The chinese is also excited to copy your new military hardware.

@MrSwccguy

2 жыл бұрын

Just cause it looks like ours dosen't mean it's the same

@thelordofthedance9301

2 жыл бұрын

China will get nuked shortly anyway

@abyyy490

2 жыл бұрын

@@thelordofthedance9301 by who saar

@thelordofthedance9301

2 жыл бұрын

@@abyyy490 by fuckin Africa

@Henrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyyy

2 жыл бұрын

the look, but probably won’t be able to copy the engine and key components 🤫

I'm a 15-T and the first thing about the blackhawk is that it can carry 11 packs 2 pilots and "2" crew chiefs, engineers, not 1. And the rotor system doesn't have a 5 bladed main and tail. It only has 4 for each.

@Screaminhelo

2 жыл бұрын

67T here. Check your -17. H-60 is fielded with 10 troop seats. We all have a fourth seat in row 4 but the original concept only used 3 to make egress for the assault troops to exit and the 11th crunchy served as the gunner on the left side. Not trying to be the old guy busting your chops, just sharing the history of a great airframe.

@TacticalVodkaOperator69

2 жыл бұрын

First off thanks to you both for serving and getting our guys in and out of harms way , now this contraption in the vid looks like an Good shop hold wall queen in the making, down time waiting on parts and oh yeah ya it's fast all right, running under striped down testing weight; load it up for bear and fully geared out combat troops will for sure drop that tops speed right down to the ole BlackHawks neck of woods for sure👌😎

@seansilhan6091

2 жыл бұрын

Also let's not forget the aircraft weighting 12k lbs and being able to fly at 180 mph and not kias. This narrator clearly got his facts twisted and all info on the defiant lost all credibility with me.

@br9028

2 жыл бұрын

@@Screaminhelo What does a -17 have to do with the “history” of the Blackhawk. It comes with 11 seats (per the -17) and can hold 11 passengers when seats are in…

@Christfollower89

2 жыл бұрын

Meanwhile H00kers can support 5 crew, 30 pax and haul a M777.

I was a crew chief in Viet Nam. The thrust/braking propeller is huge IMO. If the maneuverability is as advertised, this is far superior.

@kdrapertrucker

2 жыл бұрын

During Vietnam Lockheed tested a pusher prop attack helicopter called the AH-56 Cheyenne. The Air Force killed it by claiming it operated more as an armed airplane, which the army is not allowed by law to operate.

@johnfalkner8821

2 жыл бұрын

Could you elaborate more on why the army can't use armed planes?

@ConanTheContrarian1

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnfalkner8821 They can't land vertically.

@CaptCamel

2 жыл бұрын

they can land vertically once...but back to army and no planes, what about the o1 bird dog, that the army flew til the late 70's, infact they still fly the c-12 huron, so i dont see how its forbidden by law for them to operate fixed wing..

The USA requirements and fleet is so vast as well as diverse leaving no margin for error in procurement`! Great to see & much love GB

@glbaker5595

2 жыл бұрын

Now that half of the military weapons were left in Afghanistan the supply people who make those new weapons are going to have a birthday present having to bring all of the new aircraft and down to the bullet done to replace all of the ones left in Afghanistan. I just wonder how much of an inventory they have to replace stuff that got tore up while on the battlefield or on patrol.

It looks like a Lamborghini with propellors so many sharp angles.

MH 60, HH 60, UH 60 Black Hawk all are my favorite helicopter ever

@theduckcrispy6596

2 жыл бұрын

SH60 also

@gianpaolovillani6321

2 жыл бұрын

Katora Khan Well said.

@Gamerboy-gy1rl

2 жыл бұрын

Don't forget the pave hawk

@jojosmiff3417

2 жыл бұрын

So many different designs.... don't forget the Battle hawk, Stealth hawk, Speed Hawk, Fire Hawk, and other various designations out there. 30k as a base weight? Wonder where this fuel is coming from and what it's max takeoff is supposed to be.

0:25 "Boeing and Sikorsky"- shows Mil' aircraft factory and Mi-28))))

@fredtedstedman

2 жыл бұрын

Oh dear oh Dear ...................................

