• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

JMR (Joint Multi-Role) & FVL (Future Vertical Lift) Programs

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
It's also probable that they are keeping the exact number secret since it will be easier for Bell to demonstrate even better performances.
 

H_K

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
43
Reaction score
58
Sikorsky have already said that Raider hit 207 knots in 2018, but admitted to some vibration challenges. I understand that they may not want to reveal a top speed and with an outside pilot on board they might not push as hard but IMHO anything less than 200 knots implies that problems haven’t been resolved.

As a reminder 9 years ago the Eurocopter X3 hit 232 knots, 8 years ago it was being demoed with multiple pilots in hot weather (ISA+20) at 206 knots, and 7 years ago the X3 hit 255kts.... and THAT was supposedly an inferior design!
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
The X-3 has no operational futur. It's an experimental aircraft achieving similar perf than other demonstrators.
It's like comparing a street legal car and a Nhra dragster that won't go significantly faster...
 
Last edited:

H_K

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
43
Reaction score
58
The X3 was an operational aircraft turned into a demonstrator. So at least in terms of size, weight, vibrations, drag etc it was representative of something real... and flying at 255 knots with no vibration problems proves that the underlying technology has potential to work in the real world.

Meanwhile Sikorsky is having trouble scaling a technology that was notoriously hard to scale (rigid coax rotors). The X2 was completely experimental and was too small to be a demonstrator for any real-world operational aircraft, so the S-97 is the first practical demonstrator (though still too small to be operationally representative). And all the evidence points to it having unresolved problems.
 
Last edited:

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
You are delusional. The X-3 isn't anything like operational even in the discretized manner Airbus Military has shown it understands operational requirements (loosely... Very loosely).
 
Last edited:

H_K

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
43
Reaction score
58
You misunderstood me. The X3 was the size and weight of an operational aircraft, being directly derived from the EC155. As a result, the data collected in terms of drag, vibration etc can now be carried over to an operational aircraft with few surprises from a scaling perspective. The biggest challenge they have right now is to productize the technology (weight reduction and lift/drag optimization), which is more straightforward.

The X2 meanwhile was not so useful from a risk reduction perspective as it was too small. Sikorsky cried victory too soon... now we are 10 years (and 1 crash) later, the S-97 has been flying for 5+ years and it still seems to be struggling to reliably break 200 knots.
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
496
To my knowledge neither Sikorsky platform has sustained 205 knots TIAS in level flight. @tomcat - while not a great fan of the X3 as a tactical rotorcraft (a big bias against unprotected props around soldiers at night), I do think there are some viable missions it would do well in (MEDEVAC comes to mind). Having had the opportunity to see X3 when it was on its US tour, it certainly seemed robust enough for the job.
 
Last edited:

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705
@yasotay :
IMOHO the robust scent came from the Panther breed. Years after it is still an impressive design.

When I will see the X cruise 500 miles & do combat mission I think I would be ready to talk further ;)

Cobra can dive 220kt by the way.
 
Last edited:

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
496
I actually was privileged to fly that very aircraft in 1988 under the careful observation of Test Pilot Claude Gaud (sp) of then Eurocopter. It was the first time I had been upside down in a helicopter. Awesome maneuverability, power and visibility. I was absolutely awed at how well it responded. I was unconcerned with the fantastic maneuvers though as I was flying with a test pilot named "god".
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
705

That $13.5M contract is similar to the one for Sikorsky of $13M announced last month.
 
Last edited:

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
619
Another CGI of Invictus. Its only on twitter and it seems video links to twitter don't work anymore.

There is also a picture from Bell's display in the Czech Republic and I was wondering about the missile/bomb looking exhibit behind the Venom/Viper models.

Twitter Video (hopefully)


Bell Exhibit/Czech Replubic
Czech Display.jpg
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,064
Reaction score
1,053
It's an AIM-9X seen from a slight angle, making the front end look narrower than it should. The photo is from Defense24.pl (https://www.defence24.pl/mspo-2020-bell-pokazuje-doswiadczenia-z-czech-i-walczy-o-polskie-smiglowce). Translated by Google, the article says:

The stand also presents models of the UH-1Y Venom and AH-1Z Viper helicopters, along with a full-size mock-up of the latest AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missile currently being integrated on the Viper helicopter.
 
Last edited:

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
619
Odd that the shape appears so different. Must be angle and lighting.

AIM 9X.jpg
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,064
Reaction score
1,053
Odd that the shape appears so different. Must be angle and lighting.
The other distortion comes from the model helicopter blades that cut across the missile seeker and tail section. They create a bit of an optical illusion about the shape.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,271
Reaction score
1,295
Odd that the shape appears so different. Must be angle and lighting.
The other distortion comes from the model helicopter blades that cut across the missile seeker and tail section. They create a bit of an optical illusion about the shape.
I would not recommend flying near an AH-1Z with a pair of AIM-9Xs. :D
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
496

So I am going to put this here as it seems to be the catch all for Future Vertical Lift. Now I am going to go read the entire thread for the Ryan XV-5. SOF guys want jet speed without open rotors. Think XV-5 is likely one of the more mature options. Only other option that comes to mind is the stop-fold rotors. Of course there is also the fabled Senior Citizen efforts.
1600451558731.png
 
Last edited:

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,271
Reaction score
1,295
Nowhere near the payload of a V-22. Maybe a V-22 with one of these on each end? (Or an X-22 with lower bypass ducts for higher speed? Of course now you get quite a blast during VTOL. . .)

h598x2p93im21.jpg
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
619
VTOL capability with jet like speed and range. The only new wrinkle that's popped up is distributed electric propulsion. Everything else (tilt wing/augmented lift/X wing/canard rotor/etc) never produced the results they hoped for.
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
619
Nowhere near the payload of a V-22. Maybe a V-22 with one of these on each end? (Or an X-22 with lower bypass ducts for higher speed? Of course now you get quite a blast during VTOL. . .)

View attachment 641238

According to Wiki, the NK93 propfan had a 114 inch diameter. For comparison the GE9x engine is 134 inch which shows just how much bypass they are getting with the latest turbofans.
 

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,952
Reaction score
200
Then there is this idea that showed up from AFRLView attachment 641252
Will someone please explain why this creature is not just like the Aurora’s LightningStrike design which was another=
w/ extra weight, extra complexity w/ loss and drag spread al over like butter and maintainence issues?
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
496
Don't disagree with complexity arguments and suspect the Lightning Strike point might also be true. Then the same arguments were thrown at the CV-22 and the MH-53 in their time. My point was only that the AFSOC wants something that goes faster and further than the CV-22 or the (current) FVL offerings, is not reliant on predictable landing spaces, and that it seems that AFRL is working the issue.
 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
279
Reaction score
291
Foreign interest not just from us Brits (also eagerness to participate in FVL) but now from the Italians. However it is not altogether clear with the funding leftovers for Italy..

 
Top