It's like an Osprey, a Blackhawk, and a Beechcraft Bonanza had a three-way...

Little bit closer to a Pelican, loving it!!!

Kind of looks like a Blackhawk body with an Osprey rotor system except the sharper nose section and weapons attached to it. But looks good, I always though the Osprey should be better armed and this Valor does that.

Hell yeah that's awesome !!

@aayanscreativelab1786

Жыл бұрын

Soviet Union: haha, small work

*These would be great in a civilian role as a rescue/medic helicopter too. Speed and range well out strip any other helicopter in this role at the moment*

@johndavies5985

Жыл бұрын

Designing killing tools takes priority though, not much money in the civilian role.

@jordanmanray

Жыл бұрын

Other than the fact this thing is absolutely massive. This maybe could be a decent option for hospital to hospital with large cleared landing pads but taking this out to a scene and trying to land where normal helicopters can won't be possible.

@torstenmautz195

Жыл бұрын

It is not capable of civil flight because it lacks N-1 security. If 1 motor fails for whatever reason(e.g. Blade failure, fuel, electronics, turbine failure,... Bullets) it will crash. Just like the V22-osprey. Central located Rotors have autorotation after engine failure. Because of that it is impossible for it to gain a GA license from FAA. A double blade middle Rotor with wings attached and back Rotor for acceleration it way safer.

@aig9672

Жыл бұрын

@@torstenmautz195 they’re connected so this isn’t the case

@jacksonfranklinmusic

Ай бұрын

leonardo is doing this with the AW609!

The Bell Boeing V-22 is unique with unrivaled capabilities. . The tiltrotor's global fleet completed more than 500,000 flight hours of assault support, special operations, combat search and rescue and more.

@thebigmon

Жыл бұрын

Unfortunately it accomplishes it's mission by landing far away from the combat zone. The Army needs an aircraft that can perform air assaults operations. ie. landing in the middle of a firefight. A task that isn't conducive to the V-22.

@user-gg2ix8tw4y

10 ай бұрын

India & USA Joint Partnership Development 111 Defiant X Helicopter & M134 Minigun / M197 Electric Cannon Gun/ GAU 22 A Catling Gun,GAU 19 Machine Gun,GAU 12 Equalizer,GAU 8 Avemger,M61 Vulcan

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

@@thebigmon You are wrong... the Osprey has been in multiple combat zones. Either way this ISN'T the V-22.

@thebigmon

9 ай бұрын

@@n3v3rforgott3n9Not in a hot landing zone. I don't see Ospreys with side door gunners. No side door gunners no landing in a hot area, unless you're stupid. And yes, I know it isn't the V-22.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

@@thebigmon Any helicopter is very vulnerable to enemy fire. V-22 is used by the MAGTF... IE in a direct assault role. So you are calling the Marines stupid? Also again a tilt rotor is far safer than a conventional helicopter in an assault role anyway. It can auto rotate, glide, or fly on one engine. The main advantage though is being able to get into and out of the hot area twice as fast.

I hope these two models V280 and Sikorsky/Boeing model be approved for the military with two different mission sets.

@Ric33194

Жыл бұрын

It would be great, but the cost of manufacturing both will be too high. It’s possible, but most likely it won’t happen.

@jamjardj1974

Жыл бұрын

Highly unlikley.

@stewpacalypse7104

Жыл бұрын

They're both designed to fill the same role. Having both would be redundant and training & logistics would be a unessesarily complicated.

@chrissmith7669

7 ай бұрын

@@stewpacalypse7104 they don’t fill the same roll. It’s two proposals to fill one roll but each has advantages the other lacks. The Valor could go faster further over small arms fire but the Dauntless is more maneuverable and compact. They could drop the pusher prop and optimize it further for a gun platform and scout.

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

@@Ric33194 the risk of a problem grounding your entire fleet is just to high.

Bell tests them at KGKY in Arlington Texas. Super slick and agile

Interesting improvement or lesson learned from the Osprey is that the jet engines always face to the rear while only the front half of each wing nacelle tilts upward. Have to wonder what is more mechanically complex and subject to breakage, the tilting mechanism, or the counter-rotating and rear propeller torque transfer gearbox for the Defiant-X.

