You would have to be descending pretty fast to get into VR, though, wouldn't you?

Phil

Nick, what about OEI landing or flyaway from approach in helo config...

The V22 can easily fly OEI (the cross shafting is qualified for the full single engine power). I have heard no bad things about its OEI capability, at all.

Bell Helicopter joins Urban Aero to launch X-Hawk flying car

"X-Hawk Urban Warfighter disk loading would be about 40 lb/sq ft, twice that of the V-22 tilt rotor." ~ from AHS Breaking News.

How well will this Autorotate? :)

V-22 Sudden Engine Failure
 

Nick,
I never doubted if the V-22 could fly OEI. What is your take on its ability to withstand a single engine failure at a high total power setting? With both engines running and the torques matched the connecting shafts see little or no torque. Should one engine suddenly quit that shafting would have to very steeply ramp up to match the torque required at the failed engine prop/rotor gearbox. That would be similar to going from full right pedal to full left in less than 2 seconds along 40 feet of shafts and couplings. I have my doubts as to the V-22’s ability to handle a sudden engine failure.:8

Jack,

A second thought is the last engine suddenly failing while at max power demand....being a low inertia rotor system....rotor rpm decay would rather interesting. In forward flight with considerable airspeed perhaps not a major crisis but in a OGE hover.....Wow! Somewhat like a Harrier almost with the exception of no ejection seats.

SASless,

The disc loading of a light Harrier's big turbo fan may be lower than the V-22's rotors at 60,000 lbs.

This would be funny....if it wasn't so stupid!
 

The link will take you to an article about the USMC trying to figure out how to load internally the special design Jeep....the only military vehicle besides ATV's and Motorcycles that will fit inside the Osprey.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn20...9?opendocument

I was flying my R44 across the Rockies last week and on arriving at Gunnison airport (near Crested Butte), I was joined in the pattern by an Osprey. This aircraft had a test pilot and telemetry crew and was doing high density altitude trials in order to develop the operating envelope. I met the pilot (Chuck) after I had landed and he invited me for a look around the aircraft which was fascinating. To my question, he didn't think the autorotational qualities were worth relying on in the hover or rotor transition from vertical to horizontal and would always go for an aircraft-type glide approach if feasible.

Very impressive beast indeed!

I have some pictures but someone will need to tell me how to post them....

Thanks very much for the photo help to John Eacott; here they are:

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20077.jpg


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20078.jpg


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20079.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20080.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20081.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20082.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20083.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20084.JPG


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/...0(2)%20085.jpg

osprey
 

What is going to happen to the "rotors"if you attempt an aeroplane type landing?

ergonomics
 

Looking at that V22 in the shed make me think the concept came originally from a hangar company looking for a design that takes up the maximum amount of space per aircraft?

Since we are talking about the V-22's little brother....we might want to bring up this thread again.


Way back when Lu Zuckerman (Lord Bless Him!) brought up the issue of the fallacy of the V-22 replacing helicopters for the Beach Assault mission of the USMC.


The USMC has decided Vertical Envelopment relying solely upon helicopters was not the way beach assaults are done. They decided a combination of resources including helicopters, conventional landing craft, and the LCAC (Landing Craft, Air Cushion) would be the correct approach. Thus, the modern amphibious ships would all have helidecks/flight decks for aircraft and well decks for boats and LCAC's.


The introduction of the LCAC was designed to allow an "over the horizion" assault capability. LCAC's can carry very heavy loads of vehicles and equipment as well as large numbers of troops. LCAC's can travel at 40-50 knots across water and land. V-22's are said to have a 200nm range for troop lifts and pre-assault SOF Ops.


The V-22 Osprey was designed to meet a 50NM range for external cargo flights. It would follow, it seems, the Osprey operations in direct support of an amphibious assault would have to work in conjunction with the other means of transportation, those being boats, helicopters, and LCAC's.


The current LHA's (largest of the amphib ships much like an aircraft carrier without the angled deck) were not designed to accomodate the V-22.


Throw in the need for the Harrier squadrons for CAS and it seems there is a shortage of deck space for all the aircraft and operations.


A digram of the USS Tarawa shows there are three landing spots adjacent to the ship's island that are too narrow for the V-22. The ships beam is 106' and the width of the Osprey with rotors running is just over 84'.


What is it I seem to be missing? Any Marines out there that can explain how all this is going to work?


http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ges/tarawa.gif

Since this is a rumour network . . .

I heard the proprotor on the V-22 were sized to provide exactly the same clearance from the tower as the H-53E. Also the shipboard fold should give it about the same deck footprint as the H-46 for parking.

I wonder if any Marines out there could confirm or deny.

CH-53 M/R Diameter is 79 feet vice 84.5 feet for the Osprey

Here is a chart for the K model....

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-image08-s.jpg

Looking at those landing spots, would the fact that one rotor's out over the water while the other's over the deck cause any handling problems?

There are some pictures on this web link that show the V-22 deployed on a ship and can provide you with a good idea of how the aircraft fits onboard ships.
http://www.navair.navy.mil/v22/index...6&galleryId=-1

As one of the photos from the linked site below show, the deck is pretty cluttered just with the V-22's much less any 53's, UH-1's, or Harriers it would seem. The one photo of the 22 running with just a few feet of deck to its Port side shows how far off center the aircraft must be. Just compare the deck centerline markings to how the aircraft are positioned.
Now add in darkness, rain, blowing snow, a rolling, heaving deck and imagine how much fun that would be.

Photo looks like the V-22s are all parked right on the port helo spots. They only use one of the starboard spots, and only for one parked sideways.

During the first shipboard trial the fly by wire computer had trouble with one proprotor over the deck IGE and the other OGE. I'm sure it was an exciting cockpit for the test pilots. They fixed the software before trying again.

SASless,

The V-22's are spotted on the deck exactly where they are supposed to be. See the links below showing CH-53E's and 46's on the deck. Notice the similarity? The yellow centerline is only for the AV-8's. I also count 3 V-22's abeam the island, thus discounting your earlier statement that:

"The Osprey cannot land adjacent to the "island" on the Amphib Carriers thus they lose the use of that spot(s) unlike the CH-53E which can land on all spots".

The clearance between the rotor tips and the island are very similar to the CH-53E and it can land on all the same spots (I've seen it do so).

The AV-8's and the RW assets do perform launch/recovery ops concuncurrently (occasionally a AV-8 will land with RW's on the forward spots, but rarely). Therefore deck cycles will remain the same. During RW ops it's not uncommon for all port deck spots to be used with aircraft slashed starboard.

The LHD is the latest amphib (the ship that Gregg's pics are from, however it has the same beam (106') as the LHA.


http://www.usmc.mil/15thmeu/images/2...-5538M-067.jpg

http://www.naval-technology.com/proj...dex.html#wasp8

http://www.lhd6.navy.mil/images/Sep%...ial003_jpg.jpg

V-22 fleet grounded
 

Low and behold another faulty part on the V-22. This time it's a computer chip. What next?

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/16669929.htm