Z-10 is not an indigenous effort?

And nobody is doubting that Z-8 is a Chinese produced Super Frelon.

That is exactly what it means. China could not design the dynamics on their own. They needed French help and are using a commercial design as their cover to bring in French help for a military project. It is not the first time a civil transport helo and a gunship have shared their dynamics, the Mi-24 uses Mi-8 and now Mi-18 dynamics. The Z-10 is not a 100% clean sheet Chinese design. The rotor system and main gearbox were designed with French assistance. China has never built an entirely in house helicopter design, all are based on foreign designs.

 

[crobato]

but this is mid-2009 and China really needs to stop asking Russia for hardware and make them itself

for a country the size of China and the technology and gene pool of talent that exists there its amazing why china has not suceeded in certain fields fundamental to aviation industry

Partly because helicopters are such low in priority. Even the number of licensed civilian helicopters are very low in China.

No, China should invest its talent in the true Capitalist way, which is to put your resources on the areas that deliver the most money. Note for example, how China now excels in the field of telecommunication.

 

[tphuang]

That is exactly what it means. China could not design the dynamics on their own. They needed French help and are using a commercial design as their cover to bring in French help for a military project. It is not the first time a civil transport helo and a gunship have shared their dynamics, the Mi-24 uses Mi-8 and now Mi-18 dynamics. The Z-10 is not a 100% clean sheet Chinese design. The rotor system and main gearbox were designed with French assistance. China has never built an entirely in house helicopter design, all are based on foreign designs.

You are right that they have never built an entirely in house helicopter design, but that doesn't mean Z-10 is based on foreign designs. It only means certain components is based on foreign designs. There is a difference there. And to your point, which helicopter is Z-10 sharing its dynamics with?

 

[Ambivalent]

You are right that they have never built an entirely in house helicopter design, but that doesn't mean Z-10 is based on foreign designs. It only means certain components is based on foreign designs. There is a difference there. And to your point, which helicopter is Z-10 sharing its dynamics with?

It uses dynamics from the latest iteration of the Super Puma, the EC-725.
In my book, if the helo is using foreign designed rotors and gearboxes, it isn't a 100% in house design. China is still learning the helicopter craft.