Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/26/2013 11:33:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:51:06 AM EST
Sweet! Learn something new every day.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:52:06 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:54:33 AM EST
I think naming helicopters after Indian tribes is racist.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:55:54 AM EST
OV-10 with rotors?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:56:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:59:59 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFII:
My favorite of the ones that never were.
View Quote


+1 - Bad ass!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:00:24 PM EST
Impressive amount of firepower. I wonder how it's range/payload compare with the Apache?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:01:06 PM EST
If I recall correctly, they canceled it in part because some of the new Soviet AA and SAM systems coming online would of made sausage out of it.


Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:03:37 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:04:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2013 12:08:36 PM EST by d5griffin]
Simultaneous target engagement makes me moist.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:06:33 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:06:51 PM EST
I got to tour the Army hangers out at Edwards when it was there. The turret was sci-fi like back then.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:07:17 PM EST
The 56 was badass. The S-67 is still my favorite gunship that never was.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:07:53 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By raven:
I think naming helicopters after Indian tribes is racist.
View Quote


I'd be embarrassed to even be shot by it.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:28:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2013 12:29:04 PM EST by Miles_Urbanus]
The AH-56 Cheyenne was 54 ft 8 in in length. In comparison the AH-64 Apache is 58.17 ft (17.73 m) (with both rotors turning). So I don't see the Chyenne as being over sized.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:35:32 PM EST
Wish I could scan and imbed, I have a full sleeve of slides of this this taken during testing in Yuma and the rotor testing in Rye canyon at the rotor test facility in southern CA.

My father was the test director of this bird. 9 built 8 remained after testing. The one lost was bad....did not end well for anyone with a rotor mast failure.

Could hover in a 30 degree nose down attitude and reverse the pusher to allow backing with nose down on target orientation. One test was popping up over a hill, putting weapons and aiming computer on target and then backing back over hill for cover. Popping up and engaging targets plotted. Very effective for it's time. Computer simulation against a fully armed destroyer had the destroyer sunk.

The army evaluation pilots used in Yuma were affectionately refereed to as APES (Army evaluation pilots) and I had the honor to meet one of their sons when I took my son to the Williams AFB closing. He was a Apache driver.....small world.

One of my fathers team, later went to McDonald Douglas and work on the Apache program.

I have some fond memories of Yuma and great pictures of the testing and in flight pics from the King Air chase plane used during in flight tests. The only bad memory was the look on Dad's face when he came home late (2AM) the day the one bird went down. White sheet recovery and crash investigation....Damn!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:38:57 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:39:22 PM EST


Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:41:23 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:41:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CFII:
My favorite of the ones that never were. Gunner cockpit was a tad too over the top tho.
View Quote

I agree. If it's going to have a turret, the turret should have a 105mm gun, if not more. IMO, this failure is why they didn't adopt it.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:45:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2013 12:45:32 PM EST by HeavyMetal]
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 12:50:24 PM EST
Ya, I think so too. The official line on the "crash", as always, is not quite "accurate"......."which part?" LOL

Several items that were in their infancy on this bird. Rigid rotor system (rotor wing guys will get this) and the requirement from the Army for possible ejection ability. They looked into blowing the mast/plate or rotors to clear, but eventually came up with a downward ejection. The bottom of the seats had a large hardened ram point that would pierce a special panel. This had an altitude safety as you could imagine. No live testing was ever done.....LOL.

It was during this time I also had the pleasure to meet Ben Rich and some of the other gurus of the time.

Hey dad, I miss ya a lot!!!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 1:49:00 PM EST
Imagine the cost difference between it and a Cobra...

Had a model of it when I was a kid.
Got pictures of the one at Ft. Rucker museum.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 1:50:32 PM EST
They landed a Cheyenne next to the PX at Ft. Rucker just shortly before I graduated from Flight School. I was excited to see it, especially since I already knew I was headed off to Cobra School at Hunter AAF. At that time, the Army was well on the way to bringing the Cheyenne into the inventory and I couldn't wait to get my hands on one. It was a sad day when they announced the program had been cancelled.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 1:53:50 PM EST
My professor told me the air force scrapped it because it "Was able to shoot down and defeat most of their fighters" and that they saw it as a threat. Which is why they scrapped it.

Sounded like a bunch of BS to me.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 1:55:53 PM EST
A-10 was procured specifically to kill the AH-56.
If not for the AH-56 there never would have been an A-10.

How is that for a badass airplane. It destroyed aircraft before it ever took flight.
impressive.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 1:56:46 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
My professor told me the air force scrapped it because it "Was able to shoot down and defeat most of their fighters" and that they saw it as a threat. Which is why they scrapped it.

Sounded like a bunch of BS to me.
View Quote


Wasn't the AF's decision.
It was the SECDEFs.

The only thing the AF hates more than providing CAS to the Army is the Army providing CAS to the Army.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:01:52 PM EST
I wonder what the AF will have to say when the V-280 and SB-1 have their fly-off.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:02:54 PM EST
What is the purpose of the smaller rotor on top of the main one? Does that help with the tail rotor's job of counter rotation or is it something totally different?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:04:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


Wasn't the AF's decision.
It was the SECDEFs.

The only thing the AF hates more than providing CAS to the Army is the Army providing CAS to the Army.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
My professor told me the air force scrapped it because it "Was able to shoot down and defeat most of their fighters" and that they saw it as a threat. Which is why they scrapped it.

Sounded like a bunch of BS to me.


Wasn't the AF's decision.
It was the SECDEFs.

The only thing the AF hates more than providing CAS to the Army is the Army providing CAS to the Army.


