[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: IMG_0687.png (189 KB, 768x401)
189 KB
189 KB PNG
The V-280 Valor has started ground testing.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dafw9bFOr1I

Say something nice about her.
>>
It looks like a blackhawk, which I guess is a compliment
>>
>>35452152
I sexually identify as a VTOL
>>
>>35452152
I understand that the long wings help with fuel efficiency and weight, but it looks so silly.

Tbh the civilian model looks nicer.
>>
>>35452152
What song will be for the Valor as "Fortunate Son" (It Ain't Me) is for the Huey?

"Radioactive," maybe?
>>
File: Untitled.png (9 KB, 520x88)
9 KB
9 KB PNG
>>35452152
Its already triggering people on youtube.
>>
File: bell-V-280-range.jpg (176 KB, 700x358)
176 KB
176 KB JPG
>>35452152
Valor is a cute, and has twice the speed and range of a UH-60.
(322mph vs 180 mph)
>>
>>35452152
Are they blurring the fucking gearboxes? We all know how a diff works, baka
>>
>>35452370
T-that's lewd!
>>
>>35452355
Huh. So it can fly from Japan to SK? That seems really useful. Is that safe?
>>
>>35452152

It's so ugly....

Why are they making the valor when we already have the osprey?

Can we please post aesthetic vtol aircraft? Even if it's just concept art or fictional? Bonus points if it looks like it can be built within this decade
>>
Do the wings fold?
You could probably fit three black hawks in the same footprint.
>>
>>35452377
Because of the lack of rotating engines, lower disc-loading and no wing rotation mech, it's lighter and safer that the V-22.
It won't burn the shit out of ramp surfaces or grass either.
>>
>>35452382
Osprey for cargo
Valor for people

It’s cheaper to make and operate than the Osprey, so they can have more of them.
>>
>>35452377
Why would it not be

Tiltrotors in forward flight are no more unsafe than anything else, its just when you start going full retard and doing sketchy vertical landings that they start having problems
>>
File: xd.jpg (173 KB, 850x708)
173 KB
173 KB JPG
OMG IT SPINS
>>
wtf
>>
baka
>>
>>35452152
deeply disappointed at the lack of inverted V tail.
>>
File: IMG_3272.jpg (16 KB, 248x195)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>35452355
>tfw ferried from Tokyo directly to the battle of Pyongyang.
>>
>>35452382
Falcon is my baby
>>
>>35452386
I would hope so, considering ospreys already have that weird mechanism where the wings turn to go long ways ontop
>>
>>35452386
>>
>>35452152
How many dead can this thing digest... i mean deploy /
>>
>>35452536
14 troops 4 crew
10,000 lbs load
>>
>>35452152

Wow, that is some serious sound reduction. How do they do that?
>>
Another marine murdering machine.
>>
>>35452656
It's for the Army actually
>>
File: 24669247722_4e8a4a8b1a_o.jpg (3.02 MB, 3840x2880)
3.02 MB
3.02 MB JPG
Why don't they make a tilt-jet craft?
>>
>>35452717
Other than the obvious safety issues?
>>
>>35452740
Safety issues? Jets can tilt the exhaust, yes? Like F-35.
>>
>>35452717
Fuel efficiency
>>
>>35452757
But you don’t have people under, let alone getting in and out, of the F-35 while it’s hovering.
>>
File: Tiale.jpg (74 KB, 960x539)
74 KB
74 KB JPG
>>35452152

Reminds me of a bigger, less aesthetic version of the rotor winged helos from avatar.
>>
>>35452396
Osprey is only cheaper because the tooling is there. Valor does away with a huge amount of complexity and parts via fixed wing, tilt prop, instead of tilt everything pivot for storage etc etc.
>>
>>35452508
>>35452890
>see folding wings.

i stand corrected and eat my words on that sentiment.
>>
>>35452890
Additionally it weighs much less because of composites and the things you mentioned
>>
File: Scorpion.png (247 KB, 645x360)
247 KB
247 KB PNG
>>35452858
the gunship version is so nice too

