|
Description
| Manufacturer: | Kaman | |
| Base model: | H-43 | |
| Designation: | QH-43 | |
| Version: | G | |
| Nickname: | Huskie | |
| Equivalent to: | HOK-1 | |
| Designation System: | U.S. Air Force | |
| Designation Period: | 1948-Present | |
| Basic role: | Helicopter | |
| Modified Mission: | Radio controlled drone | |
| See Also: | ||
Specifications
| Length: | 25' | 7.6 m | |
| Height: | 15' 6" | 4.7 m | |
| Wingspan: | 47' | 14.3 m | |
| Gross Weight: | 6,800 lb | 3,083 kg | |
Propulsion
| No. of Engines: | 1 | ||
| Powerplant: | Pratt & Whitney R-1340-52 | ||
| Horsepower (each): | 600 | ||
Performance
| Max Speed: | 110 mph | 177 km/h | 95 kt |
Recent comments by our visitors
| Stan Bellanco Pittston, PA | Got to see theKaman QH-43G 'Huskie' pulling cable above the Wright Awesome sight. Not as exciting as the helicopter ride we were treated to 08/08/2015 @ 10:04 [ref: 69199] |
| Richard Danler , OR | I was on the USS Wright CC-2 from Late 1966 thru early 1970 as an ETN-5. We used the two QH-43's to lift a 10,000 foot 1/4 wave antenna for the Shipboard Very Low Frequency (SVLF) transmitter we had on board. It pulled the antenna at 4000# from the deck to 10,000 feet. We were the only ship that could transmit to submerged submarines. The transmitter room, control room, antenna coupling room and winch room took up a significant amount of area near the fantail.
There was a story told about an early failure. The drones were flown by a test pilot be cause the the remote control did not work. He was pulling at 4000 pounds when the cable broke with the helo just above the deck. The helo flew up very quickly and turn on its head as it disappeared below the deck (40 feet above the water). The pilot recovered control an landed the helo undamaged. I think he earned his pay that day. 12/07/2011 @ 20:26 [ref: 51045] |
| Johan Ragay Den Haag, CT | The Kaman QH-43G Huskie is also known as Kaman Model K-137 and is based on the HH-43B (and not the HOK-1)
Two were bought by the U.S. Navy . They were registered by the FAA as N10031 (c/n 167) and N10032 (c/n 190) I would like to ask Mr. Roger Simpson, Medford, OR (see his comment on this webpage) to make contact with me. Thanks, Johan 11/17/2008 @ 08:15 [ref: 23086] |
| Roger (Munga) Simpson Medford, OR | The ONLY drone I ever saw was in a "SECRET" film used for D.O.D. training purposes. It ended up being an A.A. missile target. The view was a "closeup from the nose camera" of the fighter. The missile hit the engine but took out the left Main Rotor. I was surprised to see a gentle left roll from the still intact right Main rotor assy., which may have allowed rapid egress of a (potential) crew; however, unbalanced oscillation put too much strain on the right main and the mostly wooden blades dis-integrated, dropping the bird from the sky. As I recall, the inherrent stability of the "43" was due to it's balance in the "Azimuth" design and it's matched blade sets. Blades were matched in "pairs" to .5 oz. (hand-made)and their control flaps accordingly. Those were matched with balanced Rotor Heads. Each Head (as well as blades) were visibly marked with a Red circle and an Orange square. Respectively, all were marked either "right" or "left". This resulted in Kaman's assesment of 1 Vert. rev. by 1 Horiz. rev. VERY smooth inflight ride. Even with these perameters in-place, an "in-flight" tracking acctuator on either side was employeed to allow the Pilot/Co-Pilot to adjust weight/balance in'flight'. The "Q" model was a basic, remotely flown plane and I believe the tracking was pre-set, prior to take-off. Roger 02/07/2008 @ 12:14 [ref: 19593] |
Recent photos uploaded by our visitors