They don't care who provides it for them, as long as they keep getting the money
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:05:24 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By massmann:
What is the purpose of the smaller rotor on top of the main one? Does that help with the tail rotor's job of counter rotation or is it something totally different?
View Quote


Just for fun, man... just for fun.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:05:56 PM EST


Silly question -

Do the weapon stubs (or whatever they're called) provide for any lift or are they designed to be aerodynamically neutral?

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:06:08 PM EST
The comanche would have been a bit better.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:13:01 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jozsi:
The comanche would have been a bit better.

View Quote

There were only a few decades between the two, and I don't think they really had the same mission anyway.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:15:04 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R0N:


They don't care who provides it for them, as long as they keep getting the money
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By R0N:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
My professor told me the air force scrapped it because it "Was able to shoot down and defeat most of their fighters" and that they saw it as a threat. Which is why they scrapped it.

Sounded like a bunch of BS to me.


Wasn't the AF's decision.
It was the SECDEFs.

The only thing the AF hates more than providing CAS to the Army is the Army providing CAS to the Army.


They don't care who provides it for them, as long as they keep getting the money


I'll get around to bitching about the army later.
Gray Eagle opens up some possibilities.
we'll see.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:15:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Johnny_Reno:


Silly question -

Do the weapon stubs (or whatever they're called) provide for any lift or are they designed to be aerodynamically neutral?

View Quote

one of the arguments against it was that they did provide lift and therefore violated the laws of physics.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:17:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.
View Quote

That looks a lot like a gyro-copter
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:18:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:18:43 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


I'll get around to bitching about the army later.
Gray Eagle opens up some possibilities.
we'll see.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By R0N:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
My professor told me the air force scrapped it because it "Was able to shoot down and defeat most of their fighters" and that they saw it as a threat. Which is why they scrapped it.

Sounded like a bunch of BS to me.


Wasn't the AF's decision.
It was the SECDEFs.

The only thing the AF hates more than providing CAS to the Army is the Army providing CAS to the Army.


They don't care who provides it for them, as long as they keep getting the money


I'll get around to bitching about the army later.
Gray Eagle opens up some possibilities.
we'll see.


The Gray Eagle is a good platform, you watch your mouth.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:21:14 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:21:51 PM EST
"First shot from the 30mm cannon, consistently hit inside a 10" circle at 2 miles"....NICE.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:24:14 PM EST
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.
View Quote


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:28:05 PM EST
Tag.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:31:24 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Naffenea:


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Naffenea:
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.

Aren't Apaches using a similar attack profile in places like Afghanistan today? It is my understanding that the hovering-behind-shit attack profile the Apache was designed for has been abandoned. Can anyone enlighten me?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:31:36 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Naffenea:


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Naffenea:
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.


AF argued, correctly, the A-X (which became the A-10) would be more survivable.
Which was correct.
Ironically we still bought the AH-64.

we kill things, then reagan resurrected zombie weapon systems.

B-1 program dated from 1963.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 2:32:20 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ElectricSheep556:

Aren't Apaches using a similar attack profile in places like Afghanistan today? It is my understanding that the hovering-behind-shit attack profile the Apache was designed for has been abandoned. Can anyone enlighten me?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ElectricSheep556:
Originally Posted By Naffenea:
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.

Aren't Apaches using a similar attack profile in places like Afghanistan today? It is my understanding that the hovering-behind-shit attack profile the Apache was designed for has been abandoned. Can anyone enlighten me?

these were designed to fight central europe, not 3rd world insurgents.
check out syria videos. Helos are getting their ass handed to them.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 3:00:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:

these were designed to fight central europe, not 3rd world insurgents.
check out syria videos. Helos are getting their ass handed to them.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By ElectricSheep556:
Originally Posted By Naffenea:
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.

Aren't Apaches using a similar attack profile in places like Afghanistan today? It is my understanding that the hovering-behind-shit attack profile the Apache was designed for has been abandoned. Can anyone enlighten me?

these were designed to fight central europe, not 3rd world insurgents.
check out syria videos. Helos are getting their ass handed to them.


But are they getting their ass handed to them due to non-existent training, a lack of combined-arms practice, and shitty quality of the equipment being used...or because it's just that dangerous of a speed/altitude space to occupy on the modern battlefield?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 3:01:27 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 3:01:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:

these were designed to fight central europe, not 3rd world insurgents.
check out syria videos. Helos are getting their ass handed to them.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By ElectricSheep556:
Originally Posted By Naffenea:
Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csGWV541yjw

It seems the Key West Agreement did it in more than anything else.

It looks like an Attack Helo if Silvan designed it.


I remember reading about it. One of the prime reasons it was killed off wasn't Key West, it was it's performance envelope and attack profile put it square in the MANPAD sweet spot.

Aren't Apaches using a similar attack profile in places like Afghanistan today? It is my understanding that the hovering-behind-shit attack profile the Apache was designed for has been abandoned. Can anyone enlighten me?

these were designed to fight central europe, not 3rd world insurgents.
check out syria videos. Helos are getting their ass handed to them.


The hovering behind shit only works during peace time while you practicing with unarmed helicopters. Try hovering a loaded gunship full of fuel and armaments at 10,000 ft. like in Afghanistan. When we came back from Vietnam and they introduced the hovering behind trees & hills to make long range guided rocket kills against armor concept, we said say what? I laughed when I heard that the Apaches quickly abandoned their hovering fire in favor of diving running fire much like we employed in Vietnam.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 3:07:07 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
I wonder what the AF will have to say when the V-280 and SB-1 have their fly-off.
View Quote

What's the J in JMR stand for?



Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top