Road Program said:
I may be way off here, so any -47 or -46 guys feel free to prove me wrong.
I'm pretty sure the rotors on the -46 are connected by a transmission shaft or something like that and spin in opposite directions at the same speed. This counter rotation of equal masses at the same speed eliminates the torque-spin effect (insert more technical term here) of the typical larger rotor on other helos.
Directional control is provided just like any other helo by the angle of the blades.
Well, that's my $.02...how'd I do?
There is indeed a "sync" shaft that connects the forward and aft transmissions. Thirteen and a half feet is the number that comes to mind on the overlap of forward and aft rotor blades.
The '46 was/is powered by a pair of T-58's wich connect to a mixing unit that evenly distributes torque to the forward and aft transmissions. It looks a little comlimplicated but in truth the frictional forces were no different than a single rotor drive system - just more spread out, etc.
Pich control (forward and aft cyclic)results in differential collective between the rotor heads. The individual swashplates on the heads were only capable of lateral cyclic movement. A seperate mechanism provided for slight forward and aft tilt (speed trim) to allow for level fuselage attitude over most cruise airspeeds.
Yaw was produced with differential cyclic (pedals). Moving the cyclic left pr right resulted in AOB and a normal turn.
AFCS was provided by a pair of Honeywell digital computers - and provided rate stabilization and dampening as well as attitude and heading hold. Altitude hold was all collective based.
The '46 was strong and easy to fly. Definetly a fun ride. Putting all your available power to lifting and not anti-torque was it's speciality. The Chinook is the platform of choice in the Afghan mountains. Heavy loads during hi DA was it's sweetspot.