Bell V-280 Valor - Blackhawk replacement

[FourWheelDrift]

Textron’s Bell has won the U.S. Army’s competition to build the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft, the service’s largest helicopter procurement decision in 40 years.

https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2022/12/05/us...

Another bloody tilt rotor.

[FourWheelDrift]

Sikorsky and Boeing’s Defiant X was the other contender.

[Krikkit]

What's wrong with the tiltrotor? Now they've ironed out the Osprey it's proving a pretty reliable machine, I believe they're considering it as a candidate for Marine One in future which says a lot.

[RizzoTheRat]

The interesting bit to me is that it's been chosen as the replacement for Blackhawk and Apache. I've yet to even see a mockup of a gunship version. I can see how the extra speed could be very useful but how maneuverable is it at lower speeds compared to a conventional helicopter?

Krikkit said:

What's wrong with the tiltrotor? Now they've ironed out the Osprey it's proving a pretty reliable machine, I believe they're considering it as a candidate for Marine One in future which says a lot.

I thought it already was, when Trump visited the UK a few years ago he flew in to Sandhurst in an Osprey in presidential colours.

Edited by RizzoTheRat on Wednesday 7th December 12:22

[Boom78]

FourWheelDrift said:

Sikorsky and Boeing’s Defiant X was the other contender.

That looks v cool!! Saying that, so does the tilt rotor winner. Have we got any plans to get onboard with these?

[Evanivitch]

Great choice. The question for the UK is whilst we urgently need to replace the Puma fleet, do we need to be considering this as the long term solution?

RizzoTheRat said:

The interesting bit to me is that it's been chosen as the replacement for Blackhawk and Apache. I've yet to even see a mockup of a gunship version. I can see how the extra speed could be very useful but how maneuverable is it at lower speeds compared to a conventional helicopter?

It's not an Apache replacement as such, as Apache was actually replacing the Kiowa in , but also the Apache will be incapable of keeping up with the speed and range of the V280, so either they arm it or they have to produce another design to go alongside.

[Krikkit]

RizzoTheRat said:

Krikkit said:

I believe they're considering it as a candidate for Marine One in future which says a lot.

I thought it already was, when Trump visited the UK a few years ago he flew in to Sandhurst in an Osprey in presidential colours.

I'm very much behind the times then!

[Evanivitch]

Krikkit said:

RizzoTheRat said:

Krikkit said:

I believe they're considering it as a candidate for Marine One in future which says a lot.

I thought it already was, when Trump visited the UK a few years ago he flew in to Sandhurst in an Osprey in presidential colours.

I'm very much behind the times then!

You're not, a US President has never flown in a V22 Osprey. The V22 Ospreys would have been carrying additional personnel and presidential press pack.

[RizzoTheRat]

I obviously forgot what else came in at the same time. I remember the ospreys making a hell of a racket coming over our office and a couple of apaches circling the area, but a quick google shows pictures of a Backhawk as well

Evanivitch said:

It's not an Apache replacement as such, as Apache was actually replacing the Kiowa in , but also the Apache will be incapable of keeping up with the speed and range of the V280, so either they arm it or they have to produce another design to go alongside.

Kiowa was a light scout wasn't it? Apache was somewhat heavier, and presumably slower, to fill the gap. V-280 will be way faster but it'll be interesting to see how stealthy it can be, the lighter weight will presumably mean it's at least not as loud as Osprey.

[Evanivitch]

RizzoTheRat said:

Kiowa was a light scout wasn't it? Apache was somewhat heavier, and presumably slower, to fill the gap. V-280 will be way faster but it'll be interesting to see how stealthy it can be, the lighter weight will presumably mean it's at least not as loud as Osprey.

A light scout, but then remember the Apache was conceived as an anti-armour vehicle. You wouldn't be flying airborne troops into a fight with armour!

[TGCOTF-dewey]

It's a cool looking thing. Noise is a potential issue though - one of the reasons the littlebirds are so beloved by US SF is how quiet they are in comparison to other helos.

It's all very well being radar stealthy, but for most opps noise is just as important.

