The US Office of Naval Research's February request for information on cargo unmanned aircraft has drawn a response from Baldwin Technology, which has been working on the unusual Mono Tiltrotor (MTR) concept with funding from the US Army's Aviation Applied Technology Directorate. Basically Baldwin has taken its idea for a subscale MTR demonstrator and adapted it to the Cargo UAS mission, as shown in this 8-minute video:
Video: Baldwin Technology
Having completed work under its AATD contract, Baldwin is hoping to continue refining the design with funding from ONR. The MTR started out as a concept for an unmanned heavylift rotorcraft capable of carrying a 20-ton payload 1,000nm unrefueled. The company calculates the MTR would be half the size and a third the weight of a conventional heavylift helicopter, with one third the fuel burn.
The scaled-down MTR-SD was conceived to demonstrate the key features of the design: aerodynamically deployed wing, pitch-axis suspended load, and tilting coaxial rotor. It was sized around an earlier ONR vision of a VTOL cargo UAV - 9,400lb gross weight, 3,000lb payload, 200kt cruise speed, and capable of being folded up for transport inside a container. ONR's latest spec calls for less payload (1,600lb), but more speed (250kt).
Even if it gets an ONR contract, Baldwin still has a long way to go to make the MTR a reality. Under its AATD contract, the company flew a small radio-controlled helicopter to demonstrate the articulating wing, suspended load and tilting rotor. But Army safety rules prevented Baldwin from achieving its goal of combining all three features in a larger RC model, as detailed in a previous Ares post and seen in this earlier video.
Video: Baldwin Technology
Having said that, the Baldwin MTR is not a realistic or practical approach. The configuration has too many development issues to overcome. The more likely solution will be a conventional tilt rotor, such as that being proposed in the JFTL program.
Complex,
Don't count the K-Max out. It is a impressive ship in a relatively small package.
Thanks for passing on the requirements. That certainly is an interesting worded requirement set.
I particularly find it interesting that it sets a 24-hour 20,000-pound requirement. I have been kicking around what is more tactically important to the Marines when it comes to the extremes of that requirement: a quick ship that can do 20 1,000-lb load cycles versus a heavy doing 4 5,000-lb cycles.
In my job, I spend alot of my time doing this exact exercise and I almost always conclude that a heavy doing a minimum number of cycles is far superior due to the reduced flying time (maintenance)and reduced risk/stress on pilots. However, an unmanned ship completely changes this thought process.
The other side of this is that no one (particularly my employer) likes sending a heavy out with a 1,000-lb sling-load when there is another 24,000-lbs more of capability (S-64 Skycrane/Aircrane). It just is not efficient.
All this being said, I am guessing that the capabilities of the ship that is selected will be closer to the 5,000lb side than the 1,000lb side. Given that both the Unmanned Little Bird (MD500F) and the A160 both have max-hook capacity around 1,000-lbs (at ideal altitudes and temperatures), it looks very likely that the K-Max will come out ahead considering its ability to operate well above the 1,000-lb minimum cargo requirements in high altitudes and hot temperatures.