AVX Aircraft Company?

[colorado]

Hello, does anybody know anything about a supposedly radically advanced helicopter being developed in Fort Worth, Texas called the AVX 300 by the AVX Aircraft Company? Thanks!

[Shawn Coyle]

There are a couple of hints about an AVX-12 on some interesting websites, but little else.

It appears they've been in business for a while, supposedly selling light helicopters..
Brett Jackson - LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/pub/5/456/A3A) - their marketing guy

There's a website that doesn't open up
Untitled Document (http://avxaircraft.com/)

(not sure what this says about their marketing guy)

And one more from some design company
Edward Bae Design (http://www.edbae.com/)

[colorado]

yes, ran into their marketing guy, Brett Jackson at an airshow in Denver but could not get much out of him, 3 to 4 place turbine powered......claims helicopter will change industry.

[Richard Spivey]

Yes, But not ready for prime time. Come back in six months.. :)

[Helinut]

Question

Why have a marketing guy when you don't want to tell anyone about what you are developing?

[500e]

There are a fair no of Co. making helicopters! without actually having a product that stands up.
Must be a lot of capital about at low interest to be able to start shouting about the revolutionary machine , that they are going to bring out in the next ( fill in your own time scale here) , how much to develop even a 2\3place machine with full type approval then market to a sceptical industry that is working on slim to no margins.:{

Lets see them in finished form flying & with approval, not a concept or a lash up. :suspect:

[heli1]

The marketing guy is probably there to sell the concept to naive bank managers and investors....a continuing trend with "revolutionary" helicopters that fail to get beyond drawings and concept models.
How many of these have we seen come and go ??

[Ian Corrigible]

AVX has finally emerged from the shadows: New firm proposes makeover for Army scout copter (http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/04/11/2105997/new-firm-proposes-makeover-for.html).

And, based on the configuration shown in the article, it looks like flight testing is already well underway:

http://origin-images.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/thumbs/AirHogHeli_79.jpg (http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/AirHogHeli_79.jpg)

http://origin-images.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/thumbs/AirHogHeli_78.jpg (http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/AirHogHeli_78.jpg)

http://origin-images.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/thumbs/AirHogHeli_89.jpg (http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/reviews/831/AirHogHeli_89.jpg)

:E

I/C

[Darkhorse30]

I saw an AVX presentation last week at a local AHS dinner near Ft. Worth last week. Met some of the Engineers that are working on the concept. They are all ex or retired Bell Engineers (I think) including the boss who was VP for Engineering at Bell. AVX has a good chance of becoming a reality given the talent base. The funding will be the major wicket.

[widgeon]

My question is what of the OH58 do you keep ?. Maybe just the data plate .

[riff_raff]

AVX are a group of mostly retired Bell engineers. They might be long in the tooth, but I'm sure they are all still sharp.

I think the approach they have taken in their bid for a revised ARH program is actually quite good. They're using some parts of an existing Army helo that are worth keeping (engine and airframe), replacing the rotor and drive system with improved components, and getting much better performance in the bargain. This less costly "major upgrade" approach may appeal to the army more than a clean sheet design given the army's current budget situation and the recent cost overrun/cancellation debacle of the ARH-70.

The only stumbling block I can see is that AVX is not well funded. And the DoD is usually reluctant to award big contracts to vendors with limited financial resources. AVX will likely need to partner with a company that has deeper pockets if it is to be successful bidding for something like this.

Regardless, I wish them well. The US rotorcraft industry needs just these types of small, nimble, aggressive and creative companies to shake it out of its current doldrums.

riff_raff

[Darkhorse30]

For those of you that are in Ft. Worth this week, AVX has a pretty neat display at the Quad A Convention. Includes a large model plus simulator.

[Aser]

Things are getting interesting with the US Army's Armed Aerial Scout
(AAS)

Sikorsky offers the X2

Ares Homepage (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:74dbcd32-3ee8-43b4-82ff-d3278ab8b639)

AVX:
The Kamov Warrior :E
http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/10/3/3a946012-a54c-40f2-93fb-0d0468ff1397.Large.jpg
Ares Homepage (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:47232937-e382-4a39-ae62-8a0574b9b27a)


EADS Lakota:

http://www.aas-72x.com/

Regards
Aser

[9Aplus]

Orders are welcomed, production within NATO :cool:

http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/ww304/d9aplus/smPicture138.jpg

http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/ww304/d9aplus/smPicture135.jpg

http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/ww304/d9aplus/smPicture140.jpg

[Arnie Madsen]

My comments will not likely apply to AVX Aircraft Company but I got thinking .....

Frank left the mainstream helicopter industry and did well selling the R22..... and now plans to discontinue it ....

So what if a group of seasoned engineers set out to develop a new company with a new 2 place piston.

Imagine something with a real cyclic , a rotorhead that even the late Lu Zuckerman would endorse , 2000 TBO ..... hey .... a guy can dream right !!!

It could also be a marketers dream. They would sell like hotcakes.

[9Aplus]

Arnie

take close look at Cabri G2
:ok:

[lotusexige]

My first thought too.

[Matthew Parsons]

I'm interested in seeing how they will provide the low speed yaw control and directional stability that a scout would need. Perhaps differential aft thrusters?

Matthew.

[3top]

Matthew,

Kamov is doing this since decades (and without fans) - where do you see a problem for AVX?

Cheers,

3top:cool:

[Darkhorse30]

AVX uses differential thrusters at for yaw control. On coax it is usually differential collective and in the KA-32 there are two big rudders.. Hover yaw control in the KA-32 is not very responsive.

[hotzenplotz]

What exactly are the fans for when the AVX makes only 120 kts? Only for jaw control?

[maxtork]

I stopped by and talked to AVX while at the Quad A show this week. Some interesting points that I took away from my brief conversation:

1. Performance is listed as 120kts as mentioned before. Anyone know what the speed is on a standard OH58D?

2. Even with the added height it is still supposed to be able to fit into a C17

3. I asked if the fuselage would handle the added stress from the forward thrust of the fans and was told "no problem". I wouldn't argue the point as I'm not an engineer but as I recall that isn't the most sturdy area of that airframe so I guess we will see.

4. Yaw control is accomplished by differential thrust but there will be an additional twist grip on the collective to add forward thrust.

5. I asked if the current hydraulics from the OH58 would be up to the task with two rotor systems to control and he wasn't sure. He said they would have to wait and see how it goes. I would have expected that to be figured out ahead of time but maybe not.

6. He said they actually have a gearbox already designed but nothing made yet. He said they could have a working prototype aircraft in under 18 months ....if the money was there.

I think it is a neat concept to use what you already have and make it better but I'm not sure if the bennefits out weigh the effort. The speed doesn't seem to be anything to write home about. The high altitude performance (6K 95) might be better than the over loaded OH58D but do you really need to go to a coaxial rotor system and pusher props to get there? Bell seems to think a bigger engine and larger diameter rotor system in a conventional layout will get it done just fine if you look at their ARH offering. I admit I haven't compared performance specs between Bells ARH and what AVX is proposing but with the same basic airframe underneath I can't see AVX getting THAT much more.

My two pesos!

Max

[amsci99]

I'm no aerospace engineer and pardon my ignorance but the coaxial rotor system employed by AVX (based on the concept drawings) seem to resemble those employed on the Kamov series. Would they not present a high drag profile when they are being offloaded by the ducted fans?