Could the Osprey be an Ostrich?

Just had a thought about the USMC’s Osprey.
Anybody got any ideas to its single engine drills, apart from falling out of the sky?
Can it survive a PFL with the rotors in the vertical position?
Is the lift generated from the wing on the dead side sufficient to maintain stability?
apart from that the spams are whining it can't swoop in fast and low but has to stop tilt then lower itself not exactly brilliant in a tactical transport plus too narrow to carry serious sort of kit plus it regualrly kills marines :cry:
whatch MOD order oodles of them :twisted:
Felix you plonker!

The rutors are not driven by individual engines, the engines drive gearboxes which in turn drive the rotors. One engine will drive both sides but at reduced power!

Oops! is this a whaa!
Actually although you are right, beefer, there are a number of problems with the V-22. To save time and effort, I'll grab this from another thread:

crabtastic said:
Well, it looks like that after 20 years of development they think they've finally figured out a way of stopping them falling out of the sky at the most inopportune moments. However:

The current price tag is ridiculous. The USMC will say that the unit cost is about $40m a piece, but in actual fact the real number is around $80m. Last month, a measure in the recently passed $97bn emergency supplimental appropriations bills cut $230m that would have been spent on NVGs, light armour and replacement equipment and re-appropriated it for the acquisition of 3 Ospreys. (Got to keep the pork rolling in during an election year.)

As it is, the Osprey is twice as big and costs about four times as much as a helicopter with similar lifting capabilities. It's going to be one big fcuk-off target. The only place you can fit guns will be on the rear ramp because of the obstruction of the nacelles and props and you can only fastrope from the ramp, no lower than 100ft AGL, because of the horrendous downdraft. If you don't want to spend 3-5 mins in the hover at 100ft to disembark 18 fastroping troops, then you WILL have to land- no letting the self-loading freight jump from a few feet because the downwash will knock them all over the shop (which is why the USAF is now buying more helicopters for the CSAR role). Picking people up from rooftops and hills and anywhere snowy, dusty or sandy etc. will be very interesting too. The nature of the vortices actually blows FOD towards the aircraft too.

Other things to consider:

1. Even though the Osprey has been cleared for full scale production, its only half as reliable as the CH-53E (similar empty weight and engine power).

2. It has an advertised dash speed (unladen) of 300kts at 20,000ft (not that this matters because the cabin isn't pressurised) but it cruises at 220- not much faster than modern helicopters. An OPEVAL in June last year saw the a/c demonstrate only 240kts at 3000ft at full pelt.

3. The CH-46's cabin is 70% bigger by volume and the Osprey only has 50% of the floor space.

4. The aircraft cannot autorotate. Nice to know in a hot LZ.

5. Manoeuvrability is shite compared to a helicopter, especially at slow speed/VTOL mode, due to very restrictive g-limitations. Something else to consider when you go somewhere where people are likely to be shooting at you.

6. The US Navy's own study to measure the transport effectiveness of the the V-22 compared to the CH-53E (speed x payload= ton miles per hour) rated the Super Stallion 1.66 times more effective. The '53E can carry twice as much payload to the same range and is 2.3 times as cost-effective as the Osprey.

There's lots more where that came from, but I'm sure you get the picture. Looks nice, but it's crap. Even Dick Cheney himself tried to bin it in 1989. It was only Congress and the Pork Barrell that kept it going.
Col Harry P Dunn said:
For some 18 years, everyone involved in the V-22 -- Congress, Contractors, USMC, Navy, etc - have all claimed that the V-22 would be easily capable of conducting a SAFE auto rotation. We have been telling DOD and others that the V-22 cannot do an autorotation - which is a standard for ALL helicopters. Recently they DELETED this capability as UNSAFE. In all of this time, the test pilots actually attempted (ONCE ONLY) to accomplish a full autorotation and almost loss total control.
After visiting the Boeing web site, it was a stupid question.
I didn’t envisage it having a common drive shaft which if I had stopped to think is the only way it would work. Sorry. :oops:
Memory says that the ex Sikorsky Test pilot did a magnificent job of rubbishing it on Prunne a year ago when compared to the CH 53.

Similar threads

Latest Threads