The next vertical lift military generation has arrived
Thread Starter
The next vertical lift military generation has arrived
Bell's V-280 Valor hovered for the first time. While there is still competition for the US Army's "future of vertical lift" core aircraft to replace the Blackhawk, and perhaps the Apache if the modularity promised in the advertisements can be made to come true, the next progression of tilt rotor tactical aircraft hovered today. We live in interesting times. Granted, Sikorsky's Defiant is aiming for a similar spot by using a different technical solution in applying the S-97's coaxial rotor methodology on a larger scale. Will be interesting to see how large that scaling allows that concept to progress.
The question I ask is: who will be able to afford it? For those who can, it seems to be a significant step forward in military rotary wing aviation sometime in the middle of next decade. As with Osprey and F-35, however, some potential customers may look at the price tag and walk away. Unfortunately.
Pushing the edges of tech brings a price premium with it. I am not sure if a ball park cost has been tossed out, but this isn't your grandpa's Blackhawk. (If your grandpa was a Utility pilot ...)
The question I ask is: who will be able to afford it? For those who can, it seems to be a significant step forward in military rotary wing aviation sometime in the middle of next decade. As with Osprey and F-35, however, some potential customers may look at the price tag and walk away. Unfortunately.
Pushing the edges of tech brings a price premium with it. I am not sure if a ball park cost has been tossed out, but this isn't your grandpa's Blackhawk. (If your grandpa was a Utility pilot ...)
Er, how on earth could something that size even be contemplated as an AH-64 Apache replacement?
Wow - great to see.
Is the blurring of the front of the nacelles just due to gas turbine efflux - or are they trying to hide some type of whizzy proprietary universal joint...?
I thort part of the point of the design was that the hot bits faced backwards and didn't melt decks (or airmen/troops).
Is the blurring of the front of the nacelles just due to gas turbine efflux - or are they trying to hide some type of whizzy proprietary universal joint...?
I thort part of the point of the design was that the hot bits faced backwards and didn't melt decks (or airmen/troops).
Thread Starter
FWIW, S-70/Blackhawk was available in a variety of armed variants. For a force with a modest budget, supporting two different Type/Model/Series is less affordable than one. Optimized? Likely not. Not every armed forces has the kind of budget the Pentagon does.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's interesting to me is the way the competing teams came together.
Sikorski is owned by Lockheed, but is teamed with Boeing on this project while Lockheed is teamed with Bell. At the same time, Bell is teamed with Boeing on the V-22, but Boeing went with Sikorski for this project and Lockheed with Bell. Go figure.
Sikorski is owned by Lockheed, but is teamed with Boeing on this project while Lockheed is teamed with Bell. At the same time, Bell is teamed with Boeing on the V-22, but Boeing went with Sikorski for this project and Lockheed with Bell. Go figure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that there have been mockups shown of an armed V-280. Clearly there are problems with forward-firing weapons under the wing, until we fit a Hellfire with an interrupter gear. Hence the weapons slid out of the body side in a manner with which anyone who ever built the Airfix Sunderland will be familiar.
Thread Starter
I'll offer that the 2.75 Hydra rockets will be a common load (IR / laser guided 2.75s) and it occurs to me that you could rotate the prop rotors up 10-15 degrees (based on a bar napkin sketch with a pen) to avoid hitting self while still flying. I suspect that sort of thing will be part of the test plan as this particular version of tilt rotor matures. Baby steps.
I had also sketched out a weapons rack shaped like an elongated "C" with the open end facing the sliding doors. Slide doors open. rotate the mount out into the airstream. By the time it rotates though about 180 degrees, you end up with a forward firing weapon hanging under the centerline of the aircraft. Yeah, it's a bit of a Rube Goldberg device, but it permits two things: the bulk of the flight being flown clean with all weapons inside the aircraft, and a selectable munitions package that can be changed by the crewchief in flight. Mount the modules on rollers, whatever, and have one or two weapon choices to attach to that mount as one nears the engagement zone.
So much for the "back of the napkin" sketch.
I had also sketched out a weapons rack shaped like an elongated "C" with the open end facing the sliding doors. Slide doors open. rotate the mount out into the airstream. By the time it rotates though about 180 degrees, you end up with a forward firing weapon hanging under the centerline of the aircraft. Yeah, it's a bit of a Rube Goldberg device, but it permits two things: the bulk of the flight being flown clean with all weapons inside the aircraft, and a selectable munitions package that can be changed by the crewchief in flight. Mount the modules on rollers, whatever, and have one or two weapon choices to attach to that mount as one nears the engagement zone.
So much for the "back of the napkin" sketch.
