Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

V22 Osprey discussion thread Mk II

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

V22 Osprey discussion thread Mk II

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25th Jun 2012, 04:26
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: stateside
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah as funny as they were I had to tell him to stop PM'ing me!
TukTuk BoomBoom is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2012, 11:13
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 511 Likes on 213 Posts
It is being reported that the Eglin crash of the CV-22 may have been the result of "Roll Off". The formation of two Osprey's were in Conversion Mode, fairly low to the ground doing a Gunnery mission using a tactic carried over from Pavelow Helicopter Tactics.

The Squadron Commander was fired by his Wing Commander after the crash occurred.

That makes three crashes in a row that are being put down to Aircrew Error.

AFSOC Relieves Osprey Commander; 'Roll Off' May Have Caused CV-22 Crash
SASless is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2012, 12:20
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
V-22 Formation

SAS, your link makes for interesting reading.

Thanks,
John Dixson
JohnDixson is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2012, 14:59
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 396 Likes on 246 Posts
SAS, thanks for the article. Some food for thought there.

In re crashes due to roll off or other turb/vortex related mishaps ...

Over a decade ago, a Navy T-34C crashed after joining up on an F-14 to perform a visual gear check. If I remember the details right, the F-14 crew had asked tower for someone to give them a visual since their gear was down, or so they thought, but their gear indicator wasn't indicating "safe."

A T-34 was nearby and obliged.

Sadly, the unsafe gear pattern wasn't high enough, in this instance, for the T-34 to recover from the tumbling and buffetting (unexpected) that was induced by a turbulence/vortex originating from the F-14.

The caution about "stay away from 5-7 position" is interesting in re the Osprey formation technique. I suspect that if the T-34 had joined up from abeam, or the 8/4 position, that mishap might never have occurred. (My memory is a bit fuzzy, if anyone knows more about that mishap in detail, please correct what I may have gotten wrong.)

There are some rules of thumb that are taught to every pilot regarding wing tip vortices in the landing environment, typically summarized as "make sure you land beyond the touchdown point of a heavy that you are following" which accounts for the settling rate of wingtip vortices.

It appears that for Osprey, another layer of awareness is added to the wing tip vortex caution, given its method of lift creation in the flight modes that are in more "helicopter" than "fixed wing" configuration.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2012, 17:57
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
V-22 Eglin

Does the V-22 have voice or flight data recorders?

Failing that, do the digital flight control computers have a limited time memory function capability?

Thanks,
John Dixson
JohnDixson is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2012, 21:45
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 511 Likes on 213 Posts
This Roll Off thing got me to thinking....which is dangerous.

If the requirement is to avoid being within the 5-7 arc and stay further than than 250 feet from the lead aircraft.....just how big does a two Ship LZ have to be? Or....say a Six Ship where you are trying to land a sizable number of troops on the ground in a single quick Insert?

If we consider the AFSOC mission....part of which the MH-53's used to do being given to the Army's 160th Night Stalker Chinooks.....was part of that decision to shift some of the mission tasking driven by this consideration?

Also....if the wake/prop rotor turbulence is so strong that another Osprey can experience a loss of control and be upset by that disturbed air....does a height above ground minimum need to be determined much along the lines of an airspeed/ROD warning as is given for A-VRS?

Any idea what the max rearward speed of the Osprey is?
SASless is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2012, 15:32
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 396 Likes on 246 Posts
Good questions, SAS. The operators may or may not wish to discuss that in an open forum, however.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2012, 15:52
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 511 Likes on 213 Posts
At the airshow at Leuchars Air Force MH-53 crews discussed some of the mission sets they were going to have to give up when converting to the 22. They did not go into real detail other than saying their view was it was due to some deal at very high positions on the Totem Pole that was driving it.

The tactical issues can be sensitive I am sure but in reality....as open source documents are bringing these limitations into view....no more damage is going to be done here as anywhere else.

I am sure some bad guys have their scissors, graph paper, and rulers and are comparing public source data and drawing out some layouts. They are pretty smart folks sometimes....and they are very good at thinking out counter measures to our tactics.....and we best be aware of that and doing the same to them.

That is why we have the advantage....we can draw upon some pretty amazing resources well in advance than what they can. We just have to be smart enough to stay ahead of the curve.
SASless is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2012, 18:24
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 770
Received 29 Likes on 14 Posts
"Roll off." Hmm. "Roll off."

