EADS and Sikorsky have practically driven Boeing and Bell out of contention.
Why do I say that?
Because both helicopters offer something that neither OH-58II or the AH-6 can offer.
Utility.
The Sikorsky offers technological innovation and drastic improvements in speed and performance.
The ball is in the Army's court but it would appear from this outsiders view that they can whittle this comp down to two helos before the contest even begins.
Hello Solomon,
ReplyDeletethere is one purpose designed reconnaissance/light utility helicopter in production but it costs about three times as much as a Lakota:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_f_TiAqdkqU4/TSThcGifMsI/AAAAAAAABds/e1dVoYrN62k/s1600/Lynx+Wildcat.jpg
GrandLogistics.
yeah but it can't match the Lakota on price or the S-97 on performance. i'm afraid it wouldn't get a look either. but i will keep that image and add it to my collection...thanks!
ReplyDeleteHere's the thing to me. Commonality with the EADS offer. The Lakota is already in the pipeline both training wise and it is in service as a utility helicopter already. Not to mention the fact that it offers something that the kiowa did not have and the oh-6 did not have as well (at least in my recollection) two engines... S-97 looks great on paper but is still several years away from being ready to go. The Lakota is already ready to go within a year or two at most not counting the possibility to just modify some of the existing lakotas...
ReplyDeletethey're already building the S-97 and it can be ready in the same time frame. two engines is a big whoop to me. its not 1960. two engines no longer give you a margin of safety over one. that another reason why four engine airliners gave way to two engines;...equal performance lets points of failure.
ReplyDeleteTwo engines are more efficient than four. One engine is a single point of failure, which is why you won't see single engine airliners in the near future. Two engines no longer give a margin of safety over one? Because engines don't fail anymore? A single should be cheaper to buy and operate. You might achieve increased range. You won't achieve good engine out performance.
Deletehow many helicopters have recovered back to base on one engine? how manyhelicopters have been scrambled because their single engine failed?
ReplyDeletesorry cowboy. i still disagree.
engine technology is improving. multiple engines are multiple points of failure. single engined jet fighters have as good a safety record as twin engined airplanes...at least in the modern age so your theory is....not well formed.