236kts is absurd. This thing would make a perfect air-ambulance. Also perfect for extracting troops on sensitive missions very rapidly from enemy airspace. Would also make an excellent DART aircraft. So many great applications.
Clear winner for the future heavy lift program. Seems so much more of a plug and play than the bell design. I think the slight reduction in speed for more access to confined terrain is a fair trade.
@@ehenri1438 lol such an idiot. 1st, the tandem rotor design in those soviet chopper was nothing new even at that time. 2nd, this design, even though with similar look, is a different design. The blades are fixed. have some education.
@@NhatHuyNg I never understood why people are rude to someone on the Internet? After all, you can’t reach the interlocutor. Nothing to physically affect him. You can't even shut his mouth. Do you want to be persuasive? Tell us what you wanted so beautifully and clearly so that we can believe you and take your side in the dispute. In any case, swearing is a weak substitute for intelligence and rhetoric, where there is nothing but words.
@@cup_and_cone it’s variable pitched and able to be independently driven. There are plenty of videos of the Defiant hovering with the prop stopped. It’s fully electric. Part of the safety of the vehicle is eliminating tail rotor strikes. So landing in a confined area with the prop spinning is counter intuitive.
@@bradleyfriesen What's the spool down and spin up time from idle? The prop pitch can be reversed to act as a brake to avoid using the main rotors...beneficial for low level when you don't want to drop the tail into terrain. And if in a tactical situation, maybe the pilot wants to keep the pusher prop going for fast egress. There's probably scenarios for both instances.
Stunning looking aircraft. Curious on what the the stats will be with the inevitable external stores fitted, countermeasures package and door gunner positions open and manned?
Money. They only care about money when it’s important. Idiots in office can give a few trillion to their friends and buy votes, but something that protects America, that they’re trying to destroy, will be cut as far as possible. Oops, did that slip out
Well they could do that due to the fact that the FVL ( FLRAA ) is a US Army Program, so big Army could go with Defiant X and the Marines and/ or Navy would then select the V-280 valor series to replace the AH-1Z & UH-1Y as well as the Navy's MH-60S/R, however it would be a smaller quantity. :)
Range and speed is very very critical in future military actions, but SB1 will be perfect for combating in complex environment. Both can supplement each other.
logistics and interoperability, to be efficient you want to minimise the number of systems you need to train your air and ground crew on. You want to limit the spares and parts you need to hold in inventory, and you want a partner in industry which you know will continue to be there twenty thirty years down the line.
The problem with these crafts is the complexity, they will never be a workhorse if they are difficult to maintain and require complicated parts to stay in the air
But it ain't that complex, helicopters with anti-rotors, and coaxial helicopters have existed for a very long time at this point. We are at a point with improved manufacturing and maturity of both of these concepts that it's very feasible to combine the two methods and have a reliable, improved, practical design. We could have said the same thing about the osprey and chinook.
@@sonny9608 are you joking or just really fkin dumb? Most of our current military hardware has been designed during the cold war or just after. For example the chinook 1962, Blackhawk in 1979, Apache in 1986. Thats like pre most of modern computer era. You don't think we made massive manufacturing and technologicsl strides? We are able to design way more complex parts with 3D software, while machining has stayed largely the same, there are still many improvements that have been made with things like CNC machining and what not, everyting has become more precise and faster. Prototyping is also incredibly easy nowadays. Electronics and computers have also miniaturised greatly while being many folds more powerful and capable. Entire rooms of computer from that time are many times less powerful than a modern smartphone. Sensors have also become a lot better which allows us to do more things with them. There are just too many potential improvements to list that came after all these iconic 1990 military vehicles. Basically they can and probably are implementing many novel ideas and building on old ones to create a reliable new generation of helicopter from better designs to materials and tech. Also the second sentence makes perfect sense, im saying that the concept of coaxial rotors and a tail rotor have existed for so long now that, while looking cool and sleek, this heli is really just doing something we have already figured out for many decades now, the only thing new here is a novel arrangement of the two and improved body design. Let's not pretend this is some sort of UFO, all this is familiar territory.
