Damion I am a retired Army Aviator. I was an officer who was commissioned via the ROTC route. I graduated in 1969 and graduated from flight school in 1970. When I attended flight school there wasn't an aviation branch. I was initially an infantry officer and got a branch transfer to the transportation branch. I attended the maintenance flight training course and spent most of my assignments as an aviation maintenance officer and test pilot. I also was an instrument instructor pilot at Ft. Rucker for four and a half years. I left active duty after 10 years and spent 14 years in the NY Guard and the reserves. In some of your other videos it was interesting how much has changed and how much has remained the same in the selection, and training of Army pilots. Keep the videos coming I am enjoying them very much. Best of luck on your career. Leo Armbrister, Major (ret)
Now that the Army has made it selection, I’ve been reading and watching everything I can about it. This video has done more than anything I’ve come across to make me feel comfortable with the Army’s choice for the security of our troops in it and battle effectiveness of our military going forward. I can see that Bell has done their homework well and chosen a design with a lot of important advantages in operational effectiveness, tactical safety, and limited control forced landings. Very good attributes to this aircraft. I’m impressed with it and this video. My dad flew in one of the first helicopters as a passenger in the early days of our involvement in WWII. He enlisted in the Army Air Corps, or as it may have been renamed by then, the U.S. Army Air Forces. He said they flew over a highway in NY state, drawing lots of attention as helicopters were new to everyone outside of military aviation. Cars were pulling off the road and stopping with people getting out and looking up at them. He scored at the top of his class in ground school at Wright Patt and had a strong desire to bomb Nazis. He has tried to join the RCAF before Pearl Harbor. The Canadian commandant personally signed a letter to him suggesting he wait for the U.S. to join the war which he predicted would be soon. He did and he was such a good pilot they made him a B-25 instructor pilot. He trained others to go take care of winning the war in all the places their skills were called for. I’m very proud of him. And all of our aviators serving the country these days on behalf of all of us, willing to do the risky things for our protection. Kudos to the engineers who work hard to give our military the best equipment also. It’s quite a team effort.
Excellent interview - smart questions. We'll see what the Army picks for FLRAA, but the Bell guys seem to have done their homework, and they tell their story well.
This is one of those times in which buying a new platform for the Army. There’s an embarrassment of riches. Both the Valor & Defiant are incredible game changing systems. Both should be bought for different reasons.
Now that the v-280 has won, there is still the competition for the future assault reconnaissance aircraft, who’s finalist candidates are the Sikorsky Raider X (similar design to defiant but different size) and the Bell 360 Invictus (a more traditional helicopter). I am personally hoping the Raider X wins.
Former USMC aviation here. All I can say is it’s about time the US Army transitioned to V/STOL aircraft. Bell is very well known for producing reliable, maintainable aircraft. Readiness begins on the ground. Very happy to see the the continued V/STOL refinements incorporated into the 280 Valor, and the close attention to detail on reliability and maintainability. Sikorsky aircraft are known for poor maintainability and high cost. What takes minutes to replace on Bell aircraft often takes hours on a Sikorsky. Numerous special tools are often required to maintain a Sikorsky aircraft. Why reward a company that produces inferior designs? Simple: You don’t. Job well done by Bell. 👏👍 God help our adversaries.
Exactly. Many people wanted the Sikorsky just because it looks nicer. However we must take into account what was being asked for, more speed which they both have and more survivability which is where Bell wins since if one engine fails the other can keep going
@@Ferchos-kl6mi Bell goes to great lengths on survivability. It shows up in the maintenance statistics: fewer component failures. As a former technician I could see the care and concern about reliability and maintainability (survivability) built into their products.
@@martinclennon4640 No we did not use software. All training was hands on with assistance from Naval Air Rework Facilities (NARF) and company technical reps (Bell, Boeing, Sikorsky, etc). Training was top notch.
@@josephringling Bell just started using ms holo lens for the v280 program. I was asking if you saw the video on how bell plans to use the tech. I am a programmer and looking to offer holo lens tech to solve different problems. I am an old-school programmer and know the limitations of tech. Software or the holo lens tech will only be able to improve hands-on tech training not in any way reduce the need.
I’m pleased to see the Army chose the V-280 as a successor to the UH-60 Black Hawk. As a veteran Army Structural/Crash Rescue Firefighter I would have love to have taken a class on rescue procedures on this aircraft.
Wow. best thing since the internet. the scale up/down capability, attack helicoptor varients. and also naval drones. every single corvette or frigate+ could now have heli arms that have 3 times the range and twice the speed.
Welp it won! Great video by the way. I know a great military hardware video when I can't tell exactly what the folks are talking about for roughly half the video. Subbed.
I think the v280 is about to become a civilian commercial success as well. It solves many issues of the osprey while having some serious advantages over traditional helicopters without bringing the premature wear issue of compound designs. I mean, you have the flexibility of a helicopter with the capability, fuel economy and comfort of a fixed wing platform. If it isn’t a pain in the ass to maintain, I don't see a reason to choose a traditional heli design over this other than upfront cost.
The v-280 needs to be designed into different models such as micro, small (5 seats), medium (12-24 seats), medium and large (40-60 seats) and heavy (80-150 seats), seaplanes, etc. The speed needs to reach more than 900 kilometers per hour, the steering, acceleration and deceleration actions must be faster and more flexible (the steering action in the current film is still very slow), and it must be able to function in bad weather. Automatic unmanned driving systems and automatic remote-controlled weapon systems need to be installed to cope with various scenarios. It is also hoped that the SB-1 will be put into production after being equipped with an autopilot system to replace some old and slow helicopter models.
i have to say after reading and watching a lot of analysis it seems the bell design it the right choice, it's proven and will be more useful in the Pacific.
He's certainly right about speed and range. As we say, helicopters don't really fly, they beat the air into submission. However, no matter what he says, Bell is going to have to prove it for reliability and safety. Getting the stink of the Osprey washed off any tilt rotor system has to be the priority. If they get past that, there is a lot of upside that comes with tilt rotor. Anyways, I'm coming over from TikTok. You've seen me comment over there as Sgt Beavis.
Does the V-22 really have a bad history? In the first 10 or so years, yeah, there were 3 or 4 accidents before it became operational. The Osp has proven itself 15 years since it became operational in 2007, with the USAF, USN, and USMC. Is there really a "stigma" at this point? I really want to see the V-280 AND the 360 win the comps. Go Bell!
To be fair of the V-22 it has an amazing safety record it just gets more press because when something eventually goes wrong many people can die. Also the vast majority of crashes in the V-22 were pilot error as the system was so new the military didn't even know how to properly train people on it.
This might sound strange but one of the things that was a life saver about the 60 was it’s ability to crash well. The 47’s would flip every time. The 60s tended to just kinda crunch down and tip a bit. I’d say that’s an aspect of the new helo’s that they prob didn’t consider. The unfortunate thing about combat is sometimes the helo goes down.
