The moment I saw that rotating gunnery chair my mind immediately went to "Greetings, Starfighter..."
@axehammer38505 ай бұрын
DEATH BLOSSOM! 😊
@ImpendingJoker5 ай бұрын
I see you are a man of culture.
@sidefx9965 ай бұрын
You have been recruited by the Star League to defend The Frontier against Xur and the Kodan Armada
@hateforall40125 ай бұрын
Fantastic movie!!
@brothergrimaldus38365 ай бұрын
You too?
@joshuabessire91695 ай бұрын
Bell:"We're making America's first jet fighter." Lockheed:"We're making America's first good jet fighter." Bell: We're making America's first attack helicopter." Lockheed:"We're making America's first good attack helicopter." Bell:" ....Listen here you little shit!"
@stefankohler30605 ай бұрын
Lockheed build the F-104, Widowmaker in Germany, we lost 300 Planes and 116 Pilots. Now they build the F-35. 641 Errors per Plane and we buy it again.
@akisamefsghi5 ай бұрын
@@stefankohler3060 The F-104 crashed often in Germany because the pilots were not used to supersonic aircraft with high stall speeds. The F-35 has proven to be the most affordable, effective, and popular stealth aircraft that every single nation flocks to buy
@nikolaideianov50925 ай бұрын
@@akisamefsghiand for the price its cheaper then the f15 was when it came out
@kingjames48865 ай бұрын
bell: fine, we'll move to canada and recoup our losses by over-charging for sub-standard utilities
@Shalashalska5 ай бұрын
@@akisamefsghi That's largely because the F-35 is the only stealth aircraft available for purchase. All other stealth aircraft are only used by the country that produces them.
@neilwarren8755 ай бұрын
Nobody seems to have mentioned one of the best reasons for going with the AH-1. It has about 40% parts interchangeability with the UH-1. Really streamlines logistics.
@raymondyee20085 ай бұрын
Correct. Compare with the AH-56 where in hells teeth are they getting spare parts in Nam?
@Spinex019625 күн бұрын
now look whos the master of logistics
@jgr74875 ай бұрын
Bell was building a current generation attack chopper, while Lockheed was already working on the future of attack helicopter. They could have coexisted.
@felixknorpp28035 ай бұрын
there is no coexisting in capitalism
@williamzk90835 ай бұрын
One thing that the Russian war on Ukraine has shown is that Attack Helicopters need more range when a peer opponent is involved. Russian helicopter airfields were destroyed by ATACMS forcing use of the longer range Ka-52 in airfields far from the front line. Also in the Pacific the AH-64 is too short ranged. The 1970s Cheyenne could have done the job.
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
@Some_Dingus I don't know about that. The AH-64 Apache has been around since the early 1980s and the Marines still fly Cobras and was buying new ones until very recently. The Army and Marines use attack helicopters very differently.
@reebquincom5 ай бұрын
Cobra had interchangeable parts with the Huey. Great for the field. Cheyenne was too far ahead for its time.
@TheTrueAdept5 ай бұрын
@@reebquincom This is pretty much that, and Congress is changing the spec requirements mid-dev with a side order of the USAF being a jackass (of the 'no, the army can't have anything ever resembling aircraft' kind).
@Mariner3115 ай бұрын
I built a Cheyenne model as a youngin' back in 1972 - was crushed to learn the project was cancelled. Amusing that in 1986 I became a Naval Aircrewman - and later did the Maverick missile tests for the Seahawk helicopter.
@blacktophemirt85265 ай бұрын
same but it was a commanche
@Tutisclutis5 ай бұрын
Seeing how much the Cobra have changed from it's original design, makes me wonder how the Cheyenne would look today.
@pegcity4eva5 ай бұрын
Like an Apache
@williamzk90835 ай бұрын
@@pegcity4eva The Cheyenne is faster and much much longer ranged than the AH-64 (about 3 times) . One think the Russian war on Ukraine has taught us is that longer range is needed for attack Helicopters. ATACMS was able to destroy multiple helicopter bases leaving the Russians only able to use the Ka-52 and aircraft with limited ability to fire behined cover.
@pancudowny5 ай бұрын
Think of the Cobra as the Ford Mustang to the Huey's Ford Falcon: It lives on, but is so-much different from what it started from or as.
