On 12 Dec 2003 14:25:59 GMT, (Rhodesst) wrote:

But then...what do you consider Vertical "Flight"? A V-22 Osprey or any
other tilt rotor ie. Bell or Kawasaki weren't developed for Vertical
"Flight". They were developed to get to their approximate destinations at
fixed wing speeds. In commercial applications this would allow for them to
fly in a commercial traffic arrival pattern (as toward a major airport and
then "break out" to transition to a heliport. In military applications they
could get to a destination at fixed wing speeds and then transition in and
out of a "LZ" pick up or deploy personnel or cargo. Comparing them to
helicopters is apples and oranges.



Point taken, John. OTOH, aren't you talking about some transition to vertical
flight when they leave standard fixed wing patterns to land at a helipad or
some out of the way LZ that a fixed wing could never hope to arrive at in one
piece? Both of those scenarios will involve a transition to hover for landing
and a vertical lift off to hover before the climb out and acceleration to fixed
wing mode which is not unlike what helicopters do under normal circumstances
anyway, with the exception of the fixed wing mode part, that is. :-)

Fly Safe,
Steve R.


The conceptual art for the gunship designs had them hovering to
launch their ordanance, and one conception had the rotors interfering
with the underwing gunpods in horizontal flight.
So, I wonder if the intended use of the design was to use the
horizontal flight as a dash and transit mode, and then quickly
transition to Vertical hover to fire thier ordanance before dashing
off somewhere else.