Back in the late 70's when the "UTTAS" program was underway, Sikorsky and its Black Hawk was one of the competitors vying to win the contract to replace the UH1. During an evaluation the Black Hawk had a malfunction and crashed. The chief engineer at that time was Ray Leoni and he was present at the incident. The entire Sikorsky team felt the contract was lost and sent a repair crew to get the Black Hawk up and flying again which they did in short order. When the military dignitaries saw how quickly the Black Hawk was repaired they awarded the contract to Sikorsky stating any ship that can go down that hard and be airworthy in such short time is exactly what the military is looking for. Ray Leoni went on to become president of Sikorsky. I know all this as I am a retired Sikorsky employee who started there in 1980. However the entire Black Hawk story can be enjoyed by reading BLACK HAWK: The Story of a World Class Helicopter. By Ray Leoni himself.
@@georgeharitos7501 Sikorsky's design also significantly outperformed Boeing's YUH-61. Not that surprising since the YUH-61 is the only helicopter Boeing itself designed that ever flew, so Sikorsky had a lot more experience to enable them to make a better aircraft.
When they first built the Osprey, nobody had done it before, so it's not surprising they found problems, and took some time to get the bugs worked out, but they have been fantastic. The F35 too 10yrs to really hit it's stride. This is gen 2, it will go much faster.
Plus the Opsrey is a good aircraft, contrary to popular beliefs. Its accidents gained much public attention but they are far from outweighting the ones with the blackhawk.
I’ve been in Aerial Medevac company for about 3 years now and picking up patient was always a challenge. Base on the lesson learn from previous theater of operation (Vietnam, 1st Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghan) I think confined landing and dust landing will be a major problem with this platform. In Vietnam, confine landing was such a problem that we started to using Jungle penetrator just to hoist wounded troops out of combat. And dust landing in Iraq and Afghanistan we would cause brown out, to the point that we can’t even land. With near peer adversaries (China, Russia) in mind, something tells me that our future operating theater would be in the mountains forest, cities with lots of confine landing, dust/snow (brown out)
It only has a 19% larger footprint than the Blackhawk. Like he said if the rotors are designed in such a way to blow the dust away that should also help. The V-22 suffered from those issues mainly because of the marine's requirements for it which limited the rotor diameter for its size.
JP Morgan predicted Bell would win the deal and Wells Fargo downgraded Lockheed Martin recently, citing if they don’t win this contract it will hurt their business. Pretty interesting stuff.
Great video. I’d love to see the Valor become operational. Every branch of the service could use a troop carrier that is comfortable over the water if the threat moves to the western pacific. The Army had to fight there right along side Marine Corp in WWII.
So the Valor has just won that competition to replace the Black Hawk. Will it have a gunship version or it's just a fast ultra-modern utility airplane/chopper for the US military?
Excellent video, very well done and easily understandable. I'm thinking that since only the props change position instead of the entire engine as on a V-22 would be a very big plus and I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned. Thank you.
This is one of the reasons the Army did not purchase the V22. The Army wanted to be able to ingress/egress in mass via the side of the aircraft vs the rear as done of the V22. The engine exhaust of the V22 is also limited where the V22 could land; the force of the exhaust can destroy a landing surface.
I’m going to say the Sikorsky Defiant is going to be the winner here with the Army. It is an amazing aircraft. That’s not to say the Valor isn’t amazing; It is. I could see the Marines and Navy being interested in the V-280 for obvious reasons. The Bell 525 could be a Blackhawk or UH-1Y replacement if Bell ever gets the program off the ground. Still looking for a bird to replace what I flew from 2008-2019. The underrated OH-58 Kiowa.
FARA was initially setup to replace the Kiowa but from everything ive seen of FARA it seems far too large and expensive to fill the same role as Kiowa did. Bell's FARA submission, the 360 Invictus, borrows its rotor system from the 525. Sadly I suspect any future aircraft in the same category as Kiowa will be exclusive to drones.
@@cwo8771 you didn't ask me but the reason Marines and Navy would want v280 over Defiant is purely for range. The farther their aircraft can travel, the farther they can keep their ships off shore. Being close to enemy land is extremely dangerous, the farther away the ships can operate the better.
@@Mediiiicc Agreed. Just thinking the Army may face the same operational challenges-long range over water missions. I’m sure the Defiant is also an impressive bird. Wouldn’t be surprised to see both get contracts.
There can be only on winner of the Future Lift Program. As you know Bell has been awarded the contract to produce the V-280. Sikorsky is protesting the decision. But Lockheed Martin is the true winner. Because LM owns Sikorsky and is partnering with Bell to produce the V-280. Very Intelligent video Brother Man!!!!
Great introduction to this. I'd like to see a deeper dive on the "improvements" of this over the Osprey, especially full payload range and "brownouts". It looks great with just a pilot in a nice controlled environment but we all know that tells us next to nothing.
For your questions, it's already exceeded all Army requirements for FLRAA see : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Long-Range_Assault_Aircraft in testing with Army pilots either present or in control. The engines do not rotate as the V-22's did specifically to reduce the brownouts. Some dust is always kicked up by any rotorcraft, but with the engines on V-280 they aid in clearing dust back and away from cabin and intakes of engines. The tests were all performed with smaller engines than are planned on the actual craft having 10K vs 14K HP, so performance and lift capabilities will be improved as well in next version. They will also be able to use any lessons learned from this test phase to enhance design as requested for final aircraft design.
I'm worried about the side gunnery your 3 o'clock is kind of exposed... I don't trust the target fixated crew chief not to shoot the rotors off.... I've been the target fixated crew chief...lol
@@keithadams812 Don't they have range limiters so they can't be aimed higher than a few degrees above horizontal or forward ? If nothing else use the old WW1 German gun interrupter so it cannot fire while blade wing or engine is in front of gun firing arc... V-22 has tried out both chin mount and belly mount (retractable) machinegun systems successfully for SOC as well as Griffin-B Missiles and APKWS systems that could be deployed.
@@keithadams812 That's a danger with any helicopter, and some have shot themselves down. i imagine they'll have something that prevents the gun form elevating too much
The very first thought I had when I saw the V-280 is what name will the Army give it? The second thought I had would it be possible to redesign the cargo area to allow the V-280 to carry a infantry fighting vehicle?
It has a reported carry capacity of 10k pounds flying at 150kts. Maybe some SF vehicles or a future scout vehicles but even a JLTV has 14k+ pounds so likely nothing too armored. A bonus is it can carry a M777A2 which a Blackhawk could never carry.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 I would like to learn about or read about a raid where Air Assault got drop off. Then drove to a different location. Attacked that location. Then drove to a third location and got picked up.