Now where have I heard that term before?
FH1100 Pilot is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2012, 18:43
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 396 Likes on 246 Posts
Right here.

Roll-on/roll-off - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 04:37
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 770
Received 29 Likes on 14 Posts
HAHAHAHAHAHAH! Oh Lonewolf, so funny!

But I actually meant it with respect to the V-22. We find it used in the following report, when talking about A-VRS.

Dispelling the Myth of the MV-22

If this turns out to be a genuine case of "roll off," then I wonder why the pilot didn't simply beep the nacelles forward and fly out of it? That is the "so easy a child could do it" response to a roll-off, no?

I don't know...I'm puzzled.
FH1100 Pilot is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 04:43
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 511 Likes on 213 Posts
Seems a common occurrence FH....

As in most things....if there is not air between you and the ground....there is not enough air between you and the ground.

The real question is why did it happen. What was done that should not have been....and what wasn't that should have been done?

It does seem interesting that the 22 puts out enough wake turbulence/prop rotor wash that it can cause an upset in another 22 following behind it.
SASless is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 13:52
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 396 Likes on 246 Posts
SAS, are you familiar with why helicopters, in formation, fly with step up rather than step down, which is what fixed wing typically use?
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 14:02
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 396 Likes on 246 Posts
But I actually meant it with respect to the V-22. We find it used in the following report, when talking about A-VRS.
Dispelling the Myth of the MV-22
If this turns out to be a genuine case of "roll off," then I wonder why the pilot didn't simply beep the nacelles forward and fly out of it? That is the "so easy a child could do it" response to a roll-off, no?
I note that you inserted a term (in quotes) not used by the LTC who wrote the report you cited. Why am I not surprised?

I am not sure how much time in your life you have spent investigating aircraft mishaps. I had to do a few. One of the things you learn in so doing is something I'll call a decision cycle. When something goes wrong while flying, you have a finite time to (while flying the aircraft)
  1. identify that something is wrong
  2. indentify which something is wrong
  3. apply a remedy or correction
if simple correction is insufficient due to malfunction or failure ...
  • proceed with the correct EP / Malfunction procedures, memory items and maneuvers, without delay and in the right order.
Diagnosis is a critical difference between living through some "something's wrong" events and not.

While the point the LTC made about moving nacelles to 12-15 degress to escape VRS is a simplified summary, what goes into that is first recognition and diagnosis of what is wrong and what is to be done.

Depending upon how close to the ground and what you are doing, if something like VRS or roll off surprises you, your decision cycle is significantly compressed. In the AF mishap recently in Florida, my estimate is that if what happened was in the roll off category, the pilot flying was surprised, which influenced his corrective process.


In your own case, FH, when flying your helicopter, your ability to quickly and correctly diagnose the difference between a loss of power or a loss of tail rotor control is critical to your taking the correct actions to get back down to earth in one piece. If you are at fifty feet, or at a thousand feet, your decision cycle will contract or expand.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 14:12
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 770
Received 29 Likes on 14 Posts
Actually, Lone, I have had a tail rotor failure in flight and I did get it down in one piece. Good analogy!

But fair enough comment on my quote. I didn't mean to show that the guy who wrote the article said anything about recognizing and reacting to a "roll off." Here's how I should have written it (hindsight being as sharp as it always is).
If this turns out to be a genuine case of "roll off," then I wonder why the pilot didn't simply beep the nacelles forward and fly out of it? That is the so-easy-a-child-could-do-it response to a roll-off, no?
The question still stands.
FH1100 Pilot is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 14:22
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 697
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
Looks like Major Luce was indeed the pilot in command of the CV

AFSOC Osprey Pilot's Crash Was His Second In CV-22s; Was Copilot First Time

AFSOC Osprey Pilot's Crash Was His Second In CV-22s; Was Copilot First Time

WASHINGTON: The pilot in command of the Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22 Osprey that crashed at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida on June 13 was also the copilot of an AFSOC Osprey that suffered a fatal accident in Afghanistan on April 8, 2010, AOL Defense has confirmed.

Still unclear is whether Maj. Brian Luce or his copilot, Capt. Brett Cassidy, was at the controls over an Eglin gunnery range when their Osprey went down around 6:45 p.m. on a clear day while flying in formation with another CV-22 during a training exercise. Luce, who like Cassidy and their three enlisted crew members suffered undisclosed injuries in the accident, was released from Eglin Hospital two days after the crash.

Two years ago, Luce, who declined through the 1st Special Operations Wing's public affairs office to comment, was also in the right seat of a CV-22 Osprey that landed hard while carrying Army Rangers on a night raid against insurgents in Afghanistan. That Osprey flipped onto its back after its front landing gear collapsed and its nose went into a ditch, killing four of 19 people on board.

Col. James Slife, who as commander of the 1st Special Operations Wing at Hurlburt Field, Fla., relieved the commander of his unit's Osprey squadron this week as a result of the Eglin crash, declined in an interview with AOL Defense to say whether Luce and Cassidy might also face penalties for the accident.

"The results of the Accident Investigation Board will guide our decisions, if there's some misbehavior on the part of the crew or if they performed in a way that was unsatisfactory," Slife said. "It's too early to say whether they will or won't face any disciplinary action."

Air Force aircraft crashes are first examined by a Safety Investigation Board, whose purpose is to evaluate the cause and safety implications of aviation losses and whose evidence and deliberations are privileged and never released. A separate Accident Investigation Board, whose report is generally released after being redacted, examines crashes to assess responsibility.

The Osprey, which the Air Force designates CV-22 and the Marine Corps MV-22, is called a "tiltrotor" because it swivels two 38-foot rotors on the tips of its wings upward to take off, land and hover like a helicopter and tilts them forward to fly with the speed and range of a turboprop fixed-wing propeller plane.

Made in a 50-50 partnership by Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. and Boeing Co., the Osprey became controversial during two decades of development that included three fatal crashes, schedule delays and cost overruns. The V-22 was redesigned and retested in 2001-2002, however, and has since become a useful new capability for the Marines and AFSOC. Despite the Eglin crash and an MV-22 crash in Morocco in April that killed two Marines, the Osprey has also been one of the safest rotorcraft in the military since it went into service. Over the past decade, the U.S. military has lost 606 lives in 414 helicopter crashes, including four soldiers killed in two Army helicopters lost in Afghanistan during the past month.

The recent V-22 crashes have increased anxieties about the Osprey in Japan, where local leaders on Okinawa have cited noise and safety concerns in resisting a Marine Corps plan to deploy MV-22s on their island later this year. Japanese Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials were at the Pentagon on Friday to receive briefings on the Air Force and Marine Corps crash investigations from U.S. officials including Christopher Johnstone, director for Northeast Asia in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Policy) and Brig. Gen. Terrence
O'Shaughnessy, deputy director for politico-military affairs for Asia on the Joint Staff.

"The Department of Defense takes the inquiries made by the Japanese government very seriously and provided relevant information to the extent currently possible, and will continue to do so," Pentagon spokesman George Little said. "The Osprey is a highly capable aircraft with an excellent operational safety record, which includes more than five years of worldwide
deployments and 140,000 flight hours."

Luce was quoted in a recent Popular Mechanics article which reported that the V-22's speed and range have "turned doubters into converts" among special operations troops. "Some of the guys have a little hesitancy," Luce told the magazine. "But then they ride with us and get from point A to point B in record time."

1st Special Operations Wing commander Slife said there was "no reason to expect there are any mechanical flaws" that could have caused the Osprey crash at Eglin. He also confirmed that investigators would examine whether the crash resulted because the Osprey that went down, the second in a two-ship formation, got too close to the CV-22 it was following. The aircraft were flying in helicopter mode as a gunner fired at targets on the ground with a machinegun mounted on the rear ramp of the second Osprey.

As AOL Defense reported June 21, a major hazard for Ospreys flying behind others in helicopter mode is the risk of the trailing aircraft getting into the lead aircraft's powerful rotor wash, which can knock the lift out from under one of the second V-22's rotors and cause a sudden "roll off" that may be unrecoverable. Osprey pilots are admonished to keep at least 250 feet between cockpits and avoid the 5 to 7 o'clock positions behind another V-22.

"That phenomenon is well understood in the V-22 community," Slife said. "There's prominent warnings against flying in that flight regime in our flight manual. That's certainly one of the things the safety board is going to investigate."

Slife declined to explain in any detail his reasons for relieving Lt. Col. Matthew Glover of command at the 8th Special Operations Squadron, which Glover had taken over in May 2011, but the colonel said that "philosophically" all the military services hold commanders responsible for what happens in their units.

"The Navy is certainly known for this, but I think everybody acknowledges that commanders are accountable," Slife said. "Accountability and culpability are not necessarily the same concept."

