Bell V-280 Valor

FLRAA is the procurement program, we dont know whether Bell will keep the name or change it for the production version, so far they have been procuring the production contracts from suppliers under the same V-280 name. I am sure the US will want to give it its own name in service so the 'Valor' might change.
 
The US Army, assuming the program survives, will classify the platform (UV vice UH?) and provide a Native American tribe for its name.
As pointed out Bell will continue to work there program with their nomenclature but once a platform is built on federal funds it will be renamed. All of this is being done under the supervision of the Program Manager FLRAA.
 
yasotay said:
The US Army, assuming the program survives, will classify the platform (UV vice UH?) and provide a Native American tribe for its name.
As pointed out Bell will continue to work there program with their nomenclature but once a platform is built on federal funds it will be renamed. All of this is being done under the supervision of the Program Manager FLRAA.
Click to expand...
I'm really hoping the Army gets a sense of humor about it, and calls it the Crow. "Bird" name like Osprey and Harrier, "Tribe" name like everything else in the Army.
 
Forest Green said:
www.twz.com

How To Satisfy The Navy's Future Vertical Lift-Maritime Strike Needs With Bell's Rob Freeland

Bell sees a version of its V-280 Valor and its navalized V-247 Vigilant drone concept as the solution for the Navy's ambitious goals.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
I'm still not sold on tilt-rotors to replace the MH60R/S, unless the Navy abandons the dipping sonar.

Tilt-rotors for the Marines? Absolutely. But if you look at the number of H-1s the USMC operates, that's only 190 of each (planned). So that's a really small order for V280s and maybe V247s, if the Marines decide to replace their AH1Zs with V247s.
 
Certainly if the USN wants to continue to "dip" sonar, then I would agree that tilt rotor is likely to be a suboptimal solution. However if you could make a disposable sonar that is launched, flies to, and then activates on entry into the water, it might be more desirable. This in conjunction with faster response times over larger distances could be of significant benefit. I have heard (rumor intel) that the USN has already considered other missions for CMV-22B.
 
yasotay said:
Certainly if the USN wants to continue to "dip" sonar, then I would agree that tilt rotor is likely to be a suboptimal solution. However if you could make a disposable sonar that is launched, flies to, and then activates on entry into the water, it might be more desirable.
Click to expand...
What about aerial recoverable bouy? Use something like fulton recovery mechanism and even fixed wing can do it, with hover-capable aircraft the design options expands.
 
shin_getter said:
What about aerial recoverable bouy? Use something like fulton recovery mechanism and even fixed wing can do it, with hover-capable aircraft the design options expands.
Click to expand...
Certainly an option to be considered. The fancy term being used these days regarding small uncrewed aerial systems is "Attritable". Which means that you desire to recover the unit, but are willing to accept that you might loose it.
 
Latest FLRAA trade show model, is it getting shorter compared to the V280 and its bid renders?
Nose in front of Cockpit is elongated but distance between front wheels and tail has shrunk.

flraabesty.jpg


90
 
WatcherZero said:
Latest FLRAA trade show model, is it getting shorter compared to the V280 and its bid renders?
Nose in front of Cockpit is elongated but distance between front wheels and tail has shrunk.

flraabesty.jpg


90
Click to expand...
No, I think it's just the nose being longer. If anything, the distance from the wheel sponsons to the wing looks longer as well.
 

New V-280 Model Shows FLRAA Design Evolving | Aviation Week Network

An updated model of the Bell V-280 shows that the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) design is evolving from the demonstrator that won the competition.
aviationweek.com aviationweek.com

Notice the AAR probe. AW states it as a Special operation feature but it seems to me that a long range a/c needs an AAR capability anyway. So, IMOHO, this could be a standard equipment instead as it doesn't appear to be removable or be a quick bolt-on kit.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind the JMR-TD aircraft was a technology demonstrator not a production prototype. So this isn't even a "concept car to production car" level of transition.

I may be alone here but I like this nose, along with having larger doors and more room for systems, it looks more Bell than before.
 
A refueling probe is only half of the equation. Unlike the USMC, U.S. Army does not have Squadrons of KC-130 to provide the other half.
I do agree there does appear to be more area forward. As stated likely for more avionics.
 