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
@@williamzk9083 As air defenses improved the Cheyenne's speed became moot. US Army Cold War helicopter tactics were to fly no higher than 50 feet above ground level. They used trees, foliage and terrain to hide behind so enemy air defenses would not detect them. They used scout helicopters and ground mounted sensors on cherry pickers to find and illuminate enemy formations so the attack helicopters could attack from difilade ( behind trees or terrain) and thus not expose their presence to the enemy before attacking. Airspeeds were low, 50-60 knots max as the scouts led the gunships through the forest. The Russians use their gunship helos more like close air support airplanes and suffer high losses as a result. They are also ineffective. The Cheyenne would have been equally ineffective.
@mrgrinch8375 ай бұрын
@@williamzk9083 Attack Helicopters are not used for such deep strike missions, although there are exceptions the vast majority of the time they are used to support ground infantry troops and armor. In that role I guarantee you they're going to run out of bullets pretty quickly if the fighting is that intense that's why they don't go further away than they have to for their own FAARP's or forward area arming and refueling points. Does no good to fly 70 miles and be gone so long that by the time they finally get back to the battle the people they're supposed to be supporting are dead. We don't do much further away than 20 to 25 miles. Bottom line kind of staying out of artillery range. It was an Army tactical operations officer and Cobra pilot and the only time I have ever heard of an attack helicopter being used in what's considered a deep strike mission was the nine Apaches that went into remove the early warning radar systems in the Kuwaiti desert. There is no reason for us to use maximum range when that will also give us the maximum time away from the battle. In this case, the range is not a factor, what is a factor is ammo load and the ability to stay with the ground troops.
@forgetittube58825 ай бұрын
McNamara, his impact, cancelling programs he wasn’t invested in, is legendary
@Americum5 ай бұрын
McNamara, if it wasn’t a ww2 equivalent design, then he was gonna cancel it.
@jacqueschouette74745 ай бұрын
We are still paying for McNamara's stupidity.
@johnhiggs3255 ай бұрын
@@jacqueschouette7474 His corruption
@Einwetok5 ай бұрын
Ladybird's worth a mention too. Bell kept getting contracts because of her stock in the company.
@jacqueschouette74745 ай бұрын
@@Einwetok Oh you mean a politician profiting from his or her office? Say it isn't so.
@LayOverWeb2 ай бұрын
As a former AH-1 instructor pilot, the Cobra could do its mission but just barely. The real reason for the cancellation of the AH-56 was the USAF. They took the Army's funding for the project with the USAF promising a close air support aircraft "A-10" that the USAF was trying to cancel as soon as it was built. This fiasco is explained in the biography called "BOYD" the Air Force officer that concocted the scheme. The A-10 was great but the Army really needed the AH-56 it would still be flying today. Thank you for the outstanding documentary!
@biddinge88985 ай бұрын
A big part about the cheyenne, was not only the push prop and actual functioning wings, but the special stsbilized rotor blade system. It didnt use a traditional swash plate, it used a system similar to what toy helicopters actually use, with a stabilizing bar on top for a inherently stabilized system gyroscopically.
@ImpendingJoker5 ай бұрын
This was not new at all. Bell pioneered this with the Bell 47, and it was also on the Bell UH-1. Bell upped Lockheed by completely eliminating the need for a stab-bar by introducing electrical stability system. So that huge merry-go-round clothes hangar on the AH-56 was also outdated, and Blom Und Voss built the first fully rigid rotor production helicopter with the Bo-105. No, that Cheyenne as cool as it was very out dated by the time it was in the prototype phase, and by the time it would have entered LRIP it would have been a dinosaur.
@nullterm5 ай бұрын
Minor correction: AH-64 was started by Hughes. Which was bought by McDonnell Douglas 1984. Which was bought by Boeing 1997.
@viruspter1dactl14 күн бұрын
THANK YOU!!!!
@rileybriggs47315 ай бұрын
Having 130 successful missile tests and then your first display test failing is like something out of a movie. I like to imagine a bell employee snuck in and cut a wire.
@atomicskull64055 ай бұрын
Someone was bribed to scuttle the test for sure.
