Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news

[Randy Daytona]

Well, my guess, and it is a total guess, is that the Corps is going to piggyback off the FVL work done by the army so their new machines can keep up with the V-22. The tech going into the new ships is expensive so probably there will be fewer of them. So, while hovering isn’t going anywhere, we might see the end of skids in the next ten years or so.

I thought in The Commandant’s plan, the Corps was cutting (some but not all skids) because they lacked the range required in the Pacific? Likewise, the Corps got rid of all its tanks and a large portion of tube artillery.

I haven’t seen any version of Bell’s V-280 that can fold for shipboard operations. Doesn’t mean Bell isn’t working on it, but I haven’t seen it.

 

[Hotdogs]

Well, my guess, and it is a total guess, is that the Corps is going to piggyback off the FVL work done by the army so their new machines can keep up with the V-22. The tech going into the new ships is expensive so probably there will be fewer of them. So, while hovering isn’t going anywhere, we might see the end of skids in the next ten years or so.

Not in the current plan.

I thought in The Commandant’s plan, the Corps was cutting (some but not all skids) because they lacked the range required in the Pacific? Likewise, the Corps got rid of all its tanks and a large portion of tube artillery.

I haven’t seen any version of Bell’s V-280 that can fold for shipboard operations. Doesn’t mean Bell isn’t working on it, but I haven’t seen it.

Every Marine Aviation community took cuts with a few exceptions (VMGR, VMU).

What's going on with the USMC skids community? I've heard of cobra/huey guys showing up to their FRS as of late and having their contracts dropped from 8 years to 6. And being told some things that have left them... feeling less than motivated.

That is the first I am hearing about contracts being cut short. Marine Aviation is still hurting for 75XXs on the aggregate right now.

 

[phrogdriver]

I think Japan's situation is pretty unique, and I don't think it is very smart decision on their part but they'll do whatever they do.

Also, one of the lessons to be learned from the Ukraine war is that relying on UAV's is not the way to go in a 'high end' conflict.

Really?

Because a lot of people are taking the lessons to be that manned helicopters are going to be dead meat, so you’d better have more loitering munitions instead.

 

[phrogdriver]

I thought in The Commandant’s plan, the Corps was cutting (some but not all skids) because they lacked the range required in the Pacific? Likewise, the Corps got rid of all its tanks and a large portion of tube artillery.

I haven’t seen any version of Bell’s V-280 that can fold for shipboard operations. Doesn’t mean Bell isn’t working on it, but I haven’t seen it.

Defense contractors build things that have requirements, programs of record, and actual money attached to them.

There is lots of talk, but little actual movement, on Navy and Marine FVL.

The Army is thus far the only service to put money where its mouth is on Future Vertical Lift, so you will see a lot of action on its priorities, and a lot less on those who are just window shopping.

 

[Hotdogs]

Really?

Because a lot of people are taking the lessons to be that manned helicopters are going to be dead meat, so you’d better have more loitering munitions instead.

There have been more fighter-attack aircraft shot down in Ukraine than helicopters. Flying RW the way Ukraine and Russia have been employing them has been absurd.

Loitering munitions are useful based on how you intend to transport them. Their utility as a fires asset has a proportional relationship to their size and employment range. Man packable = on demand effects. Anything else becomes a potential liability in terms of signature and mobility. It’s a tool in the kit, and not a wholesale replacement for air delivered fires.

 

[phrogdriver]

There have been more fighter-attack aircraft shot down in Ukraine than helicopters. Flying RW the way Ukraine and Russia have been employing them has been absurd.

Loitering munitions are useful based on how you intend to transport them. Their utility as a fires asset has a proportional relationship to their size and employment range. Man packable = on demand effects. Anything else becomes a potential liability in terms of signature and mobility. It’s a tool in the kit, and not a wholesale replacement for air delivered fires.

I agree with you.

I was just skeptical of Flash’s idea that the lesson of Ukraine was a sense of skepticism over UAS. If anything, most observers seem to take it a validation of the idea that everyone will use them a lot more.

 

[Flash]

Really?