I’m surprise the US Air Force hasn’t said that’s a fixed wing and the Army can’t have them. I’m looking forward to the Assault version, not sure for a Long Bow stalk would look on this rig, but the gun and mussels would be amazing, thinking the UH-60L with Hell Fires on the ESSS, which actually turned out to be a more stable firing platform than the Apache was, though it was never built.
I like the craft, either choice of the V-280 Valor or the Sikorsky Defiant-X would have been a win for the US military. Coming from the V-22 with major fixes it makes logical sense. My thoughts go to a service ceiling of only 6K feet as it's biggest weakness, where the V-22 could reach 25K feet. Afghanistan anyone? A pressurized cabin can hopefully come in the future. Armament, hopefully was considered on the Valor, compared the to the negligible availability of weapons on the V-22. It will be interesting to see what they do to create an attack/scout version of the V-280 in 5 years. Frankly, I hope the Defiant-X still continues to be developed for military and commercial applications, it's also a winner.
I believe the 6k ft limitation is for hovering outside of ground effects. Which is hovering without the aid of the ground acting as a air cushion. I believe level flight or air plane mode ceiling will be limited by the lack of a pressurized cabin which is typically around 10k ft. It could be increased if the supplemental oxygen is provided, which I do not believe is part of the requirements at this time.
@@Pluto_ice V-22 has a 25k ceiling and is pressurized so I'm sure they would do the same for this. Also yea it has an even higher max hover height than the Blackhawk.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 IIRC the V-22 is not pressurized and uses supplemental oxygen for the crew to go above ~12K feet but is generally required above 10K. I'd assume the V-280 would utilize the same solution when needed. A pressurized cabin was not a requirement for the V-22 or V-280. There are two altitudes to be concerned with. The first is the I'm stupid altitude. Thats the altitude where brain fog occurs which is generally 10-12K ft. The second is the my blood is boiling altitude which is the altitude where a pressure suit is needed which is around 60K ft but generally speaking they are worn above 50K ft. Flying at 25k ft with only supplemental oxygen in an unpressurized cabin is fine. As such the cost and weight vs benefits for pressurizing made it too costly. The FAA has strict regs on O2 use that pretty much mirror military regs.
The army selection process is all going to come down to money, everything else being pretty close. Just guessing but I would think the Sikorsky pusher helicopter may be cheaper than the tilt rotor. But Bells tilt wing Valour though may be the better choice for operations in the Pacific with the Marines where maximum range would be the main requirement.
Would you call the Bell Valor a second-generation or third-generation tiltrotor? A number of purely experimental tiltrotor aircraft preceded the successful but still controversial V-22 Osprey, the best being the Bell XV-15. Maybe the critical difference is the software?
As I was told by someone with knowledge of the program, one of the issues of the Osprey was adapting it to naval use. There are tight constraints on naval aircraft imposed by things like the dimensions and lift capacity of elevator lifts on aircraft carriers and hangar height. Hangar height is critical -- it's why the F-14 never flew off anything but supercarriers regularly. The Midway class carriers COULD recover and launch F-14s but there were critical maintenance cycles they could NOT be performed on the F-14 within the constraints of the hull design, one of these being landing gear tests because the Midway hangar height was just barely over 17 ft! The Forrestal-class was the minimum size ship that was practical for F-14 operations. ** A big "gotcha" that popped out to me was learning they had to change the rotor blade lengths for the V-22 to fit carriers. That means with a shorter blade it has to rotate FASTER to achieve the same lift and thrust as a longer blade! Those higher RPM's do impose greater strain on both the engine turning the blades as well as the blades themselves.
@@AvengerII There was no requirement for the Tomcat to operate regularly off the Midways because it was known they were going away. They didn't have to change thier rotor blade lenghts, they constrained from the start because of the desire to use the spots abeam the island on the smaller flat decks. This helps contribute to the downwas. V-280doesn't have this problem.
I think the Valor is cool. BUT will cool be able to do a low quickstop in an urban environment and fastrope? Its HUGE! And if it's quieter than a V-22 thats good. Because I can hear V-22s from a loooong way off. I guess we are stuck with them no matter what. The call has been made. Until of course we chuck them like the LCS ships.
@@cooljoy819 Really? Well shall wait and see. Change is hard. Im just a Blackhawk fanboy. LOL But V22s still blow my mind, no matter how often I see them.
Valor has demonstrated going from 220 knots to a hover in 45 seconds. That's a pretty good quick stop. Those V-22 you heard, were they in helicopter mode or wingborne mode because the V-22 is much quieter when on the wing? Black Hawks and Chinooks are note exactly quite.
A lot of maintenance I’ll tell you !! Too many moving parts. But definitely gonna be a asset for the army. The osprey is hated by the civilians because they don’t know what people know working with these does. All the civilians see is the bad news.
@@Fifthmiracle IF the army wants it to which is the big one. It would be an easy sell to the army if they look for a full replacement for the Apache and not just a scout / attack Heli.
I know many MV22 and CV22 maintainers and right now in the Air Force there isn't parts to keep them flying. Let's not even talk about their crash rate. What about sling load capabilities? Because the current MV22 that we work with is normally max on 4500 lbs
You are wrong about the V-22... it has an amazing mishap rate for any aircraft let alone a helicopter. Even the navy has said in the past it is one of the safest aircraft they fly. The V-22 is VERY limited because of the marine corps' requirements which also cause many of the issues and maintenance woes. It can reportedly carry 10k pounds at 150kts IE a M777A2 easily.
I just wished there was room for both (S-97 Raider) of these. I get the TR for transport but no way in hell it will replace the AH64 that's getting long-in-the-tooth. Bell 360 not that impressive either.
The Raider is in an entirely different program which has yet to be decided on. You are thinking of the Defiant which had multiple technical issues and was outperformed by the Valor.
The tilt rotor concept just seems to be almost exclusive for Navy and Marines (range over water) longer loiter time for search and rescue....Defiant seems the best for the capability where it's most dangerous. ( confines spacees, rapid insertion and evac) I''d say V280 for the Marines and Navy, Defiant for the Army.
@@WALTERBROADDUS yes, true...but other branches have picked up the alternate aircraft. Look at the Navy. They picked up on the then YF-17 after it lost to General Dynamics F-16 for the airforce. The Hornet was born. The Navy and Marines could pick up the Valor if it loses to the defiant.
@@ericjohnson341 the Marines already have a transport. As for the Navy? The Osprey and the SH60 have very different roles. And neither the uh-60 or The valor and any chance of replacing the Cobra or Huey.
Yea just a bad rap because any crash in a large transport can kill many people which sells more clicks. It DID have a bad start but many aircraft do and most of the crashes were pilot error as the military didn't even know how to properly train the people to use it.
