Sikorsky S97 Raider Makes First Flight This Morning

The Sikorsky S97 Raider with a coaxial rotor system and an aft propeller, which can reach speeds of up to 250 KIAS has made its first lift off this morning and it was successful.



3d Artist rendering when the S97 was first announced:


I've been watching this thing since the first proof of concept aircraft went up the Sikorsky X2, which is currently the fastest helicopter in the world.



The S97 Raider was built for the SOF mission set. It can reach targets faster, which is excellent for time sensitive missions.

My view on the maintenance program in general for these aircraft is based on the capability and speeds the Raider can achieve.

Corrosion Control: 90 day interval to be done in conjunction with Aircraft Wash requirements. The interval can be shrunk to down to every 30 day with a per flight fresh water soak for sea operations or within 25 miles of salt water bodies. Interval not to exceed 90 days.

Aircraft Wash: 30 days, fresh water soak per-flight interval if operating near salt water or sea borne operations.

Hourly inspections: 10 hour inspection to be done either every ten flight hours or completed on post flight. 10 hour inspections will cover the coaxial rotor head for signs of heat/friction damage, elastomeric bearing inspection for disbonding, and blade inspection for erosion, and FOD check.

Every 25-30 flight hours will be to check the wear tolerance between the coaxial rotor stator which allows for the blades to turn in opposite directions, engine to highspeed shaft inspection for heat/friction damage, exhaust system heat sink inspection for cracks(which is common). Pitch control rod and swashplate bearing and play inspections for tolerance and damage. Anti-flap, and droop stop inspections for damage an disbonding.

Every 120 hours will be Phase 1 Rotor and Propeller system inspection. The whole rotor system, engines, and drive shafting to be pulled, inspected, parts replaced if not within spec, and resinstalled/replaced as required. Engines borespcope inspected for damage to compressor fans, and flushed out.

Post-120 Hour Phase is ground runs, highspeed shaft balance, main rotor system track and balance, and propeller timing. Post phase torque checks on all torqued component parts every 6-11 flight hours.

Every 240 hours is Phase 2 Airframe/Hydraulic-Pneudraulic/Flight Control systems inspection and repair.



Based on the publicly know specs of this aircraft, these are the maintenance requirements I would press into effect until enough data has been gathered to either extend or shorten the intervals. These are extremely conservative for a reason. This aircraft is so fast, and the rotors spin so fast that stresses on the engines, drive shafting, rotors, and the airframe itself would be greater than any aircraft currently in military service.

I personally would love the opportunity to take this thing apart and study it.

Big day!
I read that it outperformed expectations and the Pilots were most impressed with control reaction and lack of vibration and sound. This is a game changer in a lot of ways. S+F

Rotorcraft all have a high maintenance requirement. They are flying fatigue machines.
Look near the end of "Tale of Things to Come", the H.G. Wells movie with Raymond Massey, about the evolution of mankind, and see this rotor craft in white delivering the space travelers to the launch cannon.
Roy

a reply to: newthings

Rotorcraft all have a high maintenance requirement. They are flying fatigue machines.

Some more than others.

The Apache spends 3 hours in the hangar for every hour it flies.

My Hawks like to fly and there are times when we spend entire weeks without doing any maintenance at all.

The Kiowas are the highest flight hour birds we have as their mission set requires it.

Chinooks tend to be hangar queens these days since the E model was released.

a reply to: projectvxn

That's what you get when you enclose a couple hundred thousand parts spinning in different directions in a shell and expect them to get along.

So what is its mission?

Is this troop insertion? So a stealth one (osama's cranial ventilation specialists) and a quick one (this).

If this carries squads, will there be gunship variants to protect the guys on board?

I like the idea of these being Red Cross to get casualties out fast!

a reply to: Forensick

I think it's mission eventually will be all of the above.

Eventually a Blackhawk replacement I think..

a reply to: Blackfinger

This is not a blackhawk replacement.

It is not suited for the mission set given to the Blackhawk.

The Raider has a very specific mission set tailored to SOF operations. This will be another asset in 160th SOAR.

a reply to: projectvxn

The Defiant will be the entry for FVL. Same technology. Different/larger platform.

Defiant

Video of the flight:

I was born to fly a rotorcraft but I'm too chicken.....stuck in fixed-wing cause of too many moving parts....
my dreams are in verticle flight....
I'm too much needy of the creature comfort

question from a layman...stealth would seem to be the logical course for any new military helicopter coming out. are they in the black budget, or simply not feasible yet?

a reply to: jimmyx

Stealth is actually a relative term.

The two "StealHawks" used in the bin Laden raid and other operations had low RCS and sound dampeners on the blade tips that, from what I understand, worked pretty well.

Stealth helicopters are not a new concept. The RAH66 Comanche, for instance.

The problem is that the role of a helicopter is inherently not a stealthy one. The role of stealth rotary wing assets would be very limited in nature.

An S-97 made a hard landing in Florida on a test flight. It was on a test flight out of Palm Beach at the time with two crew on board.

theaviationist.com...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
An S-97 made a hard landing in Florida on a test flight. It was on a test flight out of Palm Beach at the time with two crew on board.

theaviationist.com...

No injuries reported.

Though I'm sure these guys are shaken up pretty good.

a reply to: projectvxn

No one is saying much, but it was in a hover test, and appears to have come down with the gear retracted.

I'm still not a fan of this chopper I know it's probably a lot better than current active helicopter I just don't like the look of it if anything to me it seems they have gone backwards in helicopter design. I especially dislike the prop at the back it's almost like they built it and though 'crap we need more forward propulsion, screw it just stick a propeller on the back' I'm sure I'll be corrected though as to why it's a good design

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: jimmyx

Stealth helicopters are not a new concept. The RAH66 Comanche, for instance.

Or if you want to go old school: The Quiet One

Cant see the story in the article but one of the tales were that contractors were unable to discern it flying overhead at night from 250 feet by the time it was retired...

Why they usually make more than one prototype.Glad no one seriously hurt.Good advert to its crash survivability though.