V-280 wins FLRAA competition

[ClearedHot]

On 12/7/2022 at 12:42 AM, disgruntledemployee said:

Like maybe steer clear of composite airframes?  I hear they don't handle bullets very well.  Just ask Rooster 73, 74, and 75.

Disagree...mainly because I was there.  What other aircraft would continue to fly after taking well over a hundred 7.62 X 39 hits?  ALL three aircraft took many hits and ALL three aircraft made it to Entebbe.  Oh and ALL three flew again.

On 12/6/2022 at 11:14 PM, Lawman said:

You guys are missing the most important win for the Army with this procurement….

In picking an aircraft like the V-22 we game the system on how it’s hours count to getting an airline job, substantially solving the man power problem we are facing with the current loss of personnel to RTP.

Winning….

On 12/7/2022 at 6:28 AM, ThreeHoler said:

I can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not. Tilt rotor time counts toward ATP mins since 21 Oct 22.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/09/21/2022-20328/recognition-of-pilot-in-command-experience-in-the-military-and-air-carrier-operations

 

 

Think about it this way, a whole lot of Warrant Officers are suddenly going to have a lot of hours towards an ATP...

[Lawman]

Think about it this way, a whole lot of Warrant Officers are suddenly going to have a lot of hours towards an ATP...

Don’t think we don’t have a “solution” for that at HRC…

We surveyed 100 people… top answers on the board. What is the way Army leadership will address the critical manpower shortage in aviation…

“14 year ADSO!”

Survey Says!….



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[busdriver]

On 12/7/2022 at 7:04 PM, ClearedHot said:

What other aircraft would continue to fly after taking well over a hundred 7.62 X 39 hits?  

Ballistic tolerance to 7.62 is built in to modern military helicopter designs (at least UH-60 and AH-64), and the skin material has nothing to do with it.

Fixing a composite structure isn't super hard, just different and requires different tools.  People have been building composite planes in their garages since the 70s.

Nerd Stuff:

Everything VTOL has severe weight penalties to performance, so whether aluminum or composite the skin is very thin and provides no ballistic tolerance benefit. Armor plating inside is more about keeping rounds from hitting occupants than protecting the airframe. 

Instead, the components themselves are designed to be damage tolerant (keep functioning after taking a round), systems are redundant, and less critical systems are used to shield more critical systems.

 

[uhhello]

On 12/6/2022 at 11:42 PM, disgruntledemployee said:

Like maybe steer clear of composite airframes?  I hear they don't handle bullets very well.  Just ask Rooster 73, 74, and 75.

Point me to something that is a better option?  Better would have to be able to suck up the amount of rounds they took, land, load up, and then fly away again.  

[ClearedHot]

29 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Ballistic tolerance to 7.62 is built in to modern military helicopter designs (at least UH-60 and AH-64), and the skin material has nothing to do with it.

I am not Weapons School Savvy on CV-22 design, 7.62 X 39 perhaps, not so sure about 7.62 X 54.  For the group this was not simply AK-47s, this was heavier 7.62 X 54 coming our of a PKM with a much higher velocity and mass.

9 minutes ago, uhhello said:

Point me to something that is a better option?  Better would have to be able to suck up the amount of rounds they took, land, load up, and then fly away again.  

I seriously doubt any current USAF helicopter would have been able to sustain 100+ PKM hits like we did, land, load up, and then fly away again.

[uhhello]

14 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

I am not Weapons School Savvy on CV-22 design, 7.62 X 39 perhaps, not so sure about 7.62 X 54.  For the group this was not simply AK-47s, this was heavier 7.62 X 54 coming our of a PKM with a much higher velocity and mass.

I seriously doubt any current USAF helicopter would have been able to sustain 100+ PKM hits like we did, land, load up, and then fly away again.

There isn't anything out there that's "better".  Its all shot placement.  Could have been one round to take one down or the hundreds to skin (aircraft) and non critical components.  CV was the only thing that would have accomplished the objectives as the mission required though. 

Edited December 8, 2022 by uhhello

[ClearedHot]

3 minutes ago, uhhello said:

 CV was the only thing that would have accomplished the objectives as the mission required though. 

Very true, especially in Africa.  The tyranny of distance is a real thing, INDOPACOM is even worse.

[uhhello]

6 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Very true, especially in Africa.  The tyranny of distance is a real thing, INDOPACOM is even worse.

Trapani deployment was a trip for us.  On the hook for certain stuff on the continent but a minimum of 6+ hours away IF everything logistics wise works.  CV will win out if it can show up in most situtations now days.  

[Clark Griswold]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/a-reality-check-on-the-army-picking-v-280-valor-over-sb1-defiant

Worth a read


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DirkDiggler]

12 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/a-reality-check-on-the-army-picking-v-280-valor-over-sb1-defiant

Worth a read


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good read, thanks for posting.

[ClearedHot]

This is why we can't have nice things.  Billions and BILLIONS wasted on this program that the Army has now decided to cancel.  While the Army spent $6B, industry spent 3X that chasing the program.  Most of you have these defense companies in your 401K so you get a double kick in the nuts as both a tax payer and investor.  And as is normal, no one will be fired or held accountable.  Disgusting waste.

US Army spent billions on a new helicopter that now will never fly

[M2]

On 12/8/2022 at 11:08 AM, uhhello said:

Point me to something that is a better option?  Better would have to be able to suck up the amount of rounds they took, land, load up, and then fly away again.  

