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

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

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

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

Old 21st Mar 2019, 21:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,035
Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time


Many congratulations to Sikorsky

https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019...s-First-Flight

cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2019, 22:10
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 834
Awesome! Looks great!

Last edited by IFMU; 21st Mar 2019 at 22:12. Reason: YouTube
IFMU is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2019, 22:56
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 545
They had to get it into the air or risk it being a symbol of a dead end failed concept. How bad is it that even after being two years late it was too dangerous to do an in ground effect hover until now. Bell is planning to suspend funding of the 280 as it has met its goals and obtained all of the data needed to elimate the risk of a production design. At the same time senior LM management must be wondering how much more money to sink into a program that has showed no return.
The Sultan is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2019, 23:44
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In the gutter..........
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by The Sultan View Post
They had to get it into the air or risk it being a symbol of a dead end failed concept. How bad is it that even after being two years late it was too dangerous to do an in ground effect hover until now. Bell is planning to suspend funding of the 280 as it has met its goals and obtained all of the data needed to elimate the risk of a production design. At the same time senior LM management must be wondering how much more money to sink into a program that has showed no return.
I got very confused for a moment there, inadvertently assuming the old Sultana was commenting on the Bell 525.
pants on fire... is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 04:08
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 883
No info n duration of first flight ....joy selected video clips and no engagement of the pusher pro pulsed .Looks like still a way to go.
heli1 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 06:08
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Brantisvogan
Posts: 482
Mostly underwhelming.
You can almost hear the accountants working out how deep the hole is going to be on this one.
Bell_ringer is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 10:57
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 834
Originally Posted by heli1 View Post
No info n duration of first flight ....joy selected video clips and no engagement of the pusher pro pulsed .Looks like still a way to go.
First flight of the X2 was less than 30 minutes. Knowing Sikorsky test they have a build up plan and they will follow it. I don't think Sultana's jibes will change the pace at all. X2 flew 3 or 4 flights without the prop.
At least they didn't have any of that silly animation that some Sikorsky people seem so fond of.
IFMU is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 12:18
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,337
Sultan, what do you mean by this?
Bell is planning to suspend funding of the 280 as it has met its goals and obtained all of the data needed to elimate the risk of a production design.
Are you suggesting that Bell is currently in a position to go into the LRIP stage?
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 14:21
  #9 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 98
Now the Competition can Commence!

Now there can finally be a competition between FVL demonstrators. Sultan exaggerated the Defiant schedule delay. First Flight was per DOD contract supposed to occur in the fall of 2017. So the Defiant is approximately 16 months late.

The hurdle for the SB>1 team now is completing all the FVL Key Performance Parameters by the end of this year, as required in the DOD contract. Based on the Sikorsky Raider still not having completed itís flight test goals, there may not be adequate time for the Defiant. Especially if any more unpredicted problems occur.

Of of course the Army can always change the rules of the competition to give the Defiant a chance to catch up. Not very fair to the people at Bell and suppliers that busted their tails to keep their promises.

I predict a government announcement in the next couple months stating the Defiant will be given additional time to catch up with the Valor. The only question is how much time.



CTR is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2019, 21:32
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 834
Nice note from Bell Flight congratulating the Defiant team on LinkedIn. Interesting that one of the Bell Flight guys is trashing the Valor and saying Defiant is the way to go. What is up with that?
IFMU is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 00:45
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 70
Posts: 16,248
I think back to the days of the Sikorsky ABC and XV-15 competition back in the 1980's.....each outfit had a lot to win or lose upon how the competition turned out.

Odd that Sultan continues bashing anything/everything Sikorsky but then we are used to his standard of posts.
SASless is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 01:15
  #12 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 98
Experience of a Migrant Aerospace Engineer

Sultan has not had the experience of working for multiple competitors in his career. Having worked for the big three plus multiple suppliers I developed an understanding that we are all kindred engineers. I never want anyone to lose a contract. Since it inevitably means someone will lose their job.
CTR is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 09:23
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: A very long way North
Posts: 368

Is it just me of does it remind anyone else of Toothless from How to Train Your Dragon?


PlasticCabDriver is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 16:09
  #14 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 98
Toothless Dragon or Defiant?

It is not just you!

CTR is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 16:24
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Brantisvogan
Posts: 482
Originally Posted by CTR View Post
It is not just you!
You are both wrong, it's the hunt for red October.


Bell_ringer is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 16:47
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 69
Originally Posted by CTR View Post
Sultan has not had the experience of working for multiple competitors in his career. Having worked for the big three plus multiple suppliers I developed an understanding that we are all kindred engineers. I never want anyone to lose a contract. Since it inevitably means someone will lose their job.
I'm with you... worked for several OEMs and closely with engineers from all three large US OEMs and some non-US helo OEMs. My primary takeaway from my career is all vertical take off aircraft are pretty terrible in some way :-) There's no perfect solution that works for every mission. So I'm not surprised some Bell Flight staff might think the "grass is greener" on SB>1 vs V-280. Some Sikorsky staff might say the same thing, based on the details they know about their solution and perhaps somewhat ignorant of what they don't know about the other.
SplineDrive is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 18:32
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 70
Posts: 16,248
Did Sikorsky hire some British Aeronautical Design Engineers to work on this project?
SASless is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 19:08
  #18 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 98
Seriously Doubt Post Was From ďBell Flight GuyĒ

Originally Posted by IFMU View Post
Nice note from Bell Flight congratulating the Defiant team on LinkedIn. Interesting that one of the Bell Flight guys is trashing the Valor and saying Defiant is the way to go. What is up with that?
I donít use LinkedIn since it turned into another Facebook. Which I donít bother with either.

But it I seriously doubt the post was from a Bell employee. How would you ever validate the individualís claim? Any real employee could lose their job posting any information about the V-280, regardless if it was good or bad.

My guess is the post is from an old V-22 Osprey naysayer who has problems accepting the aircraftís success.

Besides, currently how could anyone claim which aircraft is better? The Defiant has barely flown, and the Radier hasnít completed as much envelope as the Valor. Not much information to base claims of superiority on for either aircraft. Other than maturity of tilt rotor technology and lower risk of development.


CTR is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 21:45
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 954
CTR - well said. I thought it was classy from Bell to congratulate their competitors. Vertical lift is hard to do - we in the industry "get" that. Bell and Sikorsky/Boeing have taken contrasting views of how to approach the Army's Cap Set 3. Sikorsky built on the "what could have been" ABC, whereas Bell have leveraged their XV-15 / V-22 experience for the V-280. The latter seems to be going well; Defiant has a lot of work to do to catch up, but a few months should mean nothing to the US Army for a platform that will be decades in service. Inevitably, a loss will effect the losing team in terms of jobs and investment. Perhaps FARA opens up the chances of "everyone winning"; V-280 replacing UH-60 and a derivative of the S-92 Raider fulfilling FARA - effectively replacing the loss of the OH-58 and the missed opportunity of the RAH-66.
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2019, 14:19
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 834
Originally Posted by CTR View Post
I donít use LinkedIn since it turned into another Facebook. Which I donít bother with either.

But it I seriously doubt the post was from a Bell employee. How would you ever validate the individualís claim? Any real employee could lose their job posting any information about the V-280, regardless if it was good or bad.
My guess is the post is from an old V-22 Osprey naysayer who has problems accepting the aircraftís success.
Besides, currently how could anyone claim which aircraft is better? The Defiant has barely flown, and the Raider hasnít completed as much envelope as the Valor. Not much information to base claims of superiority on for either aircraft. Other than maturity of tilt rotor technology and lower risk of development.
Apparently he is a disgruntled ex-employee of Bell. So, he has an axe to grind.
I've never been on facebook but I joined LinkedIn when Sikorsky closed Schweizer and I had to decide where I was going next. I agree a lot of it is non-professional.
IFMU is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.