>even in the future we use hellfire missiles to airstrike primitives
>>
I looks like a blackhawk with YUUUGE wings. Seriously, look at these engines
>>
>>35452508
My head is fucked. It's looking to me like it's dabbing.
>>
>>35452152
can this one have
>autorotation
>a glide ratio/envelope better than the spaceshuttle
>door gunners
>>
>>35452296
Probably some edgelord metal, sadly
>>
>>35452717
>>
>>35452296
>>35454525

I've got it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H1UhxpvEyo&ab_channel=AndreasHessner
>>
I'd fly it
>>
>>35452152
10/10 would be a side gunner in during Korean war part 2 while blasting the america, fuck yeah song via apocalypse now
>>
>>35452382
Osprey is a disaster and this is being sold as "not an osprey"

>>35452398
>its just when you start going full retard and doing sketchy vertical landings that they start having problems

aka actually using them as they are intended to be used
And in which case they are immensely less safe than a helicopter.
>>
>>35455403
>Osprey is a disaster and this is being sold as "not an osprey"
lmao, what?
>>
>>35455413
tilt rotors are a goddamn meme
>>
>>35455422
You are goddamn meme
>>
>>35455422
>tilt rotors
>meme
Retard.
>>
>>35455438
>>35455429
compound
helicopter
>>
>>35455450
they're overly complicated and feature bloated but they are actually pretty cool pieces of hardware
>>
>>35455403
I meant exactly what I said, actually.

Considering full retard pilots exceeding its flight envelope and doing really stupid shit has directly led to multiple crashes now.

>And in which case they are immensely less safe than a helicopter.
statistically untrue.
>>
>>35455403
>And in which case they are immensely less safe than a helicopter.
Apparently they're claiming that this one is immune to VRS. Or was that not the safety concern you were referring to?
>>
>>35455499

I hear that the complexity of their design and operation is a negative, but I disagree.

It's only over engineered if there is a simpler way to do the same thing. You can't get the same capabilities another way.
>>
>>35455499
The point of VTOL is being capable of doing these "sketchy vertical landings", lifting weight vertically, maneuvering aggressively at low speeds + low altitude, things that tilt rotor designs are not suited for.

The Osprey could be totally replaced with a less expensive & more capable STOL plane
>>
>>35455523
Love to see where they're claiming a rotor wing aircraft is "immune" to VRS, because I'm skeptical thats possible at all.

>>35455554
>The point of VTOL is being capable of doing these "sketchy vertical landings"

any and all rotor wing aircraft have a maximum decent rate. If you'd like me to break out the crayons and spell it out for you, its that more than one of the V-22 crashes are pilots exceeding this limit, and subsequently crashing.

Do the same thing in a Blackhawk and you'll die just as fast.
>>
>>35455554
>The Osprey could be totally replaced with a less expensive & more capable STOL plane

Oh I'm sorry, the retardation is terminal
>>
>>35455572
>Do the same thing in a Blackhawk and you'll die just as fast.
Well no because the Blackhawk is a more robust vehicle with crashproof seats
Also: Only the Osprey is capable of flying itself some place it is incapable of vertically landing, thats been the cause of several crashes
>>
>>35455602
>The crash hawk hasn't killed hundreds of people and doesn't have a maximum decent rate
kill yourself
>>
File: irlme.png (447 KB, 1124x717)
447 KB
447 KB PNG
>>35455554
>The Osprey could be totally replaced with a less expensive & more capable STOL plane


Is that you gliderfag?
>>
>>35455617
Crash hawk does the work while the Osprey flies from airbase to airbase
They brought the Shit Osprey along on the Yemen raid, it had to be destroyed because its a pile of shit
>>
File: orca1.jpg (129 KB, 450x300)
129 KB
129 KB JPG
Still waiting for pic related.
>>
>>35455602
>Also: Only the Osprey is capable of flying itself some place it is incapable of vertically landing, thats been the cause of several crashes
The logic here is quite interesting.

