JMR (Joint Multi-Role) & FVL (Future Vertical Lift) Programs

F-14D said:
Triton said:
I guess AVX Aircraft/Airbus Helicopters, Inc. or Karem Aircraft/Airbus Helicopters, Inc. may have been possible. BAE Systems also paired with AVX Aircraft for the medium-range maritime unmanned air system (MRMUAS).

For technology transfer as well as other issues, I don't think the Army would entertain a teaming (as opposed to subcontracting) arrangement with a foreign company for JMR. Otherwise, you might have seen those two trying to get aboard.

I would not be surprised to see the European industry weigh in for the FVL program if it comes about. That is to large of a segment of the mid-21st century rotorcraft production opportunity for them to ignore. Teaming with a US consortium would be likely.
 
yasotay said:
F-14D said:
Triton said:
I guess AVX Aircraft/Airbus Helicopters, Inc. or Karem Aircraft/Airbus Helicopters, Inc. may have been possible. BAE Systems also paired with AVX Aircraft for the medium-range maritime unmanned air system (MRMUAS).

For technology transfer as well as other issues, I don't think the Army would entertain a teaming (as opposed to subcontracting) arrangement with a foreign company for JMR. Otherwise, you might have seen those two trying to get aboard.

I would not be surprised to see the European industry weigh in for the FVL program if it comes about. That is to large of a segment of the mid-21st century rotorcraft production opportunity for them to ignore. Teaming with a US consortium would be likely.

At that point, maybe the technology transfer issue will have settled down, and maybe the US companies will be interested in partnering. . I'm just not that sure that such a happenstance would be looked on with favor for the JMR phase . Again, none of the Euro-biggies (or Asia-biggies, for that matter) participated in JMR, which may mean something.
 
Sorry for going a little off topic, but this is just too funny ;D ;D ;D

A comment posted in reply to the AW-JMR-article:

http://aviationweek.com/awin-only/bell-sikorskyboeing-build-army-jmr-rotorcraft-demonstrators

I am very sorry, but I disagree with the idea that compound and tiltrotor concepts are the most promising.
Please have a look at the diskrotor-concept to be found on the following websites:
http://www.diskrotor.com/
http://www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.html
The modified Sukhoi T-50 PAK with diskrotor could be regarded as replacement for the unhappy F-35.
 
VTOLicious said:
Sorry for going a little off topic, but this is just too funny ;D ;D ;D

A comment posted in reply to the AW-JMR-article:

http://aviationweek.com/awin-only/bell-sikorskyboeing-build-army-jmr-rotorcraft-demonstrators

I am very sorry, but I disagree with the idea that compound and tiltrotor concepts are the most promising.
Please have a look at the diskrotor-concept to be found on the following websites:
http://www.diskrotor.com/
http://www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.html
The modified Sukhoi T-50 PAK with diskrotor could be regarded as replacement for the unhappy F-35.

Well perhaps we will see a Swiss contender for the FVL
 
When BAE Systems acquired United Defense Industries, formerly FMC, and renamed it to BAE Systems Land and Armaments, a subsidiary of BAE Systems, did it cease to be a United States company regarding technology transfer or national security concerns? Is it now a UK company?

Or is Airbus Helicopters, Inc., a subsidiary of Airbus Group, that has United States manufacturing facilities in Columbus, MS and Grand Prairie, TX, that currently does business with the United States Army producing UH-72 helicopters, and has 50% of the United States helicopter market still considered to be a European company? Is the UH-72 a foreign helicopter?

As the defense and aerospace sectors continue to consolidate and defense contractors have multi-national operations, will it be increasingly difficult for the armed forces to have competition in defense programs, cash for new product development, and address their technology transfer and national security concerns? Or will the last United States-headquartered defense contractor standing be automatically chosen?
 
"Expert questions helicopter project's chance at success"
Posted: August 14, 2014
by Jim McBride

Source:
http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/2014-08-14/expert-questions-helicopter-projects-chance-success

Pull quotes:

One aviation analyst questions whether the Army’s demonstration program will be able to revolutionize new technology and deliver cheaper, faster prototypes that can be built on to develop a new family of helicopters.

Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis for the Teal Group, a Virginia firm that provides aviation analysis to aircraft executives and companies like General Electric, Boeing and others, doesn’t see the Valor or the Boeing/Sikorsky team’s demonstration aircraft pushing the limits of new technology or reducing costs if the prototypes are further developed.

“You had half a century to try a bunch of new things; none of them have been particularly successful except for the V-22 and that’s a huge price tag,” he said. “People have been experimenting with newer, faster, better ways to design a rotorcraft for a very long time now. So far what they have come up with has been very expensive. ... Is this demonstrator, in the next five years or so, going to make a huge difference? I doubt it.”
 
The AvWeek podcast on Friday stated that the winning teams are putting a lot more (hundreds of millions more) R+D dollars into JMR/FVL than the Army is budgeting, believing that the production contracts will make their money back eventually and fearful of being caught out without having their tech ready when the Army pulls the trigger. In that environment, the little guys just can't match the cash burn without a big defense contractor sugar daddy to cover the bills. But it also signals that the Industry isn't just humoring the service, that much skin in the game means they think this is doable and that they can make their aircraft meet the objectives.
 
Aboulafia has never seen a need to do anything with rotorcraft. I don't recall once reading him recommending anything toward advancement.

Think Moose has a good assessment.
 
Triton said:
F-14D said:
This implies that the Big Two were picked not only for their technology, but because they've got enough cash to pick up more of the tab from the gov't than the other two.

