Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+6
Zivo
AirCargo
magnumcromagnon
NationalRus
Werewolf
nemrod
10 posters

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    avatar
    Guest
    Guest


    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Guest Wed Oct 28, 2015 8:33 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Militarov wrote:I saw this thread just now ffs Smile

    Sikorsky Showcasing S97 Raider Helicopter First Time to the Public AUSA 2015:

    And here is the video: http://defensewebtv.com/index.php/component/contushdvideoshare/player/army/sikorsky-showcasing-s-97-raider-helicopter-first-time-to-the-public-ausa-2015-defense-web-tv


    Considering the cost of the Sikorsky CH-53K, expect this helicopter to cost $160 million per piece!

    Haha, it wont, hopefully they belive serial production will be between 15 and 20 million apiece. Somewhat like Mi17V5s lets say.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Werewolf Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:11 pm

    I am kind of astonished by US MIC achievements in the past 3 decades.

    They have put the RAH-66 helicopter down because it costs 65 mln USD per piece in its prototype phase, now they go with a CH-53K helicopter that costs 100 mln USD per piece and they still have to call russian companies to get their downed helicopters out of hot zones, mostly due their tight, preplanned flight shedules which they are not really capable off changing, despite Chinooks being capable of slinging downed chinooks.
    max steel
    max steel


    Posts : 2930
    Points : 2955
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  max steel Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:11 pm

    Black Hawk Empty: Unmanned Helicopter Passes Key Test

    After drones, now unmanned helos. What a Face
    avatar
    Cyrus the great


    Posts : 303
    Points : 311
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Cyrus the great Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:22 am

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 6a00d83451b88369e200e54f298d088834-800wi_zpsxcy0hpcu


    This picture apparently shows Kamov's conceptual designs that are not too different to the S-97 Raider. The Russians already had some of these designs before the Sikorsky X2 -- the prototype from which the S-97 was built upon. The Ka-92 will have a ridiculous range of 1200-1400 km without refueling and travel at a maximum speed of 500 km. I wonder if attack helicopters can be given a range boost similar to that of the K-92.  At 800 km the Eurocopter Tiger has the longest range of any attack helicopter, with the Rooivalk following at 700 km.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Werewolf Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:17 am

    Cyrus the great wrote:Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 6a00d83451b88369e200e54f298d088834-800wi_zpsxcy0hpcu


    This picture apparently shows Kamov's conceptual designs that are not too different to the S-97 Raider. The Russians already had some of these designs before the Sikorsky X2 -- the prototype from which the S-97 was built upon. The Ka-92 will have a ridiculous range of 1200-1400 km without refueling and travel at a maximum speed of 500 km. I wonder if attack helicopters can be given a range boost similar to that of the K-92.  At 800 km the Eurocopter Tiger has the longest range of any attack helicopter, with the Rooivalk following at 700 km.


    The requirements for Attack helicopter to operate in combined operations close to own army ground forces of armored and mecha/motorized forces have requirements more focused on having parameters and offensive and deffensive capabilities to operate along with those ground forces. There is no layout today that would reach such speeds or ranges and the only one that could achieve such range or speed due its design and aerodynamic shape would be Ka-50 when you strip it of its armor and make it overhaul lighter by 3-4tons you can achieve such speeds, but that is not a requirement for the current generations of attack helicopters.

    That picture is funny as hell must be one of the appointed people of Lockheed Martin PR department. 40ton lift with slinged cargo with a co-axial design in such a dimensions...i am gone believe that when i see that because research papers of Kamov state limitations in size and weight of blades and the exponational distance both rotor discs must have to keep a safe flexing zone for both sets of rotors which vary all the time under different speeds, rpm, disc load, maneuvering and altitude.
    avatar
    Cyrus the great


    Posts : 303
    Points : 311
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Cyrus the great Wed Nov 18, 2015 12:48 pm

    Werewolf wrote:The requirements for Attack helicopter to operate in combined operations close to own army ground forces of armored and mecha/motorized forces have requirements more focused on having parameters and offensive and deffensive capabilities to operate along with those ground forces. There is no layout today that would reach such speeds or ranges and the only one that could achieve such range or speed due its design and aerodynamic shape would be Ka-50 when you strip it of its armor and make it overhaul lighter by 3-4tons you can achieve such speeds, but that is not a requirement for the current generations of attack helicopters.