Any aircraft have mishaps that is the nature of training in the military. The V-22 is just as safe as the Blackhawk and safer than the Chinook, Sea Stallion and much much more. So if you are saying that then you better not trust those other aircraft.
Watch my video about a $50 interview mic that will be great for the type of video you have here. I really enjoyed this video. My step-daughter was an engineer at Bell in Irving Texas, so the 2 tilt-rotors were always of great interest to me. Enjoyed your content a lot!!
Faster , Farther with 6ft sliding door the troops can get in and out fast it also is better at lifting equipment the new tilt rotor is different than osprey just the blades tilt and engine the air shoots back no One hat is blowing off no wind this hybrid is absolutely the right choice there is only a minor issue I have it's the only one and it is wider believe it or not that much so in tight places instead of 12black hawks only 10 valor's so space is the only issue I have and it's not by much but for troops being saved and troops deployment is much better then Sikorsky no sliding doors and the tail roter is bad in tight places and dangerous for troop's and like I said no air blowing down like helicopter the valor is awesome 😎 great job by Bell China will be making these watch
Unfortunately decisions and comments on these kind of complex machine systems call for likes of people like Norman D. Ham or Arthur Young but both are long gone....
Bell has bet the farm on the V280. I would not be surprised if Boeing attempts to acquire Bell, if not Textron as a whole, if Bell is successful and wins the competition.
If the penny pinching bean counters in the pentagon doesn’t buy either 280 or the other one, I’m sorry but I can’t remember what the name is, anyhoo it’d be a decision of monumental stupidity
Yeah, sure. One of those "wow-factor videos" to impress you. Ain't buying it till I actually see it in combat. Like anything else new, that's supposed to be better than it's predecessor. This guy comes across like a new car salesman. Not impressed.
@@franklinknisley1953 Not only are tilt rotor aircraft just as if not even more survivable as a traditional helicopter the Valor could also make double the trips for each trip the Blackhawk could make and carry more troops each time.
I think there was a misunderstand regarding my sarcasm, to something I saw or read a year ago. I like tilt rotors. It is unfortunate that too many lives are being lost in those to discover the service life of parts, proper training regarding physics (to many died on that one) regarding rapid landing transitions and flaws of design. You foolishly called me a fool. Been called that before and worse. Only time will tell.@@n3v3rforgott3n9 It was for FREEDOM, that Christ died, yet here we sit with a yoke around our necks. It's time to STAND and shatter them who shackled us. See Gal. 5:1.
Damion I am a retired Army Aviator. I was an officer who was commissioned via the ROTC route. I graduated in 1969 and graduated from flight school in 1970. When I attended flight school there wasn't an aviation branch. I was initially an infantry officer and got a branch transfer to the transportation branch. I attended the maintenance flight training course and spent most of my assignments as an aviation maintenance officer and test pilot. I also was an instrument instructor pilot at Ft. Rucker for four and a half years. I left active duty after 10 years and spent 14 years in the NY Guard and the reserves. In some of your other videos it was interesting how much has changed and how much has remained the same in the selection, and training of Army pilots. Keep the videos coming I am enjoying them very much. Best of luck on your career. Leo Armbrister, Major (ret)
Wow, this rep knows a huge amount of information about the platform. Very impressive.
He makes it clear to see why they took this contract, it's a no brainer.
Now that the Army has made it selection, I’ve been reading and watching everything I can about it. This video has done more than anything I’ve come across to make me feel comfortable with the Army’s choice for the security of our troops in it and battle effectiveness of our military going forward. I can see that Bell has done their homework well and chosen a design with a lot of important advantages in operational effectiveness, tactical safety, and limited control forced landings. Very good attributes to this aircraft. I’m impressed with it and this video. My dad flew in one of the first helicopters as a passenger in the early days of our involvement in WWII. He enlisted in the Army Air Corps, or as it may have been renamed by then, the U.S. Army Air Forces. He said they flew over a highway in NY state, drawing lots of attention as helicopters were new to everyone outside of military aviation. Cars were pulling off the road and stopping with people getting out and looking up at them. He scored at the top of his class in ground school at Wright Patt and had a strong desire to bomb Nazis. He has tried to join the RCAF before Pearl Harbor. The Canadian commandant personally signed a letter to him suggesting he wait for the U.S. to join the war which he predicted would be soon. He did and he was such a good pilot they made him a B-25 instructor pilot. He trained others to go take care of winning the war in all the places their skills were called for. I’m very proud of him. And all of our aviators serving the country these days on behalf of all of us, willing to do the risky things for our protection. Kudos to the engineers who work hard to give our military the best equipment also. It’s quite a team effort.
I must say military spokesman are among the best salespeople you can get. It doesn’t get better than this. 👏
Excellent interview - smart questions. We'll see what the Army picks for FLRAA, but the Bell guys seem to have done their homework, and they tell their story well.
This is the best video on V-280 I've seen, by far, thank you very much and huge thanks to Frank!
Hey thank you!
Great aircopter 🤔 the guy in the video absolut professional 👏 knows exactly what he is talking about 👍
Absolutely!
Excellent film, Damion , thanks.
Hey thank you Craig, they will get better as I figure this TH-cam thing out
This is one of those times in which buying a new platform for the Army. There’s an embarrassment of riches. Both the Valor & Defiant are incredible game changing systems. Both should be bought for different reasons.
I agree with this. Why not add 2 new platforms?
@@damion_bailey my thoughts exactly.
If you have time to do a video on the bell 247 that would be great.
Now that the v-280 has won, there is still the competition for the future assault reconnaissance aircraft, who’s finalist candidates are the Sikorsky Raider X (similar design to defiant but different size) and the Bell 360 Invictus (a more traditional helicopter). I am personally hoping the Raider X wins.
Yeah, the Valor is a better transport, but the Defiant IS a helicopter, with its perks that the Valor just can't match
Former USMC aviation here. All I can say is it’s about time the US Army transitioned to V/STOL aircraft. Bell is very well known for producing reliable, maintainable aircraft. Readiness begins on the ground. Very happy to see the the continued V/STOL refinements incorporated into the 280 Valor, and the close attention to detail on reliability and maintainability.
Sikorsky aircraft are known for poor maintainability and high cost. What takes minutes to replace on Bell aircraft often takes hours on a Sikorsky. Numerous special tools are often required to maintain a Sikorsky aircraft. Why reward a company that produces inferior designs? Simple: You don’t.
Job well done by Bell. 👏👍 God help our adversaries.
did you see the use of Microsoft HoloLens as a training aid for maintenance crews?
Exactly. Many people wanted the Sikorsky just because it looks nicer. However we must take into account what was being asked for, more speed which they both have and more survivability which is where Bell wins since if one engine fails the other can keep going
@@Ferchos-kl6mi Bell goes to great lengths on survivability. It shows up in the maintenance statistics: fewer component failures. As a former technician I could see the care and concern about reliability and maintainability (survivability) built into their products.
