ha ha ha, so I was at work today looking at proposals, and this crossed my desk:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=ffcbb6b5df9cd19e61cca149bba3b131&tab=core&_cview=1

Quote :

"The objective of the Transformer (TX) program is to demonstrate a 1 to 4 person transportation vehicle that can drive and fly, thus enabling the warfighter to avoid water, difficult terrain, and road obstructions as well as IED and ambush threats. The vehicle will be capable of driving on prepared surface and light off-road conditions, while flight functionality will require Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL). In addition, range and speed efficiencies will allow for tactically relevant missions to be performed on a single tank of fuel. The ability to provide the warfighter a platform that enables terrain-independent mobility would significantly affect how distributed operations are performed today. Current transport systems present operational limitations where the warfighter is either anchored to the ground with HMMWVs and thus vulnerable to ambush, or reliant on helicopters, which are limited in flight speed and availability. TX provides the flexibility to adapt to traditional and asymmetric threats by providing the operator unimpeded movement over difficult terrain. In addition, transportation is no longer restricted to trafficable terrain that tends to makes movement predictable. The TX vehicle also allows the warfighter to approach targets from directions opportune to them and not the enemy. "

First thing that crossed my mind was






COOL STORY, BRAH!

1/7/2010 5:37:49 PM

supercool, this story is, bro

1/7/2010 5:39:09 PM

pilgrimshoes, we should start a company, apply for a SBIR, and do this, BRAH!

1/7/2010 5:40:07 PM

i want to build that

1/7/2010 5:40:32 PM

It's a pretty neat concept. I'm happy to see that a need is being expressed for it.

I'd imagine that the clearance, take off, flight process would need to be on point...like, happen super fast in order for this to be useful in the tactical application described above.

1/7/2010 5:43:24 PM

just make it hop like a bunny rabbit

1/7/2010 5:45:58 PM

you should build one.

1/7/2010 5:54:11 PM

sounds like a multi-million dollar vehicle
VTOL without helicopter limitations and off-road capability = humvee with harrier engines
and they want this readily available for every 1-4 guys? ha

how about we go back to that guy on Beyond 2000 and his james bond rocket packs?? hmm?

[Edited on January 7, 2010 at 6:03 PM. Reason : ]

1/7/2010 6:02:39 PM

I think they want for the vehicle to be able to seat 1 - 4 crew members....


and these types of things are really more of a technology demonstration type of thing. Anything resembling this wouldn't hit the field for a looooong time

1/7/2010 6:06:27 PM

especially when hemp oil becomes the only legal source of energy eh comrade

1/7/2010 6:33:43 PM

just get everyone one of these

1/7/2010 6:35:49 PM

not armored

1/7/2010 6:37:40 PM

Osprey isn't good enough for delivery and extraction? They need a helicopter that can refuel in flight? Oh wait.

1/7/2010 6:38:55 PM

I think what they're getting at is...

a small vehicle
capable of driving as well as a normal ground vehicle
capable of taking off quickly, and flying as well as a plane


Osprey def. doesn't do that jerb.

1/7/2010 6:42:42 PM

Well, I assume that means they want jet propulsion of some sort. I just don't see it happening without some crazy change in the way we defy gravity. It's like how good of an idea it is to take cover behind an M1A1.

1/7/2010 6:48:13 PM

meh...

I've seen some crazy shit at work. I think that it's far from impossible. I don't think it's anywhere close to being affordable by any means. But, that's why large corporations go after things like this. They have the money, resources, and talent to do this kind of rapid prototyping for these types of technology demonstrations. Over the course of years, the prototype is improved... technology improves... costs go down.

If the idea takes, and someone wants to buy 50,000 of them, that initial investment then becomes well worth it.

1/7/2010 6:55:14 PM

I'm not exactly sure why you would want to drive though. Soon as you land, you are again at risk for the things which were the reason to take-off in the first place. I think we can logistically support depots in places so air-cav would be able to complete strategic missions.

1/7/2010 6:59:45 PM

6^ being armored isn't part of the description



[Edited on January 7, 2010 at 7:00 PM. Reason : ]

1/7/2010 7:00:06 PM

At first I was like, we already have a thread for transformers on Chit Chat, but then I was like, oh, that's not what this is about.

That said, I think we'll see something closer to a Gundam IRL long before anything close to a Transformer

1/7/2010 7:01:23 PM

That heavily depends on the mission. There's still a very real need to fight on the ground. Since this is the case, why not fly over a marsh instead of fording through it? Why not fly over a field where you know IEDs are instead of relying on an EMP to detonate the devices prematurely or hoping that your armor is strong enough to keep you alive?


^^ True. As a general rule of thumb in the military, you don't go out in the field unless you're armored though.

1/7/2010 7:04:31 PM

Blackhawks and fuel depots?

1/7/2010 7:05:53 PM

1/7/2010 7:08:00 PM

^^ what? I think that you're missing the point.

There are things that an MH-60 can /cannot do. There are things that a HMMWV can / cannot do. This is aimed at closing that gap by providing a more versatile vehicle.

1/7/2010 7:12:34 PM

that 18m RX-78-2 is a thing of beauty

1/7/2010 7:13:00 PM

1/7/2010 7:14:24 PM

What would be better than a single do-all craft, would be something like Halo Pelican drop-ship. Have a universal cargo interface where you can deploy the carried load when you need do. You could transport a fully crewed HMMWV for a near-ground drop or a supply module drop from higher-altitude. Have multiple vehicles/modules/loadouts for the craft and you can have something very versatile. I guess you could use ducted fans, but I'm no MAE student. The ability to have one craft be in constant motion to deploy and extract assets would be amazing logistically. If there's a universal interface, then you can also re-route craft not already loaded (or just have them drop if need be). The problem with anything that flies low, I imagine, would be the susceptibility to RPGs/Stingers and need for armor against small-arms fire. Hell, you could even have a bombing module on it to supply air-support that a helicopter can't.

1/7/2010 7:17:54 PM

...and then once the HMMWV's are dropped on the ground, what do you then have?


seriously man, don't make me send the monkey after you

1/7/2010 7:23:01 PM

Do you want to fly or drive!?

If you want to fly, send out a damn gunship. If you want to drive, throw some Marines in a HMMWV and use drop-ship support for deployment/recovery. It's not like you can fly and drive at the same time and avoid IEDs and air threats simultaneously. Might as well be in a marine loaded LCAC then.

1/7/2010 7:30:11 PM

Quote :

"Do you want to fly or drive!?"

Obviously, the answer to that question is both...

you seriously can't grasp the fact that, depending on the mission, there would be a need to do both?

1/7/2010 7:33:53 PM

Nope, can't grasp that.

1/7/2010 7:34:34 PM

Alright then, that explains a lot...

I think we can safely bring a closure to this discussion

1/7/2010 7:46:17 PM

Okay, you can have your heli-humvee-ospreybot and unicorns.

1/7/2010 7:49:41 PM

Deal. Just don't do anything crazy like pop a piece of gum in your mouth while walking. We wouldn't want you getting hurt, little guy

1/7/2010 7:51:18 PM

1/7/2010 7:57:58 PM

1/7/2010 7:59:40 PM

1/7/2010 8:21:30 PM

COOL DRAWING, BRAH!

I think we're ready for production@!!1

1/7/2010 8:24:19 PM

robots in disguise

1/7/2010 8:25:08 PM

Quote :

"COOL DRAWING, BRAH! I think we're ready for production@!!1"

Hell yeah! Roll them off the production lines to drop mobile cans of whoop-ass on the enemy.

1/7/2010 8:46:04 PM

would you mind if I take that drawing in to my management team tomorrow?

1/7/2010 8:47:55 PM

Go ahead.

1/7/2010 8:49:02 PM