I heard someone asked the Mi26 what it thought of the Skycrane, and it said, “Awwe, what a cute little helicopter! I guess Sikorsky was a little insecure about going big and didn’t want to overdo it.” 😁 Just kidding, seriously, not that the Skycrane isn’t impressive as hell, but I would like to see what a coaxial “Skycrane” would be like. Give it three engines, coaxial rotors so all of its power would be for lifting and propulsion, and a T or H tail with rudder(s) for yaw control at cruising speeds. That would be cool. I’m surprised the coaxial system hasn’t been used more than it has. Kamov made some great coax helos, but their newest creation is a conventional helo with a ducted fan tail rotor. Not that the aircraft with ducted fan/Fenestrons aren’t cool as hell, but why waste power driving a tail rotor when it could all go towards lift and propulsion? Sikorsky seems to like the coaxial arrangement now with its new compound helo it’s working on for the military. Yea it uses some of its power for something other than lift but it’s being used for propulsion with the pusher prop. I’m not opposed to that, though I would like to see it with a ducted fan pusher prop for safety purposes. Just like the pushers on the Eurocopter/Airbus X3/RACER, I’d like to see them ducted/shrouded for safety as well.
I always thought that the KMAX's intermeshing counter rotating rotor system had a lot of potential. Doing what you suggest with the Skycrane might be easier to use two larger turbines rather than going to three.
HoverTime true, I figured a three engine setup like the seven bladed Super Stallion has, but now that I think about it, a Skycrane needs to limit its own weight so it can lift more, so a two engine setup needs to be kept. The 4,800 shp/3,579 kW takeoff, 4,430 shp/ 3,303 kW max cont. that the upgraded Pratt & Whitney JFTD12A-5A produces, times two, might be able to handle the weight of an additional rotor in coaxial configuration. If not, then two Aviadvigatel PD-12V’s at 11,500-14,000 shp would be great, if they can be fitted on it. I don’t know if they’d fit though. Maybe a slightly scaled down, shorter 8,000 shp version, perhaps? I think 8,000 shp, times two, could do the job since the Skycrane doesn’t have all of the fuselage and enclosed cargo bay with doors etc that the Mi26 has to lift.
Aye, there's a reason the NG uses CH-47s for high altitude mountain rescue. Not wasting power on a tail rotor just gives them that extra edge in performance in high altitude, thin air.
Paul, Sikorsky Aircraft made both military and civilian models. The U.S. Army designation was the CH-54 and Named "Tarhe" after the Tarhe American Indian tribe. The civillian model was designated the S-64 "SkyCrane" Many military models were converted to the civilian version after the military discontinued using them.
Did you see the Errickson guys in the exhibit hall?? They all looked like a bunch of old drunk Sea Captains! White beards, red veiny noses, mustard stains on their shirts...man o man!
![[Part 1] รักมาไม่ทันตั้งตัว❤ หนุ่มสาวโสดถูกจับมาแต่งงานกันกะทันหัน แถมเธอยังเป็นหัวหน้าของเขา?!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/y2pOOMkuFI0/mqdefault.jpg)
For me this heli is the art. Simple, minimal and effective.
Thanks for uploading all these great Heli-Expo videos.
God how I love this helicopter! Amazing aircraft!❤🚁
What an amazing heli....but more important, what a great camera. Congrats
Baddest ship ever 😮
Thanks for sharing this superb video and not added music so we can hear the heli's sound. I subbed to your channel.
I'd be interested to know the running costs.
the aircrane is a helicopter in a class of its own and its an amazing helicopter that does some serious lifting and work
I can't argue that.
This Helicopter is Perfect !!!
This was a great aircraft to work on.
Each T73 producing 3 megawatts off power.
I heard someone asked the Mi26 what it thought of the Skycrane, and it said, “Awwe, what a cute little helicopter! I guess Sikorsky was a little insecure about going big and didn’t want to overdo it.” 😁
Just kidding, seriously, not that the Skycrane isn’t impressive as hell, but I would like to see what a coaxial “Skycrane” would be like. Give it three engines, coaxial rotors so all of its power would be for lifting and propulsion, and a T or H tail with rudder(s) for yaw control at cruising speeds. That would be cool. I’m surprised the coaxial system hasn’t been used more than it has. Kamov made some great coax helos, but their newest creation is a conventional helo with a ducted fan tail rotor. Not that the aircraft with ducted fan/Fenestrons aren’t cool as hell, but why waste power driving a tail rotor when it could all go towards lift and propulsion? Sikorsky seems to like the coaxial arrangement now with its new compound helo it’s working on for the military. Yea it uses some of its power for something other than lift but it’s being used for propulsion with the pusher prop. I’m not opposed to that, though I would like to see it with a ducted fan pusher prop for safety purposes. Just like the pushers on the Eurocopter/Airbus X3/RACER, I’d like to see them ducted/shrouded for safety as well.
I always thought that the KMAX's intermeshing counter rotating rotor system had a lot of potential. Doing what you suggest with the Skycrane might be easier to use two larger turbines rather than going to three.
HoverTime true, I figured a three engine setup like the seven bladed Super Stallion has, but now that I think about it, a Skycrane needs to limit its own weight so it can lift more, so a two engine setup needs to be kept. The 4,800 shp/3,579 kW takeoff, 4,430 shp/ 3,303 kW max cont. that the upgraded Pratt & Whitney JFTD12A-5A produces, times two, might be able to handle the weight of an additional rotor in coaxial configuration. If not, then two Aviadvigatel PD-12V’s at 11,500-14,000 shp would be great, if they can be fitted on it. I don’t know if they’d fit though. Maybe a slightly scaled down, shorter 8,000 shp version, perhaps? I think 8,000 shp, times two, could do the job since the Skycrane doesn’t have all of the fuselage and enclosed cargo bay with doors etc that the Mi26 has to lift.
Aye, there's a reason the NG uses CH-47s for high altitude mountain rescue. Not wasting power on a tail rotor just gives them that extra edge in performance in high altitude, thin air.
Great chopper!
MY GOODNESS THAT THING IS HUGE.! I MEAN I KNEW THEY WERE BIG, BUT WOOOOOOWWWWW!!!!!! NICE VIDEO, WHAT TYPE OF CAMERA IS THAT!!!!!!!
Glad you like the video. The camera is a Canon Powershot SX1-IS
Takes stills and Video.
ถูกต้อง 100% ไหนๆก็จะเล่นแล้วจากตัวเต็มไปเลยจะไปเอาขนาดกลาง 101 ตัวใหญ่ที่สุดในที่สุด
Paul, Sikorsky Aircraft made both military and civilian models. The U.S. Army designation was the CH-54 and Named "Tarhe" after the Tarhe American Indian tribe. The civillian model was designated the S-64 "SkyCrane" Many military models were converted to the civilian version after the military discontinued using them.
W O W!!!! WHAT AN AWSOME HELICOPTER. DOES ANYONE OUT THERE KNOW HOW MUCH IT WEIGHS???? THANK YOU HOVERTIME FOR SHARING.
Helicopter is about 9 tonnes and can lift approx 12 tonnes
Did you see the Errickson guys in the exhibit hall?? They all looked like a bunch of old drunk Sea Captains! White beards, red veiny noses, mustard stains on their shirts...man o man!
I wonder how much it can lift?
A more talented group of pilots, you will never find, James. Looks can be deceiving.
Those wheel chocks should not be in Cockpit area.
its $7,400-$9,000/hr for operational costs not including the time to and from target its expensive. 20,000lbs is it operational capacity.
stevter13 its MTOW(max takeoff weight) is 42,000LBS and its own weight.
They have one i Lancaster Ca. at Gen Fox Airport for the Lacofd With other fire fighting Air Craft.
The payload is 9 tons, so, yes it could life a couple of cars !
SuperYellowsubmarin it can lift its own self
Are all the skycranes ex military copters? I mean, there were none made for the civilian maket right?
No, ~ 10 out of the 108 built were standard category models
Does anyone know whether this chopper is still in production?
Not in production at this time.
Thanks for that info !
The Erickson S-64F Aircrane is in production to demand.
Thanks for the response. I guess, that since it is such a specialised machine, it is not is series production. Impressive beast though !
Goliath? 🤔
It would cost more than the car would be worth. Not sure on the Max Gross Weight.
HoverTime max take off weight(MTOW) is 42,000 LBS
Erickson bought the rights from Sikorsky and is building them now.
Well,they don´t call him "Goliath" for nothing...........!
นายแน่มาก
I think buddy needs to go back to school and learn the definition of hover...lol.