@jandraelune15 ай бұрын
The AH-64 upgrade that is coming actually brings most of the AH-56 designs to it, minus the belly turret. The reasons for the AH-56 cancellation are superfluous at best.
@CrymsonKyng5 ай бұрын
Umm…..coming 50 years later…
@mrbigberd5 ай бұрын
You forgot to mention that the Air Force was exerting HUGE pressure that this was THEIR domain under the Key West Agreement. The Army was effectively barred from creating a fast helicopter again which is one reason the Apache is so slow.
@chheinrich84865 ай бұрын
Behold, the reason Lockheed never built another helicopter 😂 Edit: I didn’t know Lockheed acquired Sikorsky
@paulsteaven5 ай бұрын
They still are, if we consider their acquisition of Sikorsky.
@chheinrich84865 ай бұрын
@@paulsteaven oh I didn’t know that
@paulsteaven5 ай бұрын
@@chheinrich8486 yeah, not that well known as there's no major rebranding like when Boeing acquired MD.
@kazefw38345 ай бұрын
@@paulsteaventhanks, didn't knew that happen at all
@ImpendingJoker5 ай бұрын
@@kazefw3834 Happened about 10 years ago now.
@ArchusKanzaki5 ай бұрын
Lesson learned time-to-time. "There is nothing more permanent, than a temporary solution".
@jacksonfleischer97165 ай бұрын
Laughs in A-10
@cttz9 күн бұрын
@@jacksonfleischer9716 a-10c though
@sebastianthehotsaucedude54735 ай бұрын
I love watching the release live!
@FoundAndExplained5 ай бұрын
thanks for watching!
@MatejBeranek5 ай бұрын
this helicopter is awsome! sad thath it got cancelled. one of my favorite helicopter.
@Einwetok5 ай бұрын
There's one on display at Ft. Campbell
@michaelwhitefgguocv47135 ай бұрын
I love your enthusiasm, it encourages my own fascination and wonder.
@DavidSherman-m5l5 ай бұрын
It was the US Air Force that primarily put a stop to the Cheyenne attack helicopter. The Air Force wanted the skies all to themselves.
@FM-ig3th5 ай бұрын
It was the Close Air Support Mission.
@mrgrinch8375 ай бұрын
In reality the Air Force wanted to abscond with the cobra. They felt that only the Air Force should have dedicated armed aircraft. The Army told them to go pound sand.
@atomicskull64055 ай бұрын
And now the US Army thinks they will be able to field an attack variant of the V-280 without the USAF pitching a fit about it. And there's a much more solid case for claiming that a tiltrotor is an airplane. Because it actually *is* a VTOL fixed wing aircraft and not a true rotorcraft.
@taylorc25424 ай бұрын
They didn't want the A-10, they wanted the budget.
@billbill85554 ай бұрын
The video totally glosses over the Key West Agreement.
@basilmiller83075 ай бұрын
Saw one at Ft. Rucker museum in ft Rucker, Alabama
@pancudowny5 ай бұрын
McNamara probably saw the Huey Cobra as his Ford Falcon being turned in the Mustang, all-over again...!😄
@amramjose5 ай бұрын
I saw this copter, not knowing what it was, at Ft Rucker in 2005; impressive, rigid main rotor and pusher prop. By the time it was debuged, I understand it had state of the art avionics and control systems, as well as devastating firepower. Very cool.
@wedge7j75 ай бұрын
I saw the Cheyenne at Ft "RUCKER" in 1980 when I was in Huey AIT...
@Planes_Are_Epik5 ай бұрын
This premiere was awesome! You earned ur self a sub 👍
@FoundAndExplained5 ай бұрын
Legend!
@AircraftEnthusiast_79005 ай бұрын
Thank you,gratefully, for covering this wonderful helicopter.
@Steven-p4j5 ай бұрын
The development of turboshaft engines was what took helicopters to the next level. The earlier use of piston powered craft was their limiting factor originally.
@Steven-p4j5 ай бұрын
The idea that any single weapon system could win the Vietnam War, is to misunderstand the conflict completely.
@ibubezi76855 ай бұрын
The brass and DC would have f'd it up anyway - they never wanted to win (apart from the fact they didn't even know what 'winning' entailed).
@timper43264 ай бұрын
How can you win at war without setting goals.
