Sikorsky ABC Programs

yasotay

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
18 October 2006
Messages
4,094
Reaction score
4,500
Well since the "What Ifs" is down for a bit, and because I thought I would post these here for giggles, here is some work I doodled in power point while laboring through more than one exceedingly long and boring briefing. Anyway "What If!" the Sikorsky folks had been able to get past some of the vexing problems of the ABC concept in the 1980's and had found a more receptive and forward thinking Army Aviation community (as the lead for US Rotorcraft technology). What if the Sikorsky solution to the JVX had won?
 

Attachments

  • CH-44B.jpg
    CH-44B.jpg
    46.9 KB · Views: 369
  • MH-59G.jpg
    MH-59G.jpg
    50.4 KB · Views: 384
  • UH-59.jpg
    UH-59.jpg
    51.2 KB · Views: 340
Rotor flapping (this is why Kamov has such a tall rotor mast), very high vibration, torque loads, challenging flight dynamics, weight. All of which Sikorsky appears to believe they have been able to overcome with newer technology. I certainly hope so as I would like to see them push rotorcraft boundaries.
 
???

Pardon my ignorance, but what does ABC stand for?

Cool graphics BTW -- how about one is US Army or friendly foreign forces?
 
yasotay said:
Rotor flapping (this is why Kamov has such a tall rotor mast), very high vibration, torque loads, challenging flight dynamics, weight. All of which Sikorsky appears to believe they have been able to overcome with newer technology. I certainly hope so as I would like to see them push rotorcraft boundaries.
Click to expand...

Add to that very high hub and rotor drag, which is the big thing X2 technology is supposed to overcome, if the X2 ever flies. Of course, even if successful it has to demonstrate if it has any advantages over established concepts.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom