LHX Program

[hesham]

Hi,

Boeing-Sikorsky LHX helicopter in 1989.

http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1989/1989%20-%201276.html

 

[hesham]

Hi,

the Boeing-Vertol LHX in 1984.
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1984/1984%20-%200383.html

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I don't think thats anything but a generic advanced helicopter.

 

[yasotay]

I don't think thats anything but a generic advanced helicopter.

That would be a correct assumption.

 

[hesham]

I agree with you my dears overscan and yasotay,but its front wing is
strange for me,and here the Sikorsky ABC of 1982 for LHX.

http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1982/1982%20-%202712.html?search=LHX%20helicopter%201984.

 

[yasotay]

I agree with you my dears overscan and yasotay,but its front wing is
strange for me,and here the Sikorsky ABC of 1982 for LHX.
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1982/1982%20-%202712.html?search=LHX%20helicopter%201984.

I was but a mere Lieutenant of Aviation when LHX started. I remember sitting in my buddies backyard and watching the XH-59 flying back into Cairns Army Airfield. With pictures of fast almost glove fit scout helicopters making me giddy, life as an Army Aviator looked very exciting. Twenty-two years later I retired the same year as the Army finally put Comanche to rest. Now we can barely take a civil helicopter and turn it into an interim scout helicopter to replace the interim scout helicopter we have been using for ~25 years.

I certainly can understand how my Russian brethren must feel with the age of some of their birds.

 

[flateric]

OK, how do we feel with the Hokum and Havoc first flights in 1982? Its 26 (twenty six) years ago... I say, rather frustrated we are...

 

[hesham]

Hi,

I can't imagine that LHX shape,from an artist picture,but it had a
big wings.
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1983/1983%20-%201971.html?search=vfw%20AIRCRAFT%201988

 

[flateric]

LHX First Team (Boeing/Sikorsky) ad - May 1990

 

[flateric]

LHX Super Team (McDonnell Douglas/Bell Textron) ads
December 1988 (1), January 1991 (2,3)

 

[flateric]

Modified NOTAR system Super Team LHX design as of February 1991

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

More LHX drawings.

Source: Flugreview December 1988 via Flateric

 

[airman]

other materials from a free encyclopedia : wikipedia , naturally ! ;D ;D

LHX Attack Chopper - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[flateric]

Superteam ad
Superteam LHX in Transport/MEDEVAC version

RAH-66 stat photo (full-scale mockup, actually)

 

[Antonio]

More

 

[yasotay]

I remember as a young lad being giddy with excitement as I learned the UH-1, that someday I would fly a fighter-like tilt rotor or F-16-esque rotorcraft. Now all I have as a retired old fellow is a $3 billion dollar museum piece and the possibility that someday the exciting new X-2 technology will bring dramatic improvement. I can only hope that I will live long enough to see that and the realization that V-22 is a revolution.

At the 1986 Army Aviation Assoc. meeting I remember looking at the Boeing "Tadpole" concept and asking where the cockpit was. A kindly silver haired man told me it was where is always was but that there was no canopy. When I told him I would not fly it, he smiled and responded that I might not, but my son would. I thought he was a bit particular. Now I seem him as well before his time.

Anyone have any pictures of the Boeing original LHX concept?

Edit- guess I should review the thread before writing... already told my sad story and there is a picture of the Boeing concept. So let me revise my request. Anyone have any OTHER pictures of the Boeing concept?

 

[F-14D]

Anyone have any pictures of the Boeing original LHX concept?

Edit- guess I should review the thread before writing... already told my sad story and there is a picture of the Boeing concept. So let me revise my request. Anyone have any OTHER pictures of the Boeing concept?

Ah, but have you seen pictures of Boeing's Tilt-Rotor proposal?

 

[yasotay]

No I have not seen the Boeing Tilt Rotor proposal. I don't recall ever even being aware there was one.

 

[F-14D]

No I have not seen the Boeing Tilt Rotor proposal. I don't recall ever even being aware there was one.

As I recall, Boeing was trying to decide whether to bid an advanced helo or a Tilt-Rotor to meet the original LHX requirements. From what I remember of the Tilt-Rotor design they were considering, it followed the Boeing philosophy of the time, that the proprotors tilted but the engines didn't (their Model 222, which lost out to Bell's Model 300 for the NASA competition that resulted in the XV-15 shared this design concept). It had a V-tail and the air intake for the engines in the fuselage was on top, above and behind the cockpit (think of a flattened Ryan XV-5 intake). I think the wings had a slight forward sweep, and there may have been a rearward retracting sensor mast that would have been fully enclosed when down. A number of proposed XV-15 derivatives, BTW, also envisioned such a mast.

We'll never know whether Boeing would have actually bid it, because suddenly the Army revised its specifications in such a way as to exclude Tilt-Rotor. Maybe they feared that Boeing and Bell might team on LHX as they did on JVX, and the other companies would pull out. Then you wouldn't have a "competition"...

