• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Sikorsky S-97 Raider Ground Tests Today

phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
Hotdogs said:
Those issues with the combination of having to process multiple sources of data, make a judgement based decision, and then apply it to an aircraft to put it at a place in time and space to have a certain effect on a battlespace is something that requires a pilot in the loop. Anything less will require a signal, and those can be interfered with in many different ways. So yeah, if you’re saying that a fully autonomous A.I. Attack aircraft will be dropping close to any battalion in the near future, I have serious doubts about the validity of that. To the best of my knowledge we’re not even planning for it.
Click to expand...

Now that you're saying "near future," I can't disagree, though I suppose we could go back and forth over the definition of "near." It was the "ever" part I wondered about, because people will eventually completely disappear from cockpits, except for rich hobbyists who own and fly relics for their personal amusement. The only question is when.
 
IKE

IKE

Nerd Whirler
pilot
phrogdriver said:
Now that you're saying "near future," I can't disagree, though I suppose we could go back and forth over the definition of "near." It was the "ever" part I wondered about, because people will eventually completely disappear from cockpits, except for rich hobbyists who own and fly relics for their personal amusement. The only question is when.
Click to expand...
You really think people will want to board passenger jets or admirals will want to board helicopters where there's no human pilot in the cockpit whose skin is also in the game?
 
phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
IKE said:
You really think people will want to board passenger jets or admirals will want to board helicopters where there's no human pilot in the cockpit whose skin is also in the game?[/
Click to expand...
IKE said:
You really think people will want to board passenger jets or admirals will want to board helicopters where there's no human pilot in the cockpit whose skin is also in the game?
Click to expand...

100 years ago people wouldn’t imagine getting into an elevator without someone operating it.

This is not a guess. Within 10 years, probably 5, people will be getting into fully autonomous rotorcraft and getting rides from rooftop to rooftop in cities.

It won’t be long after that that cargo and then people will ride in autonomous jets.

A combat LZ or CAS have a few more unpredictable scenarios involved, so they’ll take longer. But it will happen. Perhaps not the same way we do assaults today, but it’s coming.

Absolutely.
 
IKE

IKE

Nerd Whirler
pilot
phrogdriver said:
100 years ago people wouldn’t imagine getting into an elevator without someone operating it.

This is not a guess. Within 10 years, probably 5, people will be getting into fully autonomous rotorcraft and getting rides from rooftop to rooftop in cities.

It won’t be long after that that cargo and then people will ride in autonomous jets.

A combat LZ or CAS have a few more unpredictable scenarios involved, so they’ll take longer. But it will happen. Perhaps not the same way we do assaults today, but it’s coming.

Absolutely.
Click to expand...
When elevators break, they brake. They also can't have midairs and don't have to ensure the ground floor is clear before landing, etc. I think air passengers will want a conscious, judgment-executing pilot for at least a few more decades.
 
TexasForever

TexasForever

Well-Known Member
pilot
I'm confident unpiloted pax transport is coming in the next 10-15 years. It will come about the time people get comfortable with driver-less cars and start getting uncomfortable with manned cars. I'm also confident that the armed services will be about 30-40 years behind the commercial world so I've got solid job security.
 
Gatordev

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
The part of the original question earlier for FVL was ASW. Link can be more robust, but GPS is not. Can you make an autonomous platform? Probably, although at this point I don't believe it would be better than a human. But for argument's sake, let's say it's as good. That doesn't help if the ASW platform and/or the sensors don't know where they are in relation to each other and reality. A human has the ability to overcome that while still retaining very good weapon accuracy (assuming acoustic technology keeps up with target acoustic technology). That's the weak link with UAS ASW right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IKE
wink

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
So, I read here the debate, tilrotor vs helicopter with mention of coaxial designs and the compound pushers to come. What about the intermeshing design of the old H-43 and the current K-Max? I suspect they have the same speed limitations as conventional helicopters due to blade tip speeds. What about gross weight, noise and maneuverability? I have never heard an intermeshing rotor helo fly over. Does the lack of tail rotor help quiet it? I'd guess it can side flare what about the rest of the envelope? I suspect that since we don't see them any more, there is a reason for it. But with new technologies and materials, is it worth another look?
kaman_huskie_1.jpg
 
Treetop Flyer

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
Pags said:
So I'll ask a crazy question and then be accused of being too revolutionary...but does the FVL aircraft that the Navy gets actually need to be a dipper? Would be interesting if someone proposed a solution that included manned/unmanned teaming whereby the manned aircraft acts as more a C2 node and the dipping is done by UAVs that then send the data back to the manned aircraft. Then it doesn't matter what the FVL aircraft's hover performance is, in fact then you'd want it to have a long loiter time to match that of a UAV. I imagine FVL will become more than just another helicopter that replicates the, by the time FVL is tested/fielded, 30+yr old 60R capabilities.
Click to expand...
I don’t know jack about ASW, but wouldn’t it be the other way around? One of the biggest advantages of a UAS is loiter time. If you want a communications node that can stay up for days, that’s got UAS written all over it.
 
phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
wink said:
So, I read here the debate, tilrotor vs helicopter with mention of coaxial designs and the compound pushers to come. What about the intermeshing design of the old H-43 and the current K-Max? I suspect they have the same speed limitations as conventional helicopters due to blade tip speeds. What about gross weight, noise and maneuverability? I have never heard an intermeshing rotor helo fly over. Does the lack of tail rotor help quiet it? I'd guess it can side flare what about the rest of the envelope? I suspect that since we don't see them any more, there is a reason for it. But with new technologies and materials, is it worth another look?
View attachment 20071
Click to expand...
I've seen the K-Max work. It did seem quieter than most, but not exceptionally so. The reason intermeshing is used in the K-Max is because it gets rid of the the tail rotor and the accompanying loss of power and wind effects that go with tail rotors. It also doesn't require the huge fuselage that a tandem rotor aircraft like the CH-47 has to have to do the same.

The K-Max is not a fast helicopter itself, and I don't think that intermeshing systems of that type would work well at the higher speeds we're talking about for FVL. The S-97 slows the blades and lowers the pitch to reduce blade stall and compressibility effects, but they're still there--that's part why the rotors are stacked, so it's happening symmetrically and doesn't cause extreme roll moments. An intermeshing design wouldn't accomplish that.
 
Randy Daytona

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
IKE

IKE

Nerd Whirler
pilot
The Raider is too small to carry all the missions systems, and the Defiant is too big to fit on CRUDES ships. If Sikorsky is working on something to replace the Romeo, it'll have to be somewhere in between.
 
phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
The aircraft collided with itself.

If your aircraft ends up in multiple pieces, it’s not a “hard landing,” it’s a crash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top