@JamieR2077

Жыл бұрын

I would have thought the downward thrust would help with lift. But I know the downward exhaust was damaging to flight decks and they had to put pads under thr exhaust when taking off?

@samjubilee6593

Жыл бұрын

A different approach would be to use electric motors to power the rotors (great flexubility for location of generator/jet engine). This eliminates the jet downdraft problem, but also greatly increases mechanical simplicity - eliminating the complex gearing required for tilt, less likelihood of failure with simpler mechanics/fewer moving parts. (Sikorsky double helicopter should not even be under serious consideration, as it still retains the problems with higher forward speed common to all helicopters: The advancing blade dance with transonic air velocities near outer blade tip, plus the complex issues on the retreating blade side required to minimize negative lift.) Keep in mind that the V-280 is not a helicopter - it is a tiltrotor. While it gets some lift from its "wing" struts, it gets major lift from its rotors, even when they are tilted for forward flight. A tiltrotor could be designed/built to fly with round struts instead of wings, receiving no lift from "wings" (though, since a strut/beam is required to position the rotors anyway, it makes sense to shape tbe strut as a wing, for increased lift) - it would still fly. In an airplane, the propellers do not generate lift - they merely propel the plane through the air so the wings can generate lift. A tiltrotor is fundamentally neither a helicopter nor an airplane, though it has all the capabilites of a helicopter, as well as forward speed of (all but the fastest) propeller airplanes.

@cielopachirisu929

Жыл бұрын

EDIT: Changed a mistake on my part! My bad! The engines are indeed in the nacelles, they're just connected to each other by drive shaft in the wings. The Defiant and its unusual coaxial rotor design is at a severe disadvantage by being more complex and having much more of a disc load iirc, not to mention it suffers from the Retreating Blade Stall issue that all traditional helicopter designs suffer from. While the counter-rotating blades of the Defiant do in theory completely counteract the RBS at high speeds, the resulting loss of lift on either side is still going to cause vibration from dissymmetry of lift, which must be accounted for. The Valor, being in 'plane' mode while at high speeds, does not need to worry about this. As much as I love the Defiant X, the Valor is 100% a better machine. Heck, once the prices of this type of tiltrotor come down, I wouldn't be surprised if it started muscling out the traditional helicopter design as a whole by 2100.

@howard6433

Жыл бұрын

The Osprey has over 700,000 flight hours so far, so lots are known about that design. The Defiant, not so much.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

@@cielopachirisu929 Yea people are so biased against tiltrotors they don't bother to look at the Valors competition which was frankly very lacking. Valor is faster, longer range, carries more people, can carry more cargo, could come to a stop quicker, and mainly didn't have the numerous issues the Defiant had.

Awesome !!! Thank you 👍👍👍

these beasts can turn the scene into hell in seconds.

They've come a long way with tilt rotor aircraft .

I’d like to see it fully rotate forward from the hover position but still an awesome video and aircraft. 👍

AMAZING WORK INITIATIVES COVERAGE

Sikorsky has the S-97 Raider compete with the Bell+Textron 360 Invictus in the AAS / FARA (armed scout) program. Meanwhile, the Sikorsky+Boeing SB-1 Defiant competes with the Bell+Lockheed V280 Valor for the FVL (long-range lift) program. Given how the US defense industry works, it is likely that both companies get one contract each, to keep every factory running, everybody employed. So if you like both Sikorsky or both Bell designs, get ready for a disappointment. The Raider has troop capacity while the Invictus does not, but that gives the Invictus better stealth properties, just like the Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche had. Not sure why they abandoned that design. Just to push a common scout and transport design when they know it's not very likely they'll get both contracts? The V280 seems to be the more mature design, faster and longer range. But the SB-1 might offer better handling and safety, as it is not a tilt rotor. And it's smaller, closer to the Blackhawk size. This might really go both ways.

@rosevitelli5814

Жыл бұрын

I don't know I also this Invictus will win also reason being Bell is very good with helicopter and always on time and the biggest reason always under budget or on Target proven technology SB Lockheed makes great stuff but always costs always over costs Bell will win both and I like the 360 looks like a scout should look sleek and bad ass

Awesome 😎

gorgeous!

No one talks about single engine emergency capability…

@mcblaze1968

Жыл бұрын

If the clutch works properly.

