What's New With The Civil Tiltrotor?

[21stCen]

The powers that be at PPRuNe have agreed that now that the civil tiltrotor has turned the corner and will be moving forward to production, it is time for a new thread to track developments...

____________________________________________________________ ____________
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
BA609 Tiltrotor Now Under Full AgustaWestland Control</SPAN>

European manufacturer purchases Bell's share in program, plans to rename as AW609.

By Thierry Dubois

AgustaWestland has bought out Bell’s share in the BA609 tiltrotor program and is now expecting certification in 2015—12 years after the first flight—with deliveries beginning “immediately afterwards.” After years of discussions, the two helicopter manufacturers have found an agreement that was signed in June, just before the Paris Air Show. The European company is saying it is now “fully committed to proceed rapidly.”

Bell Agusta Aerospace Co. (BAAC) will be renamed but will remain a U.S. company, being the type certificate applicant to the FAA. AgustaWestland will take full ownership of BAAC under the agreement, which is subject to regulatory approvals from European and U.S. authorities. The civil tiltrotor program, the first of its kind, will be renamed AW609.

http://www.aviationtoday.com/Assets/Image/rw_photo_archive/BA609%20web.jpg

Bell will “remain involved in the design and certification of AW609 components,” according to Larry Roberts, senior vice president of the manufacturer’s Commercial business unit. When the aircraft reaches the production phase, the U.S. firm will be a supplier. Roberts told Rotor & Wing that, according to the agreement, his company will provide “engineering support” to AgustaWestland. He made it clear that no “V-22 technology will be transferred to the BA609.”

As soon as this autumn, a single “integrated development team” will manage the program in Cascina Costa, near Milan, Italy, where one of the two prototypes is based. In Arlington, Texas, where the other prototype is located, AgustaWestland will open “a new operational base.” Two more aircraft will be assembled at Cascina Costa. Prototype #3 will be used for icing certification testing, for both EASA and FAA approvals. AgustaWestland says it is targeting commercial and government markets.

The BA609 made its first flight in 2003 in Arlington. Since then, the program’s schedule has repeatedly moved to the right. Bell’s and AgustaWestland’s respective shares in the program were believed to be 60/40. The BA609 is a nine-passenger aircraft, flown by two pilots. Powered by two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67A turboshafts, it is designed to cruise at a maximum 275 kts. Its maximum range is around 700 nm.
Related News (http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/military/attack/72700.html)

[ShyTorque]

A few thoughts:

Speed limit outside of CAS in UK is 250 kts.

Where is it actually targeted to fly to / from in UK?

Will it fit on the FATO at the (only) London Heliport?

If not, will it be allowed to land at City Airport instead?

If so, isn't there a cheaper way of doing the same job?

[9Aplus]

General characteristics


Crew: 1 or 2
Capacity: 6 to 9 passengers/5,500 pounds (2,500 kg) payload
Length: 44 ft (13.3 m)
Rotor diameter: ()
Height: 16 ft 3 in (5.1 m) nacelles vertical; (21 ft 10 in (6.6 m) nacelles horizontal
Wingspan: 38 ft 5 in (11.7 m)
Width with rotors: 60 ft 5 in (14.1 m)
Rotor diameter: 25 ft 10 in (7.92 m))
Disc area: 981.75 ft² (98.53 m²)
Empty weight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturer%27s_Weight_Empty): 10,483 lb (4,765 kg)
Useful load: 5,500 lb (2,500 kg)
Max takeoff weight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Takeoff_Weight): 16,800 lb (7,600 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_Canada) PT6C-67A (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_Canada_PT6) turboshaft, 1,940 hp (1,447 kW) each

Performance


Maximum speed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#Vno): 275 knots (315 mph, 510 km/h)
Cruise speed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#Vc): 260 knots (299 mph, 465 km/h)
Range (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_%28aircraft%29): 750 nmi (852 mi, 1,390 km)
Service ceiling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceiling_%28aeronautics%29): 25,000 ft (7,620 m)
Rate of climb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_climb): 1,500 ft/min (7.62 m/s)
Disc loading (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_loading): 15.8 lb/sq ft (77 kg/m²)



to fit on FATO is my last concern....
Others are:
price,
price per seat,
price per mile/km
:E

[21stCen]

Will it fit on the FATO...

The 'D' value is 60 feet proprotor tip to proprotor tip (comparable to our Bell 212 'D' value of 57 feet). Pilots can see the outer most rotating parts of the a/c unlike conventional tailrotor, and with the rigid proprotor blades 15 feet above the pavement, no danger of pax walking into them.

[Snapsimo]

About time the development of the Acft progresses.
But....... never fly the 'A' model of anything!
I hope it has a better start time limit than the AW139, oh, and its tail stays on.:O

[TIMTS]

What is it with the Italians and finishing other peoples work?

The AB139, bought out Bell....I'm sure Bell provided some technology they needed then was bought out.

The BA609, same. When Bell isn't needed anymore for their expertise...bought out...

The new jet trainer....went into a partnership with the russians...got the already finished plane...got out of the partnership and now sells it as their own!!


I have heard more examples but can't remember them right now....anyone?

[9Aplus]

Concerning AS139 even Swidnik design was involved....for airframe design
and production, and that was before purchase/privatisation.
Concerning BA609 already 2 years, Bell/Textron reduced support to that program,
buy out, is sort of damage management. Heart of design MGB and distribution
shaft system was designed and made in Cascina Costa any way...

Concerning YAK130/M346 Russians was paid from Italian Finmechanicca / Alenia side, to make that project...airframe only
- Italian is transonic, Russian so far not.
Next similar cooperation project is SSJ regional jet built in KnAAPO

[Lonewolf_50]

Might there be good reason to pursue this, in commercial flights, as a single pilot aircraft? (Thinking economics, not trying to rain on pilot jobs here, please be gentle).

By looking at the aircraft, it seems that the answer is no (need two sets of eyes to keep clearance on two proprotors) and so cost per seat and KM get to be very interesting variables.

(Anyone have any ideas on how the Japanese market for these is shaping up?

[SansAnhedral]

Heart of design MGB and distribution
shaft system was designed and made in Cascina Costa any way...

Ha, that's a laugh. Why do you suppose that AW is retaining Bell as a supplier of engineering and rotor components on the 609?

[9Aplus]

I know what I saw, and you may know better.... but FYI
same laugh was here on buy out subject, approx. 1,5 y ago,
amazing grace, now BA is AW :cool:

Blades and rotor heads are Bell know-how..... that is fact

[Ian Corrigible]

Agusta's involvement extended to drivetrain components from its original entry into the program (along with responsibility for the empennage, flaperons, overwing fairing, wing leading edge, wingtip/nacelle junction and engine inlets). It'll be interesting to see whether fuselage production remains at Amarillo (TAC) or transfers to Cascina Costa. Otherwise I'm sure Fuji still has a set of plans somewhere. :E

Don't think Bell's departure wasn't the result of an extensive AoA of their options. The bottom line was that AW's prospective customers (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/334540-bell-609-program-trouble-2.html#post4279829) were considered more likely to be able to afford the aircraft than Bell's prospects.

I/C

[riff_raff]

Bell will make profit as a supplier to Agusta on the 609, without incurring much more risk. I'm sure that if there was a large potential market for the 609, Bell would have pushed ahead. But I believe Bell's profits now mostly come from military sales, so that's apparently where they have chosen to focus their development budgets.

[tottigol]

Not to worry, Bell shall soon unveil a secret version of the 412, and by means of an innovative advertisement campaign shall pitch it to the gullible of the world as a new class of fast and economical rotorcraft.
"Just needs a new coat of paint".:E

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland Completes 609 Tiltrotor Programme Acquisition

Tuesday November 29th 2011 - AgustaWestland


http://verticalmag.com/news/article_files/40868159849197.jpg


AgustaWestland, a Finmeccanica company, is pleased to announce that it has finalised the transaction with Bell Helicopter Textron for the acquisition of the 609 tiltrotor programme. All legal and regulatory approvals have now been successfully completed.


The development of the AW609 tiltrotor programme is now moving forward under full AgustaWestland control with civil certification expected in late 2015, early 2016 and deliveries following immediately afterwards. Additionally AgustaWestland has plans to introduce a new generation satellite based navigation system and mission avionics to enable all weather operations and increase the aircraft’s operational capabilities. A new state-of-the-art avionics architecture will provide the pilot with increased situational awareness and a reduced workload.


The first two prototypes have achieved more than 600 flight hours so far and have validated the AW609’s unique flight envelope including the ability to fly at altitudes of up to 25,000 feet and cruise at speeds up to 275 knots, all at the aircraft’s maximum weight. The test programme continues to check all the points of the flight envelope, 85% of which has been completed, as required by both the FAA and EASA. Two further aircraft will join the test programme to complete the certification programme.


The third prototype, now being manufactured in Italy, will be devoted to icing certification testing while the fourth prototype will be used for the development and integration of new avionics and mission avionics. Additionally, STOL (short takeoff and landing) procedures will be investigated in order to permit operations at increased maximum gross weights to further enhance the AW609’s operational capability for specific applications.


AgustaWestland announced the acquisition of ownership of the programme in June. Bell Agusta Aerospace Company (BAAC) will be renamed and will remain a US company being the new type certificate applicant to the FAA. The new company will be totally owned by AgustaWestland. The AW609 programme is to be managed by a single Integrated Development Team, based in Cascina Costa, Italy. AgustaWestland will also open a new operational base in Arlington, Texas, to manage US based tiltrotor operations.


The tiltrotor concept is the answer to the growing need for an aircraft matching the vertical capabilities of the helicopter with the speed, range and altitude capabilities of fixed wing aircraft. AgustaWestland is investing in the next generation of rotorcraft technologies and the AW609 and future tiltrotor concepts are part of the company’s innovation commitment.


Preliminary orders for approximately 70 AW609s have been placed by around 40 customers in over 20 countries to perform a range of commercial and government roles. The AW609 provides customers with a new way to fly and AgustaWestland expects significant worldwide market opportunities for the aircraft with no aircraft in the market place that can come close to offering a similar capability.

AgustaWestland Completes 609 Tiltrotor Programme Acquisition | Vertical - Helicopter News (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/articles/agustawestland-completes-609-tiltrotor--programme-acquisition.html)

[Shell Management]

Bell must be kicking themselves they walked away from the AB139.

[DauphinDude]

What kind of certification would you need to fly one of those? CPL-A and CPL-H?

[GoodGrief]

Usually one CPL and one PPL with preference on a CPL(H). There will be a rating called "powered lift".
I heard...

[DauphinDude]

There is a category called powered lift already (at least under FAA), but that refers to the category only, but I don´t think a powered lift flight school exist outside of the USAF.

[21stCen]

AW609 Finally Ready for its Close-up

HAI Convention News (http://www.ainonline.com/taxonomy/term/218498) » February 11, 2012 (http://www.ainonline.com/taxonomy/term/525605)
by James Wynbrandt (http://www.ainonline.com/james-wynbrandt)

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/ainonline.com/files/styles/article/public/uploads/hai2012_bb_00093_0.jpg (http://www.ainonline.com/sites/ainonline.com/files/uploads/hai2012_bb_00093_0.jpg)


AgustaWestland is demonstrating the AW609 civil tiltrotor at Heli-Expo 2012.

February 11, 2012, 9:25 PM



Agusta Westland Tilt Rotor Co. (AWTR) flew an AW609 (née BA609) tiltrotor at Arlington Municipal Airport yesterday. The company also provided an update on the program, which comes in the aftermath of AgustaWestland’s taking over full ownership of the 609 project when former partner Bell Helicopter relinquished its half last November.
AgustaWestland established AWTR to complete certification and bring the AW609 to market, with its U.S. headquarters based at AWTR’s new office-hangar complex at the airport.
http://www.ainonline.com/openx/www/delivery/lg.php?bannerid=123&campaignid=48&zoneid=6&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ainonline.com%2Faviation-news%2Fhai-convention-news%2F2012-02-11%2Faw609-finally-ready-its-close&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.aol.com%2F35478-211%2Faol-6%2Fen-us%2Fmail%2FDisplayMessage.aspx%3Fws_popup%3Dtrue&cb=c3599b27e1


Though development of the civil tiltrotor has lagged in recent years, the allure of tiltrotor technology remains strong, as it combines the vertical-lift capability of helicopters with the higher speed and longer range of fixed wing aircraft.
Resembling a half-scale V22 Osprey, the AW609 is expected to have a maximum takeoff weight (mtow) of 16,800 pounds, a maximum cruise speed of 275 knots, a range of 700 nm (with no reserves), a 25,000-foot service ceiling and a climb rate of 2,500 to 3,000 fpm. AWTR plans no change in the performance envelope, but may seek an increase in takeoff weight for short-takeoff performance, versus the current mtow, which is based on vertical takeoff operations.
According to the company, yesterday’s approximately nine-minute flight marked the first public flight demonstration of the AW609 since the Farnborough Air Show in 2008. Experimental test pilot Pietro Venanzi, who commanded the demo flight, showcased N609TR’s maneuverability in both vertical, horizontal and transitional nacelle configurations in the traffic pattern and in maneuvers over the apron in front of onlookers. Transition of the nacelles from full vertical to horizontal appeared seamless with no visible change to the aircraft pitch or flight path. The aircraft was surprisingly quiet in its fixed-wing configuration, with the growl of the two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67A turboshaft engines increasing as the nacelles tilted toward vertical.
The company said it has orders for close to 70 aircraft from 40 customers in 15 countries, though it declined to identify any of the buyers or whether they had paid deposits for their positions. Some of those orders will likely be contingent on the final price, which AWTR has yet to announce.
According to Bell, early in the last decade the 609 was priced at $8-10 million adjusted to the year of delivery. Subsequently, outside estimates on the price have been as high as $30 million. AWTR said it will announce the price 25 months before first delivery.
Clive Scott, program manager, said the company is in contact with position holders but has given them little guidance on final cost. Nonetheless, officials are bullish on prospects, estimating that 450 to 500 AW609s will be built over a 20-year period.
In the executive/transport configuration, the aircraft will carry eight to nine passengers, but AWTR sees many other applications, including oil-and-gas operations, search and rescue and border and maritime patrol. “I’m sure there are many applications out there we haven’t conceived of yet, in interesting ways that are yet to be invented” said Robert LaBelle, AWTR Managing Director. The aircraft will have a digital glass cockpit and avionics suite, though AWTR declined to disclose potential suppliers.
Venanzi said the company is designing a flight-training curriculum for prospective pilots, whose recommended qualifications would include extensive rotor-wing experience and some fixed-wing experience, preferably with IFR capability. The company is also working with both the FAA and EASA to establish requirements for Tilt Rotor license requirements.
But Venanzi, a former F-104 fighter pilot in the Italian air force, noted that he only had about 100 hours of rotor time when he entered test pilot school, and that ease of flying was an aircraft design criteria for the 609. As an example, he noted that the controls that manage the tilt of the nacelles have detent stops, making it easy to make changes to nacelle configuration, unlike in the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor. (In related news, newly released Pentagon budget figures for fiscal 2012 indicate funding for the Boeing/Bell V-22 program will be cut from $2.6 billion for 35 V-22s to $1.91 billion for 21 aircraft.)
Venanzi said autorotation tests have been conducted at altitude, and that “it doesn’t take much altitude” to achieve a power-off full flair to a sink rate of zero fpm.
Two prototypes are flying. Prototype #3 is under assembly at the AW facility in Cascina Costa, Italy, with a fourth prototype to follow. The third prototype will be used for icing and high-and-hot trials, and will be outfitted with both anti-icing and deicing systems (for different parts of the aircraft).
The two aircraft flying have accumulated about 650 flight hours, and 85 percent of the 609’s flight envelope has been explored. LaBelle said the company has been developing its certification program with the FAA for several years, and FAA certification flight tests are scheduled to begin in 2013. FAA certification (with simultaneous EASA validation) is anticipated in the first half of 2016, with deliveries commencing that same year.
Though their partnership has been dissolved, Bell is continuing to assist in both design and flight testing. AWTR said it has 250 engineers dedicated to the program in Cascina Costa, and will soon have about 150 engineers at the Arlington facility. According to chief project engineer Silvano Scorbati, the two workforces are fully integrated and collaborate in real time. “We are able to work, instead of eight hours, 16 hours a day with four to five hours of overlap,” Scorbati said.
While declining to disclose development costs or the costs of ramping up for production, LaBelle said, “We’re not going to tell you specific numbers, but our message is [that] the company is committed to this project. We know what it’s going to take, and we’re going to execute and get it certified in the timeline we’ve laid out.”


