New Books Claims Only *2* Stealth Blackhawks Made (hrm)

originally posted by: stormcell
Wasn't stealthiness simply the use of special radar-absorbing paints, angled surfaces, concealed engines and carbon-fiber surfaces?

Go get you a copy of "method of edge waves" by Ufimtsev from DTIC, pretty sure they have that in the open lit site. Read it, get back to us on the easy peasyness of angled surfaces. Once you got that one down, there's Ufimtsev's next opus on curved surfaces to dismiss handily.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It's not just the rotor blades that need stealthed. I heard a long while back that using a foreign radar in a western US test area was able to detect helicopters that were not in direct line of sight. It appears that the air above the rotor is moving fast enough that it can be used to detect the helicopter. That's a long time ago so unknown if the problem or capability still exists.

a reply to: datasdream

No, there's a lot more to it than just the rotor, you're right. That's the hard part.

So we are to believe that part of Lockheed's Plan to purchase Sikorsky from UTC was to build a lot more of these.

One might wonder if there are plans in the making to give the same treatment to the -53 or Chinook.

Keep an eye out.

With the Sikorsky S-97 RAIDER I think they are looking at going for speed as well as Stealth..

a reply to: Blackfinger

But there is still a need for lift....

a reply to: Blackfinger

The raider is an exciting aircraft. Is it large enough to be tactically relevant in today's environment though? Consider that a geared up infantryman can weigh over 250lbs today..

a reply to: Caughtlurking

The Raider is for the Armed Arial Scout program. They were going to team with Boeing to develop the Defiant for the Future Vertical Lift program and offer an S-97 based platform that was larger than a Blackhawk, and smaller than a -53.

a reply to: Zaphod58

True but the s-97 is supposed to be used for speedy insertion and is also supposed to be capable of moving 6 troops.

On the stealth hawk though; doesn't it seem that these choppers are less sought after because of the sensitivity of the technology and the usual ease of downing a helicopter than say am f-35. With their usual austere operating conditions and vulnerability I don't see the stealth hawk or any variation of a stealth helicopter being anything but a novelty at SOCOM's disposal for high risk/reward operations.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

Even a Little Bird can carry six Pax, so I don't see any reason the Raider would have trouble carrying more, if they replace the engine with the one under development.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

That and they are a real pain to pilot.

On the stealth hawk though; doesn't it seem that these choppers are less sought after because of the sensitivity of the technology and the usual ease of downing a helicopter than say am f-35. With their usual austere operating conditions and vulnerability I don't see the stealth hawk or any variation of a stealth helicopter being anything but a novelty at SOCOM's disposal for high risk/reward operations.

Think they are a fix for a hole in the force of getting troops somewhere quietly and reasonably quickly.Thinking the Stealthing of a Blackhawk is a move in a direction that will morph into something better with lessons learned.

a reply to: Blackfinger

I think it is a uniquely JSOC capability however. It'll be interesting to see if this technology does trickle down into conventional helo units but for the moment I think it's staying with the 160th. But from what I've gathered the program is expanding and more stealth frames are being built. I could see a need for heavy lift down the road. An LO Chinook would be something to see.