Its somehow the airframe's fault for going to a place it can't land, and the fact that a conventional rotor wing wouldn't get there in the first place is a negative point for the V-22.

>They brought the Shit Osprey along on the Yemen raid, it had to be destroyed because its a pile of shit

So exactly like the raid that killed Bin Laden?

You're a moron.
Final (you)
>>
>>35455513
so what you're telling me here is that we need to improve the technology until the the flight envelope of these things is so retarded that even the ballsiest of nutjobs isn't going to get close to the edge, right
>>
>>35455663
What I'm telling you is that if the maximum decent rate is 2000ft/min and you go 4000ft/min expect shit to fail, cretin
>>
File: zsqxyttr2bkwmgpseuej.jpg (234 KB, 1024x554)
234 KB
234 KB JPG
>>35455641
And evacuates the embassy in Tripoli pretty damn well.
>>
>>35455646
it needs to be painted black and red so I can scream COBRAAAA
>>35455681
I see, I see
>>
>>35455661
>and the fact that a conventional rotor wing wouldn't get there in the first place
Conventional helicopters are far better at performance at altitude. Another massive drawback to tilt rotors, their anemic vertical lift high up.
>>
>>35455572
>Love to see where they're claiming a rotor wing aircraft is "immune" to VRS, because I'm skeptical thats possible at all.
Something about space magic causing each of the rotors to enter the vortex state at different times so it doesn't result in a complete loss of power. I dunno, Google it.
>>
>>35455693
and tiltrotors are far faster, with a larger range.

Thats the trade off. Literally the reason they exist.
>>
>>35455693
>Conventional helicopters are far better at performance at altitude.
well no, V-22s have a much higher service ceiling than conventional rotor wings.

6,000ft higher than a blackhawk. If you're talking specifically VTOL, maybe you should say that.
>>
>>35455710
Give a chopper the fuel fraction that the Tilt rotor has and it'll have a similar range
Actual speed of a tilt rotor is not massively faster than a helicopter either, certainly doesn't justify its 2x+ price tag or unique limitations.

>>35455750
It has to switch to VTOL to land outside of airbases
>>
>>35455770
>It has to switch to VTOL to land outside of airbases

You are aware that the Osprey can't do rolling landings, right anon?
>>
>>35455805
So now you can't land where you want to land, you have to find some place a mile away where you have 1000 feet of flat.
>>
>>35455750
he did, dude
that's what this specific thread of conversation was about, tilt rotors flying themselves to heights that they can't safely do the vertical landing due to anemic lift at altitude and pilots being dumbasses and crashing
>>
>>35453875
If only the valor was this sexy. Sheeiitt.
>>
>>35452152
She'll speed up popping the US debt bubble, so that's nice.
>>
File: Bait.jpg (304 KB, 2824x1277)
304 KB
304 KB JPG
>>35455403
>>35455422
>>
>>35455770
>Give a chopper the fuel fraction that the Tilt rotor has and it'll have a similar range
no
>Actual speed of a tilt rotor is not massively faster than a helicopter either

446 km/h is about 40 km/h faster than its physically possible for any pure rotor wing to travel, and most helicopters of similar size travel about 150km/h slower than the V-22.
>>
Close family member works for bell and I think the US military's interest in a smaller tilt rotor whose purpose mainly to carry people increased greatly when we lost SEAL team 6. Putting large teams at risk is not a viable strategy. They made a fix. Tilt rotor changed aerial insertion tactics for small forces, but was unweildy on such a large craft.
>>
>>35452152
Looks sexier than an Osprey.
>>
>>35453875
That's alot of dakka
>>
>>35452370
>blurring the fucking gearboxes
gotta protect the secrets of that elfin magic
>>
>>35452296
Thematically it might be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US1z-RR2j50
But this will forever be my sci fi alium slaying jam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCxv2daOwjQ
>>
File: Bell XV3.jpg (107 KB, 900x1377)
107 KB
107 KB JPG
>>
File: Bell XV3 08.jpg (130 KB, 1024x768)
130 KB
130 KB JPG
>>35459094
>>
File: Dornier Do-31.webm (2.01 MB, 726x400)
2.01 MB
2.01 MB WEBM
>>35452152
>2017
>still decades behind 1960 German tech
Damn those Nazi mad scientists!
>>
>>35452296
TAKYON
>>
>>35455770
>Give a chopper the fuel fraction that the Tilt rotor has and it'll have a similar range
But it will still be less useful since it's
SLOWER THAN A TILT ROTOR.
>>
>>35452296
hell no not imagine dragons
>>
File: 1437611619299.jpg (55 KB, 640x480)
55 KB
55 KB JPG
>>
>>35459458
>can't fire its missiles unless the rotors are in hover-mode
>>
File: ASAT_missile_launch.jpg (591 KB, 793x1050)
591 KB
591 KB JPG
>>35459546
>motor ignites after missile drops a bit
ez
>>
>>35452382
This is the next generation, with a design that's ~40 years newer than the Osprey.

The biggest difference is that the engines have been separated from the prop nacelles, which makes sense, given that a) you can't hover on one prop, and b) there's a driveshaft allowing either engine to run both props.

I don't know why the engines weren't relocated to the fuselage roof, though; that would seem to have been less vulnerable to ground fire.
>>
>>35459546
Belly mount em
>>
>>35460560
>there's a driveshaft allowing either engine to run both props

you know the Osprey does exactly the same thing, right?
>>
>>35452858
>bigger, less aesthetic version of the rotor winged helos from avatar
Fun fact, half the mech units in Avatar were designed by the games company that did the game tie-in simultaneous with the movie. The movie people liked them and wrote them back in after buying the 3d models from the game company.
>>
>>35452508
Guys guys hear me out. Like what if, listen to me, what if we put a motor in the middle that spins the whole wing fast enough to generate lift. While the rotors on the wings are also spinning! I bet we can quadruple the lifting powah.
>>
File: 1506442221726.png (151 KB, 500x376)
151 KB
151 KB PNG
>>35461822
That was the only game tied to a movie I ever actually enjoyed. Loved the multiplayer too. Nothing quite got right what that game did getting to play as the RDA. That explains why the game seemed so seemless compared to similar games.
>>
The Valor is too big for city operations. It wouldn't be able to fly in between buildings like a regular chopper could.
>>
>>35452508
What's to stop it from deciding to do that mid flight?
>>
>>35462089
Probably a $5 door stopper
>>
>>35461829
Are you run wild, man? Such a thing could cause a chain reaction, ignite the veryatmosphere itself and kill us all!
>>
File: TotallyWhite.jpg (159 KB, 859x828)
159 KB
159 KB JPG
>>35458890
>elfin
Why would the Finns steal American tech?
>>
The prototype uses the glorious T64 engine that I worked on for the past 4 years
>>
>>35455554

>The Osprey could be totally replaced with a less expensive & more capable STOL plane

Not for the Navy since many of their ships only have helipads.
>>
>>35462060

regular helicopters fly above buildings, not between them
>>
>>35452296
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUeuEXYslR4
>>
>>35452152
>Say something nice about her

Well I guess at least it has not developed a taste for muhreens yet.
>>
i gueas this vehicle will be featured in the next Grand Theft Auto.

Then it would truly be...stolen valor
>>
File: 1506988448974.jpg (28 KB, 362x380)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>35464943
>>
>>35452296
three options

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbXx2ag6L4I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs7LxRDX8qc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49IOXAQDDiY
>>
>>35452382

wtf does that tiny ass helicopter even need 3 ram air scoops for? It doesn't even pressurize.
>>
File: RelayInternals.jpg (48 KB, 300x228)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
>>35462089

Its probably just some relays. Could be some hydraulic stuff too but I only know about electrical and environmental systems on C-135s.

