BPCs

BAH! Si on la ramenait avec le Mi-26, c'est justement parce qu'il ne se trouvait pas déjà limite pour emporter des blindés légers de la génération d'avant... comme si les remplaçant du VAB n'allaient pas grossir au fil des évolutions!

PHOTOS: New gunship flies to Paris Air Show debut By Stephen Trimble on June 6, 2009 12:14 AM http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/06/photos-new-gunship-flies-to-pa.html The Air Tractor AT-802U is now en route from Olney, Texas, to Le Bourget, France, to be unveiled at the Paris Air Show, said Lee Jackson, design engineer. Featuring an armoured fuselage, a 10hr loiter time and the ability to haul more than 8,000lb of payload, unarmed AT-802Us have been operated by the US State Department in South America since 2002 eradicating drug crops, Jackson said. Air Tractor is now offering the weaponized AT-802U Air Truck to the US Air Force and other militaries to serve as a a trainer/light attack fighter. After its international debut in Paris, the PT6A-67F-powered turboprop will return to Olney for a series of wepaons and sensor integration trials, he said. The AT-802U must overcome its stigma as an old-fashioned tail-dragger, but Jackson sees its lack of a tricycle landing gear as an advatange in the irregular warfare role. For lighly trained pilots forced to make hard landings on remote strips, the two main gears offer a great advantage, he said. The aircraft may find its true niche in an operational setting like Afghanistan, he said. It's an interesting idea. The Afghans need a sturdy trainer and attack fighter. The ability to spray the Taliban's poppy fields might also come in handy.

Et si par hasard il y a bien une augmentation de portée du SM-39 Block 2 (je crois qu'il n'y a pas de block 3) Il restera plus qu'à trouver comment faire la désignation de cible à distance. Heureusement, BPCs veille ... :lol: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/10/underwater-subs-trash-tube-can.html http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/sothoc.html http://maschinenbau.gabler-luebeck.de/en/entwicklungen/eigenschutz/index.html

avec les 50 mdcn grecs on arrive à 250.

C'est intéressant cette option chypriote... comme dirait O.Kempf sur son blog EGEA, c'est déjà la base d'abu dahbi ou le 2ème PA... Si en plus on ramène de l'ada au-dessus de la 3ème zone de conflit possible, il va devenir difficile de trouver des scenarii justifiant un PA autonome (sans une action OTAN ou US)... Et une poire à péter pour moi zossi...

Bon si on laisse de côté le ton peu amène qui incite vraiment à discuter dans la joie et la bonne humeur... :O Concernant mon BPC chéri, je remarque qu'il n'est pas prévu de lui faire recevoir autre chose que des hélos de la classe NH-90 pour ce qui est de ceux dont on disposera un jour... Même s'il est étudié pour recevoir des AW-101 qu'on n'aura pas (spécification du pont pour recevoir des hélos jusqu'à 15,6 t dixit la DGA) ET pas d'héloplus lourd qui pourrait transporter du matos à roue comme les Chinook peuvent faire avec les BVS-10 GiBi Ensuite que c'est du vécu des opérationnels qui étaient à bord du Mistral d'avoir constaté qu'ils se sont fait allumer par un autodirecteur lors de l'évacuation du Liban Et que bien sur notre belle marine en devenir, ne t'en déplaise, devait bien sur faire couvrir le BPC par des FDA, sauf qu'il n'y en avait pas toujours une de dispo...d'où une FLF je crois... C'est qq part dans le forum, peut-être Philippe nous retrouvera t il le lien. Enfin pour le CdG, il est à la même enseigne que l'USnavy qui fait pour le moment encore dans sa culotte avec les missiles antinavire russes ou chinois et qui a décrété que les grandes unités ne s'approcheraient plus à moins de 300 km du littoral tant qu'une réponse crédible n'aura pas été apporté au C-803 ... En attendant le C-805 de 500 km de portée. Quand on voit la vidéo du Hezbollah tirant un C-803 on se dit que effectivement, il n'y a pas un scenario crédible montrant la possibilité d'un "Malouines à la française" mais que par contre je verrais bien un équivalent d'opération Balliste matinée de C-803 finissant en Drakkar maritime... Et simplement parce que notre si belle marine, trop à flux tendu qu'elle est, n'aura pas forcément à ce moment là, pu dégager une Horizon ou un Fremm (si il y en a plus d'une de dispo à ce moment) pour couvrir le BPC et son autoprotection, autant en devenir que le reste de la flotte...

