<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sikorsky Piasecki X-49 &#8220;Speedhawk&#8221; - First Flight in June</title>
	<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/</link>
	<description>The Aviation Blog</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Edward</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-4834</link>
		<author>Edward</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 19:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-4834</guid>
					<description>UGLY!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UGLY!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-7175</link>
		<author>Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-7175</guid>
					<description>[...] Sikorsky Piasecki X-49A &#8220;Speedhawk&#8221; flight test video has emerged on YouTube. Piasecki Aircraft is near the end of its initial test run [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Sikorsky Piasecki X-49A &#8220;Speedhawk&#8221; flight test video has emerged on YouTube. Piasecki Aircraft is near the end of its initial test run [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock!  Anytime, Baby!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-7470</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock!  Anytime, Baby!</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-7470</guid>
					<description>kinda cool, though not real practical...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>kinda cool, though not real practical&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beagle Pilot</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-18454</link>
		<author>Beagle Pilot</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 02:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-18454</guid>
					<description>Outstanding!  If they can get the speed over 200 Kts, it will be a terrific low cost alternative to the tilt rotor for a high speed insertion and extraction of Special Forces teams, Combat SAR for downed aviators and many other missions requiring a hovering capability where time and range is of the essence to mission success.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Outstanding!  If they can get the speed over 200 Kts, it will be a terrific low cost alternative to the tilt rotor for a high speed insertion and extraction of Special Forces teams, Combat SAR for downed aviators and many other missions requiring a hovering capability where time and range is of the essence to mission success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-21558</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-21558</guid>
					<description>beagle pilot, the wings might make getting in and out in a hurry kinda difficult.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>beagle pilot, the wings might make getting in and out in a hurry kinda difficult.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hotrod</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-21693</link>
		<author>Hotrod</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-21693</guid>
					<description>It's a solution to a problem that no-one has been talking about. Groovy aircraft though. I can't see what sort of mission this aircraft would fulfil, though. The V-22 fits any mission profile that the Speedhawk could carry out, and the tilt-rotor system is a more elegant solution....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a solution to a problem that no-one has been talking about. Groovy aircraft though. I can&#8217;t see what sort of mission this aircraft would fulfil, though. The V-22 fits any mission profile that the Speedhawk could carry out, and the tilt-rotor system is a more elegant solution&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-22558</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-22558</guid>
					<description>Hotrod, tilt-rotor is also a very problematic, complex solution, plus Speedhawk is smaller and presumably a little more versatile</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hotrod, tilt-rotor is also a very problematic, complex solution, plus Speedhawk is smaller and presumably a little more versatile</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hotrod</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-23103</link>
		<author>Hotrod</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-23103</guid>
					<description>Granted, but the USMC seem to be making good use of the Osprey! I really cant see the point of the Speedhawk, apart from looking extremely cool, because the wings preclude most evac missions and the ducted tailfan would be noisy as all hell as well as blowing crap all over the shop. I mention the evac mission as the CSAR-X program is in trouble and I could see the Speedhawk being a new contender in it, with suitable development...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Granted, but the USMC seem to be making good use of the Osprey! I really cant see the point of the Speedhawk, apart from looking extremely cool, because the wings preclude most evac missions and the ducted tailfan would be noisy as all hell as well as blowing crap all over the shop. I mention the evac mission as the CSAR-X program is in trouble and I could see the Speedhawk being a new contender in it, with suitable development&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: XV-15</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-28104</link>
		<author>XV-15</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 02:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-28104</guid>
					<description>You know, the statement about how "complex" Tilt-Rotor is keeps cropping up, but is it so?  The Speedhawk concept frankly doesn't seem to be any less complex.  You've got all the complexity of a conventional helo plus the auxiliary propulsion system and thrust diverter for anti-torque.  In addition you have to deal with the issue of rotor tip speed at these higher velocities as well as retreating blade stall at above 200 knot speeds.  The concept has been mooted as a way to get increased speed out of existing rotorcraft in lieu of developing a whole new aircraft.  Maybe so, but this guy has been around for quite a while and so far has not flown faster than a clean H-60 without all the extra gear.  

