US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

most recent on the FVL:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


ARLINGTON: And then there were five. There were already going to be four different aircraft in the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(FVL) family, from light to medium to heavy to “ultra.”

Now it’s almost certain that the medium FVL will be split into two separate versions: a smaller attack/reconnaissance aircraft and a larger troop-carrying assault craft. What’s more, the Army’s aviation chief said today, they might even end up using entirely different forms of propulsion, for example with one being a tiltrotor (like the V-22 Osprey) and the other being a “compound” helicopter with a pusher propeller and coaxial blades (like the Sikorsky X2).

“Really, the medium category is going to be two aircraft with two capability sets,” Maj. Gen. Michael Lundy, commanding general of the Aviation Center of Excellence at Fort Rucker told an Association of the United States Army aviation symposium. The logic of splitting the medium lift category into different aircraft will be discussed Friday at a meeting of an FVL executive steering group that includes officers from all the armed services, Lundy added.

“We’re going to talk about where we’re heading,” Lundy said, emphasizing that no decisions are being made at this stage: Much will depend on the results of flight tests in 2017 and 2018 of technology demonstrator aircraft being developed by Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. — the tiltrotor — and a team of Boeing Company and Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. — the coaxial rotors — under the Joint Multirole (JMR) program. An industry official, however, said the Army briefed Bell and the Boeing/Sikorsky team earlier this week on the fact that service leaders think the attack and assault versions of the medium-lift FVL will need to be two different aircraft.

The JMR is one of the first concrete steps in the long-range FVL initiative, which aims to develop new, far faster and more agile vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft for all the services in four different sizes: light, medium, heavy and ultra.

The initial requirements for the JMR Technology Demonstrator (JMR-TD) call for attack and utility versions of an aircraft that weighs about 30,000 pounds at takeoff, can fly faster than 230 knots (about 265 miles per hour), can carry as many as 12 troops about 230 miles in the utility version and then loiter for half an hour before returning to base without refueling.

Bell, which builds the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
troop transport for the Marine Corps and Air Force in partnership with Boeing, is offering a new, smaller tiltrotor called the V-280 Valor. Sikorsky and Boeing are developing a compound helicopter with a coaxial rotor and a pusher propeller to provide more speed than a conventional helicopter can manage. Their aircraft, the SB>1 Defiant, is based on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
high speed technology demonstrator and a derivative S-97 the company developed for an armed aerial scout helicopter program the Army has put on hold because budget cuts.

“We’re not going to release a requirements document tomorrow,” Lundy told the AUSA symposium, referring to more specific requirements each service will help develop. “We need to see how mature the technology is and what’s in the realm of the possible. We’re not going to develop ‘unobtainium.’”

In a quick interview with BreakingDefense.com after his remarks, Lundy said that while no decisions are being made yet, it’s clear that the attack aircraft and the assault aircraft need to be sized differently, just as the Army’s current AH-64 Apache attack helicopters and its UH-60 Black Hawk troop carriers are. Other services may also need their own FVL medium variants, he ventured.

“We’re probably not going to have one aircraft that’s going to be able to do all the missions in the medium category,” Lundy said. “I’ve got an attack variant and I’ve got an assault variant. Based on what I see out of JMR-TD, one airplane may not be able to do those, and we’re not going to build a sub-optimized aircraft. If we’ve got to have two different aircraft, we’re going to have two different aircraft.”

FVL is a joint program aiming at producing common aircraft for all the services, as was mandated for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, to provide savings through using common parts and equipment.

“Commonality’s going to be in the cockpit, it’s going to be in the drive trains, things like that,” Lundy said, offering the analogy of the AH-1 Cobra attack helicopter and the UH-1 Huey utility helicopter, both made by Bell with many common parts. “They’re differently configured but have a lot of commonality,” Lundy said. “That’s really where we’re going.”

At the same time, he added, “I need to see where JMR-TD goes. It might be that one technology is really good for a smaller aircraft and another technology is better for a larger aircraft. We can’t shrink the size of troops, so we’re going to move a squad inside of the assault variant, so it’s got to be able to move 11 soldiers.” What’s more, he said, “The attack/recon aircraft does not need to be as big as the assault aircraft. The bigger they are the more expensive they are. The bigger they are, the less stealthy they are. But you can only make a squad so small. So we know that the assault aircraft is going to be sized by that. The attack aircraft is sized by speed, range and the payload of the weapons systems.”