@@martinclennon4640 No we did not use software. All training was hands on with assistance from Naval Air Rework Facilities (NARF) and company technical reps (Bell, Boeing, Sikorsky, etc). Training was top notch.
@@josephringling Bell just started using ms holo lens for the v280 program. I was asking if you saw the video on how bell plans to use the tech. I am a programmer and looking to offer holo lens tech to solve different problems. I am an old-school programmer and know the limitations of tech. Software or the holo lens tech will only be able to improve hands-on tech training not in any way reduce the need.
I’m pleased to see the Army chose the V-280 as a successor to the UH-60 Black Hawk. As a veteran Army Structural/Crash Rescue Firefighter I would have love to have taken a class on rescue procedures on this aircraft.
Wow. best thing since the internet. the scale up/down capability, attack helicoptor varients. and also naval drones. every single corvette or frigate+ could now have heli arms that have 3 times the range and twice the speed.
Welp it won! Great video by the way. I know a great military hardware video when I can't tell exactly what the folks are talking about for roughly half the video. Subbed.
Detailed and informative video Damion. Keep up the great work! 👏🏽
Great job man, thanks for the video!
I think the v280 is about to become a civilian commercial success as well. It solves many issues of the osprey while having some serious advantages over traditional helicopters without bringing the premature wear issue of compound designs.
I mean, you have the flexibility of a helicopter with the capability, fuel economy and comfort of a fixed wing platform.
If it isn’t a pain in the ass to maintain, I don't see a reason to choose a traditional heli design over this other than upfront cost.
I agree, Leonardo is also building a tilt rotor for civilian use
Great video Damion, thanks for taking the time to make it.
The v-280 needs to be designed into different models such as micro, small (5 seats), medium (12-24 seats), medium and large (40-60 seats) and heavy (80-150 seats), seaplanes, etc.
The speed needs to reach more than 900 kilometers per hour, the steering, acceleration and deceleration actions must be faster and more flexible (the steering action in the current film is still very slow), and it must be able to function in bad weather.
Automatic unmanned driving systems and automatic remote-controlled weapon systems need to be installed to cope with various scenarios.
It is also hoped that the SB-1 will be put into production after being equipped with an autopilot system to replace some old and slow helicopter models.
i have to say after reading and watching a lot of analysis it seems the bell design it the right choice, it's proven and will be more useful in the Pacific.
I agree
Bell V-280 is the Winner!
Great narration! I appreciate your concerns and your experience with Army helicopters.
I like the Bell 360 Invictus. ⚔️
The V280 won the competition
He's certainly right about speed and range. As we say, helicopters don't really fly, they beat the air into submission. However, no matter what he says, Bell is going to have to prove it for reliability and safety. Getting the stink of the Osprey washed off any tilt rotor system has to be the priority. If they get past that, there is a lot of upside that comes with tilt rotor.
Anyways, I'm coming over from TikTok. You've seen me comment over there as Sgt Beavis.
Absolutely
Helicopters correct description is rotary wing aircraft
Does the V-22 really have a bad history? In the first 10 or so years, yeah, there were 3 or 4 accidents before it became operational. The Osp has proven itself 15 years since it became operational in 2007, with the USAF, USN, and USMC. Is there really a "stigma" at this point?
I really want to see the V-280 AND the 360 win the comps. Go Bell!
To be fair of the V-22 it has an amazing safety record it just gets more press because when something eventually goes wrong many people can die. Also the vast majority of crashes in the V-22 were pilot error as the system was so new the military didn't even know how to properly train people on it.
This might sound strange but one of the things that was a life saver about the 60 was it’s ability to crash well. The 47’s would flip every time. The 60s tended to just kinda crunch down and tip a bit. I’d say that’s an aspect of the new helo’s that they prob didn’t consider. The unfortunate thing about combat is sometimes the helo goes down.
Back in the late 70's when the "UTTAS" program was underway, Sikorsky and its Black Hawk was one of the competitors vying to win the contract to replace the UH1. During an evaluation the Black Hawk had a malfunction and crashed. The chief engineer at that time was Ray Leoni and he was present at the incident. The entire Sikorsky team felt the contract was lost and sent a repair crew to get the Black Hawk up and flying again which they did in short order. When the military dignitaries saw how quickly the Black Hawk was repaired they awarded the contract to Sikorsky stating any ship that can go down that hard and be airworthy in such short time is exactly what the military is looking for. Ray Leoni went on to become president of Sikorsky. I know all this as I am a retired Sikorsky employee who started there in 1980. However the entire Black Hawk story can be enjoyed by reading BLACK HAWK: The Story of a World Class Helicopter. By Ray Leoni himself.
@@georgeharitos7501 that’s a cool piece of history. Thank you!
@@georgeharitos7501 Sikorsky's design also significantly outperformed Boeing's YUH-61. Not that surprising since the YUH-61 is the only helicopter Boeing itself designed that ever flew, so Sikorsky had a lot more experience to enable them to make a better aircraft.
Did they improve the clutch from the V22
I’ll have to ask about that one
I wonder how the maintenance program will work. Probably gonna be heavy on inspections for a little while until it gets more proven in its lifetime.
This is true
All the Bell haters are seething right now. So much for the all the, “experts”, who said the Defiant was the clear favorite.
When they first built the Osprey, nobody had done it before, so it's not surprising they found problems, and took some time to get the bugs worked out, but they have been fantastic. The F35 too 10yrs to really hit it's stride. This is gen 2, it will go much faster.
Plus the Opsrey is a good aircraft, contrary to popular beliefs. Its accidents gained much public attention but they are far from outweighting the ones with the blackhawk.
Love this platform already Rolls-Royce makes damn good engines
I’ve been in Aerial Medevac company for about 3 years now and picking up patient was always a challenge. Base on the lesson learn from previous theater of operation (Vietnam, 1st Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghan) I think confined landing and dust landing will be a major problem with this platform. In Vietnam, confine landing was such a problem that we started to using Jungle penetrator just to hoist wounded troops out of combat. And dust landing in Iraq and Afghanistan we would cause brown out, to the point that we can’t even land. With near peer adversaries (China, Russia) in mind, something tells me that our future operating theater would be in the mountains forest, cities with lots of confine landing, dust/snow (brown out)
It only has a 19% larger footprint than the Blackhawk. Like he said if the rotors are designed in such a way to blow the dust away that should also help. The V-22 suffered from those issues mainly because of the marine's requirements for it which limited the rotor diameter for its size.
This would make an awesome search and rescue vehicle particularly in Canada in the Canadian North
JP Morgan predicted Bell would win the deal and Wells Fargo downgraded Lockheed Martin recently, citing if they don’t win this contract it will hurt their business. Pretty interesting stuff.