I frankly don't see how Tilt-Rotor is "more complex" than other advanced rotorcraft, and so far it's been more successful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know, the statement about how &#8220;complex&#8221; Tilt-Rotor is keeps cropping up, but is it so?  The Speedhawk concept frankly doesn&#8217;t seem to be any less complex.  You&#8217;ve got all the complexity of a conventional helo plus the auxiliary propulsion system and thrust diverter for anti-torque.  In addition you have to deal with the issue of rotor tip speed at these higher velocities as well as retreating blade stall at above 200 knot speeds.  The concept has been mooted as a way to get increased speed out of existing rotorcraft in lieu of developing a whole new aircraft.  Maybe so, but this guy has been around for quite a while and so far has not flown faster than a clean H-60 without all the extra gear.  </p>
<p>I frankly don&#8217;t see how Tilt-Rotor is &#8220;more complex&#8221; than other advanced rotorcraft, and so far it&#8217;s been more successful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-28533</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:38:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-28533</guid>
					<description>more successful?  look, don't get me wrong, i love the tilt-rotor concept, and the Osprey in particular, but the Osprey has been having development problems for decades, and the Marines were forced to drop their autorotation requirement due to, idk, probably cost overruns or technical difficulties.  and yes, Speedhawk is also probably complex, but if you have two rotating rotors that have to be perfectly synchronized, and the wing swivels, and the gun doesn't have clear fields of fire out the back until the ramp until it fully opens, and...  those are critics arguments.  true, Osprey is probably better, and for sure farther along, but Speedhawk might work well in high-speed insertions in crowded environments (it's thinner)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>more successful?  look, don&#8217;t get me wrong, i love the tilt-rotor concept, and the Osprey in particular, but the Osprey has been having development problems for decades, and the Marines were forced to drop their autorotation requirement due to, idk, probably cost overruns or technical difficulties.  and yes, Speedhawk is also probably complex, but if you have two rotating rotors that have to be perfectly synchronized, and the wing swivels, and the gun doesn&#8217;t have clear fields of fire out the back until the ramp until it fully opens, and&#8230;  those are critics arguments.  true, Osprey is probably better, and for sure farther along, but Speedhawk might work well in high-speed insertions in crowded environments (it&#8217;s thinner)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A1C PERRY</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32670</link>
		<author>A1C PERRY</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 11:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32670</guid>
					<description>i work at hurlburt field on the gunships here, also where the ospreys are coming in, and from what i here from the other maintainers, they are very problematic. the speedhawk is cheaper (you dont even have to make a completely new body style for it, since it's just a modded sh-60) less complex hydraulic wise, and less accident prone (often have i heard the engines swinging down from up and safe while maintenance was being conducted) although i am a little biased since my step father is working in the speedhawk project and seen to many accidents with the ospreys than i would have liked.


hotrod, the tailring is ducted, so it can be channeled or increase/decrease power coming from it, so the noise and "blowing things everywhere" is manageble. currently the only negative thing to come from the modified sh-60 is it's weight placement: it's rear heavy, all the added weight is added to the helo's center of balance and the tail, nothing added to the front. i remember seeing a video of it's first flight and watching the tail bouncing on the pavement. the engineers are trying to solve the problem by moving the rotor a few feet back. but in time we will see how well it works out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i work at hurlburt field on the gunships here, also where the ospreys are coming in, and from what i here from the other maintainers, they are very problematic. the speedhawk is cheaper (you dont even have to make a completely new body style for it, since it&#8217;s just a modded sh-60) less complex hydraulic wise, and less accident prone (often have i heard the engines swinging down from up and safe while maintenance was being conducted) although i am a little biased since my step father is working in the speedhawk project and seen to many accidents with the ospreys than i would have liked.</p>
<p>hotrod, the tailring is ducted, so it can be channeled or increase/decrease power coming from it, so the noise and &#8220;blowing things everywhere&#8221; is manageble. currently the only negative thing to come from the modified sh-60 is it&#8217;s weight placement: it&#8217;s rear heavy, all the added weight is added to the helo&#8217;s center of balance and the tail, nothing added to the front. i remember seeing a video of it&#8217;s first flight and watching the tail bouncing on the pavement. the engineers are trying to solve the problem by moving the rotor a few feet back. but in time we will see how well it works out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32686</link>
		<author>Michael</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32686</guid>
					<description>@ A1C PERRY: Thanks for the comment. It's much appreciated!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ A1C PERRY: Thanks for the comment. It&#8217;s much appreciated!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32725</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 20:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32725</guid>
					<description>anything your stepfather can say about the Speedhawk project?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>anything your stepfather can say about the Speedhawk project?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A1C PERRY</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32894</link>
		<author>A1C PERRY</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 04:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32894</guid>
					<description>i'll call him later this week, if anything i can post more information about it that i know about (note my step dad works there, i dont, so i dont know everthing)

although i do know they are fighting with the pilot (common case) where the pilot wants to fly it to much, and it will stress the aircraft especially since its unfinished. but seeing it fly is neat regardless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;ll call him later this week, if anything i can post more information about it that i know about (note my step dad works there, i dont, so i dont know everthing)</p>
<p>although i do know they are fighting with the pilot (common case) where the pilot wants to fly it to much, and it will stress the aircraft especially since its unfinished. but seeing it fly is neat regardless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hotrod</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32972</link>
		<author>Hotrod</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 22:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-32972</guid>
					<description>A1C Perry, thanks for offering a different point of view. I'm afraid I disagree with you about the ducted fan, though! It will blow stuff everywhere, especially if it was deployed in a desert region. To make a comparison - remember the Chaparral Can-Am racer driven by Vic Elford in the 70s? That had two fans to suck the car down. Drivers behind him complained of stones and dirt thrown at them from the fans. The same thing happened with the Formula 1 Brabham "fan car" which had a large fan on the back of it. Drivers following it................etc.

