S97 Raider and JMR/FVL program News + Videos
- Thread starter TerraN_EmpirE
- Start date
Bernard
Junior Member
Just a question, Why is this new program needed with all new vehicles for helicopters? I mean we already have extreme battle tested helicopters, that we know work. And they can be upgraded with new avionics, stronger lighter materials, more efficient engines, and we don't have to do much. And at the same time save money doing it. What does this program bring? How do we know it won't turn into the F-35 project, waaay behind schedule and waay behind budget?
Equation
Lieutenant General
Different helicopters for different missions that can also brings in updated technology to meet the demands and challenges in the field of an ever changing world.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The Raider was originally developed as a offering to replace the OH58D Kiowa Warrior that dates to the late 1970s. The FVL demonstrators are aimed towards replacement of the UH60 series which literally just the other day turned 40 years old by the time JMR enters early production H60 series will be in its early 50s. JMR H ironically will be the last yet will replace a design that was developed in the 1960s Chinook.
Most of the worlds rotary wing platforms are old or based on technologies for the 1970s at best. They have been updated from time to time but there are limitations inherent to the conventional configuration helicopter such as speed and efficiency of acceleration and range that make helicopters slow and short legged compared to conventional fixed wing.
Adding to this was the revelation of Afghanistan. Operations in the GWOT in Pakistan and Afghanistan in and around the Hindu Kush mountain range pushed many Helicopters beyond there operational limits there ability to carry personal, cargo and weapons was hampered by the high altitude and thin air.
FVL calls.for a much higher Hot and high altitude rating meaning that it could operate at the highest altitudes on earth with out a problem.
In Iraq and Afghanistan a issue was speed of reaction pop up attacks or IEDs had troops on the ground bleeding fast. The faster evacuation of casualties and arrival at medical treatment the better the survival rates. The Quicker the QRF the more effective they are.
In the pacific and gulf a new issue has developed access denial. Helicopters short range means that if the USMC and Us army needed to operate in that region but the adversary forces had long range anti ship missiles conventional helicopters used for vertical assault would be useless as there range would place there mother ship in the firing ranges of systems like the DF21D, FVL and V22 have longer ranges meaning that there mother ship could stand off as the aircraft advance.
Altitude, speed, range and then we add utility. JMR requirements demand heavier cargo ratings then existing fleet of similar class. More troops more weapons per unit.
Now that said your final question what is there to prevent massive cost overruns? Well that's a tough one. Here's what I can say Raider the one seen flying yesterday was built using company funds by Sikorsky not a dime of Tax payers money. This means they have to be efficient.
Rotary wing aircraft on the whole tend to be cheaper than fighters as there high performance demands higher prices.
Sikorsky Boeing hope to use Raider as a road map for the FVL demonstrator Defiant that would be the basis of their offerings to replace Apache and Blackhawk so they seem to be aiming based on lots of proven and evolutionary process based development.
I expect that the most likely to be suffering from overruns will be the larger sizes of JMR and more complex versions so the Attack, Heavy (which would likely demand a new tilt rotor) and Ultra (a 30 ton capacity tilt rotor) but as these would be different vehicles under the JMR directory its not likely in my view that the whole thing would be scrapped in total rather that more troubled parts reorganized.
Most of the worlds rotary wing platforms are old or based on technologies for the 1970s at best. They have been updated from time to time but there are limitations inherent to the conventional configuration helicopter such as speed and efficiency of acceleration and range that make helicopters slow and short legged compared to conventional fixed wing.
Adding to this was the revelation of Afghanistan. Operations in the GWOT in Pakistan and Afghanistan in and around the Hindu Kush mountain range pushed many Helicopters beyond there operational limits there ability to carry personal, cargo and weapons was hampered by the high altitude and thin air.
FVL calls.for a much higher Hot and high altitude rating meaning that it could operate at the highest altitudes on earth with out a problem.
In Iraq and Afghanistan a issue was speed of reaction pop up attacks or IEDs had troops on the ground bleeding fast. The faster evacuation of casualties and arrival at medical treatment the better the survival rates. The Quicker the QRF the more effective they are.
In the pacific and gulf a new issue has developed access denial. Helicopters short range means that if the USMC and Us army needed to operate in that region but the adversary forces had long range anti ship missiles conventional helicopters used for vertical assault would be useless as there range would place there mother ship in the firing ranges of systems like the DF21D, FVL and V22 have longer ranges meaning that there mother ship could stand off as the aircraft advance.
