Talk:Helicopter rotor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was the article was not merged. --Born2flie 18:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Merge proposal to Helicopter
I'm happy for it to be merged, and I'm sorry it shows my lack of Wiki design ability!
However the main Helicopter article is huge, with far too much on type recognition and not nearly enough about what makes them fly or how to control them, their advantages, benefits, limitations and hazards. The Helicopter Rotor page is an attempt to redress this.
Eventually I or some other pilot will have to rearrange the Helicopter page to address these issues. Benet Allen 22:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree. The Helicopter article is a bit on the large side. However, this article should be merged... - CorbinSimpson 22:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I brought this issue up a long time ago and created a link called Helicopter theory, that was summarily changed by others to Aeronautical engineering. That does not get close to addressing the issue. I don't think this article should be merged with the main Helicopter page. Creating Helicopter Pilotage was a good move also. Madhu 18:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Keep This page has grown substantially and the whole Helicopter topic is branching out in different directions. So far, these have been logical, and I have tried to keep a non-hairy list of interlinks between them. Now we just need to prune the Helicopter article itself! Benet Allen 20:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Keep (agree with Benet Allen)--ChrisJMoor 01:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Two blades
Rotors with more than two blades have two dedicated connections, which make the inner swash plate turn. In two bladed rotor systems the blades take over this task.
– From the article
Born2flie: I wonder what the idler links are for? --03:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Born2flie: If you look at the picture here just above the swashplate boot, there is an idler link connecting the rotating swashplate to the rotor mast (which is driven by the transmission). If the blades and their pitch links, or pitch change tubes, were responsible for turning the rotating swashplate, they'd be wrapped around the mast. Even the picture on the left from the Swashplate article shows that there is a mechanical connection between the mast and the rotating swashplate that does not include the rotor blades. --04:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Asymmetry vs. dissymmetry of lift
I changed the reference to asymmetry of lift in het paragraph 'Fully articulated rotors' to dissymmetry of lift. As far as I can see the two terms got mixed. I'd like to see this confirmed? DieterVDW 19:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cross section
Can someone clarify how a rotor is a cross section of an airfoil? I thought a cross-section was a two dimensional slice of a three dimensional object. 70.56.195.231 (talk) 06:13, 29 April 2008 (UTC)jawshoeaw
air·foil n. A part or surface, such as a wing, propeller blade, or rudder, whose shape and orientation control stability, direction, lift, thrust, or propulsion.