"Warrior Part 2 of 2 from PEO Soldier on Vimeo. -- Christian June 3, 2009 07:42 AM | Video Lounge | Discuss (1 comments) Excalibur Prepping for Test Flight A prototype for an unmanned aerial vehicle that may one day insert special operators, kill bad guys or fly a wounded Soldier from the battlefield to a base hospital gets a try-out sometime over the next several weeks. The Excalibur will be tested in a proof of principal flight at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland under contract from the Army's Aviation Applied Technology Directorate at Fort Eustis, Va. Don't expect the robot plane to be carrying anyone -- at just around 700 pounds the prototype is intended only to give the Army a demonstration of its vertical take-off and landing capabilities. Patti Woodside, a spokeswoman for the company, told Military.com that Excalibur-maker Aurora Flight Sciences of Manassas, Va., "will be looking for customers and funding" to continue the UAV's development. She believes the test flight probably will happen in early July, but after July Fourth. The test version will only be about 13 feet long, have a wingspan of 10 feet and weigh in at just about 700 pounds. The company envisions an operational Excalibur to be 23 feet long, with a wingspan of 21 feet and weigh 2,900 pounds. Though Excalibur's dimension's would be shorter than the RQ-1 Predator, it would weigh more than twice as much. Aurora says Excalibur would fill a gap between weapon-toting UAVs such as the Predator, which can carry Hellfire missiles, and manned strike aircraft used for tactical air support. The Excalibur would be able to carry any of several types of ordnance, including Hellfire, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System missiles, Viper Strike laser-guided glide weapons and other small, precision-guided munitions developed or under development by the Pentagon, according to Aurora's Web site. Company officials at the Air Force Association's symposium in Washington last fall said the UAV also could be used to insert special operators into an area, as well as carry wounded troops out of a combat zone. In addition to its VTOL capabilities, the UAV would be able to take off and land using short runways. Unlike other UAVs, the Excalibur will not be remotely piloted by someone manning a computer, the company says. The plane will have a high level of autonomy, it says, which means officials can concentrate on mission planning, including finding and designating targets. The company says Excalibur will reach speeds in excess of 400 knots, but with the ability to loiter at 100 knots. Bryant Jordan June 2, 2009 12:26 PM " [/yhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTNAfSMF-A0outube]

