Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Project - Vertical Lift 2035

73ea698135df3a2e6a7748740b8c1aa3.png

 

This used to be the V-280 Valor thread. The Valor has progressed immensely with in-game testing happening on a regular basis. However I wanted to expand into the rest of the future vertical lift aircraft such as the SB>1 Defiant, S97 Raider and other derivatives of these aircraft. 

 

See here for pictures:

 

V-280 Valor

Spoiler

85efc846019a266f8264d86020d61be3.png

12f2f31f1ff485173e6e89576af8d3d7.jpg

3bd5d5e0b59bd39d0c8489358da11167.jpg

 

 

S97 Raider (WIP)

Spoiler

0c68ada1b549f00cdfbda09d54aa323c.jpg

 

 

 

Mod Team:

Martinez.FG11 - Modeller

Yasotay - Tester/Reference

FrankV - Tester

Misha - Tester

Watt - Scripter

 

Credits:

Thanks to those so far who have assisted in this project.

 

-Sykocrazy - MELB Countermeasures

-hnchmc - Troubleshooting

-Dagger[111] - S97 Model Donation

-Pretty much everyone on the Discord who answers my questions 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 21
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks great. It'll fit right into ArmA3 vehicle lineup. When I first heard of VTOLs for Apex I thought about this, not a gargantuan C-130 replacement with dubious rotor design. Really looking forward to seeing more progress on it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks great. It'll fit right into ArmA3 vehicle lineup. When I first heard of VTOLs for Apex I thought about this, not a gargantuan C-130 replacement with dubious rotor design. Really looking forward to seeing more progress on it.

 

Agreed. The design of the V-44 Blackfish was from a aviation perspective not very realistic in my opinion. I highly doubt that two variable tilt rotors would provide enough thrust to be effective on all different variations, but especially the gunship variant.

 

Why would one not use a turbofan instead of propellers? Surely, by the mid 2030s they must be more suitable for military applications then rotors? Quicker response to thrust input, thrust vectoring, efficiency, more thrust...The list goes on. I also doubt that putting a 105 mm cannon on a plane is necessary at that time. I'm guessing that stealth and aerodynamics will compensate for the raw firepower that it provides, when "intelligent" ammunitions are a few years away today. But I digress...

 

Needless to say, I look forward this project nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sling loading is a nessecity for this,I would think..this looks fantastic..would be one of the most used aircraft in Arma 3!   Keep it up!

 

 

Could we get some hardpoint (under-wing  placement) of missiles and gunpods for this,please?    They are quite small and some will be tempted using them in close to the enemy situations,so they

 

may benefit from a lot less hit-points (what makes them bullet-proof(-resistant)--- that makes a difference,so users may use them in much more dangerous envirionments.

 

 

A Hoist that will acctualy work- with a Sling Load Rope with an attach_to point ,to give us the chance to hook-up and be pulled up to /inserted into cabin will be awsome,if put into this ;) .

 

If we possibly could open the doors,retract the missile pods into the cabin ,it will be a cool feature. :lol:    Thanks for making this in Arma 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK the engine doesn't currently support slingloading with the AirplaneX class simulation that V/STOLs use at the moment, which is why neither the vanilla V-44X Blackfish or the Y-32 Xian can slingload stuff.

 

Only choppers are able to slingload stuff but if you config the V-280 as a helicopter then you won't be able to use vectoring to switch between VTOL and STOL flight modes.

 

You'll need to wait for BI to come up with an engine solution or config it to use duda123's Advanced Sling Loading in the mean time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck yes! I've been waiting for this! :D

Also I feel the Blackfish seems way too small for what it can carry. A quadrotor version would make much more sense to me, especially for a gunship variant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big problem with the Blackfish are the ginormous 3-blade props. Those props are straight and very big, so it seems to me that the tips would break the sound barrier, making an unholy racket and causing problems for disembarking troops (not to mention ruining any chance of a "stealth insertion" with it). They could, of course, spin slowly enough not to do that, but then I wonder if a 3-blade propeller, even that big, would've been enough. Blackfish has roughly the same proportions as an Osprey, but the square-cube law means that it would need much more power to operate as a VTOL (it's already a problem on the Osprey).