Survivorship Bias

During World War II, the statistician Abraham Wald took survivorship bias into his calculations when considering how to minimize bomber losses to enemy fire.^[18] The Statistical Research Group (SRG) at Columbia University, which Wald was a part of, examined the damage done to aircraft that had returned from missions and recommended adding armor to the areas that showed the least damage.^[19][20][21] The bullet holes in the returning aircraft represented areas where a bomber could take damage and still fly well enough to return safely to base. Therefore, Wald proposed that the Navy reinforce areas where the returning aircraft were unscathed,^[18]: 88 inferring that planes hit in those areas were the ones most likely to be lost. His work is considered seminal in the then nascent discipline of operational research.^[22]

[Lawman]

This is why we can't have nice things.  Billions and BILLIONS wasted on this program that the Army has now decided to cancel.  While the Army spent $6B, industry spent 3X that chasing the program.  Most of you have these defense companies in your 401K so you get a double kick in the nuts as both a tax payer and investor.  And as is normal, no one will be fired or held accountable.  Disgusting waste.
US Army spent billions on a new helicopter that now will never fly

What?




I can’t hear you over the sound of all this burning contract money and the 1/3 of Chinook fleet life we bled moving cargo/people we couldn’t get transported.

FARA was always the Army’s lowest aviation priority, and the Victor is a disaster so thank god that’s gone.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Stoker]

I don't really understand how a program that could effectively be "take a commercial helicopter and strap guns, bombs, and sensors to it" could cost $2 billion in development.

[Biff_T]

17 hours ago, Stoker said:

I don't really understand how a program that could effectively be "take a commercial helicopter and strap guns, bombs, and sensors to it" could cost $2 billion in development.

They wanted a "fast" helicopter.  That's how. 

[Clark Griswold]

Decent little article on the subject

https://www.twz.com/air/cancelling-the-future-attack-recon-helicopter-was-the-right-move
 

Edited February 10 by Clark Griswold

[Clark Griswold]

22 hours ago, Lawman said:

What?




I can’t hear you over the sound of all this burning contract money and the 1/3 of Chinook fleet life we bled moving cargo/people we couldn’t get transported.

FARA was always the Army’s lowest aviation priority, and the Victor is a disaster so thank god that’s gone.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

so true

[Lawman]

Decent little article on the subject
https://www.twz.com/air/cancelling-the-future-attack-recon-helicopter-was-the-right-move
 

That article has a lot of misdiagnoses of the situation being quoted as gospel.

The Army isn’t stacking on 100-150 knots to increase protection, it’s doing so to provide the capability of traversing greater distance in a convergence of enablers. That’s necessary to push out effectively from sanctuary of Air Defense and ground security.

Showing video of Russians being dumb as a way to justify getting rid of the RW part of multi domain disintegration of the IADS is because you won’t find the opposite argument plastered across Reddit. Anybody that thinks Helicopters have no part in going offensive in the IADS should probably let the Israelis know… they seem confused by that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

That article has a lot of misdiagnoses of the situation being quoted as gospel.

The Army isn’t stacking on 100-150 knots to increase protection, it’s doing so to provide the capability of traversing greater distance in a convergence of enablers. That’s necessary to push out effectively from sanctuary of Air Defense and ground security.

Showing video of Russians being dumb as a way to justify getting rid of the RW part of multi domain disintegration of the IADS is because you won’t find the opposite argument plastered across Reddit. Anybody that thinks Helicopters have no part in going offensive in the IADS should probably let the Israelis know… they seem confused by that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt, I see the cancellation as a resources saving issue not necessarily as a recon scout helo is not needed/viable issue

[Lawman]

No doubt, I see the cancellation as a resources saving issue not necessarily as a recon scout helo is not needed/viable issue

Same was true of Comanche.

That thing was an albatross around the neck of wider more critical acquisitions (even if it had worked).

Killing it paid for the Army to make the fleet entirely D model Apache, put MTADS across said fleet, and upgrade the Chinook fleet to Fox model which was miles more critical in the GWOT fight than a stealth Kiowa prone to damage maintained by guys putting blade paint on the skin because “black equals stealth.”

As much as we wanted it all, FARA was the long sell for the Army. I’m already getting talks from ATIC guys asking for 64F concepts they want to compile for the next senior leaders discussion. Suddenly the end of the railroad track for going beyond Version 6 or 8 no longer seems like a hard stop. Sky is the limit… well… 17.5k is the limit probably, but that’s still Sky.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[busdriver]

16 hours ago, Lawman said:

That article has a lot of misdiagnoses of the situation being quoted as gospel.

That dude is a very enthusiastic aviation nerd, but ignorant.  He's fundamentally a technologist/journalist in the same vein as the folks who write for a website like ars technica.  

Gell-Mann amnesia and all.....

[Lawman]

That dude is a very enthusiastic aviation nerd, but ignorant.  He's fundamentally a technologist/journalist in the same vein as the folks who write for a website like ars technica.  
Gell-Mann amnesia and all.....

Yeah looking through his archives it reads like he’s got access to trade shows and shiny sales sheets from Raytheon but no actual institutional knowledge.

Anybody calling the 64E the Guardian is either a direct employee for Boeing or hasn’t ever actually worked on the thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk