A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Rotorcraft
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bell Textron D-314 tiltrotor designs.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 8th 03, 09:21 AM
Charles Gray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bell Textron D-314 tiltrotor designs.

During the 1970's, Bell came up with a variety of Tiltrotor concepts,
including several gunship models. Does anyone know where a good place
to start looking for conceptual art or planned specifications would
be?

Also, isn't a tilt-rotor considerably less effecient than a
helicopter in vertical flight?
Ads
  #2  
Old December 11th 03, 03:42 AM
John Roncallo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Charles Gray wrote:
Also, isn't a tilt-rotor considerably less effecient than a
helicopter in vertical flight?


Yes

You dont get something for nothing. Tiltrotors have extreamly high disk
loading which makes hover performance very poor.

John Roncallo

  #3  
Old December 12th 03, 05:00 AM
Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Charles Gray wrote:

Also, isn't a tilt-rotor considerably less effecient than a


helicopter in vertical flight?


Yes

You dont get something for nothing. Tiltrotors have extreamly high disk

loading which makes hover performance very poor.

John Roncallo

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.


  #4  
Old December 12th 03, 02:25 PM
Rhodesst
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #5  
Old December 12th 03, 09:11 PM
Charles Gray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

  #6  
Old December 14th 03, 03:40 AM
John Roncallo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


What stops an S-76 from doing this?

John Roncallo

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.


  #7  
Old December 14th 03, 04:34 AM
Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What stops an S-76 or any other helicopter from doing this is that their
SLOW speed doesn't allow them to STACK UP with 747's et.al. in an approach
pattern to ANY major airport. In other words they can't keep up with the
big boys, so they can't play.

Bob


  #8  
Old December 14th 03, 04:40 AM
John Roncallo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob wrote:

What stops an S-76 or any other helicopter from doing this is that their
SLOW speed doesn't allow them to STACK UP with 747's et.al. in an approach
pattern to ANY major airport. In other words they can't keep up with the
big boys, so they can't play.

Bob



I have flown into JFK and BOS in a fixed wing Piper Archer. It is not a
helicopter but it is a lot slower than an S-76.

J. Roncallo

  #9  
Old December 15th 03, 05:54 PM
JIM105
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What stops an S-76 or any other helicopter from doing this is that their
SLOW speed doesn't allow them to STACK UP with 747's et.al. in an approach
pattern to ANY major airport. In other words they can't keep up with the
big boys, so they can't play.

Bob

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

  #10  
Old December 17th 03, 05:19 AM
Helimech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Does the S76 have that long of range? I didn't think it was that high, or
is that with aux tanks? JC
"JIM105" wrote in message
...
What stops an S-76 or any other helicopter from doing this is that their
SLOW speed doesn't allow them to STACK UP with 747's et.al. in an

approach
pattern to ANY major airport. In other words they can't keep up with the
big boys, so they can't play.

Bob

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



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm a flight Instructor & I can't even get a job at Taco Bell Brad Zeigler Piloting 6 November 18th 04 07:28 PM
Bell 214B/B1 Helicopter Wanted N. Brown Owning 0 April 22nd 04 12:17 AM
Taiwan to make parts for new Bell military helicopters Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 February 28th 04 12:12 AM
Bell X-1 sonic boom. Ed Majden Military Aviation 4 December 2nd 03 05:20 AM
Bell 47 Flying Club Atlantic City John P. Kelly Rotorcraft 0 July 23rd 03 12:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.