    That picture is funny as hell must be one of the appointed people of Lockheed Martin PR department. 40ton lift with slinged cargo with a co-axial design in such a dimensions...i am gone believe that when i see that because research papers of Kamov state limitations in size and weight of blades and the exponational distance both rotor discs must have to keep a safe flexing zone for both sets of rotors which vary all the time under different speeds, rpm, disc load, maneuvering and altitude.

    Yeah, I understand what you're saying... there is simply no way the Russians are going to compromise the armour protection of the Ka-50-2 just to increase range and speed, especially when such a performance would rarely be used, if ever. The Klimov TV7-117 or the VK-3500 engine are significantly more powerful than any helicopter engine and would probably allow the Ka-50-2 to achieve such speed and range without necessitating a reduction in weight and protection.

    The 40 t lift conceptual design strikes me as odd, but the Joint Heavy Lift High Speed Lifter looks like a Mi-26 with coaxial rotors and side propellers. Question: Why is it that the Ka-50-2 is limited to carrying 12 Vikhr missiles when it has impressive takeoff weights, second only to the Mi-28? It also has the superior coaxial rotors set up in addition to being lighter than the Mi-28 with slightly more powerful engines and 3 pylons at its disposal.

    Thanks, Werewolf.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Werewolf Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:22 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:The requirements for Attack helicopter to operate in combined operations close to own army ground forces of armored and mecha/motorized forces have requirements more focused on having parameters and offensive and deffensive capabilities to operate along with those ground forces. There is no layout today that would reach such speeds or ranges and the only one that could achieve such range or speed due its design and aerodynamic shape would be Ka-50 when you strip it of its armor and make it overhaul lighter by 3-4tons you can achieve such speeds, but that is not a requirement for the current generations of attack helicopters.

    That picture is funny as hell must be one of the appointed people of Lockheed Martin PR department. 40ton lift with slinged cargo with a co-axial design in such a dimensions...i am gone believe that when i see that because research papers of Kamov state limitations in size and weight of blades and the exponational distance both rotor discs must have to keep a safe flexing zone for both sets of rotors which vary all the time under different speeds, rpm, disc load, maneuvering and altitude.

    Yeah, I understand what you're saying... there is simply no way the Russians are going to compromise the armour protection of the Ka-50-2 just to increase range and speed, especially when such a performance would rarely be used, if ever. The Klimov TV7-117 or the VK-3500 engine are significantly more powerful than any helicopter engine and would probably allow the Ka-50-2 to achieve such speed and range without necessitating a reduction in weight and protection.

    The 40 t lift conceptual design strikes me as odd, but the Joint Heavy Lift High Speed Lifter looks like a Mi-26 with coaxial rotors and side propellers. Question: Why is it that the Ka-50-2 is limited to carrying 12 Vikhr missiles when it has impressive takeoff weights, second only to the Mi-28? It also has the superior coaxial rotors set up in addition to being lighter than the Mi-28 with slightly more powerful engines and 3 pylons at its disposal.

    Thanks, Werewolf.

    Yes the JHLHSL helo looks very much like Mi-26 because it makes very good use of internal volume while keeping a very good aerodynamic shape.

    The Ka-50 isn't really limited to just 12 Vikhrs by design but they limited it by layout since what you gonna do with 24 fucking ATGM's? Use ATGM's against every single running guy and waste highly capable weapons isntead you could use unguided rockets. The thing is such helicopters are used against combined arms, you will never see tanks in more numbers than soft targets, that is never going to happen. They will always be accompanied by soft armored and infantry in more masses then you could find tanks on the battlefield. HEAT is not bad against everything but HE-Frag unguided ammunition is still superior against soft armor and infantry that are scattered around or sitt in BTR's/IFV's or are remotley buy. The Vikhr has a HE-Frag warhead aswell but it is just to expensive to waste so many missiles if you have better suited weapons for that.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38767
    Points : 39263
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  GarryB Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:41 am

    werful than any helicopter engine and would probably allow the Ka-50-2 to achieve such speed and range without necessitating a reduction in weight and protection.

    I seem to remember the US Army had a requirement that the Apache should be able to self deploy to europe in an emergency so it could carry external fuel tanks on its four wing points and its internal magazine for 1200 rounds of 30mm cannon shells could be replaced with an extra fuel tank.