@@AvWoN yes they exist for a very long time but they are by no means popular because they are complicated and have reliability issues. an aircraft is already complicated the benefit of anit-rotors designs are generally not worth it
@@midnightwatchman1 Sure, but they (helis with coaxial rotors) do exist and have their advantages. Especially in this configuration in which they make space for a propeller in the rear for additional thurst. I am hopeful for this being an excellent vehicle.
The problem w/ tilt rotor is that they’re more airplane than helicopter. It’s fine for Navy COD and long range uncontested SAR when hovering is not at a premium but for everything else tilt rotor sucks. I hope this is selected to replace the 60s.
Worked at Bell for a bit during the V280 flight program. The 280 had completed all of its flight testing and exceeded 300 kts before the Defiant had its second flight. The Defiant was plagued with rotor blade issues. Hands down the 280 is the winners in ability, agility speed heavy lift and versatility.
How does safety compare between the two? I would have thought the bell wouldn't be capable of a soft landing due to power loss where as this may be able to auto-rotate?
@@Jack3md Did anything that I wrote state that it wasn't a joint program? No, it didn't. I simply stated that "The whole X-program was originated at Sikorsky", and it was. Okay, I see you have to have Boeing's name in there, but what I said was completely factual. The X2 demonstrator program was a Sikorsky product while they were still part of (formerly) UTC, now RTC. The X2 demonstrator laid the groundwork for the SB1-Defiant Okay with that?
Dual rotors and payload are not related to each other. The dual rotors help to counter torque. That is the main purpose as you dont need a tail rotor. See Kamov Helicopters
@@nightlightabcd I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say, the original comment is implying that this rotor configuration makes the helicopter more powerful, but it is really just to counter the spin. Payload is more related to the engine, see Mi-26 and CH-53.
I know everyone's really happy about the military applications for this bird, but there's another side. High speed and long range, what if it's fitted as an air ambulance? Aeroplanes have the speed and range but need an airstrip to land on. A chopper like this would be a boon to people like the Royal Flying Doctors or Careflight in Oz. It could save a lot of lives.
The push prop makes more noise than the main rotor, it can be disabled if needed. It has flown at 230kts, expected top speed 250kts. All we know for cargo is that it is expected to lift M777 howitzer.
this is only possible because of the twin rotos on top though. A conventional design would still need a vertical tail rotor to keep the helicopter from spinning
No, it won’t. The King Stallion CH-53K is in a league of its own. It can pick up a Humvee and a Boeing 747. It’s a colossal bird the likes no one has ever seen before.
@@paazbra you mean the US intervention in their fight for freedom. And the big Fail in afganistan now ruled even worse by taliban with huge loads of western weapods. A country who have its own caoitolium attacked and a peoples who don't beleve in its own democracy shold jeep back in talking of it towarda others
@@paazbra well every one are being sarcastic about it but it have not been funny for any one for years. It just seem narrow minded and ignorant. Its a jargong that have to change.
God! It must hve a tear rotor that can turn right & left for NOW but 1 day off a bit the rear push prop will be not shaft driven but free full tilt pod up & down as well. It is the precise control that helos can claim, plus the added security of completely diff power plant w/full push up down side to side safety requires.
Well dont many country's in asia already have the Ka52. So if some one would be copying its ... but counter rotating propellers have been around rather long.
236kts is absurd. This thing would make a perfect air-ambulance. Also perfect for extracting troops on sensitive missions very rapidly from enemy airspace. Would also make an excellent DART aircraft. So many great applications.
Thanks to this video I will definitely get this when it is released!
Absolutely stunning aircraft.
and brave , I would certainly identify as one .
Yes. It hovers real nice.
