http://www.dsti.net/Information/News/67166
美國西科斯基飛機公司自籌經費開發S-97新概念旋翼機
2011-04-27
[據美國《空軍時報》網站2011年4月24日報導]西科斯基飛機公司目前正在自費研製一個全新的直升機概念方案,這種自費研製的專案在當前財政預算日趨嚴苛的情況下可能會越來越普遍。
S-97“劫掠者”將裝備一個尾部推進螺旋槳,使其能夠突破傳統構型直升機的約200英里/時(321千米/時)的前飛速度上限。此外,西科斯基公司還希望S-97能夠獲得國防部的訂貨合同。公司還打算為軍方生產一架原型機進行試驗。
西科斯基公司希望S-97能夠成為陸軍OH-58“基奧瓦勇士”的替代機型,但陸軍雖然已經完成了武裝偵察飛行器的方案研究,卻沒有對西科斯基公司的這一意願表態。除陸軍外,空軍和陸軍的特種部隊、海軍陸戰隊也是S-97的潛在用戶。
S-97的設計將基於西科斯基公司的X2技術驗證機進行,採用共軸反轉雙旋翼,尾部裝推力螺旋槳。西科斯基公司的官員稱,X2在試驗中已達到253海裏/時(469千米/時)的前飛速度,且只需要消耗最大功率的70%。在進行一些改進後(如加裝旋翼頭整流罩),X2將能夠達到280海裏/時(520千米/時)的前飛速度。
該構型具備更高的機動性,與常規構型直升機相比,其加速/減速性能更高。在懸停性能方面,該構型比機械結構和氣動特性更加複雜的V-22相比更好。
S-97的極限速度限定為220海裏/時(407千米/時),但該機將依據承擔真實任務的需求進行設計。該機將能夠搭載2名飛行員和6名士兵,且其短翼能夠掛載武器。西科斯基公司計畫於2013年開始首架S-97的建造,並希望能夠在2014年完成首飛。
西科斯基公司建造X2技術驗證機所花的費用將超過5000萬美元,而S-97建造所花的經費將更多。
公司自費進行防務產品研發專案將成為未來發展的一個趨勢,除X2外,通用電氣航空集團的F136、通用原子航空系統公司的幾個無人機型號目前均是由公司自籌經費研製的。
阿爾法夥伴資本公司(Capital Alpha Partners)的一位分析師認為,由於缺少經費投入新技術研製,美國國防部近年來對採辦預算的控制越來越嚴格,各公司必須在經營上更加激進、更加具有進攻性,才能夠贏得預算份額,而不再是坐等著客戶提出需求。
但蒂爾集團的一位分析師則認為,目前這種預算環境並不是常見的,一旦項目未按照預計進展,公司將很難為產品找到銷路。
對於一個自費研製的機型來說,如果只有國防部能夠成為其客戶的話,這個專案的風險將會非常高。
而西科斯基公司稱,其X2技術將有很好的民用市場,儘管公司還未考慮民用型的開發。
西科斯基的S-92直升機也可以看做是類似的賭博項目之一,S-92在總統直升機的競標中落敗,到目前為止,S-92仍沒有收回開發成本。(中國航空工業發展研究中心 李昊)
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/04/air-force-sikorsky-develops-agile-helo-042411w/
Sikorsky develops agile helo on its own dime
By Dave Majumdar - Staff writer
Posted : Sunday Apr 24, 2011 8:37:28 EDT
Sikorsky is betting its own money on a radical new helicopter design, a gambit some observers say might become more common in austere budgetary times.
The S-97 Raider will have a pusher propeller meant to send it zooming past the roughly 200-mph top speed of conventional rotorcraft — and, the company hopes, win Pentagon contracts. The Connecticut-based company intends to furnish a prototype for testing by U.S. service officials.
“It’ll be a Sikorsky product, but we’ll have our pilots in the seat and we’ll let the military evaluate it,” said Steve Engebretson, Sikorsky’s director for the Armed Aerial Scout program. “We’re picking this size because the most likely replacement aircraft next up will be the Kiowa Warrior.”
Other potential customers could include Air Force Special Operations, Army Special Operations and the Marine Corps, Engebretson said.
The Army, which has yet to complete its Armed Aerial Scout study, said it couldn’t comment on the Sikorsky effort.
The S-97 design will be based on Sikorsky’s revolutionary X-2 demonstrator, which features two counter-rotating rotors on a single axle plus a pusher-prop. Company officials said the craft has flown 253 knots in level test flights, and that was at just 70 percent power. An axle fairing and other tweaks might allow the X-2 to reach 280 knots, said Steve Weiner, the project’s chief engineer.
Its unique design makes it far more maneuverable and quicker to accelerate and decelerate than a conventional helicopter — and better at hovering than the mechanically and aerodynamically more complex Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor, Weiner said.
The Raider will be limited to 220 knots, but will be designed to fly real operations, carrying two pilots and six troops. Its wings can hold weapons. Sikorsky plans to start building the first S-97 aircraft in 2013 and hopes to have it in the air by 2014.
The company will spend $50 million on the X-2 effort and more to build the S-97s, Engebretson said.
Company-funded developmental efforts are part of a growing trend, analysts and current and former government officials said.
General Electric, for example, is pouring money into the continued development of the F136 engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — despite the Pentagon not wanting a second engine.
Another example is General Atomics, which has developed several unmanned aircraft on its own dime.
The expected tightening of acquisition budgets will accelerate the trend because the Defense Department doesn’t have the money to fund new designs or technology, said Byron Callan, an analyst at Capital Alpha Partners in Washington.
“You’ve got to be very forward-leaning, and I think, more aggressive, these days to win market share in a declining budget and not just wait for the customer to write requirements,” Callan said. “At the end of the day, in this kind of environment, that’s how you’re going to get in and win market share.”
But Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group of Fairfax, Va., disagreed.
“It’s pretty unusual for this budget environment. Usually when things turn down, you get real scared about finding customers for new products with bells and whistles,” he said.
Moreover, Aboulafia said, sheer velocity is not necessarily a selling point.
“We really don’t know who will pay for speed in this industry,” he said.
Others said the risks of spending company money to develop defense products would keep it from becoming common.
“I don’t see that as a broad trend across the board in the DoD because all my history has told me that there are times when it makes sense to make your own investments to advance the capability, but whenever you can, getting your partner to make that co-investment, to get that skin in the game, is very important,” said Paul Kaminski, who heads the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board.
Potential civil applications can mitigate the risk of developing military technology, Kaminski said, but he doesn’t immediately see one for Sikorsky.
“I don’t know if they have a commercial companion outlet for the product which helps them justify spending the money to demonstrate this on their own,” he said.
Former Pentagon procurement chief Jacques Gansler agreed.
“In the commercial world, there are lots of different buyers and you have multiple customers; in the case where you have to put up your own money and the only customer is the Department of Defense, that’s really a much higher-risk approach,” Gansler said.
Gansler cited the ill-fated F-20 Tigershark lightweight fighter jet. Northrop developed the plane, but could not persuade the Air Force to buy it — a failure that scared off potential export customers.
“It’s a trend you’re seeing, but not necessarily one that has the likelihood of continuing very long because people are going to lose too much money over it,” Gansler said.
Engebretson said the X-2 technology might well be desired by civil customers, but he said that the company does not yet have specific ones in mind.
Aboulafia said Sikorsky made a similar bet, on its S-92 helicopter, during the downturn of the 1990s. The S-92 lost the competition to become the White House helicopter, and the investment has yet to pay off for the company.