DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Grand Ole Osprey » Bell Bearish on 609

Bell Bearish on 609

bell609.jpg

Defense Tech friend and contributor Bob Cox of the Fort Worth Star Telegram has been a Bell-Boeing/Osprey/tiltrotor watchdog for years. His latest story is quite a scoop and looks like a crushing blow to the civilian tiltrotor industry in which Bell had invested a lot of effort and hope.

Bell Helicopter spent a half-century developing tilt-rotor technology and the V-22 Osprey, but the companys once-enthusiastic commitment to build a similar aircraft for the civilian market seems to have diminished considerably.

The company doesnt see a promising market in the U.S. for the BA609 tilt-rotor aircraft and has shifted a larger share of the continuing development work to its Italian joint-venture partner, AgustaWestland.

Bell will continue to provide personnel and some funding for continued development and testing of the BA609, but Mike Blake, executive vice president of programs for the company, said AgustaWestland will provide more capital and take the lead in completing flight testing and production of the aircraft.

“I think Bell will always be involved in the 609 program in some way,” he said in an interview with the Star-Telegram. “How is to be determined.”

Officials of the two companies met recently and agreed on the latest revision to the development plan and timetable, Blake said. Test aircraft three and four have been delivered to AgustaWestland, which will now operate three of the four test planes. Bell will continue test flights of the first aircraft from its Xworkx facility in Arlington.

A six– to nine-passenger aircraft, the BA609 was designed to take advantage of tilt-rotor technology to provide an aircraft for government and private-sector users that combines airplane speed with the vertical takeoff and landing capability of a helicopter.

When the Bell-Agusta alliance was formed in 1998, company officials advertised the BA609 as a $10 million aircraft and said they had 68 orders. Now they have about 80 orders, many of them on the books for a decade. No firm price is quoted publicly, but numbers in the range of $15 million to $20 million each are tossed about within the industry.

Publicly, Bell officials continued to voice support for the program. But privately its another matter.

Again, as you all know I’m a proponent of tiltrotor technology and think that opposition to it has become almost like a religion. And with the bleak history of the V-22, who can blame them.

But to me if the civilian version of the V-22 can’t get any traction then it seems that tiltrotors still have a long way to go before they can be considered viable alternatives to rotorcraft. And I guess cost and convenience would have to play a large role as well.

Good on Bob for keeping Bell honest.

– Christian

Share |

July 7th, 2008 | Grand Ole Osprey | 394012 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/07/07/bell-bearish-on-609/Bell+Bearish+on+6092008-07-07+16%3A13%3A51Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « 10K MRAPS Lumber into Battle | Point Blank Wins Again » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. ohwilleke says:
    July 7, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    The currently economically viable uses are light civilian passenger rotorcraft are basically, in approximately this order of market size:
    1. TV News
    2. Medevac
    3. Law enforcement
    4. VIP transportation
    5. Military/coast guard/national guard duty
    A tilt rotor doesn’t seem to add much to TV News or Law Enforcement use, where the focus is on hovering while in the air at short range, not medium distance transport with verticle landing.
    The military/coast guard/national guard function seems more likely to be filled by the Osprey than the 609. SAR duty and security team transport both favor large passenger numbers and payloads.
    This leaves Medevac and VIP transport. Both are thin markets. But VIP transport is thinner and more price conscious — taking a helicopter from a downtown helipad to private jet isn’t that much more burdensome than going direct from helipad to destination, but is much cheaper, although someone might want one for the attention it attracts. The VIP market is also limited by the tortured testing history of the Osprey which might inspire fear when your billion dollar CEO is in one.
    Medevac seems a perfect role for the 609. Time is truly of the essence for medevac. The need for rotorcraft is to takeoff and land, rather than to hover during flight. The greater range and speed than a traditional rotorcraft would be a significant benefit. And, the ability to have a larger payload would be nice; most have room for one or two patients and two crew, at best.
    The best business strategy for selling the 609, it would seem to me, is to get the planes out there being used so that they can demonstrate their value. Individual lives saved in remote areas make a better sales pitch than specifications on paper.
    Perhaps Bell should try to get a rural health grant to put some in the hands of communities that need long range, difficult terrain medevac and can’t afford it. Alaska’s earmark kings and queens would have an easier time selling 609s for remote medevac than they would roads to nowhere.