D'ailleurs j'ai trouvé cela sur ARES : "Helo Speed Freaks Speak Out Posted by Graham Warwick at 6/8/2009 9:00 AM CDT At the American Helicopter Society's Forum 65 gathering in Grapevine, Texas a week or so back, several of the speakers talked about the need for speed. This is coming out of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, for two reasons. First, the V-22 tiltrotor has set a new standard for speed around the battlefield. Secondly, as its rotor has to produce lift and thrust, a helicopter struggling to lift its load in a hot day at high altitude does not have much oomph left to go fast. The Black Hawk is not a 150kt helicopter in Afghanistan. A need for speed came out of the Vietnam War also, and resulted in the US Army's 212kt Lockheed AH-56 Cheyenne compound helicopter. But development difficulties, cost overruns and a roles and missions dispute with the US Air Force led to its cancellation. The Army ended up with the AH-64 Apache, and helicopter speeds stayed pretty much unchanged. (Photo: 1000aircraftphotos.com, Jan Visschedijk Collection) Now the call for speed is being heard again, and the problem is how to respond. There are no new helicopter programs on the books, or even on the horizon until beyond 2025. Some, like Sikorsky with its X2 Technology, argue it needs a new design to take full advantage of speed and are willing to wait. Others, like Piasecki with its X-49 SpeedHawk, believe today's helicopters can be upgraded and want to get on with it. Speed is high on the list of needs coming out of the Pentagon's Future Vertical Lift capabilities-based assessment (FVL CBA), which is intended to draw up a science and technology investment plan to support the Pentagon's future rotorcraft. Increased speed is a big piece of two "relatively certain" requirements identified by the study - high-speed VTOL insertion/extraction and multirole ISR/attack. The problem with the FVL CBA for some in the industry is it's only looking beyond 2020. This is deliberate, to avoid being sidelined by efforts to protect existing helicopter production programs, which run out to about 2018. But with the Army planning block upgrades that will keep the AH-64D and UH-60M in service well past 2025, there seems little opportunity to insert new technology. Sikorsky, which hopes to fly its company-funded X2 coaxial-rotor demonstrator to 250kt by year-end, says it could deliver a new high-speed helicopter by around 2018 at the earliest. Piasecki says it could compound the Black Hawk sooner and cheaper, but is struggling to get the funding needed to prove its X-49 demonstrator can safely fly beyond 200kt.

Je trouve que cela fait usine à gaz (même éjecté en bout de rotor :lol:) Quand on pense au crash avec abandon de programme à la clé du X-50 voire du TR-918, on se dit qu'on est pas près de le voir sur le pont d'un LHD celui-là (on note au passage mon ton zabsoluement pas provoc, alors que zuzuellement je l'aurais posé sur mon BPC préféré ;)) J'ai l'impression que la baston va être entre le X2 de Sikorsky et le Piasecki avec le X3 d'Eads et le pseudo X2 des russes en outsider plus tardifs...

encore un ! "Rotor-heads, enjoy! This is Lockheed Martin's latest patent filing for a new aircraft, and it completely stumps me. The patent document [see below] explains the "wings are directly driven by engines located at the wing tips. The aircraft incorporates large-span, high aspect ratio blades or wings that are joined at their outermost tips to improve the structural characteristics of the wings. ... The design enables vertical takeoff and landing capabilities, thus simplifying launch and recovery operations for the aircraft. Interestingly, the publication of this patent filing on May 21 came only two weeks after a senior Bell Helicopter executive told me thinks Lockheed wants to jump back into the helicopter market (remember the Cheyenne?).

Même s'il est plus grand et moderne que le Principe de Asturias, le BPE n'est pourtant qu'un Porte Aéronef de "dépannage" pour les cas où celui-là n'est pas disponible , d'où une moindre dotation en défence active et en électronique. Peut-être cette approche serait à considérer par la "Royale", si il s'avère de plus en plus que le dossier du PA2 ne peut pas passer pour des raisons politico-stratégique accolée contre les difficultés budgétaires : Plutôt qu'un PA2-CVF avec plus d'emport et plus de déplacement, un PA2 plus light avec notamment une électronique moins couteuse. La question amène quand même une quadrature du cercle à résoudre : Trouver les économies en palliant au plus la diminution capacitaire...

Je ne suis pas sur qu'un Ocean qui peut recevoir des chinook lesquels peuvent emporter des BVS-10 Viking soit tellement plus limité qu'un BPC limité à des NH-90. Sans compter que les BVS-10 Viking sont également amphibies... Et surtout que les Chinook sont nombreux et en dotation ops Et que idem pour les BVS-10 qui peuvent faire la course avec notre batellerie antédilluvienne... Bref à l'heure actuelle l'Ocean a une fonctionnalité moins limitée que nos Boites Pour Conserve Vide, sans hélico ni batellerie ni autodéfense... Qq'un disait plus haut que sans AVT un débarquement par BPC n'aurait pas lieu, mais la question ne se pose pas : Si le CdG n'est pas sorti de carafe ou à nouveau en Iper, le BPC sera par le fond avant que de s'approcher, occis par un missile antinavire type C-802 voire 803 (300 km de portée) soit tiré par un Mig-21 Bison porteur de missile antinavire Kh-35, bradé par les Indiens après la réception de leur nouveaux jets... ET comme dit G4lly , pas de couverture antinavire avant longtemps, et probablement pas de PA2, notamment si on commande un 4ème BPC, l'interview d'un amiral, qq post plus haut disait que ces avances pour cause de crise financière, étaient imputée sur le budget à venir de la Marine. Donc la marine se trouve amputée de 780 m€ sur la LPM à venir, alors qu'initialement les BPC étaient prévus après 2015... Sur un PA2 autour de 2000m€ c'est énorme ...surtout dans le contexte budgétaire qui s'annonce et comme le dit O.Kempf sur son blog, la Base D'abu dhabi solve une partie des justificatifs du PA2, dans la vision du Livre Blanc... Assurément, on a certainement la meilleure marine en devenir... au monde... Comme aurait Chichi, ma Marine dedans 10 ans.

On a certainement la meilleure marine en devenir au monde... Je ne suis pas sur qu'un Ocean qui peut recevoir des chinook lesquels peuvent emporter des VHM vikings soit tellement plus limité qu'un BPC limité à des NH-90. Sans compter que les BWS-10 sont également amphibies...

Il conviendrait de préciser tes sources...

Thales at the International Paris Air Show 2009 ... http://www.defpro.com/news/details/7888/ Thales will also present its latest Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM), which has been optimised to take on a wide range of targets on the ground, in the air and at sea http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=24268 In today’s asymmetric warfare environment, a target is as likely to be a rigid inflatable as a destroyer, a pick-up truck as a tank, or a micro-UAV as a manned aircraft. Taking them out with traditional missiles is like using the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut – and also depletes stocks of expensive equipment. With this in mind Thales showed off its new lightweight multi-role missile (LMM) at the Farnborough air show this week. Weighing just 13kg and built to be fired from multiple ground, air and naval platforms against an equally wide range of targets, it is designed to meet military requirements without draining budgets. www.thalesonline.com/renderdetail/1e17115c-5201-097f-482e-6f591e6b1724:central Lightweight LMM Drawing on Thales’ experience with the Starstreak very short-range air defence missile, it uses a value-engineered rocket motor designed against a target cost by Roxel. It also uses a laser proximity fuze, as many of its intended targets will be ‘soft-skinned’, with little metal content. The Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM) has been designed by Thales UK’s Belfast site, with low cost being one of the key drivers. Through the introduction of new proven technology, and the re-use of the best-of-breed sub-systems, LMM has been optimised to take on a wide range of targets, at sea, on the ground, or in the air - anything from fast in-shore attach craft / fast attached craft, landing craft to wheeled or medium armoured tracked vehicles to unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) and helicopters. The missile system is a lightweight, laser guided, missile, which lends itself to being fired on the move from land or naval platforms, or, because of it's light weight and zero recoil, can be deployed on fixed or rotary winged UAVs (helicopter) small ships or lightweight vehicles. The missile, sealed in its canister, consists of a two-stage motor, warhead and safe arm unit, together with guidance and control equipment. Skid to turn commands to the canards in the nose give extremely accurate guidance of the missile. The blast fragmenting shaped charge warhead, coupled with the proximity fuze provides excellent lethality against a wide range of targets. Initially the missile will be offered with laser beam riding guidance, however there will also be a semi active laser variant. The system will also be offered with a family of warheads to provide maximum effect against the wide target set out to ranges of around 8km. Prototypes of LMM have been successfully flown to prove design concepts. The product was officially launched to a select gathering of potential customers and partners on 2 June in London. In addition detailed planning for the realisation of the full integration programme is underway with the team working closely with the Ministry of Defence

