The first stealthy blackhawk helicopter shown?

a reply to: Arnie123

The Comanche was outmatched right away by the KA52. Not only that drones and satellites made the Comanche obsolete for what it was designed to do which is battlefield recon.

Stealth Hawks are useful because they move people. But other than that, manned stealth helicopters aren't really needed.

Outmatched by the KA-52? How so?

a reply to: Masisoar

By the time the Comanche was to enter service the amount of upgrades it would have needed were prohibitively expensive and it made more sense to upgrade existing airframes. This is where the M model Hawk and E model block 3 Apaches come in.

The KA52 was designed from the ground up to have all of those desired upgrades plus it boasted a larger payload and is a much more maneuverable and faster aircraft compared to the RAH66. We would have been playing an expensive game of catch up.

a reply to: projectvxn

The Comanche was sort of a proof of concept vehicle?

a reply to: Salander

It was supposed to go into full production but that rug got pulled out in favor of upgrading the Blackhawk from the L model to the M and V models, the Chinook from the E model to the F model, and the Apaches from the E model Block 1 and 2 to E model block 3.

It wound up costing significantly less.

a reply to: projectvxn

The only edge that the Comanche concept would have is in a true peer state conflict such as the age-old hypothetical Soviet incursion into West Germany through the Fulda gap, where air superiority was far from guaranteed, making drones vulnerable and stealth incredibly valuable, and in which the "peer" had a level of technological advancement such that them shooting down our KH-11s and SAR satellites was a very real possibility, and so having a stealth scout helicopter that could duck in and out of tree cover while tracking advancing tank formations was a pretty attractive proposition.

The possibility of such a conflict more or less died with the Soviet Union, though, and so the Army now had no need for a scout helicopter that cost damned near as much as a new F-16 while being useless overkill for the Desert Storm/Kosovo style conflicts it was now fighting.

a reply to: Zaphod58
One of the big things with reducing noise is the tracking of the rotor blades. You can't do too much with a two bladed rotor, but, when you get to three plus blades it is a big help. It also reduces the effect of turbulence on the blades which saves wear.

a reply to: JIMC5499

However they did it, I've never heard a helicopter that quiet. It was absolutely amazing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The "rigid rotor " helps by removing the flap and the lead and lag that caused some of the noise. If you have noticed that the blades are wider now, this allows the same lift at a lower rotor RPM. The sweep at the end of the blade keeps the same blade area, but, shortens the rotor arc, preventing the tip of the blade from nearing supersonic speed and the associated noise.

a reply to: JIMC5499

I knew about the curve at the tip, but not the rest. Very interesting.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Once they figured out that Lift was a function of the AREA of the rotor disc not the area of the rotor blades, they've been able to do some pretty neat things.