* Airwolf soundtrack starts playing *

@iceman9678

Ай бұрын

They gonna need a volcano.

Airbus is really kicking it in the last couple of years. Awesome!

Nicely done Airbus Helicopters let’s go!

This looks like an awesome aircraft

@coolleo149

Ай бұрын

It sure does. Imagine if it came to my airport and I would’ve been surprised like crazy! XD

@somealias-zs1bw

Ай бұрын

Can only imagine the maintenance hours per flight hour ratio for something like this.

Looks awesome!

So the x3 is back?!!

@lexnite22

Ай бұрын

Is it x3 combined with H160?!

@coolleo149

Ай бұрын

Honestly it’s just called the racer, but there’s no model name of the number or letter itself

@lexnite22

Ай бұрын

@@coolleo149 yea after watching a it few times it has a completely different body to the x3, which looked like it was based after the as365 dauphin. This Racer looks closer to the H160

@sc149

Ай бұрын

Please, call it the Biplopter.

This is a beautiful design

Just wonderful and amazing performance. Luv it.

airbus rocks

THIS IS SO COOL

Nice graphic representations! 👍

Beautiful

Very impressive ...

Very slick 😮

Me gusta el diseño y sus dos nuevos rotores laterales, además desaparece el rotor trasero y su forma de volar tiene que ser muy agradable. Muy buen trabajo.

I want one!!

The world has finally got a compound helicopter on the market again!

@davidanalyst671

Ай бұрын

the USA army just got a contract for hundreds of bell v280 to replace the blackhawk

A Airbus conseguiu reunir nesta aeronave, o melhor do helicóptero e o melhor do avião, as hélices laterais movimentadas por um sistema cardan, acopladas às asas assimétricas, um conjunto aerodinâmico inovador. Um conceito simples e eficiente. Esplêndido!

Glad we've got an update. I heard about the first flight, but was sad to see no raw video of it flying... Want to see how it sounds vs the regular helo's we've all heard for years now.

Guys went all out on the soundtrack!

That`s new hope !

Kool 👍😎. Awesome... would be great for Air Medivac. Air Ambulance..US Coastguard.

Next gen Airwolf..

Dual rotor makes more sense since you don't have to worry about losing lift on one side at high speeds

Want to see the gunship variant.

Interesting, I wonder how much uplift those wings create.

❤

Anyone else humming the Airwolf theme tune?

@TheDasHatti

Ай бұрын

but, will it also make Mach2? :)

🏎💨 Wow, this video is an adrenaline rush from start to finish! The speed of the Racer high-speed demonstrator is absolutely mind-blowing! 🚀 The sleek design and powerful performance make it a true marvel of engineering. Watching it in action is like witnessing a symphony of speed and precision! 🎶🔥

God damn

Very interesting! How is the size of the cabin? Like a H145 or more like a H160? This would be a gamechanger for HEMS operations.

Great achievement. Can you please bring the Photo from Second 00:09 as Wallpaper? Thank you.

Heli: Am I a drone. Drone: I don't know what you are.😂

in case of emergency landing the cost of rapair would be enormous, because those two engines are very close to the floor.

I have many concerns about this design. I think Bell V-280 Valor have much more chances to be a successful next-gen aircraft...

Ahhh…. I have a hangar you can park that in. Just leave the keys in it in case I need to move it !

Will the Racer Prototype comes to the ILA in Berlin?

Now this is podracing

me likey!

This seems ,on the face of it, a simpler design than the V22 Osprey with its swivelling engine pods. Good luck to Airbus .

@Freq412

Ай бұрын

Apples and oranges

@92JohnDorian

Ай бұрын

has barely anything to do with the osprey. thank you for your comment.

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

@@92JohnDorian The intent of compound helicopters, tilt-wings, and tilt-rotors is identical: to combine the VTOL capability of helicopters with higher speed and greater efficiency of fixed-wing aircraft.

@92JohnDorian

Ай бұрын

@@brianb-p6586 and it still has barely anything to do with the osprey. thank you for your comment

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

@92JohnDorian it has everything to do with the Osprey, because a compound helicopter like this is a direct alternative to a tilt-rotor such as the Osprey.

That's *Helicopter-NG*

Where can i apply for test flying? :D

It is an evolved autogyro. good

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

No, it's not. The main rotor is powered.