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
I grew up in the San Fernando Valley not all that far from the original Lockheed Skunk Works in Burbank. Back in the 1960s the sound track of the San Fernando Valley was sonic booms from jets screaming overhead and the roar of Clay Lacy's purple P-51 "Miss Omni" pylon racer making hot laps of the Valley from its home at Van Nuys Airport. Oh, and the sound of prototypes of the Cheyenne. One of them would fly over our elementary school right at recess time every day like clockwork, and I always noticed. One day I will never forget it pulled a loop right over our school. Even as a 4th grader I "knew" helicopters weren't supposed to pull loops but there it was right before my eyes. One nice clean loop on the way north probably to some test range out by Edwards Air Force Base. What a thrill for a little kid who would as an adult go on to fly helicopters, though nothing that hot.
@Faelen_furry5 ай бұрын
Don't you love when someone change the requirements without giving notive to the other but by some dark way, the opponent knew what would change
@Navy_Army3055 ай бұрын
The rotating CPG station would get you super sick lol
@ImpendingJoker5 ай бұрын
Actually no, as your inner ear is what controls your balance and equilibrium. The Cobra and Apache are worse for motion sickness because your eyes are looking left or right but your inner ear is still looking straight ahead so when the pilot turns your brain gets conflicting input, and up comes your lunch. 🤮
@ognjenivanovic78715 ай бұрын
Bell: I ain't taking this humiliation! *makes a helicopter that would be quicker to make* . Lockheed: *surprised pikachu*
@biddinge88985 ай бұрын
Ive seen concepts for a boeing ah64 upgrade package that would turn it into a cheyenne more or less. With bigger wings, and a pusher propeller.
@dw70944 ай бұрын
Boeing has got their hands in everything these days. So much, that their quality control suffers, and it's taken them over a year to get a rocket off the ground. Lately it has not been the company that Bill Boeing started.
@timbrake34045 ай бұрын
I've always wondered why the canopie was so large. It has to be 3 feet higher than the gunners head! I bet he could have stood up and not needed to open it.
@CraigLandsberg-lk1ep5 ай бұрын
That's what I thought, would have made it a little lighter and cut down the crosssection a bit😅
@timbrake34045 ай бұрын
@@CraigLandsberg-lk1ep I can usually figure out design features on aircraft but I never understood that one. I would to find out why.
@dimassalazar90613 күн бұрын
I worked on that thing at Ft Rucker Aviation museum. It was huge. Almost as long as a chinook and it was a long way to the ground if you fell off while working on it.
@Saffi____5 ай бұрын
One of my personal favorite helicopters (mostly by design) is the Yak-60. Looks like a Chinook, just bigger, though I think the Mil V-12 has it beat in weight.
@BarryHWhite5 ай бұрын
Lockheed didn't need to build helo's anymore, as with the Griada treaty Skunk works got anti-gravitic technology in 1954.
@magdovus5 ай бұрын
I think you missed the real problem. The Cheyenne was designed to attack from relatively high altitude in a fast steep dive, then pulling up to high altitude. This would have been safe in Vietnam as the main threat to helicopters was AA guns, which couldn't easily hit at the altitudes they'd have cruised at. Then, the Soviets brought out the SA-7 which would have decimated helicopters at altitude. The only way to avoid the SA-7 would have been going even higher (not feasible for helicopters) or lower, which would have made the high speed less useful as a defence. The Cobra was actually introduced into combat while the Cheyenne was in test.
@raymondyee20085 ай бұрын
Ah finally somebody brought that up.
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
Exactly right. And Army SOP during the Cold War was to stay below 50 AGL where early Soviet MANPADS could not acquire you and the radars on their longer range missiles systems could not track you.
@Hoverfiles5 ай бұрын
Great mini documentary 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@DatChernobylGuy_5 ай бұрын
Amazing video!
@fitzachella5 ай бұрын
"First attack helicopter" The AH-1 litrally flying the same year
@naturalfreq5 ай бұрын
When I was a undergraduate in mechanical engineering, my professor in my mechanical vibrations class (1979) said this helicopter had vibration problems that could not be corrected. Thus it was cancelled.
@atomicskull64055 ай бұрын
The lockheed engineers have said that they fixed the vibration problems. Until the last 10 years or so what was known about the AH-56 program was largely filtered through USAF propaganda.
