Bell Textron D-314 tiltrotor designs.

"Helimech" wrote in
news:yHRDb.570333$Tr4.1545717@attbi_s03:

Does the S76 have that long of range? I didn't think it
was that high, or is that with aux tanks? JC

He said he can't go that far. A standard S76 can go about 350NM
without refueling, with 30 minute reserve, topped off. And I
agree with Jim, I can go as fast as the airliners on approach -
they have to slow way down for an approach, I don't. Top speed
is just slightly higher for a 777, though. :-D

--
Regards,

Stan

John Roncallo wrote in
m:


What stops an S-76 from doing this?

Nothing. But flying an approach to an airport and then breaking
off is very inefficient. Better to fly the approach directly to
the helipad. With differential GPS coming on, it's going to be
easy to do.

--
Regards,

Stan

Charles Gray wrote in
:

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.


The rotors wouldn't interfere with the guns in horizontal
flight. The ability to fire through the propellor was invented
in WWI. It's trivial to do it now.

--
Regards,

Stan

On 17 Dec 2003 05:35:42 GMT, Stan Gosnell me@work wrote:

Charles Gray wrote in
:

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.


The rotors wouldn't interfere with the guns in horizontal
flight. The ability to fire through the propellor was invented
in WWI. It's trivial to do it now.

Well the gun was an underslung turret much like the cobra-- the
underwing hard points appeared to be either TOWS, or Hellfire
missiles-- since the design was a mid-1970's, early 1980's, they might
have been artist conceptions of hellfires, or one of the other ATGM's
that never actually made it to service.
If they're not wire guided, I could see dropping for a short
distance before the moter engaged, thus clearing the roters, but for
anything like unguilded 2.75 rockets or wire guided missiles, it
wouldn't be so easy.

"JIM105" wrote in message
...
Not hardly. On numerous occasions in the -76 I'm asked to slow during
the
approach because I'm gaining on the airliner in front of me. One of the
nicest
things you can hear from ATC. On the other hand, I can't take the 76 500
miles
without refueling and getting above much of the weather like the tilt
rotor
will be able to do (someday).

Jim

It's hardly to believe, that the tilt rotor will be able (someday) to fly so
fast and so far as a conventional turboprop and lift in hovering so much as
a conventional helicopter with the same installed power, because the tilt
rotor (tilt wing) has not and could never have optimal rotors for hovering
and optimal props for cruising. But the disk rotor helicopter shown on the
www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.htm will be able (someday) to cruise as fast as a
Lear Jet above all of the weather and lift in hoverig so much as a
conventional helicopter with the same installed power.

George

George Vranek wrote:
"JIM105" wrote in message
...

Not hardly. On numerous occasions in the -76 I'm asked to slow during

the

approach because I'm gaining on the airliner in front of me. One of the

nicest

things you can hear from ATC. On the other hand, I can't take the 76 500

miles

without refueling and getting above much of the weather like the tilt

rotor

will be able to do (someday).

Jim


It's hardly to believe, that the tilt rotor will be able (someday) to fly so
fast and so far as a conventional turboprop and lift in hovering so much as
a conventional helicopter with the same installed power, because the tilt
rotor (tilt wing) has not and could never have optimal rotors for hovering
and optimal props for cruising. But the disk rotor helicopter shown on the
www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.htm will be able (someday) to cruise as fast as a
Lear Jet above all of the weather and lift in hoverig so much as a
conventional helicopter with the same installed power.

George



OK George

I said your concept had about as much merit as a tilt rotor in previous
posts. But now you are trying to stretch it a bit.

J. Roncallo

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
. com...
George Vranek wrote:
It's hardly to believe, that the tilt rotor will be able (someday) to
fly so
fast and so far as a conventional turboprop and lift in hovering so much
as
a conventional helicopter with the same installed power, because the
tilt
rotor (tilt wing) has not and could never have optimal rotors for
hovering
and optimal props for cruising. But the disk rotor helicopter shown on
the
www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.htm will be able (someday) to cruise as fast as
a
Lear Jet above all of the weather and lift in hoverig so much as a
conventional helicopter with the same installed power.

George


OK George

I said your concept had about as much merit as a tilt rotor in previous
posts. But now you are trying to stretch it a bit.

J. Roncallo


Hallo John

I am pleased, that you still remember me and the disk rotor helicopter.
Years ago I saw the Bell XV-15 flying at the Paris Airshow and my opinion
was, that the pilot transports a basket of rough eggs. When I was a farmer
boy, I often had to transport a basket of rough eggs to the city with the
bicycle of my mom. Therefore I know, what it means.... Now, a row of years
later and development costs of billion $$, the V22 does not fly better.
Therefore I mean, that the disk rotor concept has much more merit as a
tiltrotor and I am only trying to publish this fact.

George

George Vranek wrote:

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
. com...

George Vranek wrote:

It's hardly to believe, that the tilt rotor will be able (someday) to

fly so

fast and so far as a conventional turboprop and lift in hovering so much

as

a conventional helicopter with the same installed power, because the

tilt

rotor (tilt wing) has not and could never have optimal rotors for

hovering

and optimal props for cruising. But the disk rotor helicopter shown on

the

www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.htm will be able (someday) to cruise as fast as

a

Lear Jet above all of the weather and lift in hoverig so much as a
conventional helicopter with the same installed power.

George



OK George

I said your concept had about as much merit as a tilt rotor in previous
posts. But now you are trying to stretch it a bit.

J. Roncallo



Hallo John

I am pleased, that you still remember me and the disk rotor helicopter.
Years ago I saw the Bell XV-15 flying at the Paris Airshow and my opinion
was, that the pilot transports a basket of rough eggs. When I was a farmer
boy, I often had to transport a basket of rough eggs to the city with the
bicycle of my mom. Therefore I know, what it means.... Now, a row of years
later and development costs of billion $$, the V22 does not fly better.
Therefore I mean, that the disk rotor concept has much more merit as a
tiltrotor and I am only trying to publish this fact.

George



I'm not challenging whether the disk rotor will out perform the tilt
rotor. But your message states you will get the same performance with
the disk rotor as you will with an airplane in airplane mode or as much
performance as a helicopter in hover mode. This I find to be pushing the
limits of insulting our intelligence.

John Roncallo

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
. com...
I'm not challenging whether the disk rotor will out perform the tilt
rotor. But your message states you will get the same performance with
the disk rotor as you will with an airplane in airplane mode or as much
performance as a helicopter in hover mode. This I find to be pushing the
limits of insulting our intelligence.

John Roncallo


I am sorry John, but my mother speach is not english and therefore you could
get the impression, that I am pushing the limits of insulting your
intelligence. I only want to explaine why the disk rotor is better than the
tilt rotor. You know, the conventional rotor is good for hovering only and
to fly fast with it is an aerodynamic crime, which is punished immediately
by vibrations, noise, low efficiency... The disk in the disk rotor improves
the rotor efficiency in hovering and compensates so its weight penalty. In
the cruisig, the rotor blades are retracted in the disk and the disk acts
than as a fixed wing, which is well suitable for fast flying similar to a
delta wing. Please have a look at www.vranek.ch/diskrotor.htm for more
details.

George