AW609 Finally Ready for its Close-up | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/hai-convention-news/2012-02-11/aw609-finally-ready-its-close)

[birrddog]

Going to be a nightmare...
For your logbook :p

[FH1100 Pilot]

Though development of the civil tiltrotor has lagged in recent years, the allure of tiltrotor technology remains strong, as it combines the vertical-lift capability of helicopters with the higher speed and longer range of fixed wing aircraft.

So far, so good.

In the executive/transport configuration, the aircraft will carry eight to nine passengers, but AWTR sees many other applications, including oil-and-gas operations...

Hmm. Let's ruminate on that a little.

Oil companies simply will *not* use the 609 on any sector that's already being served by a conventional helicopter. No matter how important those nine people are, they can go in the Puma with the rest of the roustabouts. No, the 609 would be used for really deepwater rigs, the ones that are (or will be) beyond the practical range of existing helicopters.

Which leads me to ask...

What is the emergency procedure for loss of oil pressure in one of the 609's engines?

Oh, but that would never happen. Right?

Let's ask the Sikorsky S-92 certification team how "extremely remote" such a thing would be!

[21stCen]

the 609 would be used for really deepwater rigs, the ones that are (or will be) beyond the practical range of existing helicopters.


That is correct. In general the practicality of the civil tiltrotor only comes into play when two criteria are met:
1) A requirement for vertical take off or landing exists at one end of the trips flown routinely (otherwise a turbo-prop aeroplane would be more economical if flying from airport to airport).
2) Routine flights require a normal minimum distance of 150 or 200nm plus (otherwise a helicopter would be more economical).

Tiltrotors are a niche aircraft, they will not replace airplanes and they will not replace helicopters, but they will perform missions that no other a/c can do as efficiently. A good example was given to me by a couple of guys working at Heli One. They approached Sikorsky to determine how they could perform remote arctic flights in an S-92 over a distance of 600nm to a drilling rig and return. Sikorsky devised a potential recommendation to have fuel stored in the passenger cabin to complete the flight (maybe not considered a safety hazard by the Russian authorities?). However, as a consequence of the added fuel weight they would be limited to 7 to 9 passengers. A mission that the 609 could accomplish more efficiently.

What is the emergency procedure for loss of oil pressure in one of the 609's engines?


If you were enroute the situation would be handled by routine checklist use. If the low oil pressure was accompanied by high oil temperature and/or the appropriate CAS warning the engine would be shut down and the flight continued to a safe landing location. The difference between a fixed-wing a/c and a tiltrotor is that it does not exhibit the same asymmetrical thrust in OEI ops that would occur in an aeroplane due to the fact that the proprotors are interconnected via a cross shaft that allows both sides to continue turning at the same steady RPM with the remaining engine driving them.

FH1100,
Both very basic but normal questions you raise. It's good that this time you are not trying to pretend to be an expert on tiltrotors (or helicopters, or aeroplanes). You still have a lot of unanswered questions that were posed to you in response to some of the astonishing statements you made on the V-22 thread. There are some there still anxiously awaiting your enlightening responses. As a reminder, here are the questions pending your answers (scroll down about half way):
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/204936-whats-latest-news-v22-osprey-71.html
thanks...
21stC

[FH1100 Pilot]

21st Century, please try to stay on point, okay?

I asked:
What is the emergency procedure for loss of oil pressure in one of the 609's engines?

21st Century replield:
If you were enroute the situation would be handled by routine checklist use. If the low oil pressure was accompanied by high oil temperature and/or the appropriate CAS warning the engine would be shut down and the flight continued to a safe landing location. The difference between a fixed-wing a/c and a tiltrotor is that it does not exhibit the same asymmetrical thrust in OEI ops that would occur in an aeroplane due to the fact that the proprotors are interconnected via a cross shaft that allows both sides to continue turning at the same steady RPM with the remaining engine driving them.

So, no engine oil pressure is really no big deal then, is that right? So, there is a sprag clutch then? A sprag clutch that allows the proprotor on the shutdown engine to turn without back-driving the engine? Because we sure wouldn't want an engine with no oil pressure being driven by a prop. Would we?

[arismount]

Get on board, FH1100.
I am far from being a tilt-rotor proponent but your question apparently comes from ignorance of information that's been published in the trade press for about the last 25 years or so concerning the tilt-rotor's construction, i.e., the XV-15, the XV-22, and the whatever-it-is-now-609.
To wit: the two engines input to their respective prop-rotor gearboxes, and there is a cross-drive shaft connecting those two gearboxes. So, in the event of an engine failure scenario, which would include a loss of engine oil pressure, the failed engine would be shut down and the remaining engine would drive both prop-rotors through the connecting driveshaft...similarly to the way that both fore and aft rotors in a CH-47 are driven by the drive shaft that connects the combining transmission to the forward transmission.
As somebody else in this thread tried to point out to you, what this means is that a TR with one engine failed would be in the same situation as any other twin engine airplane with one powerplant failed, i.e., proceeding to a landing site on partial power, as such multiengine vehicles are designed to do...with the exception that the tiltrotor won't have the problem of asymmetric thrust/drag resulting from one failed plant, such as a King Air or other twin turboprop plane would have.
And yes, there is a sprag clutch mechanism that declutches the powerplant from the respective transmission when transmission speed exceeds plant speed, i.e., if that powerplant should fail.
Now, if you want to raise a serious question, by all means ask what should happen if one of the prop-rotor gearboxes should lose lubrication; but that is an entirely different situation than the engine oil pressure scenario you are thinking of.
Look, you can be against the tiltrotor all you want (again, I am myself), but try to make your objections from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance. Because as it is you're making our side look bad.

[stilton]

Seems like a very versatile Aircraft.


But 275kts max speed ?


Pretty slow really, many civil turboprops cruise much faster, Saab 2000 for example, 370 knots and at the top end the Avanti with a 400 kt cruise.


All that power and what looks like a very slippery shape you would think could do better.

[Colibri49]

At the risk of stating the obvious the Saab and the Avanti can't hover, so to get 275 knots from a rotor which isn't purely a propeller seems pretty impressive to me. But then I'm no aerodynamicist.

[FH1100 Pilot]

arismount:And yes, there is a sprag clutch mechanism...
You could have said that without all the condescension. Thank you anyway.

[Trojan1981]

Even a cruise speed of 240-250 Kts would yield an advantage over both fixed and rotory wing aircraft for some types of ops. Particularly in the SAR and EMS roles, where both FW and RW platforms could potentially be replaced. At least one EMS operator in Australia has expressed intrest in the 609.

Currently in NSW 4-5 B350/400s are used to conduct long range medical retrieval, and a network of 13 helicopters (AW139s, EC145s, BK-117s, B412s, Dauphins and an A109E) are used for shorter range EMS, IC hospital transfer and SAR. The 609 could trump the King Airs by flying direct from hospital to hospital (or accident scene), over long ranges. Taking IC Paramedics, Doctors and IC Ambulance bays with them. Patients could be retrieved from the scene and transported directly to a metropolitan operating theatre without the need for modal transfer. All this would likely be achieved in a quicker time frame than could be achieved utilising any of the existing platform types.

So, potentially, a small number of helos could remain for metro EMS, while everything elso could be achieved using 609s. All this is pie in the sky however. I have no idea of costs or the practicalities of such an operation. Just a thought.

I wonder how the efficiencies of the 609 will compare to the developments of Sikorsky's X-2/S-97 long term?

[stilton]

At the risk of stating the obvious the Saab and the Avanti can't hover, so to get 275 knots from a rotor which isn't purely a propeller seems pretty impressive to me


Kind of my point, it's no that impressive as a helicopter, or as a fixed wing turboprop.


Jack of all trades, master of none ?

[tottigol]

Read the post above yours Stilton.:rolleyes:

[SansAnhedral]

Kind of my point, it's no that impressive as a helicopter, or as a fixed wing turboprop.

Jack of all trades, master of none ?

Being a "jack of all trades" is not impressive in and of itself?

You get a King Air to hover/VTOL and I'll be impressed.

[ospreydriver]

First, I'd love to fly one of these when my time in the big green gun club is up.

At the same time, I think its application is going to be limited. The 609 is going to entail some serious expense to operate, which means it will be limited to applications where the return on investment is sufficient to justify it. The Osprey fills a tactical role, plus the government isn't concerned with turning a profit. Private users aren't constrained by an enemy, and they must make a profit.

For most corporate transport, it would be cheaper to take a helicopter to the airport, take a jet to the destination city, then a helo to the meeting than taking the 609. Only the biggest, most prestige-minded individuals are going to pay the premium for the speed and convenience of the 609.

For EMS, most trips are relatively short and not at the max range of existing helos. Also, they get reimbursed through insurance or local government funding, both of which aren't likely to enjoy paying a premium. It would be useful in remote areas, but there isn't enough volume, and thus money, to be affordable unless highly subsidized in some fashion.

Deepwater drilling is definitely the big possibility. The Deepwater Horizon hurt American deepwater drilling a lot in the short term. Eventually oil price will go up to the point that deepwater drilling is both necessary and prevalent. That's the one good market for the 609 in my opinion.

[Trojan1981]

I should clarify Ospreydriver.

Most EMS operators in New South Wales are 100% government funded. The King Airs are used for retrieval beyond the economical range of the helicopters. I'm only just getting into the field, so I am no expert. Perhaps someone who works for ANSW in EMS could shed some light? I know there are a couple of you on here.

[SASless]

the government isn't concerned with turning a profit.

Out of the mouth of babes!

There's one Marine that has a grasp of the obvious!

Twice in one day OD.....this is getting scary!

The current administration isn't concerned about the private sector turning a profit either it seems!

[500e]

"The current administration isn't concerned about the private sector turning a profit either it seems!"
Now aint that the truth.

[ospreydriver]

If NSW starts using 609s, let me know. I'll be the first one in line for a visa. I already play footy, so I'm up for the move.

[Tcabot113]

Sas

Why the thread creep? Got nothing?

As to companies making profit, the President cares a lot about GM making a record S6.7B of profit. It is Mitt and Republicans who want to see American business destroyed. As to Santorum he is trying to figure out why everybody snickers at his name.

TC

[riff_raff]

Deepwater drilling is definitely the big possibility. The Deepwater Horizon hurt American deepwater drilling a lot in the short term. Eventually oil price will go up to the point that deepwater drilling is both necessary and prevalent. That's the one good market for the 609 in my opinion. The AW609 is being certified for 9 passengers & 2 pilots, probably because of FAA part 121. With such a small passenger load, the AW609 itself is probably not the best choice for offshore oil uses. However, I read recently that AW is working on another commercial tiltrotor, but we likely won't see much about it until after the AW609 enters service around 2016.

[TukTuk BoomBoom]

Yeah it may be getting certified for 9 but when you look inside you get the impression it might fit 5 rig workers maximum.
Theres also the pop-out windows vs pressurisation issue and thats just the tip of the iceberg to get it offshore ready.
I doubt it will ever be used in that role, in fact i think the whole aircraft is borderline commercially viable.
I say put a gun on it and make it a combat escort for the V-22, that would be a great team!

[SASless]

Civil pressurized aircraft have emergency exits....so what is the problem there?

The design of them will not allow bringing the exit doors inside as is done on some airliners and thus designing a pop-out exit door is going to be interesting I suppose. Also expensive and heavy....operative issue will be weight.

As long as the Oil Patch Clock and Weigh Scales remain standard as they are today....no problem getting the aircraft loaded.

The 165 pound Oily that looks like a Sumo Wrestler dragging a 40 pound Suitcase and 25 pound Toolbox....for a total weight of 230 pounds.....Nay Lads...no problem!

Getting off the ground might pose a small problem however!


Tcabot113....you convinced me finally.

Along with Jane-OH and Shell Management....you earned my "Ignore" tag

After all these years....you are exactly number three. You might ask yourself where the other two are now....and why they seem to be conspicuous by their absence.

[SEIFR]

I am thinking it would work pretty well in nothern Canada doing EMS.
A litttle pricey maybe but none the less I think it be a good fit for the work we do out here.

[SASless]

Agusta used to have a very cozy arrangement with part of the Canadian government until recently....well an organization funded by the government. Things seem to be a bit blue at ORNGE currently however. Maybe Agusta's investment there might be good money thrown away now.

[Trojan1981]

Ospreydriver, ChildFlight Sydney were fundraising to get into a 609 at one stage. I remember seeing the ads. Maybe their plans were put on hold as the certification process dragged on, because I can't find anything about it now.

SEIFR, I imagine Canada and Australia have a lot in common regarding EMS needs; long distances, sparse population outside metro areas and a lack of airfields suitable for EMS aircraft in remote areas. It's a niche market though.

[Tcabot113]

Sas,

Take your personal problems somewhere else. This thread is for educated discussions on tilt rotors, your knowledge of this technology is only surpassed by FH100 which means you appear to know absolutely nothing. FH100, did you really asked what happens if an engine on the 609 looses oil or was your account hacked?

TC

[riff_raff]

I say put a gun on it and make it a combat escort for the V-22, that would be a great team! TukTuk BoomBoom,

The USMC asked Bell to take a look at doing just that a few years back.

Bell asked to come up with a tilt-rotor gunship to escort V-22s - Dallas Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2004/07/05/daily3.html)

riff_raff

[ospreydriver]

2004? That's a while back.

[Lonewolf_50]

OD, you may know that there was a move afoot, ~ 2000-2001 timeframe, to try and get a 609 (or something like it) built for CNATRA to use as pre Osprey Trainer, instead of the TH-57 & C-12 lash up currently used.

Part of the problem was running into Rummy's austerity intentions (before 9-11). There was something like 70-90 million to get that program going for an "off the shelf" tilt rotor trainer that ran into a couple of problems.
1. Uncertainty of final configuration and certification timeline for 609.
2. Some differences in the monkey skills chosen for V-22 versus 609, which I suspect you understand far better than I.
3. Building a simulator package on a timeline that was sane.
3a. (Dealing with the whole JOINT crap since CV-22 was going to be involved and JUPT USN/USAF momentum was picking up and lots of USN/USAF interservice training ... but never mind)
4. A bunch of other 'Orange and White' aircraft program priorities (A-C mod for T-45, and the NFO's wanting a new trainer to replace the T-39) that were going to get money first.
5. It died a fairly rapid death in the staffing process, and I don't think ever got to the SECNAV level for a look at money ... I don't think it even got out of CNET. (NETC?)

All this before the V-22 program ran into that much publicized "stop, go back, sort out x, y, z, and then move forward" set back to Osprey.

I don't think the Navy is going to revisit that idea for a trainer any time soon, but will more likely stick with the blend of multi-engine and helo, and adapt it via the usual curriculum modifications, since doing that appears to be one hell of a lot cheaper considering 609 the cost of operations point your raised.

Jet Rangers and King Airs are not all that expensive to operate.

With Panetta cutting where he can, APN 1 money for a TR trainer like 609 ain't gonna happen, particularly now that Bell, and the Texas lobby, are no longer in play for a 'buy American' option that tends to get political traction.

I have heard that order book for 609 is already 60 or 70, and wonder who it is that wants to buy one.

[SEIFR]

I was talking about the 609 at work today. Someone asked if they would be able to do hover exits. So, does anyone know? Would that be an option with the 609?

[ospreydriver]

Don't see why not, other than that the door configuration I've seen seems to be the type designed for admin unloading, i.e. it looks like the type that opens up with stairs built in the lower part--not very conducive to a hover exit. There's no ramp, so that way's out. Now, for the right price could they give a different door configuration? Don't know.

[SEIFR]

It needs a ramp and or big sliding cargo door.

[21stCen]

It needs a ramp and or big sliding cargo door.

That would be nice to have, but not likely because of difficulties that would be encountered with the pressure vessel (the V-22 is not pressurized, the 609 is).

The 609 prototypes have the old 707 style door installed that opens forward, but a design for a Lear-style clam shell door was completed years ago and was under serious discussion as the most likely production fit last time I heard (that also had winch configuration capability designed into it). There was also a wider cargo door design (not sliding) that will likely be an option.

Of course there is the emergency egress door on top of the fuselage for water exits etc. And external to future production models the first prototype (not sure about the second) has a 'blow-out manhole' in the cabin floor with explosive charges for the test pilots to have access to, but fortunately it has never been needed.