Being relieved of command is usually a career ending event and "a personal tragedy for the person involved," Slife said. "But at the end of the day, our loyalty has to be towards the organization, and in this case, toward the airmen of that squadron. We owe those airmen the very best leadership that we can provide them."

Osprey pilot Luce's name wasn't included in the Accident Investigation Board report on the 2010 CV-22 crash in Afghanistan. AOL Defense confirmed with three individuals who know him personally that he was the copilot. The fatalities in the Afghanistan accident included pilot in command Maj. Randell D. Voas, who was at the controls in that incident. Also killed were Air Force Senior Master Sgt. James B. Lackey, Army Ranger Cpl. Michael D. Jankiewicz and a female Afghan interpreter.

Luce, who was thrown from that aircraft still strapped into his seat, had flown part of the mission in that intended night raid against an insurgent target but wasn't at the controls when that CV-22 touched down at more than 90 miles an hour a quarter mile short of where it was supposed to land. The Osprey's landing gear were down when it hit the ground and the aircraft raced over flat, sandy earth with its rotors tilted nearly all the way up, according to the Accident Investigation Board. Some of the Rangers on board thought they had merely made a fast roll-on landing until the aircraft flipped onto its back.

Following the accident, Luce told investigators his memory was blank about everything that happened after they were about one minute away from their intended landing zone.

"Unfortunately, that was the last thing I remember," Luce testified. "I don't know if it's my mind playing tricks on me or if this is something I actually remember, but I remember watching the radar altimeter" showing stages of their descent. "When I remember seeing this, I felt as if, not that I was outside the aircraft, but I was just not in my copilot position; I was watching this from outside the aircraft. I didn't feel like I was – it was kind of like I was a spectator. I wasn't part of the crew. I was just seeing this happening."

The Afghanistan crash investigators concluded that as many as 10 factors led to that accident but that none could be singled out as a primary cause. They included the crew being distracted as they pressed to make their target landing zone on time, a 17-knot tailwind and, in the view of the eight-member Accident Investigation Board's chairman, then-Brig. Gen. Donald Harvel of the Texas Air National Guard, possible loss of engine power. The vice commander of AFSOC at the time, however, overruled Harvel on the engine issue, citing engineering studies that detected no evidence of power loss.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 14:59
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 511 Likes on 213 Posts
Lone,

I have done a bit of formation flying in both helicopters (a whole lot) and airplanes (a little bit).

I very much understand why we stacked up in helicopters and not down.

In Roll Off.....my interest is the fact the strength of the disturbed air can cause an Upset of the following aircraft.....as Helicopters do not try to roll upset down when encountering the wake/rotor turbulence of the preceding aircraft.

It is the loss of Roll Control that I find so interesting to consider.

As many have said....these things are Tiltrotors and not Helicopters. (....or Airplanes either for that matter.)
SASless is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 15:00
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 697
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
FH, you seem to accept entering an auto as a fairly routine recovery procedure, and that a conventional helicopter is not "fundamentally flawed" due to a pilots ability to initiate one.

Do failed autorotations indicate that conventional helicopters are a flawed design? Does an accident that occurs when flying below the HV curve indicate the same?

Your inconsistency between these scenarios and similar unique situations in the V22 betrays your claimed objectivity.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 15:53
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: here
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If this turns out to be a genuine case of "roll off," then I wonder why the pilot didn't simply beep the nacelles forward and fly out of it? That is the "so easy a child could do it" response to a roll-off, no?
Because you're confusing two different phenomena. Roll off caused by VRS (to which LtCol Gross refers) and roll off caused by another aircrafts wake...same term different thing. For a roll off caused by VRS forward nacelle is the answer because it sheds the rotor vorticies. I don't believe it to be effective though for roll off caused by wake interaction.
jeffg is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2012, 16:35
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
VRS vis a vis Roll Off

I recall reading the article by Lt Col Gross, but just mentally pigeon-holed the roll-off events as instabilities related to the unsteady flow associated with VRS.

That was an underestimation apparently, judging by the comments from some here with specific V-22 knowledge who propose that it is a potential causal factor in the Eglin accident.

The article does not describe the aerodynamic mechanism related to the roll-off events encountered during testing. It doesn't describe the magnitude of the events, i.e., roll attitude change, associated roll rates, amount of lateral control input required to correct the situation, altitude loss, if any, associated with the event.

Makes one even more curious about the sort of onboard data that might be retrievable from the normally installed flight control computers.

Thanks,
John Dixson
JohnDixson is online now  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.