I wouldn't worry about it
>>
>>35452717
A helicopter carries a lot of energy in its rotor and can react very quickly to changes in commanded lift. On the other hand, a turbine engine might take more than a second to spool up when commanded, meaning it would be horribly unresponsive and dangerous.
>>
File: IMG_5181.png (171 KB, 644x361)
171 KB
171 KB PNG
>>35453875
Let's not forget the assault ship version
>>
Will probably get a kill count higher in testing than most things the US builds.
>>
>>35452152
she's...... cute
>>
File: BOSvertibird.jpg (72 KB, 1202x664)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
soon lads...
>>
What about Pulse Ejector Thrust Augmentor? Basically a modern pulse jet that negates the problems of input lag and spooling.
>>
>>35455837
If the Osprey can't do rolling landings then 1000 feet of flat is of equal value to the Osprey pilot as it is to the Black Hawk pilot.
>>
>>35468749
We will probably see these on Chinese production craft within the next 10 years. I doubt any western service will do these until the 2050s.
>>
>>35459546
step 1: drop the missile
step 2: turn on the missile
step 3: missile flies to target
>>
>>35452382
Osprey's higher maintenance, Army wants side-doors for ingress / egress, also this FVL program is producing replacements (of varying sizes) for the Chinook, Apache, Blackhawk and Kiowa. The Osprey can't do all of that.
>>
>>35452152
It *looks* stable and airworthy in a way that the Osprey doesn't.
>>
>>35462323
....
So.... figure we can have a mockup ready for a test flight by Tuesday...

Wait, who's gonna fly it?
>>
>>35452152
She's very pretty
>>
>>35469959
>And then all of /k/ uttered the phrase
"Fuck it. Hold my beer. /x/ can copilot.
>>
>>35463983
What precisely makes the t64 "glorious"? It's it really efficient and powerful?
>>
>>35469011
This wouldn't work if the aircraft was on the ground.
>>
>>35461367
Yes. That's exactly why rotating the engines turned out to be useless in the Osprey; it accomplished nothing.
>>
File: sb-1 defiant.jpg (108 KB, 935x495)
108 KB
108 KB JPG
Would it be better to go the Lockmart Route and stick with an old, but reliable design? Sure, the Valor is faster and more efficient than the defiant, but it's no chopper. It's not like you can put weapons on the Valor like you can with a chopper.
>>
>>35470580
Internal weapon bay = problem solved
You can also put some small stub wings on the Valor
>>
>>35470580
By far the better choice.
>>
>>35452858
The mechanical design for Avatar was fucking unparalleled. It's a shame the story was just a ripoff of Disney's Atlantis except shitty.
>>
>>35452296
It would never happen but it'd be nice if it was
https://youtu.be/JXtujxT9rzA
>>
>>35452386
Blackhawk blades are a bitch to fold. It's easier to just have more ramp space.
>>
>>35459094
>>35459110
What's old is new and new is old. Most big concepts of shit now go back half a century or more. Often times it's that the technology of the time made it unfeasible to make or that there wasn't a doctrinal need.
>>
>>35468749

The fuck is that?
>>
File: teddy_watch_our_six.jpg (83 KB, 540x523)
83 KB
83 KB JPG
>>35472190
i like your taste anon.

BLASTO FROM THE EL PASTO
>>
>>35452386
they do, twists around like the v22 does

Sauce, their website I think
>>
>>35471883
Sure, gramps.
>>
File: DestroyerRA2[1].png (27 KB, 308x248)
27 KB
27 KB PNG
>>35452152

Now it looks even more like the Red Alert 2 sub hunter.
>>
File: Cheyennepylons[2].jpg (1.02 MB, 1567x867)
1.02 MB
1.02 MB JPG
>>
>>35472811
I hated RA2 for the most part because it was the first step toward the cartoony dumb stuff. I thought it was dumb at the time, I just didn't know why.

Also destroyers and other ships not having turrets made me annoyed, I wanted Generals style vehicle movement before that game came out.
>>
Why don't they make a tilt rotor aircraft that uses an offset pilot seat and cabin to fit a central large rotor instead of two on the tips of the wings?

Would function like a normal heli in most situations, and then when they need to go fast it turns into a somewhat wacky version of a prop plane. When something goes wrong it retains the autorotation capability of its forebears.

Just need to avoid flying too close to any obstacle.
>>
>>35472867
how do you solve the counterrotation problem
>>
File: triggered.gif (1.25 MB, 400x226)
1.25 MB
1.25 MB GIF
>>35472169
>that one guy with his finger on the trigger, triggering me
>>
>>35473025
he's obviously spooked and about to shoot at a bush
>>
File: 1505517376017.gif (1.96 MB, 400x225)
1.96 MB
1.96 MB GIF
>>35464890
>>
>>35470580
>It's not like you can put weapons on the Valor like you can with a chopper.
You could practically like the wings with machine cannons. Before you say >muh props, this issue was solved in WW1 with an interruptor gear. I am fairly certain that with todays' electrically fired maching cannons, it would be even easier to have the guns stop shooting exactly when there is a rotor blade in front of them.
>>
>>35470580
I see the Defiant winning the Attack configuration and the Valor winning the transport contract.
>>
>>35473179
Does it depress you to waste time shit posting like that?
>>
>>35473190
Exactly what is wrong about that? He was comparing the thing to a Blackhawk and talking about armament. Either you turn the thing into an overgrown COIN plane by sticking autocannons into the lift wings like this was WW2 and it was an OG Thunderbolt or, if he was talking about it having weapons for the vertical landing hover mode, give it a minigun to hang out of the sides, which would at least give it parity with a Blackhawks' armament.
Either way, his statement about not being able to stick weapons on this thing is completely false. You stop shitposting.
>>
>>35472950
Tailfan as usual? Keep it ducted in a housing that can seal itself off when in fixed wing flight.
>>
>>35461829
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Triebfl%C3%BCgel

kinda like this?
>>
>>35473184
I don't think that's even possible. From what I've heard, they're doing the f-35 variants thing. One design will be chosen, then that bird will be made into 4 configurations.

I seriously don't see the Valor ever pulling off a viable attack configuration, so the Defiant will will purely because it's a better replacement for the Apache. LM and their conventional designs always win.
>>
>>35472950
Same way they solve it on every helicopter with no tail rotor.
>>
>>35473202
It's better to stay silent when you're in danger of confirming yourself a fool. You just removed any doubt. WW2 is over. The Valor is not going to be made into a WW2 tier plane. Guns won't fit in the wings, besides.
>>
>>35473229
And? Then the other half of the statement is still true. It can still be armed as well as a Blackhawk. So why exactly couldn't you do that?
>>
>>35473229
>WW2 is over
rip wing guns
rip big bunches of autocannons
>>
>>35473208
Not really, they've been open to two aircraft for awhile. Both aircraft offer capabilities the other can't match.

https://breakingdefense.com/2015/01/army-looks-to-build-two-forms-of-medium-future-vertical-lift/
>>
>>35473239
It doesn't need to be armed as well as a black hawk. It needs to be better armed than it. That's one of outlined goals of the replacement aircraft. It needs to be a leap ahead in every way.
>>
>>35473208
Looks pretty valid to me
>>
>>35473269
I didn't know jack shit about the competition, I just called you on your bullshit. And I quote:
>It's not like you can put weapons on the Valor like you can with a chopper.
But you can. Therefore you talked bull.
>>
>>35473266
In that case, I guess the valor will replace the osprey and chinhook, while the defiant replaces the black hawk and apache
>>
>>35473269
Also I think you just got proven wrong again, that attack configuration seems to look like a mighty fine pile of guns.
>30mm nose gun
>it's WW2 again fuccbois
>>35473279
>>
>>35473279
>rocket pods and door gunners
I can feel the vietnam intensifying
>>
>>35473282
The Valor is a Blackhawk replacement, not a Chinook or Osprey. Both those aircraft carry significantly heavier loads than either aircraft in this competition.
>>
>>35473279
One step closer to Pelicans.
>>
>>35452431
This guy gets it.
>>
>>35473266
Hopefully they learn from the LCS experience that "just buy both" is fucking retarded
>>
>>35455403
this, go do the research yourselves anons but the osprey is a complete fucking trainwreck in every possible sense
>>
File: xzibit-happy.jpg (40 KB, 744x481)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>35473206
YO DAWG, I HEARED YOU LIKE FLYING, SO WE PUT RAMJETS ON YOUR PROPELLER SO YOU CAN GO FAST WHILE YOU GO FAST
>>
File: 1371845701366.jpg (206 KB, 959x715)
206 KB
206 KB JPG
>>35472169
>every sci-fi or action movie in the future will feature lego rails
They aren't even being put into use, there.
>>
>>35452152
Mom and dad Boeing vertol sooo many dead test pilots as x and y variant typically flown by e-3 sitting behind pilots only takeoffs and landings.tied with lancer program for stiffs
>>
>>35452296
Death Grips