[21stCen]

Cut down on travel time, fly TiltRotor craft

Vinay Kumar Published: March 25, 2012 01:29 IST | Updated: March 25, 2012 01:29 IST NEW DELHI, March 25, 2012

A new generation of hybrid machines to hit the skies

As traffic on the ground clogs arterial roads, a new generation of hybrid machines capable of taking off from the heart of Delhi and landing at Cuffe Parade in Mumbai in half the time it takes to travel the distance by any commercial airline could become a reality in the Indian skies in the years to come.

Performance capabilities
AgustaWestland 609, already booked by five Indian corporate houses, is a certain possibility based on the performance capabilities of the TiltRotor craft.
Giving a presentation on Tilt Rotor technology at an international seminar on Heli Power India-2012 here, Roberto Garavaglia, senior vice-president (Marketing), AgustaWestland, said AW609 would be able to cover the distance between Connaught Place and Cuffe Parade in about two-and-a-half hours.
If one takes into account the time it takes to reach the airport, go through security check-in, boarding process and the flight time of nearly two hours from New Delhi to Mumbai, it amounts to nearly five hours spent on the journey. If a person travels by AW609, the hybrid TiltRotor craft can take off directly and land in Mumbai in around two-and-a-half hours.
The presentation organised by the Rotary Wing Society of India (RWSI) — the nodal agency for helicopter industry in India, was attended, among others, by Sitaram Yechury, Chairman of Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport Tourism and Culture, S.N.A. Zaidi, Civil Aviation Secretary, E.K. Bharat Bhushan, Director General of Civil Aviation and K. Sridharan, president of RWSI.

Efficient and safe
Mr. Yechury said that civil helicopter operations in the country should be made more efficient and safe. He emphasised the need to impart necessary impetus in order to make the helicopter available for the common good whether it be for emergency medical services or law and order or disaster management.

Huge potential
Dr. Zaidi said though the number of civil helicopters was not enough, the potential was huge and the number was expected to increase in the future. He also mentioned a study commissioned with experts from the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to prepare a road map for the next 15 years for the development of aviation, sea planes and helicopters.

The Hindu : Sci-Tech / Technology : Cut down on travel time, fly TiltRotor craft (http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/article3220885.ece)

[21stCen]

In His Helicopter, Bloomberg Can Rule Skies, and Even Get to Albany
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/04/13/nyregion/Copter/Copter-articleLarge.jpg AgustaWestland
The AW609 Tiltrotor, a helicopter-plane prototype, which Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg wants.

By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/christine_haughney/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

Published: April 12, 2012

Among all the high-flying toys that a billionaire can buy, the futuristic AgustaWestland AW609 Tiltrotor (http://www.agustawestland.com/product/aw609), a hybrid helicopter-plane, is as coveted a trinket as they come. Forty people have lined up to buy the aircraft, which is modeled on the V22 Osprey used in the military. It maneuvers like a helicopter, but with the speed and altitude of a plane.
It will not be ready until 2016, and the price has not even been established — though estimates place it between $5 million and $30 million. And near the top of the ultraexclusive waiting list is one Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per).
Private jets have practically become de rigueur among the elite; everyone who is anyone either owns one or charters one regularly. Mayor Bloomberg is no exception: his trips to Bermuda (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/nyregion/26bermuda.html) aboard his private jet often fill in the blanks on weekends when he has no public schedule.
But his passion for flying and owning helicopters puts him in a rarefied circle, occupied by the likes of Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford and Gisele Bündchen.
Mr. Bloomberg, it turns out, is a fan of copters: he does not merely enjoy flying in them, he is obsessive about piloting them himself. His fellow pilots have seen how he delights in a helicopter’s mechanical quirks and how quick he is to compare notes about the latest gadgets or a trusted mechanic.
“People who experience this, it’s a dance,” said the crime fiction writer Patricia Cornwell, who flies her own helicopter and has talked with the mayor about the joys of flying one around New York. “It’s not take off, go straight and land.”
“You take someone like the mayor, this is a really handy thing,” Ms. Cornwell added. “It’s a bird’s-eye view of America from your cockpit.”
Through his company, Mr. Bloomberg owns a $4.5 million, six-seat Agusta SPA A109S helicopter, which he keeps at the Morristown Municipal Airport in New Jersey with his private planes, according to records.
There is no public data for how often the mayor flies his helicopter, but those familiar with his travel patterns said he had taken it to Albany and the Hamptons, among other destinations. His up-in-the-air celebrity is such that other pilots recognize his tail number, but Mr. Bloomberg has blocked public aircraft-tracking systems from tracing his exact aerial whereabouts. He is typically accompanied by a pilot, Toby Wilson, whose primary job is to fly the helicopter to New York to collect the mayor, or fly it back to New Jersey once the mayor has gotten off.
The helicopter can come in handy during the work day.
On the morning of March 16, a thick fog shrouded the city, causing huge delays at La Guardia Airport, where the mayor and several lawmakers were waiting to travel to Albany for a news conference on state pension reform. So Mr. Bloomberg offered to fly his guests, who included James P. Molinaro, the Staten Island borough president; Thomas M. Roach, the mayor of White Plains; a mayoral aide, Micah C. Lasher; and a security officer, in his helicopter instead.
As the mayor took the controls and steered north, he pointed out the Catskills and asked his passengers if they felt airsick. Mr. Molinaro, who previously flew Navy helicopters, said he was impressed with the mayor’s skills, especially during the landing.
“He came down nice and slow,” Mr. Molinaro said. “It was like you were just sliding. There wasn’t even a bounce.”
When Mr. Molinaro told Mr. Bloomberg how much smoother the flight was than some he had taken with the military, the mayor replied: “It’s not the plane. It’s the pilot.”
Things have not always gone perfectly. Back in 1976, when Mr. Bloomberg was training to become a pilot, he nearly encountered disaster as he flew alone off the coast of Connecticut.
“I wasn’t sure what was going on in the engine compartment behind me, but I certainly knew I was falling and couldn’t breathe. I was going down,” he wrote in his autobiography. He landed on an island and ultimately put out the helicopter fire himself.
“Was I scared?” he wrote. “Well, there’d been no time for any emotion when I was in the air, and on the ground I was safe. So the answer is no — unless of course you count the internal shaking I couldn’t stop for the rest of the day.”
There have been other hiccups.
In October 2004, officials with the Meadowlands Sports Complex denied Mr. Bloomberg’s request to fly his helicopter to a Jets game and encouraged him to take the bus from the Port Authority Bus Terminal. In January 2002, when he was criticized for taking the controls of a police helicopter to attend Adolfo Carrión Jr.’s inauguration as borough president in the Bronx, he defended himself, saying, “I fly helicopters more sophisticated than that all the time that I happen to own.”
Mr. Bloomberg declined to be interviewed for this article. But Ms. Cornwell, the crime author, said he “made it very clear to me that he doesn’t like to give up the controls to anyone else.”
Some public officials, like Representative Jerrold L. Nadler, fear that Mr. Bloomberg’s passion could cloud his judgment on how he handles issues of helicopter safety in the crowded New York airspace. After a fatal crash in the East River in October, the mayor defended the safety record of helicopters.
“There’s three or four deaths in automobile accidents every single week in this city,” he said then. “Nobody’s suggesting you’re going to ban automobiles.”
Mr. Ford, the actor, said the mayor once lent him his AgustaWestland helicopter to pick up his daughter from summer camp; the favor was in return for once borrowing Mr. Ford’s Gulfstream jet.
Mr. Ford and Mr. Bloomberg also shared a relationship with Mr. Wilson: the mayor’s frequent co-pilot had given flying lessons to Mr. Ford. (Mr. Wilson also has flown Malcolm Forbes’s helicopter off his yacht.)
The mayor is a gracious host aboard his helicopter. One passenger said that on a flight, the mayor asked his passengers if they wanted coffee, and then proceeded to pour some from a Thermos into a Styrofoam cup. He then said, “Do you need milk with that?” before returning to speaking flight jargon with his co-pilot.
A sense of superiority can creep into the way the mayor speaks about helicopter flying versus other forms of travel. Hours after he arrived in Albany last month with Mr. Roach and the other passengers, he held a news conference and thanked Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo for signing the pension reform legislation. He then singled out two people on his staff: Mr. Lasher, who accompanied the mayor on the helicopter, and Timothy F. Mulligan, the mayor’s fiscal director, who did not.
Mr. Mulligan, the mayor dryly noted, was “still, last I checked, No. 44 in line at La Guardia to try to get off and come here.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/nyregion/in-mayor-bloombergs-jet-setting-heart-a-love-for-helicopters.html

Between $5 million and $30 million??? Don't think so...

[Lonewolf_50]

So one of these esteemed journos now calls it "a helicopter plane."

Frock me, I need get a drink and go lie down. The stupidity seems to be increasing without limit.

The term "tilt rotor" has been in common usage for well over twenty years for this type of aircraft. What the hell is it with journos?

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland Names Three Key Suppliers For AW609 Civil Tiltrotor

Farnborough Air Show (http://www.ainonline.com/taxonomy/term/218491) » July 12, 2012 (http://www.ainonline.com/taxonomy/term/526554)
by Chad Trautvetter (http://www.ainonline.com/chad-trautvetter)

July 11, 2012, 6:05 PM
AgustaWestland signed three key supplier agreements for its AW609 civil tiltrotor program (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2012-07-09/agustawestland-offers-higher-weight-aw609-option) here at Farnborough yesterday, with Pratt & Whitney Canada, Rockwell Collins and BAE Systems. These major agreements follow a trail of contracts signed with AW609 component suppliers since AgustaWestland acquired the tiltrotor program last November. FAA and EASA certification of the AW609 is projected to occur in the first half of 2016.

Under its agreement, Pratt & Whitney Canada will provide the PT6C-67A, a new turboshaft derivative of the venerable PT6A with increased performance capabilities, which is slated for certification in the 2014 to 2015 time frame. While -67A engines have been flying on the AW609 prototypes for the past 10 years, the certified powerplant will incorporate several upgrades, among them being core design changes that will increase efficiency, P&WC vice president of engineering Walter Di Bartolomeo told AIN. He added that the turboshafts are also specially designed for “rotating vertical operations,” meaning they can withstand the AW609’s transitions between vertical and airplane modes.

Rockwell Collins will supply integrated avionics for the AW609 based on its touchscreen Pro Line Fusion embedded display system (EDS). Fusion EDS is a scaled-down version of Fusion for turboprops and light jets, with the processing hardware and software integrated into the “smart” touchscreen displays instead of in a cabinet-based architecture like it is for larger jets.

The new avionics system, announced last October, offers touchscreen control on the 14-inch primary flight displays, head-up guidance system capable of displaying synthetic-vision imagery, “autonomous backup flight control modes, MultiScan weather threat detection and full integration with Ascend flight information solutions,” according to Rockwell Collins.
With Fusion EDS, the AW609 will be capable of single-pilot operations under instrument flight rules conditions, a Rockwell Collins spokesman told AIN. The new cockpit will be installed on the fourth airframe, which is scheduled to fly in 2014. Certification of Fusion EDS is planned for late 2013.

Finally, BAE Systems will provide an upgraded flight control computer for the AW609’s triple-redundant fully digital fly-by-wire flight control system. The computer, which is expected to receive TSO certification in 2014, will include the AgustaWestland control laws and flight-control software, as well as the Fadec digital engine control system.

According to AgustaWestland, the vendor base for the civil tiltrotor is being renewed, “providing opportunities for cost-reduction initiatives, upgrades and improvements.” In line with this, the company is holding a presentation to key suppliers tomorrow at its Cascina Costa, Italy facility, which will include an update on the certification program. A single integrated development team in Cascina Costa is managing the AW609 program, but much of the flight testing for the tiltrotor prototypes will take place at its Arlington, Texas subsidiary.
AgustaWestland Names Three Key Suppliers For AW609 Civil Tiltrotor | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2012-07-11/agustawestland-names-three-key-suppliers-aw609-civil-tiltrotor)

[21stCen]

Sat, Oct 20, 2012
UK Government Funds AgustaWestland Civil Rotorcraft Projects (http://www.aero-news.net/bannertransfer.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=4f71b78a-84eb-4f56-a69e-cac674639f15)

Program Will Support Development Of Civilian Tilt-Rotor Aircraft, Among Other Programs

AgustaWestland has been selected to go forward to the contracting phase for their bid of up to £46 million ($73.3 million) from Round 3 of the Government’s Regional Growth Fund (RGF). The combined RGF and AgustaWestland investment of more than $160.5 million (US) will create a brand new industry sector in the UK with the establishment of a Civil Helicopter Hub. The projects will create and safeguard over 3000 jobs across the UK and create hundreds of new opportunities for the UK supply chain.
http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/general/2012/AW169-1012a.jpg (http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=4f71b78a-84eb-4f56-a69e-cac674639f15#)
The funding will also support the design and development in the UK of advanced technologies in the field of tiltrotor systems integration and for increasing the performance of tiltrotors, which combine the benefits of a helicopter and an aeroplane in one aircraft.
“Advanced manufacturing is important to the future of our economy and the Government is determined to get behind it through our industrial strategy," said Business Secretary Vince Cable. "Our work with industry through the Aerospace Growth Partnership has identified boosting exports and growing high value jobs as priorities. Targeted support through the Regional Growth Fund can really help world leading companies like AgustaWestland to continue to compete with the very best.”

“Today’s announcement marks the start of a new era for Britain’s rotorcraft industry," said Ray Edwards, Managing Director, AgustaWestland. "This funding and the investment being made by AgustaWestland will enable the UK to become a key player in the growing commercial rotorcraft sector. We welcome the support of the RGF and Government as we are committed to helping develop further the UK Civil Aerospace industry through the work undertaken by the Aerospace Growth Partnership. It is this type of positive collaboration of industry and the Government that will help create a long term strategy and a shared vision for UK aerospace.”
http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/commav/2012/AW609-0212a.jpg (http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=4f71b78a-84eb-4f56-a69e-cac674639f15#)
The Civil Helicopter Facility will include a commercial helicopter final assembly line, helicopter maintenance facility, helicopter training academy in conjunction with the Aerohub at Newquay Cornwall Airport, and a helicopter Research and Development (R&D) Center in conjunction with industry and academia.

RGF funding will support design and development work for the AW609 TiltRotor and future tiltrotor designs. AgustaWestland will work with the National Composites Center, University of Liverpool and a number of key UK suppliers on this program. This project will allow UK industry and academia to be involved in the most advanced and innovative aerospace programme of today. The AW609 TiltRotor is set to revolutionise flying by combining the benefits of a helicopter and an aeroplane and it will be the world’s first high speed commercial rotorcraft to enter the market following certification in 2016.

These projects will provide long term sustainability and growth of highly skilled engineering and manufacturing jobs across the UK and create hundreds of new opportunities for the UK supply chain. It will also support a wide range of research projects for future commercial rotorcraft programmes, keeping the UK at the very forefront of rotorcraft technology.

UK Government Funds AgustaWestland Civil Rotorcraft Projects | Aero-News Network (http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=4f71b78a-84eb-4f56-a69e-cac674639f15)

[21stCen]

(http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/rotorhub/feed/)

Rockwell Collins’ Pro Line Fusion selected for AW609

26 October 2012 - 9:31 by the Shephard News Team (http://www.shephardmedia.com/author/shephard/)

http://www.shephardmedia.com/static/images/article/pro_line.jpg

Rockwell Collins has entered new market territory with the selection of its Pro Line Fusion integrated avionics for AgustaWestland’s AW609 TiltRotor aircraft. The selection marks the first European customer for the Pro Line Fusion product.
Pro Line Fusion is a 14 inch (35.5 cm) touch-control primary flight display that enables natural, eyes-forward operation and enhanced situational awareness through all phases of flight. It provides advanced communication, navigation and surveillance systems, and will render the AW609 aircraft capable of single-pilot operations under instrument flight rule conditions.

According to the company, this is the first announced forward-fit application of Rockwell Collins’ touch-control primary flight displays.

Claude Alber, vice president and managing director of Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EuMEA) for Rockwell Collins, said: ‘This is a very important win for Rockwell Collins as it demonstrates the extreme flexibility and advanced capabilities of our newest avionics offering, and deepens relationships with our customers. Pro Line Fusion is a perfect fit for the unique, multi-role characteristics of the AW609’.

Pro Line Fusion entered into service in March 2012 and is now featured on 15 announced platforms ranging from turboprops and light business jets to air transport and military aircraft.

