plawolf
Lieutenant General
I don't know about you, but when the head of a something like Kamov makes a statement, I tend to not dismiss it out of hand as your typical rumor mill BS. When those claims also tally up very closely to claims and the diagrams posted several years ago are exactly the same as what as used during Sergei Mikheyev's presentation, that really makes me sit up and take notice.
I think you need to take a look what what was actually said rather than what the Russian fanboys are trying to make it out to be.
The articles with direct quotes have already been posted in this very thread.
What is claimed is that Kamov did some preliminary design drawings based on specifications China provided, Sergei Mikheyev even went out of his way to clarify that that was the full extent of Kamov's involvement and that the Chinese did the real hard work of designing the prototype and bring that to mass production. Having some basic line drawings to a Star Destroyer doesn't tell you much about how to build one.
Additional information posted in 2007 states that Kamov's contract ran from 95-96, which gives you a good idea of the level of detail they went into.
Basically, what China did is ask Kamov to give them a basic shape and size estimate for what a modern attack helicopter meeting China's weight and performance specifications would look like, Kamov did that, and only that much.
I would not expect the result of Kamov's work to be much more in-depth than the basic line drawings and scale models shown in that presentation. In terms of actual work, it is pretty simple, and did not consider at all how the thing would be built. That is why the design is such a departure from your typical Russian attack helo design. When you are making production blue prints, you also need to consider your own technological and industrial capabilities and adjust your design so that it can be made with the technologies and industries you have available. That is where the hard stuff start to come into play.
You or I or anyone with any sort of basic engineering skills could have made the kind of line drawings Kamov displayed. What made Kamov's work valuable is it was drawn by people with a lot of actual real life experience designing and making attack helicopters, so they know from experience what works and what doesn't. It made a lot of sense for China to contract out that very basic work to Kamov.
The length of time from those initial preliminary drawings to the WZ10 first flight and entering service is also testament to how much hard work was left, and conversely, how little Kamov did. If Kamov had been more involved in the WZ10, it would not have taken anywhere as long, and would probably have ended up look a lot more like Kamov's other attack helicopters.
More evidence that Kamov's work was only conceptual and very preliminary to the point where they did not even begin to consider how the design might be turned into reality.
Cough, Su27, Cough.
Wikipedia as a source? Seriously?
Funny thing to say on an internet forum no?
Weight calculation was probably referring to weight distribution and CG positioning etc. It was more to do with balance to give you maximum agility rather than anything remotely specific as what actual engines might weigh etc.
Well, I think you kinda got that backwards. You don't build a helicopter and then try to figure out its weight distribution and CE, you work out what the ideal weight distribution and CG is, and design your helicopter to try and achieve those aims.
But the thing is, how do you know what the best weight distribution and CG position should be? You can either spend years and a lot lot money doing all the basic research and testing to find that out, or you can ask someone who knows to run your desired specs through their formula and programmes and tell you exactly what you want to be aiming for in a year, for a fraction of the cost it would have taken you to do it all yourself.
Aircraft design is as much art as science, and the only way to get good at it is to do it. So, you can either let pride drive you and make all the same mistakes others have made and learnt from, or you can learn from those who know more than you to try and avoid some of their blunders. Which is the smarter way?
Just as it is wrong and stupid for certain Russian fanboys to try and take credit for the WZ10 design based on this very basic work Kamov did, it is equally wrong to deny any Russian involvement without any back up or proof of your own.
If the WZ10's designer went on record denying Kamov's claims, I would believe him. But absent such a denial or any other actual evidence to refute the Russian claims, I really cannot see how one can be so resolutely sure the Russian claims are all lies.
