Bell V-280 Valor

[Triton]

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/bell-ceo-army-should-move-faster-fvl-program

 

[Triton]

Bell Helicopter Analyst Meeting at HAI 2015

Source:
http://www.slideshare.net/TextronCorp/2015-heli-expo-jg-analyst-preso-v12-final

 

[Triton]

"Bell Unveils Single-screen V-280 Cockpit"
by Mark Huber
- May 21, 2015, 9:10 AM

Source:
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2015-05-21/bell-unveils-single-screen-v-280-cockpit

Bell Helicopter is unveiling a single-screen instrument panel concept for its V-280 Valor next-generation military tiltrotor. The panel currently is installed in the V-280 mock-up, which will be on display in the Pentagon’s courtyard from June 2 to 4. The panel display is a collaborative effort among Bell, partner Lockheed Martin and Los Angeles-based Inhance Digital; the companies have been working together on the concept for the last 18 months.

While the team is likely a decade away from developing a system for a flying aircraft, it already has some definite ideas about its architecture. Bell was able to draw on technology developed for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter, including “smart helmets” with PDAS (pilot displayed aperture systems), as well as ideas from commercial off-the-shelf technology. “The pilots who will be flying this aircraft are today’s eight-year-olds,” said Jeremy Chavez, project engineer on the V-280 program. “The aircraft would become operational during the 2025 to 2030 time frame, so we looked at trends where cockpits were heading: more touchscreen interactive capabilities. We looked at the technology currently on the commercial market and who the pilots will be operating the aircraft in that time frame. They have grown up with iPads, pinching and swiping screens. That kind of thing will be highly intuitive to them.”
System Survivability Is Key

While the panel is still in the concept stage, the team is focusing on developing a product that can incorporate and present an enormous amount of data and imagery to the pilots from both their own and other aircraft in logical sequence and is ballistically survivable. One idea on the latter is to construct the screen from a series of small mosaic displays that stitch together a larger image. “If a round pierced the screen it might take out one or two tiles, but the rest of the screen would function around it, sort of like poking your finger through a screen door. The screen is still intact; you just have a localized area where the screen is not functioning,” Chavez said.

This survivability is particularly critical since most of the switchology aboard the aircraft will be eliminated and replaced with inputs made directly on the touchscreen. “You won’t have all the toggle switches you have in today’s cockpit, but there will be back-ups that we will develop with the survivability group,” Chavez said. “With the mosaic design, you don’t lose the entire screen. You can move information off the damaged area or the display control system would be smart enough to know not to display critical information in the damaged area and would automatically move it off to the side… Beyond that we are still developing failure modes and how we want to mitigate those risks.”

The V-280 team is also looking at ballistic-resistant materials for the display. “A ballistic-tolerant screen is something we are looking at,” said Chavez, “like bulletproof glass on an armored car. But we don’t want to put something out there that is ballistically tolerant but constantly fails.”

Chavez sees the instrument panel, smart helmet and data projected onto the windshield as providing a triple-redundant system, able to display enough data either in concert or independently to ensure safety of flight. “A lot of the flight-critical information is going to be distributed across the [helmet] visor screen and the windshield. As on the F-35, the visor integrates with PDAS sensors on different parts of the aircraft to provide a 360-degree spherical view of the world around you. That would just be streamed into the helmet and distributed across the visor as the operator wants to customize it,” he said.
Keeping Pilots Focused

Another critical challenge is keeping such a massive display from overwhelming the pilots with information or tempting them to fly with eyes only in the cockpit. “It is a massive display and it is very eye-catching, but the last thing we want is for pilots to be mesmerized by it. They need to be eyes out as well. That will be a balancing act that we develop over time,” Chavez said.

Sensors will detect aircraft condition, and system logic will display only the most critical information needed under any given conditions. Chavez gives some examples. “If you are entering a brownout at 100 feet agl, all displays go to a primary flight display; if your radar altimeter goes to 50 agl, certain information would vanish and the display would give you just the most critical information, such as an attitude indicator. There will be a predetermined logic to the system.”