@imdeg9821

Жыл бұрын

First thought that comes to mind

@kazedcat

Жыл бұрын

It is a helicopter. It can autogyro during engine failure.

@damiangrouse4564

Жыл бұрын

@@kazedcat helicopter rotors have a fixed orientation. Engine failure in this craft can occur at any angle and let’s say best case scenario is at the limits (full “helicopter or full “airplane” mode), those huge rotors/propellers far from the center of balance will be a problem.

@damiangrouse4564

Жыл бұрын

@@mcblaze1968 and assuming the failure occurs when in full “helicopter” mode…

Air flows and altitude conditional change are new aero technology. Download aviation program and body cameras are essential to watch out dimensions side,back,bottom lenses cameras and sensors are additional options. That's good!

It seems tail rotor and main blade strikes are the assault helicopters Achilles heel. The Defiant has the vulnerable tail prop, but smaller landing footprint. The Bell has a large footprint which can rule out landing near the objective and aggravate strikes . Similar thinking applies to small arms strikes. Sikorsky has the advantage. In a Coax with prop, retreating blade stall balances between the rotors. The rotor is not producing thrust...the prop is. A coax can scoot along, top speed limited by advancing blade Mach. They have very low disc loading. Sikorsky’s coax is a better traditional helicopter. The Bell is an airplane capable of hovering. Has high disc loading. But the wings yield speed, fuel efficiency, and a bit of a glide. Since choppers only hover 10-15% of a mission - if that- Bell has the advantage. In complication/maintenance Sikorsky has 1 transmission and 2 rotors, 1 prop. The Bell has 2 transmission, 2 rotors, so the Bell is simpler. (Full disclosure! I am assuming the qty of transmissions). Bell has the advantage. Mission thinking trends less Europe/Middle East to more Asia/China. Which chopper is easiest to get to a war zone? Which can reliably (with internal fuel bladders) get from California to Hawaii to Midway to phillipines? Edge to Bell. In politics, Texas has large congressional delegation; Connecticut paltry. Former red, later blue. Slight lean to Bell?? Cheers

Nice Video

Nice 👍

I do think that the defiant x is better suited to the army's needs and should win the competition but this would be a great aircraft for the Marines where the speed and range of the valor would be put to good use, that is as long as there's not too much overlap with the osprey in mission that is

@dianapennepacker6854

Жыл бұрын

Short of maintenance, clost, and size? Tilt rotors are superior with range and speed. Why is the Defiant better? I'm not sure what it can do that the Valor can do. Shooting its self down I guess too haha. Wonder if they could put hard points under the wings. I think tilt rotors are the future, because traditional helicopters are reaching their limits due to retreating blade stall. So might as well get use to the technology now. I'm just a pleb though.

@jPlanerv2

Жыл бұрын

@@dianapennepacker6854 Biggest problem with Valor is its whole idea of tilt rotor aircraft, lift of engines is spread far apart on both sides of the aircraft so if one of them gets damaged aircraft starts to spin like a pinning top and goes down and its no go for vehicle that will intentionally go to places where it will face fire from the enemy, That's why helicopters are safer because their whole lift in places in the center so even after engine failure pilot can still manage to control or carsh land the vehicle also engines on them can be better protected

@phantumdrummer

Жыл бұрын

@@jPlanerv2 Incorrect. If one engine is lost it does not cause an imbalance of power. Like the V-22, both sides are interconnected. If one engine fails, both rotors continue to function normally on the single engine. Slight loss of performance, but the aircraft still continues to fly normally. Having the power plants so far apart means there is a lot of less of a chance that battle damage will effect both engines, as opposed to a "regular" helicopter.

@pihermoso11

Жыл бұрын

@@dianapennepacker6854 I think the defiant X is a huge upgrade over the Blackhawk, they learned a lesson the hard way back in the 90s with the Somalia incident, when a blackhawk's tail rotor is compromised it's game over, so the counter rotating main blades are definitely a better resort than the usual design, and besides the tech is already tried and tested by the Russians like their KA50, the new thing though is the push prop at the rear, that is yet untested in real combat situations..