Yes it does. That's very disappointing. It means that start-ups like AVX Aircraft and Karem Aircraft without deep pockets didn't have a chance with JMR-TD.

My question may sound naive or irrelevant for lack of in-depth knowledge of the program's developments, but why didn't AVX and Karem increase their chances to win by teaming up with other US-based industry giants? Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman may not have the strong credentials of the other two when it comes to rotorcraft, but production would have been guaranteed and at least the companies are here to stay. I guess Kaman, though a smaller company, could have been another choice.
 
They no doubt both had meetings with major vendors. None would likely commit without seeing the level of interest from the government. Nor would the investor have been happy with a.hedge bet.
 
http://www.compositesworld.com/news/sikorsky-boeing-to-build-technology-demonstrator-for-future-vertical-lift

Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. (Stratford, Conn., USA), a subsidiary of United Technologies Corp. (UTC, Hartford, Conn., USA), and Boeing Defense, Space & Security, a unit of The Boeing Co. (Chicago, Ill., USA) have been selected to build a helicopter for the U.S. Army’s Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator Phase 1 program (JMR TD), paving the way for the next generation of vertical lift aircraft.
The U.S. Army Aviation Technology Directorate (AATD) selected the Sikorsky-Boeing team to continue the development of the SB>1 Defiant, a medium-lift helicopter configured to Sikorsky’s X2 coaxial design, through flight testing. First flight for the program is expected in 2017.
“Defiant will use Sikorsky’s proven X2 technology to overcome aircraft design challenges, which will be critical requirements on future vertical lift aircraft,” said Mick Maurer, Sikorsky president. “The Sikorsky-Boeing team’s integrated approach has created a unique blend of expertise, innovative spirit and customer commitment that are unmatched in the industry. The complementary capabilities of each team member have delivered a design that will provide the best future vertical lift solution to the U.S. Army, and the flexibility of our design makes it suited for naval applications as well. This is a major leap forward.”
The Defiant aircraft will feature counter-rotating rigid main rotor blades for vertical and forward flight, a pusher propeller for high-speed acceleration and deceleration, and an advanced fly-by-wire flight control system.
“Our team brings leadership and new ways of thinking to aircraft development,” said Shelley Lavender, president of Boeing Military Aircraft. “As the original equipment manufacturers for both the Black Hawk and Apache helicopters, we bring tremendous technological breadth and depth to the customer. I believe our technical capabilities and experience in development and flight testing of complex rotorcraft systems were a key factor in the customer’s decision.”
To date, Sikorsky and Boeing collectively have delivered more than 3,000 helicopters to the Army in support of its challenging missions.
The JMR TD program supports the Department of Defense’s Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program to deliver the next generation of vertical lift aircraft with greater performance, reliability and affordability. The Defiant aircraft packages evolutionary technologies in a new, innovative and affordable design that flies faster, farther and with more payload.
The JMR TD Program offers Sikorsky and Boeing the opportunity to partner with the U.S. Government in demonstrating the maturity of advanced and enabling future vertical lift technologies. Sikorsky and Boeing formed their JMR team in January 2013, and each company has invested significantly in the program.
 
Skyblazer said:
Triton said:
F-14D said:
This implies that the Big Two were picked not only for their technology, but because they've got enough cash to pick up more of the tab from the gov't than the other two.

Yes it does. That's very disappointing. It means that start-ups like AVX Aircraft and Karem Aircraft without deep pockets didn't have a chance with JMR-TD.

My question may sound naive or irrelevant for lack of in-depth knowledge of the program's developments, but why didn't AVX and Karem increase their chances to win by teaming up with other US-based industry giants? Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman may not have the strong credentials of the other two when it comes to rotorcraft, but production would have been guaranteed and at least the companies are here to stay. I guess Kaman, though a smaller company, could have been another choice.

Lockheed Martin is already teamed with Bell for the V280. When LM offered to develop a mission system for a JMR craft, Bell took them up on it. I wonder if things might have been different if AVX or Karem had taken advantage of LM's proposals. NG (assuming they were approached) may not have wanted to play a subsidiary role to such small companies, or AVX/Karem may have feared they be absorbed by such a behemoth... or maybe NG just wasn't that interested in the program.
 
"Commentary: Budgets, Not Tech, May Delay US Army's Next Rotorcraft"
Aug. 18, 2014 - 03:01PM |
By M.E. RHETT FLATER

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2014308180007

Though the US Army has yet to make a formal announcement, according to reports the Sikorsky-Boeing team and Bell Helicopter Textron have been selected for government-funded Joint Multi-Role (JMR) program technology demonstrations.

The other competitors, AVX Aircraft and Karem Aircraft, both privately held companies, failed to gain approval for funding, though both will be encouraged by the Army to continue their efforts focused on the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program.

The Boeing-Sikorsky Team and Bell Helicopter are expected to field working JMR demonstrators and perform a “first flight” prior to the end of the fourth quarter of 2017. Risk reduction will be a critical driver for the JMR program.

JMR is regarded as a science and technology precursor to the formal announcement in 2019 of a replacement aircraft for Army medium-lift under the FVL program. Valued by analysts in excess of $100 billion, FVL medium lift is intended to replace the Army’s aging fleet of nearly 4,000 Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopters and Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk utility aircraft and achieve initial operating capability in the 2035 time frame. Additional variants of FVL will follow, including light (scout reconnaissance), heavy (a CH-47 Chinook replacement), and ultra-heavy lift aircraft.

