Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Network World)   Miltiary wants to build radical helicopters on steroids   (networkworld.com) divider line 29
    More: Cool, DARPA, pollination, confluence, high-techs  
•       •       •

5092 clicks; posted to Geek » on 26 Feb 2013 at 9:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



29 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-26 09:22:32 AM  
Say, what's that humming noi--
 
2013-02-26 09:24:58 AM  
Has VTOL capability ever made a difference in any conflict, anywhere? (Outside of regular helicopters.)

One of the first things we do on the attack is capture airfields so the airforce can operate their fixed wing aircraft, and we've got plenty of airfields in the US should we ever need to fight here.
 
2013-02-26 09:26:22 AM  
What's a miltiary?
 
2013-02-26 09:27:18 AM  
thechive.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-26 09:35:34 AM  
Well why the fark not?
There's endless money for this kind of crap, right?
 
2013-02-26 09:36:47 AM  
I don't see how being on steroids would help build a helicopter.
 
2013-02-26 09:38:00 AM  

WinoRhino: What's a miltiary?


Mother I'd Like To Insert A Recon ... Yikes!!
 
2013-02-26 09:39:43 AM  
How about no. Aside from research in computer security not one more dollar should be spent on defense or research.
 
2013-02-26 09:42:29 AM  
Beware of "Rotor Rage."
 
2013-02-26 10:25:38 AM  

J. Frank Parnell: [thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x372]


Damn you, I had that on my clipboard and everything.
 
2013-02-26 10:44:27 AM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-26 10:46:17 AM  
www.airwolf.tv
DNRTA
 
2013-02-26 10:52:13 AM  
The Enclave will be pleased.
 
2013-02-26 10:58:59 AM  

Fubini: Has VTOL capability ever made a difference in any conflict, anywhere? (Outside of regular helicopters.)


Falklands? VTOL carriers are presumably a lot cheaper to maintain than fixed-wing carriers with the catapults and whatnot.
 
2013-02-26 12:03:02 PM  
Oh a DARPA BAA.  This is how they work:

1) Put out BAA
2) Pay too much money to people who don't know what to do with it.
3) Receive reports and models.  Don't read reports.
4) Shelve idea for five to ten years.
5) Go to 1)
 
2013-02-26 12:12:46 PM  
This actually makes more sense than a fighter-bomber that freezes the pilots lungs and costs more to maintain than the GDP of Australia.
 
2013-02-26 12:13:33 PM  

J. Frank Parnell: [thechive.files.wordpress.com image 500x372]


Where can I buy one of these...for...ummmmm...recreational purposes.
 
2013-02-26 12:44:18 PM  
They already have a VTOL high speed, high capacity (in terms of cargo and troops) aircraft: The V-22 Osprey. I know it has a bad rep with the press and probably Congress as a result, but the USMC seem to love it. Maybe this is for a jet version?
 
2013-02-26 12:45:39 PM  
If one of the armed forces brances actually wants this, then I'm all for it.

It's us building the multi-million dollar stuff they don't want, and have asked us to stop making, that really annoys me.
 
2013-02-26 12:48:18 PM  
I think they already have a prototype design:

aliens.humlak.cz
 
2013-02-26 02:18:21 PM  
No problem. Let Boeing, Lockheed, BAE etc develop, build and test it, and once it's ready we'll buy it.
 
2013-02-26 02:50:41 PM  
Great. How many Billions of  tax $ are they gonna piss away this time?
 
2013-02-26 03:08:40 PM  
0-media-cdn.foolz.us

/Possibly involved
 
2013-02-26 04:20:48 PM  
Ummmmm.... can I just submit the Osprey design and just pocket the billions of development dollars they are going to spend?
 
2013-02-26 04:34:46 PM  
images2.wikia.nocookie.net

Want.
 
2013-02-26 05:50:46 PM  

SurelyShirley: No problem. Let Boeing, Lockheed, BAE etc develop, build and test it, and once it's ready we'll buy it.


Sikorsky is doing just that with the S-97 Raider.  I think first flight is in 2016ish but it is being developed on their own dime without a military contract.
 
2013-02-26 06:49:35 PM  

Echo0: SurelyShirley: No problem. Let Boeing, Lockheed, BAE etc develop, build and test it, and once it's ready we'll buy it.

Sikorsky is doing just that with the S-97 Raider.  I think first flight is in 2016ish but it is being developed on their own dime without a military contract.


Except the S-97 will only go 253 mph and not the 300 to 400 knots sought by the RFP
 
2013-02-26 10:38:51 PM  
These wild-eyed combination vehicles never really work out. You get something like the Pontiac Aztek of aircraft, and it ends up being a maintenance nightmare.

The design requirements for efficient hover and the design requirements for fast level flight are just too radically different to get a vehicle that performs as well in either mode as a well-designed single-role machine. Short of a radical new powerplant development, anyway.

Personally I think VTOL is kind of overrated, when you can have super-STOL at a much lower price point. Unless you need an aircraft that can hover on-station for a while or explicitly land on a rooftop, and in those rare situations you really just want a helicopter.
 
2013-02-27 01:58:02 AM  

QuietMan: [www.airwolf.tv image 768x576]
DNRTA


Thank you for saving me the time. :)
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report