Comments by "Don" (@dct124) on "Sikorsky challenges US Army's helicopter award" video.

@KC_Smooth Defiant is likely to get up to those speeds with it's new engine. Honestly I doubt the Army will pivot from Bell b/c it's about suits at this point. Supposedly Sikorsky has some business issues. This isn't about getting our troops the best. Valor can't do a lot of what the Black Hawk can do that it actually needs to do. Such as fly low in tight terrain even if to avoid enemy pursuit or saams radar. That top speed and range they keep bragging about comes down when you factor in an actual load.
4
Hold up, you know how long helicopters been around, a lot long than tilt rotors. Army wants a fix wing platform. When you really and I mean really look at what both have to offer Valor is not the right choice.
3
@johns70 True, however, Sikorsky can add a 3rd rotor to Defiant X. Not sure if you were aware. We also have yet to see what it's new turbine engine can do for performance and efficiency. It's currently using the old T55 engine. Weight plays a role as well. Valor and it's high range is from empty loads. Valor V280 combat range is 500-900 nm and Defiant X combat range is, 700 nm. I can't find the weight, but I know Valor is much heavier than Defiant X. What we're looking at, is slightly new technologies that can redefine what we know about aviation. A 3rd prop would may push Defiant X past Valor top speed or equal it's 340mph speed. What then? If its range, speed and efficiency exceed Valor V280? (I doubt Army will pivot off Valor. Sikorsky Lockheed Martin and Boeing has some connection with China. I think that's what pushed the Army in favor of Bell)
2
@johns70 again totally different technology sir. With the new engines, they're potentially going to have higher speeds and a higher combat range over the V280. The V280 only flies 900nm. Currently Defiant X flies 700nm. The new engines are potentially going to put it past 990nm with +350mph speeds. Bell is misleading with it's press b/c it's longest range was done EMPTY. All Sikorsky flights have been done under combat loads. They upgrading from T55 Chinook engines to new HTS7500 engines. You keep thinking like it's a traditional helicopter and it's not. The rear prop alone gives it +100kts as is and it can fly with or without it. Look if you like helicopters, my suggestion look into the actual program instead using what you Think You Already Know.
2
@Ripper13F1V Bell didn't listen either 😅 This is going to be very costly. I'd wager Valor V280 will be over budget, won't meet demands and be cancelled in under 20yrs. Way too many moving parts. On the aircraft, logistics, troop retention and infrastructure. We don't live in the past, where you could just make big things and people ooh and ahh. Good luck to them, and I pray it has a perfect record, God knows those soldiers will need it regardless of conflict.
2
@johns70 The Army wants to upgrade to the T901 GE engine's as well from the T700 which will go in both the Black Hawk and Apache 🤷🏾‍♂️ so new engines for everybody 🤣
2
@danielsnook7362 You mixed the end. Helicopters fly low to avoid radar detection. An A-10 wouldn't be able to do that. As for the A-10 in the future they planned to use decoy's. The V280 will use decoy's, drones and other gadget's to evade or confuse radar b/c it's not stealth.
2
@johns70 Dude you realize the Defiant X uses a rear prop for propulsion right? You're thinking of traditional rotor craft in your explanation. The Defiant X literally flies in a straight line without the need to tilt. It can hover higher and faster than the V280. The V280 additional range and speed is meaningless if targeted by SAAMS. Fighting a war over the Pacific is going to be much different than Iraq or Afghanistan and that thing is not safe. Take a better longer look at the Defiant X program. That top speed and range of the V280 is going to be matched or exceeded. The new Honeywell turbine engine will add 42% more power and efficiency, not to mention possibly adding an additional rotor. Don't be surprised if Defiant X hits 400mph. Coaxial rotors don't fly like typical helicopters. Sikorsky X2 is the fastest helicopter in the world. Also a coaxial or even traditional rotor design has better hover characteristics, and handling especially in bad weather ie heavy winds, rain and sand. Coaxial design improves upon safety. Settling with power — Reduced Retreating blade stall — Reduced Medium frequency vibrations — Reduced High frequency vibrations — None Anti torque system failure in forward flight — Eliminated Anti torque system failure while hovering — Eliminated
1
@johns70 Read Vertical mag "Defiant X pilots discuss FLRAA" One thing that'll stick out is safety and survivability. Shoot off the tail of a Defiant X and it's still combat capable and can fly faster than any helicopter today. Just for comparison, shoot the tail off the V280 and you'd be lucky to crash land. You'll need to be air lift recovered while the Defiant X flies home similar to a damaged A-10. Also the learning curve is low even for non-helicopter pilot's. It can run off one engine for redundancy and efficiency.