@dianapennepacker6854

Жыл бұрын

@@pihermoso11 Yeah look at how well helicopters are doing in the Ukraine. I personally think speed is the greater defense and tilt rotors have that plus range unless we break physics. Get in and out ASAP. We have learned a lot from the Osprey, and computer power compared to then has come a long way so the teething issues shouldn't be as bad. The Defiant better be a huge upgrade over the Blackhawk with all the money plus R&D.

amazing

The Sikorsky with that rear pusher prop seems frail. I like the counter rotating mains though. Very stable. (Russians love it too). Bell's newer design seems okay as long as they throw everything at it in testing phase. (winds, rain, snow & ice, single engine perf, and shaft failures).

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

It’s best for some missions.

its a beauty

I hope they build both

Being a mechanic for decades Simple mechanical system is always the best for a machine keep working in extreme conditions

Been hearing this for 4to6 years ,we take to long getting new stuff for our great MILITARY

The nacelle area where the motors tilt does look really exposed, but this thing can move

I hope if this gets adopted that the versions the military gets has protection for those exposed engine parts

@fedra5873

Жыл бұрын

Maybe like bo2 looking

@wz8729

Жыл бұрын

Exactly my feeling. To many exposed vital parts that an enemy sniper can easily target.

The wings with two rotor engine also acts as central rotor for superspeedes of 1000 knots now

Nice

I don't know how it can replace the Apache with that slow "molasses-like" maneuvers. As a utility aircraft, definitely.

This is like Airwolf!

Rapid producing huh I'm going to see alot of these

I love planes and helicopters so this is a video for me

Looking much better than the SB-1 in many area - payload, speed, performance

As a former military and combat vet looking at the specs it made no sense going with the Bell V-280 Valor over the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey which is already inservice with the USMC and USAF. The Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey also has a larger capacity. *Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey capacity:* 24 troops (seated), 32 troops (floor loaded), or 20,000 lb (9,070 kg) of internal cargo, or up to 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) of external cargo (dual hook) 1× M1161 Growler light internally transportable ground vehicle *Bell V-280 Valor capacity:* • 14 troops The performances otherwise are very similar in roughly the same size. So the army has larger amount of troops than the USMC yet they go for smaller capacity. Going with the Osprey also would've meant discounts on more parts and the ability to obtain parts from the other branches if one ever came up short for instance in combat zone to get the aircraft back in use rapidly. And what is gonna escort you into hot LZs?

@davidlambert1102

Жыл бұрын

The V-22 was designed for ship to shore missions as a medium/heavy lift transport. The V-280 was designed for an Army/Marine Squad for long range assault which includes rapid egress from side doors vs single rear exit ramp on Osprey, and during low-speed approach/egress of LZ, the gunners can fire out of the sides without engines being in the way. It is also almost half the weight of the Osprey giving it more range and speed. V-280 will soon to be equipped with offensive weapons like the Apache Gunship.

I live in Arlington, TX, about 3 miles from Arlington Municipal Airport where the Bell Helicopter facility is located. We have been able to see the first flights of the V-22 and the V-280. They each have a distinctive sound when they are up so its hard to miss them if you are outside. As cool as the V-22 is, the V-280 is even better. Once they have achieved a certain amount of hours of testing and development they move them out to military facilities for finishing the testing. I was at Arlington Airport one day watching the V-280 do some of the autonomous maneuvers shown in this video, although I did not know they were autonomous at the time. On one test flight, they flew that bad boy right up South Cooper St at about 300-400 ft altitude. Traffic was stopping and pulling over, not knowing what was going on. Very cool plane.

Looks fast.

OMG 🤩

Neno KICK REAR ENDSGOD BLESS THE MAN AND WOMEN WHO ARE SERVICING NATIONS OF NATIONS KEEP ON GOING AND YOUR SERVICE IS AWESOME THANKS, ETC...

Nice Plane

The CGI is pretty good.

The army just said a few days ago that they chose this to replace the Blackhawk and they just put $6 Billion (pretty sure) in production so be ready to see these.

tremendous! love your channel. it's awesome that you can fit and land four V-280 Valors on a regular soccer field lol hahahahahaha

@RobinP556

Жыл бұрын

True, but can you fit one of these where a Blackhawk can land? Hopefully they’ll allow and use input from actual ground troops.

Good PS pdf for budget 2024.

Hopefully they improve on the Osprey's reasons for grounding.

They are literally making AIRWOLF!!!

