Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Sikorsky quietly launches the S-100

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

Sikorsky quietly launches the S-100

Old 7th Aug 2018, 14:48
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,781
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sikorsky quietly launches the S-100

HeliHub.com Sikorsky quietly launches the S-100 helicopter

Sikorsky has registered N100FV with the FAA thus according to the FAA web - its a twin engine fourteen seater rotorcraft

FAA Registry - Aircraft - N-Number Inquiry

Thus the assuumption it could be based on the SB-1 Defiant.

cheers
chopper2004 is online now  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 15:09
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That HeliHub article proposes that it is the SB>1 Defiant.
BossEyed is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 16:43
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll be silly and suggest that it can't be "launched" if it hasn't flown yet (yeah, I know, program launch, not air vehicle launch). Also, not sure what's up with that artist's conception, but those rotors with the forward angle and then the sweep I think we've seen somewhere before.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 16:52
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
its a twin engine fourteen seater rotorcraft
Where are these details shown?
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 17:55
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: yyz
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
helihub.com
7 Aug, 18, Source: HeliHub.com As Sikorsky has developed various helicopter models over the years, so each has been given an “S” designation. Many are well known, such as the S-76 and S-92, and others which only ever existed as office drawings and did not make it to hardware. There are also likely to be numbers in the series which have been skipped, prompted by the Marketing Department.Many of the “S numbers” are better known by other designations, such as the S-65 which everyone knows as the H-53, or its sub-models CH-53 and MH-53. So what is the S-100? The landmark “one hundred”… We expected a fanfare!Very recently, Sikorsky have registered the first S-100 (msn 0001) with the FAA, who have allocated the registration N100FV. FAA data shows it as having two engines and 14 seats, which fits perfectly with the joint venture Sikorsky-Boeing SB>1 Defiant, which the two companies are putting forward for the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program. The specifications of the Defiant on Sikorsky’s website show “cabin for 12 combat equipped troops”, and this size of helicopter would routinely be flown by two pilots in US military service and thus the total of 14 seats.Sikorsky have also revealed at various events that the initial prototype is due to fly in 2018 and will be powered by two trusty Honeywell T55 engines, thus confirming the two engine designation given by the FAA. While the company has acknowledged that this particular engine may make it a challenge to achieve the FVL requirement of 229 to 450 nm range with payload, the partners are looking at other future engine options which are more efficient.Taking the first two letters of the “FVL” program name provides the confirmation that N100FV is indeed the SB>1 Defiant. The model features a co-axial rotor system and a pusher prop, a format Sikorsky developed with their X2 Demonstrator, and they carried on through the S-97 Raider which first flew on 22 May 2015.We look forward to the S-100 making its first flight in the near future. Its competitor, the Bell V-280 Valor, first flew on 18 December 2017.
rigpiggy is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 19:22
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 76
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sikorsky quietly launches the S-100


So I take it that it has stealth capabilities?
Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2018, 19:51
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 78
Posts: 7,304
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Plenty of motive power complications there ... good luck!
MPN11 is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 06:14
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SansAnhedral View Post
Where are these details shown?
You could have just read the article, you'd have seen the picture.

Plenty of motive power complications there ... good luck!
Sikorsky have previous with the S-67 Blackhawk for the tail and S-69 for the co-axial mains.
Harley Quinn is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 07:50
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 73
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anybody seen any sign of a Genuine "Stealth Blackhawk"over the last seven years ?
Just Asking .
Haraka is online now  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 13:16
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Harley Quinn View Post
Sikorsky have previous with the S-67 Blackhawk for the tail
Are you referring to the Piasceki experiment? Speedhawk?

I think John Dixson posted some info about that a few years back; he was familiar with that project.

@Haraka
Anybody seen any sign of a Genuine "Stealth Blackhawk"over the last seven years ?
Of course not. They are all invisible. It's one of those cool Stealth features.
(How you do a preflight on an invisible aircraft, however, remains a mystery to me).
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 16:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Harley Quinn View Post
You could have just read the article, you'd have seen the picture.
What are you talking about? I was specifically asking where on the FAA registration does it say anything about 14 seats and twin engine.

