It's an advanced Osprey that has learned from it. A Blackhawk class helo that can lift what it can as far and as fast as it can is going to be a game changer in the Pacific especially when deployed from ships.
Keep in mind power will increase by 40% in actual aircraft, speed and capacity as well as range will be better in actual aircraft. Speed should be higher with more lift than in this demo version. Speeds of 400+ mph possible with refinement.
I don't think you will see that great of a speed increase. By the time you add mission equipment which will increase drag, and account for gearbox limitations, I bet the speed doesn't increase much. Just builds in a margin for hot and high performance at max gross weight. The current H60 will not be able to use the 3000 shp provides by itep when it fields
I think one of the big advantage of V280 is not having to wait to be shipped by airforce or navy, it just need air/ground refueling in order to get to the units it serves, lets not forget it also flies like a plane right, but it should not be used for initial air assault missions but would be great for follow on forces, materials and security and evac. The Defiant/Raider looks tailored to have an attack/air assault mission design. 8:24
Faster than the Sikorsky S-97 RAIDER. This concept will probably win the race. The similarity to the V-22 Osprey is only external. In contrast to the Osprey, the V-280 does not tilt the engine nacelles, only the rotors.
It’s a problem though. Apache doesn’t have the range or speed to keep up with the V-280. So if you don’t arm it you severely limit your shiny new air craft.
I don’t see why not. At the beginning the Apache was revolutionary. But this could easily handle those tasks. It’s faster, has more range, more agile. It could easily operate a 30mm and some hellfire missiles on it. Not to mention it will have far better electronics and avionics in it. This was so impressive that the Army cancelled the FARA program. How often do you see that? A troop carrier that had such good results it basically eliminated a need for a new Apache and Kiowa. That should make life much easier for the Army.
@ I do t know about that. Yeah, those are factors but there are many reports the army felt, once armed, the Valor would be more than sufficient to carry out attack missions as well.
@@SeanP7195 The FARA program wasn't ever intended to replace the Apache in its primary role, it was intended to replace smaller helicopters like the OH-58 that had already been retired, forcing the Apache to fill in for the role. That's what was cancelled in favor of small drone development. Bell has offered to make an attack variant of the V-280, but they're also working on similar drones which the military is more likely to be interested in for the role. That would probably be a better, more optimized solution.
Because even the US army is mostly using Metric and has done so for quite some time now.. the US is one of the last countries in the world that uses the imperial system. Which is less accurate and it makes more sense to use the metric since her allies all use metric. Yes even the Brits. It's nice to speak the same language.
Commissioned in the U.S. Army Field Artillery in 1969. Served 24 years never,never used anything but metric system. U.S. Army has been using only the metric system well before I was in it.
Some of the design dimensions were specifically because of lessons learned from the Osprey. Training programs have been changed as well, they would implement similar methods for these as well
@@jmbaka007 The Army is concerned with the deployment range and speed. Tiltrotors offer twice the range and speed conventional helicopters do, and the Bell prototype has a rather good performance record, especially compared to the Sikorsky prototype. I believe a production model prototype will be delivered next year or 2025 for more intensive Army testing.
The issues the Osprey have are the same issues any other helicopter has, people seem to have forgotten that the Blackhawk used to be known as the Crashawk because of its abysmal safety record early in its career, even now the Osprey has a better safety record than the Blackhawk, its just that the Osprey carries more people and thus crashes tend to kill more and thus the media likes to focus on it because "20 killed in crash" is more interesting than "6 killed in crash".
No this is not the best airframe for what WE need. The Raider X is far superior to this fragile toy. Politics ought not play any part in war machine selection.
... you need to do some research then. The Raider is in a completely separate program and is against the Invictus. The Defiant (what the valor was against) had multiple technical issues which even resulted in a crash and 18 months of delays.
Is this a game changer or another failed Boeing Osprey?
Osprey is very successful and is one of the safest aircraft the Navy flies even if fools on the internet say otherwise.
It's an advanced Osprey that has learned from it. A Blackhawk class helo that can lift what it can as far and as fast as it can is going to be a game changer in the Pacific especially when deployed from ships.
@@FJB-187 It only has a 19% larger total footprint. It can already land anywhere they would set a Black Hawk down anyway.
A worse failure than the Boeing Osprey.
And a terminally bad choice.
Especially when compared to the Raider X.
@@MrFritzzz666 you can't even get the name of it's competition right ... Just stop you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Its nice BUT I cant see the 160th SOAR giving up the MH-47?
Keep in mind power will increase by 40% in actual aircraft, speed and capacity as well as range will be better in actual aircraft. Speed should be higher with more lift than in this demo version. Speeds of 400+ mph possible with refinement.
I don't think you will see that great of a speed increase. By the time you add mission equipment which will increase drag, and account for gearbox limitations, I bet the speed doesn't increase much. Just builds in a margin for hot and high performance at max gross weight.
The current H60 will not be able to use the 3000 shp provides by itep when it fields
I think one of the big advantage of V280 is not having to wait to be shipped by airforce or navy, it just need air/ground refueling in order to get to the units it serves, lets not forget it also flies like a plane right, but it should not be used for initial air assault missions but would be great for follow on forces, materials and security and evac. The Defiant/Raider looks tailored to have an attack/air assault mission design. 8:24
It's a work of art just beautiful in everyway. 😮
Great! Lovin' some VTOLs!
Faster than the Sikorsky S-97 RAIDER. This concept will probably win the race. The similarity to the V-22 Osprey is only external. In contrast to the Osprey, the V-280 does not tilt the engine nacelles, only the rotors.
Game changer!
🔥🔥🔥
Its massive propellers alone make it intimidating. Beheading comes to mind
If the valor is anything like Osprey. We’re going to loose lives.
Replace the Apache? Doubt it. Probably compliment it more.
It’s a problem though. Apache doesn’t have the range or speed to keep up with the V-280. So if you don’t arm it you severely limit your shiny new air craft.
I don’t see why not. At the beginning the Apache was revolutionary. But this could easily handle those tasks. It’s faster, has more range, more agile. It could easily operate a 30mm and some hellfire missiles on it. Not to mention it will have far better electronics and avionics in it. This was so impressive that the Army cancelled the FARA program. How often do you see that? A troop carrier that had such good results it basically eliminated a need for a new Apache and Kiowa. That should make life much easier for the Army.
@@SeanP7195 The FARA program was cancelled because of the rise of drones in light attack and reconnaissance roles, not because of the V-280.
@ I do t know about that. Yeah, those are factors but there are many reports the army felt, once armed, the Valor would be more than sufficient to carry out attack missions as well.
@@SeanP7195 The FARA program wasn't ever intended to replace the Apache in its primary role, it was intended to replace smaller helicopters like the OH-58 that had already been retired, forcing the Apache to fill in for the role. That's what was cancelled in favor of small drone development.
Bell has offered to make an attack variant of the V-280, but they're also working on similar drones which the military is more likely to be interested in for the role. That would probably be a better, more optimized solution.
If this is supposed to be a US Army Aircraft, why are all your stated measurements in metric form?
Because even the US army is mostly using Metric and has done so for quite some time now.. the US is one of the last countries in the world that uses the imperial system. Which is less accurate and it makes more sense to use the metric since her allies all use metric. Yes even the Brits. It's nice to speak the same language.
Commissioned in the U.S. Army Field Artillery in 1969. Served 24 years never,never used anything but metric system. U.S. Army has been using only the metric system well before I was in it.
Sorry US Army Aviation for 20 years…fuel was always in pounds, Altitude always in feet (AGL/MSL), granted it’s been 30 years, but still…
Its over 3000 miles from north America to Africa! Definitely alot more than 2800+ kilometers 🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️
Yeah, we'll see how the production aircraft turns out. I think they made the right choice though.
Notorious?? What's up with that?
Too complicated to work reliably.
But what did the military learn from the Osprey? Is it true the Osprey is still having problems?
Some of the design dimensions were specifically because of lessons learned from the Osprey. Training programs have been changed as well, they would implement similar methods for these as well
@@andrewreynolds4949I am still skeptical of this program. I wished they stuck with the traditional.
@@jmbaka007 The Army is concerned with the deployment range and speed. Tiltrotors offer twice the range and speed conventional helicopters do, and the Bell prototype has a rather good performance record, especially compared to the Sikorsky prototype. I believe a production model prototype will be delivered next year or 2025 for more intensive Army testing.
The issues the Osprey have are the same issues any other helicopter has, people seem to have forgotten that the Blackhawk used to be known as the Crashawk because of its abysmal safety record early in its career, even now the Osprey has a better safety record than the Blackhawk, its just that the Osprey carries more people and thus crashes tend to kill more and thus the media likes to focus on it because "20 killed in crash" is more interesting than "6 killed in crash".
Most of what he said was complete BS.
No this is not the best airframe for what WE need.
The Raider X is far superior to this fragile toy.
Politics ought not play any part in war machine selection.
... you need to do some research then. The Raider is in a completely separate program and is against the Invictus.
The Defiant (what the valor was against) had multiple technical issues which even resulted in a crash and 18 months of delays.
So every winner is politically driven? Did the Raider (which was the attack program not this one) not implement any politics?
@@SeanP7195 Talk about a leap.
That and Boeing is building shit.
@@MrFritzzz666 And neither was chosen
@@MrFritzzz666 Are you actually following this or what?