2009/02/23 High speed rotorcraft / Derschmidt rotor system . Helicopters have a problem; they're slow. We wouldn't accept that problem if there wasn't one strength; the ability to take-off and land vertically (VTOL) and to hover. The practical limit for dominant layout helicopters is 300 km/h, and decades of experiments didn't really change that. The V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor is slightly faster, but its cruise speed is still below 500 km/h and it's extremely complex and expensive. It's pretty much a niche design that cannot beat comparably complex and expensive heavy-lift helicopters in practical transport capability. The helicopter's problem is an extension of the problem that almost doomed propeller aircraft. The propellers of WW2 aircraft had a small radius, but many revolutions per minute - the tips approached Mach 1 and that caused such great aerodynamic troubles that propellers were and are impractical for aircraft faster than 800km/h. The V-22's rotors have less revolutions per minute but bigger radius, thus limiting its speed as well - even below 700-800 km/h because of the requirement for good lift at take-off and landing. Today's propeller aircraft aren't much faster than 600 km/h anyway. The helicopter with its horizontal rotor that tilts only slightly to produce forward thrust has an additional problem; its indicated air speed needs to be added to the relative rotor tip speed because the rotor tip moves forward half of the time. Some of the proposed solutions for the problem had the rotor turned into vertical (tilt-wing, tilt-rotor, tail-sitter) while others reduced the rotor to a take-off and landing component; the most extreme proposals had pusher propellers and stub wings and had the rotor folded in flight to reduce drag. All these proposals weren't exactly a good solution to the problem, but VTOL is still considered to be extremely desirable and thus we keep researching for solutions. There's one quite obvious solution left that gets usually little attention in English-language writings about the subject; a third most obvious approach: Do the same as with the wings; swept wing geometry solved the Mach problem for wings, and it can theoretically do the same for rotors. I don't know exactly why we don't simply use sickle-shaped rotors, but there's another approach that lends from another solution used by fighters; variable geometry. Variable geometry wings were very fashionable in the 60's and solved some requirement conflicts for aircraft like the Panavia MRCA Tornado. The corresponding helicopter rotor design was the Derschmidt rotor. The Derschmidt rotor system was tested in 1964-1966 in the experimental helicopter Bölkow Bo 46 and this system uses rotor angles of up to +/- 40°. Estimated speed potential of the Bo 46 was 500 km/h, it was tested with up to 615 km/h in a wind tunnel and total potential with additional thrust and wings was estimated at 700 km/h. A helicopter with such a rotor system might today have the same speed range as a V-22 due to the forward thrust of the gas turbines and retractable landing gear. The lesson was pretty much that the technology of the 60's couldn't handle the challenge. Both control and materials challenges were too great. It's a recurring topic in German aviation literature that today's or future technology might be up to the challenge and create a high-speed helicopter. The present helicopter research is more oriented towards ongoing military helicopter programs and near-term solutions for Eurocopter's success, though. The political interest in renewed research seems to be small. Nevertheless, it deserves some attention next to the usual suspects that are being preferred by the Americans like Piasecki's compound helicopters, tilt-rotors, ABC rotors and alike. Sven Ortmann "