Perhaps the giant display’s most impressive ability is to integrate data from the PDAS to provide a giant outside window with synthetic vision during limited or zero-visibility situations. “It’s basically the same as looking outside. That is definitely where we are headed with this display,” Chavez said.

Additional image source:
https://twitter.com/jenjudson/status/653655338260955136

 

[SteveO]

The V tail seems to be much reduced in area in the latest images. http://www.bellhelicopter.com/military/bell-v-280

 

[fredymac]

Maybe some changes in the nacelle too.

 

[sferrin]

Higher rez pic.

 

[Moose]

They look more like the nacelles on the Naval variant models from last year.

 

[TomS]

Does it look like the tail fins have been lowered enough to allow the wing to rotate and stow lenghwise without needed to fold the fins?

 

[yasotay]

Tail is indeed significantly different as well as the nacelles. I would imagine it is from continued refinement of the design toward a more joint solution and perhaps to reduce out as much weight as possible, especially at the back of the bus.

 

[Triton]

Incredible machine! I wonder why we hear so little from the Sikorsky-Boeing team concerning the SB-1 Defiant?

Source:
http://www.bellhelicopter.com/military/bell-v-280

 

[SteveO]

Looks like there is a F-35 style Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) on the chin in some of those pics. First time I've noticed it anyway. Nice looking aircraft!

The brochure also mentions a distributed aperture system (DAS) which probably works the same as the AN/AAQ-37 which provides 360 degree day/night vision and threat warnings for the F-35. I wonder if the door gunners will be able to have this imagery available on their helmets?

 

[sferrin]

Definitely wins the "cool" factor. B)

 

[yasotay]

Looks like there is a F-35 style Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) on the chin in some of those pics. First time I've noticed it anyway. Nice looking aircraft!

The brochure also mentions a distributed aperture system (DAS) which probably works the same as the AN/AAQ-37 which provides 360 degree day/night vision and threat warnings for the F-35. I wonder if the door gunners will be able to have this imagery available on their helmets?

Lockheed is the prime for the Mission Equipment, so F-35'esque equipment is not unlikely.

Would also like to know what is going on with the Sikorsky effort. Have heard little on either their effort or the Raider.

 

[fredymac]

Physical mockup with latest revisions displayed at the HAI 2016 show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pSJ_7aux84

 

[jsport]

Appreciate the vid Fredymac.

Pilots have the wind shield view plus the mega HDTV. how do they not become dizzy or at least distracted. guess better to let HAL2000 to do the flying. B)

 

[Avimimus]

What happens if a bullet hits the dash?

 

[hesham]

Hi,

what is the different between it and V-22 ?,indeed the V-22 was heavier and larger,although
it crashed,the same concept !!,I told Boeing and Bell before you must improved the design
of this normal tilt-rotor system,in a medium or high storm degrees,the performance will not
be good and the aircraft will tend on axis as its former.

 

[Moose]

Hi,

what is the different between it and V-22 ?,indeed the V-22 was heavier and larger,although
it crashed,the same concept !!,I told Boeing and Bell before you must improved the design
of this normal tilt-rotor system,in a medium or high storm degrees,the performance will not
be good and the aircraft will tend on axis as its former.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, thate the V-22 is a poor aircraft because it has crashed? I've got bad news for you: it's not alone in that failing.

 

[hesham]

Hi Moose,

of course I know that,but please focus on my words,I want to say the tilt-rotor by this
way is wrong,not V-22 or V-280 only,but any aircraft in this form will be getting failure
in a hard circumstances,such as small tornado or bigger.

 

[skyblue]

any aircraft in this form will be getting failure
in a hard circumstances,such as small tornado or bigger.

What aircraft can survive a tornado?

 

[hesham]

What aircraft can survive a tornado?

The aircraft design must bear a small tornado,the concept was wrong at first.

 

[TomS]

I'm sorry, but what you are saying makes literally no sense. Where does this "tornado" nonsense come from?

