RotorTorque,
In an earlier post by PTIUAE he relayed the comments of a NASA test pilot who spent years flying the XV-15 and the V-22. He said the he did experience settling with power (not at 285 feet of course!) and got out of it "instinctively" as an EXPERIENCED Tiltrotor pilot by simply moving the nacelles forward with a push of the switch. The moment the nacelles started moving the vortex ring was disrupted and he flew right out of it. The problem is the pilots in the Marana crash never had the opportunity to develop this "instinct" (80 and 90 hours of tiltrotor experience for pilot and copilot)and obviously the training they had was not deep enough to to prepare them for what they had gotten into. Worse than that, in this case it doesn't matter because they were in so far and at such a low altitude that nothing they could have done would have gotten them out at that point. It doesn't matter if the settling was assymmetrical or normal (if the wind was on the nose or tail it would have been normal settling) they were finished at that point regardless. The same way that if we were in a 57000lb helicopter we would not have been able to lower the collective and push forward on the cyclic to fly out of it.
Your moral of the story should be the title of this thread, you are right, there is no fault in the design.
Unctuous,
You have demonstrated in this thread that you are the KING of WAFFLERS. But it is nice to hear you talk about professionalism though. Obviously the posting by PTI UAE on June 3, 2000 where he lectured you on your lack of professionalism on forums has made a lasting impact on you (that’s the post when you never showed up again for 6 months). However your consistency of never letting the facts get in the way of your theories hasn’t changed since your first post. You keep showing us the facts that we already know (and all agree with) in an endless manner, but completely miss the point of what they mean. You sprinkle your silly theories in between the facts, and expect we will believe those theories which have been indisputably ruled out earlier in the thread by testimony from people who have ACTUALLY BEEN FLYING the aircraft for thousand of hours! Your arguments hold as much water as a sieve. The press will draw their conclusions regardless of the facts, but those of us in the business should know better. We look at the facts and are supposed to have a better idea of what they mean than a journalist trying to make headlines.
If you are wondering why nobody is lining up behind you on this forum, it’s because you have destroyed you credibility over and over again in your previous posts. IE XV-15 theory, Chinooks don’t experience settling with power, your choosing to ignore the opinions of those who fly tiltrotors when you have never even seen one, etc. etc. When you are proven wrong you make up a new theory and swear by that one too. You have already been proven wrong with hard evidence POINT BY POINT, again and again throughout the thread and given indisputable evidence by the guys that have experience with them! Your response to the extraordinary point by point dismantling of your theory was to disappear for 6 months (and wait for a tragic crash that killed 4 Marines to try and boost your ego – sorry, it doesn’t work that way).
Speaking of point by point, it seems that you are the one not willing to answer the questions. Let’s try again: 1. Where were you for 6 months 2. How do you respond to the dismantling of your theory on the XV-15 that supposedly did not go to 95 degrees (5 degrees aft). 3. Do you think a 57,000 lb helicopter would have survived the scenario of over 2000 fpm ROD at 285 ft pulling in full aft stick to reduce airspeed and full power (IE there is no difference between asymmetrical + normal settling, you are dead either way, and that’s the important thing (avoiding it that is). There are some points for you, give it a try (many more to come).
There are a lot of questions readers are curious about. You failed to answer before, what was your user name for the 6 months that you stopped posting under the Unctuous name. (can’t imagine you went hot and furious on this thread, got blasted out of the water, and then came back to try again to apply your theory to the latest crash)
The writer of an article you posted said the MV-22 cannot do everything a small helicopter can do. That could be true. SO WHAT!!.. There are a lot of things a tiltrotor can do that a helicopter cannot (that’s why the Marines want them!) Aviation is all about give and take. Even if there is a more restrictive envelope for settling with power avoidance, you can’t describe it as technologically flawed and throw it out. The obvious answer is DEFINE THE ENVELOPE thoroughly and TRAIN for avoidance. We're not going to throw away all airplanes because they can’t hover or autorotate, and we won’t throw out all helicopters because they get into settling with power, or retreating blade stall, or dynamic rollover and can’t go over 200kts. PERSPECTIVE!
No I have not been “tasked” by anybody with showing the obvious flaws in what you call a theory. I do it for personal satisfaction being a part of this memorable thread. The only disappointing part is that I have joined after th "knock-out punch” has been thrown. Like Bruce Willis in the Sixth Sense (excellent movie) you just have not come to realize what has happened to you yet. I thought it was funny when you said I must have a “vested interest in the tiltrotor.” Wrong again (you must be used to that by now!). You can add this to your list of mis-fire claims being proven wrong on this thread. You don’t seem to have a good handle on theories OR people. Why Is it when anyone disagrees with you, you say they must have a vested interest. You accused PTIUAE of working for a manufacturer writing public relations notices (and called him “Tom”!?), and he gave you extensive details on his background and proved that he was more interested in finding out if there is a design flaw in tiltrotors then you are. Rhett Flater, the guy you responded to and assumed he was a “stake-holder” in the 609, is the Director of the American Helicopter Society, and a former US Marine helicopter pilot. So tell us, how much is Sikorsky paying you to make your posts? (maybe you are the one with the vested interest)
Have you noticed that you have a following of one on this forum (yourself). I’m sure you will come up with a good theory to explain it away (you are good at that and it won’t bother you when it is proven wrong). Do you think there might be a good reason for that? Think about it and you will be able to avoid further humiliating yourself. We are supposed to be the experts capable of interpreting the facts. Don’t be mislead by media stories that make claims that are definitely not backed up by the facts (and don’t be foolish enough to parade those baseless claims around as facts). It might be fun to make up theories, but it’s more rewarding to make a useful contribution by attacking the things that are really bad about the aircraft (like the blottle that REALLY serves no purpose and has REALLY caused an accident already!)
[This message has been edited by HeliFlight (edited 19 December 2000).]
[This message has been edited by HeliFlight (edited 19 December 2000).]