@aaronsanborn42915 ай бұрын
One is on display at Ft Polk, Louisiana...I was stationed there from 97-02
@blurglide5 ай бұрын
This thing was always 50 years ahead of its time. The Army dropped the ball by cancelling it.
@notoriousbigmoai11255 ай бұрын
Can you make a video about the new biggest plane in the world concept built to carry wind turbine blade, the Radia WindRunner?
@gort82035 ай бұрын
If I had a dollar for every video claiming an aircraft should not have been cancelled I could have my own helicopter. The Cheyenne faced as much competition from the A-10 as it did from the Cobra. The problem with the Cheyenne was not just developmental issues and cost, but that fact that it was seen as encroaching into the roles of fixed-wing ground attack aircraft. The Cobra was a genius move by Bell and was so cost-effective that it is still flying today. The A-10 was simpler and less expensive than the Cheyenne, and the 30mm gun gave its proponents room to claim is was the more cost-effective solution to the Fulda Gap problem. The AH-64 that came along later did not overreach and try to take roles and budget away from fixed-wing aircraft, which is why it got the green light.
@JeffreyJoseph-g3g5 ай бұрын
A10 had its own critics, too slow to survive over the battlefield, hence the proposed A-16. Àt least Cheyenne could hide behind terrain and lob ATGMs. Different tactics make countermeasures harder for enemy. Besides Cheyenne was tasked for escorting Chinooks & other helos and Warthogs probably not ideal for that. Building Apaches after the sky high inflation of the 70s and early 80s cost us all a fortune.
@gort82035 ай бұрын
@@JeffreyJoseph-g3g The A-10 is too slow to survive over the modern battlefield, and a slower helicopter is even less survivable if employed in the same way. But attack helicopters should not be employed in roles more suited to fixed wing aircraft. Firing from positions of cover is a good example of how they operate in different ways than fixed-wing. A helicopter is more like a high speed ground unit that brings support to critical points on the battlefield by responding quickly and then sorting and engaging its own targets with direct fire. Fixed wing is more like indirect artillery fire that is called in on specific targets by an observer. To many the Cheyenne looked like an attempt by the Army to cross the line into fixed wing capability.
@jimcabezola30515 ай бұрын
Built the Aurora model kit of this back in the early '70s. Soon after building it...I found the Cheyenne project was canceled. (Cue sad trombone...)
@tmcd46575 ай бұрын
Seen one of these things on static display at Ft Rucker. Cool as hell, too bad they couldn't have been put into production
@johnnyt13055 ай бұрын
🤔 The AH 56 Cheyenne reminds me a bit of the A-10 Thunderbolt II 🤔
@OzdeDemiraz5 ай бұрын
Obsessed with landing everywhere
@nofearnelson585 ай бұрын
You didn't do your due diligence when researching this chopper. The US Air Force exerted a lot of influence to the powers that be to cancel this program since it would take away funds from their Close Air Support program. They argued that since it had functioning wings, the US Army should not be allowed to operate it since fixed wing aircraft are the Air Forces' domain. It's petty and silly but that's how the Air Force operated during the 60's and 70's. Also, it was Hughes Helicopters who produced and won the contract for the original AH-64 Apache until they were acquired by McDonnell Douglas in the early 80's and then MD merged with Boeing in the late 90's.
@gort82035 ай бұрын
You're right, that USAF was against the Cheyenne, but it was not silly. The helicopter was planned to have performance close to a fixed wing aircraft and would encroach on the roles of fixed wing aircraft. At the same time the Air Force was developing the A-10 to support the Army in those roles. The proper use of aircraft on the battlefield can be argued about all day, and was a conflict within the Army long before the Air Force became a separate service. In this case the Cheyenne was going take food out of the USAF rice bowl, and the rice supply was limited by Congress.
@marioacevedo50775 ай бұрын
This is true. I flew Cobras in the US Army and had the opportunity to chat with old-timers who had flown the Cheyenne as test pilots. They said the Cheyenne was a beast to fly. The A-10 turned out to be a great choice and in the Army we loved having them show up over the battlefield.