Wow can’t wait to see who gets it
@@damion_bailey looks like JP Morgan was right, Valor just won.
Great video. I’d love to see the Valor become operational. Every branch of the service could use a troop carrier that is comfortable over the water if the threat moves to the western pacific. The Army had to fight there right along side Marine Corp in WWII.
Well dont know how ive never seen your channel before. But i love American Military tech shows that are not Robot channels lol so i def subbed.
So the Valor has just won that competition to replace the Black Hawk. Will it have a gunship version or it's just a fast ultra-modern utility airplane/chopper for the US military?
Bell has shown models of gunship versions, but if Army wants it, they've got to order it.
Excellent video, very well done and easily understandable. I'm thinking that since only the props change position instead of the entire engine as on a V-22 would be a very big plus and I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned. Thank you.
This is one of the reasons the Army did not purchase the V22. The Army wanted to be able to ingress/egress in mass via the side of the aircraft vs the rear as done of the V22. The engine exhaust of the V22 is also limited where the V22 could land; the force of the exhaust can destroy a landing surface.
I’m going to say the Sikorsky Defiant is going to be the winner here with the Army. It is an amazing aircraft.
That’s not to say the Valor isn’t amazing; It is. I could see the Marines and Navy being interested in the V-280 for obvious reasons.
The Bell 525 could be a Blackhawk or UH-1Y replacement if Bell ever gets the program off the ground.
Still looking for a bird to replace what I flew from 2008-2019. The underrated OH-58 Kiowa.
FARA was initially setup to replace the Kiowa but from everything ive seen of FARA it seems far too large and expensive to fill the same role as Kiowa did. Bell's FARA submission, the 360 Invictus, borrows its rotor system from the 525.
Sadly I suspect any future aircraft in the same category as Kiowa will be exclusive to drones.
Just curious, why do you think will it be good for the Navy and Marines, capability or bias (theirs, not yours)?
@@cwo8771 you didn't ask me but the reason Marines and Navy would want v280 over Defiant is purely for range. The farther their aircraft can travel, the farther they can keep their ships off shore. Being close to enemy land is extremely dangerous, the farther away the ships can operate the better.
@@Mediiiicc Agreed. Just thinking the Army may face the same operational challenges-long range over water missions. I’m sure the Defiant is also an impressive bird. Wouldn’t be surprised to see both get contracts.
Kiowa is a cute little thing.
Could a small amount of batteries (or super capacitators) and a small electric motor provide power long enough for a vertical emergency landing?
Theoretically you wouldn’t need it worst case I still flies like an airplane so it’ll crash like an airplane
It would be too heavy to give the aircraft any kind of meaningful range..
@@damion_bailey My idea was that it would just be used for a few seconds, only for an emergency vertical landing. But it's probably not worth it...
There can be only on winner of the Future Lift Program. As you know Bell has been awarded the contract to produce the V-280. Sikorsky is protesting the decision. But Lockheed Martin is the true winner. Because LM owns Sikorsky and is partnering with Bell to produce the V-280.
Very Intelligent video Brother Man!!!!
awesome , you should attempt to do the raider x, or other aircraft army is thinking about getting 😅
Ok! I’ll do the the defiant next and then the raider
Great introduction to this. I'd like to see a deeper dive on the "improvements" of this over the Osprey, especially full payload range and "brownouts". It looks great with just a pilot in a nice controlled environment but we all know that tells us next to nothing.
For your questions, it's already exceeded all Army requirements for FLRAA see : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Long-Range_Assault_Aircraft in testing with Army pilots either present or in control. The engines do not rotate as the V-22's did specifically to reduce the brownouts. Some dust is always kicked up by any rotorcraft, but with the engines on V-280 they aid in clearing dust back and away from cabin and intakes of engines. The tests were all performed with smaller engines than are planned on the actual craft having 10K vs 14K HP, so performance and lift capabilities will be improved as well in next version. They will also be able to use any lessons learned from this test phase to enhance design as requested for final aircraft design.
I'm worried about the side gunnery your 3 o'clock is kind of exposed... I don't trust the target fixated crew chief not to shoot the rotors off.... I've been the target fixated crew chief...lol
Crew coordination better be exquisite
@@keithadams812 Don't they have range limiters so they can't be aimed higher than a few degrees above horizontal or forward ? If nothing else use the old WW1 German gun interrupter so it cannot fire while blade wing or engine is in front of gun firing arc... V-22 has tried out both chin mount and belly mount (retractable) machinegun systems successfully for SOC as well as Griffin-B Missiles and APKWS systems that could be deployed.
@@keithadams812 That's a danger with any helicopter, and some have shot themselves down. i imagine they'll have something that prevents the gun form elevating too much
that rep knew his stuff
The very first thought I had when I saw the V-280 is what name will the Army give it? The second thought I had would it be possible to redesign the cargo area to allow the V-280 to carry a infantry fighting vehicle?
It has a reported carry capacity of 10k pounds flying at 150kts. Maybe some SF vehicles or a future scout vehicles but even a JLTV has 14k+ pounds so likely nothing too armored. A bonus is it can carry a M777A2 which a Blackhawk could never carry.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 I would like to learn about or read about a raid where Air Assault got drop off. Then drove to a different location. Attacked that location. Then drove to a third location and got picked up.
Can the valor glide with engines off and propellers feathered?
Yes
@@tararaboomdiay7442 What is the best glide speed at max gross weight?
@@crawford323 That information is not public knowledge yet and neither is the final weight.
if they take the flight control systems of the f-35b stovl system and implement that ease of control to this aircraft it could be a great improvement
I’m surprise the US Air Force hasn’t said that’s a fixed wing and the Army can’t have them. I’m looking forward to the Assault version, not sure for a Long Bow stalk would look on this rig, but the gun and mussels would be amazing, thinking the UH-60L with Hell Fires on the ESSS, which actually turned out to be a more stable firing platform than the Apache was, though it was never built.
I like the craft, either choice of the V-280 Valor or the Sikorsky Defiant-X would have been a win for the US military. Coming from the V-22 with major fixes it makes logical sense. My thoughts go to a service ceiling of only 6K feet as it's biggest weakness, where the V-22 could reach 25K feet. Afghanistan anyone? A pressurized cabin can hopefully come in the future.
Armament, hopefully was considered on the Valor, compared the to the negligible availability of weapons on the V-22. It will be interesting to see what they do to create an attack/scout version of the V-280 in 5 years. Frankly, I hope the Defiant-X still continues to be developed for military and commercial applications, it's also a winner.
I believe the 6k ft limitation is for hovering outside of ground effects. Which is hovering without the aid of the ground acting as a air cushion. I believe level flight or air plane mode ceiling will be limited by the lack of a pressurized cabin which is typically around 10k ft. It could be increased if the supplemental oxygen is provided, which I do not believe is part of the requirements at this time.