Narrator: “US military engineers have produced many legendary helicopters.” Video: Shows Robinson Helicopter factory. 😂

@akane742

2 жыл бұрын

Ya whoever made this vid had no knowledge of aviation in general

@lluvik2450

2 жыл бұрын

Not to mention the russian attack choppers in the factory just before that

@natureofparadise2380

2 жыл бұрын

Nope the russian made first wisely and poweful

@alexanderschnoder2185

2 жыл бұрын

And the caption showing the European NH-90...

@natureofparadise2380

2 жыл бұрын

@AMERICAAA FreeWorld some russian technology is better than USA. Like elon musk rockets it is made first in russian ICBM.

Putting a "more complicated" piece of equipment into a combat situation doesn't always leave you with good results.

@Phil858

2 жыл бұрын

Yup. It's too big and too heavy. And not fast enough. So Big 1 Deficient.

@nick_0

2 жыл бұрын

@@Phil858 isnt this helicopter in almost every way? even in survival redundancy?

@easternperspective0244

2 жыл бұрын

still a pice of art

@easternperspective0244

2 жыл бұрын

@@Phil858 does not matter how fast it is sam`s will take it down

@archerc3811

2 жыл бұрын

@@easternperspective0244 they would take down a blackhawke the same, hell an rpg-7 can bring down a BH

Also mention mini guns and shows .50 m2hb then mentioned helfire shows unguided rocket pods

The Uh-60 Blackhawk is a beautiful helicopter, I want it to remain operational for many decades to come, and never need to be replaced unnecessarily.

@radaraacf

3 жыл бұрын

Sadly australia chose to replace the 60 with the NH90, from what I read it’s a junker, the floors can’t handle the full load, door guns are a pain to fit, and several other significant issues, not to mentioned it’s eurotrash

@Jaxxv01

2 жыл бұрын

They make very effective firefighting and rescue helos. CA uses them as Firehawks. They will remain alive and VERY important for a long time to come.

@gianpaolovillani6321

2 жыл бұрын

@@Jaxxv01 which helicopter are you referring to?

@lucabuca2449

2 жыл бұрын

@@radaraacf I thought it was the other way around. Australia replacing their current helicopters with Blackhawks.

@MiniDevilDF

2 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately the UH-60 is outdated and will have no place in future combat. It's time to modernize.

The only way to prove the new helicopter's "superiority is to put both of them in a head-to-head competition. Anyone can *_say_* theirs is better. Just because it's new, doesn't make it superior.

@dagwould

2 жыл бұрын

and in battle.

@Thatstereotypicalstoner

2 жыл бұрын

I completely agree

@tc1uscg65

2 жыл бұрын

Yep, new doesn't always mean better. Look at the Jeep wrangler. It is turning into a puzzy car for posers. Just sayin.

@trvman1

2 жыл бұрын

Like they want to replace the A-10 with something new that will be less capable of doing the same job.

It would be interesting to cover the previous history of dual coaxial propeller helicopters in other countries.

@beerthug

2 жыл бұрын

Or in this country. I.e. Cheyenne.

@wickedcabinboy

2 жыл бұрын

@@beerthug - or the Russian Kamov KA-27

@barriewright2857

2 жыл бұрын

That's a good idea, so you get a start of the technology and we're and it's future development, and what's in development now.

@cliffterrell4876

2 жыл бұрын

@@beerthug the Cheyenne was built before the cobra. The comanche was a stealth design attack helicopter that never went past the test phase.

@FlyboyHelosim

2 жыл бұрын

"Dual coaxial propeller". I think I had a stroke reading this.

This helicopter better be good because I love the Blackhawk.

@markhusseymh1

2 жыл бұрын

So did I when I member of the United states military forces

@kennymccormick9973

2 жыл бұрын

It's not as sexy as the black hawk in my opinion

3:33 *4 Blade Main and “4 blade” tail which is actually two paddles* 4:13 11 troops, 2 pilots and 2 crew chief/gunner seats Not trying to hate. All in all a great video!

@29roadking

2 жыл бұрын

Glad someone put it out there before me lol

@LuisGarcia-sr9vs

2 жыл бұрын

i was getting worried nobody was gonna say something... 😆

@LuisQ7492

2 жыл бұрын

I was looking to see if anyone called that out.

The Defiant is awesome and I hope the Mil will see that as well!.

Just an updated Cheyenne, which Lockheed built in the 60's. Rotory wing aircraft are speed limited due to rotor tip speeds going supersonic so there's a practical limit. Knowing that, helicopters like the Blackhawk or Apache are already at the practical limits of the design concept. Just the take from an old Cobra guy. Cheers!

@dianapennepacker6854

2 жыл бұрын

I only learned about the Cheyenne a few months back, and cannot believe they didn't use it. I know it had teething problems but all do. I hope the Valor wins

@davidclaudy4822

2 жыл бұрын

Yep. Retreating Blade stall. I flew the UH-1, OH-58 and the cream of the crop. The Loach. The famous OH-6. My God was that a fantastic aircraft to fly. I flew that into the early 90’s until Task Force took our birds. At least they went for a good purpose. Good times.

@phatboizbackyardkustomz9006

2 жыл бұрын

Yup retreating blade stall

@nooneyouknowhere6148

2 жыл бұрын

They watched too many episodes of Air Wolf

@davidclaudy4822

2 жыл бұрын

@@nooneyouknowhere6148 The rocket boost on the helicopter would have caused aerodynamic hell and nose would pitch up violently, roll left and go inverted as any pilot knows happens in retreating blade stall. The blade looses lift and you become and home sick multi thousand pound safe at altitude. Plus, being upside down really ruins the flight envelope and ultimately your day. 🤔😕

They need to make it look more aggressive

@hrishihru

2 жыл бұрын

;p; ;LOOOKS DONT MATTER

@byronmoreira7274

2 жыл бұрын

@@hrishihru that's what ugly ppl say LOl

@miningchip1

2 жыл бұрын

@@byronmoreira7274 well not everthing gonna look pretty, as long as it does what it was made for

@pvosoccer1585

2 жыл бұрын

The 'look' is very important, and now that is not finalized yet. Of course, the 'fan' or the tail pusher propeller is like a disabled 'body part' (as an analogy is the appendages of a person.) When the pusher propeller is not actively engaged, it looks like an abnormality in design, and thus need a shroud cover, like that of a propeller-driven boat!

Excellent video, Very informative.

Great specs, sleek aerodynamic looks.

I think it loses - range being the deciding factor. I can see the army wanting both it and its competition. The osprey inspired competition is impressive - speed range troop capacity. It is a tough choice but I think it will win the day based on that range and speed edge.

@HawkSnake23

2 жыл бұрын

You also have to look at the size of the aircraft. The Osprey simply can’t land in locations where the Black Hawk and a potential successor might, due to the size of the Osprey. One may argue that troops could simply fast rope from the Osprey (or similar aircraft) at a hover, not requiring it to land. I would argue that hovering for that extended period of time in a non-permissive environment (hot LZ) would not be a sound tactic.

@erika_itsumi5141

2 жыл бұрын

@@HawkSnake23we got a osprey down, we got a osprey down.

A question for the more knowledgeable in the area, do you think it's still worth it becoming a heli pilot? It's my dream job but I'm a little scared that it will soon become obsolete with drones and other autonomous tech. (I want to work in the civil market btw)

@MrGriak

2 жыл бұрын

Pilots will always be needed. Combat pilots, maybe not so much. But adding automation to an already expensive aircraft means companies will have to pay a whole lot for it. At some point it will actually be cheaper to hire a pilot. Plus in the case of emergencies, computerized aircraft can’t land just anywhere. They have to land exactly where they are told to land. A pilot will be able to land at any location available to them. Biggest point to remember is the first one. Companies will always look for the cheapest option and unless pilots are demanding 1mil a year, they’ll be cheaper to hire than millions of dollars of tech added to the aircraft.

@milkeylicker8826

2 жыл бұрын

Food for thought. Your in the infantry you are getting into a helicopter to go into battle or one that is already happening. You approach the helicopter that is taking you into harms way. When you look in the cockpit and there is no pilot or human there. Would you get in?

