2ndGen Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Valor is so far off from flying its not even funny, the Bell rep said 2017, to anyone with a brain that means 2020. The mock up was build for display purposes only, its not even close to flyable, everything is plastic and what not, no flight controls. I don't think the Army will every be able to purchase something like this. We are on the dark and dangerous road of an ill funded military. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyreaper Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 We are on the dark and dangerous road of an ill funded military. Ugh. Seems history is repeating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akscott60 Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 The idea that we need to replace the fleet is funny. When you replace engines, transmissions, and rotors on an existing airframe, you have made a new helicopter. Pair that with the sexy glass cockpits, and bam. I understand we all want to be sleek, shiny, and fast, but it seems MX, cost per flight hour, and reality are forgotten.Take the F35 debacle. Its a f*cking nightmare, and in the end, we get a compromise aircraft. This Valor is supposed to replace the Hawk and Apache. I dont see it doing either. Dark times indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_P148 Posted February 5, 2014 Report Share Posted February 5, 2014 I don't really understand how or who gave Bell permission to build a mock up of an aircraft that isn't even flyable for another 3-4 years. This really isn't passing the common sense test. More than likely it is going to end up in the same hangar as the RAH, collecting dust and just another airframe we will never use. I am open to VTOL aircraft but I just don't think the technology has been refined enough for the Army's use, other then what Velocity had mentioned about a VIP platform. The Army doesn't have a Long range CSAR or Expeditionary mission so why are we putting so much interest in this? If the Army wants long range, simply install refueling probes on their aircraft. or use more ESSS or internal tanks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stearmann4 Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 You guys have to remember, all these crazy designs that surfacing are really just technology demonstrators. Sure, the Chinook, hawk, and Sherpa will out carry them, but it's a neccessary, but painfully long step in Army Aviation getting the next generation of aircraft. Unfortunately, for you guys just starting out, you'll probably still be flying legacy aircraft up to your 20-year retirement as the acquisition process is more cumbersome than you can imagine. I remember first seeing the V-22 concept in 1990, and it just went operational about 4 years ago... You guys will see some cool stuff no doubt, technology is moving to fast for even the archaic Army to stick with legacy aircraft for too much longer. We'll e forced into modernization. Mike- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.