According to many experts, the Army’s ambitious FVL program represents nothing less than a revolution in rotary wing aircraft design. Preliminary requirements indicate that the aircraft should be able to carry 12 troops equipped with Land Warrior Systems, cruise at 230 knots or more, have a combat radius of 424 kilometers, and be capable of performing all requirements at 6,000 feet in temperatures of 95 degree Fahrenheit.

By comparison, current aircraft have a smaller payload, cruise at speeds of 155 knots or less, and operate within a more confined radius at 4,000 feet in 95 degree weather. The only fielded military rotorcraft that currently meets the Army’s FVL speed requirement is the Marine Corps MV-22 tiltrotor.

The stakes are high. The Army earlier this year announced a plan to decommission its fleet of OH-58D scout reconnaissance aircraft, as well as its fleet of TH-67 trainers, dealing a serious blow to Bell Helicopter’s military prospects. This leaves only the maturing multiservice V-22 program, which Bell shares with Boeing, and the US Marine Corps H-1 program.

Meanwhile, Boeing’s CH-47 heavy lift is maturing, though its AH-64 Apache program appears healthy. Also mature are Sikorsky’s H-60 programs, including the Army UH-60M and Navy SH-60R and S model aircraft.

The implications for the rotorcraft defense industrial base are significant. The world market for military rotorcraft is expected to drop from $12 billion annually to just $6 billion between now and 2018. Not all vertical lift primes and members of the supplier base are expected to survive. Many companies will increasingly depend on foreign military sales. Failing that, industry members will be forced to close major production lines and possibly merge or consolidate.

This is occurring in a backdrop of future budget uncertainty and the specter of sequestration.

The Sikorsky-Boeing JMR demonstrator, known as the SB>1 Defiant, features a co-axial design with counter-rotating rigid rotor blades for vertical and forward flight, a pusher propeller for high-speed acceleration and deceleration and an advanced fly-by-wire flight control system.

“Defiant will use Sikorsky’s proven X-2 technology to overcome aircraft design challenges, which will be critical requirements on future vertical lift aircraft,” said Mick Maurer, Sikorsky president. The FVL medium lift variant will incorporate new technology from the Army’s Future Affordable Turbine Engine Program (ATEP).

Bell Helicopter has teamed with Lockheed Martin, GE Aircraft Engines, Moog, GKN Aerospace, Spirit Aerosystems, AGC Composites, Eaton, Meggitt, Astronics and Lord Elastomerics to produce the Bell V-280 Valor. According to Keith Flail, Bell V-280 Valor program manager, “the clean sheet design of the Bell V-280 creates the capability to fly twice the range at double the speed of any existing helicopter.”

Bell’s design features newer, stronger and lighter materials, such as advanced composites and cost-saving elastomeric rotor structures.

The planned JMR demonstrator will feature the legacy General Electric T-55 engines, while the ultimate Bell Helicopter FVL design will feature technology advances from the Army’s ATEP Program.

The success or failure of Future Vertical Lift depends largely on the state of the defense budget and the probable return of sequestration in 2016. In recent remarks, Dan Bailey, the Army’s JMR program director, maintained that the $200 million JMR program was not in danger of cancellation.

“From a science and technology perspective, I have full confidence that we are not at risk,” he said.

But while government leaders regard funding for the two competing demonstrators as near certain, funding issues could delay the launch of a formal FVL completion well beyond 2019. If this materializes, JMR technologies might be applied to upgrade existing rotary wing military aircraft well beyond FVL’s intended IOC in 2035 — budgets permitting.■

Flater, a former executive director of AHS International (1991-2011), consults on issues regarding aerospace and the defense industrial base.
 
"Affordability Challenge In Pursuit Of Army JMR/FVL"
Higher speed will not be enough to persuade the U.S. Army to pursue an advanced rotorcraft
by Graham Warwick

Aug 25, 2014

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/affordability-challenge-pursuit-army-jmrfvl

Proving affordability is the biggest challenge facing Bell Helicopter as well as the Sikorsky/Boeing team as they build and fly advanced rotorcraft demonstrators aimed at the U.S. Army’s requirement to replace its Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters from the mid-2030s.

The two teams have been chosen to fly high-speed rotorcraft in 2017 under the Joint Multi-Role (JMR) technology demonstration, a precursor to the planned Future Vertical Lift Medium (FVL-M) program to replace first the utility UH-60s and later the Army’s Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopters. FVL-M could also replace the Navy’s Sikorsky MH-60 Seahawks and the Air Force’s Black Hawk variants.

Between them, the three companies supply most of the Pentagon’s rotorcraft. For Boeing and Sikorsky, winning one of the two JMR “X-plane” contracts and an FLV-M “Y-plane” fly-off planned for the mid-2020s is crucial to protecting their incumbency with the Army. For Bell, FVL-M would keep the company in the Army business after the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior is phased out.

They faced competition for the demonstrator contracts from two companies offering a “small prime, big team” approach to JMR/FVL—AVX Aircraft and Karem Aircraft. But ensuring the teams had the capability to accomplish the demonstration was a key part of the Army’s evaluation, and the “Big Three” and their suppliers brought significant engineering resources and cost-sharing to the table. Both AVX and Karem are waiting to hear if the Army will fund them to continue some technology development work on their designs.

Agreements in place with all four bidders called for 50:50 cost sharing, but both Bell and Sikorsky/Boeing say industry is investing much more than the government. The reason is the program’s importance to the rotorcraft manufacturers. JMR/FVL will “reinvigorate industry with an opportunity to design an aircraft from the ground up,” says Pat Donnelly, director of the Sikorsky/Boeing JMR team, noting that winning FVL-M would be “a significant continuation of the industrial base built up for Black Hawk and Apache.”