[LotusOmega375D]

What happens to the loser in these new aircraft selection competitions? Is it effectively the end of the road, project gets canned and the development costs written-off? Will they try and sell them to other countries or organisations, or is that not allowed? I’m thinking back to the gawky Boeing X32 participant in the Joint Strike Fighter competition.

[TGCOTF-dewey]

A lot of bid and dev costs are recoverable on such projects - otherwise no one would bid.

Defence procurement is bonkers though.

I've had arguments with MoD over a desired cost reduction that cost more than was 'saved' on the contract... And they got less for it becuase it reduced the scope.

But hey, everyone wants a CV builder example

[RizzoTheRat]

Evanivitch said:

A light scout, but then remember the Apache was conceived as an anti-armour vehicle. You wouldn't be flying airborne troops into a fight with armour!

True, it'll be interesting to see what an armed version looks like, but it seems strange they've not shown one already if it's won the competition to do that role.

LotusOmega375D said:

What happens to the loser in these new aircraft selection competitions? Is it effectively the end of the road, project gets canned and the development costs written-off? Will they try and sell them to other countries or organisations, or is that not allowed? I’m thinking back to the gawky Boeing X32 participant in the Joint Strike Fighter competition.

The YF-17 lost out to the F-16 in the lightweight fighter program, but the Navy didn't wasn't a single engine aircraft so eventually bought a modified version of the F-17 and called it the F/A-18. So there might be hope for the Defiant yet if someone doesn't like the idea of a tiltrotor

[wisbech]

Many of you are going "aren't tilt-rotors terrible?" and the answer is "hopefully not anymore, the V-280 learned everything from the V-22 Osprey", including the main fact that It's simpler. The wing doesn't fold over itself like the V-22's does for storage, and the engine doesn't tilt, only the propeller and drive shaft do. The V-22 is also currently the "safest" (or near the top) aircraft in the US aviation fleet (but that's likely because they've put a higher emphasis on training and maintenance due to its earlier problems).

The V-280 is also reportedly faster and longer ranged than the Defiant, and reportedly the transmission of the Defiant was a complicated beast (2 rotors and a pusher).

It's worth noting that the US Army basically fked up helicopter procurement for like 30 years and the US helicopter fleet is really just new models of ancient platforms:

UH-1 Huey, first flew in 1956
H-6, first flew in 1963
AH-1 Cobra, first flew in 1965
H-47 Chinook, first flew in 1961
H-53 Sea Stallion, first flew in 1964
H-60 Blackhawk (various models), first flew in 1974
AH-64 Apache, first flew in 1975
V-22, first flew in 1989
UH-72 Lakota, flew in 1999, but it's not a combat aircraft (mostly off-the-shelf EC145 painted green)
MH-139 Grey Wolf, military derivative of AW139 (because the USAF is SPECIAL and will have their own completely different platform of ~80 aircraft, delayed because it turns out that fully militarizing COTS gear isn't easy this day and age)

After the Blackhawk and Apache (70s-80s), the next helicopter programs were Comanche (canceled 2004), ARH-70 Arapaho (canceled 2008, absolutely amazing fkup of a commercial conversion project), then they tried to upgrade the OH-58D for a bit before binning that entire platform in 2014.

The next competition is for the new scout helicopter to replace the OH-58 (FARA). The Apache and drones are currently filling that role. It'll be another Bell vs Sikorsky fight.

Bell 360 Invictus:



That is totally not a Comanche.
 

Sikorsky Raider-X:




Yup, same basic thing as the Defiant.

From my perspective, I'd go with Bell again. Why? There's no place to mount a sensor turret, meaning they're going with some sort of conformally-mounted things which, well, are harder to make if you want equivalent performance. And, if the entire contra-rotating-with-pusher transmission is just too complicated, then.... it ain't going to win here.

There's also a little bit of "it's Bell's turn". Bell's military arm just finished off the UH-1 production contract, there's no new military helicopters in their pipeline. Sikorsky is building various UH-60 models (and will for decades) and the CH-53K.

