Members Login
Post Info TOPIC: Boeing 235 AAH
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Dec 14, 2014
Boeing 235 AAH
Permalink  
 


Boeing 235 AAH (Advanced Attack Helicopter) actually not the beautiful helicopter, especially is strange, an arrangement of the pilot and shooter.



-- Edited by mil on Sunday 14th of December 2014 08:04:20 PM

Attachments
__________________


Moderator

Posts: 95
Date: Dec 15, 2014
Permalink  
 

Very unique. It seems like that would pose a hazard to the crew especially in hot zones. The glass would have to be armored I would guess to protect them against enemy fire. Thanks for posting this, I had no idea this helicopter even existed. Would you happen to have a side view? Kind regards, Jeremy

__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Dec 15, 2014
Permalink  
 

Look with a side it here stingraysrotorforum.activeboard.com/t26318430/boeing/

__________________


Moderator

Posts: 95
Date: Dec 16, 2014
Permalink  
 

Thanks mil, the joys of being a noob. Lol

__________________


Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Dec 20, 2014
Permalink  
 

jrbirdman wrote:

Very unique. It seems like that would pose a hazard to the crew especially in hot zones. The glass would have to be armored I would guess to protect them against enemy fire. Thanks for posting this, I had no idea this helicopter even existed. Would you happen to have a side view? Kind regards, Jeremy


 The Model 235 was Boeing-Vertol's entry for the AAH program in 1973 built with shared components from the YUH-61A. It was only a mockup and it lost to the Hughes YAH-64. Good riddance, it was fugly! X_x



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Moderator

Posts: 95
Date: Dec 21, 2014
Permalink  
 

I agree, it wasn't pretty at all. lol

__________________


Senior Member - Level 1

Posts: 500
Date: Dec 23, 2014
Permalink  
 

I don't recall most of the technical characteristics, but I can tell you straight away that the aesthetic alone was enough for the Army to pass it up. The asymmetric seating was too radical.  It *slightly* improved visibility for the rear crew member's left side and front, but so much as to sacrifice visibility for most of the right side. Bad idea.



__________________
Alan Dallas


Global Moderator

Posts: 1328
Date: Dec 23, 2014
Permalink  
 

It does look like a lot of wasted space on the right, better to just have a regular tandem config.



__________________
Airwolf_logo.jpg


Moderator

Posts: 95
Date: Dec 23, 2014
Permalink  
 

Why would they think that design would be practical in a wartime environment? Makes no sense to me.

__________________


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 219
Date: Jan 8, 2015
Permalink  
 

jrbirdman wrote:

Why would they think that design would be practical in a wartime environment? Makes no sense to me.


 This is likely the same response from Army Aviation. I would love to read the technical documentation that concluded with this configuration, if it's available. Just to get a clearer idea of what they were going for.



__________________


Senior Member - Level 1

Posts: 500
Date: Jan 8, 2015
Permalink  
 

There isn't much else to say about it. It was an idea for improving visibility for the rear crew member. The result was a skewed and wider frontal profile than what is normally preferred for helicopters in this particular role, and as Leela said, a lot of wasted space on the right hemisphere where you could seat a third person if you wanted to (though unnecessary). Somehow the design team overlooked the problem with right-side visibility.

I would hardly consider this to be the "concluding" (i.e. finalized) configuration had the Army expressed interest and surely would have responded to these issues with a major revision.



-- Edited by Gunship on Friday 9th of January 2015 06:19:31 AM

__________________
Alan Dallas


Veteran Member - Level 2

Posts: 219
Date: Jan 8, 2015
Permalink  
 

Actually there is. Based on what we see in the pictures, how much of its radical nature influenced the control layout? Which of the crew members is the pilot or gunner? I would assume that the pilot would be in the rear position as on a standard tandem layout, but the special emphasis given to the front seat suggests, in my opinion, a pilot position with increased visibility while the rear position housed the gunner in which he would utilize whatever optical sighting they had planned. There is a lot that needs clarifying.



__________________
mil


Veteran Member - Level 1

Posts: 47
Date: Jan 9, 2016
Permalink  
 

not really beautiful helicopter



Attachments
__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard