![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Helowriter" wrote in news:1110895207.080893.269810
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: For starters, the S-92 and EH101 were designed a generation apart as far as flaw-tolerant design and birdstrike and turbine burst protection. For the next 30 years or so, the US101 will still seat the President above aircraft fuel cells. Also like an earlier generation of helicopters, the EH101 structure does meet current crashworthiness requirements for forward impact strength. Strengthening the core EH/US101 up to the latest standards will put cost and risk into the VXX program, just what the Navy said it was trying to avoid. I think you'll find that the selection of the US-101 was precisely to minimise programme risk. The selection team thought that the Sikorsky capability vs the required updates to the S-92 were riskier than those needed for the US-101 in the hands of Lockheed Martin & friends. toad. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Flying high: Lockheed wins presidential helicopter contract | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 11 | February 8th 05 02:20 PM |
Flying high: Lockheed wins presidential helicopter contract | [email protected] | Rotorcraft | 0 | January 30th 05 03:48 AM |
Lockheed wins Presidential helicopter contract | Tiger | Naval Aviation | 0 | January 29th 05 05:24 AM |
Musings of a Commercial Helicopter Pilot | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 6 | February 27th 04 09:11 AM |
Musings of a Commercial Helicopter Pilot | Badwater Bill | Rotorcraft | 0 | February 25th 04 06:39 PM |