Can it really replace the Apache?

Can it really replace the Apache?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Its not meant to replace the apache. Its meant to replace the black hawk from a logistical standpoint.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Defense news are saying the program aims to replace both the Blackhawk and the Apache, with FARA (a subsidiary program) finding a successor to the Kiowa Warrior.

      Looks like they want the escort to have the same speed and maneuverability as the utility craft to not bottleneck either helo.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the escort will still be slower due to all the munition's it's carrying

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They're somewhat confused. The whole FVL/JMR/BBQ mess has not exactly been straightforward. The original JMR program planned to replace both the Blackhawk and the Apache. However, the actual procurement program, FLRAA, is primarily to replace the Blackhawk. FARA is to produce a faster, up-armed Kiowa replacement that can carry something like half the payload of an Apache (which means that it can be used as an attack helicopter in a pinch, and probably will be at some point). There currently is no program of record to replace the Apache, which will likely continue to receive upgrades for at least another 10-20 years. There really isn't much money left to spare for an Apache replacement right now compared to other priorities, and most Apaches have been re-manufactured into the E model within the last decade, so they're not in critical need of replacement right now.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They're somewhat confused. The whole FVL/JMR/BBQ mess has not exactly been straightforward. The original JMR program planned to replace both the Blackhawk and the Apache. However, the actual procurement program, FLRAA, is primarily to replace the Blackhawk. FARA is to produce a faster, up-armed Kiowa replacement that can carry something like half the payload of an Apache (which means that it can be used as an attack helicopter in a pinch, and probably will be at some point). There currently is no program of record to replace the Apache, which will likely continue to receive upgrades for at least another 10-20 years. There really isn't much money left to spare for an Apache replacement right now compared to other priorities, and most Apaches have been re-manufactured into the E model within the last decade, so they're not in critical need of replacement right now.
          This, thanks for making the effortpost to try to educate people anon.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I can see FARA replacing the Apache in the future, after the 10-20 years. Both reporters and representatives seem to think so, even if the latter aren't explicit about it. The role of attack helis will probably be reduced by the F-35B's deployment by then anyway.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Listen to what the Army says instead of defense journalists. FARA is meant to replace both the Kiowa and the Apache, since the Apache has been filling in for the Kiowa in the wake of its retirement. That being said, the Valor will probably get an armed variant a la DAP Blackhawks.

        It won't even do that
        its just another gay fraud program to steal taxes
        you cant put that thing in a place a blackhawk can go

        It's barely any bigger.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I see we learned nothing from the Hind

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          what's wrong with the hind?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It won't even do that
      its just another gay fraud program to steal taxes
      you cant put that thing in a place a blackhawk can go

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >you cant put that thing in a place a blackhawk can go
        Its not like helicopters are meant to go tight places

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    God I hope not

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    mybe

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Probably

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't see why not, commonality should primarily focus on the propulsion but the body can likely be modified. I think people look at the CGI that's literally just the troop carrier version with missiles on it and think that's what the attack variant will look like, hence the weirdness about it not looking "purpose built"

    I think any potential loss of maneuverability and increase in size is worth it for the massive boost in range and speed. Helicopters in peer environments already have to fly extremely low and use terrain for cover before launching long range munitions. The range and speed would allow you to base these assets further away from the things that will kill them, which is increasingly shit like spammable cheap ass drones. If you can increase your basing options and limit the number of threats you have to worry about by being far as fuck away it makes you just a bit safer. There really should be a navalized attack/recon version to replace to seahawks when they're ready to retire tbh.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >CGI that's literally just the troop carrier version with missiles on it and think that's what the attack variant will look like
      picrel, lolwut
      from the same article
      >Another way to save both money and time in both production and maintenance is having multiple types of aircraft with common parts. Bell’s model here is its work on the Marine Corps AH-1Z gunship and UH-1Y transport, which have totally different roles and very different shapes but share 84 percent of their spare parts. The company wants to do the same thing for its V-280 variants.
      Interesting.
      I know jackshit about helicopters, but it would be cool if they implemented nacelles with a wider ranger of movement (and potentially a different CoM) so you could tilt the fuselage down on a hover.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Oh shit I didn't know they were going that far with the commonality. It makes sense from a cost perspective but I'm pretty against trying to make a one size fits all option after the F-35 meme, not that the F-35 sucks just there were consequences of that decision that led to compromises in all of the variants. I kinda envisioned using all the same propulsion and parts but having distinct fuselages. Since the attack variant wouldn't need all the internal volume for people and cargo it could be trimmed down a bit, sleeker and maybe incorporate some LO shaping features. Doing this looks like they could probably get massive payloads though, it would pretty pretty fucking effective if one attack variant could pack double the load of hellfires of JAGM

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >no 30mm
        This ain't replacing shit

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Does have one. It's actually a laser beam or some shit.

