Bell 360 Invictus (FARA program)

Scott Kenny said:
That's usually a not-so-subtle hint to the customer that it's a really bad idea to do what they want.
Click to expand...
Oh, there was nothing subtle about it. The end users in question were harbour pilots, not a class of people given to diplomatic language. Especially when the matter at hand is their personal safety.
 
Any word yet as to when the test flights will be? I know that it is early day's yet considering that they have only just recieved the first engine for the Bell 360 Invictus.
 
FighterJock said:
Any word yet as to when the test flights will be? I know that it is early day's yet considering that they have only just recieved the first engine for the Bell 360 Invictus.
Click to expand...
I'd be surprised if the first flight was before the end of the year.
 
Later part of 2024. First year engine, like a first year cars, must be treated carfully, with suspicion, and lots of progressive testing. Neither vendor, nor the U.S. Army can afford a pranged bird.
 
Later part of 2024? Sikorsky are going to be flying in the first quarter of the new year, Bell will have to play catch up concerning flight testing the Bell 360 Invictus.
 
If Sikorsky is willing to take the chance with their one and only Raider X, that is their choice. However, the U.S. Army as the "investor" might not think that so wise.
 
TomS said:
The LinkedIn chat about this patent confirms -- it's related to 160th SOAR. And even the designer admits it's a nasty ride, especially over 80 knots.

www.linkedin.com

Sign Up | LinkedIn

500 million+ members | Manage your professional identity. Build and engage with your professional network. Access knowledge, insights and opportunities.
www.linkedin.com www.linkedin.com

Interesting to see that the full patent also includes a Stokes basket stretcher option.

US11753167B2 - Modular deployable external passenger system for aircraft - Google Patents

An embodiment is a system including an external passenger seating unit comprising at least one seat; and a translation mechanism for translating the external passenger seating unit between a first position in which the external passenger seating unit is stowed in a payload bay of an aircraft and...
patents.google.com
Click to expand...
You don’t know how they got the patent (perhaps for a fancy folding scheme) since prior art dates back to World War 2.
Americans experimented with stuffing mechanics into converted drop tanks hung under the wings of P-38 Lightning fighters.
 
Last edited:
yasotay said:
If Sikorsky is willing to take the chance with their one and only Raider X, that is their choice. However, the U.S. Army as the "investor" might not think that so wise.
Click to expand...
From AW&ST today - "The Army in an announcement says ground runs are expected in the second quarter of fiscal 2024 and first flights in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024."
 
yasotay said:
From AW&ST today - "The Army in an announcement says ground runs are expected in the second quarter of fiscal 2024 and first flights in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024."
Click to expand...
Which means ground runs NET January 2024, first flights NET April 2024. (yes, the USGov Fiscal Year is that far off)
 
Scott Kenny said:
Which means ground runs NET January 2024, first flights NET April 2024. (yes, the USGov Fiscal Year is that far off)
Click to expand...
No, not that far off.

The US government fiscal year starts 1 October and ends 30 September.
1Q = Oct-Dec
2Q = Jan-Mar
3Q = Apr-June
4Q = July-Sept

So ground runs between 1 January - 31 March 2024, and first flight between 1 July - 30 September 2024.
 
What a waste. How many times is the Army going to do this? If the Army ever asks for a scout helicopter again contractors shouldn't even bother trying because it will just be cancelled like the last three times.
 
Last edited:
A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
Surely ITEP is still important for FLRAA?
Click to expand...
FLRAA is using much larger turbines, Osprey's turbines to be precise.

They also killed UH-60V in favor of more -60Ms, so ITEP doesn't have an aircraft at the moment. They're keeping it in development so it is available for another aircraft in the future.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
What a waste. How many times is the Army going to do this? If the Army ever asks for a scout helicopter again contractors shouldn't even bother trying because it will just be cancelled like the last three times.
Click to expand...
They're not talking about trying again, they're saying the Ukraine war has convinced them drones will be superior scout platforms in a peer conflict. It's a compelling argument, though I'd like to see them make a more comprehensive case for it.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
What a waste. How many times is the Army going to do this? If the Army ever asks for a scout helicopter again contractors shouldn't even bother trying because it will just be cancelled like the last three times.
Click to expand...

They'll probably ask them for a UCAR-like aircraft that can be controlled by the gunner of an Apache, like the MELB was but with greater autonomy, so think CCA for rotorcraft. Given the pilot shortage that won't be abating any time soon, this is a sound move, and Ukraine seems to have shown how lethal modern SHORAD is to even well equipped rotary aviation units (IRIS-T versus Ka-52 with LMUR and Vikhr).
 