 

A quadrotor design would solve this, I also think that more blades per rotor would've been more fitting. 5-6 at least would make it look more plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big problem with the Blackfish are the ginormous 3-blade props. Those props are straight and very big, so it seems to me that the tips would break the sound barrier, making an unholy racket and causing problems for disembarking troops (not to mention ruining any chance of a "stealth insertion" with it). They could, of course, spin slowly enough not to do that, but then I wonder if a 3-blade propeller, even that big, would've been enough. Blackfish has roughly the same proportions as an Osprey, but the square-cube law means that it would need much more power to operate as a VTOL (it's already a problem on the Osprey).

 

A quadrotor design would solve this, I also think that more blades per rotor would've been more fitting. 5-6 at least would make it look more plausible.

 

No, propper blades solve this problem already.

 

http://gizmodo.com/5481081/the-blade-that-would-make-helicopters-almost-silent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they don't. This is about noise reduction from subsonic rotors. Supersonic blade tips will make a racket, no matter what. The only way of preventing them from doing so is not to have blade tips (that is, using ducted fans). One can also delay the problem by using scimitar props... which the Blackfish doesn't have.

 

As an aside, the Blackfish doesn't have Blue Edge blades, either (though it probably should). The Huron seemingly does, though the blades are flat on the model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't you just change the blades and tips to be like those on the NH-90? Also, isn't much of the noise in helicopters more from main rotor turbulence slapping tail rotor turbulance than anything else, hence a fenestron tail vs open tail rotor in some designs? Lastly, if you have two rotor systems mounted on identical sized shafts and run at the same shaft rpm then the blade tips on the bigger system would make less revolutions than those on the smaller one, which by your theory would also reduce noise.

You are never going to eliminate rotor noise in anything with a rotor. You can still hear "stealth" helicopters, much like you can still hear electric weed eaters.......

~S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally do not like the V-280 design, I prefer the SB>1 defiant design that Sikorsky/Boeing is working on. I was actually interested in making the Defiant after completion of the Valor, but I don't even know if ARMA supports it's "variable pusher prop" design.

 

646_425652_570978.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no modder, but Unsung does have the pusher/puller Cessna, and one of the C-130's has a close enough prop to this. I bet you could get it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ArmA probably can't do that. I don't know if rotorlib even can. Unsung stuff is something completely different, here you have a helicopter that can also produce forward thrust from the pusher engine. Unless they actually modeled the Cheyenne in the latest version (the last one I tried was Bravo), there's nothing similar in there.

Couldn't you just change the blades and tips to be like those on the NH-90? Also, isn't much of the noise in helicopters more from main rotor turbulence slapping tail rotor turbulance than anything else, hence a fenestron tail vs open tail rotor in some designs? Lastly, if you have two rotor systems mounted on identical sized shafts and run at the same shaft rpm then the blade tips on the bigger system would make less revolutions than those on the smaller one, which by your theory would also reduce noise.

You are never going to eliminate rotor noise in anything with a rotor. You can still hear "stealth" helicopters, much like you can still hear electric weed eaters.......

~S

My original point was that the rotors on Blackfish would make incredible amount of noise (as in, enough to knock out people on the ground) due to blade tips going supersonic. The Valor is much smaller, which means propeller tips can go slower and this problem doesn't arise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ArmA probably can't do that. I don't know if rotorlib even can. Unsung stuff is something completely different, here you have a helicopter that can also produce forward thrust from the pusher engine. Unless they actually modeled the Cheyenne in the latest version (the last one I tried was Bravo), there's nothing similar in there.

