” … helicopter that will replace Black Hawks”

“America’s new V-280 “Valor” helicopters will take off and land vertically, but be able to tilt their propellers, allowing them to fly at speeds similar to a fixed-wing plane.

The new machines will travel roughly twice as fast, and have several times the refuelling range of the current Black Hawks, which have ferried soldiers around war zones for 40 years.

Amid the growing threat from China, the US wants its helicopters to have the capability to cover huge distances over the Pacific, while still performing tight manoeuvres delivering troops to battlefields.

Steve Trimble, defence editor of US-based Aviation Week, said: “The US Army is preparing to be ready to fight a war in the Pacific against a peer adversary.”

US reveals futuristic helicopter that will replace Black Hawks (telegraph.co.uk)

This entry was posted in weapons. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to ” … helicopter that will replace Black Hawks”

  1. gordon reed says:

    Are the people in the DoD, State Dept. Neocons el. al. seriously considering a war with China. This would be the end of our country, they are already in a war with Russia and blathering about attacking Iran, these people need to be purged.


    • Bill Roche says:

      A call for remembrance of our lost dads, uncles, and friends, at Pearl Harbor 12/07/41. Now to GR’s word … purged? Really.

      • Gordon reed says:

        My comment has nothing to do with the bravery and commitment of the troops, I am referring to the policy makers that have gotten us into these regime change exercises and are trying to dominate the world

        • TTG says:

          Gordon Reed,

          Well, that’s different. Being opposed to those regime change exercises or any military adventurism is a reasonable, prudent and commendable attitude. But that’s a far cry from being prepared for a possible war with China or Russia.

    • borko says:

      They wouldn’t be serious if they didn’t consider a possibility of an armed conflict with a near-peer power such as China.

    • TTG says:

      gordon reed,

      The people in the DoD have seriously developed detailed contingency plans for a war with China for decades. They’ve seriously invested the time and resources to create the doctrine, weapons and forces to carry out those contingency plans if required. I’m damned thankful they’ve done so. And I’m damned proud to have been one of rough men standing ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm IAW those contingency plans. As the quote goes, this is all so you can sleep soundly in your bed.

      • cobo says:

        TTG, god bless you big brother.

        gordon reed – can you withstand “the purge?”

        Infamy knows this day.

      • Gordon Reed says:

        I don’t sleep soundly with the people that are in charge, just look at their record especially since the onset of ” The War on Terror”.

    • Peter Hug says:

      Contemplating the requirements and consequences of a war with China is not at all the same as advocating one. Even if we were at war with Russia (we aren’t, really) or “blathering about attacking Iran” (that’s mostly people like Bolton and Netanyahu), we would in any case need to understand the options we would have and the requirements that would create, and then prepare for such an eventuality. I’m not sure what your problem is.

  2. scott s. says:

    So I guess a V-22 Osprey derivative. I see “initial obligation of $232 million will fund Bell’s preliminary design and development of a virtual prototype that the Army will then use to proceed with the acquisition”. Not sure what a “virtual prototype” is? Something to carry “virtual troops”?

    As far as Navy variants, I’m guessing Navy would go with UAV tech for small decks.

    • TTG says:

      scott s,

      I just hope they’re quieter than the Osprey. Those things fly low over our house quite a bit and they are window rattling noisy.

      The Navy and Marines use the Osprey extensively, including for shipboard operations. The Bell VTOL’s size shouldn’t stop their use on ships. The already have two engines to satisfy that Navy requirement.

      • Leith says:

        Too big for destroyer ops. I expect the Navy will keep their SH-60s for awhile. V280 might be OK for carriers, amphibs, and logistics ships but it would need folding wings and rotors.

        • borko says:

          U.S. Space Force should team up with Elon Musk to create vehicles capable of much quicker deployment anywhere in on the planet.
          Hello space marines.

  3. KjHeart says:

    OK is it BAD that I went completely ‘Fan-Girl’ over this helicopter? OMG-This-is-so-COOL!!!!
    I found a video – this is it/ Correct?

    At the end of the video there is a crowd in front of it – gives an idea of size…



  4. jerseycityjoan says:

    I am very worried about China now. I am echoing what people used to say during the Cold War.

    I want to know why we are still allowing their elite to come here (or at least their wives and families) to live, get green cards and citizenship? Why are we guarding their dirty money and assets and allowing them to launder it?

    We give them and the students here freedom. We also train their student scientists how to build new weaponry to shot our own out of the sky. Their spies are still stealing our technology.

    Does anyone doubt the Americans of prior eras would think we are incredibly blind and stupid for doing this? Times have changed and the Chinese are aggressive and have big plans for the future for themselve.

    Who helps a future enemy win?

    • fredw says:


      “Does anyone doubt the Americans of prior eras would think we are incredibly blind and stupid for doing this?”

      Not sure that I value their opinions. That would be the prior generation that harassed the Caltech nuclear scientist Qian Xuesen into virtual house arrest and then swapped him to Red China in exchange for a couple downed pilots. In China he became the star of their atomic bomb development program.

      A former US Secretary of the Navy, Dan Kimball – later head of the rocket propulsion company, Aerojet – once said it was “the stupidest thing this country ever did”.


      • jerseycityjoan says:

        Thank you for the link. What a story.

        Yes we were wrong to assume someone whose family did great in China and who came here way before the Communists took over China was a Communist. We were crazy to send him back but people don’t think clearly in times of fear. We didn’t do well ourselves after 9/11.

        I do not think this story, however unfortunate, invalidates my point. Do you think it smart for America to teach Chinese students to build better weapon?

  5. Jim S says:

    Sir, how would this have stacked up against the UH-1’s performance in VN?

Comments are closed.