Last edited:
yeah but they still need a attack heli that can operate in vast oceans for the island hopping strategy.
 
If the DoD is accepting of loosing thousands of UAV (as is going on in Ukraine), then UAS is viable. There is still a significant challenge for Pacific operations due to range requirements. This is not an issue for tactical operations in Europe or Middle East. Small UAS are sufficient as long as the weather conditions are benign. Higher winds and rain are problematic for small UAS and larger UAS have the same survivability issues as helos against a competent air defense network.
 
Kat Tsun said:
breakingdefense.com

Army cancels FARA helicopter program, makes other cuts in major aviation shakeup - Breaking Defense

In addition to halting the FARA competition, service leaders want to end UH-60 V Blackhawk production, postpone moving the Improved Turbine Engine Program into production, and phase out legacy drones.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

Bad news: FARA and ITEP are both canceled.
Click to expand...
Not correct about ITEP.

It is simply being kept in development rather than entering production... and it seems it was running behind schedule anyway:

Breaking Defense said:
In addition, the Army plans to end production on the UH-60 V Black Hawk in fiscal 2025, due to “significant cost growth,” keep General Electric’s Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) in the development phase instead of moving it into production
.....
As for the engine slated to power FARA, the service isn’t pulling the plug on it right now – but it is slowing it down.
The T901 Improved Turbine Engine is meant to have 50 percent more horsepower and 25 percent better fuel efficiency, and will also replace some of the Army’s legacy powerplants. All AH-64E Apaches and UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters, currently powered by the T700 engine that first started flying Black Hawks in the 1970s, have been planned to have those engines swapped out for the T901, according to the Army.

But delivery of the T901 powerplants, developed by GE Aerospace, was delayed as the engine maker wrestled with supply chain disruptions. Late last year the service accepted two engines and they were sent on to both FARA competitors.

Brig. Gen. David Phillips, the Program Executive Officer for Aviation, on Thursday said the service has now received six more ITEPs, with another two slated to arrive in May and head to Black Hawk line.

“All that is on track, we’re learning from all that effort and we’re really putting all that learning to use and how we’re thinking about integrating it in Apache, how we’re thinking about integrating it in Black Hawk long term,” the one-star general said. “Then really thinking carefully about the transition to production because we have had challenges in that development phase was some of those very unique pieces and parts and manufacturing.”
“As we go toward production, we want to make sure we get that right,” he added.
Click to expand...

Moose said:
They also killed UH-60V in favor of more -60Ms, so ITEP doesn't have an aircraft at the moment. They're keeping it in development so it is available for another aircraft in the future.
Click to expand...

See the above quote - the ITEP is still scheduled to replace the T700s in all AH-64Es and UH-60Ms.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's probable that ITEP equipped legacy platforms closed the gap with some revised requirements.

The question was also with the next platform. What would escort high speed tilt-rotors? FARA was not. I think that's why ITEP is not canceled yet. It all depends if there would be some use for it (I hope so!).
 
Now, we'll see in the next 10 years any type of FARA memorabilia on eBay go for crazy money, under listings named:

CANCELLED ARMY HELICOPTER PATCH

Or CANCELLED ARMY HELICOPTER DESK MODEL RARE
 
TomcatViP said:
Yeah, it's probable that ITEP equipped legacy platforms closed the gap with some revised requirements.

The question was also with the next platform. What would escort high speed tilt-rotors? FARA was not. I think that's why ITEP is not canceled yet. It all depends if there would be some use for it (I hope so!).
Click to expand...
Well, I've been pretty sure that the replacement for the MH60R/S fleet was going to be another H60 but with the T901 for power.
 
Moose said:
They're not talking about trying again, they're saying the Ukraine war has convinced them drones will be superior scout platforms in a peer conflict. It's a compelling argument, though I'd like to see them make a more comprehensive case for it.
Click to expand...
UCAR program again maybe??
 
While Bell has its tilt rotor program for the army running, the cancellation must be a real blow for Sikorsky.
 
It is a blow for sure in that the technology they bet the business on (X2) has no clear route to production now.
However they will keep the factory going producing ~300 + new UH-60M.
 
yasotay said:
It is a blow for sure in that the technology they bet the business on (X2) has no clear route to production now.
Click to expand...
Yes, they try to get going their ABC concept for production since the early 1970s and something always comes in between ...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom