Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

S97 Raider

Old 7th Apr 2017, 02:18
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,112
Received 101 Likes on 71 Posts
Funny, I thought that was Dave who did the structural design. We had many Daves on the program but one was the rotors structural designer. Ashish's aero design was a masterwork.
IFMU is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2017, 15:49
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Dave Darrow, he did the rotor head, including the very clever tailored blade grips.

I suppose it all comes down to semantics of concept design versus detail design.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2017, 21:14
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This just got posted by Lockheed.
https://youtu.be/yuStvGT1aFA


Last edited by Senior Pilot; 10th Apr 2017 at 21:46. Reason: Insert YouTube link
retoocs is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 00:21
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by retoocs
This just got posted by Lockheed.
https://youtu.be/yuStvGT1aFA
Wow, so the rotor fold at 1:22 and 3:08 doesn't come anywhere near functioning as shown. The blade grips are crashing straight through the fairings.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2017, 02:47
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Notice they never mention the S-97 as if it never existed.
The Sultan is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 05:46
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Blade fold systems always seem to add a significant amount of complication. Not easy to do cleanly.
riff_raff is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 14:21
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by riff_raff
Blade fold systems always seem to add a significant amount of complication. Not easy to do cleanly.
Indeed. If you're going to tout it in your promo video, you ought to show something that actually works at least in virtual space.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 15:11
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If the S-97 program does end up being shelved, it raises the interesting question of that $50 million or so funded by the 35 companies in the supplier team (responsible for 25% of the program's $200 million cost). Did this contribution buy all 35 of the suppliers a seat on the SB>1, or will some of them just have to write it off as a lottery ticket that didn't pay out this time around?

I/C
Ian Corrigible is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 18:03
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
I can say for certain that some of those listed suppliers were already entirely shut out of SB>1 regardless of the fate of the Raider.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 02:05
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,112
Received 101 Likes on 71 Posts
Originally Posted by riff_raff
Blade fold systems always seem to add a significant amount of complication. Not easy to do cleanly.
Nifty marketing video aside, hard to imagine a folding rigid rotor. I doubt interference with the fairing would be the biggest technical challenge. With no articulation the loads there are elevated.
IFMU is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 14:12
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by IFMU
Nifty marketing video aside, hard to imagine a folding rigid rotor. I doubt interference with the fairing would be the biggest technical challenge. With no articulation the loads there are elevated.
Dave and Frank are still at it

SINGLE ACTUATOR BLADE FOLD LINKAGE

NON-LOADED MANUAL BLADE FOLD ASSEMBLY
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 19:39
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Guess the program is still going. This just got posted.


Last edited by Senior Pilot; 18th Apr 2017 at 21:00. Reason: Fix YouTube insert
retoocs is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 22:13
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,112
Received 101 Likes on 71 Posts
Cool video! I guess sultan's last dig must have hurt, so they had to post something.
IFMU is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 23:26
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by retoocs
Guess the program is still going. This just got posted.

Can anyone more familiar with the situation clarify whether this video shows additional flights or is it a creative montage of images from the initial flight?
I've heard nothing about any additional S-97 flight testing, so was surprised by this release.
etudiant is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 23:34
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
As it shows being beyond the airport perimeter it must be very recent flights. Looks like they finally met their May 2015 objectives. The "high speed" flyby looked pretty slow and the maneuvers minimal.

With SB1 reported to be at least a year late and the Bell V280 approaching being readied for ground and flight tests this year they had to do something.
The Sultan is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2017, 23:48
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 237
Received 48 Likes on 23 Posts
It seems safe to assume that they haven't met the speed goal yet, otherwise it would be more prominently advertised. Still, the program continues. Looks good with the gear up and the slick engine installation. Video shows perhaps a bit over 45 AoB? Not really aggressive but demonstrating more maneuverability than the X2TD did. Not sure what the XH-59A demoed back in the day.

Blade fold on a rigid rotor is certainly possible... just a pain. But anyone who has done blade fold knows it's always a pain.

Remember when the comments were that they'd never get that inter rotor fairing to stay straight? :-)
SplineDrive is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 14:21
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 700
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
creative montage
Interesting thought, especially with the tactically interspersed CG.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 18:06
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 237
Received 48 Likes on 23 Posts
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...nt-fly-in-2017

Article admits what we've all suspected, Defiant is behind schedule. States Raider flew in March, so there's opportunity for what appear to be off airport property flights since the last acknowledged flights from last fall.
SplineDrive is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 20:44
  #199 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 41 Likes on 22 Posts
A schedule delay announcement starring contest?

Originally Posted by SplineDrive
Defiant delayed: Joint multi-role demonstrator won?t fly in 2017

Article admits what we've all suspected, Defiant is behind schedule. States.
Defiant is a year late to scheduled first flight? Sikorsky and Boeing must have known they were falling behind schedule for a long time before today's official announcement. Contracted first flight is only a few months away.

I don't think S and B upper management were in the dark about this. They are a good company with smart people in charge.

I can only guess that Defiant management was playing the equivalent of a starring contest with the Bell V-280 program. S and B hoped Bell would blink first and ask the government for an contract extension first. Problem for the Defiant program was Bell appeared to be meeting schedule.

With only months remaining before the truth would be obvious to all Sikorsky and Boeing blinked.

Running into technical or procurement difficulties is understandable. Holding back information that your program is a year behind schedule until a few months before first flight is unacceptable contractor behavior.
CTR is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 22:01
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The schedule is pretty flexible, as this is a long term fleet renewal oriented development.
So I think taking time up from to make the right decisions is very appropriate. Costs are largely determined by these early choices, so this is the best chance for getting it right.

These rationalizations aside, it is also a reality that Boeing has been late and over budget on almost all its developments, both civil as well as military, throughout this century. So it would be surprising if this project, which is projected to scale a concept from a 6,000 pound vehicle to something in the 30,000 pound class, were not to experience substantial slippage and cost growth.
etudiant is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.