But FVL-M is not a done deal for the JMR winners. The technology demonstration is intended to ensure that advanced rotorcraft capable of at least 230 kt.—50% faster than the Black Hawk—are viable candidates for procurement. However, the Army has yet to decide whether and when to launch a program, or if it will be an advanced rotorcraft, a new conventional helicopter or another upgrade to the UH-60.

“The timeline is a government decision. The best we can do is execute the [demonstration] program well, show the Army the realm of the possible by 2017 and make it more likely they will want to commit,” says Chris Gehler, director of military program operations for Bell. “Affordability is critical.” Cost-prohibitive leap-ahead performance is not a solution, he says. “Everything we are doing is focused on bringing an affordable vehicle to the game. We have to give them a reason to continue.”

Sikorsky/Boeing must prove the benefit of coaxial rotors and propulsor to the utility mission. Credit: Sikorsky-Boeing Concept

For Bell, proving its 280-kt.-cruise V-280 Valor tiltrotor is affordable is crucial because the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey has established the tiltrotor’s reputation as capable, but costly to produce and maintain. “With tiltrotor you get inherent performance, but the question is affordability,” says Gehler. “The V-280 is a clean-sheet third-generation tiltrotor. Our focus is on reducing cost and weight, increasing reliability and performance, and making the aircraft come together in the most affordable way.”

The main driver of cost is weight, Gehler says, so the V-280 makes extensive use of composites in the wing, fuselage and V tail. Wing skins and ribs are of honeycomb-stiffened sandwich construction with large-cell carbon cores for fewer, larger and lighter parts. Skins and ribs are paste-bonded together, eliminating fasteners. Costs are reduced more than 30% compared with a scaled V-22 wing, Bell says.

For Sikorsky/Boeing, the 230-kt.-plus SB-1 Defiant is a scale-up of the rigid coaxial-rotor compound helicopter configuration already flown at smaller size with Sikorsky’s X2 Technology demonstrator and being built at a larger size with two industry-funded S-97 Raider light tactical helicopter prototypes, the first of which is to fly by year-end. In addition to affordability, the team will have to demonstrate the utility of the SB-1’s rigid rotors and tail-mounted propeller in the Black Hawk’s transport missions.

“Our hingeless coaxial rotors provide better maneuverability and handling, and allow us to reduce the height between the rotors for lower drag,” says Donnelly. “The goal is long range and high speed without compromising low-speed maneuverability. The Defiant will operate like a helicopter in the landing zone, but have the speed and range of a tiltrotor.” The variable-pitch propulsion will provide acceleration and deceleration, nose-up/-down pitch pointing and can be declutched for safety and quietness in the landing zone, he says.

In the phase just ended, each contender produced two rotorcraft designs, for the air vehicle concept demonstrator (AVCD) and for an objective aircraft meeting the model performance specification (MPS)—the Army science and technology community’s best guess at the FVL-M operational requirements, which will not be set for several more years. “The AVCD is a fully representative, full-scale flight demo of the MPS design to provide the Army with an accurate reflection of what to expect in a future medium-class aircraft,” says Gehler.

The AVCD designs used available technology, including legacy engines: General Electric T64s for Bell’s V-280 and Honeywell T55s for Sikorsky/Boeing’s Defiant. The MPS designs were not limited to what is available now, and could be designed around the Army’s planned fuel-efficient Future Affordable Turbine Engine, for which GE is building a demonstrator. “Composites use in the AVCD fuselage is similar to the V-22, with carbon skins and aluminum stringers. MPS has a completely composite fuselage,” says Gehler.
 
As I have said repeatedly before, I would suspect that in the mid to late 70's the same article was about; concerning the Army's desires to replace the AH-1 Cobra and UH-1 Huey. With the end of the longest war in American history (Vietnam) and the financial malaise of the day, few doubted that an Army that was to be reduced in size considerably could afford one, let alone two new rotorcraft programs.

It is exceedingly frustrating to me that the United States spends more on fixed wing engine technology than on the entirety of rotorcraft technology all together. While I certainly agree with the need to maintain an edge in engine technology, I have to wonder why it is not apparent as to which type of technology spends more time operating in dangerous combat environments. Yet there is no effort to point out this disparity.
 
yasotay said:
Yet there is no effort to point out this disparity.

Because the most likely outcome would be a chop in engine R&D not a bump in helicopter R&D.
 
sferrin said:
yasotay said:
Yet there is no effort to point out this disparity.

Because the most likely outcome would be a chop in engine R&D not a bump in helicopter R&D.
Sadly I have to agree with this.
 
Possibly some good news for AVX and Karem:


"US Army could fund AVX, Karem JMR tech development"
Marina Malenic, Washington, DC - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
06 October 2014

Source:
http://www.janes.com/article/44154/us-army-could-fund-avx-karem-jmr-tech-development

The US Army could fund development of rotorcraft technology offered by two companies not selected to build demonstrator aircraft under the Pentagon's Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator (JMR-TD) programme, officials announced on 3 October.

The army selected a Sikorsky-Boeing team and Bell Helicopter in August to build rotorcraft for JMR-TD with partial government funding,

However, in a 3 October statement, the Army said AVX Aircraft Company and Karem Aircraft Inc, two smaller companies, "also offer technologies and configurations of interest", adding it would "seek to continue technology development efforts with those teams based on resources and opportunities".

