But the Sikorskys knew how to make helicopters...
Yes, indeed, today there are such passions blazing around helicopters in the USA that willy-nilly you start thinking about the fact that they evaluate what was done before very poorly. And a lot was done…
Not long ago there was an article about how the US Air Force preferred a Boeing product to the clearly more advanced Sikorsky Defiant. Well, yes, probably behind-the-scenes negotiations, lobbying and all that. Sikorsky knew how to make machines, both winged and rotary-wing.
It is not for nothing that it is in the plural: services to the world aviation Sergei Igorevich Sikorsky may be less than Igor Ivanovich, but only a complete layman would not appreciate them: 37 years of design experience at United Aircraft/United Technologies and Sikorsky Aircraft is, excuse me, a lot. In 1992, Sergei Igorevich retired from the position of vice president for special projects, but he was not allowed to leave so easily, he remains in work as a consultant.
So – Sikorskys!
Speaking about the past competition and the victory of a strange transport rotorcraft and an unclear prospect of armament, which we discussed in detail here: The non-assault aircraft that will destroy the Sikorsky company cannot help but cause surprise.
And the point here is absolutely not that the Sikorskys are our compatriots, yes, the elder was a citizen of the Russian Empire and left quite soberly after the revolution. And he did the right thing, as much as the gentlemen Bolsheviks "left" for nothing in the aviation environment, and especially in its design part, then Igor Ivanovich, who was awarded with the awards of the last emperor, really had nothing to catch except a bullet.
I am very sorry that one of the galaxy of the most brilliant people who created history aviation, went to the other end of the world and there put all his talent into the service of another state. And throughout its career, Sikorsky Aircraft offered very modern and effective machines, from the H-5/S-51 Dragonfly to the UH-60 Black Hawk/SH-60 Seahawk.
But since all the recent buzz has revolved around a new multi-purpose helicopter designed to replace the Black Hawk, it makes sense to remind readers (preferably on the other side of the world) that Sikorsky Aircraft built not only transport and commercial aircraft, but also combat and reconnaissance helicopters.
For example, based on the experience of Vietnam, a reconnaissance vehicle based on a well-armored hull was very quickly developed and built.
The Airborne Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle (AARV) was a two-seat reconnaissance helicopter. It was intended as a successor to the Hughes OH-6 Cayuse and Bell OH-58 Kiowa helicopters in service with the U.S. Army.
After helicopters were introduced to the battlefield on a large scale in the 1950s and 1960s, it became clear that these machines could have a major impact on the course of war. At the same time, experience taught everyone that helicopters were inherently vulnerable, and measures were developed to make them more survivable. Since then, new tactics, high speed, a wide range of countermeasures, and even stealth technology have been introduced to varying degrees in various fields. However, the US attempt to create a protected helicopter that would essentially be a flying armored fighting vehicle was less successful. Here is its story, which began and ended long before the AH-64 Apache emerged as the US Army’s main attack helicopter for a very long time.
In 1967, the US military was sent to the Vietnam War, and helicopters played a vital role. Of the approximately 12 helicopters used by the US military in Vietnam, more than 000 were lost.
The Vietnamese military had demonstrated a high level of skill in crashing helicopters to the ground, and while American helicopters were burning in the jungle, manufacturers in the United States were looking for ways to create helicopters that would have a better chance of surviving both in Southeast Asia and on even more brutal battlefields.
Soldiers of the 3rd Battalion, 9th Infantry Division, U.S. Army, wait to board UH-1 helicopters on Reed Plain during an operation in Tan An, South Vietnam, January 1970.
That same year, Sikorsky Sr. was developing a new type of aircraft armor that would protect helicopters from at least large-caliber small arms. In Vietnam, helicopters were repeatedly fired upon when they landed in and out of "hot" zones. On the ground, they became targets for mortars or missile shelling.
Sikorsky's new dual-hardness steel armor was strong and light enough to be used as the basis for a new helicopter design.
At the same time that the company was working on this innovative armor, Sikorsky was developing his Advanced Blade Concept (ABC), which promised to create helicopters much faster than those using traditional rotors.
An Armoured Reconnaissance Vehicle (AARV) model that combines the Advanced Blade Concept (ABC) with a heavily armoured fuselage.
The ABC was just one of many designs developed at the time to greatly improve the efficiency of rotary-wing aircraft, including hybrid helicopters that combined conventional rotors with a wing and some sort of auxiliary engine to achieve higher speeds.
Sikorsky's ABC was an alternative to such a helicopter and featured a main rotor with two contra-rotating propellers coupled with an auxiliary power unit for forward propulsion. The use of such a rotor design eliminated the stall problem that would otherwise limit the speed of conventional helicopters and eliminated the need for a tail rotor, a fickle beast that has been a source of headaches for helicopter designers.
For a heavily armored helicopter, the ABC offered a number of advantages. The design was more robust and simpler than a conventional helicopter configuration, allowing it to withstand damage better, especially since it lacked the highly vulnerable tail rotor and its transmission. High speed was less important, since an armored helicopter had to withstand small arms fire, at least to a certain level, rather than avoid it. Additionally, the ABC design was highly maneuverable, which was useful for actively engaging in combat.
Sikorsky began to consider two options for armored helicopters at once.
The first of these was the two-seat Aerial Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle (AARV). It was intended as a successor to the US Army's Hughes OH-6 Cayuse and Bell OH-58 Kiowa helicopters, which were purchased under the Light Observation Helicopter (LOH) program and used extensively in Vietnam.
U.S. Army soldiers work on an OH-6 helicopter that was shot down in Tay Ninh Province in December 1967 during the Vietnam War.
The AARV program was funded by Sikorsky and the Army over a two-and-a-half-year period. The Army Materials and Mechanics Research Center played a major role in helping develop the half-inch-thick, dual-hardness armor needed for the helicopter's frame.
Of the total weight of 6800 pounds (3084 kg), armor accounted for about 1800 pounds (816 kg).
Since this was a completely new technological approach, a lot of effort was put into understanding how best to cut, join, shape and finish the helicopter using this material. After that, a mock-up of the fuselage was made, which was then subjected to ballistic tests.
Scheme of the armored fuselage of the AARV reconnaissance helicopter
In its overall configuration, other than the ABC propeller arrangement, the AARV was fairly conventional and simple. The fuselage was angular, with a square nose and a faceted overall appearance. Although this design was later used in stealth helicopter concepts, it was used here for better protection from small arms fire. weapons.
This is the vision of the new Black Hawk.
While the main fuselage was made of dual-hardness armor, the tail unit was made of aluminum. The tail unit had an inverted-V configuration.
At 7,74 m long and 1,57 m high, the AARV was even more compact than the diminutive OH-6, which was 9,24 m long and 2,47 m high to the top with the propeller.
AARV cross-section drawing
Unlike other company offerings, the AARV had no auxiliary power unit and was powered by a single Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6 turboshaft engine. With 1 horsepower, it gave the helicopter a top speed of 175 km/h.
During the tests, the helicopter's hull withstood fire from a 7,62 mm caliber weapon at close range (300 m), and at longer distances (from 1000 m) it could not be penetrated even by .50 caliber (12,7 mm) bullets. In addition to the hull armor, the cabin glazing was made of improved ballistic glass "transparent armor". But as for large-caliber machine guns, it was generally a difficult task to hit such a relatively small device with a not very rapid-fire weapon.
AARV layout
The AARV was also to be armed with its own armament. This was accomplished by mounting a 7,62mm Minigun on a telescopic mount under the fuselage, while unguided rocket pods could be mounted on pylons on the sides of the fuselage.
Weapons options for AARV
Although a full-scale ABC model was successfully tested in NASA's Ames wind tunnel in 1970, the AARV project was not developed further because the Army concluded that the technology would be better used in a high-speed platform.
Sikorsky completed work on a high-speed demonstration aircraft ABC, which was named S-69, but it, too, was not put into serial production.
A Sikorsky S-69 demonstrator during Army testing as the XH-59 in 1981.
Meanwhile, the same "armored helicopter" idea that led to the AARV was used as the basis for another Sikorsky project, the Airborne Armored Personnel Carrier (AAPC). The Sikorskys had many ideas.
Various variants of the Sikorsky armored attack helicopters
The AAPC was essentially a scaled-up version of the AARV, built around an armoured, box-shaped cockpit that could accommodate 12 troops. The rotor diameter was increased to 12,2 metres, compared to the AARV's 10,8 metres. At least two different tail configurations were studied: an inverted-V design, in which the tail was attached to the rear of the landing skids, and a more conventional horizontal tail with vertical endplates.
Actually, the idea of an armored box to which everything else is bolted as needed is not new. Sikorsky obviously closely watched the developments that were being implemented in his former homeland, so a helicopter version of Sergei Ilyushin's attack aircraft scheme - why not?
AAPC airborne armored personnel carrier fuselage mockup
Three-view drawing of the fuselage of the airborne armored personnel carrier (AAPC)
The AAPC was developed to the full-scale mock-up stage, but the Army was not interested in developing it further. However, the AAPC does make a very interesting comparison with the Mi-24 Krokodil, which was the Soviet response to a similar requirement, although it emphasized speed and firepower over protection and manpower.
AARV and AAPC have faded into oblivion, but the Advancing Blade concept has made a comeback many years later.
Sikorsky returned to the concept with the X2 demonstrator, which first flew in 2008 and was intended to once again prove the technology's effectiveness. ABC was again seen as a way to improve speed, maneuverability, and combat survivability of helicopters.
The X2, which became the basis for the S-97 Raider, which took to the skies in 2015
The S-97, in turn, paved the way for the promising Raider X, which many considered a potential frontrunner for the Army's Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program, which sought to build a next-generation, high-speed reconnaissance and attack helicopter. The FARA program was canceled early last year.
The first flying prototype of the Raider X in a hangar at Sikorsky's West Palm Beach, Florida facility.
Meanwhile, the Raider X was subsumed into the larger SB-1 Defiant project, which lost the Advanced Long Range Attack Aircraft (FLRAA) bid to a project based on the next-generation Bell V-280 Valor tiltrotor. It was a high-stakes competition that, to the surprise of many experts, Boeing won.
It turns out that years of testing that demonstrated impressive speed, maneuverability, high performance, and the ability to fit all of this into a relatively small space were not needed by the US Army.
Ultimately, the AARV and its amphibious counterpart were doomed to become a relic of US helicopter history during the Cold War. But they played an important training role during a period of rapid advances in helicopter technology, highlighting ongoing concerns about how best to ensure combat survivability.
And here we can finish on such a strangely optimistic note: strangely enough, we are the ones who benefit from the fact that helicopter projects with Russian roots turned out to be unnecessary. It is, of course, a pity that the Sikorsky case is being suppressed, and openly so, but Russia is the one who benefits from this: the worse the US Army's planes and helicopters are, the better for us.
In general, gentlemen, you are on the right path. We approve in every way. More convertiplanes, autogyros, in general, anything but decent helicopters. The developments made by the Sikorskys can and should be archived under some pretext and give way to more innovative inventions. Naturally, with an emphasis on stealth and multi-billion dollar. To repeat another slogan of past years - more "Zumvolts", flying, swimming and diving!
And the United States' global dominance on the battlefield is assured.
Information