 

[Jeb]

I'm sorry, but what you are saying makes literally no sense. Where does this "tornado" nonsense come from?

I wonder if the language barrier is mixing up "tornado" and "vortex" and he's thinking about VRS issues.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

I meant that; in fickle and unstable weather it couldn't be survivor or make accidents,that's
because its concept,very clearly,as V-22 done before.

 

[TomS]

Sorry, you're wrong. The V-22 has a very good safety record in operational service and if I had a choice of what to fly into bad weather, I'd pick an Osprey over a conventional helicopter for certain.

 

[sublight_]

Sorry, you're wrong. The V-22 has a very good safety record in operational service and if I had a choice of what to fly into bad weather, I'd pick an Osprey over a conventional helicopter for certain.

I would disagree. Stepson watched one fall out of the sky in Morocco because the pilot couldn't sense the sudden tail wind and had rotated the blades too far forward with the teeny tiny thumbstick, where a millimeter or two can make the difference between life and death. The transition mode should have never been made human controllable. That is the fatal flaw.

 

[hesham]

Sorry, you're wrong. The V-22 has a very good safety record in operational service and if I had a choice of what to fly into bad weather, I'd pick an Osprey over a conventional helicopter for certain.

I am not wrong,and that was not my opinion,it was a facts about it from some reports,it's not
my evaluation but the experts who said that.

 

[TomS]

That['s pretty nebulous.

Yes, the V-22 ha some accidents, and some troubles during development. And yes, it still has crashed recently. Automating transition might be a worthwhile thing to look into. But none of that invalidates the entire concept of tilt-rotor aircraft, which is what you seem to be saying.

 

[fredymac]

Somehow the "experts" never seem to include the actual pilots, maintainers, or users (ie, ground troops) of the V-22. A quarter million operational hours over multiple combat theaters and by now almost every LHD/LHA in the fleet would indicate that any systemic/design flaw is either minor or nonexistent.

Vortex ring state was heavily investigated and determined to exist for all rotor borne aircraft. I seem to recall that tiltrotors are actually easier to fly out of VRS than a conventional helicopter. In any event, comparative loss rates for the V-22 vs any conventional helicopter does not show any noticeable deficiency. I expect the same will be true for the V-280.

 

[sublight_]

But none of that invalidates the entire concept of tilt-rotor aircraft, which is what you seem to be saying.

Not what I am saying.

Automating transition might be a worthwhile thing to look into.

What I am saying.

 

[TomS]

Sorry, got my "you's" mixed up. Hesham is the one saying tiltrotor is inherently unsafe.

 

[yasotay]

So an ACTUAL helo pilot here. Actually it does not matter rotary or fixed wing: down wind take off are not recommended. The old OH-58A/C, so beloved, could not hover with a quartering tail wind. It lost tail rotor effectiveness. I doubt there are any rotorcraft (none that I flew) that did not have caution/advisory language in the manuals about wind speeds and directions for takeoff. The MV-22 NATOPS (Operators Manual) is quiet clear about caution with tail winds. I looked it up.

I must disagree with the assessment regarding V-22, because it would have to apply to any tandem rotorcraft (CH-47) as well that has two rotors used to lift the aircraft. Then there is the fact that the V-280 will have a huge increase in hover controllability because it is putting more flexibility into the prop-rotor design.

 

[fredymac]

The more I see of this the more plausible it seems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-Yvt2UzxqM

 

[RavenOne]

Here are my photos of the V280 from Heli Expo 2016 a month back,in Louisville

cheers

 

[Triton]

"Bell V-280 taking form in Amarillo"
21 April, 2016 BY: James Drew Washington DC

It’s a moment of truth for the engineers and fabricators who have been working on prototype aircraft, which is being prepared to fly in September 2017 as part of the US Army’s Joint-MultiRole Technology Demonstrator (JMR-TD) programme. If one part or structure doesn’t line up the project might stall, Vince Tobin, Bell’s vice-president of V-280 and Future Vertical Lift says the company’s three-dimensional design models have proven accurate so far.