@cambad9900

2 жыл бұрын

Anyone can want to be a pilot. Getting there is very hard and competitive. The question isn’t “is it still worth it?” The question is “will I even be chosen?” You really have to have your life together to be trusted with flying a Blackhawk (or any aircraft). The easiest way is to go warrant. You gotta ask yourself, are you the guy people trust to get something done? They look and examine all aspect of your life.

@ccengineer5902

2 жыл бұрын

You can get your heli license, AND become a drone operator.

@ruthnoya8424

2 жыл бұрын

@@ccengineer5902 No pilot wants to be a drone operator.

Cool design!!! Look like a flying submarine

The Army found the Sikorsky- Boeing Defiant X submission "unacceptable" in an insufficient level of detail in how it would integrate emerging systems over time, an element of a larger engineering design and development category that contributed to the decision. On 5 December 2022, the US Army selected the rival Bell V-280 Valor as the winner of the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft program.

LOL! Note: At 8:34 they are talking about the Defiant's engineers, they show a video of a lady in front of her computer showing a building floorplan.

With its added manoeuvring and quick direction change, a forward facing pair of 6 barrel cannons would be a better idea than a heavy remotely operated funq system???

@blackwoodsecurity531

3 жыл бұрын

Maybe something minutely adjustable like what the Kamovs have.

man this is awesome

Thanh you for sharing. Amazing machine.

It can have all the bells and whistles, but in the end it comes down to cost and maintenance. We hesitated to deploy B2's and F-22's in conflict zones because they were expensive. We ended up deploying our crappy A-10's and cobra helicopters not because they were better, but they were cheaper.

@OfficialCANVAS

Жыл бұрын

you act like you can't collect more taxes from humans having nothing to do with the artificial conflict between 2 men

With all that speed and no weapons landing in a hot zone , not great idea with troops trying to get off and no cover fire🤔

@somedude3887

2 жыл бұрын

Not sure we’re still in the era of just dropping off soldiers, I’m sure some drone will drop some type of bomb first then they go

@beerthug

2 жыл бұрын

I'm sure the deployed version will be armed to the teeth. Just what the Army wants is another 'black hawk down'.

Nghe Phúc hát mà nước mắt rơi mãi ....quá nhiều cảm xúc ùa về, quá nhiều kỉ niệm. Cảm ơn Đức Phúc thật nhiều, giọng hát anh ấm tựa nắng mùa Thu vậy.

Simply AMAZING 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸💪🏼💪🏼👍🏼💯

They are rotors not propellers, the pusher is a propeller... Does this guy know anything about helicopters? Slip between buildings in mega cities.. haha

@pvosoccer1585

2 жыл бұрын

I think what he meant is that it will be adopt by secret agencies for use by spies on conducting paramilitary operations and human intelligence (HUMINT) gathering missions, as their helicopters won't cause any advanced vibrations, on their way to cityscapes and hotspots, and announcing their arrivals unintendedly and undesirably, so they can achieve somewhat an element of 'surprise' to certain extent, and possibly they had avoided some RPG's hitting at them.

@jojosmiff3417

2 жыл бұрын

This helicopter is not quieter. The vibration system he talks about deals with airframe vibrations, not sound vibrations. The 60M already has this. This video has my eyes twitching

It was called the "Raider" several years ago when it broke the speed record.

@omarn6989

2 жыл бұрын

No. The Raider is for a different competition - FARA. The Defiant is for FLRAA.

That Sikorsky property they showed in West Palm Beach is freaking awesome if your ever lucky enough to get on site. It’s a huge property with gators laying all over the place and the best fishing ever 🤙

@LuisQ7492

2 жыл бұрын

That's Florida for you!

Nice helicopters!

I like when you mention the specifications...please add the components,controls and physical laws to equip your viewers with better orientation and entertainment if possible.Technical descriptions for technical viewers.I am a good well wisher and watch things with good interest.

@matthewtaylor9066

2 жыл бұрын

You might have good interest but bad intentions you might even be Chinese

@lip124

2 жыл бұрын

Sus

What i would like to know is, whats the speed of max payload between both heicopters?

00:36 - Who designed the AH-64 Apache Helicopter? Hughes Helicopters The AH-64 Apache Helicopter has significant systems redundancy to improve combat survivability. The Apache began as the Model 77 developed by Hughes Helicopters for the United States Army's Advanced Attack Helicopter program to replace the AH-1 Cobra. I worked on the AH-64 Assembly line at Hughes Aircraft Helicopter Division in San Diego beginning in mid to late 1986.