suite de l'article de mer et marine posté par G4lly sur le Panther : http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=110408 "Les armes : L'antinavire léger en ligne de mire Pour l'heure, les seules armes embarquées sur Panther sont, en sabord, une mitrailleuse du type AN-F1, ou un fusil de 12.7 mm pour tireur d'élite. Ces armes sont utilisées pour les missions de police, d'assaut héliporté et d'interception d'embarcations rapides, les marins français ayant acquis dans ce domaine une solide réputation. Lors de la présentation à Hyères, le Panther 505 présentait un missile disposé sur le côté droit de l'appareil. Il s'agit d'une maquette de l'antinavire léger (ANL), dont l'aéronautique navale pourrait se doter à l'horizon 2015. Ce projet implique la France mais également la Grande-Bretagne, qui souhaite remplacer ses actuels Sea Skua. La Royal Navy souhaitant conserver au maximum ses structures existantes, comme les systèmes de manutention des missiles, l'ANL (FASGW pour les Britanniques) devrait rester dans les volumes du Sea Skua, c'est-à-dire un missile d'environ 2 mètres pour 150 kilos. Anglais et Français en sont actuellement à la phase de levée de risques, MBDA devant rapprocher les besoins des deux armées pour converger vers un produit commun. Jusqu'en 1995, la France disposait sur ses Lynx d'un missile antinavire léger, l'AS 12. Son successeur, l'AS 15, adopté sur Panther par l'Arabie Saoudite et les Emirats Arabes Unis, n'a pas été retenu en France. A l'époque, les risques semblaient limités mais l'évolution des menaces asymétriques a remis au goût du jour cette capacité, tout comme la mise en oeuvre de moyens d'autoprotection. S'il s'avère qu'une embarcation de terroristes ou de pirates dispose de missiles sol-air de la classe Stinger, l'hélicoptère ne pourra en effet s'approcher, au risque de se faire abattre. Il devra donc rester hors de portée, mais également trop loin pour employer sa mitrailleuse ou son fusil de 12.7 mm. Dans le même temps, la marine souhaite redonner à ses hélicoptères une capacité antinavire contre des unités de combat de faible tonnage, très présentes dans les zones littorales. D'où la nécessité, pour traiter ces menaces, d'équiper les Panther d'un ANL, missile voulu comme simple et peu coûteux, pouvant être tiré contre un petit bateau ou un navire de la gamme corvette. Sa portée serait de quelques dizaines de kilomètres."

Il y a aussi dans cet article de mer et marine un paragraphe détaillé sur l'armement , dont le 12.7 montré par G4lly mais aussi tout un paragraphe sur le futur missile ANL que je colle dans le topic "missile héliporté".

Non, le KFIR était une copie sur plans du mirage III , peut-être dérobé chez le fabricant des M3 SUISSES. L'appareil ''indigène'' était le LAVI, plus proche d'un F16.

Est ce cette absence de développement de la fonction air-sol qui explique aussi l'absence de version Sea Typhoon ou seulement les taquets logiciels notamment à basse vitesse de l'appareil ? Je guette toujours si l'on revoit réapparaitre ou non le monstre du loch ness de la version navalisée du Sea Typhoon : Théoriquement la prochaine apparition devrait être lors des prochains soucis du F-35 ou de la seconde moitié de la tranche 3 des typhoons...

"25 May 2009 ... Schwartz: Air Force to Kick Off OA-X Irregular Warfare Aircraft Program by 2011. " defense.iwpnewsstand.com/newsstand_latest.asp mais c'est un lien payant... on trouve toutefois ceci début Avril : AIR FORCE FUNDS STUDY TO DETERMINE LIGHT-ATTACK PLANE REQUIREMENT _______________________________________________ Date: April 3, 2009 The Air Force has kicked off a study to determine whether it will buy a light-attack plane, according to service officials. The capabilities-based assessment -- which is being conducted by the Air Combat Command strategic plans division with fiscal year 2009 funding -- will “help with the initial requirements definition for a potential OA-X” aircraft, according to a service official. “The results of that effort will be used in formulating requirements documentation and acquisition strategies in accordance with the Joint Capabilities Integration Development System,” the official said, noting the study is still in the early stages. The OA-X capabilities-based assessment follows a similar ACC irregular warfare study -- which included an analysis of light-attack and other propeller-driven aircraft -- conducted last year. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz ordered the study in September 2008, ACC officials told Inside the Air Force in October (ITAF, Nov. 7, 2008, p1). “Embedded within that capabilities-based assessment are the concepts such as an OA-X [light-attack plane] or an enduring RC-12 mission,” Col. George Bochain, then-chief of ACC’s Joint Air-Ground Combat Division, said in an Oct. 29 interview at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia. Air Force officials believe some type of multirole, light-attack aircraft could have a role in counterinsurgency operations and assist in building partnerships with nations that cannot afford -- or do not have a need for -- pricey fighter jets or unmanned aerial systems. “Who knows where that’s going to go, but certainly our Air Force is looking very, very hard at it and looking at the various courses of action and potential CONOPS and then fitting it into that big thing called reality of money and budget prioritization,” 12th Air Force and Air Forces Southern Commander Lt. Gen. Norman Seip said in a March 30 telephone interview. The three-star -- who oversees Air Force operations in the Caribbean and South and Latin America -- likened potential foreign sales of an OA-X aircraft to the service’s highly successful international F-16 fighter program. “When you join the F-16 club, you’ve got great support from all aspects of that weapons system,” he said. “The same thing can happen with a . . . light-attack, light-interdiction, OA-X . . . aircraft there. “You can envision some day where everyone would come up to the states for that training, or you’d have some regional training centers and now you’ve got the exchange pilots in place [and] exchange maintenance officers in place,” Seip continued. An Air Force endorsement and purchase of an aircraft helps if a foreign nation eventually acquires the platform because supply systems, training, logistics and maintenance pipelines are already established. “Anytime the United States is buying something and putting it into their Air Force . . . lots of people are going to have an interest in it because we will have worked through all the bugs,” Seip said. Still unclear is when the OA-X capabilities-based assessment will be complete, or how much it will cost. -- Marcus Weisgerber http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36808348

Y aussi cela mais j'ai qq problèmes (pour le moment à tout comprendre)! http://www.avia-n-aero.ru/photo.php?category_id=596&parent_id=564&photo_id=4916&countdisplay=&start=0 et qq data sur secretprojects : http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2766.30.html Ka-92 - 227-243 kts cruising speed

"Ka-90 The most radical concept is the Ka-90, described as a “high-speed vehicle of rotorcraft type”. Kamov general designer Sergey Mikheyev says the Ka-90 has been a “long evolving” concept of “helicopter at take-off/landing, and airplane in cruise flight”. In essence, the Ka-90 is a “variable-geometry” air vehicle with two separate propulsion systems, one for cruise and one for take-off/landing. Proposed in 1985, it was shelved after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Now dusted off, it is back under work. A scale model revealed at the HeliRussia 2008 show in May provided evidence of the Ka-90 having a turbojet in the rear fuselage for high-speed level flight and retractable rotor for take-off and landing. Presumably, the lift in cruise flight will be generated by a “wing”, in this case a huge, specially shaped container above the fuselage to which the rotor blades are retracted after being folded. According to Mikheyev, the Ka-90 is intended to have a cruise speed of 378kt.

Effectivement, sauf que cela va faire comme pour l'A400m : on va mettre une somme non négligeable au pot pour la R&D mais sans rien voir venir avant 2020 (si tout va bien... ;)) Et qu'entretemps cet argent va être pris sur le peu qui reste avec une RGPP pas encore fonctionnelle et une bosse budgétaire pas aplanie : donc encore des sous de moins pour le PA2 et sans combler un besoin Ops urgent (ex en A-Stan où merci les Chinook US...) sans parler de l'aérotransport au bord du gouffre... Bref comme dit Berkut : le Mimile il couterait moins cher et on l'aurait de suite...et on amputerait pas d'autres programmes (suiver mon regard).

Certes mais comme le seul prospect qui te permette de différer tes livraisons pour l'AdA est les EAU, lesquels demandent une version améliorée non encore sur chaine d'assemblage (notamment pour le M88 à 90 kts) comment faire pendant ce temps ?