Because a lot of people are taking the lessons to be that manned helicopters are going to be dead meat, so you’d better have more loitering munitions instead.

I agree with you.

I was just skeptical of Flash’s idea that the lesson of Ukraine was a sense of skepticism over UAS. If anything, most observers seem to take it a validation of the idea that everyone will use them a lot more.

Yes, really. UAV's aren't dead by any means and they still play a significant role in the war but there is good reason you haven't heard a lot about Bayraktars lately.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Defense contractors build things that have requirements, programs of record, and actual money attached to them.

There is lots of talk, but little actual movement, on Navy and Marine FVL.

The Army is thus far the only service to put money where its mouth is on Future Vertical Lift, so you will see a lot of action on its priorities, and a lot less on those who are just window shopping.

• The Army is reducing its buy of production-ready weapons and vehicles by $700m in 2024 so it can afford to develop new ones

 

[phrogdriver]

Yes, really. UAV's are dead by any means and they still play a significant role in the war but there is good reason you haven't heard a lot about Bayraktars lately.

That’s because the Bayraktar is a glorified model airplane.

The US services are tracking towards 40/60 unmanned/manned headed towards 50/50.

 

[Flash]

That’s because the Bayraktar is a glorified model airplane.

The US services are tracking towards 40/60 unmanned/manned headed towards 50/50.

I was using it as an example but the war in Ukraine has not been the friendliest environment for UAV's in general for several reasons, even for us. I think there are plenty of great lessons learned of what works in a higher threat environment than the ones we've faced in the past 3 decades, and a more competent force would be even more challenging.

 

[Ventus]

That’s because the Bayraktar is a glorified model airplane.

The US services are tracking towards 40/60 unmanned/manned headed towards 50/50.

I've seen some videos of people taking commercial and custom made racing drones, the kind people fly through parking garages with super maneuverability, attaching warheads to the underside, and swarming targets so fast it's pretty nuts.

 

[Griz882]

It looks like all of the services are rethinking their vertical lift future. I think the push for increased range is the right direction, but I wonder how long it will take to scale up (or down) to specific capacities such as heavy lift or attack?

Sikorsky spins up to defend HH-60W combat rescue helicopter from planned cuts - Breaking Defense

With possible alternatives still undefined and likely several years away, Sikorsky and supporters are leaning on Congress to rescue the HH-60W from planned cuts. But will the argument win the day?

breakingdefense.com

 

[red_stang65]

It looks like all of the services are rethinking their vertical lift future. I think the push for increased range is the right direction, but I wonder how long it will take to scale up (or down) to specific capacities such as heavy lift or attack?

Sikorsky spins up to defend HH-60W combat rescue helicopter from planned cuts - Breaking Defense

With possible alternatives still undefined and likely several years away, Sikorsky and supporters are leaning on Congress to rescue the HH-60W from planned cuts. But will the argument win the day?

breakingdefense.com

Considering how much time USAF took with this program, I wonder how much longer or how many more dollars they’re willing to spend to get the next right platform for the mission?

On the other hand, I have to wonder what else they’ve (not) considered to improve the survivability of the platform. Reminds me of some other arguments we’ve had on the Navy side.

Payloads over Platforms: Charting a New Course

We can’t afford weapons specific to a certain type of ship or aircraft. Time to move to a modular, one-size-fits-all system.

www.usni.org

Army evaluating first âlaunched effectsâ prototype

A team of five industry players is building the first launched effects prototypes for the Army as the service continues to experiment with the capability.

www.defensenews.com

 

[ChuckMK23]

The scale and inertia of the 60W program is crazy. It's also completely disingenuous of the AF to parrot "oh it was designed around the last war, help!".

I do think the original HH-47F contender for the program looks awfully good in hindsight - fast, long range, survivable, low risk.

Now - let's get some radar and lightweight AAR kits (probes) on Navy Sierras!

 

[ChuckMK23]

Germany!

US clears $8.5 billion Chinook sale to Germany, skis included - Breaking Defense

The Boeing helicopters would come with a laundry list of additional systems, from electronic counter-measures and missile warning systems to skis and life rafts.

breakingdefense.com