1
@johns70 The Defiant X is literally PLUG & PLAY for the Army. They don't have to change ANYTHING, (no tools, no facilities, etc.) and it's an even easier platform to learn (near video game like) ie HIGHER RETENTION RATE and faster pilot training. Look man, if you're not going to actually look in detail to what its actually about we're done. You're basing your judgement off OLD information of what you may have learned about helicopters. Don't let it's appearance fool you. I wouldn't be surprised if the army buys some of these for special forces. I don't know if you've heard a V280 but it's loud asf, has no stealth capabilities and we will barely be able move the thing around logistically. Smgdh. I said this about the stupid F-35, now this thing. What the V280 is for, is to pull more money from the defense budget. Stop letting the fact that it looks like a traditional helicopter confuse you.
1
@Ripper13F1V It's about money and wanting to redesign there facilities. This going to be a big ass mistake. You speak of maturity as if the V22 hasn't been killing our men in non-combat related crashes. This isn't about what's on the front end, but the back end. You did make a far better argument/case than the other guy who thinks it's just a helicopter.
1
@Ripper13F1V Dude the T55 engine has been around since the 50s predating the Rolls Royce engine by over 30yrs and the new engine is literally just an upgraded version of the T55 called HTS7500. Y'all haven't looked into these programs enough.
1
@Ripper13F1V also Coaxial rotors crafts have been in existence a lot longer than tilt rotors used by NATO *S69 and other aircraft around the world
1
@Ripper13F1V So what happens with the Apache, b/c the SB-1 pretty much out classes it and Invictus in every aspect. The Invictus is nearly 100mph slower even at it's smaller size. It more than quentuples it's range and has actual redundancy in case it's aft is damaged.
1
@johns70 and yes it's an old engine as in it's proven more reliable than the V22 Rolls Royce engine over the years and upgrading for more power and efficiency. The V22 does not, does not perform well in adverse conditions and that's very likely to be the same for the V280.
1
@dianapennepacker6854 Dude you do realize 90% of the engines power goes to the pusher prop and that the two main rotors are essentially wings only using 10% of the engines power. How bout y'all actually go research the technology first. Yes, it looks like a helicopter, it can do many things out performing many if not all at this point. Its said to perform more like an airplane than a helicopter at speed. I've linked a video of the test pilots talking about it in a simulator trade show from 2019. It already goes 247 knots (284mph) as is with a load. Valor goes 280 knots (322mph) empty, and they were able to test it up to 300knots (345mph) also empty load.
1
@dianapennepacker6854 matter fact even with V280 higher speed, it still can't get remotely near hot zones effectively, especially not to land. Same issue with the V22. It can't maneuver well at low speeds and transition to airplane mode. Neither aircraft is perfect. With more speed and power, Defiant X will lose some range theoretically b/c there's at least 5 variables to consider. V280 already goes fast but it can't get to you. So even if you can fly super fast, it loses time by having to land further away. The Army is choosing raw speed b/c that makes sense when you can possibly send in 6 or more V280 to possibly clear an area. These things are going cause a shit ton of collateral damage. If they fly side ways they're around the size of a Black Hawk. I'm not opposed to Valor, I think it needs modifications. Like being able to rotate the wings like the V22 b/c right now you can't transport that thing except atop a ship deck.
1
@johns70 That I can completely agree with 👍🏾💯 My biggest concern is an article I read from the NY times when I was in college back in 2006/2007 about the V22. It still to this day can't land close. Granted the V280 engine point rearwards so maybe it won't destroy civilian property. The V22 sometimes causes more problems than good during a rescue.
1
@johns70 So they're just going to ferry empty. Not bad. Has Sikorsky released it's ferry distance. I've looked for a few days and can only find its combat miles.
1
@johns70 But it can't fly to Hawaii unless it has a tailwind or rather no head wind based on the numbers.
1
@johns70 I'll have to see it, those wings are tiny and props too big to mount anything safely. It sits way too low to mount anything underneath. Its slow as balls in hover mode and it's likely to have the same jet wash problem as the V22 (yet to be seen). So I don't think mounting external tanks is a good idea. Maybe an internal fuel tank overflow and let it fly autonomously. Weapon's at best are going to be limited. I can see 3 to 4 mini gun's, bombbay doors that drops bombs or drones like the AMD-160 Mald or Rapid Dragon. There's no room for hard points.
1
@johns70 while it can ferry far, I think that's going to be expensive asf. The V22 cost $11,500 per flight hour. Do you really see the V280 cost $3,100? I don't. The C-130 cost $7,000 but can transport maybe 3 Black Hawks. If Black Hawks had that range they'd still cost more to fly than hitch a ride on a C-130. The ferry range is for empty loads so it honestly won't be island hoping without refills regardless and it's not easy to do that. Maybe the CPU can do it now.
1
@dianapennepacker6854 Look please pull up the video I linked before responding further, you're annoying at this point. IT ACTS NOTHING LIKE A REGULAR HELICOPTER during high speed. Get that through your head. The guy who interviewing the test pilots had to be corrected multiple times for the same reason.
1
@bl8danjil Ok, I know that. We have the same info.
1
@johns70 I can see it carrying externals, just not on the wings.
1
@johns70 when it's on the ground the base comes up to your knee. I think it's too low as is to add hard point to the fuselage. The Osprey has been around almost as long as I've been alive. They don't have any hard points is what I'm tryna get across and it has a lot more room.
1
@johns70 I could see hard points on those little winglets above the front wheels. They'll likely copy the F-22 weapon bays. I think the only external weapon will be a forward canon. Both weighing 30,000 lbs is heavy.
1
@johns70 After going through all this with a bunch of people, I've concluded that this was never about the best for our troops. I think it was about Independence.
1
@danielsnook7362 Yes you're right it hasn't due to upgrading the engine to HST7500. GE also has delays of it's engines for both Raider X and Invictus. Looking around most of the industry military and commercial have been having manufacturing delays.
1
@danielsnook7362 Defiant X SB-1 load hasn't been fully tested. They only performed a required test. The test pilot Fell has stated it can carry a lot more weight. Keep in mind the Black Hawk could carry 9,000 lbs. It's safe to say both V280 and SB-1 are well over that amount. Why do I keep coming across people that think tilt-rotor is great option for underslung weight. They aren't. The V22B was designed to do it, but they all mostly carry internally especially with the downwash and the stupid clutch. The V280 still needs more time and test just like the SB-1. It is better than the V22 at underslung carry b/c it's down wash is much lower and so far 🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾 no crazy issue like the V22 and it's variants. I'm for which ever keeps our guys safe and alive especially from non-combat related mistakes/accidents. We still have yet to see it perform in bad weather.
1
@danielsnook7362 Dude SB-1 is a STEALTH aircraft or are you just dismissing that fact. V280 is not, so I'm not referring to it in that manner, and it's too damn big to do it anyway which is why I mentioned it's counter measures they plan to use on both.
1
@tararaboomdiay7442 it's not that difficult to download the army requirements. Also Bell is the one who's specifically said the loads were empty during there trade show interviews over the years, including the 5k underslung load as the airframe wasn't ready to support +13k again not me saying that, but them. If you wonder why people are saying such things, ask Bell. I've seen Valor with my own eyes as I live in Maryland and we see a bunch of real weird stuff flying all the time. Valor does not out perform the SB-1 in agility loaded or unloaded. That's not me talking down on the V280, it's a necessary platform especially to export. Seeing it actually fly puts it's selection in perspective. It's a unique and very identifiable design.
1
@tararaboomdiay7442 You say that as if I didn't know 🤣 V280 loses its tail, it's grounded and the same goes for all tilt-rotor craft and helicopters including the Chinook. As for the speed without the pusher prop, you may want to also mention the speed of the V280 and V22 while in partial hover mode as that's how it'll transport heavy loads and use its munitions. Both aircraft are comparable, neither is exclusively better than the other as they do different things. The reason Army chose Valor was speed, range and it's export potential. As well as being a bit more simple in design. The V280 is much simpler than the V22.
1