 The unsung mod has a Cheyenne!?!?! *downloads mod*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the supersonic issue, the prop-rotor once in the "prop mode" are slowed down to about 85% to overcome the tip compresibility issue.  Having been around CV-22 flying they are extremely quiet when in airplane mode.  They are very loud in helicopter mode.  Will be interesting to see what Sikorsky does with those eight rotors moving a real high speed (for a helicopter).

 

One of the issues for an Arma SB>1 will be how the pilot uses the prop to accelerate and decelerate. 

 

There is also an interesting technique with both of these aircraft that they can "hang" on the props.  For the Valor it can put the nacelles at 95 degrees and have a five to ten degree nose low hover.  SB>1 can also do this by reverse pitch on the prop. So both can back "up".

 

You might find it interesting to know that the last design developed for the Army/Air Force Joint Future Theater Lift program was a large twin tilt rotor.  Think a smaller C-17 with a larger V-22 wing.  Did not happen due to $$.  USAF needed money for F-35 and new bomber.

 

Of to download unsung mod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a former Blackhawk pilot I do to.

 

Then I did Cobras too.  So I am a bit more conflicted. ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, propper blades solve this problem already.

 

http://gizmodo.com/5481081/the-blade-that-would-make-helicopters-almost-silent

 

A helicopter design wouldn't necessarily work on a plane design. The speed operating parameters is entirely different. I doubt these motor driven flaps could withstand the force of >300 km/h before shaking apart.

 

Props are a nightmare for this very reason, many moving parts, things that can break. Sure, props have their application, but we're talking about a plane from the 2030s, not 2016. By this time, I'm fairly certain a lot of applications of propellers have been made redundant by new inventions in the propulsion field. Especially on a VTOL aircraft that is so breathtakingly large, and let's be honest here, I could probably use an radar from the 1960 to bounce signals off the Blackfish, it's that horrible of a design, because it's basically a flying rectangle from the side.

 

Anyways, that being said, OP... A thought on the (very beautiful) design, do you plan on making the structural support for the rotors any larger? Because the structural support of the fuselage seems very small leading up to the wings. I doubt that it would provide sufficient support for the seemingly heavy engine. Just some thoughts, but it's a beautiful model nonetheless.

 

Also, pilot visibility when the engine is in the horizontal position. How do you plan on making sure the pilot can see to the sides with the engines in the way? I know this is just in the design stages, but I personally think that feedback is a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FlyingVolvo - you are correct about the radar signature.  Then it is probable that by 2030, stealth will be irrelevant given technologies already out there.  As to the pilot visibility, the engines of the V-280 do not rotate like the V-22.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ArmA probably can't do that. I don't know if rotorlib even can. Unsung stuff is something completely different, here you have a helicopter that can also produce forward thrust from the pusher engine. Unless they actually modeled the Cheyenne in the latest version (the last one I tried was Bravo), there's nothing similar in there.

My original point was that the rotors on Blackfish would make incredible amount of noise (as in, enough to knock out people on the ground) due to blade tips going supersonic. The Valor is much smaller, which means propeller tips can go slower and this problem doesn't arise.

 

And my original point is that bigger blades need less revolutions to produce the same results. Reference wind farm generators vs your lawn mower......Sorry!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, exactly. If Osprey got Blackfish's props, it could be much quieter. However, there's this thing called square-cube law. You don't need the same results here. You need more. A lot more. A loaded C-130 has over three times the weight of a loaded Osprey. You need bigger and faster rotors to lift that sort of weight vertically, but due to immense size of the rotors, speeding them up without altering their design (more blades, maybe using scimitar profile) would cause you to run headfirst into the sound barrier. And you can't scale them up further (not by much, anyway) because they'd collide with the hull in plane mode. Linearly scaling up a working design (like BI did) simply doesn't work too well.

 

Conversely, the Valor should offer better safety than Osprey, assuming the engine power isn't reduced too much. It has similar proportions, but a lot less volume and thus much less weight to worry about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although i like the design nothing can ever replace the glorious Black Hawk for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×