US will not pay the high cost for order the new tec infantry helicopter. The price-performance ratio is too low.
and one handheld rocket Turns it into smoking dust
Yeah-yeah
It’s actually trash but cool for commercial sale I guess
Clear winner for the future heavy lift program. Seems so much more of a plug and play than the bell design. I think the slight reduction in speed for more access to confined terrain is a fair trade.
future heavy lift is still MI 8 if I am not mistaken.
Not heavy lift, maybe medium at best.
We'll see. I like both projects. But Bell's can keep up with drones and escort fighters.
@@MillionFoul true
@Sun Is Rising Mi 8 is still the best heavyweight helicopter
As a kid growing up watching Air Wolf. I think this aircraft is as close as it gets :) . Beautiful!!!
Question is, how loud is that bird. Makes me question why the audio was stripped and replaced with montage music.
It's not that bad actually.
I never say this lightly and hardly ever use this phrase but I think this is truly a game changer!
Another reason why the Lockheed AH-56 Cheyenne was ahead of its time.
That is the truth
like 5 decades behind the soviet style design chopper
@@ehenri1438 lol such an idiot. 1st, the tandem rotor design in those soviet chopper was nothing new even at that time. 2nd, this design, even though with similar look, is a different design. The blades are fixed. have some education.
@@NhatHuyNg I never understood why people are rude to someone on the Internet? After all, you can’t reach the interlocutor. Nothing to physically affect him. You can't even shut his mouth. Do you want to be persuasive? Tell us what you wanted so beautifully and clearly so that we can believe you and take your side in the dispute. In any case, swearing is a weak substitute for intelligence and rhetoric, where there is nothing but words.
Interesting….I wonder how difficult the field maintenance is.
Very.
Was thinking exactly along the same lines.
just a one time use helicopter, no need for maintenance.
Probably worst than a Kamov :) :)
Same idea here
Out of curiosity. Why is the rear pusher prop turning during confined area landings?
Prop is variable pitch... It's feathered.
@@cup_and_cone it’s variable pitched and able to be independently driven. There are plenty of videos of the Defiant hovering with the prop stopped. It’s fully electric. Part of the safety of the vehicle is eliminating tail rotor strikes. So landing in a confined area with the prop spinning is counter intuitive.
@@bradleyfriesen What's the spool down and spin up time from idle? The prop pitch can be reversed to act as a brake to avoid using the main rotors...beneficial for low level when you don't want to drop the tail into terrain. And if in a tactical situation, maybe the pilot wants to keep the pusher prop going for fast egress. There's probably scenarios for both instances.
Нихрена не понял
@@МихаилВолчанов-ы4г Делают вид, что впервые такую схему винтов видят. Дикари-с.
Stunning looking aircraft. Curious on what the the stats will be with the inevitable external stores fitted, countermeasures package and door gunner positions open and manned?
I like it a lot. I also like the competitor. Hard to choose. Why not both?
Money. They only care about money when it’s important. Idiots in office can give a few trillion to their friends and buy votes, but something that protects America, that they’re trying to destroy, will be cut as far as possible. Oops, did that slip out
Well they could do that due to the fact that the FVL ( FLRAA ) is a US Army Program, so big Army could go with Defiant X and the Marines and/ or Navy would then select the V-280 valor series to replace the AH-1Z & UH-1Y as well as the Navy's MH-60S/R, however it would be a smaller quantity. :)
Range and speed is very very critical in future military actions, but SB1 will be perfect for combating in complex environment. Both can supplement each other.
logistics and interoperability, to be efficient you want to minimise the number of systems you need to train your air and ground crew on. You want to limit the spares and parts you need to hold in inventory, and you want a partner in industry which you know will continue to be there twenty thirty years down the line.
Money. I think the Boeing/Lockheed one will win because the tilt rotors have a bad history.
The problem with these crafts is the complexity, they will never be a workhorse if they are difficult to maintain and require complicated parts to stay in the air
But it ain't that complex, helicopters with anti-rotors, and coaxial helicopters have existed for a very long time at this point. We are at a point with improved manufacturing and maturity of both of these concepts that it's very feasible to combine the two methods and have a reliable, improved, practical design. We could have said the same thing about the osprey and chinook.
