US Army News and updates general discussion

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Perhaps a limited time extension for Rheinmetall-Raytheon would have made more sense? Hopefully this replacement isn’t studied to the point reached with Canada’s CCV program which concluded (incorrectly IMO) that there was no need.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Perhaps a limited time extension for Rheinmetall-Raytheon would have made more sense? Hopefully this replacement isn’t studied to the point reached with Canada’s CCV program which concluded (incorrectly IMO) that there was no need.
Agree and can't understand why those running the procurement program were being so stubborn about it. I got the impression that they were being stubborn about being stubborn too.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Sikorsky put on a flying demo of the Defiant and Raider recently for some Congress critters. Video of each in the article: Defiant, Raider and SARA fly together in first public demo. Quite quiet compared to current helos and especially to me old favourite the UH-1H Iroquois.
Yes, I noticed the sound was quite different from conventional helicopters. Wouldn’t work for Robert Duvall in “Apocalypse Now”.:D Perhaps the counter rotating blades cancel out rotational noise somehow. Could be a useful stealth feature if it can be enhanced.
 

Rob c

Active Member
Yes, I noticed the sound was quite different from conventional helicopters. Wouldn’t work for Robert Duvall in “Apocalypse Now”.:D Perhaps the counter rotating blades cancel out rotational noise somehow. Could be a useful stealth feature if it can be enhanced.
Also a distinctly less noise when the bird is facing you and more towards the rear when it was hovering or moving slowly. I noticed a similar low forward noise level in the flyby sequence.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Yes, I noticed the sound was quite different from conventional helicopters. Wouldn’t work for Robert Duvall in “Apocalypse Now”.:D Perhaps the counter rotating blades cancel out rotational noise somehow. Could be a useful stealth feature if it can be enhanced.
Well the Raider and Defiant didn't have loudspeakers blasting out Wagners Ride of the Valkyrie as they swept in :D
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
US has facts tracked 3D printers used to print parts for armored vehicles In The field. Spare parts available and transport to fron line units has always been a task. This could alleviate

It does make sense because it beats having to cart around large quantities of spares. This is the way of the future as the technology continues to mature.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well, Boeing has finally released it's US Army Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) offering
Honestly, no real surprises. Traditional layout with a pusher rotor. Has a real reduced size AH-56 Cheyenne feel to it (more noticable in the video)
Boeing FARA Press Release
And, the Boeing Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft company information page

View attachment 47216View attachment 47217
Don't know, 3 seperate sets of rotors in that configuration looks awfully complicated. Three different gear boxes with possibility for things to go wrong.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Don't know, 3 seperate sets of rotors in that configuration looks awfully complicated. Three different gear boxes with possibility for things to go wrong.
Yes, I would have thought a compound design more favourable than a three rotor design but cost was likely a factor as well as time.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
It does make sense because it beats having to cart around large quantities of spares. This is the way of the future as the technology continues to mature.
It makes sense as long as carting around the 3D printer(s) & the feedstock(s) is less effort than & as reliable as carting around the spares.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
US Army has selected the Bell V-280 Valor tilt-rotor and Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant compound helicopter to proceed to the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration programme, which is the lead-up to Future Long Range Air Assault (FLRAA) programme to replace the UH-60 Blackhawk.

 

ASSAIL

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
US Army has selected the Bell V-280 Valor tilt-rotor and Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant compound helicopter to proceed to the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration programme, which is the lead-up to Future Long Range Air Assault (FLRAA) programme to replace the UH-60 Blackhawk.

Question for those in light blue.
Does a tilt rotor machine suffer from the same leading edge speed limitation as do normal helos?
I suspect not and if not, are there any different rotor aero dynamic speed limitations for a tilt rotor?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Question for those in light blue.
Does a tilt rotor machine suffer from the same leading edge speed limitation as do normal helos?
I suspect not and if not, are there any different rotor aero dynamic speed limitations for a tilt rotor?
No it doesn't because once it achieves sufficient height and just like the Harrier it can translate into forward flight and operate as a fixed wing aircraft. On the V-22 Osprey & AW609 Tiltrotor the whole engine nacelles rotate 90° vertical <-> horizontal, as seen here.
& here.

Whereas, on some others only the rotor shafts rotor assemblies rotate through the 90°, such as the V-280 Valor as seen here.

Hope this helps.
 

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #257
US ARmy testing of the new ERCA continues will new test firing hitting targets at 65KM, nearly double the current range of 35-40KM. The goal of the new ERCA is to reach 70-100KM with standard tubed SP Artillery systems giving commanders down the the Division and Brigade level the ability to strike deeper targets. Target lists could include anything from Counter Battery Fires(outrangeing most current Peer level tubed ARTY systems) to command posts, marshaling areas etc





 

Volkodav

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
The last two posts make me wonder if Australia should hold off on both the SPG acquisition and the Tiger replacement.

With such transformational capabilities around the corner it makes sense to wait a little longer, perhaps putting the allocated money into bringing other needed and ready capabilities forward. Not talking about extra money, rather delay SPG and ARH until better options are available and perhaps acquire the proposed land based antiship missile and rocket artillery earlier.

Same money, different order, increased capability, maybe even a cost saving, not having to replace the Tiger replacement and SPG in the 2030s.
 
Top