@@Pluto_ice V-22 has a 25k ceiling and is pressurized so I'm sure they would do the same for this. Also yea it has an even higher max hover height than the Blackhawk.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 IIRC the V-22 is not pressurized and uses supplemental oxygen for the crew to go above ~12K feet but is generally required above 10K. I'd assume the V-280 would utilize the same solution when needed. A pressurized cabin was not a requirement for the V-22 or V-280. There are two altitudes to be concerned with. The first is the I'm stupid altitude. Thats the altitude where brain fog occurs which is generally 10-12K ft. The second is the my blood is boiling altitude which is the altitude where a pressure suit is needed which is around 60K ft but generally speaking they are worn above 50K ft. Flying at 25k ft with only supplemental oxygen in an unpressurized cabin is fine. As such the cost and weight vs benefits for pressurizing made it too costly. The FAA has strict regs on O2 use that pretty much mirror military regs.
@@Pluto_ice You are right mb. I guess they never go to those heights with a load of troops.
Wonder what the radar cross section is?
The RCS is irrelevant
Tilt rotor aircraft make helicopters look ‘simple’. Can a tilt rotor a/c autoroute when the rotors are in VTOL/STOL positions?
You don't need auto rotation. The wings provide lift. And considering the number of helicopter crashes, it rarely works anyway.
The guy said it could.
Hope it doesn't have the hard clutch engagement issue the V22 Osprey has.
They made a lot of improvements for sure
Sir I need vertibirds and power armor all power for the bell
That’s gold
Yes it will
Agreed lol
The army selection process is all going to come down to money, everything else being pretty close. Just guessing but I would think the Sikorsky pusher helicopter may be cheaper than the tilt rotor. But Bells tilt wing Valour though may be the better choice for operations in the Pacific with the Marines where maximum range would be the main requirement.
Love from nepal 🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵💗🙏
Hey thanks!
Would you call the Bell Valor a second-generation or third-generation tiltrotor? A number of purely experimental tiltrotor aircraft preceded the successful but still controversial V-22 Osprey, the best being the Bell XV-15. Maybe the critical difference is the software?
As I was told by someone with knowledge of the program, one of the issues of the Osprey was adapting it to naval use.
There are tight constraints on naval aircraft imposed by things like the dimensions and lift capacity of elevator lifts on aircraft carriers and hangar height. Hangar height is critical -- it's why the F-14 never flew off anything but supercarriers regularly. The Midway class carriers COULD recover and launch F-14s but there were critical maintenance cycles they could NOT be performed on the F-14 within the constraints of the hull design, one of these being landing gear tests because the Midway hangar height was just barely over 17 ft! The Forrestal-class was the minimum size ship that was practical for F-14 operations.
**
A big "gotcha" that popped out to me was learning they had to change the rotor blade lengths for the V-22 to fit carriers. That means with a shorter blade it has to rotate FASTER to achieve the same lift and thrust as a longer blade! Those higher RPM's do impose greater strain on both the engine turning the blades as well as the blades themselves.
@@AvengerII There was no requirement for the Tomcat to operate regularly off the Midways because it was known they were going away. They didn't have to change thier rotor blade lenghts, they constrained from the start because of the desire to use the spots abeam the island on the smaller flat decks. This helps contribute to the downwas. V-280doesn't have this problem.
So for sf mission they can use those as like planes to parachute form
Oh absolutely
The “V80 Valor”?
Maybe you need to check your initial title.
Hey thanks
I think the Valor is cool. BUT will cool be able to do a low quickstop in an urban environment and fastrope? Its HUGE! And if it's quieter than a V-22 thats good. Because I can hear V-22s from a loooong way off. I guess we are stuck with them no matter what. The call has been made. Until of course we chuck them like the LCS ships.
The footprint of the V280 is actually the same as a blackhawk. V22 is in fact huge though.
@@cooljoy819 Really? Well shall wait and see. Change is hard. Im just a Blackhawk fanboy. LOL But V22s still blow my mind, no matter how often I see them.
Valor has demonstrated going from 220 knots to a hover in 45 seconds. That's a pretty good quick stop. Those V-22 you heard, were they in helicopter mode or wingborne mode because the V-22 is much quieter when on the wing? Black Hawks and Chinooks are note exactly quite.
@@Prifly70 It only has a 19% larger footprint while being able to carry 3(23%) more troops.
Better they put a segmented flap that covers those opening in the engine for protection
This is smart
The sheer size compared to a UH60 makes it hard for me to see it as a replacement
But the performance compared to the UH is nuts
I mean, is it that much bigger considering the rotor size of the Blackhawk?
@@jimbot.4539 16m for the UH60 vs 24m for the Valor. Big difference. Can’t see it being used much in urban environments
People always mention the size but it's simply not a priority for the Army's requirements, they've really been focused on speed and range
@@blogit24 But how do you REPLACE a medium lift helicopter that is so utilitarian such as the blackhawk.
The tilt-roter Bell V280 Valor VTOL aircraft is by far long range, fast, quite on approach and therefore the clear weapon of choice for the US Army.
If it's anything like their prior attempt, no it's not lol
@@ezekial7028 prior attempt?
Agree
And it has been selected. Also you should begin your video talking about who you are, such as being a crewman
Yep, it's replace BlackHawk
It would be amazing to see, if you replace the propellers on this plane with jet engines similar to F35
Absolutely not.
TERRIBLE idea... there is a reason it isn't done my guy.
Yes.. that’s why they built it
A lot of maintenance I’ll tell you !! Too many moving parts. But definitely gonna be a asset for the army. The osprey is hated by the civilians because they don’t know what people know working with these does. All the civilians see is the bad news.
They should see the list of uh 60s lost.
@@WALTERBROADDUS more like 30, which is too many.
@@dougcfrary WAY more than that....
Y’all both mentioned the potential new battle ground to be Southeast Asia, does that men the threat with China is inevitable at this point?
It is not inevitable. Just highly considered.
Can it carry hellfires, guns, rockets?
The mission is transport.
Eventually, the same basic airframe will replace the Apache as well. But there are tons of mockups and illustration put out be Bell or armed variants.
@@Fifthmiracle IF the army wants it to which is the big one. It would be an easy sell to the army if they look for a full replacement for the Apache and not just a scout / attack Heli.
Whats next after your commission is up?
The fuselage of the valor looks like the Blackhawk.
It does! But considerably larger in the interior
I know many MV22 and CV22 maintainers and right now in the Air Force there isn't parts to keep them flying. Let's not even talk about their crash rate. What about sling load capabilities? Because the current MV22 that we work with is normally max on 4500 lbs
You are wrong about the V-22... it has an amazing mishap rate for any aircraft let alone a helicopter. Even the navy has said in the past it is one of the safest aircraft they fly. The V-22 is VERY limited because of the marine corps' requirements which also cause many of the issues and maintenance woes.