“We have every confidence that it will work,” Tobin tells Flightglobal. “It’s a major risk reduction in the way we look at it with things going forward. Beyond just the components fitting together, we’ve used this to make sure there’s no conflict with the tooling.”

The mating of the wing comes five months after Spirit AeroSystems delivered the V-280 fuselage from its plant in Wichita, Kansas. The two nacelles, built by Israel Aerospace Industries, were mated with the wing last month, says Tobin. The entire structure should come together by the end of the week.

The V-280 is Bell’s attempt to bring the US Army back around to tiltrotor design after it abandoned the V-22 Osprey programme in favour of trusted Vietnam War-era utility helicopters, like the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk and Boeing CH-47 Chinook.

The Osprey, designed in the 1980s, is the first tiltrotor to enter operational service, having been purchased by the Marine Corps, Air Force Special Operations Command and soon the Navy for a wide variety of missions. The Army, though, prefers side doors on its multi-role helicopters, which cannot be engineered into the V-22 because of its tilting engines and main support beam.

The V-280, however, tilts its rotors and not the entire engine as it transitions from hover to forward flight and the main support beam runs over the roof of the cabin instead.

“One of the first design questions we had to wrestle with for a medium-lift rotorcraft targeted for the US Army is, do we go with the ramp like the V-22 or side doors that the army has been operating out of for the medium-lift aircraft since the 1960s?” explains Tobin. “When the troops egress out of the side doors, they have the problem of engines in their way and can’t fire out the side of the aircraft. That forced us to go to the fixed nacelle configuration.”

The hot, down-facing turbine exhaust also complicates where the V-22 can land. V-280 doesn’t have that problem, and it also does away with the V-22’s forward-swept dihedral wing in favour of a flat, straight wing. That greatly reduces the aircraft’s complexity by eliminating the mid-wing gearbox, thereby lowering the manufacturing cost.

“There’s no dihedral, no anhedral and no sweep in the wing,” says Tobin. “In the V-22, the forward sweep is there because 30 years ago when we were doing the design, we didn’t really know how far the rotors were going to flap back toward the wing in forward flight. What we’ve determined over years of experience with the V-22 is that the flapping is pretty insignificant; it’s on the order of a degree or two.”

The V-280 is Bell's answer to the US Army's requirement for a mid-sized next-generation rotorcraft with twice the speed and range of a conventional helicopter to replace the Block Hawk and Boeing AH-64 Apache gunship in the 2030s. It's competing against the Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant – a rigid-rotor, compound coaxial pusher prop type based on Sikorsky's X-2 and S-97 demonstrators.

Tobin hopes that both types will fly next September so that the army can quickly determine which of the two is best and proceed with an acquisition.

The V-280 has a top speed of 280kt (518km/h) and range of 500-800nm. The prototype is powered by two General Electric T64 turboshaft engines, which are currently undergoing testing.

Tobin expects to begin ground runs in 12 months ahead of first flight next September. The JMR flight campaign runs through 2019.

 

[fightingirish]

Bell V280 Valor Mating of Wing and Nacelles

https://youtu.be/0LOljv2evMs

https://youtu.be/0LOljv2evMs

 

[SteveO]

I think the V-280 Valor is going to be a much better looking aircraft than the SB-1 Defiant. The S-97 Raider looks great but the X2 technology starts looking cumbersome scaled up. Hopefully everything goes to plan for Bell as the Valor looks right to me.

 

[sferrin]

Yeah that SB-1 is looking clunky by comparison. Looks don't count though so it'll be interesting to see how things shake out.

 

[VTOLicious]

Quite strange that so little is published about SB-1's progress. And no mockup so far

 

[yasotay]

Quite strange that so little is published about SB-1's progress. And no mockup so far

Indeed, I was thinking the same thing. Then there is the silence on what is going on with the Raider. I would have thought that they would want to keep the world informed of how the program is progressing. Unless...