          ?t=55

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Awesome video. That was 10 years ago though, they might have given up on the idea now that they've actually designed and prototyped it. Most of the newer demonstration models don't have a gun.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Mil might not want to spend the weight on a gun anymore since they're envisioning attack choppers never getting into LOS and instead being purely shooters in the sensor/shooter paradigm since they're so inherently vulnerable. Only time a gun is useful is if you're in the sandbox smacking people who literally can't shoot back and then you can just carry a gunpod.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Considering just the likelihood of getting involved in some insurgency, or at least needing an aircraft that can provide cover to disembarking troops, I think they will have a gun.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm impressed you managed to miss the entire second half of the second sentence about a gunpod instead of having integral weight that can't be more missiles in a useful situation.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah yeah, but no. The valor frame wouldn't support a gunpod. The inability to aim it would make it next to useless. There's also no place on the frame for it. An integral, nose mounted gun is the only way to have a gun.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah. The tilt-rotor design is not conducive to a moving gun anyway, not even door guns. Against an insurgency, Apache and FARA especially will suffice for a hybrid scouting/opportunistic attack role. RIP Kiowa, you were always the baddest.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The problem is those choppers couldn't keep up with the valor. They wouldn't be able to support it on missions. The valor needs a version with its own gun to do that.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          aside from dunking on derkas, does a cannon really have much of a use on a modern battlefield?
          don't you want to be blasting dudes from maximum range with missiles anyway?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            FARA even downgraded the cannon from the Apache 30mm to 20mm, Kiowa only had the one M2 though. Higher rate of fire with more ammo is the way to go IMO, there are some Afghanistan Apache videos where it takes almost direct hits to do perceptible damage to guys.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Higher rate of fire with more ammo is the way to go IMO
              I have a suggestion

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >does a cannon really have much of a use on a modern battlefield?
              Dunking on Russians. They're not too different from each other.

              i mean if you're in range to brrt people with your gun that probably means you're also in range of them shooting manpads at you
              so not a problem with derkas but probably a problem with people who might conceivably shoot back

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >does a cannon really have much of a use on a modern battlefield?
            Dunking on Russians. They're not too different from each other.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They should mount a 30mm on each engine nacelle.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    besides range, does it have any advantages over an Apache?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Speed. She's much faster. That's how it got the V-280 name. Helicoptercucks just can't compete with tiltchads. Stealthier in some cases since you can't really figure out where it is by ear (the sound travels vertically on either side instead of horizontally all around)

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Doesn't it crash constantly?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No
          >the Marine Corps’ MV-22 Osprey has a lower mishap rate per 100,000 flight hours than the Harrier, Super Hornet, F-35B, or CH-53E Super Stallion
          >In the 33 years since the Osprey started flying, 51 service members have died in crashes. In the first 33 years the H-60 Black Hawk flew, more than 180 American service members and civilians died in non-combat-related crashes

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >33 years since the Osprey started flying
            Fucking hell, it still feels it came out yesterday

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The flies their Ospreys so often that accidents do happen on a somewhat frequent basis, but on a per flight hour basis, it's the safest helicopter in the US inventory by a mile despite being operated by the Muhreens.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Speed is useless for attack helos
        You need highly nimble aircraft that can exploit terrain
        Mi24 and Havoc are fast and they are absolute shit because they rely on speed instead of terrain
        This thing will be worse than Hinds

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's the replacement for the UH60? It somehow looks considerably more expensive.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      about 40 million allegedly for a V-280. Might come down too considering for a full Blackhawk replacement you're talking thousands of airframes and even a partial is still probably thousands of airframes so you get the economy of scale benefits. I don't know what the UH-60 costs exactly but last I remember was around 10 million or so but can easily go up depending on the variant. Generally more expensive but they're getting a shitload of capability in terms of speed and range relative to a conventional helicopter

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It is, but even a new-build Blackhawk is a lot more expensive than the originals were. Inflation and expensive sensors/avionics have dramatically driven the price up. If you're stuck with paying lots of extra money anyways, you might as well get something decent out of it.

