Next gen tiltrotor

[MiloMorai]

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Just imagine how much longer and costly its going to be to maintain that.

[Ivanhoe]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Just imagine how much longer and costly its going to be to maintain that.

Perhaps on the same scale as the Blackhawk. Which is a great bird, but was designed at the tail end of the Cold War when DOD had hordes of cheap laborers.

With the ongoing personnel shortages and higher turnover of enlisted personnel, and the oncoming financial constraints from a busted economy, the Army needs a Huey-like utility helo. Simple, cheap, reliable, maintainable, durable.

I'm still hoping the Army gives up on the Combat Cadillac approach and goes for a hi/lo fleet, with the hi option being an evolution of the BAT.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

3 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

Perhaps on the same scale as the Blackhawk. Which is a great bird, but was designed at the tail end of the Cold War when DOD had hordes of cheap laborers.

With the ongoing personnel shortages and higher turnover of enlisted personnel, and the oncoming financial constraints from a busted economy, the Army needs a Huey-like utility helo. Simple, cheap, reliable, maintainable, durable.

I'm still hoping the Army gives up on the Combat Cadillac approach and goes for a hi/lo fleet, with the hi option being an evolution of the BAT.

 

I completely agree with you. You want a jeep (or maybe a Dodge), not a Cadillac.

Interestingly im hearing the rumour hear that the MOD is NOT going to be buying Leonardos AW149, a brand new light transport helicopter, and will instead be buying Blackhawks. Its a great design, but if its so mission capable for the modern world, why is the US trying so hard to replace it?

[Burncycle360]

Because it's circa 2010s technology rather than 1989 technology and it doesn't have to fold up like a V-22, it should theoretically be cheaper to maintain and operate than a V-22, while being safer throughout the flight envelope. Much better computers and software would do a lot of the heavy lifting. However I'm not a fan of this approach - it's not clear that there's a need to "tilt rotor everything" and to me it screams of the "stealth everything" craze of the late 80s and early 90s. We know today that this is not feasible with regards to cost, nor is it practical in practice, for once the IADS, C4I and enemy air force is destroyed, conventional aircraft can do the rest far cheaper.  For most applications, tilt rotors are not necessary, and when zooming out and looking at the big picture, it's very suspect that this is being marketed without a commensurate tilt rotor based attack helicopter to replace the Apache, since in practice you aren't going to be leaving your escorts even though you can outrun and outrange them. That tells me that this is not part of a comprehensive strategy by the army outlining specific requirements while having a realistic idea of what's possible, but instead another project whose primary function is to turn taxpayer dollars into contractor profits, with a solution pressed into service to drive doctrine rather than the other way around.

I'd much prefer a more conservative approach with something along the lines of an updated CH-46 like design for general troop transport.
 
However, even if the US Army wanted a tilt rotor, having two different types doesn't make sense on its face especially in this fiscal and economic environment.  We need a V-22 follow on anyway as the design is 40 years old, and it makes more sense to unify the design between branches.  As much as I loathe the V-22, and as much as it will be a maintenance nightmare as they start getting older thanks to the requirement to transform on deck, it does fill a niche because of that capability - namely, it would be particularly useful for anti-submarine, AEW, and special operations (specifically CSAR/TRAP), and perhaps light tanker.  The army may not need the folding feature, but it still makes sense to type consolidate, and they could operate a variation that uses major components (software, engines, fuselage, cockpit, etc) and just deletes the folding feature, being built in the same plant. 

However, any V-22 follow on should feature a larger cargo compartment and should offer a pressurized variation (for the AEW task).

Edited September 15, 2022 by Burncycle360

[TrustMe]

BAe tried to get a remote magine gun pod to work on the V22 but they could never ever get it to work .

[lucklucky]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I completely agree with you. You want a jeep (or maybe a Dodge), not a Cadillac.