@@sonny9608 are you joking or just really fkin dumb? Most of our current military hardware has been designed during the cold war or just after. For example the chinook 1962, Blackhawk in 1979, Apache in 1986. Thats like pre most of modern computer era. You don't think we made massive manufacturing and technologicsl strides? We are able to design way more complex parts with 3D software, while machining has stayed largely the same, there are still many improvements that have been made with things like CNC machining and what not, everyting has become more precise and faster. Prototyping is also incredibly easy nowadays. Electronics and computers have also miniaturised greatly while being many folds more powerful and capable. Entire rooms of computer from that time are many times less powerful than a modern smartphone. Sensors have also become a lot better which allows us to do more things with them. There are just too many potential improvements to list that came after all these iconic 1990 military vehicles. Basically they can and probably are implementing many novel ideas and building on old ones to create a reliable new generation of helicopter from better designs to materials and tech. Also the second sentence makes perfect sense, im saying that the concept of coaxial rotors and a tail rotor have existed for so long now that, while looking cool and sleek, this heli is really just doing something we have already figured out for many decades now, the only thing new here is a novel arrangement of the two and improved body design. Let's not pretend this is some sort of UFO, all this is familiar territory.
@@AvWoN yes they exist for a very long time but they are by no means popular because they are complicated and have reliability issues. an aircraft is already complicated the benefit of anit-rotors designs are generally not worth it
@@midnightwatchman1 Sure, but they (helis with coaxial rotors) do exist and have their advantages. Especially in this configuration in which they make space for a propeller in the rear for additional thurst. I am hopeful for this being an excellent vehicle.
Tail rotor aren’t new, just in a different orientation, and neither are coaxial rotors.
Made in the USA. Safe from Winnie-the-Pooh.
I saw the prototype and scale model on Stuart Air Show , Florida a few years ago.
Well that rat died didn't he
@@fpshimanshuyadav171 What are you talking about?
Truly incredible engineering. The physics of controlling those dual rotors and how they interact aerodynamically is mind boggling...
Wonder what you'll say about the K-Max synchrocopter rotor system!
@@oliverwabwire2836 that thing is incredible as well! But I'm guessing the Defiant X is completely computer controlled and probably easier to fly.
Yet is was done over 60 years ago by all kinds of other people but hey, a sucker is born every minute.
The problem w/ tilt rotor is that they’re more airplane than helicopter. It’s fine for Navy COD and long range uncontested SAR when hovering is not at a premium but for everything else tilt rotor sucks. I hope this is selected to replace the 60s.
I hope so too for my sake... I work at Sikorsky. It would be a disaster if we lose this contract.
Wonder what options come standard with this thing? Not looking to spend too much when I place my order.
There will be a version with sunroof and leather seats coming out 12 months after it first releases. 😊
Stunning indeed. Now we just need for the Army to announce FLRAA’s winner so production is set afoot.
it lost, kinda disappointing
Defiant X as a "Private Aircraft" will that be available?
When will the Chinese version be released?
Dpnt they already have Ka-52s sins rather long?
when will there be an Attack variant?
WoW! What a beautiful bird!
How do you auto rotation this aircraft ?
Look for the Bo105 low level flight videos… THAT was speed and agility
Perfectness,,,imits so smooth and stable.
"How big do you want your main rotor hubs?"
"Yes"
I believe it's just a cover over the hubs for aerodynamics.
@@rubiconnn "How big do you want your main rotor hub covers?"
"Yes"
Worked at Bell for a bit during the V280 flight program. The 280 had completed all of its flight testing and exceeded 300 kts before the Defiant had its second flight. The Defiant was plagued with rotor blade issues. Hands down the 280 is the winners in ability, agility speed heavy lift and versatility.