https://youtu.be/89F5fpvwPr0
>>
File: 1504313200505.jpg (51 KB, 574x435)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>35472190
Good taste
>>
>>35473206
>>35476219
THINGS WILL GET LOUDER NOW
>>
>>35470056

>Motors up
>Tells rocket to just fire
>Motors down
>Drop and then fire off

Real hard.
>>
>>35452152
What a fugly broad. At least Osprey-chan is a e s t h e t i c.
>>
>>35473279
Better hope those rockets don't clip the props.
>>
>>35454576
>civfag detected
if you aint blasting FFDP when you unfold in ***** then hit some targets the next night, ur wrong
>>
>>35476691
you fucked up anon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdmhyEqCINM
>>
>>35452152
>next gen VTOL
>no push rotor

No words can express my joy
>>
File: 1476419093704.jpg (90 KB, 500x710)
90 KB
90 KB JPG
>>35455805
They definitely CAN do rolling landings. idiot.
>>
>>35452152
Fuck me did you let us Brits design it because that's bloody disgusting. Jesus if the fucking sa80 was a fuckin VTOL.
>>
File: 2ec.png (572 KB, 600x580)
572 KB
572 KB PNG
>>35452296
>Radioactive

idk why this is so funny
>>
>>35459017
>Mjolnir Mix
I fucking wish. Such an underrated song.
>>
>>35479490
So it wouldnt be infiltrated by shitskins like everything in Europe.
>>
>>35475147
The LCS experience was that "buying one for all roles" was fucking retarded
>>
>>35454477
>door gunners

Aren't these pretty much precluded for all tilt-rotor aircraft due to the issues with the props and/or wings having lots of different potential positions that would put them in the line of fire?
>>
>>35481698
??
>>
>>35482503
!!
>>
>>35468749
It will most likely be loud enough to shatter window and insta-burst eardrums in a half mile radius.
>>
>>35481749
Not really. You could build a stop that knows the rotor position or simply tell the gunner not to shoot the rotors in forward flight. Which is largely moot because trying to door gun at 300 knots is retarded.
>>
File: 4484284098.png (1.01 MB, 1600x900)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB PNG
>>35452152
It's so futuristic. I like it.
>>
>>35455602
>Also: Only the Osprey is capable of flying itself some place it is incapable of vertically landing
Absolutely untrue. Every helicopter in existence has a higher service ceiling in forward flight than OGE hover ceiling. Translational lift, nibba.
>>
>>35473301
Not him, but my guess is also that it will be a split buy, in order to keep both shops in business.

LM gets OH/AH/LUH roles, where small size can be helpful, and speed/rage are less important--possibly with one single design (both companies are pitching weapons that extend from the troop/cargo bay) that can be used interchangeably for each role as needed.

Bell gets UH/CH, where speed and range are more important. Whether this is 1 Chinook-class design or also has a smaller/cheaper(?) Blackhawk-sized variant is up for debate. Bell also gets some degree of funding to produce a modest number of their own extending weapons stations for cases when the tiltrotors will be operating beyond the envelope of the LM AH version.

LM gets more overall money, given the larger number of units, but Bell gets enough to continue development of the tiltrotor. Both technologies get refined over time.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.