Heli-hub says "according to the FAA web" - well I'm staring at FAA Registry - Aircraft - N-Number Inquiry and don't see a single thing about seats or engines.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 18:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SansAnhedral View Post
Where are these details shown?
If you think that's a specific question I'd hate to see a generic one from you.
Harley Quinn is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 18:35
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lonewolf, no the S67 was a dedicated AH, fatal crash at Farnborough of the only prototype wiped out the programme
Harley Quinn is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2018, 22:26
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Harley Quinn View Post
If you think that's a specific question I'd hate to see a generic one from you.
I'm sorry you lack the ability to parse the use of a forum quotation followed by a question clearly referencing said quotation. PPRuNe must be a confusing place for you.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 00:00
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 74
Posts: 17,635
Received 24 Likes on 18 Posts
(How you do a preflight on an invisible aircraft, however, remains a mystery to me).
I have heard that your Preflights were such that the aircraft might as well have been invisible.....or parked in an adjacent spot.


One mention of "Sikorsky" and Sans immediately pops up out of the Gopher Hole and starts sniping.....easy Lad....it was only mention of a Press Release!
SASless is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 01:23
  #16 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
News?

Is the aviation press so hard up for any information on the Sikorsky/Boeing SB>1 Defiant that they consider this news?
CTR is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 02:46
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Atlantic Ocean
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have anybody read or heard something about using the new generation engines (dual spool) in the new generation helicopters?

https://aerospace.honeywell.com/en/p...icopter-engine

Last edited by Jimmy.; 9th Aug 2018 at 10:33. Reason: Grammar
Jimmy. is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 12:52
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 879
Received 14 Likes on 11 Posts
LoneWolf, just to clarify. We did design ( with assistance from the prop experts at Hamilton Standard ) a fenestron for the S-67 and successfully flight tested it. Except for a small deadband around trim ( similar to the Gazelle in that respect-in fact we had a connection with a US Gazelle owner, who brought his aircraft to Stratford for a quick eval ) the fenestron was a transparent substitution in terms of flying qualities. We built a completely separate tail for this evaluation. The solution to the trim issue was a controllable rudder, but that project was overcome by events with the crash at Farnborough, with the original tail installed. We never put a thruster on the S-67. SA did fly a “ roto-prop “ convertible tail rotor on the company S-61 in 1965 as part of the AFSS proposal work. That utilized a standard articulated S-61 tail rotor and thus was really a proof of concept flight test. Flew that in 1965, a year before I signed in.
JohnDixson is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 15:02
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
One mention of "Sikorsky" and Sans immediately pops up out of the Gopher Hole and starts sniping.....easy Lad....it was only mention of a Press Release!
Oh, asking where the details were that caused Helihub to conclude that S-100 = SB1 is hardly a snipe. And lest ye forget, I got paychecks from Sikorsky once upon a time

There is an absolute dearth of information about the Defiant and its conspicuous continued absence from media scrutiny, and I am seriously curious as to what is going on this late in the game - so its less "Sikorsky" and more "SB1" that has me popping out of my humble subterranean abode.

Last edited by SansAnhedral; 9th Aug 2018 at 16:39.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2018, 16:36
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnDixson View Post
We did design ( with assistance from the prop experts at Hamilton Standard ) a fenestron for the S-67 and successfully flight tested it. Except for a small deadband around trim (similar to the Gazelle in that respect-in fact we had a connection with a US Gazelle owner, who brought his aircraft to Stratford for a quick eval ) the fenestron was a transparent substitution in terms of flying qualities. We built a completely separate tail for this evaluation. The solution to the trim issue was a controllable rudder, but that project was overcome by events with the crash at Farnborough, with the original tail installed. We never put a thruster on the S-67. SA did fly a roto-prop convertible tail rotor on the company S-61 in 1965 as part of the AFSS proposal work. That utilized a standard articulated S-61 tail rotor and thus was really a proof of concept flight test. Flew that in 1965, a year before I signed in.
As ever, thank you John for the insights.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.