Opinions for "powered lift" rating
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Opinions for "powered lift" rating
To all,
Art Nalls (nallsaviation.com) the owner of the only flying civilian owned Harrier has completed his FAA requirements and passed his check ride. We found that the FAA has issued "powered lift" ratings to some others. Most were V-22 pilots that applied for pilot's licenses and didn't fit helo or fixed wing.
Would like to hear opinions about getting a "powered lift" rating in an aircraft other than one that is supported by only engine thrust. Which is the laymans definition of powered lift.
first airshow this weekend at Culpeper VA
Art Nalls (nallsaviation.com) the owner of the only flying civilian owned Harrier has completed his FAA requirements and passed his check ride. We found that the FAA has issued "powered lift" ratings to some others. Most were V-22 pilots that applied for pilot's licenses and didn't fit helo or fixed wing.
Would like to hear opinions about getting a "powered lift" rating in an aircraft other than one that is supported by only engine thrust. Which is the laymans definition of powered lift.
first airshow this weekend at Culpeper VA
flightmaker,
Thanks for the link, an interesting guy and website.
I guess he didn't want the T4 or Jag.
p.s. You should have mentioned SHAR in the title, that would have bought out all the ex SHAR drivers.
Thanks for the link, an interesting guy and website.
I guess he didn't want the T4 or Jag.
p.s. You should have mentioned SHAR in the title, that would have bought out all the ex SHAR drivers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uffington, you may be correct about adding SHAR to the title, and yes he wants the T4 and the Jag and the A4 and the .......etc. but one at a time.
Flap62 go back and read his bio and know that he likes to kid about himself.
But lets stay on topic, what type aircraft should one fly to be rated with "powered lift"
Flap62 go back and read his bio and know that he likes to kid about himself.
But lets stay on topic, what type aircraft should one fly to be rated with "powered lift"
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would not the civilian test pilots required a "powered lift" rating to fly the Harrier or are tps treated differently?
Nice to see one will be kept flying, in my opinion at least 2 examples of all military aircraft should be kept where possible and one of those should be airworthy, sod the cost, the gov will only waste what they save on some silly social idea.
Nice to see one will be kept flying, in my opinion at least 2 examples of all military aircraft should be kept where possible and one of those should be airworthy, sod the cost, the gov will only waste what they save on some silly social idea.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gg the "word" i got about the civilian test pilots was that they were reservist and would be "activated" before they flew. So they would be military during the flights.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAES talks about Powered Lift in terms of mini UAVs as well as well aircraft like Harrier, Dave B and Osprey. Some interesting topics at the conference back in July. What rating do the guys who fly the Bell/Agusta BA609 tliltrotor fly on? Presumably the same as Art got for his SHAR.
In the UK I think most of the current civilian Harrier TPs are all ex-mil harrier pilots anyway.
In the UK I think most of the current civilian Harrier TPs are all ex-mil harrier pilots anyway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The osprey and BA609 acheive lift by means of two rotating wings like a chinook. so my thought is it is a helo not a powered lift vehicle. The BA609 news release even says it takesoff and lands like a helo.
The space shuttle takes off by rocket power but lands as a glider so I would discount it also.
What is Dave B? un familiar
The space shuttle takes off by rocket power but lands as a glider so I would discount it also.
What is Dave B? un familiar
Actually, no. 'Dave' is PPRuNe spotter 
slang for the F-35.
Presumably the same people who used to call the Buccaneer the 'Brick' and termed the Phantom F4J(UK) the 'Phantom F3'....
slang for the F-35.Presumably the same people who used to call the Buccaneer the 'Brick' and termed the Phantom F4J(UK) the 'Phantom F3'....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle - my apologies, guilty as charged
I should, of course, refer to it as the Lightning II
, to avoid all misunderstanding.
Whilst the tiltrotors do indeed land like helos, as a conventional landing would lead to a nasty mess due to prop diameters, I am pretty sure that Boeing & Bell/Agusta would not be happy with them being called helicopters. The actual flying after take off is certainly not like a helo with the sales pitch being that they can do many things faster and further than a helo. Boeing are also allegedly developing an A400M size quad tilt rotor aircraft.
From history the Fairey Rotodyne (sp?) was certainly more like a helo than a tiltrotor is.
I should, of course, refer to it as the Lightning II
, to avoid all misunderstanding. Whilst the tiltrotors do indeed land like helos, as a conventional landing would lead to a nasty mess due to prop diameters, I am pretty sure that Boeing & Bell/Agusta would not be happy with them being called helicopters. The actual flying after take off is certainly not like a helo with the sales pitch being that they can do many things faster and further than a helo. Boeing are also allegedly developing an A400M size quad tilt rotor aircraft.
From history the Fairey Rotodyne (sp?) was certainly more like a helo than a tiltrotor is.
Not really. Whilst the Rotodyne could take off and land vertically, its principal mode was as an autogyro with free-wheeling rotor; thrust being derived from turboprops mounted on stub wings which also augmented lift. Bleed air from the turboprops was mixed with kerosene to power the main rotor's tip jets.
The Rotodyne could easily land 'conventionally' in autogyro mode if the tip jets failed to light, but needed a runway in order to do so.
All done with levers and pulleys, not a computer in sight.
A great shame that the size of the Rotodyne wasn't defined soon enough and its design frozen; apart from the tip jet noise (which was on the way to being solved), it was an aircraft well ahead of its time.
The Rotodyne could easily land 'conventionally' in autogyro mode if the tip jets failed to light, but needed a runway in order to do so.
All done with levers and pulleys, not a computer in sight.
A great shame that the size of the Rotodyne wasn't defined soon enough and its design frozen; apart from the tip jet noise (which was on the way to being solved), it was an aircraft well ahead of its time.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Beagle, definately well ahead of its time. I wonder if, with the advances in modern control systems etc, something similar would be more successful these days? Of course, with civi tiltrotors already available I guess the civilian VTOL transport niche is filled.
I remember my dad had an airfix kit of the Rotodyne, it always looked like an interesting way to fly.
I remember my dad had an airfix kit of the Rotodyne, it always looked like an interesting way to fly.