    The Russian helos on the other hand have no need for such enormous flight range... extra large normally empty fuel tanks would not be any advantage to the existing designs.

    Why is it that the Ka-50-2 is limited to carrying 12 Vikhr missiles when it has impressive takeoff weights, second only to the Mi-28?

    The operational design originally called for single seat Ka-50s... so a comparison of 6 Vihkrs and a 30mm cannon and 2 x 20 shot 80mm rocket pods per crewman on the Kamov made the Hokum better in terms of firepower per crewman. In comparison the Havok has 8 ATGMs, 20 rockets and 150 rounds per crew man.

    avatar
    Cyrus the great


    Posts : 303
    Points : 311
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Cyrus the great Fri Nov 20, 2015 6:01 am

    Werewolf wrote:

    Yes the JHLHSL helo looks very much like Mi-26 because it makes very good use of internal volume while keeping a very good aerodynamic shape.

    The Ka-50 isn't really limited to just 12 Vikhrs by design but they limited it by layout since what you gonna do with 24 fucking ATGM's? Use ATGM's against every single running guy and waste highly capable weapons isntead you could use unguided rockets. The thing is such helicopters are used against combined arms, you will never see tanks in more numbers than soft targets, that is never going to happen. They will always be accompanied by soft armored and infantry in more masses then you could find tanks on the battlefield. HEAT is not bad against everything but HE-Frag unguided ammunition is still superior against soft armor and infantry that are scattered around or sitt in BTR's/IFV's or are remotley buy. The Vikhr has a HE-Frag warhead aswell but it is just to expensive to waste so many missiles if you have better suited weapons for that.

    I wonder if Mil would ever team up with Kamov to comprehensively upgrade the Mi-26 with coaxial rotors and side propellers -- possibly giving it greater speed, range and maneuverability. Now, I understand that maneuverability is not really required in a heavy transport helicopter, but it would be a positive [unintentional] byproduct of the coaxial set up.

    The Ka-52 is my favourite attack helicopter and I suspected that it could carry more than 12 missiles. I certainly don't think it needs to carry 24 ATGMs, but it certainly should be able to carry 16 missiles -like the Mi-28- if needed. I agree with you about HE-Frag and I look forward to Ugroza rockets being deployed to add precision to the mix, in addition to them being much cheaper than ATGMs.

    Thanks for clarifying things for me, mate.
    avatar
    Cyrus the great


    Posts : 303
    Points : 311
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Cyrus the great Fri Nov 20, 2015 7:27 am

    Garry B wrote:I seem to remember the US Army had a requirement that the Apache should be able to self deploy to europe in an emergency so it could carry external fuel tanks on its four wing points and its internal magazine for 1200 rounds of 30mm cannon shells could be replaced with an extra fuel tank.

    The Russian helos on the other hand have no need for such enormous flight range... extra large normally empty fuel tanks would not be any advantage to the existing designs.

    The funny thing about the Robertson IAFS is that it only gives the AH-64 less than an hour [53 minutes] of extra flight time and it still has less range than the Ka-52 --> 545 km to the Apache's 497 km. I still don't understand how it is that the Apache has greater ferry range. Americans still boast about how their Apaches are armed with 1200 30mm rounds even though they lost that capability starting in 1997.


    Garry B wrote:The operational design originally called for single seat Ka-50s... so a comparison of 6 Vihkrs and a 30mm cannon and 2 x 20 shot 80mm rocket pods per crewman on the Kamov made the Hokum better in terms of firepower per crewman. In comparison the Havok has 8 ATGMs, 20 rockets and 150 rounds per crew man.

    Have they increased the amount of 30mm rounds the Mi-28 can carry? This might sound like a manifestly bad idea to put forward, but couldn't the Mi-28 and Ka-52 be modified to accommodate a device like the 12-PAK in the old Apache variants - allowing them to carry 1200 30mm 2A42 rounds? It would increase the weight and overall size by a small margin which could be mitigated with the new engines that Russia already has waiting in the wings.

    Thanks a bunch, Garry.


    Last edited by Cyrus the great on Fri Nov 20, 2015 7:47 am; edited 2 times in total
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Werewolf Fri Nov 20, 2015 7:32 am

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:

    Yes the JHLHSL helo looks very much like Mi-26 because it makes very good use of internal volume while keeping a very good aerodynamic shape.

