Originally Posted by
SansAnhedral
Agreed, that was my point. CTR above put a rigid rotor on the list of Boeing FARA features. I don't see it.
Except the Cheyenne had a significant size lift offset wing, which the Boeing design clearly does not.
Simply adding thrust power with a pusher prop to an articulated rotor would only be useful if you could keep MR tip speeds manageable, which would be rather tricky without a wing to provide lift at a necessarily slower Nr.
The low quality cartoons also don't lend much confidence to the design maturity. If you're not going to show something robust and marketable, why show anything at all.
Part of the thing to keep in mind is that Army's requirements for FARA, including speed, are lower than for FLRAA,. In fact, the speed requirement is lower than that for Cheyenne. Cruise is only required to be 180 knots with faster speeds ~ 200 knots in a "dash". Not sure how much extra credit Army is giving for exceeding threshold and objective. So they're all looking at how much extra performance will be worth in the competition. Bell clearly thinks that the Army is not going to be willing to pay that much for over and above performance so they're going for lower cost/risk. Boeing looks like they feel Army may be willing to pay somewhat more but not a lot more.
Regarding the low quality cartoons, this is just a tease to pique interest. They used to do this when the new car models came out. You see this in movie trailers all the time. In the trailers for the 2014 Godzilla movie (which was actually pretty good) you got flashes of, or saw parts of, but there was never a good shot of Godzilla himself. Boeing says they'll reveal all in March.