@Shaun_Jones5 ай бұрын
@@marioacevedo5077 does the A10 do anything that the Cheyenne couldn’t? I don’t think so, and I bet the AH56 had a lot more upgrade potential than the Warthog.
@Predator42ID5 ай бұрын
@@Shaun_Jones A10 has greater speed, range, and payload. So yes the A10 could do a lot more than the AH-56.
@JollyGreenFE5 ай бұрын
@@Shaun_Jones Survive in Congress or Combat? The A-10s combat record stands alone. And just as with any Helicopter, its Achilles' heel will always be its Tail Rotor.
@vin74905 ай бұрын
More lockweed content please
@fakshen19732 ай бұрын
The Model 209 (Cobra) having such commonality with the UH1 was the death blow.
@TheKulu425 ай бұрын
I can understand the Army needing a combat helicopter right away thanks to the Vietnam war, but I agree that the Cheyenne should have gone to production and started on the upgrade cycle. It seems more viable as an anti-tank helicopter for Europe; especially if the Soviets felt a yearning to come west.
@StefOne-nw9un5 ай бұрын
hey, i love your videos for years now! there is one plane i'd like you to look into: the MBB Lampyridae, germany's stealth fighter from the 80's that wasn't to be... would love to see it coming to life with your great renders ;-)
@FoundAndExplained5 ай бұрын
I added it to the list
@StefOne-nw9un5 ай бұрын
thank u ^^ looking forward to it
@edutaimentcartoys5 ай бұрын
amazing helicopter video
@DrGreenthumbPhd4 ай бұрын
The ad was smooth.
@theredheadrenegade22435 ай бұрын
Does anyone notice the nose and canopy is nearly spot on with an OV-10 Bronco?
@rvh19995 ай бұрын
Good point 👌
@samuelstanton89445 ай бұрын
Can you make a video about the secret weapons of the Luftwaffe. Like the Fritz X , Hs 293, X4, V1, and V2, etc...
@baraka6295 ай бұрын
V1 and V2 weren't exactly "secret" the moment they rained down on Britain by the thousands 😂
@samuelstanton89445 ай бұрын
Still secret technology for the Germans.
@davidmoore11025 ай бұрын
The Blackburn Beverly needs some found and explained love
@Claymore55 ай бұрын
McNamara was a beancounter and a bully and we all know what means...he would have made the perfect merchant banker
@TeurastajaNexus4 ай бұрын
Looks like something to put in a retro-futuristic video game.
@Fold-1035 ай бұрын
please do the 1910 coanda, its the first "jet" biplane that was created before ww1. Would be interesting to do a what if it was successful and managed to be developed during the war.
@chris_hisss4 ай бұрын
I was looking into the Apache and don't see any lineage but it sounds an awful lot like this turned into the AH 64. I don't really think we missed out on anything, Bell was right and at the right time when the troops needed it. It was cheap and pretty much ready. Which was key there, and if they had more time and development, who knows. The fact you didn't see it produced later and instead the AH-64 instead, should tell you that whatever the cost it wasn't justified for the trade off and we found better solutions as far as 1975 came around at least. Then again the Cobra kept serving right a long, refit after refit, which is pretty amazing considering. I enjoyed this video and these animations. This looks futuristic even today and I would have liked to seen it work, but I have to trust their reasoning. I know the troops needed it sooner than later. So that was a big W. And the Cobra is flat out awesome.
@atomicskull64055 ай бұрын
The "pusher" prop was a constant RPM feathering prop that was reversible (pitch range of the prop blades could be set either positive or negative angle of attack, in stationery hover it was set to 0 degrees) and could be used for deceleration as well as acceleration, During deceleration the prop would function as a sort of regenerative brake extracting energy from forward velocity and dumping it into the main rotor.
@leeroyloke84155 ай бұрын
I recalled reading from a non-fiction Tom Clancy book which mentioned about the AH-56 and one of the issues which led to its cancellation. That was the growing sophistication and capability of Soviet AA defences such as the ZSU-23-4 Shilka and shoulder-launched SAMs (and vehicle-mounted variants of said SAM system). One of the key features of the AH-56 was diving attacks which required it to fly into the teeth of Soviet-designed mobile AA defences. In contrast, the AH-1 and others like it were meant for stalking and shoot-&-scoot tactics by hiding behind obstacles. And I think the AH-1 kept being updated even now.
@JeffreyJoseph-g3g5 ай бұрын
Apaches were prohibited from fighting in Yugoslavia because of SA-14s and other manpads. Maybe Iraq too, though by now they probably have more effective IRCM.
@leeroyloke84155 ай бұрын
@@JeffreyJoseph-g3g Don't forget this example from the 2003 Invasion of Iraq too: (a) Operation Iraqi Freedom - Mass Apache Assault Goes Wrong: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l4aygpKnnpaBpZI (b) Apache Attack Helicopter Tactics of Iraqi Freedom: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bXiblo2tdtSEnK8
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
I asked a Marine Cobra pilot about the modern threat. Whereas when I was a helo pilot in the 1980s staying below 50 feet above ground or the sea surface was enough to prevent SA-7 and similar threat systems from locking on to you. They would lose you in ground clutter and never acquire. Today every modern MANPAD can track targets down to the surface, over land or water, so there is no longer any sanctuary down low. So this Marine, who was a test pilot btw, told me in Iraq the tactic was to "stay high and trust your countermeasures". You could hear my rectum slam shut the next county over! But, they have some pretty interesting sensors and ways to disrupt the seekers on incoming missiles that we didn't have.
@Hotterk883 ай бұрын
I feel like this aircraft is what inspired the design of the Cheyenne dropship from the movie Aliens.
@grant93015 ай бұрын
Great video i make lots of model kits of the experimental prototypes and have that kit you show on the desk nice touch! I only wish the old Aurora kit was as detailed as your 3D renderings are! You should make the 3D models available for the flight sim games!
@NN1Ckl.5 ай бұрын
It looks a lot like that dragonfly aircraft
@srogamina5 ай бұрын
3:10 - the tail propeller is working backwards xD
@Archie2c5 ай бұрын
Beautiful Graphics
@shawnkelley90355 ай бұрын
Just sad that it was cancelled.
@carlosnot4682Ай бұрын
snatched defeat from the jaws of victory
@chandrachurniyogi83945 ай бұрын
the Bell UH-1D Huey multi mission helo gunship could have done with a twin-engined arrangement . . . for e.g. the 1,623 shp (1,283 kW) General Electric T700-GE-401 turboshaft engines . . . and a 4-blade main rotor instead of the typical 2-blade type . . . the ship borne Bell UH-1Y Venom maritime multi mission helo gunship is a heavily upgraded variant of the good old UH-1D & UH-1H . . .
@byzmack13344 ай бұрын
I would love to know how the controls worked. In a helicopter you push forward on the cyclic and increase power to move forward. This helicopter moved forward without pitching down. That would have to be a separate control somewhere. Or you would have to make pitch control somewhere else.
@napoleonmeowparte38745 ай бұрын
The Cheyenne's demise is tragic But the Cobra is still iconic
@jeebusk5 ай бұрын
no mention of piece price, or operating cost...
@RGP30125 ай бұрын
Very epic video
@RGP30125 ай бұрын
I wanted to see this
@ChristianKenyon3 ай бұрын
Thanks
@antoniohagopian2135 ай бұрын
The Huey and the Hind are the perfection of helicopters. Change my mind.
@philsalvatore39025 ай бұрын
How about this? If the Mi-24 pilot uses too much back stick in flight he can chop the tail boom off. It has happened. In fact there was an occasion of a Soviet Hind flying just inside East Germany and a US Army Apache flying alongside the Hind just inside West Germany doing increasingly difficult maneuvers. The US Army pilot initiated this with a maneuver that the Soviet pilot immediately copied. Kind of like two boys comparing dicks for size. The maneuvers became progressively more violent until the Hind whacked it s own tail boom off and crashed, killing the crew. This incident was covered in the Army's weekly safety newsletter Flightfax. We used to receive it weekly in our Navy ready room and we all had a good laugh reading about it. And Hueys have to be flown with great care to never pull less than half a g lest you have a "mast bump" where the rotor system teeters so much it strikes the rotor mast and breaks off. That too has happened. It is nowhere near as carefree a helicopter to fly as a CH-46, CH-47 or UH-60.
