Bell RAH-71 Algonquin Attack Helicopter

[Tim Wing]

The nice thing about vacation? Sitting around the house and doing ****.

That, and having a chance to work on the web-site guilt free while 'ol girl is at work.

This one is for a development of the AH-1 Cobra. Not really a UEDF design, but something you could use in game for non-UEG members states. Enjoy.

http://www.robotechillustrated.com/uedf ... elicopter/

FB

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Robotech ... 099?ref=hl

[Arnie100]

That's interesting.

[taalismn]

Ew...much likey....nice tail design.

[Chris0013]

Where are the skids...how does it land??

[glitterboy2098]

Where are the skids...how does it land??

retractable landing gear maybe? several military helicopter concepts used them (like the sikorsky S-67 and the Lockheed AH-56 Cheyenne, as well as the unbought Sea Apache)
the russian Hind also uses them.

[Seto Kaiba]

Where are the skids...how does it land??

Description says it has folding landing gear.

The Algonquian was a scout attack helicopter fielded by the United States Army in the late 2000′s to replace the AH-1 Cobra and OH-58 Kiowa Warrior. About the same size as the Cobra it replaced, it featured internal weapons carrying, folding landing gear and NOTAR (No Tail Rotor) system.

There's no way they would've left something as important as landing gear off... it's not a part of the Southern Cross Army inventory, after all.

[Chris0013]

Where are the skids...how does it land??

Description says it has folding landing gear.

The Algonquian was a scout attack helicopter fielded by the United States Army in the late 2000′s to replace the AH-1 Cobra and OH-58 Kiowa Warrior. About the same size as the Cobra it replaced, it featured internal weapons carrying, folding landing gear and NOTAR (No Tail Rotor) system.

There's no way they would've left something as important as landing gear off... it's not a part of the Southern Cross Army inventory, after all.

I know...I was being silly.

[taalismn]

Well, there was that ill-timed set of budget cuts....SOMETHING had to give in R&D.
"We've got a choice between filling the CEO pension fund and putting landing gear on our copters."
"...ax the landing gear. We get golden parachutes regardless of whether the company tanks."

[ShadowLogan]

The nice thing about vacation? Sitting around the house and doing ****.

That, and having a chance to work on the web-site guilt free while 'ol girl is at work.

This one is for a development of the AH-1 Cobra. Not really a UEDF design, but something you could use in game for non-UEG members states. Enjoy.

http://www.robotechillustrated.com/uedf ... elicopter/

FB

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Robotech ... 099?ref=hl

Interesting.

Couple of questions though.

Would the AH-1 even still be in service with the US Army in the 2000s as mentioned? I know the US Army retired them in the 90s IINM in favor of the AH-64 in Real Life, but it would seem to me that the Global War that proceeded the SDF-1 arrival should have worn out the airframes (not to mention losses due to attrition).

Second. You mention that the internal weapons bays are blocked by the Wing Stubs when the stubs are mounted. How is that then Bell seemed to slide backward given their involvement on the competitor to (what became the) RAH-66, which did have those features and had no issue with the internal bays being blocked by the Stubs. The RAH-66's Light Helicopter program would also predate the war, so I don't see why the bays would be blocked as Bell would have the experience (admittedly I can't find much about the B-MD competitor, but it would make sense it would be similar to the Sikorski team).

[Tim Wing]

All of the RAH-71 were new build, so flight hours on old AH-1 air frames would not be an issue. Also, helicopter air frames do not wear out in quite the same way as normal aircraft. No wings.

With the wing stubs in place, the doors (which swing up) would be blocked. This was not so much a back slide, as it was a preference by the USMC. You loose some speed and fuel efficiency, in return for greater ordnance and fuel payload. Since the Marines were using this as their primary attack helicopter, weapons payload was the priority. The US Army was using this as a scout mostly, so speed got the nod.

Also, in my Robotech world view, stealth never became a "thing". I say this based on the fact that all of the designs from all three series are decidedly "non-stealthy". Also, I've decided to not use any real world designs that are post 1984. My thought being "If the creators of Robotech/Macross didn't know about them, then they could not have included them in the series." Same thing goes for allot of historical events, such as the collapse of the Soviet Union. If the creators were to have written a detailed back story, circa 1984, they certainly would not have included the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of Communism. It seemed like to much of a fact of life.

So, in other words, no RAH-66. Instead, we get the RAH-71, which would seem like a more likely prospect to 1984 man.

