Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft: Black Hawk Killer?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/future-long-range-assault-aircraft/.
Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft: Black Hawk Killer?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
KillerFord1977
SAINT
As I stated previously. Its a nice platform, but when a shaft or rotor fails, that thing will not autorotate down like a helo. It needs to land like a plane. Engine falure is no big deal. Props can spin on one engine.
If a Shaft or prop take combat damage, then its coming down like an airplane with props forward as it wont have enough power to autorotate down like a helo. Its needs “runway” space.
MV-22 has this issue. Good luck in combat with a shaft or prop combat damage . Ain’t no hard landing autorotate . Might as well be a King Air plane.
If a Shaft or prop take combat damage, then its coming down like an airplane with props forward as it wont have enough power to autorotate down like a helo. Its needs “runway” space.
MV-22 has this issue. Good luck in combat with a shaft or prop combat damage . Ain’t no hard landing autorotate . Might as well be a King Air plane.
Talyn
SAINT
#1 - The US Army will not be flying the V-280 Valor since it's just a tech demonstrator, they will fly the "so-far" unnamed MV-75 ?-name (typically an American Indian tribe).
Note: The U.S. Army has now confirmed to TWZ that the number “75” in the MV-75 designation is a reference to the service’s official founding date, June 14, 1775. On that day, what was then the Continental Congress formally established a Continental Army.
#2 - The MV-75 will resemble the V-280 but the "final" design of the MV-75 is still being finalized. And the performance specs will likely change.
https://www.twz.com/air/mv-75-offic...to-future-u-s-army-tiltrotor-assault-aircraft
#3 - The author states..."It should be obvious, but with all tiltrotors, both engines are slaved to both proprotors. That way, a single engine failure does not result in a state of unsurvivable dissimilar thrust."
Well, the crash incidents with the MV-22 has shown that single engine failures and interlink proprotors didn't help with fatal crashes. While tilt-rotors can auto-rotate, a conventional helicopter can auto-rotate much better in the event of an engine failure since their is no dissimilar lift from the rotors.
The throw in the "Vortex Ring State" condition, that while it also can occur in helicopters, the multiple experiences with the MV-22 tilt-rotor has shown that tilt-rotors are more vulnerable to it in low forward speed/high descent rate conditions resulting in control loss and sudden drop in altitude.
#4 - The author states..."These performance specs would have the V-280 self-deploying from Hawaii to the Philippines in around 20 hours. As it stands now with Black Hawks, that requires either an aircraft carrier or a flock of C17’s."
The max range of the V-280 "demonstrator" is approx. 2,100 nm (2,400 smi; 3,900 km).
The shortest air distance from Hawaii to the Philippines is approx. 5,426 mi. (8,733 km) so until the specs of the MV-75 is proven out it will also need a CV, flock of CV-17s, or at least 1-2 refueling stops at either Wake or some other Micronesian island in between to deploy that distance.
#5 - The author implies that the V-280/MV-75 is more survivable since it could fly above MANPADS threats. Depending on type a MANPADs missile can reach up to ~15,000 ft. altitude. That is well within the treat zone of more capable (longer range) SAMs. And the MV-75 will still have to decend to off-load its payload.
IMO the use of the MV-75 will be guided by the same limitations as conventional helicopters do.
IMO #2 - either the MV-75 or the Sikorsky DB-1 has/had a place in different applications. Selecting both was not an option based on $$.
IMO #3 - The US Army/USMC/USN will still use conventional helicopters for the foreseeable future.
My .02
Note: The U.S. Army has now confirmed to TWZ that the number “75” in the MV-75 designation is a reference to the service’s official founding date, June 14, 1775. On that day, what was then the Continental Congress formally established a Continental Army.
#2 - The MV-75 will resemble the V-280 but the "final" design of the MV-75 is still being finalized. And the performance specs will likely change.
https://www.twz.com/air/mv-75-offic...to-future-u-s-army-tiltrotor-assault-aircraft
#3 - The author states..."It should be obvious, but with all tiltrotors, both engines are slaved to both proprotors. That way, a single engine failure does not result in a state of unsurvivable dissimilar thrust."
Well, the crash incidents with the MV-22 has shown that single engine failures and interlink proprotors didn't help with fatal crashes. While tilt-rotors can auto-rotate, a conventional helicopter can auto-rotate much better in the event of an engine failure since their is no dissimilar lift from the rotors.
The throw in the "Vortex Ring State" condition, that while it also can occur in helicopters, the multiple experiences with the MV-22 tilt-rotor has shown that tilt-rotors are more vulnerable to it in low forward speed/high descent rate conditions resulting in control loss and sudden drop in altitude.
#4 - The author states..."These performance specs would have the V-280 self-deploying from Hawaii to the Philippines in around 20 hours. As it stands now with Black Hawks, that requires either an aircraft carrier or a flock of C17’s."
The max range of the V-280 "demonstrator" is approx. 2,100 nm (2,400 smi; 3,900 km).
The shortest air distance from Hawaii to the Philippines is approx. 5,426 mi. (8,733 km) so until the specs of the MV-75 is proven out it will also need a CV, flock of CV-17s, or at least 1-2 refueling stops at either Wake or some other Micronesian island in between to deploy that distance.
#5 - The author implies that the V-280/MV-75 is more survivable since it could fly above MANPADS threats. Depending on type a MANPADs missile can reach up to ~15,000 ft. altitude. That is well within the treat zone of more capable (longer range) SAMs. And the MV-75 will still have to decend to off-load its payload.
IMO the use of the MV-75 will be guided by the same limitations as conventional helicopters do.
IMO #2 - either the MV-75 or the Sikorsky DB-1 has/had a place in different applications. Selecting both was not an option based on $$.
IMO #3 - The US Army/USMC/USN will still use conventional helicopters for the foreseeable future.
My .02
Talyn
SAINT
Actually, this will give the USAF the chance to dump their problematic CV-22Bs that they use for CSAR.
Cedric
Custom
The Marines had OV-10 Broncos self deploy from the US West Coast across the Pacific, Hawaii, Philippines, etc. to Saudi Arabia during Desert Shield. If you have the stops planned and the logistics many types of aircraft can self deploy. So I don't understand the big deal of the V-280 being able to self deploy except maybe less flight time.
I'm with you. Helos are here for the foreseeable future.
Talyn
SAINT
@Cedric
I bet the hop from the US West Coast to Hawaii was a nail biter. That's a looong way in a relatively small turboprop. I bet each of those were well loaded down with extra fuel in everyway they could think about.
Let's see...
The chart above doesn't account for the capabilitiy for a 300 gal DT on Station 3, the two AIM-9 stations could handle 2 100 gal DTs on the wings, and 150's on Stations 1 & 5.
That should be enough to make it to Hawaii in a long & slow flight after very long take-off run with a stiff head-wind on take-off from NAS North Island, then a good tail-wind the rest of the way.
I saw this nice one at the Hill AFB museum last fall.
And this one at the National USAF Museum in "19".
I looked for the spare keys on the back side of the visors for both but they were missing.
Last edited:
Cedric
Custom
Used to watch these birds at Graf spot for fast movers dropping 500 pounders. They'd use rockets to mark the targets.@Cedric
I bet the hop from the US West Coast to Hawaii was a nail biter. That's a looong way in a relatively small turboprop. I bet each of those were well loaded down with extra fuel in everyway they could think about.
Let's see...
View attachment 83664
The chart above doesn't account for the capabilitiy for a 300 gal DT on Station 3, the two AIM-9 stations could handle 2 100 gal DTs on the wings, and 150's on Stations 1 & 5.
That should be enough to make it to Hawaii in a long & slow flight after very long take-off run with a stiff head-wing on take-off from NAS North Island, thena good tail wind the rest of the way.
I saw this nice one at the Hill AFB museum last fall.
View attachment 83661
And this one at the National USAF Museum in "19".
View attachment 83663
I looked for the spare keys on the back side of the visors for both but they were missing.
Talyn
SAINT
Here you go @Cedric !
Three D+'s (the best model) + more on the drop down.
474 has sold but three are left. If you ask what the price is you might not be able to afford any of them.
Beautiful Bronco's. Looks like they offer a test drive before purchase.
www.ov10squadron.com
www.ov10squadron.com
www.ov10squadron.com
Three D+'s (the best model) + more on the drop down.
474 has sold but three are left. If you ask what the price is you might not be able to afford any of them.
Beautiful Bronco's. Looks like they offer a test drive before purchase.
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155493 – OV-10 Squadron
www.ov10squadron.com
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155453 – OV-10 Squadron
www.ov10squadron.com
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155418 – OV-10 Squadron
www.ov10squadron.com
Cedric
Custom
Nice. At this point the best I could do is offer a pig, a cord of wood and a draft choice to be named later.Here you go @Cedric !
Three D+'s (the best model) + more on the drop down.
474 has sold but three are left. If you ask what the price is you might not be able to afford any of them.
Beautiful Bronco's. Looks like they offer a test drive before purchase.
View attachment 83671
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155493 – OV-10 Squadron
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155453 – OV-10 Squadron
OV-10 BRONCO FOR SALE 155418 – OV-10 Squadron
