The requirements, of course, are key. If the Marines want something too different than either FARA or FLRAA, the industry is looking at yet another rapid development program of an advanced VTOL craft... which is exciting, but I think the industry is getting a little tired. One of these programs needs to become a fully funded program of record and not a one-off cost share project.

After being in this business for a couple of decades, I can tell you that if the 295+ knot speed is firm, it won't be an edgewise flow rotor. It's possible to hit those speeds, but not efficient enough to have good range and be a balanced platform. The shipboard compatibility requirements and exactly which hangers it needs to fit in will also heavily drive the design for AURA.

Today is the first day of fall. And yet again, Sikorsky misses another milestone with this program. Literally every single date, whether it was contractually driven or self-imposed, has been missed or slipped by both the Defiant and Raider teams. It's simply mind boggling.

I have been following these programs for going on 10 years now, and have been suspicious of most of the claims from a technical standpoint nearly the entire time (hell just look at my post history). I cannot fathom how there has been almost zero pressing done by the aerospace and defense community and media journalists regarding the repeated failures, complete opacity, and outright lying that has come from Sikorsky throughout.

Nearly weekly there are news stories regarding FVL with headlining pictures displaying Defiant and breathless commentary about how its a leading contender for FLRAA. Does anyone else feel like they are taking crazy pills reading these pieces year in and year out? Will Defiant even fly again by year end now? Even the laughable historical lifetime combined flight rate for all ABC aircraft of 1 hour / month far exceeds what Defiant has achieved thus far.

There are so few remaining suppliers in the sector that a publication would be courting suicide to alienate any of them.
Hence all news reports are slightly massaged press releases, rather than independent opinions.
Bad for the industry and bad for the tax payer, but short term profitable.
Imho, the relevant precedent is the pre WW2 French defense industry, it produced some truly superb gear such as the Char 2bis, was hugely profitable and an abject failure from a national perspective.

Interesting article regarding recent SB1 model wind tunnel testing

NFAC tests next-generation military helicopter | Aerotech News & Review

One wonders if a seemingly unnecessary qualifying statement like that has some implications.

The phrasing certainly leaves open the possibility that although the tests were successfully completed, the results were disappointing.
Stuff like that happens in the VTOL business.
I remember the Rockwell XV-12, a design based on the concept that a jet flux could entrain considerable ambient air, enough to add about 20% to the lift produced.
It worked fine in scale models, but not when scaled up to full size. Perhaps something similar is happening here.

Progress?
 

And no commitment to reach the SB>1 design speed at all.

20 kts!!!

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....aa81d63247.gif

Who Writes This Stuff?
 

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....76eb5eed9c.png

Any New Flight Test Status Updates?
 

There was another video posted a few days ago on YouTube showing Defiant doing low speed flights with some truly "beast mode" rotor head fairings installed. No word on if this was a check flight for the fairings or the 40 knot expansion mentioned in the media around AUSA.

Fairings look more like they will add drag.

That's why they don't make decisions based on looks! This cracks me up.

Thanks for the Update
 

Fairings can be pretty large and bluff body looking and still reduce drag, so I’m confident that SB>1’s rotor fairings will be an improvement over the comparatively inelegant metal structure that are the rotor hubs. Raider’s hubs are a different structural solution and fair more compactly.

I don’t think Raider is 50+ knots off it’s target speed... it was never advertised to hit the speeds of the X-2 Demonstrator. And I can think of ways that vibration can limit top speeds if the high 4P vibes leak into the drivetrain or other components that have loads that directly scale with speed. So it’s performance miss could be both drag and vibration limited. That said, it’s still a sleek airframe with one of the slickest engine installations I’ve ever seen.