Even video game know tiltrotor would be the future
I guess the Army was really focussing on the keeping the H-60's foot print. The V280's 5O ft x 80 Ft. foot print is pretty large.
How does safety compare between the two? I would have thought the bell wouldn't be capable of a soft landing due to power loss where as this may be able to auto-rotate?
@@grillhouse8036 tilt rotors don’t autorotate. Rotors are too small. I guess they emergency land more like airplanes than like helps
Hovering so smoothly
When performance is matched by sheer beauty.
Gaijin watching this video right now 👀
The Army has been developing and canceling helicopter programs since forever. Hopefully this one will make it to production.
@Mirror Space An absolute savage
Hello from Ukraine
what sim is this?
That is a gorgeous bird. Just beautiful.
This thing looks totally badass! It has a Star Wars meets The Terminator look.
Combat or passenger aircraft?
Year 2022, the US helicrafters finally learnt coaxial configuration
NICE! Been waiting for more footage of this and the Bell Invictus.
Let the competition begin!
Awesome, keep up the good work Boeing
The whole X-program was originated at Sikorsky.
@@bbayerit It’s still a joint Sikorsky-Boeing program
@@Jack3md Did anything that I wrote state that it wasn't a joint program? No, it didn't. I simply stated that "The whole X-program was originated at Sikorsky", and it was.
Okay, I see you have to have Boeing's name in there, but what I said was completely factual. The X2 demonstrator program was a Sikorsky product while they were still part of (formerly) UTC, now RTC. The X2 demonstrator laid the groundwork for the SB1-Defiant Okay with that?
@@bbayerit No, but you wanted it come across as Boeing isn't involved. Which they are. My point stands, good day.
@@Jack3md You stink as a mind reader, Jack. But thanks for playing the victim.
Красивая машина.
I want to see it at full forward speed then spin 180* and change direction, yeah?
Be interesting to see these being used in a fire fighting capacity, given the dual main rotors, they could potentially carry more payload of water?
Dual rotors and payload are not related to each other. The dual rotors help to counter torque. That is the main purpose as you dont need a tail rotor. See Kamov Helicopters
@@N1lav - The tail rotor is not a pusher.
@@nightlightabcd Source? It is as far as I have heard...
@@nightlightabcd I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say, the original comment is implying that this rotor configuration makes the helicopter more powerful, but it is really just to counter the spin.
Payload is more related to the engine, see Mi-26 and CH-53.
@@freddyrosenberg9288the tail rotor allows it to enter submarine mode if you land in the water
Beautiful aircraft ! Great ad. Best of luck.
I know everyone's really happy about the military applications for this bird, but there's another side. High speed and long range, what if it's fitted as an air ambulance? Aeroplanes have the speed and range but need an airstrip to land on. A chopper like this would be a boon to people like the Royal Flying Doctors or Careflight in Oz. It could save a lot of lives.
The V-280 would be better for that role.
@@MrChickennugget360 No way, the 280 is way to much for that role.
@@srs6461 v-280 won the contract
What’s the mechanical sound levels, top speed & cargo cap?
The push prop makes more noise than the main rotor, it can be disabled if needed. It has flown at 230kts, expected top speed 250kts. All we know for cargo is that it is expected to lift M777 howitzer.
I've always thought that coax rotors makes more sense than a tail rotor.
this is only possible because of the twin rotos on top though.
A conventional design would still need a vertical tail rotor to keep the helicopter from spinning
Hence the use by the Russian choppers on ships
@@peetsnort on ground command and attack helis mostly. Ka-52 for example. And yes, this is a traditional scheme for Kamov for many years already.
when they will produce it ?
It's already out, in Russia as Kamov Ka-50
When they get more money from taxpayer
1:15 Someone forgot to add in the wheels to the last part of the 3D render
So it can do normal heli stuff, just at 3 times the price?
Yes, but it also does it better. It's also much safer on the ground because they can keep the pusher rotor unpowered.
Can we speed up testing and deploy these already???
If imitation is flattery, then Kamov should be very happy.
Nice improvement,not sure of the next chapter on how it will look though
The question remains for Boeing, will this replace the CH53 Heavy Lifter?
No, it won’t. The King Stallion CH-53K is in a league of its own. It can pick up a Humvee and a Boeing 747. It’s a colossal bird the likes no one has ever seen before.
Absolutely beautiful!
wow, it's so stable! if it looks right it flys right!
Hey i dont know if 787 can use a350 engine its that even possible?
What a beauty ❤️
Gorgeous. 🤩
first time seeing an helicopter like this one thanks for sharing
Love to see this chopper in jungle green or desert brown camouflage as against traditional off black. It will create a more defiant, deadly image.
Defiant X... 😎 75th Ranger Regiment 😎 🇲🇨🇺🇸
I seen something like this creeping along I10. I couldn't figure it out then, but I can now.
it reminds me of a torpedo but in helicopter form, i love it!
Sure, but I still haven't seen the model of the black hawk that was used that night 👀
Разговоры про этот ,пепелац, идут много лет...а где серия???
Offspring of the AH-56, finally accepted.
She's a beautiful airframe boys and girls. Be safe do good works. Lachaim.
amazing
Nossa que show este helicóptero... Tmj... Abração do AVENTUREIRO PAULEK!
Really cool looking... (and omg so loud!)
Helikopter helikopteerrrrrr
I was just looking for reviews. So that I can buy this on my birthday
Beautiful Aircraft! - SB-1 🚁
no clutch shaft to jam up!?
Yay Sikorsky
*Don't have any military version with weapon?*
Incredible
And looks perfect.
Soon bringing freedom near you!
What type of freedom are you refering to? Not seen much of it. That shant us rather old and off point sadly. I wished it would be true
@@perelfberg7415 I mean Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan...
@@paazbra you mean the US intervention in their fight for freedom. And the big Fail in afganistan now ruled even worse by taliban with huge loads of western weapods.
A country who have its own caoitolium attacked and a peoples who don't beleve in its own democracy shold jeep back in talking of it towarda others
@@perelfberg7415 dude, I was being sarcastic...
@@paazbra well every one are being sarcastic about it but it have not been funny for any one for years. It just seem narrow minded and ignorant. Its a jargong that have to change.
this think looks sleek, very nice.
Absolutely and a beautiful.
I want one
beautiful
Need the add-on DCS to!
God! It must hve a tear rotor that can turn right & left for NOW but 1 day off a bit the rear push prop will be not shaft driven but free full tilt pod up & down as well. It is the precise control that helos can claim, plus the added security of completely diff power plant w/full push up down side to side safety requires.
Nice to see the AH56 design the Army wanted in 1970s make a return
I need one of these to get me to my favorite picnic spot faster
where is the comanch?
Retired
@@cup_and_cone No way !!!!!!!!
Meanwhile china :- ctrl-C and ctrl-P.🤣🤣🤣
Can thank the university feeder systems for that....
Well dont many country's in asia already have the Ka52. So if some one would be copying its ... but counter rotating propellers have been around rather long.
@Sun Is Rising Source?
@@blam320 he got it from bunch of toxic online 6-year old historians that are paid CCP bots.
Next workhorse of US Army.
WONDERFUL AIRWOLF, HUNTER, FLEXIBLE.
We have seen something similar before, the Cheyenne...
@George Vail I am aware of the Commanche, too. But the Cheyenne is much older, from the 70ies I guess.
the Comanche was made for stealth the DX is not made for stealth the only stealth it has is flying map but thats not always an option in some terrain.
just a development out of the Focke-Wulf Fw 61 from 1936??? :-)
Just curious , why the trees and the water aren’t moving much when it is flying at such low altitudes ?
Looks pretty good ;)
Looks cool
Like the Aliens type movie music score, just needed to get Michael Bien to hop off the copter with a M41A Pulse rifle!
It’s crazy American technology
Amazing!
Respect