Giant K-Max RC Turbine Scale Flettner Rotor Model Helicopter 

Mobil

Danke Stephan :)

Are you a kmax pilot? Because I'm a kmax mechanic and every pilot I've talked to would disagree with your statement

I've heard that Kaman helicopters were used to train helicopter pilots but that they were so easy to fly that they didn't help to teach how to fly a conventional helicopter so the US marines used the more difficult conventional machines instead

@@caliburncymro7988 well you heard wrong. The kmax is a single seat helicopter. They're not throwing new trainees in a single seat helicopter.....

@@helimx I used to hang out at the local airport (sort of a one horse affair in our small town), and have actually talked to the pilot that flew the one they were using here, and he had been flying this same machine for 12 years or so. He was very comfortable with it, and said it could do maneuvers that no single rotor chopper was capable of. He generally was commissioned to run a 500 gallon water bag between one of our local ponds and the fire (about 4000 lbs. when full). He indicated they would lift over 6000 lb. total, which is actually more than the aircraft weighs.😮

@@danw1955 that is definitely accurate, but to say it's one of the easiest helicopters to fly is not. I'm literally standing 20 feet away from the kmax that I maintain for a living.

Thank you

@@RCHeliJet thank to u...for presenting this idea for us...

The Kaman helicopters, even back to the early Kaman Huskies, were designed more for utility than aesthetics. They were among the easiest helicopters to fly, and Kaman would often have his mother fly one, to demonstrate this. For a time, a Kaman Husky held the record for fastest climb rate in a helicopter, and their lifting ability made them very popular helis for military combat rescue missions. Modern Kamans are designed and used for heavy lifting, in operations such as logging and construction. They may be ugly, but they are pretty darned good copters.

Danke Tobi, bleib Gesund.

A lot less dangerous than co-axial rotors.

@@Snobiker13 vs coaxial, I doubt it.

Maybe due to 2 x parts to operate ?

Mark E. Jines But there’s no tail rotor required and they develop more lift for the power. Plus, I’m pretty sure the rotors are not as complex.

Q. E. D. As a person that assembles and restores Kaman helicopters, I can tell you that you’re nearly spot on. The rotors and the rotorhead are rather simple compared to a normal helicopter. The rotor deflection is controlled by servo-flaps on the trailing edge of each blade. Think of these as model aircraft elevators. Instead of directly controlling the entire blade which is mechanically difficult, the servo-flaps drive the entire rotor blades in the desired direction. A lot less force is exerted and you’ve gained the mechanical advantage. Charlie Kaman was a brilliant man and all around wonderful fellow. He is dearly missed.

James Fieweger Thanks for that info.👍

Vernon Atease Simple: They are offset by 90 degrees and linked by gears. Then they rotate in opposite directions. There is no way that they can touch each other.

RBTech The rotors are hard-linked by gears.

Michael Crumpton Anton Flettner also came up with the concept of the synchropter, or intermeshing rotors.

Yep

First successful intermeshing rotor helicopter was designed by Flettner and saw service in WW2

@@caliburncymro7988 that's fine by it's not accurate to call these "Flettner rotors" as they're not.

He Martin schön hoffe euch geht es gut Danke Dir und bleib Gesund.

Two rotors, one engine, a jet! What happens when things goes wrong...

Patrick LastName The real one looks a bit better, the proportions here are not very accurate unfortunately. But lots of people think the K-MAX is ugly :)

even if its ugly you can't deny how capable it is.

endwood Looks quite a bit worse than the original IMHO.

hotskull jay&vjay 🖕🏽