So my guess these are not "fake" helicopters but probably "real" Ka-26s, it was just an unlicensed production. Still impressive though.
So my guess these are not "fake" helicopters but probably "real" Ka-26s, it was just an unlicensed production. Still impressive though.
>All the helicopters were produced without the necessary permits and documents of origin for the parts and equipment used.
In aerospace it's common to speak of certificates of conformance, which is a legal attestation from the manufacturer that the part is of genuine origin and complies with the specification from the aircraft's type design. The manufacturer is periodically audited/assessed for their quality control practices and parts are routinely tested to ensure they are airworthy.
The issue here, as per the above quote, is that they were probably using bootleg parts from random Chinese suppliers, which might be no big deal but might also have not been heat treated properly, for example, in order to save manufacturing cost.
If parts aren't compliant with the spec you can have structural failures in flight which is of course no bueno.
So yes, these are probably "real" Kamovs in the sense that they're probably built from real Kamov blueprints, but what many people outside the industry don't realize is that aerospace design and manufacturing encompasses much more than the blueprint. The whole program from the drawing board to the assembly line to the in-service maintenance work has to be a cohesive whole in order to produce an airworthy product.
I've heard rumors that parts past their time to live would ship to less rigorous countries. Likely a bunch of EOL parts in the mix too.
But still have to cover very wide operational margins (they are overspecced) because many failures are catastrophic so they can't run on the edge of failing all the time.
The turbomachinery is by far more simpler than high performance piston engines.
A car engine of 200kw only needs to give peak power for a few seconds of acceleration, and can be electronically safeguarded from outside of envelope operation.
An avia engine of 200kw needs to be able to operate on its full rated power continuously, for longer continuous periods of operation, be many times as reliable as a car engine, be lighter than a car engine, be engineered to accommodate, and survive failures, and be engineered free of governor mechanisms of any kind that may fail on take off (engine governor having to deliver demanded performance even if it has to waste the engine)
Is this not the case?
I believe in Helicopters you're often running at 90%+ max rated power, but on an engine that's derated from its true maximum power.
Most car engines are engineered for weight savings and efficiency instead of reliability. Not all.
FAA and certifications have improved safety a lot , most people however would still get on a unmodified 737 MAX if it was cheapest/only option available .