It's a good first try. I expect the 2nd generation will be sleeker, faster etc. They pack a lot of firepower certainly.

So they are making a bunch of Air Wolfs?

@vincentpaulvalmoria2297

2 жыл бұрын

Without any turbo

@henrylau8122

2 жыл бұрын

@@vincentpaulvalmoria2297 they cant even get that right

@alastair9446

2 жыл бұрын

No, jet engine. Got to wait another 40 years.

@Plausible_Prism2810

2 жыл бұрын

@@alastair9446 No jet engine until 30 years *if* humanity doesn't kill itself

No tail rotor also means it remains controllable if a projectile takes out the tail of the airframe 👌

Seems like the attention to missions rather than the safety of the soldiers is the focus. Saying we upgraded speed for less armament is I'm sure very comforting to the men and women that will be on board.

Looks so bad ass!

Nice... But how hard / easy is it to fold up and put it in a C-17 / C-5??

@omarn6989

2 жыл бұрын

It fits.

Was that clip for a few seconds of the b109 a clip from one of warthunders trailers?

Wow..God bless America

That's awesome.

Mate, you need to get your figures correct. Also, "equipment" is both singular and plural.

What about auto rotation in the event of engine shutdown?

@pvosoccer1585

2 жыл бұрын

Oh, you are now designing a machine for combat, what is your intent of auto-rotation besides "engine shutdown"? First, it is not a recreation aircraft. Second, it is most likely that when you venture out into the battlefields and your machine got shot down, by a SAM or whatever, then the auto-gyration feature will neither be needed nor it will be desired/practical.

@LuisQ7492

2 жыл бұрын

@@pvosoccer1585 you must have been shot down a lot to know what works on the battlefield.

I have many long nights and fond memories with the H-60..

Sooo.. A helicopter capable of hovering outside a skyscraper's window... Hmm good idea

This helicopter will become the next F35 It will be delays over budget And come short of expected shens 😥

@jojosmiff3417

2 жыл бұрын

If only they could change out the cabin/transition section in a rapid deployment mode. Wait, it will have to get it's weight under control first

What do you mean replace, this is just the upgraded Blackhawk, the Blackhawk will never be forgotten

@peterisawesomeplease

3 жыл бұрын

haha well the US military basically names things depending on how it wants to try to slip through congressional budget meetings. They either go with the "this is the most amazing thing in the world we have to have it" strat and give it a new name or they go with the "lets pretend this is just a tiny upgrade so no one will notice" strat. Which one they go with rarely has anything to do with the actual hardware its just politics.

@IMP_ROM

2 жыл бұрын

@@peterisawesomeplease Nice.

@carloste3ichert120

2 жыл бұрын

I said that about the Huey. You will be as old as I am, if you survive, like I have.

Interesting... How it develops. 👍

Passengers are greatly encouraged by getting into a combat aircraft, where the pilot isn't even coming with them, what a confidence builder!

Except reality looks nothing like your title picture.

Maintenance issue ? Too many blades ? 16 blades ? The Bell v280 -> 6 blades -> Greater range and Greater speed .... And can you imagine when with that extended range ( extended loiter time ), the V280 is made into a gunship like the AC-130 GhostRider ? But a mini version.. Just 1x25mm Gatling Gun, 2x Laser Guided Hydra 70 Missile Pods, to take take out enemy combatants, light armoured vehicles from 1 - 3 miles away with all the necessary cameras and avionics ? WOW !!!!

@dickmelsonlupot7697

2 жыл бұрын

turning the V280 into a gunship is impossible. The body is too small and the recoil from any of the big guns will destroy the structure and integrity of the aircraft

@cp_pdn

2 жыл бұрын

@@dickmelsonlupot7697 Too small for the 25mm Gau ? Laser Guided Hydra 70 ? Nope...

@dickmelsonlupot7697

2 жыл бұрын

@@cp_pdn If you're talking about the GAU-12 Equalizer that fires the 25mm, then yes it is a bad idea. You're forgetting that thing is a gun. And all guns have what we call *RECOIL* You're forgetting this thing is a troop carrier 1st and not a dedicated attack helicopter so the interior is big, wide and hallow which is a bad idea for any aircraft that wants big guns. In short, it's structure can't cope with such recoil plus the fact that the gun along with the other parts needed to operate it and the ammo would defeat the purpose of the helicopter. The only way for it to even house such a huge gun or any cannon for that matter would be to redo the whole design and make a dedicated attack helicopter from it's main design intended for such a role. Much like how the AH-1 Cobra was made specifically to be the "gunship" version of the UH-1 Iriquois (or Huey). The only reason the C-130 was chosen and was able to become the AC-130 was because it was big enough to house the guns, it had 4 engines which could cope with the added weight (which had the drawback of the AC-130s being fuel inefficient) plus the structure was already big and strong enough to cope with the recoil of the guns placed on the side. But even then, AC-130s are known to have their structures degrade incredibly quickly oftentimes with incredibly severe damage to the overall structure once a certain amount of time and maintenance is given. So no, the small frame, body and relatively weak engines (since it only has 2) and even the disadvantage of it's design being unsafe especially when an engine failure might occur (which is why the Osprey was never used as a Marine 1 helicopter) would make the V280 a very very very bad choice to become the next or be a mini version of the AC-130. As for the missiles, technically they can but what would be the point? There are far cheaper options for that i.e in the form of drones. You're not gonna convince any military official with that type of thinking

@cp_pdn

2 жыл бұрын

@@dickmelsonlupot7697 - Big Guns ? Whoever said anything about putting a howitzer in the V280 ? Also you seem to be forgetting that helicopeters that are much smaller than the V280 are already firing the 20mm chain gun ? An Apache is about 5 tons and the V280 is about 15tons and so that kills your 'recoil defense' Upgunning from a 20mm to 25mm is definitely in the realm of possibility ! As for cost - The Hydra 70's are one the cheapest missiles around and would definitely be cost effective !!!!

@dickmelsonlupot7697

2 жыл бұрын

@@cp_pdn Like I said, the V280 is *NOT* a dedicated gunship, so any thoughts of adding guns larger than a .50 cal would be stupppiddd and unnecessary because, like I said, the aircraft's structure *IS NOT DESIGNED* to carry nor be able to withstand the recoil of such a big weapon. And FYI, an Apache *IS NOT THE SAME* as a fcckckin V280. The Apache is a *DEDICATED ATTACK HELICOPTER* while a V280 is a fckknnn troop transport for the Army. How the fckkk is that huge difference not getting inside that thick head of yours?? And no, weight has nothing to do with recoil dampening you dimwit. A helicopter is not a damned tank or armoured carrier like the APC or Stryker where you can just pop any gun at the top. Hell, even if it was there are even still limits to it's design as well. For one, recoil dampening has more to do with it's structure than weight and whether or not such fitting can withstand the pressure and recoil from the guns or if the body's structure has proper recoil distribution attributes. You can't just slap any gun on a chopper and expect it to work flawlessly. And like I said before, even with the AC-130's bigger and stronger frame, there are still limits to the designs and a huge drawback is the pressure placed on the AC-130's main body and the connection between the wings and the fuselage since the fuselage "vibrates" irregularly every time the guns fire because, dduuhhhhh, it was never meant to be a gunship to begin with. Though theoretically speaking you can somewhat put 20mms on the V280 since it has been done on the UH-60 before *BUT* it is not advisable since, like I said again ang again and again, the recoil would be too great for the aircraft's body to handle and the UH-60 example I just stated was more of an "experiment" than an actual design or practice. You have to take note the difference in the design and stress distribution between a regular troop transport like the Huey, the Black Hawk, the Osprey or the V280 versus a *DESIGNATED* gunship/attack helicopter like the Apache, the KA-50, Mi-28 or even the Mi-24/25/35 (with this being the exception which I will talk about later). Transport or those dedicated for it has a huge azzz space inside it to make room for people and other gear. They also have the characteristic of being too slow, too heavy and they're not nimble enough to actually effectively evade enemy fire. And to turn such a type of aircraft into a gunship, it would have to loose it's main purpose i.e. being a *TRANSPORT* like what you'd see in the armed version of the UH-60. And like I said, the armed UH-60 is slow, not nimble and is too heavy to actually act like a "gunship"/attack helicopter. Attack helicopters are made thinner and have little to zero space at all for passengers or other "unnecessary cargo" in order to operate properly as a "gunship"/attack helicopter. Troop transports have a lot of "extra weight" that could hinder or lessen it's capability to become a "gunship"/attack helicopter. Even the armed UH-60 variant can't carry a lot of equipment where if you wanted a 20mm chain gun you can only fit two at the side and you cannot put missiles because it would be too heavy to do so plus the ammo count for the chain gun would be far less than it would be for say an Apache or whatever. And that's just the armament concern, you'd still have to worry about the stress the chopper's body has to endure from the recoil of such big guns and you also have the fact that an armed troop transport would be akin to having Melissa McCarthy carry a .50 cal around than a legit well trained soldier with an M60. Just because she has a bigger gun doesn't mean she's good at it or she's a better choice. And no, low price doesn't always mean it's more cost effective. Even if the Hyrda missiles are some of the cheapest missiles around, they're still far more expensive than using guns. Plus the aircraft (i.e. the V280) itself is far more expensive than even a UH-60. So turning an expensive platform such as this into a "gunship"/attack helicopter would make your argument of it being cost effective because "mUh hYdRaZzZz aRe cHeAp" would be invalid and moot because the total price would still be extremely high than using dedicated attack helicopters or drones if you want missiles. Plus the costs if one would be lost due to enemy attack, a malfunction or an accident would be far lower overall if we chose drones over an armed V280.

The new helicopter design opens opportunities but would be better utilised as a special purpose craft with the ENCUMBANT Blackhawk in support roles.

Well this is a DAMN GOOD TIME TO PUT IT IN SERVICE!!!

@Plausible_Prism2810

2 жыл бұрын

The build and research time: this build and research time will take 19 years..

"Here's the next piece of military equipment that'll accelerate inflation" There fixed the headline.

You are showing the SB-1, and then the Raider, which are 2 different machines!! The SB-1 is larger than the Raider.

I like this. And we have been creating new but light materials that should be tested to provide armor.

I could see the general design being great for high end civilian helicopters too.

Me: (Thinking of enlisting as 15T) "Darn"

@dangerouseducation40

3 жыл бұрын

Don't..

@crafterisland9949

3 жыл бұрын

Same, but dont worry the blackhawk wont be replaced anytime soon

@nicholas2468

2 жыл бұрын

15T here, its not going anywhere anytime soon, and if you do enlist going aviation is an absolute plus over many other options.

@kirillholt2329

2 жыл бұрын

same

@jojosmiff3417

2 жыл бұрын

This will be achievable as a Utility Helicopter in Neveruary.

3:47 I know this doesn't matter for winning wars but its too bad that the new design looks really dumb, lol. Kinda disappointing for what is supposed to be this bad-ass future helicopter haha

@Idkidkidk716

2 жыл бұрын

I'm sure it has to do with aerodynamics why it looks lame

@dustinweaver5040

2 жыл бұрын

Ehh it’s kinda futuristic looking in a way. Not quite like the osprey, but still looks futuristic compared to the Blackhawk and Apache.

@hk4lyfe59

2 жыл бұрын

@@dustinweaver5040 It literally looks like a meme.

@dustinweaver5040

2 жыл бұрын

@@hk4lyfe59 completely subjective lol

The real SKY WOLF 👍🏽

I love it 😍.

Yes but where does all the fuel go?

@ligdeyendama884

2 жыл бұрын

In the balls

@Plausible_Prism2810

2 жыл бұрын

@@ligdeyendama884 of deez nuts

Weight and firepower? Two pretty huge factors. Still looks like an awesome machine. Great work on your videos.

Colombians and the Israelis will sure improve their performance like they did with the Arpia IV.

Very good video

The moment he called rotors "propellers" I lost all confidence.

Beijing approves of their new SP2 Defungshui original future concept helicopter. Xiexie

awesome

SUPERB

I really wish there were more neutral weapons videos on youtube. I know its difficult but almost every video either sounds like pure cooperate propaganda or assumes no new weapons should ever be created. Like even mentioning cost once would be nice.

@enginepy

Жыл бұрын

Cost is tricky. Because they always state a number initially and then so-called cost overruns and delays always happen, whether intentional or not and end up making the actual production variants cost many multiples more than intended. It’s a junk system we have for procurement

Neat, but this isn't this designed strongly inspired by Russian ones?

@jameskratzer4538

2 жыл бұрын

So what? Even Russian designs can sometimes be good ones. When an airframe design makes sense, it makes sense. Engineering doesn't HAVE political issues.

@dickmelsonlupot7697

2 жыл бұрын

much of the great helicopters in the world are either made in Russia or made by Russian engineers

@sc1338

2 жыл бұрын

@@dickmelsonlupot7697 I agree, however my favorite was the stealth Comanche attack helicopter. It was amazing

@dickmelsonlupot7697

2 жыл бұрын

@@sc1338 It was too cumbersome and it's abilities are more akin to a scout helicopter rather than a full fledged attack helicopter....but it did look cool.

@sc1338

2 жыл бұрын

@@dickmelsonlupot7697 I thought I read it was very maneuverable, but yes I think it’s the most beautiful helicopter. Slightly better looking than the hind

If it can keep military people alive better. Build it. It must keep soldiers and airmen alive in combat.

A war helicopter with no weapon systems or defense systems like flares AND a thin skin? That's not a helicopter. It's a coffin ⚰

@Plausible_Prism2810

2 жыл бұрын

There gonna build the frame and engines before the defense systems unless it's included in some secret compartment.

They are gonna need something to replace the Blackhawk really soon since they left all of them in Afghanistan!

This would be really helpful to flee an area. Would have been really help to run away from Afghanistan if this model was available early

Sooooo Apache and Blackhawk had a wild night and this was born.

Well, I was recommended this video today, an hour after I saw a video about the V 280 winning the competition.

Is this the one we just gifted to the Taliban!! They love it.. says it flies like a champ!! Thanks Joe!

I bet the Taliban can't wait til they get these!

Just a few conventions. Aircraft speeds at low end usually quoted in (nautical) knots by English speakers. 1 knot approx 1.14 mph or 1.8 km/hr. Blades providing lift are “rotors” not “propellers”. Rear blade set is propeller. Reminiscent of Cheyenne AH-56 by Lockheed in 1960’s, except for coaxial counter-rotating rotors. Cheyenne more like Apache AH-64 though than Blackhawk UH-60. Cheyenne had stub wings for some translational lift & weapons. Lockheed-Martin now owns Sikorsky. Russian (Soviet) Kamov Helicopters have had several coaxial rotor helicopters since 1960’s into 1970’s: Ka-25, Ka-27, Ka-32, Ka-50, Ka-52, Ka-226 etc. w/ less sophisticated rotor heads. Coaxial rotors more efficient, greater lift, no energy lost to anti-torque. Ka-137 is a coaxial drone (unmanned) helicopter. Finally, being expensive not a virtue - just means we can afford fewer.

Even the Defensminister of Sweden is trilled will order 45 of them on standing foot!

Ka 52 Alligator wanna be

Typical America😁❤

Beautiful bird

Good luck for this giant step !

Wow, excellent 🥰

Taliban drooling 🤤 hoping we leave some of these next time

So cool

Units like SASR SEAL TEAM 6 and DELTA could benefit from these as with special units. Might be interesting to see where this goes. When its time to kick things with China mobility will be as important as fire power.

@erika_itsumi5141

2 жыл бұрын

why dont they just bring the stealth Hawk into frontline service

It is nice but can’t measure up to the UH1 c Iroquois in style and sound. Or coolness factor.

funny that the video talks about hellfires but shows us a 2.75 inch rocket pod

Where did the name Sikorsky come from 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

@sc1338

2 жыл бұрын

America...

Putting more tech doesn’t necessarily make things better. Reducing maintenance while improving performance also increasing flight hours between maintenance seems more practical. This is just my thought. The M model black hawk had way to much added which is why the A/L frankenhawk remained the go to for medivac in Afghanistan. Light fast and as simple as it could be