(Also, I'll be out of the loop for the next week guys. Talk when I get back!)

[Seto Kaiba]

Also, in my Robotech world view, stealth never became a "thing". I say this based on the fact that all of the designs from all three series are decidedly "non-stealthy".

Well... that depends on what kind of stealth you're talking about.

Granted, nobody* could kid themselves that any of the fighters in Robotech were designed with passive stealth in mind, and passive radar stealth is what most people think of when they think "stealth", but that's a consideration that had already found its practical expression prior to 1984. The Have Blue stealth prototypes first flew in 1977, and the USAF had operational squadrons of F-117A's starting in October 1983. They didn't really become known to the public until 1988 though.

Putting Tommy's claims aside, stealth doesn't seem to have become a thing in Robotech until 2043... when the UEEF adopted shadow technology. In the settings of the original three shows, the only one which had stealth technology was Macross, and that was mainly active cancellation radar stealth, a targeted form of destructive interference, which isn't dependent on the shape of the airframe.



* Well, ALMOST nobody... in The Art of Robotech: the Shadow Chronicles, Tommy made the bizarre claim that the Alpha airframe was designed for passive stealth. Mind you, it's obvious at a glance the fighter is one of the least-stealthy aircraft in humanity's history, being a big flying brick and all.

[glitterboy2098]

heck, the first real stealth in terms of greatly reduced signature was the 1960's, with the U-2 "dirty birds" (radar absorbing paint and various early efforts at controlling radar reflection) and the 70's with the SR-71 (which was huge, but appeared on radar as big as a piper cub.. about 100x smaller than the plane actually was.)

[ShadowLogan]

All of the RAH-71 were new build, so flight hours on old AH-1 air frames would not be an issue. Also, helicopter air frames do not wear out in quite the same way as normal aircraft. No wings.

I get that the RAH-71s are all new builds. What I am saying though is that the AH-1 frames might already have been used up well prior to this period so the services involved could have gone on to a new design already.

With the wing stubs in place, the doors (which swing up) would be blocked. This was not so much a back slide, as it was a preference by the USMC. You loose some speed and fuel efficiency, in return for greater ordnance and fuel payload. Since the Marines were using this as their primary attack helicopter, weapons payload was the priority. The US Army was using this as a scout mostly, so speed got the nod.

If the USMC though is interested in maximum weapons payload though wouldn't having both locations simultaneously be preferred instead of a one or the other approach you had them actually take?

Also, I've decided to not use any real world designs that are post 1984. My thought being "If the creators of Robotech/Macross didn't know about them, then they could not have included them in the series."

I agree real world designs post 1984 that are purely from that post period shouldn't have an influence. However, some of those programs have their genesis much earlier. The US Army's LHX/LH program that has its origins in the early 1980s (the specific designs chosen didn't start to gel until post 1988, then we had ~3years before award), so some aspects could materialize as influencing designs (the same also holds for the ATF program that gave us the YF-22/23).

The whole stealth shaping aspect didn't really get a public face until the F-117/B-2 of the late 80s, and then with the ATF and LH program selections in April of 1991. However, stealth at its basic level has been part of design considerations for decades already. The SR-71s paint job offers some degree of radar stealth because it absorbs radar for example. IR management also isn't unheard of either.

Also, in my Robotech world view, stealth never became a "thing". I say this based on the fact that all of the designs from all three series are decidedly "non-stealthy".

Stealth though can be achieved by a variety of methods, not just the idea of looking "stealthy". Example, USAF in the early/mid 90s looked at applying radar absorbent material to the A-10 to reduce its radar return signature. The F/A-18E/F also had signals management done as part of its design. So there is no reason that the "stealth thing" has to look "stealthy" as there are a variety of ways to approach the issue.

Putting Tommy's claims aside, stealth doesn't seem to have become a thing in Robotech until 2043... when the UEEF adopted shadow technology. In the settings of the original three shows, the only one which had stealth technology was Macross, and that was mainly active cancellation radar stealth, a targeted form of destructive interference, which isn't dependent on the shape of the airframe.

The thing is the Shadow Technology is more of an example of what would be considered Active Stealth, not passive stealth.

Well, ALMOST nobody... in The Art of Robotech: the Shadow Chronicles, Tommy made the bizarre claim that the Alpha airframe was designed for passive stealth. Mind you, it's obvious at a glance the fighter is one of the least-stealthy aircraft in humanity's history, being a big flying brick and all.

Radar Absorbent Materials would be the explanation for passive stealth on the Alpha frame. It doesn't require the unit to be shaped stealthy, only that the material it is built out of doesn't reflect radar very well.

[Seto Kaiba]

The thing is the Shadow Technology is more of an example of what would be considered Active Stealth, not passive stealth.

Did I ever say it wasn't? No.

All I said is that stealth doesn't seem to have become a demonstrable concern in the Robotech universe until 2043, when the UEEF discovered that the Invid had been detecting their generator emissions... and that the original three shows only really had one where stealth was an acknowledged concern (Macross and the VF-1's active cancellation radar stealth suite).

Radar Absorbent Materials would be the explanation for passive stealth on the Alpha frame. It doesn't require the unit to be shaped stealthy, only that the material it is built out of doesn't reflect radar very well.

Radar-absorbent material is only really effective in conjunction with an airframe designed with passive stealth in mind. You'll get a slight reduction in cross-section just spraying it on whatever, but it's not going to offer a noticeable improvement unless the aircraft itself is designed for passive stealth. The Alpha's design is terrible in terms of passive stealth, because it's got lots of right angle edges and flat horizontal and vertical surfaces to neatly reflect radar waves back to the sender. That unholy flying mess probably has a bigger cross-section than a much larger traditional plane.

[ShadowLogan]

All I said is that stealth doesn't seem to have become a demonstrable concern in the Robotech universe until 2043, when the UEEF discovered that the Invid had been detecting their generator emissions... and that the original three shows only really had one where stealth was an acknowledged concern (Macross and the VF-1's active cancellation radar stealth suite).

The problem with this though is that particular Stealth in question IS highly targeted in RT (at least if we just base it off the 85ep dialogue). Generalized stealth doesn't seem to be mentioned, but we know that ECM jamming is involved in the previous arcs, so moving undetected IS an aspect in RT, which means Stealth should also be a factor (though it likely is in the active sense as opposed to passive).

However I do agree that passive stealth in RT isn't emphasized. And there are several reasons that one can point to:
-era it was crafted originally it wasn't common/easy knowledge like would be a few years later with the B-2/F-117 unveil, and they have to preserve that without doing a new pure reboot with all new designs to address that.
-sensor technology in RT may have progressed to the point that passive stealth designs can not remain viable on their own as is current real world projections on the matter call for. Weather that is a result of the SDF-1 arrival in 1999 purely or combined with the Global War is hard to say
-stealth designs do place limits on what can be carried, in RT that trade off may not be attractive given the numerical miss match Earth forces find themselves in typically
-stealth technology is also targeted toward specific sensors and frequencies, and if you are encountering unknowns it is a lot harder to "stealth" if you don't know what to prepare for (this is clearly the case with the Invid) where active systems can meet changing needs easier (IMHO)
-then there is maintenance considerations, real stealth platforms require their RAM coatings to be replaced/serviced every so often to maintain optimal effect.
-it is also possible that the passive stealth in play has a different emphasis in RT than in the real world (like favoring IR instead of Radar).
-then there is the approach used on the F/A-18E/F that sought a more balanced approach to Stealth inclusion than what we see in the F-117/B-2/F-22/F-35 (and YF-23/X-32 and others) which means it is there, but not as noticeable

Radar-absorbent material is only really effective in conjunction with an airframe designed with passive stealth in mind. You'll get a slight reduction in cross-section just spraying it on whatever, but it's not going to offer a noticeable improvement unless the aircraft itself is designed for passive stealth. The Alpha's design is terrible in terms of passive stealth, because it's got lots of right angle edges and flat horizontal and vertical surfaces to neatly reflect radar waves back to the sender. That unholy flying mess probably has a bigger cross-section than a much larger traditional plane.

Did I say it was a perfect solution? No I didn't. Every little bit helps though as there are things that can be done to non-stealthy looking planes to manage their return signature (the F/A-18E/F is known to have done this) to make them more stealthy. Its also possible that the Alpha wasn't built for all angle stealth (like the F-22), but limited angle stealth (F-15SE is stealthy from the front). From a head-on view the Alpha DOES resemble the Stealthy YF-23, so that might be where the idea comes from.

That is also with current generation of RAM materials though. With the technological leapfrog of 1999 that exist in RT occurring which could bring in new materials that are better at the job.

[Tim Wing]

I get that the RAH-71s are all new builds. What I am saying though is that the AH-1 frames might already have been used up well prior to this period so the services involved could have gone on to a new design already.

I asked myself the same thing when I read an article today about "new build" Chinooks.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/boeing ... 1641204605

But that's not me being a smart ass... (Though it sounds that way. Sorry. ) Helicopters tend to have a pretty long shelf life, design wise. The USMC is still using the AH-1/UH-1 platform, as well as the Sea Stallion, and others. And who knows how long the Blackhawk will be with us. Something tells me they will still be flying in some form well after I'm dead. In this write up, the RAH-71 follows the same path as they did with the AH-Z in real life, just with design changes to make it look more "Robotechy".

If the USMC though is interested in maximum weapons payload though wouldn't having both locations simultaneously be preferred instead of a one or the other approach you had them actually take?

Fuel is part of the payload consideration. Plus, the stubs would block the opening of the ammo doors. If I remember correct, the RAH-66 had the same issue.

I agree real world designs post 1984 that are purely from that post period shouldn't have an influence. However, some of those programs have their genesis much earlier. The US Army's LHX/LH program that has its origins in the early 1980s (the specific designs chosen didn't start to gel until post 1988, then we had ~3years before award), so some aspects could materialize as influencing designs (the same also holds for the ATF program that gave us the YF-22/23).

Though they were already on the drafting board at this time, the writers of Macross/Robotech would not have known about them. They would not have had the required clearance. So, yeah, they there fore could not write them into the the story line.

As far as logical justifications go, lets walk the dog on this:

Operational experience showed that while Stealth was a force multiplier, it was found to be unnecessary in every counter insurgency war the US found itself involved in during the GCW period. So, the USAF decided to put their money into more conventional designs, favoring quantity over quality. (Stealth = cash. Lots of cash.) So, this would be an example of the USAF making a smart decision. Pretty fantastic statement, I know. What I described was the exact situation we find ourselves in now... and the USAF continues to place all their chips on the F-35. But I'll leave THAT argument for other forums!

With the appearance of the SDF-1, we would have had examples of Zentraedi radar and sensor systems to look at. It was found that passive stealth did not make a big difference to the (possibly short wavelength?) radar used. Plus they Zentraedi used very sensitive IR sensors with range similar to their own radar systems. This is not such a stretch, since against the cold background of space, even the smallest heat source would tend to "pop" much more so than on Earth. So, Earth forces go with conventional designs with little passive stealth. Then add sophisticated radar jamming assets (such as the VF-1E, which would play the same role as the EA-6 Prowler) to mitigate Zentraedi sensor range as much as is possible.

[ShadowLogan]

The USMC is still using the AH-1/UH-1 platform, as well as the Sea Stallion, and others. And who knows how long the Blackhawk will be with us. Something tells me they will still be flying in some form well after I'm dead. In this write up, the RAH-71 follows the same path as they did with the AH-Z in real life, just with design changes to make it look more "Robotechy".

True about the real aircraft, but that also fails to consider how the effects of a 10year Global War on said platforms would effect them. They may be made obsolete.

Fuel is part of the payload consideration. Plus, the stubs would block the opening of the ammo doors. If I remember correct, the RAH-66 had the same issue.

The RAH-66 did not have the issue as one of its configurations did call for the use of the stubs and internal weapons. Admittedly only one vertical hard point is used in the example I could find.

There is no indication either of where the internal bays actually are on your RAH-71 since they aren't depicted.

As far as logical justifications go, lets walk the dog on this:...

I agree Stealth isn't a required feature, but there are technologies that went into the designs that can be utilized by non-stealth aircraft that have nothing to really do with stealth.

The Global War might also have accelerated the development of sensors that reduce passive stealth's effectiveness. Current real world projections call for real world stealth platforms that use passive approach (F-22/B-2/F-35, etc) to require some form of active stealth w/n the projected life of the airframes (IIRC in the mid 2000s they projected it as occurring in the 2030s).

[Seto Kaiba]

Though they were already on the drafting board at this time, the writers of Macross/Robotech would not have known about them. They would not have had the required clearance. So, yeah, they there fore could not write them into the the story line.

Rather a nasty misconception you've got there.

While it's true that the creators of Macross and the other original shows wouldn't have known about the new stealthy fighters that were going into production around the time the series was made, they would've been well-aware that stealth aircraft were a thing. After all, Macross's creators named their series' main mecha for the SR-71's elder brother, the North American XB-70 Valkyrie, which did include radar-avoidance measures in its design. The series also explicitly shows the Zentradi using active stealth technology... as did the Zor Lords in Southern Cross.

Technology from the XB-70 Valkyrie program later found its way into more notorious stealth spyplanes... the U-2 and SR-71, both of which had become known to the public before Macross went into production.

There's also the slight issue that the Dark Legioss in MOSPEADA is technically a passive stealth aircraft (even painted black), though not "that kind" of stealth.

I'll leave subsequent additions out, because that just makes it way way worse...

Then add sophisticated radar jamming assets (such as the VF-1E, which would play the same role as the EA-6 Prowler) to mitigate Zentraedi sensor range as much as is possible.

No such animal as "VF-1E"... there are no canon electronic warfare craft in Robotech except the ES-11D Cat's Eye, a SIGINT/ES/AWACS plane. The RPG adds a non-canon VF-1D derivative designed for electronic warfare, the VEF-1D, which clearly was based upon the Macross VEFR-1 "Funny Chinese".

[glitterboy2098]

shame seto.. the SR-71 existed before the XB-70 Valkyrie did.. it was flying for the CIA before the Valkyrie was even begun, and lockheed actually had a number of critism's about the valkyrie's design because of their experiance in designing the A-12 (as the SR-71 was then known).. one of the biggies being lack of radar defeating design and that it was highly inefficent, unlike their A-12. lockheed even tried to get the airforce interested in a strike variant A-12 (once they got the CIA to allow partial declassification so they could pitch to the bigwigs) but the airforce wasn't interested due to their existing involvement in the valkyrie project..

[jaymz]

All things being equal...nice work again Tim

We may go different routes and go about it differently but we both look for the same thing...what we feel Robotech is in out minds

[Seto Kaiba]

shame seto.. the SR-71 existed before the XB-70 Valkyrie did..

*sigh* Please take careful note of the fact that XB-70 development preceded the A-12's by three years, and that the SR-71 is a derivative of the A-12 with substantial modifications, not just another name for the A-12. It's also worth noting the XB-70's first flight was three months before the SR-71's.

The important bit is we know the original creators knew about stealth aircraft... though Macross went in for (principally) active stealth instead, Southern Cross ignored it, and MOSPEADA briefly went in for a technical bit of passive stealth. 'course, some of the designs Macross's creators did shortly after they'd finished the series really remove all doubt, like the V-BR-2, which is a pretty straightforward SR-71 expy.

[Tim Wing]

Now, I'm not saying that they didn't know about stealth, I'm just saying that they would have no idea that it would ever become a desing requirement for all new aircraft, as it did in the real world.

Also, they would have know about it more from all the YF-19 "Stealth Fighter" conjectural model kits that were coming out at the time. Especially Testor's kit. (How important was Testor's kit at the time? So much so that Jane's All the World Aircraft circa mid eighties included a slightly reworked drawing of the model kit in their publication. No really, this is a thing. The Testor's kit was so "spot on" at least in the general concept, that the USAF actually launched an investigation regarding a possible leak, and interviewed the designers of the kit. Really, I **** you not.

Also, the drawing depicts the RAH-71 with it's internal weapons doors open, those are not the stub wings you are looking for.

Any way, Macross/Robotech went for active stealth.

Also, continuing with the helicopter theme, I'll be posting an article on the Ka-50 sometime today.

[Tim Wing]

Also, thanks Jaymz! I always appreciate your kind words!

And also thanks yo to Seto, Glitterboy, Arnie100, taalismn, Chris0013 and ShadowLogan! The lively debate and off topic threads always make this project worth it!

[mech798]

On the projections--remember that much like another game with big stompy robots, Robotech is the future of the 1980s and the early 1980s at that. The zentraedi don't make things in nanotech baths, they use automated production lines that wouldn't be out of place in Detriot. Ditto for stealth. It's just not a thing.

[taalismn]

On the projections--remember that much like another game with big stompy robots, Robotech is the future of the 1980s and the early 1980s at that. The zentraedi don't make things in nanotech baths, they use automated production lines that wouldn't be out of place in Detriot. Ditto for stealth. It's just not a thing.

"No luck, Rick?"
"No luck, Minmei. my cellphone just isn't getting any bars in here. We're cut off from anything outside here."
"Darn, and the battery on mine just went dead!"