The Sikorsky-Boeing team submitted the SB-1 Defiant, a medium-lift helicopter configured in Sikorsky's X2 coaxial design, while Bell offered the army its V-280 Valor, a tiltrotor design.

Karem has said it was developing tiltrotor designs, and AVX had been working on a coaxial rotor offering. Neither Karem nor AVX had repsonded to a request for comment at the time of writing.

Any aircraft selected for FVL will ultimately be powered by the Future Affordable Turbine Engine: a next-generation helicopter engine that is expected to provide fuel-burn savings and increased speed.

The JMR-TD is the precursor to the army's estimated USD100 billion Future Vertical Lift (FVL) programme, which is meant to eventually replace the UH-60 Black Hawk utility helicopters and AH-64 Apache attack helicopters.
 
The Army made the news official last Friday:

"U.S. Army Selects Bell and Sikorsky/Boeing to Build Prototypes for Next Generation Helicopter Program"
By: Dave Majumdar
Published: October 3, 2014 5:27 PM
Updated: October 3, 2014 5:33 PM

Source:
http://news.usni.org/2014/10/03/u-s-army-selects-bell-sikorskyboeing-build-prototypes-next-generation-helicopter-program

The U.S. Army has picked designs from Bell Helicopter and a Sikorsky/Boeing team to continue development of Joint Multi-Role (JMR) high-speed rotorcraft designs.

“These teams will build technology demonstration (TD) aircraft with flight tests starting in 2017,” the Army said in a statement released to USNI News on Friday.

The two prototype aircraft will be built and flown as part of the Joint Multi Role Technology Demonstrator Air Vehicle effort—which will inform the Army’s Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program to replace the long-serving Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk and Boeing AH-64E Apache.

The FVL program will also inform the US Navy’s MH-XX program to replace the MH-60 Seahawk.

“The intent of the JMR TD effort is to maximize the knowledge gain and risk reduction toward an anticipated Future Vertical Lift acquisition program,” said Dan Bailey, the Army’s JMR/FVL program director.
“The baseline strategy based on the current funding allocation requires descope from the four initial designs to two for build and flight test.”

Two other teams led by Karem Aircraft and AVX Aircraft were not selected for continued development, but the service is still interested in their technologies.

“The Army will seek to continue technology development efforts with those teams based on resources and opportunities,” the service said.

The Sikorsky-Boeing entry, called the SB-1 Defiant, is a compound helicopter design with co-axial rotors and a pusher-propeller. The aircraft is based on Sikorsky’s revolutionary X-2 design that was designed to overcome the 200-knot speed limit of most helicopters as a result of a phenomenon called the dissymmetry of lift.

The Bell Helicopter design, which is called the V-280 Valor, is an advanced tilt-rotor design that is based upon technology similar to the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey. The new tilt-rotor is smaller, faster and much more maneuverable than the Osprey and has a top speed of over 300 knots.

The rejected AVX design was a compound helicopter design similar to the Defiant. Meanwhile, the rejected Karem proposal was a variable-speed tilt-rotor similar to the Bell entry.
 
"The Army will seek to continue technology...based on resources and opportunities"

Trans. "Great job! Thanks for playing. B'Bye now.
 
The new tilt-rotor is smaller, faster and much more maneuverable than the Osprey and has a top speed of over 300 knots.

...how maneuverable is the Osprey (in helicopter mode)? Less than a comparable helo?
 
yasotay said:
"The Army will seek to continue technology...based on resources and opportunities"

Trans. "Great job! Thanks for playing. B'Bye now.
More accurately "You're not getting any more money, but you can still talk to us and use our logos."
 
"Army Propels Next Generation Helicopter Program Forward"
by Kris Osborn on October 8, 2014

Source:
http://defensetech.org/2014/10/08/army-propels-next-generation-helicopter-program-forward/

The U.S. Army is immersed in testing with two industry teams contracted to develop and build a fuel-efficient, high-speed, next-generation medium-lift helicopter to enter service by 2030.

The service’s Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator, or JMR TD, program awarded development deals to Bell Helicopter-Textron and Sikorsky-Boeing teams to build demonstrator aircraft by 2017 to help inform the development of a new medium-class helicopter.

“These teams will build technology demonstration aircraft with flight tests starting in 2017,” an Army statement said.

Textron Inc.’s Bell Helicopter is building a tilt-rotor aircraft called the Bell V-280 Valor – and the Sikorsky-Boeing team is working on early testing of its SB> 1 Defiant coaxial rotor-blade design.

Planned mission sets for the JMR include cargo, utility, armed scout, attack, humanitarian assistance, medical evacuation, anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, land/sea search and rescue, special warfare support, vertical replenishment, airborne mine countermeasures, and others, Army officials said.

Although requirements for the aircraft are still being refined, the notional concept is to succeed in building a new aircraft which can reach speeds of 230 knots, carry up to 12 troops, operate in what’s called “high-hot” conditions and achieve a combat radius of 424 kilometers.

A key intent of the program is to develop a fuel-efficient aircraft which can reach high-speeds while retaining an ability to hover and maneuver as though it is a traditional helicopter.

A combat radius of 424 kilometers means the aircraft will be engineered with an ability to fly 848 kilometers on a round-trip mission without needing to refuel. Along with calling for increased fuel efficiency, the draft requirements also ask that the aircraft be able to operate at altitudes of 6,000-feet and temperatures of 95-degrees Fahrenheit.

Described as “high-hot” conditions, the decreased air pressure at higher altitudes and hotter atmospheric temperatures typically make it more difficult for helicopters to maneuver, maintain lift and operate effectively.

