SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Tiltrotor Facts

1439 views
8 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: Connecticut
Tiltrotor Facts
Posted by Tailspinturtle on Monday, March 8, 2004 8:12 PM
I worked for Bell Helicopter for 20+ years, mostly on the tiltrotor programs, starting before they won the XV-15 contract and leaving after the V-22 program was well underway. At the risk of oversimplifying, but in response to questions and issues raised elsewhere in this forum:

1. The transmissions that drive the rotors are interconnected by a shafts like a tailrotor drive shaft, so if one engine fails the other engine drives both rotors. However, in the Quantico crash, the flash fire that took out one engine "melted" part of the shaft system, causing a loss of control. That failure mode, and the one that caused the flash fire, has been designed out.

2. The conversion system that tilts the nacelles is redundent and designed and maintained like a flight control system. In the unlikely event it fails in airplane mode, the V-22 can be landed like an airplane. The blades will be destroyed but the landing should be survivable and the aircraft not heavily damaged, not unlike a wheels-up landing in a low wing propellor driven airplane.

3. The XV-15 was transitioned power off from airplane mode to autorotation and a 60 knot landing could be accomplished from an autorotation; it was successfully demonstrated on the simulator from airplane mode at 250 knots at 100 feet AGL. The V-22 either can't transition or it's too hard for the average pilot, but it can still be successfully crashlanded power off in airplane mode. If you're in helicopter mode and lose both engines, it'll probably be a survivable crash, depending on what you hit.

4. The Arizona crash was pilot error, pure and simple, with the pilot trying to correct at night on night vision goggles for being too high and/or fast on approach and getting outside the approved flight envelope. You can argue whether or not the V-22 descent capability is adequate for steep approaches to a landing zone, but a warning has been developed for the impending loss of roll control and recovery with nacelle tilt is almost instantaneous.

5. Strictly speaking, the North Carolina crash was pilot error in continuing to try a control system reset following a hydraulic system failure, exacerbated by a flight control system response that wasn't well understood. The V-22 has three hydraulic systems, any one of which can operate the flight controls. The aircraft was flyable if he hadn't kept hitting the reset, which he wasn't supposed to do. However, it was an understandable reaction to the situation and the flight control system shouldn't have been so unforgiving.

6. Marines wanted to replace the CH-46 with a new Boeing all-composite fuselage tandem rotor design until they flew the XV-15. Then they were insistent on a tiltrotor rather than a helicopter. After Cheney tried to cancel the program, Marines kept it alive through their excellent relationship with Congress and a lot of hard work by Bell and Boeing because they think its capability will let them do the missions they get called on to do better than any other aircraft type.

7. Why tiltrotor? Say you have friends being held hostage in the jail in downtown Cheyenne, Wyoming and you are persona non grata in the United States. The V-22, as specified, could make a rolling takeoff from a helicopter carrier in the Gulf of Mexico at dusk with 12 well-armed and capable friends and extra fuel tanks in the cabin; land outside Cheyenne, Wyoming at 5000 feet above sea level before midnight to let off the rescue force and dump the cabin tanks; rendevous with the rescue force downtown at one in the morning in the parking lot by the local jail; make a vertical takeoff with 24 people in the back; and be back aboard the ship before dawn, unrefueled. That's the Teheran hostage raid and no helicopter can do it in one night, even with inflight refueling.

8. Is the tiltrotor in general or the V-22 specifically fundamentally flawed? In my opinion, no more than the early jet fighter, with engine TBOs in minutes, low rates of climb, and big turning radii; the jet airliner, with the Comet catastrophic failures due to cabin structure failures; the supersonic jet fighter, with strange handling qualities and high accident rates; the Boeing 727, with crashes due to high sink rate approaches at low power settings; or a highly automated flight control/management system, with the next to last words on the voice recorder being "Why's it doing that?". The operational capability of the tiltrotor relative to pure helicopters or airplanes is real and of significant benefit.
  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Lafayette, LA
Posted by Melgyver on Monday, March 8, 2004 9:17 PM
Tailspin,

Thanks for all the "inside" information. It was enlightening! Might finish my 1/48 V-22 someday. I'm trying to sync both rotors. I have one side completed with electric motor to spin the rotor and engine compressor fan. I wanted the nacells to tilt in unison and have a cross over drive for the opposite rotor. One of these days!

Clear Left!

Mel

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 8, 2004 9:38 PM
WOW, that was a very intuitive group of facts!!! Thanks for giving me a few things to chew on!!
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: East Bethel, MN
Posted by midnightprowler on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 4:40 AM
Very interesting information. Thank you sir!
Lee

Hi, I am Lee, I am a plastiholic.

Co. A, 682 Engineers, Ltchfield, MN, 1980-1986

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 1 Corinthians 15:51-54

Ask me about Speedway Decals

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Aaaaah.... Alpha Apaches... A beautiful thing!
Posted by Cobrahistorian on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 2:17 PM
Tailspin,

Thanks for the info! Very cool indeed.

and WELCOME to the Helo Forum!

"1-6 is in hot"
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 5:13 PM
Thanks for your perspective Tailspin and welcome to the forum.

I do unfortunately disagree with some of what you say. For example, you said that if the V-22 had to land like an aircraft, although it would suffer from blue blades (one blew that way, one blew the other way), it would be survivable. As I guy who's seen the results of an HC-130 chucking a prop, and what it did to the forward interior of the aircraft (left spotter would have been dead if he were in the spoter seat), along with countless helo crashes I respectfully disagree.
As a guy who's been working out of the back end of helicopters and Herks for the past 15 years and who is still in the community, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that there's a LOT of folks who are operators (not engineers), who are not sold on the V-22. I'm not saying that the V-22 won't turn out to be a good asset, I'm saying that you'll never replace the need for a pure helicopter in the US Marines or any other DOD branch.
As far as you saying that "the Marines" kept the prgram alive, I would offer that it was a very few specific Marines, and not the Marines as a whole. Having worked with -53E "big iron" drivers and crewman, I can tell you that even they weren't looking forward to flying the V-22. Again, just my experience and I'm sure there are those from the same community looking forward to it.
I for one hope I'm retired by the time the USAF starts operating them, and many other CSAR/AFSOC folks feel the same way.

Other than that, Welcome and I'm sure you're insight will no doubt benefit many others on the forums. You'll see that while we all have varied backgrounds and don't see eye-to-eye on everything, we none the less respect the opinions of all members.
Again, welcome!
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: Connecticut
Posted by Tailspinturtle on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 6:46 PM
Yes, except - the V-22 has all-composite blades that burst into non-lethal fragments for the most part when they hit the ground, with the hub staying on the mast, the mast staying in the transmission, and the transmission staying in its mounts. Metal propellor blades and metal spar rotor blades are a lot more dangerous, as you describe, with the Huey being particularly bad since the transmission was often ripped out of its mounts and wound up in the cabin or cockpit. This broom straw characteristic was dramatically demonstrated during the out of control crash of a Full Scale Development V-22 on its first flight at Philadelphia caused by a miswired flight control gyro. (The pilots weren't seriously injured, if at all.)

Note: I was very careful to not say "The Marines" in my original posting because I know that not all Marines support the program and not all Marine pilots want to fly the V-22. However, if some Marines had not been zealots about the need for its capability, with high level support from at least a few of their General officers, the V-22 program would not have survived Cheney's cancellation of the program when he became Secretary of Defence, multiple fatal crashes, and its ever increasing price tag. Congress can sustain life in a production program without significant service support, but not a development program, e.g. Comanche. :)
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: Moooooon River!
Posted by Trigger on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 10:49 PM
When I was working in Florida two years ago, the photographer at my agency was formerly a photographer in the Marine Corps. He would tell me how much aircrews didn't really like the Osprey and troops hated to ride in them too. He was flying in a Huey as a photo chase one day when they were doing trials on the North Carolina coast, deploying swimmers (I don't remember if they were SEALs or Marines, but it really doesn't matter here).

Anyway, the pilot lowered the Osprey down above the water to allow the troops to jump out of the back when he touched the surface. He quickly throttled up the engines to avoid getting stuck and going under. When he did so, the V-22 started to pitch up and down badly - so much so that the remaining swimmers decided to jump out rather than stay on board and risk going into the drink inside a tin can. Instead of the few feet they normally jump out, they ended up jumping out at a height roughly equal to the length of the V-22.

"Elvis" (as we called him due to his haircut) gave me a pic he took of this incident and of TOW launch over water (TOWs apparantly don't like flying over water. The one in the picture turned around and almost hit his Huey!) Pix are up at http://homepage.mac.com/grant_little/PhotoAlbum2.html
------------------------------------------------------------------ - Grant "Can't let that nest in there..."
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 11:41 PM
Grant,
Cool pics buddy! I've got to figure out where I can find some free webspace to display some of the reference and operational photos I've collected over the years.
BTW, I worked with several of the STS PJ's and CCT members who did the trial fast rope and helo casting from the V-22. They said the rotor wash was out of control in the hover. I also heard that the co-pilot has visibility problems with respect to the end of the AR probe during Inflight refueling. Just what I heard. That -53 echo driver said that there was also a space problem onboard the amphibious assault ships. He said that when the wings were unfolded, that a max of two-three could operate from the deck.
I'm sure it will be adopted, and the operators and maintenance troops (as usual) will be the ones finding out what works and what doesn't, but I hope we don't lose another bunch of good guys (and gals??) in the process. Speaking for myself, the CSAR community is way too small as it is and when we loose someone...you always knew them and it really hurts.

Oh, and I'm sorry tailspin but I'm not convinced of the Non-lethal fragment deal. Send anything at a high enough rate of speed and I guarantee you it'll be lethal.
JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.