Altitude, speed, range and then we add utility. JMR requirements demand heavier cargo ratings then existing fleet of similar class. More troops more weapons per unit.
Now that said your final question what is there to prevent massive cost overruns? Well that's a tough one. Here's what I can say Raider the one seen flying yesterday was built using company funds by Sikorsky not a dime of Tax payers money. This means they have to be efficient.
Rotary wing aircraft on the whole tend to be cheaper than fighters as there high performance demands higher prices.
Sikorsky Boeing hope to use Raider as a road map for the FVL demonstrator Defiant that would be the basis of their offerings to replace Apache and Blackhawk so they seem to be aiming based on lots of proven and evolutionary process based development.
I expect that the most likely to be suffering from overruns will be the larger sizes of JMR and more complex versions so the Attack, Heavy (which would likely demand a new tilt rotor) and Ultra (a 30 ton capacity tilt rotor) but as these would be different vehicles under the JMR directory its not likely in my view that the whole thing would be scrapped in total rather that more troubled parts reorganized.
Black Shark
Junior Member
Like all weapon plattforms, modifications are just an enhancement that extends the use and time span of the weapon plattforms effeciency, but each plattform was designed under specific requirements as an example you can fit new engines to an Apache but you will never be able to make it faster to the requirements a co-axial system like S-97 can achieve of course that is not an entirely perfect comperision, but the overall limitations by plattforms are obvious. You can fit all new stuff to existing plattforms but sooner or later you expire the entire plattforms capabilities that won't cut your new set of requirements. Technology moves on and modifications are just a low cost solution for extending combat performance without designing every 10 years a complete new weapons plattform which would screw up each countries budgets.
Haven't been uptodate on S-97 announcements but if they are going to use S-97 with optimizations as a replacement for AH-64 like it is right now it will end up like replacement of A-10 with F-35. The concept is useful the plattform is not suitable for combat use like we see it right now, so there will either be a new plattform with same concept of co-axial compound scheme but with newly designed specifications and weight and aerodynamic balance to fit all the new armor, weapons, targeting systems, sensors and avionics to make it an AH or it would be unfavorable remain a F-35, but i kind off doubt it. The former is more likely and the will need to change the rigid rotor to a flexible rotor otherwise they sacrifice maneuverability or the concept will be speed and sacrifice over maneuverability.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Raider as is, was designed as a replacment for the MH6 and OH58D as a scout or special ops light transport. The Dedicated attack platform of the family aimed to replace AH64E would be based on Defiant the medium lifter down the line.
US doctrine differs in this from Russian. Where the Russians Built there scout form a Dedicated Antitank Chopper the US tends to build it's Scouts from light utility platforms. This resuilts in very different weapons loads with raider only intended for 2 hard points where KA52 has 6+ a fixed 30mm gun. The Advantage is for the US that by building our Scouts from utility platforms you can still carry troops like Special ops for medevac or rescue of downed flight crew or light cargo to the troops.
The Advantage for the Russians in there method is raw fire power
As to the Eventual attacker there will likely be some F35 Tech in it probably Avionics, It's automotive systems Rotors Engines and more will likely be common to defiant meaning that if the Defiant has ridged then so will the attacker.
US doctrine differs in this from Russian. Where the Russians Built there scout form a Dedicated Antitank Chopper the US tends to build it's Scouts from light utility platforms. This resuilts in very different weapons loads with raider only intended for 2 hard points where KA52 has 6+ a fixed 30mm gun. The Advantage is for the US that by building our Scouts from utility platforms you can still carry troops like Special ops for medevac or rescue of downed flight crew or light cargo to the troops.
The Advantage for the Russians in there method is raw fire power
As to the Eventual attacker there will likely be some F35 Tech in it probably Avionics, It's automotive systems Rotors Engines and more will likely be common to defiant meaning that if the Defiant has ridged then so will the attacker.
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Sikorsky Conducts First Flight Of S-97 Helo
May 22, 2015 | Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
S-97: Sikorsky
flew its S-97 Raider rigid coaxial-rotor, high-speed helicopter for the first time May 22, completing a hover and low-speed flight at the company’s development flight center in West Palm Beach, Florida.
The aircraft is the first of two prototypes of the Raider light tactical helicopter being built under a $200 million industry effort funded by Sikorsky and its supplier partners. This follows the $50 million company-funded X2 Technology Demonstrator, which flew 23 times from 2008-11.
