Osprey Struts Its Stuff at Farnborough
 

In case Bruce hasn't posted it yet, Boeing is finally ready to say that the V22 Osprey tilt rotor is ready for prime time, by bringing it to the Farnborough Air Show.

"Bringing it"? Better than that: they flew them there from Goose Bay

Poor choice of words. I didn't mean to intimate that they had been taken there as cargo. Flew 'em. Only one made it all the way, but they flew 'em.

Yeah...I knew how you meant it; but wanted to clarify. The V-22 has gotten a bad rep I don't think it deserves; considering what a radical advance it is the problems have actually been rather few.

Osprey
 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...OspreyNASA.jpg

The only thing I like about that VTOL machine is that it's named after my favorite bird. It's hard to imagine just what role it's supposed to have in today's war theaters. It seems to me like a "jack of all trades, master of none" kinda thing.

Perhaps, Maggie, but I've read that about 20 guys have died in about 4 different accidents in the development of that thing, and billions and billions have been spent. Let's hope the improvements at least make it safer, but I still like the bird it's named after better.:neutral:

And how is it radically different from the British Harrier VTOL?

There was one prototype lost at Wilmigton because a mech wired the controls backwards. There was an inflight fire because drains on the rotating cowlings weren't properly designed. There have been I think two lost due to problems with pilot technique; the tiltrotor configuration has some unique failure modes; if you decend too fast without sufficient forward airspeed, for example.

But the advantages to tiltrotor are considerable: how about a commuter airliner that can operate from a helipad in a downtown area, for example?

Developing a completely new kind of aircraft does involve both risk and money. Ask Wilbur and Orville,Sikorsky, Mort Taylor, the crews of Apollo 1 and 13, Challenger and Columbia.

Well, it's not a jet fighter-bomber....it's in some ways a helicopter derivative. Rotary wing, etc.

Probably scads more fuel efficient, expecially in hover. More lift capacity, slower airspeeds. Vastly cheaper to operate. Won't deafen people on the ground near a landing site. (Ever been around a Harrier in hover at low altitude? I have.)

Basically how a Ferrari is radically different from a diesel bus.

Bus
 

Exactly! The Ferrari is very expensive, very complicated, and needs lots of service while the diesel bus is a cheap and dependable workhorse that rarely breaks down.

I can't see how the Osprey would be a better commuter craft than existing helicopters. In combat, troops cannot rappel out of that craft like they can in helicopters. I'm all for innovation, but how long have they been trying to perfect that Osprey? How many billions of dollars?

It seems to me that the best air machines are those that are dependable and last forever:

Huey UH-1
Hercules C-130
F4 Phantom

You know, aircraft like that.:o

It doesn't work. ;)

:biglaugha

Well, that's fine...but I was thinking of the Harrier as the Ferrari.

Not that the Harrier hasn't served well; it's a remarkable aircraft; its performance in the Faulklands was noteworthy. But it's designed for a completely different purpose.

The one I saw on display at the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich had a plaque noting that they will be replaced with the VTOL version of the JSF.

Erm....actually it does.

Well, that's a failure of your perception. Compare the speed, lift and operating range of the V-22 to "existing helicopters".
Really? Why? This will come as quite a surprise to the troops who have done it.
http://www.navair.navy.mil/v22/image...ry/v22_009.jpg

Well, of the two that were sent to the show, one does.

I'm rooting for it, though. It's a cool idea.