In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
another osprey crash
varian
Member Posts: 2,263 ✭✭✭✭
another one hits the ground. more than forty people have been killed in osprey crashes so far. my grandson is stationed there in california and flies around in those things, hope he wasnt on that one. seems to me the osprey is really not a very good aircraft no matter how much the marine brass publicly state to the contrary. seems like aircraft and many other things that are designed to do many different missions arent really very good at doing anything.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
They fly around Albuquerque regularly, stationed at Kirtland AFB. Loud but so far none have fallen from the sky here.
Sad news indeed.
I believe that makes 1 F18, 1F16, and 1 V22 down on the West Coast in about a week.
It may not be the aircraft as much as the Ops tempo. - which has killed alot more airmen than the design of the equipment in general.
Another Boeing boondoggle project with Tax payers money to be on the cutting edge. They should build a jet aircraft troop carrier with separate lift and thrush engines to over come the transition period with adjusting just one power source for flight and vertical lift vectors. No I am not flight aeronautical engineer but really what are they thinking?
serf
Perspective, people. That 40 casualty number is across the entire 30 years of Osprey flying, and includes all the prototype and developmental crashes. It is actually a pretty safe aircraft.
i think five have crashed plus one prototype. i just think a more practical solution to the problem could have been found. even Dick Cheney didnt like it. but then again his family and friends probably didnt invest enough money in it at the start of the program
RIP to all of them
They are not fun to jump out of. I think I was one of the 1st people to do a HALO jump from one and it was not a fun time. We jumped when they could not even tilt the rotors all the way horizontal. It was around 2005 or so. They have only been operational since 2007 but they have been messing with them since the late 80's.
Safe of not you can have my seat.
I always thought on a V-22 during flight while the rotors are tilting,there must be a second or two that it is neither helicopter or fixed wing aircraft.
Apparently so.
Well, yeah. But that's a bit like saying there's a time between when you're standing still and running that you are neither.
Not really.
I worked in research for Allison Gas Turbine (now RR) while the T406 engine was being developed. I didn't work on that project but many of my friends did. I couldn't turn down an early retirement offer in '92 and left at an age of 51. My 60+ year old manager couldn't believe it.
I did say "a bit like" but it's closer than you think. There isn't a hard dividing line between when the Osprey is in hover mode and when it's in forward flight mode. It's a gradual transition. That's very much like a helicopter's transition from hover to forward flight. A helicopter makes that transition by tilting the entire aircraft. The Osprey tilts the engines while keeping the fuselage horizontal.
There IS a difference in the controls, of course. In that regard, you're correct.
I’m not qualified in rotary wing air craft. But I was instructing a guy that had been a helicopter pilot in the service get his fixed wing license. Airspeed and keeping it up was a little bit of a challenge first couple of hours, but he caught on. I could imagine there is quite a bit of a transition going from fixed to rotary wing while in the air. I’ll just watch that from the ground.
Non sequitur.
The disagreement was not about the difference between Osprey transition from hover and forward flight mode or whether such transition is similar to that of a helicopter; the disagreement was about the Osprey transition of hover to forward being like the transition from standing stIll to running.
Often the mind believes it is thinking when it is only passing from one metaphor to the next.
Read that former LA Dodger Steve Sax lost his son in that crash.
I never trained in helos, but I've been allowed to fly a couple (with the actual pilot monitoring) and even managed to land one without crashing. Flying is flying.
I think the standing to running analogy is apt. When standing, you are vertical and while running you are leaning forward. There comes a moment in between when you are neither but still maintaining balance - just as an Osprey has to do.
Sorry, there is not a moment in Osprey flight when it Is "doing neither", i.e., when it is neither hovering nor moving forward. There is no "in between". There certainly can be a gradual movement from one to the other, but at no time is it not doing one or the other.
These analogies beg the answer to the question, “where was the man when he jumped off the bridge?”.
Not really.
I think we're saying the same thing. What I mean to convey is that there is only a smooth transition from one state to the other, but during that transition you are no longer in the hover nor yet fully forward. Nor is there an "on/off" moment when the pilot switches from helo controls to plane controls.
It was the same for Harrier jet pilots and for the Marine version of the F-35 (although those were to land, not takeoff.) I don't happen to know any Osprey pilots, so I can't verify any of this; I'm only going on my own experience.
Anyone know if the first batch of Osprey pilots transitioned from helicopters or Harriers?
Seems the Harrier pilots would transition easier, but moving from an attack plane to a transport would seem to be a hard sell.
Brad Steele
Perchance do you play the accordion? The way you expand and contract your "argument" to avoid counter is worthy of a Pennsylvania polka.
Originally you stated that there is not a hard dividing line between when an Osprey is in hover mode and when it's in forward flight mode. Then you changed that to say there is a time between hover mode and forward flight mode when an Osprey is in neither hover nor forward flight mode (like the transition between standing still and running). And now you've changed it again: first, that there is no time when an Osprey is neither in hover mode nor forward flight mode (no on/off moment when the pilot switches from hover mode and forward flight mode); and second, that the transition in question is no longer from hover mode to forward flight mode, but from hover mode to FULLY forward flight mode (nice try).
The reason I stated your comparison between an Osprey's transition from hover mode to forward flight mode and a runner's transition from standing to running was a metaphor instead of an analogy is because an analogy is a statement claiming that one thing or state of affairs is comparable to another thing or state of affairs in significant respects, and I did not think your comparison qualified and was more on the nature of metaphor (a word or phrase applied to a thing or state of affairs to which it is not literally applicable).
Of course, nothing of this colloquy is of any consequence. I am in middle of passing a stone
My sincerest good wishes for you with the stone. I hope you manage that transition seamlessly.
Oh, and it wasn't a metaphor. More of a simile.
The Osprey is a relatively safe aircraft. It has a very complex transmission system. I built gearboxes for Bell used in test stands for testing flight article gearboxes for the Osprey. Our company and Allison now Rolls Royce were the only Indiana companies bell listed as suppliers from Indiana. Allison got the engine contract on the Osprey becasue they had a turboshaft that could be started in the verticle orientation.
The next generation utility helicopter prototypes are now flying. The Government is again having two different companies demonstrate competing prototypes. Bell is offering a tilt rotor but without the engines tilting. Sikorsky is offering an ABC helicopter with a pusher propeller. I watched them assemble the two prototype ABC , Sykorski XH-69, transmissions at IGW whan I worked there in the earl y 1970's, Slightly later I worked for LABECO and built a test stand gearing and shafts for Bell.s XV-15 tilt rotor.
What? They aren’t holding a design review? I thought we at Gunbroker decided it was a “bad design”, not an Ops tempo issue.
A simile is a metaphor.
OK! This thread has run its coarse.