What if...? This concept helicopter wins a $100Bn Pentagon contract?
178 replies, posted
[img]http://puu.sh/a07PE.jpg[/img]
...is that a Saitek X52.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45313767]V/STOL aircraft have their own unique set of issues. In theory they should have the advantages of a helicopter and a fixed wing aircraft, but that's not usually the case.
They tend to be more mechanically complicated than either conventional aircraft or helicopters, and have a ton of maintenance issues. Not to say that the issues can't be ironed out with more development.. a ton of money..[/QUOTE]
There is also a certain phenomenon with ground effect that can develop in most non fixed-wing aircraft that can cause a complete loss of all lift. The effect is worsened with more rotors, which is why a few V-22's were lost in the prototype stage.
Multirotors are effective but can be harder to design safely
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;45311689]It has nothing to do with Chinooks not having enough lift volume in the case of armor. Even attack helicopters only have portions of the cockpit armored. When I flew back seat in Huey's we wore heavy plate armor and when we'd transport grunts we'd tell them to get used to sitting on their rear SAPI plate. Aside from the cockpit the only thing separating you from the outside is a thin piece of aluminum.
The issue with the Chinook is of maneuverability, not lift "volume".[/QUOTE]
The size of the helicopter exceeds the ability of the Chinook to haul a plate large enough to protect it and its vital components, against small arms fire.
In the absence of maneuverability, armor is necessary. The amount of lift compared to the volume of the components which would need armor plating isn't viable.
Hueys meanwhile are small and agile enough to need less armor. I'm not entirely clear on why the Marines continue to insist upon using the Huey platform. Aside from the marines generally being stuck with shit equipment. Are they easy to maintain? They are smaller than the blackhawk platform, which is nice for carriers, but is it really worth it?
[QUOTE=GunFox;45314002]The size of the helicopter exceeds the ability of the Chinook to haul a plate large enough to protect it and its vital components, against small arms fire.
In the absence of maneuverability, armor is necessary. The amount of lift compared to the volume of the components which would need armor plating isn't viable.
Hueys meanwhile are small and agile enough to need less armor. I'm not entirely clear on why the Marines continue to insist upon using the Huey platform. Aside from the marines generally being stuck with shit equipment. Are they easy to maintain? They are smaller than the blackhawk platform, which is nice for carriers, but is it really worth it?[/QUOTE]
The gunships don't really get much up armor even when they're in that role.
Marines still use Huey's and cobras because of their significant parts commonality as well as what was mentioned above. That coupled with the recent upgrades to the Y model Huey and the Z model viper greatly improve the performance and maintinence requirements of both. I started on Huey N models which barely had enough power to lift themselves, but when I got on the Y models it was like riding in a completely different aircraft.
The biggest issue with the aircraft at the time wasn't the airframe, it was the budget. Before the Y's were announced the N's were more or less regulated to command and control roles as well as troop ferrying, with the giant CH53s filling the role of medevac and troop deployment. Now the Y's do all of that and can even lift equipment once again, as well as operate as gunships and fire support.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;45299088]But you can't use schools to kill people, what's the point?[/QUOTE]
you arent trying hard enough
[QUOTE=beanhead;45309341]4000 RPM of 30mm DU rounds have quite the effect on enemy armor...[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a522446.pdf]Maybe against T-55's and T-62's sure[/url]. The problem is that modern tanks are much more survivable than cold war tanks.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45312005]Even so you're guaranteed a mobility kill with the GAU-8, like, you can't fuck that that up unless you deliberately miss. That means anyone stuck in that now burning tank has to either hope they can remain inside long enough for the A-10 to go away, or hope their recovery vehicle doesn't suffer the same fate.[/QUOTE]
Except when you don't immobilize it, as 3/10 tests against M47's show (simulated T-62's and T-55's). Modern tanks are an order of magnitude more survivable than those from the cold war in all aspects.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.