Very very impressive !! And I like how they show the Bell aircraft flying in a more aggressive manner, as opposed to the competitor's design... Only questions I would ask would be FOD related when this aircraft is in hover mode, and also regarding troop instertion into a city, say like what was going on in Somalia back in the late summer/early fall of 1993.... But I honestly love this design, and find it quite exciting and practical at the same time. Good Luck Bell !!

How do the controls work? Do you have a normal collective & cyclic for helicopter mode and a straight stick for cruise mode?

@kazedcat

Жыл бұрын

It is probably fly by wire and controlled by a couple of joystick that has it's function dynamically remap depending on flight mode.

@mkllove

Жыл бұрын

It's different, best to watch the AUSA video I saw recently where a former V-22 pilot explains the differences of control inputs.

This is like a opsprey/ attack helicopter/ black hawk

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.

@tomshackell

Жыл бұрын

6,000 ft is the maximum out of ground effect hover altitude for the V-280: how high it can hover when out of ground effect. Various sources say the V-280's flight ceiling in "cruise mode" (i.e. flying as a plane) is 25,000ft: same as the V-22.

I wish to see AH VER. of this FVL. It might be much better in every ways.

Osprey= Bumblebee V280= Bee

Bell V-280 is excellent.

Basically a UH-60 with the V-22’s rotors

This is a good replacement for CV-22s and maybe 47s, but it’s not an upgrade for 60s. Tilt rotor are brutal to fast rope out of, they have a hoist but they have to hover at 150’ so it doesn’t really work, and they need giant landing zones. There a good tool in their place, but their place is narrow.

@JoeMandell-

Жыл бұрын

I can not see this being loaded onto a C-17 for rapid deployment to the other side of the world. It is also taking up a lot of real estate for landing. Most hospitals can not support a UH-60Q landing on its rooftop pad. There is no way this would fit on that one or the one adjacent to the facility.

@tomshackell

Жыл бұрын

@@JoeMandell- No the plan would be to self-deploy: no C-17 needed. The V-280s ferry range is around 2,100 nautical miles: about the same distance Taiwan is from Australia and its twice as fast as a UH-60. It can also mid-air refuel a lot more easily than a UH-60 (being essentially just another plane). The landing real estate required is only about an extra 20%. It's a bit wider than a UH-60 but also quite a bit shorter.

That's a very beautiful aircraft.

Wow

Bell has hybrid aircraft in the work that would fly as a helo and then folds its wing and flies as a regular fixed wing aircraft at high speed.

@chrissmith7669

7 ай бұрын

Boeing & Bell have had concepts for a long time but none were worth the cost & weight penalties

I would prefer a slightly larger wing on the thing. If it loses an engine or two, it will fly like a brick it seems. I would prefer a bit more wing to give the pilots a chance to fly into the crash rather than just crash.

@leopold3146

Жыл бұрын

With such a design, it is doomed to fall like a spinning leaf at best whichever fault it gets because of overturning caused by asymmetry. That's why this thing isn't good for a combat.

great US engineering where the engine remains horizontal but the blades only rotate to vertical to give lift at slower speed. greater reliability than Osprey. great as a support vehicle but given smart ground to air missiles would be a sitting duck as an attack concept. military should still order Bell conventional plane as well. great transport vehicle concept.

No more Blackhawk down... defense (stuff) classified I’d imagine... get those bad guys, keep our guys safe.

' cooool nice airplane with 2 propellers almost same as V-22

5his particular aircraft, is actually both fantastic and also amazing well m😂

imo the X2 defiant is a more stable platform and more compact which is beneficial as a smaller target and also in landing. Surely it's not as fast as the Valor but in combat situations it might prove to be more reliable

@ameritoast5174

Жыл бұрын

hard to tell really. I do think the defiant is the better option but it really comes down to what the army thinks its needs are going to be in a possible china theater war. The defiant has smaller profile and more maneuverability. While the valor has more speed and range. Hard to tell which would be more reliable.

@augustmarshall2961

Жыл бұрын

@@ameritoast5174 Maintenance cost is a very important metric too. We'll see which one has the highest cost.

👍👍👍

Yush

Better to have both helicopters Have more V 280 & fewer defiant X 😊

good day 💞

Can we just get both ? Don't worry ill pay for it !

WOW//////////////////////WOW SO GOOD////////

It can't go too soon.

Ys NOT a diffcult decision, Valor 280 wise decision!

Cant wait to fly this in gta6

👍

I like the design, but the tilt rotor exposes to many vital parts. How do you protect that from enemy fire???

The fucking cockpit on this is insane ! 4:52 I've never seen any full screen covered cockpits before.. I know the f35s got a really big advanced looking one but.. this one is literally the entire cockpit. Wtf happens if it fails they gotta have mechanical guages somewhere

@Ohhiohh

Жыл бұрын

When a single bullet goes through that thing the whole thing will crash lol

it doesn't look tough like the v2 Osprey

We gonna give these away too?

How is it in a glide?

The question is can make an AUTOROTATION in case of one or two engine failure ?

It looks really cool but imagine if one of the blades broke off and hit the cockpit. I'd feel weird about being so close to the blades.

@gandalfthegrey8236

Жыл бұрын

Those are called rotors not blades ffs

Wow………😰😲

so... how did the weapons capability testing go?..... i"ll wait...

Difient is too slow! 100 miles slower than Valor, my my! What a difference of vital speed in military is life of death!

its very frightening imaginingl what america has behind the closed doors, than non of us know about.

Still think the Defiant X looks more like a BAMF

NOT TO BE THAT PERSON but as an aircraft technician, i could imagine that that open space between the engine nacel could become a nightmare for the technician, for example bird ingestion, tools ingestion, tecnician ingestion, FOD ingestion, rain corrosion, wind corrosion, sand corrosion, dust corrsion, UV-corrsion, technician corrosion and so much more. Fuel/Hyd lines and hoses should not be in the open during flight and in flight direction. Just saying.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

This is not the final version...

These things are easy to identify while flying. I saw one for the first time flying over Annapolis towards, (literally just realizing while typing several days later) oh shit 😮 that's what that damn road block was for 🤦🏾‍♂️ Yo I was tryna figure out why they had the damn streets blocked on MLK Day. They had a bunch of seats out infront of one of the state buildings. I was trying to pick someone up from a dentist appointment and had to go all the way down to the Navy Stadium just to get on West Street from the Naval Academy. Knowing the area I thought I could cut through Church Circle, nope. These guys got a hole down to the foundation with crains digging. I got a crummy video of it, finger prints on my screen 🤦🏾‍♂️ Anyway it's actually not that big and I gotta say it has a distinctive look and it's not really loud. It's quieter than a traditional helicopter. Those props are HUGH.

Put some weapons on those tiltrotors.

explain to us how well the Valor is going to fit on the back of a destroyer.

@Ohhiohh

Жыл бұрын

Ask the politicians

From Avartar ?

Megatron favourite vehicle

I swear the people that design these things are just taking from sci-fi and book/TV series

If a regular helicopter engine fails its supposed to creat enough propeller drag to come down safely, here with the props poited forward it looks like it would lose to much speed and stal in air , is this a problem , and how do they avoid this issue?

@user-pq4by2rq9y

Жыл бұрын

The rotors are connected to a driveshaft, so it can fly on a single engine if it is required.

@howard6433

Жыл бұрын

I watched an interview with a Bell official. Apparently the V-22 has over 700,000 flight hours total and has never once had both engines fail. The V280 is designed so that it can fly normally with just one engine if needed.

@calebpoemoceah3087

Жыл бұрын

@@howard6433 so I guess it would really not be good then, if both engines failed. Having such a good record

@tomshackell

Жыл бұрын

@@calebpoemoceah3087 As I understand it the chances of both engines failing is very low. A single engine failure happens roughly 1 in 375,000 flight hours. Even in that very unlikely event the V-280 is in a *much* better position than a twin engine plane. IIRC an autorotation in the V-280 is likely to damage the airframe but it would usually be survivable for the occupants. In contrast it has no loss of range in the case of losing one engine: so even if it takes a hit and loses one engine it can likely fly back to base normally. The same is not usually true for a twin engine helicopter: they'd be much more likely to be forced to make a landing, possibly in hostile territory. Swings and round-abouts.

United Nation Transfer Of Technology Developed Indian Army Want 6 Nuclear Attack Heavy Stretjic Bomber & Directed-energy weapon 'THOR' can down swarms of drones simultaneously countermeasures to combat enemy drones.

اشهد الا اله الا الله واشهد ان محمد رسول الله