It can reportedly carry 10k pounds at 150kts IE a M777A2 easily.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 where's your data to back that up.
@@06blkgto1 you can look up the v22 mishap rate and you will see the navy talking about it.
I just wished there was room for both (S-97 Raider) of these. I get the TR for transport but no way in hell it will replace the AH64 that's getting long-in-the-tooth. Bell 360 not that impressive either.
The Raider is in an entirely different program which has yet to be decided on. You are thinking of the Defiant which had multiple technical issues and was outperformed by the Valor.
USA вы лучшие ❗❗❗
Спасибо за помощь Украине ❤
No idea what this comment says, but thanks for watching lol
@@damion_bailey спасибо usa , что помогаете оружием Украине в войне
The tilt rotor concept just seems to be almost exclusive for Navy and Marines (range over water) longer loiter time for search and rescue....Defiant seems the best for the capability where it's most dangerous. ( confines spacees, rapid insertion and evac) I''d say V280 for the Marines and Navy, Defiant for the Army.
This is an Army program.
@@WALTERBROADDUS yes, true...but other branches have picked up the alternate aircraft. Look at the Navy. They picked up on the then YF-17 after it lost to General Dynamics F-16 for the airforce. The Hornet was born. The Navy and Marines could pick up the Valor if it loses to the defiant.
@@ericjohnson341 the Marines already have a transport. As for the Navy? The Osprey and the SH60 have very different roles. And neither the uh-60 or The valor and any chance of replacing the Cobra or Huey.
Defiant is pretty large as well, and throe's nothing to show it can decel faster than Valor, and Valor can accelerator faster.
So basically he said it will fly itself to the battlefield then humans will take over it. Real Terminator stuff lol
The V22 is not that bad for crying out loud the Osprey has less crashes than the UH60 in its first years.
Yea just a bad rap because any crash in a large transport can kill many people which sells more clicks. It DID have a bad start but many aircraft do and most of the crashes were pilot error as the military didn't even know how to properly train the people to use it.
I lost a lot of friends in the Osprey program, I sure hope another tilt rotor isn’t considered.
Your friends are wrong.
Any aircraft have mishaps that is the nature of training in the military. The V-22 is just as safe as the Blackhawk and safer than the Chinook, Sea Stallion and much much more. So if you are saying that then you better not trust those other aircraft.
Tanks for the video. You asked really good questions. I just don’t buy what this guy is selling.
Watch my video about a $50 interview mic that will be great for the type of video you have here. I really enjoyed this video. My step-daughter was an engineer at Bell in Irving Texas, so the 2 tilt-rotors were always of great interest to me. Enjoyed your content a lot!!
They can’t hear you because your on a loud speaker. In the quiet woods you can hear it coming
Faster , Farther with 6ft sliding door the troops can get in and out fast it also is better at lifting equipment the new tilt rotor is different than osprey just the blades tilt and engine the air shoots back no One hat is blowing off no wind this hybrid is absolutely the right choice there is only a minor issue I have it's the only one and it is wider believe it or not that much so in tight places instead of 12black hawks only 10 valor's so space is the only issue I have and it's not by much but for troops being saved and troops deployment is much better then Sikorsky no sliding doors and the tail roter is bad in tight places and dangerous for troop's and like I said no air blowing down like helicopter the valor is awesome 😎 great job by Bell China will be making these watch
i think they decided on the defiant
340 mph we should buy 1,000
To be fair if the program fully goes thru i think they are replacing 2k Blackhawks for the armies fleet at the start.
Not "replace" ---- just 2000 Blackhawks are being exchanged for these
Stigma. I call it teething it was the first of its kind it came with a steep learning curve.
I'm this B. Obama with Darcho Jandreoski year 1978 i ask this Drinker person from Staat MKD have you found the Pegasus Mega Tron Atom Molekular Kay
Unfortunately decisions and comments on these kind of complex machine systems call for likes of people like Norman D. Ham or Arthur Young but both are long gone....
Just looks so vulnerable, shoot at one wing and what will happen?
Then there will be a small hole in the wing? What do you think it will crash just from that?
It'll fall out of the sky like anything else. Ever see a helicopter hit by a surface air missile?
What happens if a helicopters tail gets hit...
Hopefully not soon, I just got certified as a mechanic for the UH-60 lolol
2030 is the soonest it may enter service.
the valor tilt rotor wont be allowed near front lines.. just like the v22..
so probably the defiant
fool the V-22 has done PLENTY of combat mission all over.
This chopper gives me Aerospatiale SA-2 vibes from avatar.
Bell has bet the farm on the V280. I would not be surprised if Boeing attempts to acquire Bell, if not Textron as a whole, if Bell is successful and wins the competition.
If the penny pinching bean counters in the pentagon doesn’t buy either 280 or the other one, I’m sorry but I can’t remember what the name is, anyhoo it’d be a decision of monumental stupidity
It won't be replaced, it'll be refitted with new turbines, and maybe a new frame.
Lol
The V-280 is much larger than a Blackhawk. It can not fit into a smaller LZ that a Blackhawk will be able to utilize. Too big! Too finicky. Bad idea!
Which doesn't matter much with 2-3 times the range the Army will be spoiled with viable LZ's within range.
It only has a 19% larger footprint... where 12 Blackhawks can fit 10 Valor can fit while carrying 8 more soldiers.
Yeah, sure. One of those "wow-factor videos" to impress you. Ain't buying it till I actually see it in combat. Like anything else new, that's supposed to be better than it's predecessor.
This guy comes across like a new car salesman. Not impressed.
WHY? Need 12 troops and materials there now, you know, the concentration of force and a tilt rotor is the answer? Oh, you want to come back?
fool
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 I've been wrong before. Explain yourself, or would that make you the fool?
@@franklinknisley1953 Not only are tilt rotor aircraft just as if not even more survivable as a traditional helicopter the Valor could also make double the trips for each trip the Blackhawk could make and carry more troops each time.
I think there was a misunderstand regarding my sarcasm, to something I saw or read a year ago. I like tilt rotors. It is unfortunate that too many lives are being lost in those to discover the service life of parts, proper training regarding physics (to many died on that one) regarding rapid landing transitions and flaws of design. You foolishly called me a fool. Been called that before and worse. Only time will tell.@@n3v3rforgott3n9 It was for FREEDOM, that Christ died, yet here we sit with a yoke around our necks. It's time to STAND and shatter them who shackled us. See Gal. 5:1.
Honestly I don't like it because of the stigma with the osprey.
Study military hardware long enough and you will find public perception is almost always wrong.
Then you should see the much longer list of uh-60 crashes over the years.