The JMR TD program, run by the Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center and Program Executive Office– Aviation, is also closely tracking offerings and developments from two other industry teams – Karen Aircraft Inc. and AVX Aircraft Company, an Army statement added.

“The intent of the JMR TD effort is to maximize the knowledge gain and risk reduction toward an anticipated Future Vertical Lift acquisition program,” said Dan Bailey, JMR/FVL Program Director. “The baseline strategy based on the current funding allocation requires de-scope from the four initial designs to two for build and flight test.”

The SB> 1 Defiant uses two, rigid counter-rotating coaxial rotor-blades along with a pusher-prop propeller at the back of the helicopter to provide additional thrust, said Doug Shidler, JMR program director, Sikorsky.

“Coax systems are not new they have been around for quite some time. The advantage that we are employing here is a rigid rotor with a left-offset that eliminates the need for lead-lag. We are able to bring the rotor heads closer together which, in forward speed, reduces aerodynamic drag that exists between the rotor heads,” Shidler told Military​.com.

The pusher-prop on the back of the aircraft is a small propeller behind the counter-rotating rotor heads. It operates with what’s called positive and negative pitch, allowing the aircraft to lean up or down and move both forwards and backwards, he added.

“It enables you to hover with a nose up or nose down attitude so for mission execution you can engage an enemy on a ridge line or in a valley without losing sight. You can sit there in a hover,” Shidler added.

The pusher prop is part of the technological mechanism which enables the aircraft to reach much greater speeds that helicopters have historically flown.

“When it (pusher-prop) is disengaged, the aircraft can fly as a conventional helicopter and fly up to 150 or 160 knots. Once you engage the prop itself that gives you much greater speed. With the pusher prop as you engage it you can take off pretty much like a fixed-wing aircraft. Or you can choose not to utilize the prop and take off and land like a conventional helicopter,” Shidler said.

The Sikorsky-Boeing team has already conducted reduced-scale drag wind-testing and planned additional power-model wind tunnel testing in coming weeks.

“Scaled-model wind tunnel tests provide us with aerodynamic data to ensure that the models are tools that we’ve been employing on the design properly,” Shidler said.

While the Sikorsky-Boeing team hopes their design is ultimately the one chosen by the Army for the platform, they recognized they are in part helping to inform the maturation of performance-enhancing technologies for future use.

“Our goal is to influence the analysis of alternatives and help the government make the right decision. We want to be flying by the end of the fiscal year 2017,” said Pat Donnelly, JMR deputy program director, Boeing. “We’ve completed our preliminary design and we are now in our detailed design phase where we are working with suppliers to put together a plan.”

The Army plans to closely analyze the development of the JMR demonstrator helicopters with a mind to determining which design will ultimately become a program of record for the future.
 
"Sikorsky, Boeing Expect To Fly JMR Demonstrator in '17"
Oct. 14, 2014 - 04:19PM |
By AARON MEHTA

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20141014/SHOWSCOUT04/310140036/Sikorsky-Boeing-Expect-Fly-JMR-Demonstrator-17

WASHINGTON — The SB-1 Defiant, being developed by Boeing and Sikorsky for the Army’s Joint Multi-Role (JMR) program, is on track for first flight in fiscal 2017, executives for the companies said Tuesday.

Doug Shidler and Pat Donnelly, the JMR program heads for Sikorsky and Boeing, respectively, briefed reporters on the Defiant’s progress during this year’s AUSA conference.

The JMR program is the opening stage of the Army’s future vertical lift program that aims to replace its Apache and Black Hawk fleets. A downselect in August left the SB-1 team competing with Bell Helicopter and its V-280 Valor tiltrotor design.

The Defiant is a coaxial design, featuring counter-rotating rigid main rotor blades for vertical and forward flight. The program heads said the design gives greater maneuverability, including the ability to hover and tilt the nose 20 degrees up or 20 degrees down with minimal downwash.

Full Coverage From our AUSA Digital Show Daily

Donnelly said the first flight of the prototype is planned for summer or fall of 2017 at the Sikorsky experimental flight facility in West Palm Beach, Florida. Right now, there are manufacturing risk reduction efforts underway, although a detailed design of components will not be finished until next summer.

The design is part of the family of systems that draw on Sikorsky’s X2 technology program, which began in the late 2000s. But the scale is dramatically different. While the X2 was a one-person, 5,000-pound aircraft, the Defiant is scaled to hold a crew of four and 12 fully equipped soldiers, each in excess of 300 pounds.

The current design has some wiggle room in, which has let the company learn about scalability for the design. That could pay off big, as some of the design specs for what the Army wants are yet to be finalized — and the overall future vertical lift requirement includes a number of different weight classes.

“So as the Army develops their future vertical lift requirements, we now have a tool set that can scale along with their requirements,” Shidler said.

Another X2-based program, the S-97 Raider, is Sikorsky’s challenger to replace the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior fleet.

The companies are trying to meet requirements for a program that is planned to go operational in 2034. That brings a certain amount of risk, although Shidler expressed confidence in the firm’s plans.

“We find it very important to be involved with the process of what’s going to replace our current platforms,” he said, noting that it is “critical” to invest in the technology base for both companies.

Interestingly, 40 percent of that joint team is comprised of engineers with 10 years of experience or less, a conscious effort by the companies to bring new thinking and ideas to the program.

The men admitted that the SB-1’s current T55 engine, the same one used in the Chinook, is not powerful enough to carry the design to the requirements expected by the Army. That’s partly by design, however, as the Army is expecting to have a new engine ready through a pair of development programs by the time the helicopter is operational.