@ghostrider-be9ek

Ай бұрын

@@brianb-p6586 during cruise they idle an engine and the main rotor is essentially flying on translating lift alone

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

@ghostrider-be9ek an autogyro uses the main rotor in autorotation - the airflow is upward through the unpowered rotor. A helicopter powers the main rotor - airflow is downward through the rotor. There is no indication that this Airbus design transitions to autorotation. Perhaps you're thinking that the use of propellers for horizontal thrust at high speed makes or an autogyro, but it does not; that's what makes it a compound helicopter. All compound helicopters unload the main rotor to some extent with wing lift, but as long as the main rotor remains powered, it is not an autogyro.

Inherent safety of this aircraft when on the ground is a big concern. Since the props are within striking distance of ground personnel, the no approach zone of the aircraft is much higher than the traditional helicopter. So can only approach the front part of the aircraft while the engines are on. Don’t know if the cargo and stretcher loading has taken this into account. Otherwise engine will have to be turned off every time need to load up.

@MadScientist512

Ай бұрын

They must be electric so they shouldn't be running on the ground at all when they're not needed, the only time it'd make sense to run them on the ground would be during the takeoff of a helicopter loaded heavy enough to need a run-up to use the wings to help lift it into the air.

@Gyratus

Ай бұрын

For 50 years we had planes with rotors in range of personnel and there were no more troubles than today. Just a matter of habit and formation.

3 questions que j'aimerais poser à Airbus: 1) S'il devait être commercialisé combien coûterait-il ? 2) Quelle distance pourrait-il parcourir ? 3) pourquoi les extrémités des pales ne sont pas en "boomerang"? (J'entends bien que ce n'est qu'un prototype mais...)

Isn't the main limit of helicopter speed its main rotor blades rotating forward will be supersonic? How's adding two pushers gonna change that?

Can it pull a looping?

Can electric motors also work like the reserve / emergency when the ice engine failed?

Getting in and out of that thing is a one way trip...

I miss the EC 120 :-(

а он может садиться как самолет или будет только как самолет ? и смогут ли горизонтальные двигатели поддерживать вертолет ввоздухе при отказе вертолетных лопастей ( или хотя бы не дадут свалиться и помогут в пикировании )

What's the design feature in this aircraft that doesn't require a tail rotor to counteract main rotor torque?

No tail rotor. What happens if one of the wing engines fails?

So is this an Auto gyro that can hover?

i like the concept, but advertising it as an EMS heli seems like a bad idea just due to onboarding and offboarding patients would be a real PITA with the layout

@mwip57

Ай бұрын

The bottom wings connect just slightly forward of the trail boom. Looks like it works fine to me.

What’s the speed of the racer.

Why do I hear the Airwolf theme suddenly

1:04 Symmetric thrust? How do you counter the rotation of the main rotor then?

@roberthavran2522

Ай бұрын

@tobiwan001 As long as the airspeed is high enough, the vertical stabilisers can counter the rotation of the main rotor. This is nothing new, normal helicopters can maintain a stable flight even when the rear rotot fails if the speed is sufficient enough. So in this case symmetric thrust only at cruising speed.

Looks like the anti-torque scheme could be redundant, nice! But if the electrics fail, loss of yaw control, so autorotation? Or yaw control via ailerons(?) and a run on landing?

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

The video doesn't provide details, but it does list mechanical flight controls as a feature, so yaw control is probably not lost to an electrical failure.

@Freq412

Ай бұрын

@@brianb-p6586 I might also mention that I think we will find "electrics" to be incredibly reliable, except for the batteries. And I'm sure that engine driven generators would be designed to support the prop-motors. So my original question might not even be a primary concern.

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

@@Freq412 the propellers are not driven by electric motors - they are connected by mechanical shafts to the main transmission.

@Freq412

Ай бұрын

@@brianb-p6586 Ah ha. Thanks. This machine is so interesting....

You can only go so fast until the main rotor can’t spin fast enough to produce lift.

Drives me nuts when these videos don't let us actually hear the thing.

Haven't we seen this one before?

@x-gamessimulator1067

Ай бұрын

Yes

could this thing landing verticaly? it looks like in the vid it starts and lands like an airplane.

Good luck getting on board after start up. lol

@mds3697

Ай бұрын

I'm sure the wing propellors will start up only after takeoff?

@NoChance797

Ай бұрын

@@mds3697 The wing propellers are used to counter act spin, replacing the tail rotor. They couldn't possibly takeoff safely without them. Maybe the wing propellers can be turned off independent to the main rotor when at idle. I dunno...

Bringing old tech back?

Dear Airbus, the most efficient design is the tilt rotor. Why do you come up with a compound design?

@NoManDetected

Ай бұрын

bc their objective is cost-cutting

Can i buy one?

I swear this heli better be served in the military

how does it counteract the torque of the main rotor? 🤔

@Huli-Man

Ай бұрын

Im just guessing but you can run the pusher propellers at diffirent speed

@Dimaz42

Ай бұрын

@@Huli-Man I see.. so if the rotor spins clockwise, then the pusher on the left has higher rpm

@Huli-Man

Ай бұрын

@@Dimaz42 you could run them at same RPM, just change the angle on the propeler blades so it scoop up more air per turn so you get more thrust from one of them to counter act the torque from rotor and also to change direction at a low to hover speed. But again im just guessing🙂

@Dimaz42

Ай бұрын

@@Huli-Man your first assessment seems correct, at least for the X3: _"The pusher propellers generate differential thrust to counteract the torque generated by the main rotor."_

I guess the price will equal a couple of helicopters and two Cessna Caravans together

Dave Sparks I know you're here watching this over and over again, stop drooling and get back to work! 😂

Why the pusher config and why keep an engine off during cruise? Also why even spin the rotor during cruise? Finally, can it even hover? I don’t see a tail rotor

@RameshKumar-kb7hp

Ай бұрын

Yeah we never saw it hover. It must be unstable

@matthewkantar5583

Ай бұрын

It uses the pusher props instead of a tail rotor?

looks cool. but having the extra props seems dangerous to ground crew or paramedics

@amentco8445

Ай бұрын

Isn't it better to get there faster?

@adamfilip

Ай бұрын

@@amentco8445 faster is better then Safer?

"Rapid and Cost Effective Rotorcraft - RACER" So how much cost effective are they? what's the unit price of these?

@x-gamessimulator1067

Ай бұрын

And the cost of maintaining such a complex system!

@Adrenaline_chaser

Ай бұрын

​@@x-gamessimulator1067 yeah totally. The "total cost of ownership" is the thing that matters the most to operators (and rightfully so).

i like the idea, but as a passenger helicopter it would be very difficult to keep the passengers from walking into the blades. i'd place them further towards the back for safety reasons if at all possible.🤯💩😮

I think it will too much fuel comsumption. Smaller propeller can be Electric motor and can be use like drone propellers.

Hybrid? How does that work?

Can't hear the aircraft. The music is so annoying

@ghostrider-be9ek

Ай бұрын

its probably loud as fuck!

So a gyro that people can't laugh at

Oh just pay to use the Airwolf theme and be done with it

So how much faster is it?

@ghostrider-be9ek

Ай бұрын

220 kts vs 120-130 kts?

@patricknevermind8529

Ай бұрын

@@ghostrider-be9ek I mean vs a regular helicopter.

@ghostrider-be9ek

Ай бұрын

@@patricknevermind8529 i just stated the speed comparisons

Why are everyone following footsteps of Soviet Union aircraft designs?

Chers concepteurs bonne journée! Vous pouvez dire à quel point le système de transport de l'hélicoptère RACER Project EST unifié avec le système de transport de l'hélicoptère H160. Et je comprends bien que le manchon du rotor principal sur le RACER est fabriqué à partir d'un matériau composite polymère à base thermoplastique (CF+PEEK) comme sur le H160? Et pouvez-vous suggérer quelle est la proportion d'utilisation de matériaux composites polymères sur une base thermoplastique dans la conception du prototype (démonstrateur)?

I don't understand. The side rotors are just the electric fans, not engines, right? If this helicopter has 3 rotors and 2 jet engines and only gets speed 220 knocks, that is unacceptable.

thrust to weight ratio sucks. Good experiment tho!

Cost per hour is 2x an AS350 B3? lol

Why no contra-rotating rotors?

@clutchtucker

Ай бұрын

Because, the engineers decided that wasn't needed for the aircraft. Different rotor systems are picked based off of varying decisions

@emsea1658

Ай бұрын

@@clutchtucker what a good non answer. You like to hear yourself talk don’t you.

@clutchtucker

Ай бұрын

@@emsea1658 You like to like yourself, don't you? The chances of Airbus commenting themselves is low...so I supplied an actual answer.

@clutchtucker

Ай бұрын

Also, contra-rotating rotors are practically exclusive to Kamov. They're heavy, expensive, dangerous, is more complex, prone more to mechanical issues, require high maintenance, and so much more

@troublecluster

Ай бұрын

The torque from the main rotor is being cancelled out by the pusher props so no need for a contra rotating system or a tail rotor.

Higher probability of getting sliced.

Put rocket engine on it

Range of 400Nm, is Newton a distance measurement? I guess it's Km.. (min 0:15)

@sebastiendine4834

Ай бұрын

Nm = Nautical Mile 1Nm = 1.852km. This is relevant unit if you plan to use this aircraft in maritime applications.

wow, a helicopter

Ça va être sympa quand les premiers étourdis vont de faire hacher par les deux rotors verticaux. Parce que ça arrivera, c'est ecrit. Demandez à Murphy.

@Yezou1

Ай бұрын

Mdr

The idea seems cool. The look is not great.

Euros a decade behind the Americans in aviation innovation.... sounds about right.

New Airbus product 👍 New Boeing product 👎

Bad design. The propellers should have been somewhere in the tail end just like new gen choppers are designed. The mast wing span pressure on the propellers in bad weathers isnt good.

This isn't serious design

@gerhardma4687

Ай бұрын

Do you know the meaning of the word “demonstrator”? My goodness has education failed miserably for some!!!

Looks like a whole lot of components to fail, and not really that different from their X3 demonstrator.

@gerhardma4687

Ай бұрын

Do you know the meaning of the word “demonstrator”? My goodness has education failed miserably for some!!!

@ImpendingJoker

Ай бұрын

@@gerhardma4687 Hur dur dur...you're a bright one aren't ya'? What part of my comment made you think I didn't know what demonstrator meant, or was that just a biased conclusion you reached with no imperial data like the stereotypical European?(and you'll jump to a conclusion with this comment as well, cheers!)

@gerhardma4687

Ай бұрын

@@ImpendingJoker Wow, someone's pissed off. I extend my hand of peace to you. But just to show you that I can understand your comment. Such a highly complex aircraft naturally has many parts and some of them can become defective. Do you think that's different with the Raider from Boeing/Sikorsky or the Invictus from Bell? But what really bothered me about your comment is that you say something that you can't judge at all, without any technical expertise or evidence. Or are you an engineer and know the blueprints.... also of the X3. Such generalizations simply show a need for recognition and disdain for other manufacturers. I don't care which manufacturer builds something like this and whether it comes from the USA, Europe or anywhere else. These are all technical masterpieces where many clever minds have been working on them for years. And none of us can even begin to form an opinion about them.

@ImpendingJoker

Ай бұрын

@@gerhardma4687 Since you are one to make unfounded comments. I have been in the aviation industry for over 25 years, and guess what I've worked on for the majority of those years? That's right. Helicopters. From Bell, and Sikorsky Boeing-Vertol, to Hughes, McDonnel-Douglas and gasp....Airbus helicopters which I have been working on for longer than they've been called Airbus Helicopters. That's right, I've worked on OG Sud Aviation airframes, Eurocopter and AgustaWestland ships. I've been all over the world working on just this type of thing, so while I may not be intimately familiar with these blueprints, I have more than enough professional and technical experience and expertise to be to see a mechanical nightmare when I see it. Also, why would I say ANYTHING about another aircraft manufacturer when this video is about Airbus Helicopter? As for the other helicopters that YOU pulled into the conversation, yes, they are just as mechanically horrid as this thing is. You seem to like making erroneous conclusions based on no facts, and no, you didn't understand my comment at all, so I was correct in that assertation as well. When you can get Yankee White, come talk to me. You should stop now before you make yourself look even more foolish.

I'm looking forward to never hearing of this again!

If this is about achieving better fuel efficiency that's one thing if it's about design aesthetics you lost me.

@brianb-p6586

Ай бұрын

Aesthetics are relatively unimportant in aircraft.

@ghostrider-be9ek

Ай бұрын

@@brianb-p6586 not true, and depends on aircraft market