And I still don't think it REALLY has a purpose apart from being very groovy looking. By the way, is there any news on how the CSAR-X programme is progressing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A1C Perry, thanks for offering a different point of view. I&#8217;m afraid I disagree with you about the ducted fan, though! It will blow stuff everywhere, especially if it was deployed in a desert region. To make a comparison - remember the Chaparral Can-Am racer driven by Vic Elford in the 70s? That had two fans to suck the car down. Drivers behind him complained of stones and dirt thrown at them from the fans. The same thing happened with the Formula 1 Brabham &#8220;fan car&#8221; which had a large fan on the back of it. Drivers following it&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.etc.</p>
<p>And I still don&#8217;t think it REALLY has a purpose apart from being very groovy looking. By the way, is there any news on how the CSAR-X programme is progressing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A1C PERRY</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33147</link>
		<author>A1C PERRY</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 10:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33147</guid>
					<description>well no point in argueing about opinions, but i do have some news, the project is going to phase 2 as of next week. this is where they simplify the "ring-tail" thus lowering weight and ducting complications, also in this phase they are taking the steps to move the rotor back a few feet, by how much? i dont know im not an engineer. as well as the winglets will no longer be on the lower half of the aircraft, but on the upper part much like a little cessna plane.


as a side note, they have started working a similar design into a h-1 in hopes of getting the marines to buy into this as well seeing that the army has a large interest already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well no point in argueing about opinions, but i do have some news, the project is going to phase 2 as of next week. this is where they simplify the &#8220;ring-tail&#8221; thus lowering weight and ducting complications, also in this phase they are taking the steps to move the rotor back a few feet, by how much? i dont know im not an engineer. as well as the winglets will no longer be on the lower half of the aircraft, but on the upper part much like a little cessna plane.</p>
<p>as a side note, they have started working a similar design into a h-1 in hopes of getting the marines to buy into this as well seeing that the army has a large interest already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33234</link>
		<author>F-14Ds Rock! Anytime, Baby! Remember the Tomcat!</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 17:41:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33234</guid>
					<description>you mean they're turning a Huey into one of these?  isn't the bird too old?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you mean they&#8217;re turning a Huey into one of these?  isn&#8217;t the bird too old?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hotrod</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33244</link>
		<author>Hotrod</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 21:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-33244</guid>
					<description>Maybe they will bung it on the back of a UH-1Z... Although I would have thought it would be of more use as a system on an AH-1 myself...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe they will bung it on the back of a UH-1Z&#8230; Although I would have thought it would be of more use as a system on an AH-1 myself&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dakota Ray</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-34663</link>
		<author>Dakota Ray</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 13:25:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-34663</guid>
					<description>That copter looks bad@$$ and I sure hope it can and will fly bad@$$!!! Maybe it will help with ideas for my inventions. 5/29/08, 8:20 am i5 years old.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That copter looks <a href="mailto:bad@$$">bad@$$</a> and I sure hope it can and will fly <a href="mailto:bad@$$!!!">bad@$$!!!</a> Maybe it will help with ideas for my inventions. 5/29/08, 8:20 am i5 years old.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GAB</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-35576</link>
		<author>GAB</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-35576</guid>
					<description>It was once said that filling tyres with air was a waste of time and had no purpose. Lets not stand in the way of evolution. Let it roll baby.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was once said that filling tyres with air was a waste of time and had no purpose. Lets not stand in the way of evolution. Let it roll baby.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jones</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-47393</link>
		<author>Jones</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-47393</guid>
					<description>So long as I have controllability at a hover, I'd love to be able to increase my forward airspeed and maneuvering margin as significantly as this new system indicates.  I think it's very promissing, and would love to see it effectively implemented on my 64.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So long as I have controllability at a hover, I&#8217;d love to be able to increase my forward airspeed and maneuvering margin as significantly as this new system indicates.  I think it&#8217;s very promissing, and would love to see it effectively implemented on my 64.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: arfarf</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-71528</link>
		<author>arfarf</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:34:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-71528</guid>
					<description>The plane has flown over 80 hrs.  It also has wings with full-span flaps, so blade stall is a moot point.  This is a test bed airplane, not a production design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The plane has flown over 80 hrs.  It also has wings with full-span flaps, so blade stall is a moot point.  This is a test bed airplane, not a production design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amphibious ship take off and landing - Defence Talk Forum</title>
		<link>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-113898</link>
		<author>Amphibious ship take off and landing - Defence Talk Forum</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:41:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.flightstory.net/126/sikorsky-piasecki-x-49-speedhawk-first-flight-in-june/#comment-113898</guid>
					<description>[...] an armed escort for a tilt-wing aircraft perhaps it would be applicable:  Piasecki X-49A SpeedHawk  Sikorsky Piasecki X-49 “Speedhawk” - First Flight in June at Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog  Here's another platform with a similar setup, along with a little piece of concept art for several [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] an armed escort for a tilt-wing aircraft perhaps it would be applicable:  Piasecki X-49A SpeedHawk  Sikorsky Piasecki X-49 “Speedhawk” - First Flight in June at Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog  Here&#8217;s another platform with a similar setup, along with a little piece of concept art for several [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