The spinners on the rotors have been blunted too. Guessing blunt ones are still good aerodynamically for forward flight. Apart from reduced height are there any other benefits of a blunt spinner?
 
yasotay said:
breakingdefense.com

Bell to remove Spirit AeroSystems as FLRAA fuselage maker due to proposed Boeing acquisition - Breaking Defense

“Spirit has had a successful ten-year partnership with Bell on this program and we will continue to work with them to deliver on our joint commitments,” Spirit AeroSystems spokesman Joe Buccino said.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

First big challenge for the program.
Click to expand...
Challenge? Kicking Spirit off the program and avoiding a Boeing team-up improves the chances of success.
 
I certainly agree that teaming with Boeing these days, is a toxic endeavor. Bell has dealt with this since the Congressionally mandated 50/50 split of responsibility for V-22.

The challenge is setting up a new vendor or in house capability within the current timeline for the program. It is no small feat given that Spirit has done all of the work to date.

Of note, Boeing has come up with means to sabotage programs over the last 80 years. Given that FLRAA could eventually make both of their current rotorcraft redundant, it is not a stretch to see that the purchase has more benefit to Boeing than just its more lucrative civil aircraft. In fairness though, Boeing is not the only industry to do this sort of thing. If it is a thing.
 
Bell teaming with Boeing? I can agree with yasotay, it is a toxic endeavour especially with what is happening to Boeing right now that is the worst possible scenario for Bell and quite possibly a bad mistake that may come back to haunt them.
 
yasotay said:
The challenge is setting up a new vendor or in house capability within the current timeline for the program. It is no small feat given that Spirit has done all of the work to date.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Bell needs to find someone else that can do the composites or expand their production lines to do it themselves. In either case, there's some significant learning curves in play.

Especially if Spirit has been tweaking the recipes and processes as the original materials became unavailable, without updating the recipe Bell has on file.
 
Last edited:
I read that Bell and the U.S. Government have continued to work on the design non-stop. IF Bell can quickly make a decision on how to build the fuselage, I think it is possible that they could roll out the aircraft late in 2026. I think flying it would be a very stretch goal.
 
yasotay said:
I read that Bell and the U.S. Government have continued to work on the design non-stop. IF Bell can quickly make a decision on how to build the fuselage, I think it is possible that they could roll out the aircraft late in 2026. I think flying it would be a very stretch goal.
Click to expand...

In October 2021, Bell and Rolls-Royce announced that the V-280 Valor would switch from the T64 turboshaft used in the prototype to a derivative of the Rolls-Royce T406/AE 1107C used on the Osprey, called the AE 1107F, increasing power about 2,000 horsepower, raising questions about the difficulty and duration of this change during the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase.
 
windcalm said:
In October 2021, Bell and Rolls-Royce announced that the V-280 Valor would switch from the T64 turboshaft used in the prototype to a derivative of the Rolls-Royce T406/AE 1107C used on the Osprey, called the AE 1107F, increasing power about 2,000 horsepower, raising questions about the difficulty and duration of this change during the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase.
Click to expand...
I thought the transmission setup was already built for AE1107 power levels?
 
Scott Kenny said:
I thought the transmission setup was already built for AE1107 power levels?
Click to expand...
I am not very familiar with drivetrains, but if that’s the case, it seems to have been a very critical decision. I was thinking about the changes in engine power, weight, nacelle shape, and how they affect aerodynamic characteristics, structural design, and flight control. They might have allowed extra space to fit the new engine to avoid changing the nacelle shape.
 
Last edited:
windcalm said:
I am not very familiar with drivetrains, but if that’s the case, it seems to have been a very critical decision. I was thinking about the changes in engine power, weight, nacelle shape, and how they affect aerodynamic characteristics, structural design, and flight control. They might have allowed extra space to fit the new engine to avoid changing the nacelle shape.
Click to expand...
Both V-280 Valor and SB>1 Defiant were not true prototypes and they legally could NOT be under the terms of the contracting mechanisms. They were both slightly sub scale demonstrators designed to showcase their design-build-fly processes, show that a tiltrotor could be cost competitive and have low speed agility while the Defiant needed to show it could hit the performance claims (across a wide range of metrics). Neither one used an engine that was planned for a production vehicle. Neither one had a full suite of mission equipment installed or even all the provisions to install them.

So production FLRAA is a clean sheet design. It will look similar in many respects to V-280 but with a complete turn of the design crank to meet the full production requirements. Had SB>1 won, they would have been in the same position.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom