With the prototypes of each aircraft almost complete, which

>>34473041
defiant, looks simpler to fly.

>>34473041

Whichever kills the most Marines during the testing phase.

>>34473041
More info links:

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1700527-can-the-army-s-future-helicopter-be-stealthy

http://www.bellhelicopter.com/military/bell-v-280

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/the-war-zone/9198/sikorsky-and-boeing-give-us-a-glimpse-of-their-new-attack-helicopter-concept%3Fsource%3Ddam

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/sb1-defiant.html

>>34473041
>super fast blackhawk vs deathtrap osprey blackhawk abortion
man what a hard choice

>>34473089
But anon, this is the army's program so it'll kill soldiers in the testing phase this time.

>>34473165
It's like you don't know how to use test dummies.

V-280 Valor FTW, check 'em.

>>34473105
The osprey hasn't killed anybody. Stop believing so, just say you don't like the look of them.

>>34473041
I still fail to understand how tilting just the propellers is improvement over tilting the whole engines

>tilt rotor aircraft
>ever

???

>>34475284
Less weight to move means smaller hydraulic system.

>>34473194
Marines are cheaper than a good crash dummy

>>34475309
>aircraft
>ever

Horse carriage will get you there just fine.

>>34473041
defiant looks funky as all get out

I think the Valor has a shot considering all the kinks of tilt-rotor have been mostly ironed out with the V-22. The SB-1 looks like a failed secret design from the Nazis that you'd see on the History channel.

File: Dornier Do-31.webm (2MB, 726x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 726x400px

Why are we using this rotorcraft trash when there's been a superior vehicle out there for 50 years?

>>34475434
The valor also is incorporating parts from the F-35, according to this article.

http://sys.4chan.org/derefer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scout.com%2Fmilitary%2Fwarrior%2Fstory%2F1700527-can-the-army-s-future-helicopter-be-stealthy

>>34475596

>that rough landing

I'm good, senpai

File: whynotbuth.jpg (8KB, 266x189px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 266x189px

>>34473041
Why not both?

File: osprey-crash.jpg (42KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 480x360px

>>34475642
Not as rough as its successor's landings.

>>34474838
>The V-22 Osprey had 9 hull-loss accidents that resulted in a total of 39 fatalities

>>34473105
this desu

>>34473041

the tiltrotor

reason: is cooler

File: gdi dropship.jpg (64KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 640x400px

>>34475596
>what could have been

>>34475409
Have you tried walking and not endangering your life?

File: AA2111_VJ-101_real-1.jpg (16KB, 394x203px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 394x203px

>>34473041
So last century, tilt-jets are the new hotness

>>34473041
Hopefully we get the SB-1 Defiant and continue to innovate. We've already got a tilt rotor in production even though it's fuckhuge. Besides, the Defiant is infinitely more sexy.

File: 1499522760315.png (167KB, 516x517px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 516x517px

>>34480215

File: IMG_3711.jpg (59KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x600px

>You've stirred the hornets nest now darlin'

Hoplite for the win

>>34475596
>superior vehicle
because its not

>>34480279
How is the v-22 fuck huge? Looks pretty normal size to me

>>34480215
Hubba hubba, now have the Russians build one so I can get my brutalist vtol on.

>>34481933
>>34481314
Think it was scrapped. Still shexxy though

>choice between a Bell-Lockheed project or a Lockheed-Boeing project
>Lockmart wins again

File: v22spec.jpg (87KB, 690x654px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 690x654px

>>34481851
>Looks pretty normal size to me
That's because you don't know what you're talking about. The first clue was that you haven't seen one in person. Your second should have been that the entire point of this project was to develop Osprey like capability in a helicopter that could land where the Blackhawk can. Had the Osprey been capable, it would have been purchased.

File: blackcock.jpg (33KB, 432x242px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 432x242px

>>34482201
Used to have the minimum landing space comparison from one of the original bids but it's gone now and google is coming up empty.

The V-22 is a big bitch.

Defiant for sure
Tilt rotors are a meme, and are much closer to STOL planes than a chopper.

But hopefully they cut back on their helicopter forces altogether, because that shit is wildly overrated.

>>34479513
Whoa there; just get delivery.

>>34473041
they both look fuckin dumb, they look like Gi joe toys

>>34478592
> Orca all the things!

>>34475901
Money, I guess. The tilt rotor has greater range because the wings provide free lifting power as it moves forward. On the other hand, a prop copter is a straight upgrade to the blackhawk and requires little change to transport doctrine. I see the prop copter winning. It's the simple option, even if it's less efficient on fuel.

>>34484405
>and are much closer to STOL planes than a chopper.

That's a plus in some ways. It moves faster and has longer range, while still being able to land vertically. It has its uses.

>>34484437
Everything looks like that at first. They become more gritty and realistic as the military begins to make changes and retrofits.

>>34484502
Actually building and flying the thing goes a long way too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPMKUA8xgAg

>>34484545
Do you think it would still be flyable if the tail rotor was struck by an RPG?

>>34484578
The regular control surfaces for a helicopter's main rotor are still there on the S-97, so I don't see why not, but I am not an engineer.

>>34475434

There's already coaxial/push-prop designs in the procurement pipeline, so neither technology will be entirely new by the time this gets off the ground.

I'm an apache pilot I'd rather have the coaxial. Tilt rotors are death.

>>34473041
Most likely the Defiant if anything because of size. It's suppose to be Blackhawk replacement right? Having a tilt rotar just increases your width dramatically I thought.