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I have said since day one, JMR will likely result in S97 for the light scout,
SB-1 Defiant for the JMR-M and a attack derivative,
the Marines/Navy/Air Force upgrading Osprey with V280's technologies,
a Quad-tiltrotor based on the same V280 Osprey tech scaled bigger then Chinook for the Army's JMR Heavy and perhaps eventually replacing the Marines CH53K

The one that I still have trouble with is the ULTRA class. It would be a A400 class lifter Boeing was looking into such, and Lockheed had a Partnership with karem aircraft who has dreamed of the Optimum Speed Tiltrotor AeroTrain A B737 class that if practical could be the start of a mega tiltrotor lifter the other option though would be for the USAF to push the Speed Agile program to production of a STOL jet powered lifter
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Army plans to modernise helicopters in peril
By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

WASHINGTON DC
Source: Flightglobal.com
17 hours ago
The US Army has a tight and relatively inflexible plan to modernise existing rotorcraft and eventually achieve a future vertical lift aircraft within the budget it has.

The entire modernisation plan hinges on completion of the controversial aviation restructuring initiative (ARI) being completed by 2019, says Maj Gen Michael Lundy, commander of the army’s Aviation Center of Excellence at Ft Rucker, Alabama.

If sequestration cuts are reinstated in fiscal year 2016, all bets are off that the service will be able to salvage current or future modernisation plans, he says.

"Right now, the strategy we’ve laid out and where we’ve got our priorities at is if we get a little bit of relief from sequestration, it will work. If not, I’ve got some draconian decisions to make," Lundy says.“If we went to the worst case, it would affect almost every modernisation programme we’ve got in our branch."

The ongoing ARI involves reducing aviation personnel by about 10,000 troops, divesting legacy Bell OH-58D Kiowa Warrior scout helicopters and a fleet of A- and C-models used as trainers. About 180 TH-67 Creek trainers will be sold as military surplus items, which has raised concerns about flooding the market with cheap aircraft.

Most controversial are plans to transfer
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
AH-64 Apaches from the national guard and reserve to active units, which will give up Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks in return. The Apaches, teamed with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Aeronautical Systems MQ-9 Gray Eagles, will absorb the armed aerial scout role from the divested Kiowas.

“The ARI is really about allowing us the capability to modernise our force,” Lundy says. “If we get sequestration, it’s just going to get tougher and we’re going to have to look at other cuts.”

The army’s larger timeline for force modernisation hinges on completion of the ARI by 2019. It was written into the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), but hurdles remain. Congress has ordered formation of a commission to study the ARI and present findings to Capitol Hill. The NDAA allows only limited transfer of aircraft and personnel until Congress signs off on the full ARI.

Army officials are wasting no time executing the planned transition, because it represents the only way the service can afford its longterm modernisation goals, Lundy says.

“The only way we can do this is if we execute the ARI. We have looked at every other possible excursion, every one,” he says. “For the past year, we’ve come through thousands of models. This was not just somebody’s good idea. This was the right idea and it took a lot of figuring out.”

Already there are no OH-58Ds at the aviation school at Ft Rucker and pilots are no longer being trained to fly the legacy scout aircraft. At least two Kiowa squadrons have been divested and six more will follow in 2015, he says.

As part of the ARI, the army will drop three active combat aviation brigades. The service also will go from 37 “shooting” brigades to 20, he says. At least 300 Kiowa pilots will transition to the Apache while another 28 have volunteered to become unmanned systems operators, he says.

“That smaller force has got to be much more capable, so we need to field all our modernized aircraft and divest our legacy aircraft,” Lundy says.

The plan is to modernise existing aircraft with new systems and engines like the improved turbine engine, while divesting legacy aircraft through 2019, Lundy says. The joint multi-role technology demonstrator (JMR-TD) programme, which will showcase industry offerings for a potential FVL, will inform the fielding of that aircraft beginning in 2040.

Also competing for funding are two engine development projects aimed at creating faster, more fuel-efficient rotorcraft powerplants. The improved turbine engine programme seeks to find a drop-in 3,000shp turboshaft engine for Apache and Boeing CH-47 Chinooks that improves power by 50% with 25% decrease in fuel consumption. It will be the engine that modernises the power and range of the legacy fleet prior to fielding FVL, says Gen Daniel Allyn, army vice chief of staff.

“The ITEP engine will make legacy aircraft more effective by dramatically increasing range and the ability to fly in high, hot conditions,” he says.

General Electric is working on the Future Affordable Turbine Engine (FATE), an effort to find a 5,000-10,000shp-class turboshaft engine to power FVL and possibly as a replacement engine for existing rotorcraft.

With FATE, the army is looking for a powerplant that provides 80% greater power, a 20% lifecycle increase to more than 6,000hr with a 45% reduction in production and maintenance cost and 35% increase in fuel efficiency.

Funding for development of technologies like ITEP and FATE already is being squeezed by the army’s continued operational requirements around the world, says Allyn.

“We’re having to mortgage near- and midterm modernisation in order to sustain the minimal level of readiness that we must have to respond to emerging requirements around the globe,” Allyn says.

“We are snowplowing the fielding of available technologies that will make us a better fighting force,” he adds. “We make that decision fully realizing the risk that it applies to our force."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Guided-missile frigate USS Elrod (FFG 55) was decommissioned
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Remains 6 : USS Vandegrift (FFG 48), USS Taylor (FFG 50), USS Gary (FFG 51), USS Simpson (FFG 56), USS Samuel B. Roberts (FFG 58), USS Kauffman (FFG 59) all decommissioned for this year.
 

Bernard

Junior Member
This Northrop Grumman Ad is slated for Superbowl Sunday. Of particular interest is the last few seconds as many suspect this is the forward profile of Northrop Grumman's Offering for the B3 or LRS-B

Is it worth it to do these public advertising? I don't understand why something like this superbowl ad would make sense. Or even how the pro-bowl flyover with the F-35 made logical sense. I bet 98% of the people at the game cared nor knew what the F-35 is. Same with the Superbowl I bet 95% (or more) of the populations doesn't even knows about the LRSB program. Seems a waste of money to me. But that's just me.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
This Northrop Grumman Ad is slated for Superbowl Sunday. Of particular interest is the last few seconds as many suspect this is the forward profile of Northrop Grumman's Offering for the B3 or LRS-B

Well, to date, we had seen the following from the two teams:

Boeing/Lockheed LRS-B Concept
Boeing-Lockheed-LRSB.jpg

Northrup/Grumman LRS-B Concept
Northrup-Grumman-LRSB.jpg

Now we have this from Northrup in that ad.
Northrup-Grumman-LRSBa.jpg


Seems like the central area is higher...and I wonder if it really is the LRS-B?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Is it worth it to do these public advertising? I don't understand why something like this superbowl ad would make sense. Or even how the pro-bowl flyover with the F-35 made logical sense. I bet 98% of the people at the game cared nor knew what the F-35 is. Same with the Superbowl I bet 95% (or more) of the populations doesn't even knows about the LRSB program. Seems a waste of money to me. But that's just me.

These firms are huge and they invest their money wisely.

Such as this are as much about attracting bright minds to their employ as about anything else...and they do so by referring to well known history of sterling projects...and teasing with the next step.

As to the F-35 flyover...this is traditional US Air Force (and US Navy for that matter). These fly overs are about patriotism and the service departments showing the cutting edge designs that they have in the air. They are to let the public know that their tax monies are producing such things...and also to attract new blood to the service.

They all have within their budget a certain amount of money allocated for this. when things get really lean from the public's perspective, as they were shown to be during the sequestration, they cancel such things to show they are willing to cut back if necessary.

At the same time, when it comes to recruitment and public relations, they will spend their money as they can to bolster those areas..
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
It seems to fit the Profile of the Northrup/Grumman LRS-B Concept of course it's all subjective. Since this is a White program it's all a question of how the concept has developed over time. In this case The high central point and bent wings seem to match the "Cranked kite" Configuration they showed before this could be confirmation that there Prototype will follow through on that.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
northrup-grumman-lrsb-jpg.11396


I personally like this one. I hope Northrop/Grumman teams wins it.:)
 
Top