Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:
You're not alone. Very few aviators (military or civilian) have shown
much interest in obtaining the FAA's new "Powered Lift" rating since
the V-22 seems to crash with distressing regularity.
For extremely loose definitions of "regular." Less often than the big
helicopters we're currently using, during their development, and none at
all in what, three years? Four crashes of an experimental aircraft type
in over a decade of development is actually pretty darned impressive.
Extremely loose definition of "development," too.
Then you're going to have to start screaming
Ay? Whose "screaming?"
about that horrible "F-14 deathtrap," which had about the same number
of crashes per flight hour in development, and was, by no means, anything
like the first swing-wing plane.
Why you keep trotting out the F-14 is beyond me. Squadrons of
fighters and fighter bombers with variable geometry wings have
been around for decades (since the 60's) long before the F-14
was even on the drawing boards. In fact, unlike tilt-rotor aircraft,
some swing-wing aircraft such as the F-111, Su-22 and Su-24 have
been operational for so long now that they've even become obsolete!
And there's also the B-1, Mig-27 and Tornado swing wings which,
unlike the Osprey tilt-rotor, have also been operational for decades.
Don't misunderstand, I wouldn't be building and flying flexwing trikes
if I were a luddite, but I haven't met too many pilots whom are all
that impressed by either the Osprey or the Harrier especially
when compared to their more conventional fixed and rotary wing
counterparts.
|