Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RNethAF General slams US Army Aviation Plan

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RNethAF General slams US Army Aviation Plan

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Sep 2015, 18:30
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 3,152
Received 101 Likes on 54 Posts
RNethAF General slams US Army Aviation Plan

Dutch Air Force Chief Slams US Army Helicopter Plan - Defense One
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 19:26
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting isn't it? Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

The F-35 program took huge risks and tried mightily to make big leaps in multiple technologies at once. And is being damned for it.

The Army's helicopter program tried to avoid the pitfalls of such risky technological leaps by staying conservative. And is being damned for it.
KenV is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2015, 19:26
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 401 Likes on 248 Posts
Good thing the Dutch have a robust rotary wing industry to take up the slack for those who just can't fulfill his vision.

Oh, wait, I guess they don't.

I suspect that one of the things that bothers him is how the West's defense industrial base seems to by dying the death of a thousand cuts, and thus choices are necking down. F-35 seems to be a case in point, and IIRC the Dutch are caught in that mess along with a bunch of other NATO allies and the US.

V-280 and modularity answers two critical acquisition exam questions, if it comes off as hoped: common airframe, smaller logistics and spares tail, modularity. You may want to look into the benefits USMC are accruing with AH-1Z and UH-1Y in terms of parts commonality and supportability.

There's been a never ending drive, since Graham Rudman Act of 1986, to address the tail and supportability issues in any new program.

As to the S-97 follow on that is supposed to be bigger, not sure if that will pan out. I don't doubt that sometime soon EC/Airbus Helicopters may present their ideas on the future of vertical lift as competition to the ideas already shown by the current players in the game.

I appreciate his appeal to a broad vision, but temper that with the hard facts of physics and rotary wing flight/vertical lift.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2015, 09:27
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,274
Received 671 Likes on 241 Posts
Schnitger should be grateful he has a big brother, rather than whingeing.
Not as if the Netherlands could do better, is it?
langleybaston is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2015, 11:36
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good thing the Dutch have a robust rotary wing industry to take up the slack for those who just can't fulfill his vision.
I wonder if the NH-90 project that the Dutch are involved in incorporates any of the visionary features the good general demands from the US Army's helo projects.
KenV is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.