Interestingly im hearing the rumour hear that the MOD is NOT going to be buying Leonardos AW149, a brand new light transport helicopter, and will instead be buying Blackhawks. Its a great design, but if its so mission capable for the modern world, why is the US trying so hard to replace it?

Blackhawks are not a great design for troop transport/cargo space. It has a very lousy capability for its size. 

[lucklucky]

For these new designs i prefer the  Sikorsky-Boeing idea. But it is not a tilt rotor.

 

[AETiglathPZ]

13 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

Perhaps on the same scale as the Blackhawk. Which is a great bird, but was designed at the tail end of the Cold War when DOD had hordes of cheap laborers.

With the ongoing personnel shortages and higher turnover of enlisted personnel, and the oncoming financial constraints from a busted economy, the Army needs a Huey-like utility helo. Simple, cheap, reliable, maintainable, durable.

I'm still hoping the Army gives up on the Combat Cadillac approach and goes for a hi/lo fleet, with the hi option being an evolution of the BAT.

 

Isn't that the UH-72A Lakota?

UH-72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopter, Airbus Group (army-technology.com)

[Ivanhoe]

2 hours ago, AETiglathPZ said:

Isn't that the UH-72A Lakota?

UH-72A Lakota Light Utility Helicopter, Airbus Group (army-technology.com)

Partly. I like, at least conceptually, Eurocopter's flexbeam main rotor hub, and the fenestron tail rotor is great for ground safety. Though I'm not always convinced fenestrons have enough area to give the yaw control that Army pilots expect.

Don't like the door setup too much.

[futon]

Sounds like UH-2.

[Stuart Galbraith]

21 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Blackhawks are not a great design for troop transport/cargo space. It has a very lousy capability for its size. 

Great crashworthyness though, I'll give it that.

[shep854]

The UH-60 was intended as a direct Huey replacement, with the key requirement to be far more survivable (Hueys were shot down in droves in Vietnam, though most were recovered.  In fact, some were shot down more than once), hence a lot of the expense.  

[Ivanhoe]

1 hour ago, shep854 said:

The UH-60 was intended as a direct Huey replacement, with the key requirement to be far more survivable (Hueys were shot down in droves in Vietnam, though most were recovered.  In fact, some were shot down more than once), hence a lot of the expense.  

To some extent because of tactics, but also because there are maneuvers that a 2-bladed teetering hub rotor cannot do (without mast bump, which leads to UFIT);

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD0902767.pdf

The UTTAS program raised the bar enormously on required maneuverability of trash haulers. Thus the dramatic improvement in maneuverability and performance of the Blackhawks over the Hueys. Of course, the vastly better structural design and fuel storage didn't hurt, either.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Cue my favourite training film.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_QkOpH2e6tM

[Ivanhoe]

"... this causes mast separation, which you must avoid at all costs."

Understatement Of The Year, 1982.

 

Back when I was in that industry, a fellow engineer stated that it should only be called mast bump, because you only get one.

 

[lucklucky]

Italian General do not like tilt rotors, prefer coaxial

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/10/07/italy-air-force-chief-wants-in-on-us-next-gen-helicopter-tech-pronto/

Quote

 

As part of the FVL program in the United States, Bell is also offering the V-280 Valor, a tiltrotor engine, but Goretti said he is less interested in tiltrotor technology.

“If I need to spend a lot on maintenance of the hinges on a tiltrotor, I have a problem with lower availability. Can I afford that? No. The other option looks set to be more efficient,” he said.

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

On 9/18/2022 at 4:28 PM, Ivanhoe said:

"... this causes mast separation, which you must avoid at all costs."

Understatement Of The Year, 1982.

 

Back when I was in that industry, a fellow engineer stated that it should only be called mast bump, because you only get one.

 

Yes, exactly.

 

[Dawes]

Between the tiltrotor and coaxial designs, which is considered to be more damage tolerant?

[lucklucky]

I think at this moment is impossible to tell. Tiltrotors show in some positions a bigger area so that also should factor how many impacts they get.