 

[yasotay]

No I have not seen the Boeing Tilt Rotor proposal. I don't recall ever even being aware there was one.

As I recall, Boeing was trying to decide whether to bid an advanced helo or a Tilt-Rotor to meet the original LHX requirements. From what I remember of the Tilt-Rotor design they were considering, it followed the Boeing philosophy of the time, that the proprotors tilted but the engines didn't (their Model 222, which lost out to Bell's Model 300 for the NASA competition that resulted in the XV-15 shared this design concept). It had a V-tail and the air intake for the engines in the fuselage was on top, above and behind the cockpit (think of a flattened Ryan XV-5 intake). I think the wings had a slight forward sweep, and there may have been a rearward retracting sensor mast that would have been fully enclosed when down. A number of proposed XV-15 derivatives, BTW, also envisioned such a mast.

We'll never know whether Boeing would have actually bid it, because suddenly the Army revised its specifications in such a way as to exclude Tilt-Rotor. Maybe they feared that Boeing and Bell might team on LHX as they did on JVX, and the other companies would pull out. Then you wouldn't have a "competition"...

I was just the other day reviewing the RAND study that (not surprisingly) confirmed what the Army wanted to hear; that conventional rotorcraft would make a better Reconnaissance platform. Notice I did not say Reconnaissance Attackplatform. Of the ten areas looked at eight of them were judged to be better suited to a tilt rotor. Only the two directly related to reconaissance were judged to be better suitied to a conventional rotorcraft. The tilt rotor data was so compelling that RAND even went as far as to recommend that the Army really ought to continue to invest in exploration of that technology. A recommendation that obviously did not make it past the printing shop.

Sadly with Bell's retreat on BA-609, the status quo thinkers within Army Aviation feel vindicated that it will remain too expensive. How far they have fallen since the days when they looked to take new technology and make it work.

 

[ysi_maniac]

I am interested in building (scratch, of course) the supersonic one.
Does anyone have dimensions, approx?
I assume that contrarotating will be acheived by diferential air flow through back louvres. Am I right?
Where are the intakes? under rotor?
Does it stops rotor to acheive supersonic speed? Like the other one:

 

[flateric]

it's just an artist's rendering from the head of MDC artist...so only thing you can try is to use pilot's figure for size reference

 

[Jemiba]

"Does it stops rotor to achieve supersonic speed?"

perhaps you should use a foldable rotor,as seems to be planned
for the Kamov Ka-90. (See here http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4400.0/highlight,kamo+90.html )
With the small, but recognisable wing, the MDC design looks
more realistic, than the one from Kamov ...

 

[jeffryfontaine]

I am interested in building (scratch, of course) the supersonic one.
Does anyone have dimensions, approx?
I assume that contrarotating will be acheived by diferential air flow through back louvres. Am I right?
Where are the intakes? under rotor?
Does it stops rotor to acheive supersonic speed? Like the other one:

Carlos,

I have the resin Lunar Models 1/48th scale model of the Hughes/MDC LHX SCAT helicopter that was produced by that company many years ago. Actually this is the second time I have acquired the kit having disposed of one about ten years ago, was glad to see it go away then some guy at the local model show pleaded with me to take his kit since he was not interested in building it. For the price that he offered, I could not refuse, if I had held out it may have been possible that he would have paid me to take the kit but I thought it best to at least provide him with some compensation for his troubles. This is a very basic kit based on the conceptual artwork from Hughes/MDC at the time and it consists of the following parts:

Fuselage top and bottom
Cockpit tub
Clear vacu-form canopy
Wings
NOTAR device
Rotor hub
Rotor blades (four blades)

I have had two of these kits and do not recall decals being provided in either one.

If you were to replicate this in 1/72nd scale it would be best to find a pair of very large centerline drop tanks from a 1/32nd scale F-4, you would need the original Sargent-Fletcher tank as used during the Vietnam War and by the Navy. The need for two tanks is that you will need to cut them up to double the length. The best choice for your cockpit might be from an F-16 or similar era aircraft. A source for your rotor blades would probably be from any helicopter that has at least four blades or more if you can find one.

 

[ysi_maniac]

Hi Jeffry,

Thanks a lot for your info. I was already thinking about a Phantom's centerline tank. But, imo 1/32 is too big. Can I ask you to put the pieces of your model over a scanner and scan them, or a zenital photo. Additionally I would need the fuselage length of your model in mm if possible. PM me if you prefer

Thanks again.

 

[flateric]

MDHC LHX ad from March of 1986

 

[flateric]

Some LHX artist's concepts - either new, or re-posted in better quality

Source: Inernational Combat Arms

 

[Triton]

Was the LHX/LOA program always intended to produce a recon/observation helicopter or was it also intended to produce a light utility helicopter? One of the Bell/Douglas concepts on the first page of the thread shows a medevac variant. I was wondering if at one point they also intended the program to produce a light utility helicopter like the UH-72A Lakota/Eurocopter EC 145.

Would the LHX/LOA program have produced two rotary aircraft one with an RAH/OH designation and the other with a UH designation?

 

[yasotay]

Was the LHX/LOA program always intended to produce a recon/observation helicopter or was it also intended to produce a light utility helicopter? One of the Bell/Douglas concepts on the first page of the thread shows a medevac variant. I was wondering if at one point they also intended the program to produce a light utility helicopter like the UH-72A Lakota/Eurocopter EC 145.

Would the LHX/LOA program have produced two rotary aircraft one with an RAH/OH designation and the other with a UH designation?

The original program was to produce two aircraft one a recon/attack and one a light utility. They were to have as much commonality as possible. The utility effort quickly bit the dust as funds began to dry up.

 

[flateric]

BELL/MDC LHX from "Bell Aircraft since 1935" by Alain J. Pelletier

 

[hesham]

Hi,

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1989/1989%20-%202856.html

 

[Triton]

Artist's impression of Hughes, later McDonnell Douglas, LHX scout attack (Scat) helicopter with Notar (no tail rotor) and high visibility cockpit.

Source: "LHX--a giant leap" by Mike Gaines Flight International June 1,1985
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1985/1985 - 1775.html

 

[Triton]

Artist's impression (top) of Bell/McDonnell Douglas "SuperTeam" LHX concept.

Artist's impression (middle) of Boeing/Sikorsky "First Team" LHX concept.

Artist's impression (bottom) of Boeing/Sikorsky "First Team" LHX concept cockpit.

Source: "Meeting the LHX Challenge" Flight International February 25, 1989
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1989/1989%20-%200494.html

 

[flateric]

Dynoman post from RAH-66 thread

Hughes had a NOTAR system with a scimitar main rotar (Testor kits) and a convential rotar in early drawings.

 

[frank]

I thought the Testors kit was a combination of all the theoretical stealth helo characteristics, like the F-19 & MiG-37 were overall stealth concepts, no specific design.

 

[yasotay]

I actually have a real copy of the Hughes "Fighter" LHX print matted and framed. I got it as a young aviation officer who had visions of Hughes fighters and Bell BATs swirling in my head, thinking I was going to have such a cool flying career. Boy did I get jipped! Here I am thirty years later chugging around in a souped up Model T (as in tweeked single rotor helo's that don't go much further or faster than their predessors).

 

[Sundog]

I actually have a real copy of the Hughes "Fighter" LHX print matted and framed. I got it as a young aviation officer who had visions of Hughes fighters and Bell BATs swirling in my head, thinking I was going to have such a cool flying career. Boy did I get jipped! Here I am thirty years later chugging around in a souped up Model T (as in tweaked single rotor helo's that don't go much further or faster than their predecessors).

I always liked their NOTAR system and their design. Here's hoping the X2 Technology pans out, because helo technology has been too long neglected. Of course, who knows, you might be flying one of those Israeli Urban Aero XHawks in ten years. Their website states it's about to start free flight hover testing. It looks to be a ducted fan suited for the Urban environment, as you prefer and that I'm sorry we've abandoned over here; Well, with the exception of the twin ducted fan "back pack" being worked on here.

 

[F-14D]

I actually have a real copy of the Hughes "Fighter" LHX print matted and framed. I got it as a young aviation officer who had visions of Hughes fighters and Bell BATs swirling in my head, thinking I was going to have such a cool flying career. Boy did I get jipped! Here I am thirty years later chugging around in a souped up Model T (as in tweeked single rotor helo's that don't go much further or faster than their predessors).

Although I would have far preferred that LHX had stayed with its original concept and acted as an impetus to developing advanced rotorcraft concepts, it would have been intriguing to see what would have happened if there had been a flyoff and the SuperTeam flew its concept of NOTAR married to Bell's 680 rotor.

 

[Stargazer]

I actually have a real copy of the Hughes "Fighter" LHX print matted and framed. I got it as a young aviation officer who had visions of Hughes fighters and Bell BATs swirling in my head, thinking I was going to have such a cool flying career. Boy did I get jipped! Here I am thirty years later chugging around in a souped up Model T (as in tweeked single rotor helo's that don't go much further or faster than their predessors).

Boy, what a letdown! Don't despair, maybe you'll actually get a chance to fly a Speedhawk or X-Hawk production type before you retire! LOL

 

[Dynoman]

Frank, you are correct. After a little more research the Testors model is strictly conjecture. I remember various blade concepts under development in the 80's to reduce tip votices and it was such information that Testors used to create the scimitar blade design used in their LHX.

"Testors combined many of the ideas then under development -- including a faceted composite exterior, scimitar-shaped blades and a propeller-less tail -- to create this conjectural design."

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/STINGBAT%20LHX%20HELICOPTER%20PAGE.htm

Some of the latest on the application of blade vortex generation and noise reduction can be found in an interesting article on the new Blue Edge blade system.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/02/eurocopter-moves-one-step-closer-to-whisper-mode/