Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Soooooo...well this is embarrassing...I've been doing lots of research trying to figure out what exactly makes a FenestroN(see? I can spell it!  Big Grin ) a Fenestron....and while I thought I had a good idea of what I was talking about...a final check to the Mosquito website and taking a look at the Swift's little info-graphic clearly shows that even Mr. Uptigrove referred to the Swift's tail rotor as a Fenestron....soooooo....if the creator of the Swift considers it to be a Fenestron...well who the heck am I to say its not lol.

So on that note I do apologize and retract my previous stupid post lol, however, personally I still feel like its more of a standard tail rotor that's simply shrouded, but like I said, the creator has spoken!
"Into the fires of forever we will fly through the heavens
With the power of the universe we stand strong together
Through the force in our power, it will soon reach the hour
For victory we ride, Fury of the Storm!" 
Well, fenestron has become like Kleenex and Aspirin. trade names that have been adopted as generic.
XE285 #1329 N869DJ
Start: June 2018
Done:  Sep 12, 2018  Sleepy 
AWC Issued: Sep 26, 2018  Big Grin  
(10-13-2018, 03:57 AM)Casey Wrote: Soooooo...well this is embarrassing...

No worries...

Here is some more info right from the Airbus website. It appears to me that the main goal initially was safety and later some other advantages like noise reduction came into the mix.  Typically a Fenestron seems to have more than four blades. 

Some Info from the Airbus website

Interesting that the concept doesn't seem to work well for bigger helicopters.
I have some experience with flying the a Fenestron tail rotor in the EC 135 that I flew on my first civilian helicopter pilot job as an EMS pilot in Florida for about 1.5 years. This is a great tail rotor to fly! It was very smooth, quiet and docile. I think the the EC 135 version is much quieter than the Dauphine (Like what the U.S. Coast Guard flies) because of the spacing between the tail rotor blades. On the Dauphine the ten tail rotor blades are evenly spaced. On the EC 135 the space in between the blades varies. Additionally, the EC 135 tail rotor gear box is suspended with ten slanted stators that are very thin. I could explain it's appearance but you will see in a picture search what I'm talking about much better than I can confuse the situation with a written explanation. I don't know that there is any real benefit to having a ducted style tail rotor (whatever you want to call it) on any experimental kit built helicopters. I think they tend to be heavier and more costly than a simple two bladed tail rotor. I think the Fenestron style tail rotor is really cool as long as it's at someone else' expense. If I had the option and it was cheaper I'd go with a conventional tail rotor (someone check to see if Dwight is listening). The bottom line is that, just like anything in life, "the juice has got to be worth the squeeze" and I much prefer simplicity and reliability over the fancy stuff.
Mark Thompson
From what I learned from an engineer that worked at Lockheed and the pilot of my favorite Gazelle the main reason for the fenestron tail was less noise, and it works. That being said I believe in the saying "Keep It Simple Stupid". Conventional tail rotors work fine. My 2 cents.
XE 285  1205 (Myrtle)
Start: 8/1/2013
Finish: 5/24/2014
Arrived home: 10/11/2014

Hi all, 

I agree a100% to the "keep it simple" statement especially in experimental helicopters, adding complexity just introduces failure and should therefore in most cases be avoided. However, there could be something like a risk versus benefit equation since experimental helicopters are probably more often piloted by low time aviators than certified ships. Currently, I can't prove this statement but I think I have seen quite some accident reports from experimental helicopters where the tail rotor had hit trees or the like during low altitude maneuvering or emergency landings. I am sure you know that better than I do that sudden loss of the tail rotor at low altitude is probably more than most inexperienced pilots can handle.
So I think there can be an argument for a shrouded tail rotor in experimental helicopters. Look at the Guimbal Gabri, sure that is a certified ship in a much different price range but it is intended to be a helicopter for training and therefore for low time pilots and it has a shrouded tail rotor. 

Anyhow, I bet these guys are certainly happy that they have a Fenestron.
Wow, great piloting.
XE285 #1329 N869DJ
Start: June 2018
Done:  Sep 12, 2018  Sleepy 
AWC Issued: Sep 26, 2018  Big Grin  

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)