Today I learned that the name is not a portmanteau of "heli copter" but rather "helico" (screw) and "pter" (wing). It has shaken me to my very core
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
USMC - What are V-22 pilots doing when they get out?
- Thread starter Woodsman
- Start date
It's compound etymology . . .
aero (air) + plane (the geometric figure) = airplane.
helico (screw) + pter (wing) = helicopter.
plane + helicopter = plopter.
As if helicopters didn’t shake enough
Nope. Not at all. The harrier takes off and lands like a plane 80+% of the time.
And it can fly backwards... fearless, like the honey badger.
Ospreys also regularly do rolling take offs and running landings. I almost always chose the runway if the wait at the hold short didn’t just make it easier to take a helo spot for departure.
I never thought about "helico", but I guess deep down I knew it meant "screw" because of helixes, helical gears, etc. The "pter" is what really threw me!It's compound etymology . . .
aero (air) + plane (the geometric figure) = airplane.
helico (screw) + pter (wing) = helicopter.
plane + helicopter = plopter.
At what kind of approach speed? I’m not trying to shit on Osprey guys. They are getting hired at airlines but like I said above, some fixed wing experience is a good idea for new guy advice. Having trained all types in C-12’s, the Osprey guys were much more like helo guys in learning curve than FW guys, even with prior C-12 time.
Descent planning from 35kft and 400+ knots, at a 20:1 glide ratio, dealing with upper level winds, is a different skill than starting at 10kft and 250+ knots in a ship with giant eggbeaters on the front that allow you to dump the nose and scrub excess energy if you got behind.
It's not a mark of pride or shame and it's not a great mystery either, but it is an additional skill that takes certain time and reps to get good at.
Flying a 140~ish final and managing the transition from 250-200-final, while not upsetting the passengers, is similar too. FWIW, notwithstanding its120+ approach speed, instrument approaches in the T-6 are relatively easy to fly well. (Missed approaches too.)
It's not a mark of pride or shame and it's not a great mystery either, but it is an additional skill that takes certain time and reps to get good at.
Flying a 140~ish final and managing the transition from 250-200-final, while not upsetting the passengers, is similar too. FWIW, notwithstanding its120+ approach speed, instrument approaches in the T-6 are relatively easy to fly well. (Missed approaches too.)
Oh for sure not fast by jet standards at all. I haven’t flown one since 2017 so I’m not positive but I think max roll on speed was ~80 KTS. For the nugget: definitely agree with advice to go to flight school or some other pure fixed wing opportunity if they’ll let an Osprey guy out of the cockpit.
PMPT
Well-Known Member
not exactly, to be fair. VTO is pretty rare, and you don't actually VL as often as you'd think. At home field its far more common to fly in a regime of flight much more akin to conventional flight. Conventional landings are a thing as well ( that is, fully wingborne flight). Conventional takeoffs also fairly common if crosswinds call for it.