Rockwell Collins (http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/rotorhub/rockwell-collins-pro-line-fusion-selected-aw609/)

[Ian Corrigible]

...replacing the previously spec'd Pro Line 21 glass.

I/C

[liftman]

...Anyway Agusta claims for about 80 pre-order or letter of agreements.

Any idea about who they are?

[Ian Corrigible]

That "about 80" order figure (with $100K refundable deposit) has been quoted since 2000 (http://www.helis.com/news/2000/v22acad.htm). Customers previously claimed for the type include Aero-Dienst, Bristow, Helicopter Services (now CHC) and PHI, plus Greg Norman, Wayne Huizenga, Don Carter, Ross Perot Jr. and at least one unnamed Mid East sheik, though some of the other LOI holders are likely to be six feet under by now.

The only recently announced customer is Mike Bloomberg (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/nyregion/in-mayor-bloombergs-jet-setting-heart-a-love-for-helicopters.htm).

I/C

[jinglejim]

I wonder if those options had an expiry date attached?. If not then that 100k option would be worth depending on the final price in the vicinity of 15 to 20 Mil.Not a bad investment.

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland AW609 Moves Forward, May Be Built in Texas
Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/publications/aviation-international-news) » January 2013 (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/publications/january-2013)
by Mark Huber (http://www.ainonline.com/mark-huber)
January 1, 2013, 5:35 AM

AgustaWestland is giving serious consideration to building production models of the AW609 civil tiltrotor in the U.S., possibly in Texas, a senior executive told AIN last month. Robert LaBelle, managing director of the AgustaWestland TiltRotor Co., said that initially the aircraft will be built partially in Italy and the U.S. but that the ultimate decision on where to conduct final assembly will be “driven by the customer base.” Some 35 percent of that customer base, he noted, is predicted to be in the U.S.

AgustaWestland acquired the portion of the 609 program (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ainalerts/2011-06-21/agustawestland-buys-out-bells-ba609-stake) it did not already own from Bell in 2011, effectively dissolving the joint venture known as the Bell Agusta Aircraft Company. The 609 program is currently headquartered at a new AgustaWestland facility in Arlington, Texas, across the field from its previous home at Bell’s XworX, and the aircraft will be certified initially by the FAA in the U.S. under Parts 25, 29 and a new category called powered lift. “We selected this location because of the good weather that is conducive to flight-testing and the abundance of aerospace talent,” LaBelle said.
Approximately 120 employees are working on the program in Arlington and another 120 at AgustaWestland’s plant in Cascina Costa, Italy. Bell continues to provide temporary engineering support and will manufacture the rotor blades and yokes for the 609. Two prototype aircraft, one based in Arlington and the other at Cascina Costa, have accumulated 750 test hours since 2003 and flown 90 percent of the flight envelope. LaBelle said that more than 10 percent of the total flight-test hours have been flown in the last 11 months.
The Texas-based aircraft has been used for flight envelope expansion, ice accretion, testing flight controls and handling, external noise, performance, height-velocity and autorotation trials. The aircraft in Italy has been used for flight envelope expansion, load factor and vibration analysis, stall and high-frequency vibration tests, avionics development and kits and stress test of the flight guidance system.
Another two test aircraft are under construction in Italy and will join the test program this year and next. The third test aircraft is expected to conduct extensive icing tests in the U.S. Aircraft 4 will be fitted with a full production cockpit, including Rockwell Collins Pro Line Fusion touchscreen EDS avionics hardware, AW software used to command the aircraft’s fly-by-wire control system, upgraded Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67A engines, and BAE Systems flight control computer. A 609 flight simulator will be installed at Arlington later this year.
Certification Planned for 2016
Most customers who signed with deposits since the program was announced in 1996 remain with it, LaBelle said, even though AW has yet to set a price for the 609 and likely will not do so until 2014. “We are nowhere near predicting the price,” he said. Orders have held steady at around 70 aircraft for more than a decade. “We haven’t acquired any significant new orders because we haven’t ramped up the marketing program yet,” LaBelle said.
AgustaWestland expects certification, initially for two-pilot operation, in 2016.
“This is a road that no one has driven on before,” said Roberto Garavaglia, AgustaWestland senior vice president of marketing, referring to the 609 certification program. Short-takeoff operations will be added to the certification basis to increase the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight to 18,000 pounds from the vertical-takeoff limit of 16,800 pounds. “This is extra weight that could be used to increase available fuel and the range of the aircraft [now estimated at 700 nm after a vertical takeoff],” Garavaglia said. The base aircraft is expected to have a maximum forward speed of 275 knots, a ceiling of 25,000 feet, a hover out of ground effect of 5,000 feet, hover in ground effect of 10,000 feet and a useful load of 2,500 pounds.
AgustaWestland is currently promoting four interior configurations, including a standard two-pilot, nine-passenger layout; a six- to seven-passenger executive cabin; a two-litter medevac interior; a search-and-rescue design that includes hoist, basket, litter and four single seats; and a patrol/surveillance variant.
“It was never intended to be just a private aircraft,” Garavaglia said. “With the market the way it is today compared with the late 1990s, clearly the private market would be less active, not because of less interest in the aircraft, but because the economy has made the private sector less active.”
Garavaglia said AgustaWestland conducted a new market survey last year that estimates the market for the 609 at 700 aircraft over 20 years, including a strong parapublic component and a specialized niche serving the deepwater oil exploration market. Garavaglia said AgustaWestland could sell the 609 to military customers but is prohibited by its acquisition agreement with Bell from arming it. Bell and Boeing currently manufacture the larger V-22 Osprey tiltrotor for the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Air Force.
The Italian government remains interested in acquiring an unspecified number of 609s for coastal patrol, Garavaglia said. “Italy is a natural destination for the 609 because of its [coastal] characteristics. We are a frontier country in the Northern Mediterranean, and in the Southern Mediterranean there are all sorts of [security] issues to be dealt with. So several services in the Italian government are looking at the 609,” he said.

AgustaWestland AW609 Moves Forward, May Be Built in Texas | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aviation-international-news/2013-01-01/agustawestland-aw609-moves-forward-may-be-built-texas)

[Lonewolf_50]

21st, this is good news. Thanks for the update.

[Ian Corrigible]

Since the Bell-Boeing 609 and Bell-Agusta BA609 were always planned to be produced in Amarillo, are we actually saying that the AW609 might now not be built in Texas? :E

I/C

[Lonewolf_50]

Maybe Agusta is moving its HQ to Fort Worth, and this is the first step. :E

[SansAnhedral]

FAA Publishes Modified Noise Rules For Tiltrotors | Aero-News Network (http://www.aero-news.net/subscribe.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=98a33b6f-df48-4348-88bd-c66db2d8a24a)

FAA Publishes Modified Noise Rules For Tiltrotors
Brings U.S. Regulations Into Agreement With ICAO Standards

The FAA has published a rule in the Federal Register governing noise certification standards for issuing type and airworthiness certificates for a new civil, hybrid airplane-rotorcraft known as the tiltrotor. This noise standard establishes new noise limits and procedures as the basis to ensure consistent aviation noise reduction technology is incorporated in tiltrotors for environmental protection. It provides uniform noise certification standards for tiltrotors certificated in the United States and harmonizes the U.S. regulations with the standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) Annex 16.

Tiltrotors are defined as aircraft uses rotating nacelles, a hybrid of propellers and helicopter rotors, to provide both lift and propulsive force. The tiltrotor is designed to function as a helicopter for takeoff and landing and as an airplane during the en-route portion of flight operations. The rule cites the V-22 Osprey (pictured) as the most recognizable example of the type.

In anticipation of civil tiltrotor production, ICAO's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) chartered the Tiltrotor Task Group (TRTG) in 1997 to develop noise certification guidelines for tiltrotors. The FAA participated in the TRTG and its development of the tiltrotor noise guidelines from 1997 to 2000. The ICAO tiltrotor guidelines used the same noise limits that the United States had incorporated into part 36, Appendix H for helicopter noise certification. The ICAO has included additional requirements that are unique to the design of tiltrotors. Current regulations in part 36 do not contain noise certification requirements specific to the tiltrotor and its unique flight capabilities. Since no standards for the tiltrotor currently exist, the FAA is adding new standards to part 36, and amending part 21, § 21.93 (Classification of Changes in Type Design) to accommodate certification of the tiltrotor. In order to harmonize the U.S. regulations with the international standards, this rulemaking adopts the same noise certification standards as used in ICAO Annex 16, Volume 1, Chapter 13, Attachment F (Amendment 7) for tiltrotors.

The FAA received only one comment on the NPRM during the period open for public comments, which closed October 19, 2011. That comment, from AgustaWestland, stated that the proposed rule did not specify the entity that would determine the flyover configuration in Appendix K to Part 36. AgustaWestland recommended that the regulation specify that the applicant be the entity that prescribes the constant flyover aircraft configuration.

The FAA said that it agrees the regulation needs to specify what entity prescribes the constant flyover configuration. The FAA also agreed that the applicant is the proper entity, and modified the final rule to incorporate this change.

The present value cost of the final rule is $588,000 for the certification of one tiltrotor type, about the same as would be required for a traditional helicopter design. The FAA considered this cost to be minimal in the NPRM. The FAA received no comments on this minimal cost determination. Therefore, the FAA considers this cost to be minimal in this final regulatory evaluation.

[21stCen]

AW609 Tiltrotor Certification Slips to 2017
Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/publications/aviation-international-news) » July 2013 (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/publications/aviation-international-news/july-2013)
by Mark Huber (http://www.ainonline.com/mark-huber)
July 1, 2013, 1:35 AM

AgustaWestland has confirmed reports that certification of the AW609 civil tiltrotor has been pushed out to 2017, a one-year delay. A company spokesman told AIN that the schedule change is the result of numerous upgrades being made to the design in terms of aerodynamics and systems, including new engines, avionics and fly-by-wire flight controls.
The Italian airframer acquired sole interest in the program from Bell Helicopter in 2011 and announced major program suppliers last year, including Pratt & Whitney Canada for engines, Rockwell Collins for the integrated cockpit featuring Pro Line Fusion avionics, and BAE for the flight control computer.
The AgustaWestland Tiltrotor Company, based in Arlington, Texas, is pursuing FAA certification. Two prototypes are currently flying and two more are under construction at AW facilities in Italy.
The Italian Civil Aviation Authority (ENAC) revealed the delay when it briefed the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) on the AW609 June 3 in Montreal. The introduction of civil tiltrotors is expected to generate various changes to the ICAO Annex to accommodate the unique capabilities of such aircraft.





AW609 Tiltrotor Certification Slips to 2017 | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aviation-international-news/2013-07-01/aw609-tiltrotor-certification-slips-2017)

[21stCen]

AW609 TiltRotor improvements to boost performance
2013-09-03 09:13:58 AgustaWestland Press Release

http://verticalmag.com/images/news/article_files/840942916925997.jpg
AgustaWestland, a Finmeccanica company, is flight testing a number of aerodynamic improvements that will boost the performance of the AW609 TiltRotor. On July 25, 2013 AgustaWestland undertook the first flight of a modified vertical tail fin on AW609 TiltRotor prototype #2 at its Cascina Costa flight test facility in Italy. The modified vertical fin is one part of a extensive package of product improvements which also include a new, more aerodynamic, design for the engine exhaust nozzles and changes to the prop-rotor spinner cones. Together, these modifications reduce the drag factor of the AW609 TiltRotor by approximately ten percent, as well as delivering a significant weight reduction, with a resulting performance increase.

Clive Scott, AW609 Program Manager, said “These aerodynamic improvements, new avionics, new cockpit display system and a large number of other improvements will together give the aircraft greater performance and mission capabilities, making it even more attractive for carrying out a wide range of missions which can benefit from its much higher cruise speed, high altitude cruise capability and longer range, when compared to existing helicopters or other proposed high speed rotorcraft.”

An upgraded version of the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6 engine is being used on the AW609 TiltRotor and will include the latest in technological developments, providing the aircraft with increased performance capabilities as well as the latest safety enhancements.

Rockwell Collins is supplying a fully integrated cockpit for the AW609 TiltRotor based on its Pro Line Fusion system, allowing AgustaWestland to adopt the very latest in commercial aircraft cockpit technologies, including 14 inch (35.5 cm) touch screen displays, integrated flight management systems with satellite based navigation, synthetic and enhanced vision systems and Head-Up-Display interfaces; all of which will be integrated with the aircraft’s own avionics management systems. This cockpit suite will provide the crew with increased situational awareness and will reduce pilot workload.

BAE Systems is providing an upgraded Flight Control Computer at the heart of the AW609 TiltRotor’s triple redundant fully digital fly-by-wire flight control system. The computer will include not only the AgustaWestland control laws and flight control software but also the digital engine control system.

These modifications are an integral part of the overall AW609 TiltRotor program re-baselining aimed at reducing customer acquisition and operating costs, coupled with delivering performance and technology improvements.

The AgustaWestland US subsidiary, AgustaWestland Tilt-Rotor Company, based in Arlington, Texas, is the Type applicant for the AW609 TiltRotor supported by an Integrated Development Team, based both in Arlington and in Cascina Costa, Italy. The first prototype is continuing with envelope expansion activities in the US whilst the second prototype is flying from Cascina Costa, with nearly 800 flying hours completed on these aircraft . A further two prototypes are under final assembly in Italy.

AW609 TiltRotor improvements to boost performance | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/25064#.UiYNgTZfqUk)

[21stCen]

Flying the AW609: a preview
2014-01-20 11:33:56 by Elan Head





http://verticalmag.com/images/news/article_files/491748675005510.jpg



Editor's Note: This story appears as part of a comprehensive feature on AgustaWestland in the Dec'13-Jan'14 issue of Vertical. To read the digital version of the magazine, click here (http://www.verticalmag.com/digital/digital_magazine).


It has now been more than 20 years since the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey made its first flight, and five years since the aircraft entered operational service with the United States Marine Corps and Air Force. So, the tilt-rotor is no longer a new concept. However, a civilian pilot contemplating the AgustaWestland AW609 is likely to have a number of questions about the aircraft — one of those being, “What is it like to fly?”


To find out, I paid a visit in late September to AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor Company in Arlington, Texas, where the first prototype in the program is undergoing flight testing for basic envelope expansion (a second prototype is flying in Italy, while the third and fourth prototypes are under construction). No, I didn’t get to fly the actual aircraft, which had yet to be approved for demonstration flights. But I did get to fly the next best thing: the AW609 engineering simulator, which is being used to fine-tune changes to the flight control software and to flight test maneuvers before they’re performed in the real aircraft.


The AW609 engineering simulator lacks motion, along with some of the bells and whistles that will appear in a full-flight training simulator that should be available around the time of aircraft certification. Still, it’s comparable in sophistication to many of the flight training devices now being used for pilot training. According to AW609 program manager Clive Scott, it’s also quite realistic, thanks to the more than 850 hours of actual flight data accumulated by the program so far. “Now, with so many hours flying, the models are very representative,” he said.


My guide for the demo was AW609 test pilot Dan Wells, a retired U.S. Army airplane and helicopter pilot who began flying tilt-rotors in 2006, when he was loaned to the U.S. Air Force for its V-22 development program. He has now been in the 609 program for about two years, having followed it to AgustaWestland from his previous employer, Bell. “I just love the aircraft and I love the program,” Wells said, expressing enthusiasm over the program’s renewed momentum. “We’re starting to get the mentality that we’re going to certify this thing.”


The first thing I noticed upon climbing into the simulator’s cockpit was that, as a helicopter pilot, I felt right at home. That’s because the AW609 has conventional helicopter flight controls: a cyclic-like center stick, yaw pedals and, notably, a left-side collective lever rather than the throttle-like thrust control lever found on the V-22. (For a comprehensive overview of flying the V-22, see p.108, Vertical, Feb-Mar 2012.) Is this the ideal control configuration? I’m not sure, especially given the flexibility embodied in the AW609’s triply redundant, fly-by-wire flight control system. Regardless, the arrangement is sure to be a selling point for helicopter pilots, who will find the transition to the AW609 to be that much simpler.


Similar to the V-22, the AW609 has three distinctive modes of flight, defined by the position of the nacelles. The aircraft is in “VTOL” (vertical take-off and landing) mode when the nacelles are between 85 and 95 degrees (with 90 degrees being the full vertical position, and 95 degrees being the maximum aft position, used for decelerating the aircraft or hovering with a tail wind). “Conversion” mode encompasses nacelle positions from 85 degrees down to zero, with the proprotor blades at 100 percent r.p.m. “Airplane” mode occurs when the nacelles are at zero degrees tilt, and proprotor r.p.m. is at 84 per cent.


I commenced my simulator flight with a lift off to a hover, which was much like any helicopter lift off. At this point, the nacelle position was 87 degrees: typical, Wells said, for no-wind hovers. The hover was quite stable, and the aircraft performed much like a helicopter through a few hovering turns (in VTOL mode, the flight control system controls yaw by tilting the proprotor discs differentially; this changes to differential pitch control as the aircraft enters airplane mode).


From my location over an airport runway, I then performed a normal take-off, which I initiated by holding a nacelle control switch on the collective forward until it stopped automatically at 75 degrees (these pre-set nacelle angles are another way in which the AW609 differs from the V-22, and make the aircraft safer and easier to fly). The aircraft began moving forward and climbing. As I gained altitude, I began the transition to airplane mode: first, a click forward on the control switch to set the nacelles at 50 degrees, another click to set them at zero degrees, and a final click to drop the r.p.m. to 84 per cent. At this point, we were up and away, and the aircraft was flying much like a turboprop airplane, with a maximum cruise speed of 275 knots.


http://verticalmag.com/images/news/article_files/463181304279715.jpg


After maneuvering the aircraft in airplane mode for a while, I turned it back to the virtual airport to fly some traffic patterns. As I approached the airport, clicking backward on the nacelle control switch first restored the proprotor r.p.m. to 100 percent, then moved the nacelles to 50 degrees, then moved them back to 75 degrees (although not all at once: each step in the conversion process requires that the aircraft be within a specific airspeed range, which is indicated to the pilot on the instrument panel). As I set up a traffic pattern, I began slowing the aircraft to around 60 knots as I rolled out on final, bringing the nacelles to 80, then 85 and finally 87 degrees. Without yet having a good feel for the deceleration process — how much of it owed to nacelle position, and how much to cyclic position — I didn’t aim for my landing spot too precisely. However, I brought the aircraft to a hover over the runway fairly easily, and without incident.


After a quick set down and pick up, I then performed another normal takeoff, but instead of transitioning to airplane mode, flew a traffic pattern in conversion mode, with the nacelles at 50 degrees. This felt a lot like flying a helicopter in a traffic pattern at a moderate airspeed. Instead of a normal approach to a hover, I brought the aircraft in for a running landing, touching down at around 40 knots and 85 degrees nacelle position. After landing, I moved the nacelles to their full aft position of 95 degrees (then began rolling backward before remembering to restore the nacelles to 87 degrees).


To wrap things up, I performed a rolling takeoff with the nacelles at 75 degrees, and re-entered the traffic pattern. That pattern concluded with perhaps the most interesting maneuver of the day: a steep approach initiated at 60 knots and 300 feet above ground level (AGL). With the nacelles set to 95 degrees, and the cyclic stick held forward, we were tilted nose-down and looking straight down at the runway for most of the approach. The visibility was incredible — far better than in most helicopters, which have a nose-high attitude on approach. I began leveling the aircraft at around 100 feet AGL, again bringing it to a stable hover.


One thing I didn’t get to experience was an autorotation, as AgustaWestland was still in the process of developing autorotation procedures for the aircraft (at press time, the company told me that these autorotation tests were progressing effectively). According to Wells, if the aircraft experiences a complete power failure, an emergency conversion switch will allow the nacelles to quickly be moved to vertical to enter an autorotative descent. Loss of a single engine is less dramatic, as the AW609’s interconnected drive train allows power from the remaining engine to be shared between the proprotors (and a “soft stop” on the collective will adjust automatically to allow the pilot to pull more power). Developing one-engine inoperative (OEI) procedures for the aircraft is another to-do item for the flight testing program, which will be facilitated by an OEI training mode on the aircraft’s new flight control software.


That flight control software is the real magic of the AW609: it calculates and compensates for most of the aerodynamic complexity associated with transitioning from vertical to highspeed forward flight. That may make some pilots nervous, and it certainly means that the software’s developers have their work cut out for them. The result, however, is shaping up to be a very intuitive aircraft with a highly manageable learning curve. “I think the biggest thing I want people to take away from it is how easy it is to fly,” remarked Wells. “Any helicopter pilot can get in the 609 and fly it right away.”

Flying the AW609: a preview | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/Flying-the-AW609:-a-preview?goback=%2Egde_3898142_member_5831478843889721347#%2E Ut6Hk_td7UI)

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland plans to reopen AW609 orderbook this year
By: Dominic Perry (http://www.flightglobal.com/landingpage/Dominic%20Perry.html)
London
15:18 19 Feb 2014

AgustaWestland will reopen its orderbook for the in-development AW609 civil tiltrotor this year, as it looks to add to the near 60 commitments it already holds for the aircraft.
The Anglo-Italian airframer suspended orders when it acquired Bell Helicopter's 50% share of the programme in 2011, to allow a "thorough review" of the tiltrotor to see where the company "could add value and enhance the product".
However, it now feels the development of the aircraft has matured sufficiently – with a performance baseline established – to allow a resumption of sales activity. "To that end, we anticipate opening up the orderbook for further purchase agreements in 2014, in addition to the almost 60 agreements held today by AgustaWestland," it says.

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=54473
AgustaWestland
The airframer is currently performing high-altitude testing and will shortly complete auto-rotation trials on the AW609, using its two flying prototypes. A series of aerodynamic enhancements to the vertical fin, exhausts and prop-rotor nacelles unveiled last year have "all proven positive", it says, validating its claims of a 10% cut in drag with added weight-saving benefits.
Further unspecified enhancements to the type's Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C powerplants will be implemented this year, it says.
A third flight-test article is being assembled at AgustaWestland's Vergiate, Italy facility, ahead of a likely maiden sortie in the second half of 2014. The final test aircraft will take to the skies in 2015, following ground rig tests of its new avionics suite.
Certification and entry into service for the 8.1t tiltrotor is anticipated in 2017.
AgustaWestland plans to reopen AW609 orderbook this year - 2/19/2014 - Flight Global (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/agustawestland-plans-to-reopen-aw609-orderbook-this-396112/)

[AviGuy]

AgustaWestland Family at Heli-Expo for North American Debut | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/hai-convention-news/2014-02-24/agustawestland-family-heli-expo-north-american-debut)

Wonder who gets one of these pre-arranged Demo flights? Bloomberg (ex-NYC Mayor) has an order, and Lady Gaga as well, that would be one interesting photo op!

[riff_raff]

Here's a fairly recent update on the EU Clean Sky 2 Civil Tilt Rotor (http://www.cleansky.eu/sites/default/files/documents/cs2/2b_-_20140123_cs2_fast_rotorcraft_tiltrotor_iadp_vienna.pdf) effort from AW. Looks like a pretty serious program since it involves developing technologies like a variable speed engine and a multi-speed transmission. The schedule shows first flight in mid-2019.

[Ian Corrigible]

Wonder who gets one of these pre-arranged Demo flights?
Reportedly just two (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/hai-convention-news/2014-02-26/agustawestland-offers-demo-flights-aw609-tiltrotor-heli-expo-2014) pilots, one of whom was from Chevron (http://www.agustawestland.com/news/agustawestland-completes-first-customer-demonstration-aw609).

I/C

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland completes autorotation trials for AW609 program

http://verticalmag.com/images/news/article_files/955992497969419.jpg

AgustaWestland announced on April 24 that it has successfully completed autorotation trials for the AW609 TiltRotor program.

According to a company press release, the aircraft completed more than 70 power-off conversions from airplane mode to helicopter mode during 10 dedicated flight hours between the end of March and early April. The tests were flown from AgustaWestland’s Arlington, Texas, facility under the auspices of the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and covered the full windmilling and autorotation envelopes.

“The handling qualities of the aircraft were very benign throughout the testing and the performance of the aircraft exceeded expected characteristics seen during preparation in the engineering simulator in Arlington,” AgustaWestland reported. “Together, the test pilots and engineers were able to develop the best flight maneuvers that will ultimately allow training of commercial pilots in the planned full flight simulator. This latest goal provides further evidence of the AW609’s quality in terms of design, performance, and safety in the most demanding conditions.”

This accomplishment follows the completion of the AW609 flight envelope expansion trials in December 2013, which validated the aircraft’s 25,000-foot service ceiling with a pressurized cabin and maximum cruise speed of 275 knots, both at the aircraft’s maximum weight. Other trials completed with the AW609 TiltRotor in 2013 included slope landings, run-on landings, aeroelastic stability testing, and high altitude stability testing.

AgustaWestland is aiming for FAA certification for the AW609 TiltRotor in 2017. The company said that the concurrent industrialization phase of the AW609 is also taking shape across the AgustaWestland network and associated supply chain, with new equipment and tooling being acquired “to guarantee existing orders can start to be fulfilled immediately after FAA type certification.”
AgustaWestland completes autorotation trials for AW609 program | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/27426#.U1lSozZfqUk)

[Commando Cody]

Rotor & Wing says that in their next issue they will have a pilot report in one of the actual AW609 prototypes--not a simulator

[Peter-RB]

Very interesting posts on here, spent a lot of time reading them, but just one question keeps popping into my mind, if some one can answer without shooting me that is...

Why use props...could the same not be achieved with simple jets, it would remove all that heavy hardware on the ends of the wing tips and would be lighter to swivel rather than moving all that spinning prop system ? or is it redundancy and getting back down under control,..

Peter R-B
Lancashire

[21stCen]

I'm sure those responding to you will not 'shoot at you' as happens on other threads (US taxpayers are not footing the bill for this aircraft). In general easy answers to your question as using jet engines have associated characteristics and design efficiency levels as well as safety issues that would not allow it to be a viable choice for the intended capabilities of a commercial tiltrotor. (and of course using pure jet engines would make it a "TiltJet" rather than a "TiltRotor").
:ok:

[SansAnhedral]

Peter-RB


Aside from the elements mentioned by 21st, consider the control afforded by the use of a proprotor and the ability to direct the thrust from the rotor disc in a much more instantaneous manner by adjusting collective and cyclic, versus the output of a turbojet whose response to thrust changes would be far more lagged.

In hover, a tiltrotor is not a turboprop with the props pointed skyward; its a pair of helicopter rotor heads with full authority cyclic and collective control.

Actuator technology is not to the point where you could achieve appropriate response from brute force tilting of a thrust vector, be it a jet engine or even a ducted fan.

Consider a yaw turn in a tilt rotor. This is accomplished by differential cyclic and flapping between the rotors. There is no differential nacelle tilt to accomplish the same maneuver because of the latency of the actuation.

[Ian Corrigible]

West Germany explored the tiltjet concept in the 1960s with the EWR VJ 101. Like the Dornier Do 31, ein bisschen laut.

ntZDAS4fCPA

I/C

[bobbieh]

Heard a rumour that there was an incident involving the AW609 in Italy last month, does anyone know anything further?

[Droolguy]

Hello everyone,

So I started on the long road to being a commercial rotorcraft pilot and I had a question for everyone.

Does anyone know who currently has the Bell 609/Agusta 609 on order?

From what I have heard they are supposed to get their FAA certification next year and I am trying to set myself up to end up in one down the road once I build (a lot) more flight time.

Also, if anyone on the forums has worked in the 609 program would a dual-rating really be beneficial to have on the resume vs the time I could build in rotorcraft over that same duration?

Thanks everyone.

Look forward to seeing you all in the sky.

[Um... lifting...]

Usually press release statements on certification dates are optimistic. This one says 2017. I'd guess 2018 earliest. Supposedly 70 are on order with Lady Gaga and Michael Bloomberg both on the order list (has anyone ever seen Lady Gaga and Michael Bloomberg together?). Probably many of the rest are corporate VIP transport or options.

It's a powered-lift rating, and the only way to get that now is flying the V-22 in the U.S. Marine Corps or the U.S. Air Force (soon the JMSDF or the IDF), or working for AW.

AW609 Tiltrotor Completes Autorotation Tests | Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ainalerts/2014-04-29/aw609-tiltrotor-completes-autorotation-tests)

[tottigol]

The last one is the best solution.

[Droolguy]

So, it's an aircraft that you can only get certified on by flying it, but you can't fly it without being certified in it.

This is the issue I am running into, no one really knows the proper career path to follow to end up in tiltrotors.

Even our chief instructors in the area are scratching their heads... helicopter pilots in the 15,000+ hour region who are well connected in the industry.

I emailed AW to try and get some clarity on how one would go about getting a rating for them, just waiting on a response back.

I'll post it here if they respond.

[noooby]

I guess you would do your flight training through AW with their Instructors and they would give you the type rating?

Just need the FAA to allow the AW Instructors to do that, and I think the FAA are behind in dealing with the Tilt Rotor concept, regulations wise.

[tottigol]

Droolguy, You could do worse than join the NAVY/USMC as an officer, then join the Naval Aviation training program, qualify on tiltrotors and have an assured career on the TR.:E
Other than that the FARs Part 61 is quite clear to the regard.

[Um... lifting...]

Several people do indeed hold FAA powered-lift ratings. and I have seen the rating, so they are issued. The few I know of personally are all active-duty officers, though there are probably others who have worked on the V-22 and / or the AW609 at Bell/Boeing or AW.

Until the AW609 is certified, I would be willing to wager there will be no civil courses offered. And that's 3+ years away. That's not to say that I think that there isn't a civil course 'under development', but nobody's going to share that info until it's ready to be offered.

I'd further be willing to wager that the first civil certifications will go to pilots with several thousand hours in their logbooks, whether that be rotorcraft, airplane, or both. They'll work (and probably already do work) for the customers who have ordered the machines. Those lead customers will pay the freight for the first courses. That's how it works.

Since the contractor is Agusta-Westland and they operate in-house training, and they're in the helicopter business, they will probably promote training staff from within and perhaps augment that with former military pilots with tiltrotor experience as their initial instructional staff. The USMC found adding some additional ME airplane to the initial training syllabus was valuable, and they also discovered that experienced airplane pilots had and easier time with some of the skill sets than experienced helicopter pilots (and vice versa).

In the meantime, you probably should focus on putting a couple thousand hours in your logbook. Your first paying job will not likely be in the tiltrotor.

tott, I think you may be assuming our candidate is: American; young enough to be picked up for an officer accession program; qualified for same; and willing. Perhaps he is, and perhaps he isn't.

[Lonewolf_50]

Drool:
Based on the syllabus the USMC uses for its flight training track, getting some multi engine time/certs would be a good thing to add to your kit bad along with your helo rating. The USMC found that as their initial syllabus from zero to V-22 pilot evolved, that they emphasized the Multi Engine a bit more than in the initial cut.

Been a few years for me, so that's a rough suggestion.

[Droolguy]

Thanks for the replies everyone. As for the military, I did eight years and a couple deployments in the Army. Trying not to go back. I started on the path to being a helicopter pilot so that I could have a job that I enjoyed doing that challenged me, military has too many bad memories for me to ever be enjoyable.

Still waiting on that reply from AW.

[tottigol]

AW replied to you in this forum, just need to read between the lines.
If you are going about it the FAA way, there needs to be an approved course, however that TR course cannot exist without the aircraft certification by the relative aviation authority.
Believe me, I know...:*

[Droolguy]

I see. Well then I suppose I will be working to rack up time waiting for the FAA. Thanks again everyone.

[mckpave]

I have the Comm PL rating and still fly the Osprey as a civilian. There is no path currently on the civilian side for gaining this rating, because there exists no aircraft to operate. About the only thing that comes close is being a production test pilot at the V-22 plant in Amarillo. I've been flying the Osprey nearly 10 years now, I'll be glad to answer questions you may have about tiltrotors if you have them.

[21stCen]

Monday, December 1, 2014
The AW609 Tilt Rotor: 2014’s Best Ride  

By Ernie Stephens, Editor-at-Large
In mid-February of this year, I received a call from the publisher of this magazine asking me the most ridiculous question I have ever been asked in the 25 years that I have been a pilot: “How would you like to be trained to fly the AgustaWestland (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=AgustaWestland) AW609 Tilt Rotor?”
As it turned out, I would be the first person outside of the manufacturer’s own pilots to fly the current iteration of the civilian tilt rotor, the experimental aircraft that can fly like a helicopter then reconfigure to fly like an airplane. The offer was extra exciting because I was also one of the first people to fly the hybrid Airbus (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=Airbus) X3 (formerly the Eurocopter (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=Eurocopter) X3), and probably the only person in world who has flown both.
http://www.aviationtoday.com/Assets/Image/1(13).jpg(Left) The author in flight at the controls of N609TR. Photo by Dan Wells, AW609 test pilot
(Middle) A slow, steep approach in the AW609. Nacelles are at 87 degrees to slow the aircraft during decent. Photo by Ernie Stephens
(Right) Adrian Board, pres. and CEO of AgustaWestland (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=AgustaWestland) Tilt Rotor, presents Ernie Stephens with an official AW609 ball cap, post flight. Courtesy of AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor Co.

