Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
This Came Out Of Nowhere: Bell A R H Recon Helo  
User currently offlineGreaser From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1101 posts, RR: 4
Posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 15252 times:

Well, i don't know about you guys, but whoah i've never seen this before, looks like it's just a 407 with shiny rocket pods but Bell claims it's something more...am i hearing a OH-58 Kiowa replacement here???
I mean this thing can carry arms,recon equip, can function as C2 in combat, as well as a light attack chopper,carry pax at the same time and has the reliability guarranteed from the 407 line.2 of them can also be deployed from a C-130 and be flown in 15mins after arrival.
.Pdf brochure

Armed Recon Helo video

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v399/Greaser72/BellARH.jpg

more info on the ARH:
Bell Helicopter is offering a militarized version of its enormously successful Bell 407 single engine light helicopter in response to a Request For Proposal (RFP) issued by the U.S. Army on Dec. 9, 2004, for an Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH). According to the RFP, the Army is expected to make a decision on the ARH Program in June 2005, for a total of 368 aircraft to be delivered between fiscal years 2006 through 2011.

The Bell ARH will be powered by the Honeywell HTS900 turbine engine that is based on proven, mature commercial and U.S. Army T800 technology and design. In addition to being designed for extremely low Direct Operating Costs (DOC), the HTS900 turbine engine will be equipped with a sophisticated dual-channel full authority digital engine control (FADEC) system, based on T800 technology.

One of the key requirements of the Army’s RFP is deployability. Two Bell ARH helicopters can be deployed aboard a C-130 and be unloaded, flyable and ready to fight within 15 minutes.

info courtesy of Asia Pacific Aviation News & Bell Helicopter


Now you're really flying
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week ago) and read 15203 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There is a requirement for an LUH and LOH helicopter out there now that the RAH-66 has been cancelled. The rumor is that the Bell 210 will get the LUH contract and the MD OH-6 variant will win the LOH contract.

All the aircraft must be C-130 deployable and be off the shelf in order to avoid expense. It is portrayed as an interim solution to Army needs which will probably end up being the long term answer.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 15131 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 1):
It is portrayed as an interim solution to Army needs which will probably end up being the long term answer.

So was the KC-135



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 15060 times:

That looks very similar to what the Marines are doing with their Bell UH-1N in upgrading to the UH-1Y - you would think either the Army could use what the Marines are or that the Marines could use these new 407's?

I guess the UH-1Y uses two GE T700's from the Cobra and Blackhawks, but it's not a whole lot bigger and come on now, even the OH-58D can use more power, what's with this single engine stipulation? When you in combat, and in particular the desert with high temps or high altitudes, you need all the power you can muster!

http://www.bluejacket.com/usmc/images/uh1y_roll_out.jpg


User currently offlineAGM114L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 14841 times:

The rumor going around is that the Army will decide this month on who the contract will go to. Does anyone have information on the product MD Helicopters is contending with?

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
I guess the UH-1Y uses two GE T700's from the Cobra and Blackhawks, but it's not a whole lot bigger and come on now, even the OH-58D can use more power, what's with this single engine stipulation? When you in combat, and in particular the desert with high temps or high altitudes, you need all the power you can muster!

I agree, two engines are definitely better than one. But the turbine engines are reliable and if the Kiowa or ARH takes a hit that would knock out the engine, chances are the transmission or tail rotor drive shaft would be damaged too due to their close proximity to the engine. What the army likes about the OH-58D is its ease of maintenance and low cost, that's what they are looking for in the ARH. Two engines would mean more down time and higher acquisition costs.


User currently offlineEchster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14824 times:

I'm sorry I missed this thread when it started. There was an article in Army Aviation (official publication of the Army Aviation Association of America - AAAA) 31 March that dealt specifically with this new aircraft. If you don't mind, I'll hit some highlights since I'd have to type the whole thing otherwise.  Smile

The article was written by LTC Thurgood, Product Manager for the Armed Recon Helicopter Program, PEO Aviation, Redstone Arsenal, AL.

- After Comanche was cancelled, the Army Chief of Staff identified a need for 368 armed recon helicopters (ARH).

- This helicopter was needed now to fill identified armed recon gaps and to replace the OH-58D, in service since May 1991.

- The ARH project office was established with 3 goals: 1) provide a low-cost platform, 2) field first unit equipped (FUE) organizations in FY08, and 3) ensure the new platform has growth potential for new capabilities.

- The USAAVNC (US Army Aviation Center at Fort Rucker, AL) prioritized the material solutions and recommended that fulfillment of the ARH should be through modification of an existing helicopter platform. The ARH platform is thusly defined as a modified commercial off the shelf (COTS) product integrated with non-developmental mission equipment packages (MEP). (In other words, an existing helicopter that the Army doesn't have to spend a lot of money on to test.)

- What is the ARH? It is a relatively inexpensive armed aerial platform that will replace the OH-58D and will provide interoperability with joint fires (Field artillery, mortars, etc.) and manned or unmanned aviation platforms.

- It will be capable of operating worldwide in VFR and IFR flight. (IIRC, the OH-58D is not capable of precision approach capabilities outside of PARs. With this in mind, the ARH will have the capabilities of using civilian and military precision approach landing structures - ILS/VOR/TACAN.)

- It will be dual-crew station, single pilot aircraft with all systems operable from either side. It will be capable of cruise airspeeds of at least 100 knots true (at 4000 feet and 95-degrees F) in standard configuration.

- The standard configuration is sensor assembly, active and passive countermeasures, 2 x fully loaded 7-shot rocket pods, and crew station armor.

- It will have a slewable target acquisition sensor suite (TASS) that can be controlled from both pilot stations. The TASS will have the following: infrared imaging sensor, color TV, laser rangefinder and designator, laser spot tracker, and laser pointer.

- It will have an advanced communications package - secure and unsecure.

- The final request for proposals went out December 8, 2004. Proposals were due in by February 7, 2005. The Defense Acquisition Board was scheduled to meet late June 2005 and final approval was expected by end of July.


User currently offlineLongbowPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 577 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 14284 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

replace an underpowered aging scout helicopter, with a new underpowered version. It is a sad tale that never ends.

User currently offlinePaveLowDriver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 14251 times:

Army Dudes,

If any of you guys are in the know - Is this thing eventually going to get a mast-mounted sight or are they going to stick with the chin turret? Also, are they going to integrate any kind of "baby IHADSS" or just have one guy heads-up flying the aircraft and an observer working the gear? Has there been any talk on how it's going to integrate with the D-model Apaches (as far as data-linking, etc...)?

Just wondering...


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 14245 times:

As seen often huge budget cuts improve creativity & decisiveness..

User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 14239 times:

No on the mast mounted sight. The one drawback that the OH-58Ds in Iraq have been encountering is that the threats are all ground based at short distances. The MMS on the Kiowa has been having issues with getting enough "look down" angle. The chin sight iss common witht he UH-1Y and AH-1Z, and it vastly increases the field of view in the operations that we are currently fighting.

In truth, the MMS is a cold war relic, for when the Kiowa was to be hiding behind trees and laser-designating soviet tanks for Apaches to plink off with Hellfires. I think going with a lighter, simpler, less maintainence intensive system is a better idea.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 14214 times:

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 9):
I think going with a lighter, simpler, less maintainence intensive system is a better idea.

In that regard new buld, modernized OH-6's would have been the wiser choice given it's smaller profile and greater agility.


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 14188 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10):
In that regard new buld, modernized OH-6's would have been the wiser choice given it's smaller profile and greater agility.

Well, I was referring only to the mast mounted sight, not the aircraft overall.

Don't count out the MH-6 entirely, Special Forces seems to really like them, they may get their own little fleet.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineLongbowPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 577 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 14186 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't see an IHADSS ever being used on any other airframe at this time. It is more or less an Apache Specific design. Not going into specifics the system is a Head tracking system following the pilots head movements to allow the pilot to see (at night using the FLIR sensors) and to allow them to quickly aquire a target for observation or dispatching. The system will not give the scout pilot an extra advantage especially with "fixed" pylons.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic This Came Out Of Nowhere: Bell A R H Recon Helo
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Report - Rafale Out Of The Running In Norway posted Thu Aug 31 2006 22:46:33 by Lumberton
Russia Pulling Out Of An-70 Project posted Sat Apr 8 2006 10:36:04 by EHHO
Did The SR-71 Ever Operated Out Of Langley posted Tue Apr 4 2006 18:06:43 by 747400sp
C-17A Based Out Of March ARB posted Tue Mar 29 2005 00:53:18 by Socal
When Would The Folland Gnat Run Out Of Life posted Mon Aug 23 2004 12:37:11 by L-188
Vmfa (AW) 224 FA18C's Training Out Of TVC posted Mon Jul 5 2004 01:54:33 by Maiznblu_757
C-5: People Looking Out Of The Roof Hatch, Why? posted Sun Jul 4 2004 01:21:00 by Sabena332
Harrier Drops Out Of Sky At Airshow posted Fri Aug 2 2002 20:28:16 by Backfire
Italy Officially Out Of The A400M Programme posted Thu Dec 20 2001 10:44:24 by Steman
Need Help With The Reg Of This Aircraft posted Thu Jun 30 2005 18:44:27 by DLX737200
First Boeing P-8 Poseidon Out Of Factory posted Mon Apr 20 2009 19:57:38 by AeroplaneFreak
Out Of The 'Blue: New B-2As Needed? posted Tue Sep 9 2008 15:52:47 by Flighty
Roll-Out Of The Next Generation Gripen Demonstrat posted Wed Apr 23 2008 02:39:26 by Moriarty
US Satellite Out Of Control And Earthbound posted Sat Jan 26 2008 13:42:36 by Kaitak
Air Force One 747 Out Of Service In Vietnam posted Mon Nov 20 2006 02:11:49 by Md94
Report - Rafale Out Of The Running In Norway posted Thu Aug 31 2006 22:46:33 by Lumberton

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format