    The Ka-50 isn't really limited to just 12 Vikhrs by design but they limited it by layout since what you gonna do with 24 fucking ATGM's? Use ATGM's against every single running guy and waste highly capable weapons isntead you could use unguided rockets. The thing is such helicopters are used against combined arms, you will never see tanks in more numbers than soft targets, that is never going to happen. They will always be accompanied by soft armored and infantry in more masses then you could find tanks on the battlefield. HEAT is not bad against everything but HE-Frag unguided ammunition is still superior against soft armor and infantry that are scattered around or sitt in BTR's/IFV's or are remotley buy. The Vikhr has a HE-Frag warhead aswell but it is just to expensive to waste so many missiles if you have better suited weapons for that.

    I wonder if Mil would ever team up with Kamov to comprehensively upgrade the Mi-26 with coaxial rotors and side propellers -- possibly giving it greater speed, range and maneuverability. Now, I understand that maneuverability is not really required in a heavy transport helicopter, but it would be a positive [unintentional] byproduct of the coaxial set up.

    The Ka-52 is my favourite attack helicopter and I suspected that it could carry more than 12 missiles. I certainly don't think it needs to carry 24 ATGMs, but it certainly should be able to carry 16 missiles -like the Mi-28- if needed. I agree with you about HE-Frag and I look forward to Ugroza rockets being deployed to add precision to the mix, in addition to them being much cheaper than ATGMs.

    Thanks for clarifying things for me, mate.
     

    I doubt that Kamov and Mil would cooperate together unless they are ordered to do it, but usually there is a competition for both unless one is significantly better and for heavy lifters Mil is unparalleled, but if the requirements for a new helo with higher MTOW would be not feasible by Mil design capabilities they could be pushed to try to figure out solution with Kamov. Think it is unlikely because i haven't heared about requirements for heavier lift then they have right now. First there need to be an urgend need for such requirement before they even take into consideration for a new plattform while most weights that are above Mi-26 are carroud out by cargo planes. Unlikely but not impossible for a KaMi Helo.

    The Ka-52 already can carry more than 12 missiles, even tho the inner pylons are prohibited to be used for Sprial class ATGM's due to saftey reasons dating back to Mi-24A to avoid possible ATGM to fuselage collition in maneuvering launchese which happen more than some might think in heat of battle. The inner pylons are allowed to be used for ASM, AShM and GR Ugroza S-24/25 guided rockets. So it has 14 missles. 12 destroyed tanks and two destroyed small fregates or corvettes or two destroyed bunkers, radars, SAM/SHORADs or infrastructure like bridges. No other attack helicopter can destroy bridges, vessels or SHORADs due the weapons integration. The other only helo that comes close to such capabilities is AH-1 which has AGM-65 Maverick integrated in it in different versions. That is also why i would prefer AH-1Z over AH-64E along with future projects of integrating Longbow as the Cobra Radar System and jamming pod ALQ-231 and more fancy stuff.

    The funny thing about the Robertson IAFS is that it only gives the AH-64 less than an hour [53 minutes] of extra flight time and it still has less range than the Ka-52 --> 545 km to the Apache's 497 km. I still don't understand how it is that the Apache has greater ferry range. Americans still boast about how their Apaches are armed with 1200 30mm rounds even though they lost that capability starting in 1997.

    The americans use on Apaches 230 gallon fuel tanks russians use around 130 gallons if i didn't miss something. So yes it is a big plus for Apaches for self deployment even tho that comes at cost of time it takes and the extra time it takes again to maintain the helo after that long range of self deployment.
    avatar
    Cyrus the great


    Posts : 303
    Points : 311
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Cyrus the great Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:08 am



    I agree with you about the prospects of Kamov and Mil working together... unless the Russian government demanded it they would understandably resist it. The Mi-26 is a great platform with unique capabilities and so I don't think needs to be replaced, but a modification program wouldn't hurt. Coaxial rotors and side propellers would add to its performance. It would increase power, range, speed and possibly maneuverability.

    The Ka-52 has some very unique capabilities which is what I think makes it the best attack helicopter in the world.

    Thank you, Werewolf. I've learned a great deal.

    Sponsored content


    Sikorsky S-97 Raider - Page 2 Empty Re: Sikorsky S-97 Raider

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:42 am