• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Future Helicopters

I notice that artist rendering there is missing a bunch of avionics and others physical aspects (like totally rearranging the front landing gear) that allow the gunner to be there too…
Not to mention they hacked through a bunch the building on their left to land and no apparent downdraft.....
 
I haven’t flown an Osprey in real life, but flew HMX-1’s FSim and it wasn’t a very intuitive power quadrant to me as a fling-wing guy. The Harrier pilots definitely won out over the helo pilots during the design phase. Thrust/power control through the TCL (thrust control lever), not to be confused with the TCL of a Chinook (‘thrust’ is used on a tandem rotor helicopter in place of a single-rotor helicopter’s ‘collective’ control lever), moves linearly forward and aft with increasing power settings in the forward direction, so in hover mode the TCL is pushed forward to rise instead of a pure helicopter’s collective/thrust control levels pulling up/back to rise. Having flown the Defiant X FSim at an Army Aviation exposition, it felt a lot more intuitive, where control of the aft propellor was digitally blended into what most helo pilots would know as the cyclic control lever. That’s not the be all to end all, but in a pinch or critical moment, if the necessary immediate action is counter-intuitive, there may possibly (will) be situation where the outcome may not be as guaranteed as it might otherwise be. We shall see what the end result is.
I have read similar for when the Osprey was introduced, that fixed wing pilots adapted faster than rotary wing types.
 
I have read similar for when the Osprey was introduced, that fixed wing pilots adapted faster than rotary wing types.
The major issue is that for FLRAA they are all Rotary wing pilots.
Now speaking to a few pilots who did fly the 280, they said the system is better than the Osprey, but still not conducive to an easy transition.
*I don't know how many hours they have on either, one of the guys used to be a 58-D pilot, and not sure what else he is qual'd on.
 
The major issue is that for FLRAA they are all Rotary wing pilots.
Now speaking to a few pilots who did fly the 280, they said the system is better than the Osprey, but still not conducive to an easy transition.
*I don't know how many hours they have on either, one of the guys used to be a 58-D pilot, and not sure what else he is qual'd on.

When you say "easy transition" do you mean pilots transitioning to the V-280 or do you mean the V-280 transitioning between horizontal and vertical flight?
 
Transition (and sometimes conversion) describes the steps from a basic rotary qualification (or previous operational experience on another type) to the new target aircraft. The majority of US Army aviators will pass through the gates at Fort Novosel (previously Fort Rucker) in Alabama, and as KevinB notes, this is a US Army program. Who knows what the USAF, USN and USMC will do for their future rotary lift systems.
 
The stakes are higher in this than most awards that is why Lock is protesting I would think. If it like the Blackhawk program its for the next 50+ years. Plus only 15% of the challenges are upheld so it is an uphill climb. It will be interesting to watch.

And Lockheed does win even with Bell because it is number one system supplier after the engines.
 
The stakes are higher in this than most awards that is why Lock is protesting I would think. If it like the Blackhawk program its for the next 50+ years. Plus only 15% of the challenges are upheld so it is an uphill climb. It will be interesting to watch.

And Lockheed does win even with Bell because it is number one system supplier after the engines.
Several folks in the Army Aviation community have expressed to me that they felt the process was rigged against the Defiant.
Looking at the article it appears to bear that out.

Given the type of contract LPTA (Lowest Price Technically Acceptable) and Defiant was BOTH technically acceptable and the lowest priced bid, it seems to smack of the Army using non existent grading materials to attempt to justify Bell’s Valor being the winner.

Now if the Army had been transparent about grading criteria, then several different things may have occurred.

To me it seems some segment of the Source Selection Committee significantly favored a tilt rotor design and the aspects of that, however that wasn’t in the RFP, nor the KPP for the contract. The original draft RFP apparently did have larger range and speed requirements, however those where removed - and for some reason the SSC appears to have given weight to the draft requirements, which had been superseded by the actual contract, and as thus had no weight.

One could argue that if the contract had been written as either Best Value to the Gov or Best Performance (not going to happen outside of certain SOF entities) that the results would be different- but I would expect the GOA to uphold LocMart’s protest and need to reverse the award.
 
Here is the piece


Also most Canadian armed aircraft made today. Models 407, 412, 429 and 505 are manufactured in by Bell Helicopter Canada in Quebec. Plus the Webcam ball optics. And the 412, 429 have P&W Canada engines. Most Canadian armed thing flying today
 
I remember now. Sad. Thanks.

In a world of blood Trudeau tries to keep his hands clean.
OIP.ehPqN8MdUmA2ynZA7KB9UQHaJm
 
Back
Top