“We are taking off-the-shelf engines, but we have sized the aircraft to meet the [range] requirement,” Shidler explained. “We have the fuel size and so forth. That is based on the fuel efficiencies that are expected coming out of the [Future Affordable Turbine Engine] type engine technology that would be available in this time frame.”

The executives stressed that the program represents a true joint venture, with engineers co-located in one office and working on the entire program together.

“We are working together. We haven’t necessarily identified ‘you’re doing that part, we’re doing this part,’ ” Shidler said. “The team is working together without one specific assignment.”
 

Attachments

  • bildeSB1.jpg
    bildeSB1.jpg
    22.8 KB · Views: 375
"Sikorsky, Boeing finalise design of SB-1 Defiant"
By: Dan Parsons
Washington DC
Source: Flightglobal.com
22:30 14 Oct 2014

Source:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/sikorsky-boeing-finalise-design-of-sb-1-defiant-404763/

Sikorsky and Boeing have finalised the design of the team’s offering for the US Army’s joint multi-role technology demonstrator (JMR-TD), called the SB-1 Defiant.

The configuration is a militarised and scaled up version of Sikorsky’s X2, the rigid rotor coaxial compound helicopter that demonstrated a 250kt (460km/h) speed in level flight in 2010.

“In addition to speed, the low-speed manoeuvrablity is also quite significant, as well as the high-hot performance,” says Doug Shidler, Sikorsky’s JMR programme manager, meaning the aircraft can hover 6,000ft above sea level on a 35˚C (95˚F) day.

The SB-1’s pusher propeller will allow it to move forward and back at a level attitude or pitch 20˚ nose up or down without moving forward or back, which is impossible with current rotorcraft. The aircraft will be able to cruise at more than 250kt, outpacing the army’s 230kt speed requirement.

The coaxial rotors create very little downwash compared with a traditional helicopter, Shidler says. It is also maritime capable with folding rotor blades.

Pat Donnelly, Boeing’s JMR programme manager said the aircraft is designed to carry 12 fully equipped troops, plus crew of four. To do that, the cabin is about 50% larger than the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk, he says.

Because it is using off-the-shelf Honeywell T55 turboshaft engines, the Defiant demonstrator will fall short of the army’s fuel efficiency and range desires, Donnelly says.

The production model of the aircraft is designed with engines that meet the army’s 229nm (424km) range requirement based on fuel efficiencies expected from the future affordable turbine engine (FATE), Shidler says.

Two participants will compete for a contract to build a future vertical lift (FVL) aircraft, the overriding long-term effort to replace the army’s entire inventory of rotorcraft beginning with utility platforms like the UH-60 around 2030.

X2 technologies, including rigid coaxial rotors and fly-by-wire flight controls, already have been parlayed into the Sikorsky S-97 Raider, the Defiant’s smaller brother.

While the X2 weighed about 2,720kg (6,000lb), the Raider weighs about 5,000kg. A functional prototype of the Raider was unveiled in early October and is scheduled for first flight by the end of the year.

Weighing in at over 13,600kg, the Defiant is much larger in comparison. A ground test rig for the engine, rotors and transmission is scheduled to fire up in 2016 with first flight scheduled for the end of fiscal year 2017 at Sikorsky’s West Palm Beach, Florida facility.

“We wanted to demonstrate the scalability of this configuration and architecture,” Shidler says. “As the army develops their future vertical lift requirements, we now have a tool set that can scale along with their requirements.
 
"Sikorsky, Bell Tout Flying Characteristics Of JMR Rotorcraft Candidates"
Replacing U.S. Army medium helicopters is about more than speed
by Graham Warwick
Oct 20, 2014


Source:
http://aviationweek.com/technology/sikorsky-bell-tout-flying-characteristics-jmr-rotorcraft-candidates

Speed comes at a cost and, as Bell and Sikorsky/Boeing design fast rotorcraft demonstrators for the U.S. Army, to justify the price they must prove their designs will do more than cross the battlefield more swiftly than today’s helicopters.

Their competing Joint Multi Role (JMR) demonstrators are set to fly in 2017, but Sikorsky will have an early opportunity to showcase all its rigid coaxial-rotor compound helicopter configuration can do when its 220-kt. S-97 Raider armed scout prototype flies.

The first industry funded S-97 rolled out Oct. 2 (see photo) and is planned to fly this year. A second will be used for customer demonstrations soon after the first Raider has opened up the flight envelope. Sikorsky is already designing demonstrations with prospective customers, to show the military utility of higher speed, but also the design’s “unique flight characteristics.”

Sikorsky’s X2 configuration comprises contra-rotating rotors with hingeless hubs and stiff blades for hover efficiency and low-speed agility. The rigid rotors are closely spaced, hubs and shaft faired, to minimize drag at high speed. Coaxial rotors eliminate the tailrotor. Instead the engine also drives a pusher propulsor via a clutch so the propeller can be disengaged at low speed to increase safety and reduce noise.

This integration of coaxial rotors and pusher propulsor gives the Raider its unique characteristics. The 11,000-lb. helicopter will hover out-of-ground effect at 10,000 ft. on a 95F day, compared with 4,000 ft. for the Army’s 5,500-lb. Bell OH-58D Kiowa Warrior armed scout. The Raider will cruise at 220 kt. carrying external stores—faster when clean and light—while the OH-58D can be limited to just 90 kt. in hot/high conditions, Sikorsky says.