Being allowed to fly the AW609 was going to take more than the permission of Adrian Board, the president and CEO of the AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor Co (AWTRC), the wholly owned subsidiary of AgustaWestland created to focus on the AW609. I would have to get permission from the FAA (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=FAA) to even touch the controls because the aircraft falls under the category of an experimental aircraft to be used for research and development. Therefore, it cannot be flown by anyone other than the company’s pilots “to conduct aircraft operations as a matter of research or to determine if an idea warrants further development.” But hold on, because it got more complicated than that.
First, the FAA (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=FAA) had to come to Arlington Municipal Airport, the home of AWTRC, and recertify the tilt rotor as an experimental aircraft in the crew training category since I am not an employee of the company. It also meant that I had to be officially trained as second-in-command aboard the aircraft before being allowed to fly it. And that was fine with me. Normally, when I do an evaluation flight for Rotor & Wing, I get a thorough technical briefing – usually between 90 minutes and two hours, depending on the complexity of the aircraft - from one of the design engineers or company pilots before climbing aboard. But to get two full days of what amounted to a transition course, including simulator training, followed by official authorization to serve as a second-in-command of the AW609 was a nice situation.
The May 2014 issue of Rotor & Wing recounts the way the AW609 handles throughout its full range of configurations and during various maneuvers. But space limitations being what they are, I couldn’t write too much about what I learned about the aircraft’s systems. Here is what they taught me:
Wing and Stabilizers

http://www.aviationtoday.com/Assets/Image/opening_AW609_3.jpeg
The AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor serial #0001 shows off its new paint job at Heli-Expo 2014 in Anneheim, California.
It is one of three prototypes.
Image courtesy of AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor Co.The 34-ft wing is attached to the top of the fuselage and sweeps several degrees forward. The trailing edge has flaperons – surfaces that double as flaps and ailerons. A manual control for the flaperons resides on the instrument panel, but is only used as a manual override to the automatic system that handles them under normal conditions.
Bringing up the rear of the 609 is a high-mounted horizontal stabilizer with an elevator atop a rudderless vertical stabilizer.
In helicopter mode, the proprotors will provide lift. The flaperons will be at a 66-degree down angle to reduce the amount of wing area exposed to the proprotor’s downwash. And since movement of the 609 will be zero, or at a hover-taxi speeds, the horizontal and vertical stabilizers will serve no real function on a calm day.
In airplane mode the wings provide the bulk of the lift, and the flaperons provide roll moments and additional lift at slow speeds. The vertical stab will help keep everything in line.


Nacelles

At the end of each wing is a nacelle that houses a Pratt and Whitney Canada PT6C-67A turbine engine. A pylon protruding from the wing serves as the primary load-bearing member for the weight of the engine, gearboxes and proprotor system. It is also the portion of the wing structure that the nacelles rotate around.
In helicopter mode, the nacelles will be somewhere between 75 degrees from horizontal, which takes the aircraft into translational lift speeds, to 95 degrees, which is just enough aft vectoring to create a braking force while on approach, or brisk reward flight when in a hover. An 87-degree angle, however, is where the aircraft prefers to hover because it counteracts the aerodynamic forces that tend to make the ship drift slowly backwards. When the nacelles are tilted beyond 75 degrees, the 609 is virtually an airplane. The farther the forward tilt, the greater the forward airspeed.
In either mode, an automatic system will “discourage” the pilot from exceeding the tilt angle/speed schedule.
http://www.aviationtoday.com/Assets/Image/3(5).jpg

Engines

A drive shaft connecting the power outputs of the engines runs through the wing’s pylon. So, when one engine is running, both proprotors will turn. If both quit, the 609 will autorotate.
Looking at the nacelles from the side while in airplane mode, the engines lay horizontally in the lower section of the nacelle and, of course, they stand on end when in helicopter mode. To keep the engine oil flowing, the engineers created two reservoirs, so that one or the other will be at the engine’s lowest point through its range of rotation.
http://www.aviationtoday.com/Assets/Image/2(8).jpg

Metamorphosis: N609TR transitions from a hover to its top-speed configuration.
Courtesy of AgustaWestland Tilt Rotor Co.
Proprotor System

The 3-bladed proprotor system occupies the top have of the nacelle when viewed in airplane mode, and is driven by a gearbox powered by a shaft coming from the front of the engine. When vertical, blade pitch is controlled by an assembly that looks and works like the swashplate and connecting rods in any helicopter. And the same blade pitch that gives the AW609 lift when the nacelles are vertical gives it thrust when horizontal.
To slide left, displacing the center stick to the left will add pitch to the right proprotor, dragging the aircraft to the left, and vice versa. Pedal inputs rotate the 609 about its yaw axis by creating what amounts to a forward cyclic input in one proprotor set and an aft input in the other.
One thing I can’t emphasis enough is the adrenaline rush I received when I looked out the window and saw those nacelles rotating, followed by the mix of vertical lift and fast-forward feels. What a ride!
Aviation Today :: The AW609 Tilt Rotor: 2014?s Best Ride?? (http://www.aviationtoday.com/the-checklist/The-AW609-Tilt-Rotor-2014s-Best-Ride_83577.html#.VH62s2dxmAg)

[Ian Corrigible]

Sounds like Ernie enjoyed himself.

Still no sign of the third prototype. #3 & 4 were originally scheduled to fly in 2002 (http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release_ar/5721/first-two-ba609-tiltrotors-completed-(june-25).html), with #3's departure gradually pushed back in line with the program slippage, the most recent prediction being "the end of 2014 (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-aw609-nears-1000h-of-flight-testing-401293/)." Must make for some interesting obsolescence (/supply chain) management!

Also interesting to see talk (http://www.agustawestland.com/news/agustawestland-aw609-tiltrotor-aerodynamic-improvements-set-boost-performance) of an 'upgraded version of the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6 engine" with "the latest in technological developments." More power, or just the replacement of the EEC's out-of-production chips?

I/C

[Paradaxos]

A good looking ship certainly.

I didn't realise it didn't have a rudder before now. I wonder how yaw works in aeroplane mode.

[exwessex]

The proprotors provide differential thrust to give yaw control which is also roll control in vertical mode.

[Ian Corrigible]

BobbieH (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/456619-whats-new-civil-tiltrotor-4.html#post8598487) hinted at the time that something had occurred, but no additional info was ever forthcoming...

I/C

(Edited to add: a second PPRuNer, who shall remain nameless, posted to say that they were surprised a rumored AW609 prop-strike incident last fall hadn't been discussed on the forum. This post - which has since been deleted - would appear to give credence to BobbieH's post from last August.)

[John Eacott]

AgustaWestland and Bristow Sign Exclusive Agreement for the AW609 TiltRotor Programme
(http://bristowgroup.com/bristow-news/latest-news/2015/agustawestland-and-bristow-sign-exclusive-platform/)

Joint announcement made at Heli-Expo with real aircraft ‘on-static’ public premier

• Addressing concepts around operations, regulations, support, configurations, commercial aspects towards certification
• Preparing introduction into the market as the AW609 industrialization phase starts
• Almost 60 customers have already chosen the AW609 globally to perform several missions

Finmeccanica – AgustaWestland and Bristow announced today the signing of a platform development agreement for the AW609 TiltRotor programme. The announcement was made at Heli-Expo (Orlando, FL) on the occasion of the ‘on static’ public premiere of a real AW609 aircraft at the US exhibition, featuring a dedicated Bristow/Eastern Airways paint scheme.

The development agreement envisages AgustaWestland and Bristow working closely on a number of activities in support of AW609 program development addressing concepts around operations, regulations, maintenance, configuration optimization, as well as identifying possible areas of enhancement or modifications.

Under the agreement, AgustaWestland and Bristow will work to support the development of oil & gas and search and rescue dedicated configurations and capabilities. The companies would provide contribution to flying activities towards aircraft maturity and to address commercial aspects for future AW609 acquisitions.

The signing of this agreement sets a major milestone for the development of the first commercial tiltrotor towards FAA certification, which is expected to be achieved in 2017. This exclusive agreement further strengthens the long established partnership between AgustaWestland and Bristow, a prime global operator of the AW139 and the AW189 covering offshore transport and SAR operational requirements. By joining forces through their respective expertise and know-how, AgustaWestland and Bristow are moving towards a marketing and operational preparation stage as the AW609 program enters its industrialization phase.

As demand for integrated point-to-point transportation grows, Bristow has made strategic investments in Airnorth and Eastern Airways, combining fixed wing and helicopter transportation into a one-stop solution for customers. The agreement to further develop the potential capabilities of the AW609 marks a significant step towards the production of one aircraft type that will provide an ideal transportation solution for offshore travel in the future.

“We see tremendous opportunities for this aircraft for our clients who are flying to more remote and hostile environments,” said Bristow President and CEO Jonathan Baliff. “With its vertical lift and landing capabilities combined with increased speed, extended range and airline-style amenities, Bristow will be able to provide more value to clients by offering complete logistics solutions with one aircraft type that will take them faster and farther offshore.”

With more than 1,100 flight hours logged by the first two prototypes and two more aircraft coming, the AW609 programme is continuing to benefit from a range of enhancements to maximize the aircraft’s performance and mission capabilities. Almost 60 customers have already chosen the AW609 globally to perform several missions such as offshore transport, patrol and search and rescue, executive/private transport and government roles.

Bristow Group Inc. is the leading provider of helicopter services to the worldwide offshore energy industry based on the number of aircraft operated and one of two helicopter service providers to the offshore energy industry with global operations. The company has major transportation operations in the North Sea, Nigeria and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, and in most of the other major offshore oil and gas producing regions of the world, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, Russia and Trinidad. For more information, visit the company's website at Offshore Helicopter - Helicopter Transport ? Helicopter Services ? Transport Helicopters - bristowgroup.com (http://www.bristowgroup.com).

[megan]

AW609 for Darwin?

Bristow Commits To Being Partner and Customer for AW609 Civil Tiltrotor | Business Aviation: Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2015-03-03/bristow-commits-being-partner-and-customer-aw609-civil-tiltrotor)

[JohnDixson]

I found this AW Report online, describing flight test results. The chart on page 22 is intriguing.

http://www.sfte2013.com/files/78635976.pdf

[21stCen]

AgustaWestland Begins Production Phase of AW609 Tiltrotor

AgustaWestland (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=AgustaWestland)'s AW609 TiltRotor program has achieved key milestones, the company announced on March 2 at HAI Heli-Expo, and is initiating the production phase in anticipation of the first customer deliveries.
The company has expanded the AW609 TiltRotor program to include the AgustaWestland (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=AgustaWestland) Philadelphia, Pa. facility through its designation as the first final assembly line for the only civil tiltrotor in development to date. A second final assembly line is expected to be established at AgustaWestland’s Vergiate facility in Italy at a later date.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii305/tiltrotors/Black%20Ship%202.jpg
Photo courtesy of AgustaWestland

The involvement of AgustaWestland Philadelphia in the AW609 program represents the anticipated progression towards assembly and certification with the FAA (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=FAA) as the main certification authority. The move signifies an expansion of the capabilities present at AgustaWestland Philadelphia, particularly in the engineering and supply chain functions.
AgustaWestland currently has two prototypes undergoing flight testing with a third in final assembly. The first prototype aircraft will continue flying at the AgustaWestland facility in Arlington, Texas in parallel with FAA (http://www.aviationtoday.com/search/?query=FAA) Certification support work at AgustaWestland’s Philadelphia facility. The fourth prototype will be assembled in Philadelphia in 2016.
Full integration of the AW609 program into AgustaWestland Philadelphia’s operations is expected by third quarter 2015, and will include facility expansions as required to accommodate the AW609 TiltRotor engineering, certification, and aircraft assembly activities.
The AW609 aircraft have so far logged nearly 1,200 hours, with achievements over the past year that include successful completion of envelope expansion, autorotation trials, and improvements in aerodynamics and aircraft systems. Nearly 60 aircraft have been ordered to date for a variety of roles and missions, including offshore transportation, EMS and patient transfer, search and rescue, VIP, and parapublic operations.Aviation Today :: AgustaWestland Begins Production Phase of AW609 Tiltrotor (http://www.aviationtoday.com/the-checklist/AgustaWestland-Begins-Production-Phase-of-AW609-Tiltrotor_84365.html#.VPf6tmf9mAg)

[26500lbs]

This has got to have huge potential for those who commit early in offshore operations. It has the potential for operators to offer a new capability for a more comprehensive logistics solution. In these days of cutting cost it may allow operators to reduce the number of bases to essentially one hub and provides a needed increase in range of operations. As operations expand into the arctic areas of Northern Norway this may well be the answer to the long range ops there. However the limit to 9 pax may be a significant limiting factor, but when compared to an S92 with extended range tanks and the loss of pax seats there, this may prove to be a more palatable solution.

[laurenson]

How AW609 manage D value limits?
It will require dedicated helideck, and be banned from all small one.

[noooby]

You can bet that a growth version is already on the drawing board. I would imagine they won't commit to it until the certification of this one is completed though.

[26500lbs]

The D-value of the AW609 is less than that of an S92 which is certified for almost all decks in the North Sea. S92 d-value is 21 (20.88). I believe the Aw609 is a little less the 20. In addition full icing clearance and performance class 1 as well as cruise speeds of 250kts, it is easy to see some real advantages to the offshore sector.

[21stCen]

The 'D' value of the 609 is about the same as a Bell 212 (60ft vs. 58ft) which has been operating to rigs and platforms around the world for decades. The advantage of the 609 is that the pilots can see the outer most rotating bodies of the aircraft (the proprotors) while maneuvering on the helideck, whereas we cannot see the same in our 212s (the tailrotor).

Add to that the fact that 609s no longer have the potentially fatal problem of having pax walk into the tailrotor which is an exponential leap in safety for deck handling ops.

[jymil]

What about the overall dimensions (particularly the width), would that fit on existing decks ?

[21stCen]

The width of the 609, proprotor tip to proprotor tip, is 60 feet (hence the 'D' value). Pilots have a good visual of the stiff proprotor blades which are about 15 feet above the deck causing no hazard to persons walking on the deck and of course there is no tail rotor to walk into. The length of the 609 is 44 feet.


http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot-restricted/helicopters/agusta/agustawestland_ba609-40937.jpg


In comparison our Bell 212s have a 'D' value of 57 feet 3in from the forward tip of the main rotor disk to the aft tip of the tail rotor disk. The pilots cannot see the the tailrotor while maneuvering which is about 5ft 9in above the deck when sitting on the skids.


So no problem for the 609 operating to typical rigs and platforms. Many helidecks are sized for the old S-61.

[John Eacott]

Are there any downwash and/or exhaust issues for embarking/disembarking passengers with the proprotors in the vertical position?

[21stCen]

You would not want to stand next to the outer side of the nacelles for an extended period when the engines are running as the exhaust duct from the PT6C-67A faces downward toward the deck when in the upright helicopter mode (and face aft when the nacelles are in the airplane mode in flight). I asked one of the test pilots if you could safely walk under it on the deck and he said you can, but I have not tried it myself!

[John Eacott]

Without belaboring the point, does that exhaust create a heat issue for the helideck, too?

[21stCen]

No John, fortunately nothing at all like the problems they had with the V-22. The Osprey with its 6,150 SHP Rolls Royce AE1107C engines vent the exhaust directly out the bottom of the nacelle when in the upright position. The design of the PT6s with the exhaust circulated back up to the front of the engine and then out just happen to give it an advantage of being raised further above the helideck with the nacelles in the upright position.
http://vertassets.blob.core.windows.net/image/ed6f73c2/ed6f73c2-9f54-11d4-8c6d-009027de0829/pratt4.jpg

[nowherespecial]

I'm trying to think if this is likely to be a commercial success. It only takes 9 pax and while the range looks good, is it really going to be a game changer? It can go likely under 300nm each way and is there an idea of what it will cost?

Fuel on rigs will help massively though but 9 pax is not a lot and the numbers need to add up to make it worthwhile.

Have AW just gone into competition with itself with the AW101 and plans to use this in the O&G role?

[21stCen]

NWS,

This aircraft will definitely fill a niche as it can do things that no other aircraft can do. It has a max cruise speed of 275kts and a range with aux tanks of up to 1100 nm. It will never replace airplanes or helicopters. In order for it to be successful the normal routine mission has to require a vertical take off and landing at least at one end of the journey - otherwise a fixed wing turboprop would be cheaper flying airport to airport. The minimum normal distance flown routinely should be greater than 150 to 200nm - otherwise a helicopter would be more economical. (other variables like number of pax, total payload req'd, etc. must be considered too)

In this part of the world the 609 will be very popular for VVIP transport - or palace to palace transport as we like to call it. The aircraft will be expensive, in the area of $24 mil USD as one AW exec alluded to, but over here that amount is a drop in the bucket. In addition to the added speed that is so important to heads of state and other VIPs (time is money), the added security of not having to go through an international airport is a huge plus. They can take off from their palace to any location in the region.

Military applications here are clear too. From the UAE the 609 can reach any naval vessel in the Persian Gulf or Arabian Sea unrefueled in a shorter time than any helicopter can do. They can also rapidly deploy a small number of people anywhere in the Arabian Peninsula, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the west coast of India, or anywhere in Iran :eek: if they need to.

SAR operations that use fixed-wing a/c to locate distressed vessels at sea and then call out helicopters could use the 609 to locate and perform a rescue all in one. Or the 609s could wait for the call out from a FW and respond in a much shorter period of time out to further distances than existing VTOL aircraft. Or as mentioned, they could reduce the number of helicopter bases and spread them out with the increased range and speed capability available.

EMS operaters could use 609s in places like western Canada, the outback in Australia, the Midwest US, and many other locations to conduct flights in vast sparsely populated areas with a quick response time over long distances that no other aircraft could perform.

On the corporate side, a company that uses a helicopter to fly their execs from their HQ to an airport, then take a turboprop or small jet to another airport where the execs get out and go to their manufacturing plant, could instead take a 609 direct from HQ to the plant without needing the helicopter, airplane, and limo.

In the offshore market the potential future is good when the price of oil climbs back up. Only long haul requirements will be viable for 609 ops. Heli One approached Sikorsky some years back asking about the viability of doing 600nm trips up in the arctic with an S-92. They were told it could be done by carrying additional fuel in the passenger compartment, but they would only be able to carry 7 to 9 passengers. The 609 could accomplish this type of mission more efficiently. Of course on shorter distance routes with larger passenger requirements the 609 would not be able to compete.

You can go on and on with possibilities. In the end it will be a balance of cost over importance of speed and range that determines how many 609s will be needed. When the aircraft comes out and begins regular use by customers that is when we will begin to see all the potential missions that can be performed efficiently compared to other modes of transportation. Interesting to see that the main stream media (as opposed to the industry media) is just learning that a/c exists! See NBC video:
Tilt-rotor goes commercial - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/watch/cnbc/tilt-rotor-goes-commercial-408846915624)

[Old and Horrified]

For anyone near Wolverhampton on March 19th, there is a Royal Aerosoc lecture at Moog's new factory starting 19.00 (tea and coffee 30 minutes before) titled: "The Bell AW609 tilt rotor and the Bell 625 Relentless control systems". All welcome.


See more at: Royal Aeronautical Society | Event | The J D North Lecture - The Bell AW609 tilt rotor and the Bell 625 Relentless control systems (http://aerosociety.com/Events/Event-List/1638/The-J-D-North-Lecture-The-Bell-AW609-tilt-rotor-and-the-Bell-625-Relentless-control-systems#sthash.xftzvh9Z.dpuf)

[rjsquirrel]

What is often missed on this concept is the awesome inefficiency of the tilt rotor type:

the 16,000 lb AW609 needs more power installed than the 21,000 lb Black Hawk, it weighs more empty weight, and it has a gross weight about 5000 lbs less, all lost payload.

It has no more range, dont be fooled by the fact that TRs have enormous fuel tanks as standard, where helicopters has smaller tanks. If the helicopters used even half the extra payload they have as takeoff fuel, they have more range than a tilt rotor.

Also don't be fooled by the speed hype, the best range speed of the 609 is nowhere near 275 knots, it is likely about 220 knots (don't try to find it in their material, that is a number they will tell you as you fly away after purchase!) The Best Range of the V22 is somewhere between 205 and 218 knots true airspeed.
And ask the question about Cat A performance. I don't think they have described what MGW it can have when PC2e from a small ground level heliport. Old Bell data said they needed about 1100 feet from a ground level heliport as Cat A landback, so stand by for the real info.

Does any of this mean the TR is not attractive? No, the speed and elan of the machine is awesome, but its reality is probably well inside its current hype. It niche will be smaller by far than the one folks have mapped out for it, I believe.

[noooby]

If the Blackhawk is so good, then why don't Sikorsky sell them to Civil Operators?

True, the max range speed won't be the same as the max speed, but AW do make speedy machines. Max in the 139 is 167, best range is about 150. The AW109 is even quicker and a massive rework of the 609 has yielded increased speed during development.

Is it going to be expensive? Yes. Are there offshore operators interested in it? Yes. Can it be upscaled, so increasing the per seat efficiency? Yes.

The "easy" oil is getting further offshore as inshore reserves are explored and used up. It is either something new that can go that far, or floating runways for fixed wing to operate out of. Which actually isn't as crazy as it sounds!

And I for one don't believe that AW will tell you that the max range speed is 275 and let you find out for yourself that it isn't. That would be like telling people that the MGB has been tested for 30 minute dry run, when in fact it hasn't been. Oh, bad example.

I'm sure as it gets closer to certification and the actual operating envelope is finalised, that performance data will be made available, at least to potential customers.

[OnePerRev]

If the Blackhawk is so good, then why don't Sikorsky sell them to Civil Operators?

HMM. Late eighties they had that idea, the operators did not like the short ceiling (Hawk had to packup transportability reqt). Make it a "fat hawk" they all said.

It is now known as the S-92A.

[topendtorque]

Besides it looks too much like a Mitsubishi MU2 on steroids, they weren't much good for anything other than crashing.

[KiwiNedNZ]

AW609 taking off from Heli Expo this morning.

https://vimeo.com/121508551

[21stCen]

What is often missed on this concept is the awesome inefficiency of the tilt rotor type: ... It has no more range, dont be fooled by the fact that TRs have enormous fuel tanks as standard, where helicopters has smaller tanks. If the helicopters used even half the extra payload they have as takeoff fuel, they have more range than a tilt rotor.Not true, in fact just the opposite. For example, our AW139s carry 2,767 lbs standard fuel that provides a range of 437nm, while the 609 carries 2,480 lbs standard that gives it a range of 720 nm. When in the airplane mode the tiltrotor is far more efficient. The main reason for this is because the thrust developed by the main rotor of a helicopter has to provide both vertical lift and forward thrust. In the airplane mode a tiltrotor gets its lift from the wing and can use 100% of the proprotor thrust in the horizontal plane. However, in a hover the helicopter is far more efficient than a tiltrotor. The smaller blades of the tiltotor's proprotor cause it to have a much higher disk loading and are far less efficient than a larger helicopter rotor, plus the downwash on the large surface area of the wing creates a downward force on the top of the wing in addition to adding other aerodynamic inefficiencies.
the 16,000 lb AW609 needs more power installed than the 21,000 lb Black Hawk, it weighs more empty weight, and it has a gross weight about 5000 lbs less, all lost payload.The max t.o. weight of the AW609 is now 18,000 lbs. The reason the manufacturer added such a large amount of power is because of the hovering inefficiencies mentioned above plus the added weight of the unprecedented number of triple redundant systems onboard the aircraft. The power to weight comparison is a good discussion point for engineers to debate and evaluate technical efficiencies. From a customer/end user standpoint that is irrelevant. Our customers will decide on an aircraft based on the number of pax it can carry and the performance offered (primarily speed and range). On the VVIP side our customers might compare an S-76D vs. AW139 vs. 609 for their choice of aircraft. In this category of customers cost is less of an issue particularly in our region. The same is sometimes true with military customers within reasonable limits. And as mentioned previously, if the 609 is the only aircraft that can do the job and the price is not obscenely high, the customer will choose it.
Also don't be fooled by the speed hype, the best range speed of the 609 is nowhere near 275 knotsPlease reread the post you are referring to. It says very specifically that the "max cruise speed" is 275 kts. Best range and max cruise speeds are very different numbers. Max cruise speed is the speed that you are capable of cruising at if you need to get there in a hurry, but because of higher drag and added fuel burn it will certainly not provide best range! Several years ago the 609 demonstrated 334 kts inflight and at that time it was estimated that the redline would be set at 292 kts. Those numbers are probably outdated as they have since increased the amount of power available from the PT6C-67A engines.
...but its reality is probably well inside its current hype. It niche will be smaller by far than the one folks have mapped out for it, I believe.Not true, in fact just the opposite IMHO. We no longer have to listen to hype from the marketeers. The 609 as flown nearly 1200 hours and the data hard points are readily available to customers. The CEO of Bristow just announced that the 609 will become a big part of their fleet in the future and they have committed to join in the operations development of the aircraft (see post #98). This decision was after the operations and engineering departments at Bristow studied the data from the 609 test flights to date and applied the cost and benefits in a business case study primarily for offshore ops. As a result the CEO remarked, “We see tremendous opportunities for this aircraft for our clients who are flying to more remote and hostile environments... With its vertical lift and landing capabilities combined with increased speed, extended range and airline-style amenities, Bristow will be able to provide more value to clients by offering complete logistics solutions with one aircraft type that will take them faster and farther offshore.” If you know something that Mr. Baliff is not aware of, perhaps you should give him a call...
:ok:

[21stCen]

Test Pilots Say AW609 is Easy to Fly

by Mark Huber (http://www.ainonline.com/mark-huber)
- March 4, 2015, 5:33 PM

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/ain30_fullwidth_large/public/uploads/aw609flyin.jpg?itok=AjsRwShA (http://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/aw609flyin.jpg)
AgustaWestland AW609 test pilots Dan Wells and Paul Edwards insist that the civil tiltrotor is “easy to fly” for those transitioning from either helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft. The duo brought AW609 test ship number one to Heli-Expo from the manufacturer's 609 test facility in Arlington, Texas. (Photo: AgustaWestland)

AgustaWestland AW609 test pilots Dan Wells and Paul Edwards insist that the civil tiltrotor is “easy to fly” for those transitioning from either helicopters or fixed-wing aircraft. The duo brought AW609 test ship number one to Heli-Expo from the manufacturer's 609 test facility in Arlington, Texas. Along the way they flew up to 23,000 feet and saw average fuel burns of 1,000 pph.
Wells joined the program three and a half years ago after serving as a U.S. Army test pilot and being seconded to the Air Force to fly its version of the military V-22 tiltrotor, the CV-22, test flying avionics packages. After serving in the Army for 26 years, he joined Bell Helicopter and then AgustaWestland when Bell sold its share of the 609 program to the Italian manufacturer. Wells has logged 650 hours in tiltrotors.
Edwards flew rotorcraft as a test pilot for the UK Royal Navy and was seconded to the U.S. Navy as a rotary wing test pilot. He has both rotary wing and fixed-wing aircraft experience. He joined the 609 program in 2013 and has 300 hours in the tiltrotor.
Edwards said the hardest thing about flying the 609 is to keep in the proper mindset given the aircraft's profile. “It changes from a fixed-wing aircraft to a helicopter in about 30 seconds. So you have to fly it like a fixed-wing when it is fixed-wing and then get ready to fly it like a helicopter. It sounds trite, but that is what it is like.
“The fly-by-wire system makes it very easy to fly,” Edwards added. “Dan and I also are both instructor pilots. When you transition from helicopter to fixed-wing you do have to increase alpha a little to get wing lift. A helicopter is designed for zero alpha. When you roll on the bank in the helicopter you increase a little collective. In an airplane when you roll on the bank you increase a little bit of alpha and that is exactly what you do with this,” Edwards said. “You just have to remember that when you roll into the turn unless you are in conversion mode, when you have to do a little bit of both.”
Edwards said development of the fly-by-wire system on the aircraft is largely done. “We're down to the minutiae,” he told AIN. “It flies beautifully.”
Flying an approach from fixed-wing configuration at full speed to a vertical landing is a busy event, but the fly-by-wire control system helps lessen the pilot workload. “You pull the power off at 250 knots and it slows down at about 10 knots per second,” Edwards explained. “Once you are below 200 knots, you make the first click on the thumbwheel. That speeds the proprotors up to 100 percent. They’re at 84 percent in level cruise for noise abatement and efficiency. That slows you down some more and in a couple of seconds you’re below 180 knots. One more click and the rotors come back off the stops to 50-percent nacelle. Another click and in five seconds you’re doing 80 knots at 75-percent nacelle turning onto final. You can go from 240 knots to 80 knots in about a minute. On short final you're at 82-percent nacelle and about 40 knots. Bring the nacelles back to 95 percent and that will stop you really quickly. You can be on the helipad a minute after you were on the downwind at 240 knots.”
Wells said the 609 really shines on steep approaches. “When you tilt the nacelles back to 95 percent, the fuselage is going to be at about minus seven or eight degrees. You can see exactly where you are going. You can see any obstacles. It is totally different than a helicopter. You'll feel yourself hanging in the shoulder belts. If you are going into an austere environment, that is an amazing ability.”



Test Pilots Say AW609 is Easy to Fly | Business Aviation: Aviation International News (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2015-03-04/test-pilots-say-aw609-easy-fly)

[rjsquirrel]

21st Century decided to debate:

TR Inefficiency== He says, "Not true, in fact just the opposite." Then he says, " in a hover the helicopter is far more efficient than a tiltrotor."
THAT was my point, 21st. The TR carries far less in the hover, were we make our living. To any range, an equivalent helicopter will carry about twice the payload of a tilt rotor. (Equivalent meaning same power and same empty weight)

He says. "The max t.o. weight of the AW609 is now 18,000 lbs" But he doesn't say what atmosphere it can hover at that new heavy weight. He also doesn't say what the heliport Cat A/JAR OPs 1 weight is to compare to that wildly high 18,000 lbs. What is the takeoff weight, sea level, heliport, 32 deg C? What is the real equipped empty weight and thus, what is the true useful load on that takeoff?

Max Speed- 21st century waxes on for a hundred words, and never tells us what the REAL cruise speed is. Since he tells us the 609 goes 720 nm on a load of fuel, maybe someday, after we pay for the machine, he will tell us how slow it has to be flown to get that far. My bet: 215 knots, a whopping 60 knots slower than the speed he still mentions.

The size of its niche: Tell us, 21st Centuy, the following - if the 609 takes off from a heliport at Cat A on a 32 deg C day, and flies to its max range, How far will it get, how fast does it fly and how many pax does it carry to that point? Some specifics (you have specifics, after 1200 flight hours, don't you? Unless those hours were all spent posing for magazine covers).

[tottigol]

RJ, if the civil T/R, was meant to be doing sling loading over 50 nm distances it would have been designed with a more efficient rotor system or not designed at all.
That is why the USMC has v-22s and (soon) 53Ks, two different missions.
The 609 has the same powerplant as the 139, however its GW is at least 2000 lbs higher and my guess is the empty weight is around 12000/12500 lbs.
The 609 is designed to fly efficiently, like a turboprop at altitudes requiring pressurization, hence the higher weight for structure.
I don't get your beef, I would not go offroading in a Ferrari and wouldn't go on a racetrack in a jeep Wrangler.
Even with the same powerplant as the 609, the 139 does not go 720nm period. And with 12 passengers you don't carry full fuel and auxiliary fuel, unless you operate at increased gross weights, but then you have compromises in CatA performance.

[rjsquirrel]

totogol,
I have no beef, at all. I love the potential for speed, and having flown the 609 simulator, I think its integration of controls, limits and displays is brilliant. But I'd love to know what the aircraft really does, not what its PR agents say it might. After 1200 hours of flight test these things are still unknown to the unwashed rest of us:

1) What is its real cruise speed? Best range speed?
2) What is its real payload? At what range?
3) What is the Cat A takeoff weight from real heliports?

You confuse sling load capability for some reason, which is a red herring, I believe we are truly interested in what the 609's passenger load will be on real missions. I don't know these answers.
Since you and 21st Century so strongly defend the 609, do either of you know these answers, which are the bread and butter of the 609's capability? Would you share?

for $25million, I think we all deserve to know before we follow the bandwagon.

[nowherespecial]

21st, thanks for your thoughts.

I'm not against the Tilt Roter concept, I just think that as it stands today, the lack of pax for the range makes it unlikely to be a wild commercial success. The cabin is tiny for a start so the VIP/ royalty might not be that enamored with it. I can absolutely see the utility in the advantages of the concept which tilt rotor brings, I just don't think a 700nm range 9 pax ac is the winner. The energy market will be the nice earner that the whole project is based on. AW are not going to get their investment back on selling 30 in the Gulf to every rich member of a royal family IMHO, esp if they already have private jets.

When they can bring a roughly similar sized foot print version with a bigger cabin (15 pax ish) and 1000nm range it will be a huge increase in capability etc over EC225 or S92 with a tank(s).

Happy to be proved wrong but right now my risk averse nature thinks this will be close but no cigar as the investment case doesn't quite yet bring game changing capability.

FYI as a comparison EC225 in oil and gas slick mode is about $25m with a tank fitted and will give you up to about 250nm each way range.

[SansAnhedral]

the lack of pax for the range makes it unlikely to be a wild commercial success

This was the primary reason Bell divested, if memory serves me correctly.

[riff_raff]

....The 609 has the same powerplant as the 139.....That's not correct. While they both use the PT6-67, the C model the 139 uses is rated a couple hundred hp less than the A model the 609 uses. Plus the PT6-67A used on the 609 is able to operate while tilted vertical.

[tartare]

Would it be possible to fit some kind of retractable winch to that front door (it looks like a plug type door, but I may be wrong).
Surely something with that kind of speed to destination would have utility as a SAR platform?
Or would there be a problem with hot exhaust gas directed downwards while in helicopter mode?
I assume the fuse is far enough from the nacelle to avoid cooking anyone on a winch in helicopter mode - but again, may be wrong.
Interesting to note that the Bell Valor rotates only the prop-rotor, not the entire engine assembly - wonder if we will see new civil tilt rotors that do the same thing?

[RVDT]

Would it be possible to fit some kind of retractable winch to that front door (it looks like a plug type door, but I may be wrong).
Surely something with that kind of speed to destination would have utility as a SAR platform?

Go figure out the downwash velocity - there probably wouldn't be anything left on the end of the cable!

PI9gWlM0QY8
RXZAfYrMYko

[tartare]

Fair point - side door obviously not an option.
But there are numerous pictures online of troops fast roping from the ramp of Ospreys in helicopter mode.
So downwash velocity can't be that much of an issue.
A civil tiltrotor with a rear door or rear belly hatch?

[Stinger10]

Surprise! You're AW negative again....:rolleyes:

AW 609 while not perfect, will be the FIRST. It will have an impact to the civil market not seen since the first civil certified helicopter because it will forever change civil aviation with a new category of flight besides fixed and rotary wing. Yes its small, but like the V-22 it will change conops and bring new capabilities in terms of range and speed never seen before to the civil vertical lift paradigm (think EMS, Offshore, SAR yes SAR, and even corp). Optimization of capabilities and design comes in versions v.2 and beyond.

Perhaps that's why a company as forward looking as Bristow chose to get involved with the 609 already......:ok:

[Stinger10]

Go figure out the downwash velocity - there probably wouldn't be anything left on the end of the cable!

Rotorwash or downwash is a more significant issue for the V-22 than the 609 because of MGW and the disk loading.

The V-22 is more than double the MGW of the 609 and the disk loading on the V-22 is much greater factor because the prop-rotor diameter was artificially shrunk to fit on the US Navy ships in particular landing spots. This lead to a more aggressive disk loading factor, which results in a more violent downwash.

[EESDL]

How about that for opportunism - Heliexpo 609 in Eastern Airways colours ;-)

[Ian Corrigible]

Finally, some insight into last year's AW609 testing incident (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/456619-whats-new-civil-tiltrotor-4.html#post8598487), courtesy of HELiDATA News (http://www.aviapress.co.uk/hdn.htm):

The second prototype currently remains based at Cascina Costa in Italy, having recently reflown following repairs after an incident late last year due to a reported in flight software failure. This is said to have led to a severe tail sideslip and apparent blade strike on the wing, causing an emergency diversion to the nearest airfield, which happened to be a base for Alenia Aermacchi, another Finmeccanica subsidiary.

I/C

[Stinger10]

I/C-
It IS still developmental, no?

I also heard at HeliExpo that 609 A/C 3 is near completion, and A/C 4, which is the first production baseline, has started its build. So it sure sounds inevitable and soon. :ok:

[Ian Corrigible]

Stinger,

Yes, and it's obviously preferable to wring out the bugs now, but it's remarkable how many journos I talked to re: the testing incident were unwilling to be seen as 'stirring up trouble' by reporting on the incident, lest they miss out on getting into the left seat. The fact that the aircraft recovered to a Finmeccanica owned airport added to the mystery. Still, more telemetry for the engineers to review!

609 A/C 3 is near completion, and A/C 4, which is the first production baseline, has started its build

A/C 3 & 4 have been in build since 2004 (http://aviationweek.com/awin/green-light-ba609-program), with A/C 3 "ready" since 2006 (http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/71504/second-ba-609-tiltrotor-begins-ground-runs-in-italy.html)... :E

I/C

[Stinger10]

I-C,
you must have missed the part when AW took over full control, they had to rebaseline the design and test program since the previous "owner" had let it go dormant to attend to more pressing existential programs? My guess is that included all additional A/C like #3&4.

WRT to the incident, maybe there is no story? It sure sounds like a developmental issue that many programs go or have gone through. They simply found a "test point" and resolved the issue. Why so suspicious of the 609?

[Ian Corrigible]

Stinger,

I missed that since, at the time of the handover in 2011, AW was insisting that it was "fully committed to rapidly proceed with the AW609 programme development," with "FAA/EASA certification...planned in 2015."

Why so suspicious, you ask? How can you not be suspicious after 15 years of repeated assurances from various CEOs that the program was 'on track for certification in 20XX'?

'Re-baselining' sounds cool, but is it not simply the inevitable obsolescence management required after 15 years of delays? Certainly some of the figures mentioned last week sounded familiar: per a BAAC "BA609 Presentation" from May 1999, 750 nm was the original range goal of the program (before being trimmed to "over 700 nm" and then "over 600 nm"), and the "higher weight" option (e.g. 17,500 lb or above, for 1,000+ nm range) was also always planned from day 1 (i.e. for STOL ops).

The Bristow tie-up is interesting, but I'm sure your own contacts have already explained to you the 'long-term' nature of this strategic move (the kind of blocking that would make Jim Brown proud :E), and Guardia di Finanza aside, the NGCTR surely remains the more likely success story?

The 609 is neat tech, but her cabin is so small! And you've only got to look at the mixed fortunes of the bizjet OEMs to see that "bigger is better" when it comes to cabin selection by corporate and HNW customers right now.

I/C

[SplineDrive]

The AW609 wing strike incident is interesting (and a little gut wrenching) if due to a software problem, as reported. It would not be the first in-flight airplane mode incident to result in structural damage due to a software problem on the 609. Yaw control via differential collective requires very fine control of the rotor collective. Very small inputs result in large forces.

As for the economics of the aircraft, the break-even production run went stupid more than 15 years ago, at least from Bell's standpoint. I'm not even sure that AW's investment makes sense any more, but I have no direct knowledge on the particulars of their investment. I always felt it was a little on the small side, but certainly would have been a neat aircraft to introduce in the early 2000's and at 16,000 lb GW...

[SansAnhedral]

Surprise! You're AW negative again....

How so? I merely stated that it seemed Bell concurred with the sentiment that the cabin was too small to be profitable in the market, when they divested in 2011.

The only thing I have been negative about with respect to AW is the essentially pointless flash-in-the-pan Project Zero.

[SansAnhedral]

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/agustawestland-prepares-for-aw609-certification-push-416790/

16 SEPTEMBER, 2015 BY: DOMINIC PERRY LONDON
AgustaWestland will fly the third prototype of its AW609 tiltrotor late this year as the manufacturer accelerates testing activity ahead of planned certification in 2017.

Two flight-test articles dating from the early days of the programme, then a joint development with Bell, have been used for the validation campaign so far and have amassed 1,300h, alongside 300h of ground runs.

But with the initial aircraft "now reaching the end of its useful life", according to Paul Edwards, experimental test pilot at AgustaWestland, the arrival of two subsequent prototypes is required to attain US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval.

Prototype three is "in final build" at the manufacturer's plant in Vergiate, Italy, he told a conference on future rotorcraft on 14 September. It will be transported to its Philadelphia, Pennsylvania facility – the location of the tiltrotor’s eventual final assembly line – late this year, to be used for icing trials and then cold weather testing.

The fourth flight-test article, which will have the production standard cockpit installed, is also being produced in Philadelphia.

Service entry is scheduled for 2018, says Edwards, and he anticipates rapid take-up of the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6-powered type.

"This aircraft is going to be part of the aviation fabric far more quickly than a lot of people realise," he says.

With no certification standard existing for the tiltrotor, AgustaWestland has worked with the FAA to develop hybrid rules – the Powered Lift Certification Requirement – that draw on regulations from both the fixed- and rotary-wing worlds.

These involve proving that the aircraft can perform both gliding and autorotation landings in the event of engine failure, as well as rapid reconversion from forward flight, and flare before touchdown.

So far, 28 power-off reconversions have been performed, says Edwards, although he cautions that it has yet to pass certification trials for the engine-out state.

Edwards says the evaluations have also dispelled the view that tiltrotors are particularly vulnerable to vortex ring settling.

"Tiltrotors are not susceptible to vortex ring," says Edwards. "We had to try really hard to get there."

"It was about to fly itself out when we applied the recovery technique. Both rotors are not going to enter vortex ring simultaneously – it slides sideways to get itself out."

Describing the AW609’s capability, Edwards highlights toa recent flight he performed from Yeovil in the UK to Cascina Costa in Italy. The 627nm (1,160km) sector was completed in just 2h 18min, albeit with a “strong tail wind”.

Emphasis mine.

Now wheres FH1100....?

[Lonewolf_50]

Now wheres FH1100....? Didn't we have a link in one of the Osprey threads to a discussion of what the test pilots did at altitude after the Marana crash?
The abrupt roll they discovered when trying to induce VRS suggests that the following
"Tiltrotors are not susceptible to vortex ring," says Edwards. "We had to try really hard to get there." may not be entirely accurate, and is at face value self-contradictory.

EDIT: Summary of some Ospray VRS testing here. (http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_Myth_0904,00.html)

Here is what I think that statement means: It is very difficult to induce vortex ring state in a tilt rotor (609) but it can be done (as part of a test profile?).

Mr Edwards has been flying these things and I have not. He knows how those machines fly. It's the summary of what he's learned, and is trying to express to the general public, that has me puzzled.

[SansAnhedral]

Yeah in this case it appears to be the semantics of the usage of the word "susceptible" which, by definition, can mean either "likely to occur" or "capable of occuring"

[FH1100 Pilot]

SansAnhedral:Now wheres FH1100....? Oh, I'm still here...although...since I'm nearly retired now I pay less and less attention to silliness like these irrelevant forums.

But look, it's not about whether a tilt-rotor can or cannot get into VRS (we know it can), and neither is it about how difficult or not it is to get into. That's all just a smokescreen produced by the manufacturer and the starry-eyed, fanboys who think the tilt-rotor is something "new" or ground-breaking when it is neither.

The PROBLEM with the tilt-rotor configuration...the thing they cannot predict, eliminate or even reduce is A-VRS - in other words ASYMMETRICAL-VRS: One proprotor goes into VRS and the other does not.

It's fine when you're ready for it. Why, just tilt those nacelles forward and fly away. Simple!

But what if you're not expecting it? What if you're already really busy at the bottom of a screwed-up approach (oh, that never happens)...or maybe you're not the super-duperest pilot you think you are...and *one* proprotor goes into incipient VRS? The wing on that side drops and the pilot instinctively makes an opposite control input. Adding opposite control to a dropping wing in a tilt-rotor increases the collective pitch on that side, the side that is starting to go into VRS.

Even the lowest time, self-appointed-expert Robbie Ranger knows what happens when you increase the collective on a rotor going into VRS.

But that'll never happen in a tilt-rotor, right? Right.

Glad we're all on the same page.

Yes, yes, fixed-wings stall, and sometimes well-trained, supposedly experienced airline pilots do just that (e.g. Asiana in San Francisco and the infamous numbnuts in that Air France 447 Airbus). But you know what? A stall in a fixed-wing is announced by the stall-warning horn (not presently invented for tilt-rotors because VRS is UNPREDICTABLE) and a fixed-wing stall is recoverable! Just lower the nose. When a tilt-rotor on short-final gets into A-VRS and rolls over on its back you can cancel Christmas: Everyone onboard is going to die. With basically no warning.


THAT is the problem with the tilt-rotor: A-VRS. Do away with that little peculiarity and I'm on board!

I hope all of you prospective BA-609 pilots are as good as you think yous are! I am confident that I will be long gone before the first civil tilt-rotor ever hits the market.


Thank you, I shall now go back into hibernation.

[jeffg]

FH your argument is devoid of facts.
Your assumption that a stall in a fixed wing aircraft is announced as opposed to VRS being unannounced in a Tiltrotor is false. The V-22 and the AW609 both have visual and aural VRS warning indications.
Your assertion that VRS is ‘UNPREDICTABLE’ is also false. If you take the time to read the many good papers available through AHS and other societies you’ll find that VRS is very predictable. From those papers you’ll find the data of both Tiltrotor aligns very nicely allowing for accurate predictions to be made and limits set. This isn’t theoretical data, its data from actual flight test with roll off events. What is also known is that to get into VRS you have to exceed the flight manual limit by a minimum of 100%.
You also over simplify a fixed wing stall recovery. NASA, NTSB and the FAA all tell us that in the fixed wing world LOC is the largest cause of fatal mishaps. Depending on operation stalls make up 25-40% of LOC mishaps. If the recovery technique is so simple why is it the leading cause of fatalities in the fixed wing world? In your straw man you have the poor Tiltrotor pilot “really busy at the bottom of a screwed-up approach” but in your fixed wing argument the pilots are ‘numbnuts’ if they get into a stall. Reality is that many landing mishaps no matter what type of aircraft are a result of pilots getting “really busy at the bottom of a screwed-up approach”. The facts are that recovery from a stall isn’t always so simple. The wrong control input, i.e. instinctively adding aileron in an asymmetrical stall can result in the aircraft entering an unrecoverable spin when close to the ground, just as you assert that adding the wrong input will cause the Tiltrotor to roll over. The Tiltrotor requires one simple movement, thumb forward. As long as the nacelles are moved it doesn’t matter what the pilot does with the other controls. You would argue that the Tiltrotor pilot will get confused and make the wrong input. Maybe, but that holds true for every airframe does it not?
What is the biggest recommendation for avoiding a stall? Training and recognition. When I went through my Citation initial type rating every session we focused on stall recovery and recognition, clean stalls, dirty stalls, and approach turn stalls, etc. When I go for recurrent what do we focus on? Stall recovery and recognition. Why? So that the recovery is instinctual and immediate because stalls have been identified as a risk. The same is true of Tiltrotor training and VRS. VRS will be trained to just as stalls are and the pilot’s ability to react correctly will be no different than for a stall. The truth is that fixed wing aircraft fly much closer to the stall boundary (<10-20% margin depending on type) than a Tiltrotor does to the VRS boundary (>100% margin for all Tiltrotors).
“When a tilt-rotor on short-final gets into A-VRS and rolls over on its back you can cancel Christmas: Everyone onboard is going to die. With basically no warning“.
Same is true of a fixed wing stall close to the ground. So what’s the point? The same agencies mentioned above also found that most fixed wing stalls happen below pattern altitude with the majority happening below 250 ft AGL, not much chance of a recovery from that is there?

[SansAnhedral]

Good points Jeff

Also, it's prudent to mention the number of A-VRS crashes in the 200,000+ hours of V-22 operation is precisely zero.

I am sure the 609 would follow suit.

[John Eacott]

It was a decision between this thread, and Helicopter pilots and motorcycles (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/116643-helicopter-pilots-motorcycles.html)!

hJYXJsJSAIM