    Reply
  2. tipover says:
    July 7, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    Military capability and requirements don’t always cross over to civilian needs. Someday someone may come up with a need for VTOL, long range, high speed that justifies the price. Example: The Hummer is a great military vehicle but most civilians don’t have the real need for the vehicles capability’s at the cost involved. Something cheaper will do the job (H2 and H3 work as well in most cases, are cheaper and still provide some ego boost for wannabe’s).
    So far the market for the product has not been developed or is there. It sounds like the manufacturers need to develop and SELL their product; the customers are not running to them with money in hand.
    Could it be that military contractors are used to the customer coming to them with a request for a product, paying for development and obligating themselves to a minimum purchase?

    Reply
  3. Dennis says:
    July 7, 2008 at 12:58 pm

    Another reason they may be backing away is a British Company just came out and said they are developing a Hybrid tilt rotor design.
    A turbine makes electricity in the body and sends it to electric motors to turn the props.
    No fuel lines thorough the tilt part. No multiple hydraulics systems through the tilt part.
    This design is about a hundred times simpler. And a lot more heavy duty.

    Reply
  4. Formerly known as Skeptic says:
    July 7, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    One other significant market segment for civilian rotorcraft is the offshore oil rig transport. A tiltrotor would seem to be ideal for this market segment as well.

    Reply
    • Leavon says:
      January 30, 2010 at 7:02 pm

      Especially with the fields getting farther away from the mainland, the added range makes this a good choice though the payload will be an issue.

      Reply
  5. justbill says:
    July 8, 2008 at 5:18 am

    Except perhaps for medevac use, where speed often means life, I don’t see many civilian customers legitimizing the increased cost of a tilt rotor vs. what’s already on the market at a lower price. Bell is probably doing the smart thing.

    Reply
  6. Roy Smith says:
    July 8, 2008 at 6:16 am

    Why couldn’t VIP air squadrons like the Army’s 12th Aviation Battalion or the Marine’s Marine One Squadron use them? I also thought that the Coast guard were considering using these? I don’t think that the problem here is no mission for them,but it is rather no imagination for what they could do.Also,if it’s a matter of cost,congress doesn’t seem to have a problem with finding money for bridges to nowhere in Alaska,I’m very sure they could find money for this.

    Reply
  7. David Hambling says:
    July 8, 2008 at 7:40 am

    Breaking news: Tilt-rotors are not economical!
    Next up: What is the Pope’s religion?
    Not too surprising, but it’ll be very impressive if they really can deliver a 609 at less than $25m at that volume. Meanwhile, other technology like the fast rotorcraft covered recently is going to start eating away at the potenetial market at much lower cost.

    Reply
  8. coviepresb1647 says:
    July 10, 2008 at 10:45 am

    “Next up: What is the Pope’s religion?“
    The Pope’s religion is obviously Catholic. However, in our denomination, our Confession (in addition to the Lutheran and other Reformed Confessions) states that the Pope is Anti-Christ and “Son of Perdition” in the New Testament (i.e, Thessalonians).

    Reply
  9. SOF gold says:
    August 2, 2008 at 2:56 am

    The game world, Red dust roll, the vast human sea, a friend to encounter each other, can come together and mutual understanding, mutual understanding and closer, it is fate. In life journey, in their different life trajectory, the different experiences in the heart of the sea, to meet each other, it can be said is a lucky, fate is not at all times, should treasure the hard earned edge.
    Game days, he pursued JP, clothes completely F10, fire 8. Hands and feet are completely F10. Knife is the Z10. WGF complete sets of 80. Certainly, he spent a lot of SOF gold. He is also very good friends. They play with friends are also now 10 knives. But one day, the things of him was lost, we are very sad.

    Reply
  10. 2moons gold says:
    August 6, 2008 at 4:00 am

    Therefore, when I practiced this role, I have also spent much energy and the 2moons gold.

    Reply
  11. Michael says:
    October 12, 2009 at 2:24 am

    Lacoste Shoes
    Discounted Lacoste Shoes
    Latest Lacoste Radiate Croc Shoes

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    Recent Comments
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      From a national security perspective we should do all we can to keep...
      mike
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      Please define what is "best". Boeings plane is cheaper and...
      Curt
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      F4 was origionally a Navy Fighter, so coming up with a...
      Curt
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      The US Navy was right to bypass congress and develop the...
      Tony C
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      The fly-away cost of a F-22 is between 130 and...
      The Norwegian
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      I reckon that the J-10 would be a good bet. Y'all...
      Chimp
    • Raptor Down (58-40)
      This story never gets old. This plane was never meant to be this...
      DeepThinker
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      um… they already have them. Hunters and...
      Buongi
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      Interesting, though, from my experience, many...
      Buongi
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Not completely true-remember the Navy can be very picky...
      Chops
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage