Osprey

[Greaper007]

I'm not mako. I was just talking to a pilot I know about it and we couldn't figure out how the time would transfer for the FAA. Since something like C-130 time still counts as jet time, I was trying to figure out if the Osprey was in the same category as that, of if it counted at helicopter (forgive my phraseology) time. Or perhaps it counted as a combination. It's fixed wing and uses what I guess would be considered turbo-prop engines. However, the nature of the aircraft is definitly different. Believe me, I'm not planning any sort of career 10 years in advance. I'm much to supersticious for that, and too weary of the Airlines to begin with (USAir anyone). I should have proof-read my post better. Like I said someone I know asked me the same question I posted above and I thought I would come to the experts for an answer. I'm just curious how one defines this unique "new" aircraft.

 

[46Driver]

It's a fair question - I don't know how airlines will count it. Many airlines will not allow you to count any helo time. Because it is a "tilt-rotor" and the bias of many in the industry, I am guessing not many airlines will count it towards fixed wing time.

 

[makoslim]

so... the Osprey is just for the hard core "not doing this for free flight hours guys?" maybe I should look more into the osprey... You never know what youll get, could be fun to fly if I dont get selected to AH-1.

 

[invertedflyer]

I'd love to see the Osprey become a success.... I agree with Phrog on this one.. I've read some stuff and I submit that its definitely ready for its upcoming operational testing... hope it makes it...

As for the Airlines.. I also think that they won't count it as jet time... maybe some regional commuter airlines would... you're guess is better than mine.

 

[Flash]

I would be inclined to agree with Phrog that the V-22 is ready for operational testing but I would have to disagree that it is necessary for the USMC, at least in the numbers they are buying it. It does give the Marines much more flexibility and range, but they couldn't be used as a supplement to the 53's instead of replacing the Phrog? Right now, there are 2 helos that I think would be great replacements for the 46 flying and done with testing, one of them even operational right now. The EH/US 101 and the S-92. I know the stated reasons for buying the V-22 but why not buy them in smaller numbers and get 101/92's instead?

One of the impressions I get is the V-22 has become somewhat of a holy grail to the Marines and they can't let it go. It will be used to further differentiate them from the Army and their airlift instead of having equivalent aircraft (Cobra/Apache, Chinook/53E, Huey and Phrog/Blackhawk).

BTW, I am acting as a devil's advocate, don't be too harsh.

 

[ChuckMK23]

I agree with the previous post.

Now that the MH-60S is online in the Navy - that is also another "off the shelf" and fully validated combat lift platform. I don't know what the number of seats would be but in a pinch I bet the Marine Corps could work around it especially given more numbers of MH-60's.

The S-92 would be an incredible platform as well - it has the size internally to rival the '46 - essentially a drop in replacement.

But you're right, the V-22 is a USMC Holy Grail - a differentiator and branded as an "expeditionary" aircraft. With the self deployment capabilities it could really be a big step. It still seems like the technology isn't all there yet though. Maybe it will take a comittment to operational deployment to work the bugs out finally.

The wing/blade folding mechanism scares the crap out of me!

 

[phrogdriver]

I don't know why the folding mechanism would be scary. The blades fold like a helo, then the nacelles come forward and the wing pivots. Folding helo blade in general is kind of scary in concept (ask any Army pilot), but at least in the Osprey the wing stays in one piece, unlike most carrier fixed-wing.

As far as airlines go, I think we'll be regarded more as multi-engine props than as helos after a while. V-22s can fly jet routes , and our fuel planning is very remiscent of a fixed wing.

 

[Blacky]

Well, I suppose that until Delta, United, and the other big boys start lauching/recovering their equipment vertically, they'll shy away from anyone with "powered lift" flight time. Perhaps they'll log it as both fixed wing and rotary, and just divide the time they were hovering and the time they were cruising. That would make the most sense to me, but as we all know, being practical is not a part of military policy.

 

[makoslim]

Have you guys heard about the plans for a tilt rotar gunship? The Deputy Commandant for aviationasked contractors at Bell to look into making an armed variant of the commercial BA609 to serve as an armed escort for the MV-22B. Trial of the TR gunship could begin as early as 2015.

 

[Greaper007]

The osprey seems like a pretty cool aircraft. I was wondering if anyone had a website or anything where I could see more of its mission?

 

[go4the8]

The osprey seems like a pretty cool aircraft. I was wondering if anyone had a website or anything where I could see more of its mission?

Go here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm. There's some good info there.


I put Osprey as my number one choice last week. They weren't giving out anymore Osprey slots, so I got C-130's instead. I did my research and I believe the Osprey is good to go. Yea, there might be teething issues, but I think the major bugs have been worked out. As it was mentioned before, vortex ring state (VRS) was a major issue, but NATOPS was changed to reflect safer descent rates, airspeeds, and nacelle positions to aid in the prevention of VRS. As with any new platform, look at the Harrier in its early years, it takes time, patience, and new experiences to work out the bugs and idiosyncrasies of the new platform.

 

[Greaper007]

Thanks Go4. Congratulations on the C-130 slot. I've heard that they are hard to get. Forgive my terminology but is the Prop pipeline for both C-130's and Osprey's now?

 

[HueyCobra8151]

Excuse me in advance for my lack of research (something I guess I will rectify shortly), I have not really followed it's development very often.

But just for the sake of knowing,

The Arizona crash was caused by unequal lift from vortex ring state due to an excessive rate of descent. (emphasis mine)

Does that mean that the MV-22 cannot auto-rotate? If that is the case, does it have sufficient glide characteristics to allow for any sort of survivable roll-on crash landings in single engine or total engine failure?

Also, I do not see why the haven't outfitted the MV-22 with ejection seats. If it is a possibility, why not use it? Certainly if there were pax or crew in the back it wouldn't be viable, but if you are cruising along with a load of MRE's in the back or something it would be nice to know you might come out alive if the worst-case scenario happens.

Also, I am curious (if anyone knows) if there is a huge difference between HIGE/HOGE aircraft characteristics. It seems like with the available aerodynamic/lift producing surfaces, there would be a lot of interference when HIGE.

And how do they fit the rotating controls in there? Do they have a whole swashplate assembly of some kind?

Blah...n/m, I started with just that one question, now I have a million. Time to go see what google can tell me.

 

[phrogdriver]

VRS has nothing to do with autorotation. The VRS is strictly a powered phenomenon--the more power applied, the worse it gets. The Osprey can auto--not like a TH-57, but it's doable. Most scenarios will involve an airplane-style ditching, and for that it glides pretty well. It has more than enough power to do a single-engine flyaway for most temps and gross weights.

To the other questions: It hovers HIGE and HOGE very well, since it has a very good stabilization system.

There is a type of swashplate in the proprotor assy.

No other assault or transport aircraft has ejection seats. Why would the Osprey? Putting ejection seats in a bird is a lot harder than just bolting one to the floor, anyway.

 

[go4the8]

Thanks Go4. Congratulations on the C-130 slot. I've heard that they are hard to get.

Thanks....They don't give them out too often. I'm really looking forward to flying it!!

Forgive my terminology but is the Prop pipeline for both C-130's and Osprey's now?

C-130 bubbas fly the complete T-44A syllabus and get winged when finished. The Osprey bubbas fly a portion of the TC-12 syllabus and then they go to Pensacola to fly either a portion or all of the helo syllabus (gotta ask my buddy who was "drafted" into the Osprey pipeline), after which they get winged.

Not sure about the differences between the T-44 and the TC-12, looks like something Google could be helpful for.