@PatrickCallahan-wg2sh5 ай бұрын
I saw one of these AH=56 helicopters in the local on post museum at what used to be called Ft Polk, LA, back in the mid 80's. I was serving in the US Army as an LT and recognized it what it was. May have been an example being tested at this post when the program was cancelled in 1972.. Perhaps its still there slowly turning to dust.
@jessietoney89195 ай бұрын
Our government always does this for example the F-16 XL and the XF-23... Even now they have the Abrams-X in testing but I bet it never goes into production.
@Rose.Of.Hizaki5 ай бұрын
YF-23? Its not what you think. it has been rumored that the design has been passed on to Japan.
@mikkodoria47785 ай бұрын
Even the modern rifles like the xm8, or the newest rifle in testing, wasting money to prove m4 is still better rifle?
@evo3s755 ай бұрын
The Abrams X is a tech demonstrator, it's GD's own venture and not a prototype for some Government project
@jessietoney89195 ай бұрын
@evo3s75 But yet the Army did acknowledge that they are currently looking at it for testing so at the end of the day everything I say is fact
@Shaun_Jones5 ай бұрын
I think the F16XL was rejected because although it could carry a lot of ordinance, it could only carry 500 pound bombs. Compare that to the F15E, which could carry multiple 2,000 pound weapons. Also, in my selfish opinion, the F16XL was pretty ugly.
@Zachary2445 ай бұрын
what website do you use to make the AI videos??
@DarthVader-yd9id2 ай бұрын
Sikorsky's design looks like it inspired the blackhawk and Lockheed's design went on to become the apache thats actually pretty cool
@echo1nine2 ай бұрын
my favorite channel
@taherahmad28185 ай бұрын
Thank you for this wonderful video. The helicopter is a great invention and its primary purpose was for rescue and flying ambulance.
@ryanmac82833 ай бұрын
All these prototypes are sweet.
@koiyujo15435 ай бұрын
how badass this was... to have a rotating gunner seat for an attack helicopter
@5stardave4 ай бұрын
The Huey and the Cobra have been upgraded and are still in production for the USMC and others.
@Predator42ID5 ай бұрын
Ah the Cobra, the first helicopter if not aircraft to ever go through the entire alphabet.
@ImpendingJoker5 ай бұрын
There is no Quebec, Victor, or X-Ray model Cobra.
@running2standstill6858 күн бұрын
It had a pusher propeller for a tail rotor, The CG video is incorrect.
@jfangm5 ай бұрын
The cancellation of the Cheyenne is just another reason why the USAF was a mistake.
@msnbkn9 күн бұрын
you should check out the Sikorsky S-67!!!!
@aerohard4 күн бұрын
The question to be asked is how many Cobra gunships supported by the logistics chain could you field as opposed to a Cheyenne. The Cheyenne has the complexity of an Apache, but with some huge extra steps. You can argue in a vacuum the efficacy of any weapon, but that efficacy is directly related to the other systems that allow it to exist. Example: If you can attrit and neutralize enemy air defense to the point of nonexistence, you can do things like fly 70 year old bombers over a target. Wagner group got pwned by friggin C130s in 2018.
@lawrencehubbard29855 ай бұрын
Many years ago there was one on display. Walking around the helicopter it was unbelievable how that they were rejected. Then many years later there was a program about it. It was loaded with errors and overruns that killed the program.
@ChristianKenyon3 ай бұрын
Nice leg break in the matrix
@Dingofighter785 ай бұрын
I feel like the program was sort of revived in the sense that it's idea was, ish, i think the V-22 Osprey can revive the idea if they made an attack helicopter variant
@craig48675 ай бұрын
Defiant X looks very similar to the AH-56 Cheyenne and it also got canceled! Bell helicopter 🚁 wins again! Makes you wonder 🤔
@frankpemberton95895 ай бұрын
Never knew there was a pusher prop helicopter back then
@aviationlogs84785 ай бұрын
Its lookalike ov 10 bronco
@FerrariDMC5 ай бұрын
My Uncle flew Cobras in Vietnam. 👍🏼
@Chimpunk7295 ай бұрын
Lockheed....Apple of defense industry One thing i had hear about the cancellation due to the Air Force that didnt like Army took over their job on XAS role. The cancellation would led to the birth of the A 10 Thunderbolt II.