Skip to comments.Ospreys to stay grounded for now
Posted on 08/04/2012 4:33:11 PM PDT by ME-262
Ospreys to stay grounded for now Pentagon chief bans test flights until Japan OKs aircraft's safety
WASHINGTON The United States will suspend all flight operations by MV-22 Ospreys in Japan until Tokyo confirms the tilt-rotor aircraft's safety, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said.
(Excerpt) Read more at japantimes.co.jp ...
Well someone didn’t get the word because I just saw one making maneuver turns over the West Mesa here in Albuquerque just a bit ago.
It’s suspended in Japan only.
The ban is just in Japan because of the basing in Futenma. The Japanese have built up to the fence at that base, so any incident gets them worked up fast.
“The gift that keeps on giving. Maybe if we throw a few hundred billion dollars more at the program this lemon will become a little less of a lemon.”
The basic idea is good. I hope they’ve worked out the problems and the MV-22 will stay operational.
That is where I disagree. Putting the lifting rotors on the wingtips guarantees that any disparity in thrust will roll the craft over and kill everybody. Then the wings had to be made so much stronger and heavier since they lift from the very tip only while hovering. Then a massive drive shaft had to go from one wingtip to the other to guarantee a chance of surviving the loss of a single engine. If this aircraft had been designed with a center-line thrust rotor on a raised pylon that pivoted from above the center of gravity to in front of the craft it would be simple stable and efficient. The design was/is/and always will be unnecessarily complex, inherently unstable, and inefficient with correspondingly poor performance.
“That is where I disagree.”
I was referring to the idea of altering the angle of the rotor between traditional prop airplane to helicopter. Having a hover-capable vehicle that can cruise over 350 KT is clearly a big win.
Your points are interesting, I’d like to see them evaluated by a qualified aero engineer. One thing I’d note right off the bat is having two counter-rotating props eliminates the torque issue. With a single rotor design, you need a way to counter torque in hover mode.
Plenty of work went into the Osprey design, I’m pretty sure they covered the obvious issues.
When a RPG is fired at them upon approach, they maneuver quite nicely to avoid the incoming.
They tried to put them at the wing roots, but the blades kept chewing into the fuselage. < /sarc>
Counter rotating props on co-axle shafts negates torque.
Or counter rotating rotors on meshed, twin shafts as the USAF rescue helo from the 60s with no tail rotor.
You still suffer from cranial rectumitis.
How many hours have you logged in either seat of a V-22?
>”Things are shortened for illustration purposes”<
I’ve never used that excuse. What you see is what you get.
You are correct in assuming that the rotor system would either be coaxial or a torqueless type of system of which I am not at liberty to speak.
They’ve been flying with no problems for a couple years at Kirtland AFB in NM. They frequently come over my house.
Have a sound you can’t mistake.
I didn't do the 1923 drawing. In patent drawings I have submitted certain things are often given a vague representation to prevent certain aspects not covered by that particular patent from being disclosed to potential competitors and perhaps making the idea seem less viable to them.
Uh, I was just kidding around. I don’t think the guy who drew the picture has an Account on FR. #;^)
I find it kind of ghoulish that some people appear to wish for an Osprey to crash to validate their point of view.
That is a mindset I expect from liberals, not anyone posting on FR.
I find it kind of ghoulish that some people would keep pushing for a very bad design with an extensive record of fatal crashes despite its limited duty. I don’t relish the deaths, but as an aerospace engineer I see that ignorant designs can kill a lot of people, and not just time, money, and their mission. I’m just saying, start over with a good design.
It also seems that by calling me ghoulish, you are conceding the facts that the V-22 is a killer, and will continue to kill our boys, and you have shifted from debating the danger of the aircraft to questioning the motives of those who have been right about it for decades.
Who said I was talking to you? Seems you are a bit oversensitive. If the shoe fits, you can wear it. If it doesn’t, don’t.
It's Okinawa for cripes' sake!
The locals will protest anything American other than the cash flow.
There are a lot of idiots who post here. FR is a microcosm of America.
Are you talking about the H-60 now?
"Even counting two crashes of Air Force CV-22Bs in the past two years, the Osprey's safety record has been exceptionally good since the aircraft was redesigned and retested a decade ago. Since Oct. 1, 2001, three Ospreys have crashed with a loss of six lives. During the same period, the U.S. military has lost 414 helicopters at a cost of 606 deaths." Richard Whittle
Why is your plaintive wail deathly silent over that fact?(That's a rhetorical question because we already know the answer.)
the facts that the V-22 is a killer, and will continue to kill our boys,
More Bravo Sierra "facts" from you.
Despite your claims to the contrary and based on the historical ineptness in your posts, much of the following will be way over your head, madame. However, even an obtuse mind like yours should be able to comprehend the following. The next time you go sit down and empty your bladder take the report and a dictionary with you because it is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that you are full of s***.
In August 2003, the V22 Integrated Test Team completed a thorough investigation of the V22s low-speed / HROD flight characteristics. Testing defined an operational envelope for the aircraft and demonstrated flight regimes free from vortex ring state (VRS). Tests also probed deeply into fully developed VRS to determine precise flight conditions where it may be encountered, and to confirm the ability of the V22 to recover from the condition. The ability to tilt the nacelles proved to be a powerful and (in every case) reliable means for rapidly regaining aerodynamic function of the rotors, even when operating in VRS beyond the point of having sufficient controllability. Results for steady-state HROD conditions are presented and the methods for testing are described. In an operational sense, the test results show that the V22 has a significantly higher rate of descent margin for avoiding VRS with respect to the published NATOPS limitation than conventional low disk-loading helicopters. Furthermore, dynamic maneuver testing of the V22 showed that VRS cannot be initiated outside the steadystate VRS boundary. Simple engineering analysis is used to show that the V22s steady-state VRS boundary is predictable by simple methods that work for conventional helicopters. High blade twist, and the side-by-side rotor configuration of the V22 do not play a significant role in defining the VRS boundary.
Freedom of speech...:)