Welcome to the "there are 2 competitors in any market space, no more, no less".

[Fabric]

wisbech said:

From my perspective, I'd go with Bell again. Why? There's no place to mount a sensor turret, meaning they're going with some sort of conformally-mounted things which, well, are harder to make if you want equivalent performance.

Regarding this, what's your opinion on Lockheed's integrated PDAS? If they end up choosing it, I think it'll be one of its strong points going forward.

[wisbech]

Eh - it is a solution to the problem for sure, but at greater complexity and cost (which would also apply to the inevitable mid life upgrades) Though this is the US military, so cost & complexity may be in its favour!

[Evanivitch]

wisbech said:

Eh - it is a solution to the problem for sure, but at greater complexity and cost (which would also apply to the inevitable mid life upgrades) Though this is the US military, so cost & complexity may be in its favour!

Their target point is same as Apache and specialist versions of existing Blackhawks.

[Teddy Lop]

wisbech said:

Many of you are going "aren't tilt-rotors terrible?" and the answer is "hopefully not anymore, the V-280 learned everything from the V-22 Osprey", including the main fact that It's simpler. The wing doesn't fold over itself like the V-22's does for storage, and the engine doesn't tilt, only the propeller and drive shaft do. The V-22 is also currently the "safest" (or near the top) aircraft in the US aviation fleet (but that's likely because they've put a higher emphasis on training and maintenance due to its earlier problems).

The V-280 is also reportedly faster and longer ranged than the Defiant, and reportedly the transmission of the Defiant was a complicated beast (2 rotors and a pusher).

It's worth noting that the US Army basically fked up helicopter procurement for like 30 years and the US helicopter fleet is really just new models of ancient platforms:

UH-1 Huey, first flew in 1956
H-6, first flew in 1963
AH-1 Cobra, first flew in 1965
H-47 Chinook, first flew in 1961
H-53 Sea Stallion, first flew in 1964
H-60 Blackhawk (various models), first flew in 1974
AH-64 Apache, first flew in 1975
V-22, first flew in 1989
UH-72 Lakota, flew in 1999, but it's not a combat aircraft (mostly off-the-shelf EC145 painted green)
MH-139 Grey Wolf, military derivative of AW139 (because the USAF is SPECIAL and will have their own completely different platform of ~80 aircraft, delayed because it turns out that fully militarizing COTS gear isn't easy this day and age)

After the Blackhawk and Apache (70s-80s), the next helicopter programs were Comanche (canceled 2004), ARH-70 Arapaho (canceled 2008, absolutely amazing fkup of a commercial conversion project), then they tried to upgrade the OH-58D for a bit before binning that entire platform in 2014.

The next competition is for the new scout helicopter to replace the OH-58 (FARA). The Apache and drones are currently filling that role. It'll be another Bell vs Sikorsky fight.

Bell 360 Invictus:



That is totally not a Comanche.
 

Sikorsky Raider-X:




Yup, same basic thing as the Defiant.

From my perspective, I'd go with Bell again. Why? There's no place to mount a sensor turret, meaning they're going with some sort of conformally-mounted things which, well, are harder to make if you want equivalent performance. And, if the entire contra-rotating-with-pusher transmission is just too complicated, then.... it ain't going to win here.

There's also a little bit of "it's Bell's turn". Bell's military arm just finished off the UH-1 production contract, there's no new military helicopters in their pipeline. Sikorsky is building various UH-60 models (and will for decades) and the CH-53K.

Welcome to the "there are 2 competitors in any market space, no more, no less".

Don't forget the VH-71 kestrel, $billions spent attempting to domestically build otherwise relatively easy to procure merlin helicopters before giving up. But can't have the prez flying in something made by Johnny foreigner right?

[RizzoTheRat]

Teddy Lop said:

Don't forget the VH-71 kestrel, $billions spent attempting to domestically build otherwise relatively easy to procure merlin helicopters before giving up. But can't have the prez flying in something made by Johnny foreigner right?

You could probably argue something similar about the Westland Apache, but I suppose that was partly about keeping up domestic skills which is less of a problem for the US