- Joined
- Jun 3, 2011
- Messages
- 13,574
- Reaction score
- 1,598
What are the chances that Boeing's offer will be the new Comanche?![]()
Zero.
What are the chances that Boeing's offer will be the new Comanche?![]()
I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
Probably to keep sfc down and meet easily range requirement. Add to that the added discretion of having to burn less fuel when trying to sneak somewhere (less noise) .As an old Cobra guy, I can't not like its lines. A little taken back with needing for a "SPU" to get the power. Leaves me less impressed with the shiny new T901 engine ... or the weight of the Invictus.
I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
That's a good looking Bell helo, but why the single engine? Is it an Army requirement? I'm sure there's going to be a need for a Cobra replacement in the future as well, and the Marines like their twin engines.
And with their special power unit they have a degree of safety in case of engine damage.
Army mandated single T-901 engine as a KPP. I suspect that they had to go with a "big APU" to meet some of the other KPP - like going faster.And with their special power unit they have a degree of safety in case of engine damage.
Does anyone know what this SPU might be? I'm guessing an APU that can also supplement the propulsion system?
Anyway, the SPU is probably significantly smaller than the main engine, otherwise it makes more sense to go with two identical engines. You may not be able to optimize for SFC by shutting down the SPU, but historically the cost and all the "-ilities" favor engine commonality.
I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
Says who? Last I heard pretty much the entire AH-64 fleet is being remanufacture to the E model. Who's to say the advanced model couldn't be the "F" model after that? No need to have them both in rate production at the same time.
Until the Army changes it's mind. I would not be surprised to see Congressional testimony in 3 to 5 years where someone with lots of stars and bling, tells the panel that the situation has changed. Boeing will use this as ammo for their Congressional delegations to warn that the Boeing Mesa facility will slowly loose well paid constituents. Recall the Army said it was done with CH-47 BLK 2 and Congress basically said "No you are not!".So the AH-64E will be the last variant of the Apache (the best attack helicopter on the planet), it's replacement will have some very big shoes to fill.
Are you sure about the CH-47F BLK 2 procurement not being cancelled? The last things I read on it a month back or so said only the MH-47 variants are being bought.Until the Army changes it's mind. I would not be surprised to see Congressional testimony in 3 to 5 years where someone with lots of stars and bling, tells the panel that the situation has changed. Boeing will use this as ammo for their Congressional delegations to warn that the Boeing Mesa facility will slowly loose well paid constituents. Recall the Army said it was done with CH-47 BLK 2 and Congress basically said "No you are not!".So the AH-64E will be the last variant of the Apache (the best attack helicopter on the planet), it's replacement will have some very big shoes to fill.
It is in the time since that announcement by Boeing we've seen mock-up for the high speed AH-64 so maybe they think they have a chance of convincing the Army otherwise.
All of that faceting on the Bell 360 but it's not designed to be stealthy? Rather disappointing.
I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
Says who? Last I heard pretty much the entire AH-64 fleet is being remanufacture to the E model. Who's to say the advanced model couldn't be the "F" model after that? No need to have them both in rate production at the same time.
Recall that the Army has been getting the "last" version of the CH-47 since the mid-seventies. Apache will likely be around in Army inventory till after the middle of the Century, so I would very much expect there will be at least one more major upgrade. Now if that is a systems upgrade or propulsion upgrade, or both is anyone's guess.I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
Says who? Last I heard pretty much the entire AH-64 fleet is being remanufacture to the E model. Who's to say the advanced model couldn't be the "F" model after that? No need to have them both in rate production at the same time.
Valid point, but isn't the apaches days drawing to a close? Better to spend sparse dollars where they are required. That's why I see this offering here, and maybe I am crazy, but more for export. Its pretty typical helicopter performance unlike the newer stuff now testing and soon to be testing. Hot high numbers not too impressive by comparison.
I actually love rotary wing aviation and wish they would bring back the HVM from the 80s. That and stealth would be the stuff of dreams.
Recall that the Army has been getting the "last" version of the CH-47 since the mid-seventies. Apache will likely be around in Army inventory till after the middle of the Century, so I would very much expect there will be at least one more major upgrade. Now if that is a systems upgrade or propulsion upgrade, or both is anyone's guess.I'm afraid there are no money for them two .I love Advanced AH-64 moreNow that's intersting...
![]()
Bell Unveils Army Scout Helicopter — With Wings
With its trademark tiltrotors too big for the Army’s FARA requirement, Bell is squeezing every ounce of performance out of a helicopter. Will it be fast enough?breakingdefense.com
No reason there can't be both.
Says who? Last I heard pretty much the entire AH-64 fleet is being remanufacture to the E model. Who's to say the advanced model couldn't be the "F" model after that? No need to have them both in rate production at the same time.
Valid point, but isn't the apaches days drawing to a close? Better to spend sparse dollars where they are required. That's why I see this offering here, and maybe I am crazy, but more for export. Its pretty typical helicopter performance unlike the newer stuff now testing and soon to be testing. Hot high numbers not too impressive by comparison.
I actually love rotary wing aviation and wish they would bring back the HVM from the 80s. That and stealth would be the stuff of dreams.
I wonder why none of the contenders picked up the "swiveling tail rotor" concept, especially for FARA.
That was done before by Piasecki, with limited success. They developed several demonstrators, with the X-49 Speedhawk being the latest. I would think the duct adds too much weight and drag.I wonder why none of the contenders picked up the "swiveling tail rotor" concept, especially for FARA.
I suspect it would be both mechanically simpler (no need for a bendy gearbox) and propulsively more efficient to use a ducted fan and vector the thrust with vanes in the exhaust.
I wonder why none of the contenders picked up the "swiveling tail rotor" concept, especially for FARA.
I suspect it would be both mechanically simpler (no need for a bendy gearbox) and propulsively more efficient to use a ducted fan and vector the thrust with vanes in the exhaust.