But the variable-pitch propulsor, active elevons and rudders on the tail, and rotor disks that can tilt together or differentially give the S-97—and therefore also the Sikorsky/Boeing SB-1 Defiant JMR demonstrator—“more control degrees of freedom” than a conventional helicopter, says Andreas Bernhard, Raider chief engineer.

To move into forward flight from the hover, a traditional helicopter tilts its rotor disk down and the fuselage follows, leaving the pilots looking at the ground as it accelerates. Using the pusher propeller, the Raider can lift into a hover and accelerate “in a level attitude to 200 kt. at the end of the runway, giving the pilots complete situational awareness of the environment around them,” Bernhard says.

At low speed, the propulsor’s forward- and reverse-thrust capability “allows us to decouple the aircraft’s attitude from its trajectory, to point it in directions different to where it is flying,” Bernhard says. “We can hang on the prop and drop the nose, or sit on the prop and pull the nose up, which allows us to sweep a cone with the sensors and weapons.”

In level flight, rudders and elevons allow different trim states that enable aircraft attitude to be adjusted to reduce drag or optimize the sensor or weapon field of regard, he says. The Raider will also be able to pull -higher-g maneuvers at higher speeds than conventional helicopters, although Sikorsky is not revealing its maneuverability targets for the aircraft.

But it is not just Sikorsky (and Boeing) that must prove the value of a new configuration. Bell has to show that a high-speed tiltrotor can match a helicopter in hover capability and low-speed agility. The V-22 Osprey has proved a tiltotor is fast, and can decelerate and accelerate quickly to increase survivability into and out of the landing zone. But the V-22 has higher disk loading and lower hover efficiency than a helicopter.

Compared to the V-22, the 280-kt. V-280 Valor JMR demonstrator will be simpler and lighter, with lower disk loading and longer wing for greater hover and cruise efficiency. But Bell does not have a prototype to display before the V-280 flies. So it has teamed with Textron sister company TRU Simulation & Training to build a high-fidelity marketing simulator. “We want to get more pilots in, so they can understand how to fly a tiltrotor, its acceleration and deceleration and low-speed agility,” says Keith Flail, Bell’s Future Vertical Lift program director.
 
With defference to Cammnut, I found the comments of MandS VERY interesting at the bottom of the article.
 
Model of Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant on display at AUSA 2014.

Source:
https://twitter.com/valerieinsinna/status/522121159190802432
 

Attachments

  • Bz7ybT-IQAAFmmx.jpg
    Bz7ybT-IQAAFmmx.jpg
    37.9 KB · Views: 356
yasotay said:
With defference to Cammnut, I found the comments of MandS VERY interesting at the bottom of the article.

Perhaps you could interpret them for us mere mortals :)
 
marauder2048 said:
yasotay said:
With defference to Cammnut, I found the comments of MandS VERY interesting at the bottom of the article.

Perhaps you could interpret them for us mere mortals :)

My immortal status is revolked

There is a long comment to the article by Graham (a.k.a. Cammnut) Warwick that I thought interesting. Not overly agreeable, but interesting. ...just trying to generate some conversation.
 
yasotay said:
My immortal status is revolked

There is a long comment to the article by Graham (a.k.a. Cammnut) Warwick that I thought interesting. Not overly agreeable, but interesting. ...just trying to generate some conversation.

Gotcha. I was merely interested in knowing what you found interesting.
 
Source:
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/DCPhoto4/media/20131022sikorskydefiantsbgt1_zps1c12bb5f.jpg.html
 

Attachments

  • sikorskydefiantsbgt.jpg
    sikorskydefiantsbgt.jpg
    178.3 KB · Views: 312
VTOLicious said:
The new tilt-rotor is smaller, faster and much more maneuverable than the Osprey and has a top speed of over 300 knots.

...how maneuverable is the Osprey (in helicopter mode)? Less than a comparable helo?

How do you define manoeuvrability?
 
Avimimus said:
VTOLicious said:
The new tilt-rotor is smaller, faster and much more maneuverable than the Osprey and has a top speed of over 300 knots.

...how maneuverable is the Osprey (in helicopter mode)? Less than a comparable helo?

How do you define manoeuvrability?
Like all other things with the government there are specifications laid out for what constitutes the minimum criterion for maneuverability by weight class. Don't recall the exact nomenclature for the document, but I would expect if the V-280 cannot at least maneuver to the standards of the UH-60 ... well that would probably be less desirable.
Sikorsky-Boeing will have to meet the same criteria. May not be so simple since they don't have a sideways propeller at the back of the machine.
I am guessing here, but would not be surprised if the USMC opted for a different route with the V-22 since it is not catagorized as a helicopter. It is the size of a CH-47 with the weight of a CH-53.
 
Published on Nov 27, 2014

The Sikorsky S-97 Raider and Defiant SB1 Defiant are the next generation multi-mission helicopters platform. The S-97 RAIDER aircraft’s capabilities will meet both conventional U.S. Army and Special Operations future requirements in a variety of combat roles. Additionally, potential applications for US Air Force, US Navy, and US Marine Corp services are being explored.
The U.S. Army Aviation Technology Directorate (AATD) selected the Sikorsky-Boeing team to continue the development of the SB1 Defiant, a medium-lift helicopter configured to Sikorsky’s X2™ coaxial design, through flight testing. First flight for the program is expected in 2017.

http://youtu.be/0BT_xbMrfi0
 

Attachments

  • SikorskyDefiant.jpg
    SikorskyDefiant.jpg
    58.3 KB · Views: 368

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom