PDA

View Full Version : MV-22B Osprey; N-1 question


KingChango
4th Oct 2012, 16:17
Hi all today i was watching a video on youtube on the Osprey, and I was wondering if this thing is able to fly N-1.

Im not talking about landing vertically on a single engine but

flying; cruising
flying; approach
landing.
it seems almost impossible since the engines are attached at the "wing-tip"

Any insights, idea's, experience?

Tourist
4th Oct 2012, 16:47
The "props" are connected by a shaft, so a single engine can drive both.

Lyman
4th Oct 2012, 17:57
"props". What do the military call them? Rotors? Or both, depending on flight phase, launch, cruise?

A question I have had for some time. Do the Props have cyclic?

GarageYears
4th Oct 2012, 18:07
"Under normal, two engine operations, each engine delivers its power to its corresponding proprotor through the proprotor gearboxes. Only a small amount of power (511 hp max) is transferred down the pylon mounted drive shaft, through the tilt-axis gearboxes and down the interconnecting drive shaft to the mid-wing gearbox. The mid-wing gearbox contains the auxiliary power unit (APU), the constant frequency generator and the variable frequency generator. The mid-wing gearbox transmits power between the left and right interconnecting drive shafts without changing speed or direction of rotation. (During single engine operation, power is distributed from the remaining engine to both proprotors through the interconnecting drive shaft.)"

Oh, this answers the what are they called question = "proprotors"

- GY

GarageYears
4th Oct 2012, 18:09
Flight controls:

"The Osprey has both conventional airplane and conventional tandem-rotor helicopter control surfaces. The primary flight controls consist of cyclic sticks located in front of each pilot, thrust control levers mounted to the left of each seat, and floor-mounted directional pedals. These controls are part of a fully digital, electronic, fly-by-wire system. Because it is completely digital, the V-22's flight control system offers exceptional flexibility to incorporate the actuator control command for both fixed-wing and rotary-wing control surfaces and provides a smooth transition between airplane and helicopter flight modes."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Cockpit_of_V-22_Osprey.jpg/800px-Cockpit_of_V-22_Osprey.jpg

- GY

Microburst2002
4th Oct 2012, 20:05
Is it still experimental or it is in service?

GarageYears
4th Oct 2012, 20:37
It's been in operational service with the Marines since 2006 and Air Force since 2007

- GY

Lyman
4th Oct 2012, 21:09
GY Thank you, again....

gums
4th Oct 2012, 21:32
Salute!

I have a Dash-1 for the Osprey due to my previous life working on the Spec Ops armament features.

Although the motors interconnect to the proprotors, I would have to say that above a certain gross weight that it would not be able to land perfectly vertical from a hover.

Watched the thing during its climatic testing here at Eglin and it could easily land with 40 or 50 knots forward speed and proprotor nacelles up at maybe 60 degrees or so.

The thing that got my attention was the FBW system and the flight controls. Buttons and roller wheels on the stick gave you translation, nacelle movement to get to conventional flight or back to the helo mode , descent rate and such, while the rudder pedals commanded yaw.

An Xbox or Nintendo dude could prolly fly the thing with zero hours in the real thing.

Unlike the Chinook and other twin rotor birds, the side by side proprotors produce some nasty vortexes that have caused some accidents. i.e. you lose some roll authority and even some lift when close to the ground and moving slowly.

Gums sends...

KingChango
5th Oct 2012, 14:13
The osprey is an exceptional plane. loved the concept from day one. it defies logic (to me) i guess.
Although I've seen some civilian concept of similar designs, isn't this a/c itself viable for the integration into every mans land?

I guess it could provide excellent service into let's say, remote areas such as where float planes are needed. helo ops only needed.

After watching this excellent show on TV on bush pilots in Alaska, I'd say the Osprey would have a very good market there.
Moving the heavy cargo and causing further development of the area.
Such as what the "train" did in the early days !

TAAMGuy
5th Oct 2012, 14:28
I think it's probably cost prohibitive. According to Wikipedia the fly-away cost per unit is $69 million. Of course there would definitely be a lot of military kit that would be removed for a civilian air frame but still a very expensive bird.

Microburst2002
5th Oct 2012, 16:18
What is the cruise altitude and speed, and its maximum range with a full load?

asc12
5th Oct 2012, 18:26
I was talking this summer to an Osprey pilot, and asked him about the transition from the more vertical flight regime to the more horizontal flight regime.

As was stated above there's a cyclic and a thrust lever, but the thrust lever increases thrust when it's *pushed,* in all phases of flight.

This means when you're controlling a hover, and want to *increase* vertical thrust, you *push* the thing in the spot where the collective is supposed to be.

He said you get used to it awfully quick.

The translation of command from the controls to the flying surfaces is drastically different in the two regimes, of course, but he said the transition is nearly seamless.

sandiego89
5th Oct 2012, 18:54
KingChango, as TAAMguy says, this aircraft is waaaay too expensive for bush flying. Huge upfront and operational costs with a team of maintainers and contractors working on it. Huge logistical tail as well. Complex hydrualics and avionics, and frequent engine changes.

While it may have a great capability that would be usefull for bush/remote flying, the costs associated with it would be astronomical. Perhaps a market for deep pocket energy exloration and production if rigs go offshore off Alaska, but not a money maker for normal bush operations.

Will see if the smaller 109 ever makes it to market.

ECAM_Actions
5th Oct 2012, 20:09
Is it still experimental or it is in service?
Experimental.

General: 'My Career Was Done' When I Criticized Flawed Warplane | Danger Room | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/air-force-silenced-general/all/)

Disgusting!

jcjeant
5th Oct 2012, 20:19
Hi,

It seems that some do not like the Osprey ..
Police officers try to remove demonstrators who staged a sit-in against the planned deployment of Osprey aircraft, in front of a gate at Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Ginowan City, Okinawa, Japan, on September 27, 2012
Futenma base Ospreys make maiden flights | The Japan Times Online (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20121005a5.html)
http://i.imgur.com/gdtdc.jpg

Lonewolf_50
5th Oct 2012, 20:38
jcjeant, what's politics got to do with this?

ECAM, not sure why you put your trust in the spin of David Axe To Grind.

BGEN in 35 years ... you may not be aware that the typical max service length is 30, with extension for flag officers based on both sub specialty and needs of the service.

He'd reached his sell by date. I do not believe that his report is what ended his career. A good friend of mine is about to be retired from the Navy as a one star, with 32 years. He didn't make the 2 star cut, and off he goes.

If the BEGN had not made two stars already by 35 years, he wasn't going to.

Sorry to bust your bubble, or more accurately, David Axe to Grind's bubble.

Please feel free to drop over to Rotorheads and see some informed, albeit contentious, discussion about the Osprey.

It's expensive. No question.

jcjeant
5th Oct 2012, 22:01
Hi,

Lonewolf
jcjeant, what's politics got to do with this? ALL
Money come from taxpayers .....
No politics ... no Osprey :)
BTW .. the protest in Japan is not only to do with a politic problem between US and Japan
The people know that this (hybrid) plane is prone to crash .. and the areas around the base are very populated !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlE0YtMzNug

Ian W
6th Oct 2012, 02:14
BTW .. the protest in Japan is not only to do with a politic problem between US and Japan
The people know that this (hybrid) plane is prone to crash .. and the areas around the base are very populated !

The crash rate is no worse than many other novel concept aircraft such as the Harrier. The problem is that the Osprey is neither one nor t'other so the rotary guys don't like it and the fixed wing guys don't like it. Initially every chance anyone got they would run down the Osprey. Now its has been in service in war zones and it has not been falling out of the sky and been a sitting duck target as claimed. It has also operated in ways that no other rotary wing could by leaving the 'Gulf' area and self deploying to Libya where it was used in a downed pilot recovery and the pilot was back on board ship before normal rotary wing SAR would have reached him.

Unfortunately, the initial bad press scared off the commercial world and the Osprey was never taken through type certification for civil use. The initial intent was to use it as a regional turbo-prop equivalent operating without taking runway slots at busy airports but able to land on helipads in the middle of cities.

I have been amazed at how heated some people are in their dislike of the Osprey. However, I think that like the Harrier it will win its critics over - but it will take time.

Microburst2002
6th Oct 2012, 14:40
If it has a good range and payload, and speed, they can give a decisive advantage to the army that has them. They can deploy troops in large numbers in any place in a short time.

Regarding the civilian use. If with time they have no more accidents than conventional airplanes, they could be really useful.

And who knows... Maybe in the future we will see big double decker airliners with similar characteristics. It would be nice, to see a jumbo taking off like a harrier :D

Lyman
6th Oct 2012, 15:28
I drive by three bladed propellors with a disc diameter of two hundred feet, twice a week. Nothing would surprise me.

ECAM_Actions
6th Oct 2012, 17:19
Lonewolf_50 (http://www.pprune.org/members/307224-lonewolf_50)

Good point on the neutrality of the argument/article. It isn't new however when they try and attribute all the fault on the pilot, when it was in fact the machine that was entirely at fault.

Just look at the way they tried to pin the crash of a Chinook on the two pilots who died in the crash (along with the others on-board). The MoD, 16 years on, have only just cleared them COMPLETELY.

I'll check out the other forum. :ok:

Jigsaw 1
27th Apr 2013, 18:00
Does anyone have any good pictures of the AE1107C engine, the interconnecting Drive shaft, Proprotor Gearbox, Transmission Adapter, Mid-wing gearbox and APU.