      Captcha: N0P2W. Rather fitting, but modern warfare *is* P2W to some extent.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No and who says it's meant to?

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not pick Ospreys to replace the Hawks??

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Valor is direct upgrade from Osprey

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Valor is direct upgrade from Osprey

      this is like saying the M16 is a direct upgrade from the BAR

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ospreys are fucking expensive

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because Hawks are reliable, while Osprey are suicide machines

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >he thinks that burgermutts can ever figure out tilt-rotors
    LMFAO

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      US is the only country in the world that use tilt-rotor. What the fuck are you talking about?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They'll keep crashing, killing scores of troops and they'll be called flying deathtrap.

        In contrast, our Z-20 can reliably and safely transport our troops above 13,000 feet.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >our Z-20
          Bing bong ching chong

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >In contrast, our Z-20 is a plagiarized and shitty version of a 40+ year old American helicopter.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why did they narrow the fuselage before the tail? Wouldnt that fuck with the Longeron design?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why did they narrow the fuselage before the tail? Wouldnt that fuck with the Longeron design?

            Its a copy of the export version of the blackhawk. I think the U.S. gave some away to china at some point in the 70s. But its a copy of the s70 than the uh60.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Implessive!

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Japan uses them, too. There's even an intelligence department within their Ministry of Internal Affairs that operates them.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I miss Origa terribly.

    • 4 weeks ago
      yoink

      my friend have you ever heard of the "osprey" y'know the HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL TILT-?ROTOR THAT PIONEERED MILITARY TILT-ROTOR AIRCRAFT

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    60080485
    Weak

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    offtopic cause FARA, not FLRAA, but the Bell 360 Invcitus has a side-stick cyclic/joystick like an Airbus. The goofy A-10-style throttle is probably a stand-in. Verbally confirmed by Keith Flail in the DefAeroReport video.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      touchscreens because the generation that'll fly it will have been raised on iPads

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        confirmed by the 360 Invictus's project manager's kid making goofy Gacha Life slideshows, really cute.

        https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLmI8XReREYubMOXwpdB1bA

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Muh steam gauges and soft buttons
        Literally the worst interfaces ever designed. Touchscreens aren't much better but at least you can operate the fucking thing without spending 3 years memorizing menu layering

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Keith himself said it's for the pilots of tomorrow. Should have been for the pilots of yesterday, MFDs look like an absolute nightmare.
          Here's the V-280 cockpit.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can we even trust those screens? Can you even have redundancy with that?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              There are some types of screens that will still work if they were punctured, but it seems total instrument failure is just going to be a constant concern in the future.
              >if they're good enough for astronauts and the F-35, they're good enough for Army aviation

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >1 bullet hits the screen.
            >You now have zero access to any of your instruments.
            Wtf are they supposed to do if the screen malfunctions! It all or nothing.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It's a projection, so damaging part of the screen means only that part is not visible

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The projector is hit by a bullet
                >You now have zero access to any of your instruments
                Not a great design.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/UMeuIbR.png

      touchscreens because the generation that'll fly it will have been raised on iPads

      The stick and throttle are Thrustmaster Warthogs. What the fuck. Is this real?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        wouldn't be the first bit of gaming hardware used for serious business if it is real

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You are now aware that the thrustmaster warthog was designed to be an almost identical replica of the actual hotas from the a10

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is Tilt-rotor good in ASW role?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ASW role?
      What's that?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think they're less fuel efficient in hover mode then a traditional design for a dip sonar, but that doesn't matter if you want them to just chuck wireless sonars into the water and they're obviously far faster and more fuel efficient when traveling, so I'd say they're better.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    these big propellers look silly

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    lol they're still trying to make tilt rotors happen?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >lol they're still trying to make tilt rotors happen?
      It's already happening.

      Because Hawks are reliable, while Osprey are suicide machines

      Good thing your generation isn't going to fly them, then. You keep enjoying your inefficient conventionals in the ash bin of history.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    sure perhaps

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Drones are the real attack helis replacement.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Apache is an attack helicopter, that’s a fucking v22 with a V-tail
    >I bet it will try to do anything, and do it all with mediocrity

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    2018 Valor mockup with door Miniguns and a fairly luxurious cabin

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      now that's a kid having fun

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They're the kids from this video

        Does have one. It's actually a laser beam or some shit.

        ?t=55

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          fuck, meant this one
          https://yewtu.be/watch?v=1O3Onyas984

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *