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

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

Wikiposts
Search

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

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st March 2019 | 21:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,536
Likes: 295
From: The Alps
Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time


Many congratulations to Sikorsky

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

cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 22:10
  #2 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Awesome! Looks great!

Last edited by IFMU; 21st March 2019 at 22:12. Reason: YouTube
IFMU is offline  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 22:56
  #3 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 724
Likes: 41
From: Arlington, Tx. US
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  
Reply
Old 21st March 2019 | 23:44
  #4 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 114
Likes: 8
From: In the gutter..........
Originally Posted by The Sultan
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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 04:08
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 912
Likes: 1
From: UK
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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 06:08
  #6 (permalink)  
Community Builder
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jun 2016
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 1,318
Likes: 387
From: Brantisvogan
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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 10:57
  #7 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Originally Posted by heli1
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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 12:18
  #8 (permalink)  
Community Builder
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,336
Likes: 2,184
From: Texas
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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 14:21
  #9 (permalink)  
CTR
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 300
Likes: 42
From: Texas
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 it’s 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  
Reply
Old 22nd March 2019 | 21:32
  #10 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
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  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 00:45
  #11 (permalink)  
30 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
Veteran: Army
Veteran: National Guard
 
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
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  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 01:15
  #12 (permalink)  
CTR
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 300
Likes: 42
From: Texas
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  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 09:23
  #13 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 497
Likes: 31
From: A very long way North

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


PlasticCabDriver is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 16:09
  #14 (permalink)  
CTR
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 300
Likes: 42
From: Texas
Toothless Dragon or Defiant?

It is not just you!

CTR is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 16:24
  #15 (permalink)  
Community Builder
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jun 2016
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 1,318
Likes: 387
From: Brantisvogan
Originally Posted by CTR
It is not just you!
You are both wrong, it's the hunt for red October.


Bell_ringer is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 16:47
  #16 (permalink)  
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 258
Likes: 58
From: USA
Originally Posted by CTR
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  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 18:32
  #17 (permalink)  
30 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
Veteran: Army
Veteran: National Guard
 
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
Did Sikorsky hire some British Aeronautical Design Engineers to work on this project?
SASless is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 19:08
  #18 (permalink)  
CTR
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 300
Likes: 42
From: Texas
Seriously Doubt Post Was From “Bell Flight Guy”

Originally Posted by IFMU
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 don’t use LinkedIn since it turned into another Facebook. Which I don’t bother with either.

But it I seriously doubt the post was from a Bell employee. How would you ever validate the individual’s 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 aircraft’s success.

Besides, currently how could anyone claim which aircraft is better? The Defiant has barely flown, and the Radier hasn’t 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  
Reply
Old 23rd March 2019 | 21:45
  #19 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 28
From: Zummerset
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  
Reply
Old 24th March 2019 | 14:19
  #20 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Originally Posted by CTR
I don’t use LinkedIn since it turned into another Facebook. Which I don’t bother with either.

But it I seriously doubt the post was from a Bell employee. How would you ever validate the individual’s 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 aircraft’s success.
Besides, currently how could anyone claim which aircraft is better? The Defiant has barely flown, and the Raider hasn’t 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  
Reply


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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.