The Raider flew for 1 hr. instead of the 30 min. planned, says Mark Miller, vice president of research and engineering. It completed three takeoffs and landings: forward, rearward and sideward. The aircraft was flown by Raider chief pilot Bill Fell, with X2 test pilot Kevin Bredenbeck as co-pilot.
Rolled out Oct. 2, the first Raider had completed 36 hr. of shakedown ground runs since February. This culminated in an untethered ground run on May 20, clearing the aircraft for flight.
All 97 points on the “aggressive” first-flight test card were completed, including piloted frequency sweeps in all axes, something normally considered too risky for a first flight, Fell says.
The X2 demonstrator last flew in July 2011, having exceeded 250 kt., and Bredenbeck says the flight of the production-representative Raider “picked up … like the X2 program never ended.”
For this initial flight, the Raider was flown with its triplex fly-by-wire flight control system in backup degraded mode so as to focus on basic airworthiness in the low-speed regime, Fell says.
Over about 100 hr. of flight testing, aircraft 1 will expand the Raider’s flight envelope with the goal of achieving the program’s key performance parameters (KPP) by mid-2016, Miller says. These include demonstrating hover out of ground effect at mission weight at 6,000 ft. altitude on a 95F day (6k/95); 220 kt. cruise speed with external weapons; and 3G maneuverability at speed.
Flight testing will be conducted in three phases involving two blocks of flight-control software, Program Manager Mark Hammond says. For initial flights with Block 1 software, the Raider will fly in traditional helicopter mode without the propulsor engaged.
The Raider will be flown to 140-150 kt. in pure helicopter mode, Miller says. Toward the end of Phase 1, software will be upgraded to Block 2, bringing in the propulsor and articulating tail to increase speed and enable the full flight envelope.
Phases 1 and 2 will demo the hover KPP carrying the equivalent of six troops and two crewmembers as well as an endurance objective. Phase 2 will focus on demonstrating – and likely exceeding – the speed objective. “Raider is a balanced design optimized for more than 220 kt. fully weaponized, but the inherent speed of the configuration is more than 250 kt.,” Miller says. “That’s 100 kt. faster than anything else.”
Phase 3 will demo the maneuverability potential of the rigid coaxial rotor and propulsor. In addition to enabling level-attitude acceleration and deceleration and pushing the helicopter to higher forward speeds, the variable-pitch propeller can be used to produce reverse thrust, enabling the Raider to “hang on the prop” to point sensors and weapons toward the ground.
The second Raider is being assembled and is expected to fly late this year or in early 2016. Where aircraft 1 is heavily instrumented for envelope expansion and will remain at West Palm Beach, aircraft 2 is intended for customer demonstrations and, after an initial 50 hr. of flight testing, will be released to conduct demo tours to other locations. Aircraft 1 will be a backup.
The formal program will end once the KPPs have been accomplished, but the customer demonstrations will be open ended, Miller says. Sikorsky is in discussions with industry partners and potential customers about fitting specific sensors and weapons to aircraft 2 for demos in operational scenarios.
When Sikorsky launched the Raider program, it was aiming at the U.S. Army’s Armed Aerial Scout (AAS) requirement. This has since been shelved, with AH-64 Apache attack helicopters being used as armed scouts to replace the Army’s Bell OH-58D Kiowa Warriors, which are being retired.
Current Army plans call for a new Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Light armed scout sometime after 2030. But Sikorsky’s goal in demonstrating the operational effectiveness of the Raider using production-representative prototypes is to persuade the Army to revisit AAS or pull FVL Light forward.
While the X2 had a gross weight of 6,000 lb., the Raider weighs around 11,000 lb. and, Miller says, is also serving as a risk reducer for the 30,000-lb.-class SB-1 Defiant being built by Sikorsky and Boeing for the Army’s Joint Multi Role technology demonstation, a precursor to the FVL Medium program.
so early flight tests will prove the coaxial, then it will move to the high speed.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Your reasoning is one of the primary reasons why the Comanche was cancelled. The powers to be decided that the apaches were good enough and even though billions were already spent of the rah66, and advanced flight testing was already underway it still got the axed.
The threat matrix and future forcast was considered acceptable and can be achieved with the apaches. Someone the development dollars were diverted into the existing design which culminated in the Longbow apaches.
As much as I like the Comanches, I think that from a standpoint of fiscal responsibility the right decision was made. The 64 Echo is peerless and without a doubt the most capable attack Helo in the world.
The stealth characteristics of the Comanche would've been of little advantage considering the type of asymmetrical wars we've been fighting in the last 10 years etc.