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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
BlackBeard wrote:
On Oct 19, 11:57 am, Vince wrote: V-22 crew chief Staff Sgt. Brian Freeman's letter to Gannett's Marine Corps Times, however, says that: "...during the last four years flying on the MV-22, I have been single-engine two times; on both occasions, the aircraft responded as if nothing had happened. The aircraft's ability to provide lift comes from its torque available vs. torque required - simply put, if you limit the amount of torque that a student pilot can use during takeoff or landing training events, which we do, you in turn simulate a single-engine profile. I can tell you that there is no difference between actual and simulated single-engine performance." http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...g-shame-03930/ This is not the same thing as landing with an engine shut off. Vince No it isn't, but it is still a valid test of the OEI operability. BB no it's not among other things it puts no stress on the engine to engine drive shaft It does not simulate rotating one engine at full speed while the other idles. It does not test the cut out mechanism for isolating the non functioning engine Vince |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
Andrew Swallow wrote:
Vince wrote: [snip] They simulate it by running both engines at reduced power With one engine out the I would expect the Osprey to roll badly at low speed. An effect that reducing both engines would not simulate. Andrew Swallow The drive shaft is supposed to prevent this, if it works AFAIK they have never tested whether it works in landing or take off Vince |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:48:56 -0700, BlackBeard
wrote: On Oct 19, 11:57 am, Vince wrote: V-22 crew chief Staff Sgt. Brian Freeman's letter to Gannett's Marine Corps Times, however, says that: "...during the last four years flying on the MV-22, I have been single-engine two times; on both occasions, the aircraft responded as if nothing had happened. The aircraft's ability to provide lift comes from its torque available vs. torque required - simply put, if you limit the amount of torque that a student pilot can use during takeoff or landing training events, which we do, you in turn simulate a single-engine profile. I can tell you that there is no difference between actual and simulated single-engine performance." http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...g-shame-03930/ This is not the same thing as landing with an engine shut off. Vince No it isn't, but it is still a valid test of the OEI operability. Well, Don Q., I think the windmills are winning!!! ;-) There are some things you don't need to practice; like bleeding. There are some things you don't "real world" test because of the inherent hazard of doing so. Could this be one of those things? When I transitioned into P-3s one of the simulator items was a single engine, boost out landing. This was ONLY done in the simulator because it was an untrahazarous manuever. You do it right or you make a smoking hole. It took me few times to do it without crashing the aircraft (and I was about Fleet Average). The anti-Osprey crowd is clearly made up of "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with facts" advocates. You can overlay a general anti-Bush feeling (as anything that damages Bush's credibility is good, no matter that it's based upon lies, innuendo, and highly suspicious science). I figure we've spent the money, now let's see what we bought. If it works then we've made a big leap foreward. If it doesn't then the V-22 can join the ranks of other failed experiments like the rigid air ship. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
On Oct 19, 5:06 pm, Bill Kambic wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:48:56 -0700, BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 19, 11:57 am, Vince wrote: V-22 crew chief Staff Sgt. Brian Freeman's letter to Gannett's Marine Corps Times, however, says that: "...during the last four years flying on the MV-22, I have been single-engine two times; on both occasions, the aircraft responded as if nothing had happened. The aircraft's ability to provide lift comes from its torque available vs. torque required - simply put, if you limit the amount of torque that a student pilot can use during takeoff or landing training events, which we do, you in turn simulate a single-engine profile. I can tell you that there is no difference between actual and simulated single-engine performance." http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...g-shame-03930/ This is not the same thing as landing with an engine shut off. Vince No it isn't, but it is still a valid test of the OEI operability. Well, Don Q., I think the windmills are winning!!! ;-) There are some things you don't need to practice; like bleeding. There are some things you don't "real world" test because of the inherent hazard of doing so. Could this be one of those things? When I transitioned into P-3s one of the simulator items was a single engine, boost out landing. This was ONLY done in the simulator because it was an untrahazarous manuever. You do it right or you make a smoking hole. It took me few times to do it without crashing the aircraft (and I was about Fleet Average). The anti-Osprey crowd is clearly made up of "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with facts" advocates. You can overlay a general anti-Bush feeling (as anything that damages Bush's credibility is good, no matter that it's based upon lies, innuendo, and highly suspicious science). I figure we've spent the money, now let's see what we bought. If it works then we've made a big leap foreward. If it doesn't then the V-22 can join the ranks of other failed experiments like the rigid air ship. Ironically, Cheney is the guy who wanted to cancel the V-22 and Congress kept reviving it. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
BlackBeard wrote:
On Oct 19, 8:42 am, Vince wrote: BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 19, 3:01 am, wrote: They'll quickly learn that it can only be used in secure areas. Moving small numbers of men and/or ammo between rear area bases. A helo losing power can auto-rotate and possibly most or all aboard will live. One engine gone from the Osprey during transition and it's game over. One engine gone in transition has been tested, and passed during flight test. BB I guess everybody has some mountain to climb. It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet... When did they test a fully loaded V-22 with an engine out? No one, prior to you, said anything about "fully loaded." That was not in the discussion. OEI was tested in 1999, as you have acknowledged previously. But they have been talking about engine out on approach to a combat landing.. I assume it will be carrying a full load of 24 Marines when landing in a combat zone |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
"Kerryn Offord" wrote in message ... BlackBeard wrote: But they have been talking about engine out on approach to a combat landing.. I assume it will be carrying a full load of 24 Marines when landing in a combat zone An engine-out combat landing... The Marines will have relieved themselves before disembarkation. -c |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
Bill,
I figure we've spent the money, now let's see what we bought. If it works then we've made a big leap foreward. If it doesn't then the V-22 can join the ranks of other failed experiments like the rigid air ship. Pretty much my thoughts as well. This thread has developed the classic Usenet characteristic of having value inverse to its duration and bellicosity. -- Mike Kanze "Golf can best be defined as an endless series of tragedies obscured by the occasional miracle, followed by a good bottle of beer." - Anonymous "Bill Kambic" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:48:56 -0700, BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 19, 11:57 am, Vince wrote: V-22 crew chief Staff Sgt. Brian Freeman's letter to Gannett's Marine Corps Times, however, says that: "...during the last four years flying on the MV-22, I have been single-engine two times; on both occasions, the aircraft responded as if nothing had happened. The aircraft's ability to provide lift comes from its torque available vs. torque required - simply put, if you limit the amount of torque that a student pilot can use during takeoff or landing training events, which we do, you in turn simulate a single-engine profile. I can tell you that there is no difference between actual and simulated single-engine performance." http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...g-shame-03930/ This is not the same thing as landing with an engine shut off. Vince No it isn't, but it is still a valid test of the OEI operability. Well, Don Q., I think the windmills are winning!!! ;-) There are some things you don't need to practice; like bleeding. There are some things you don't "real world" test because of the inherent hazard of doing so. Could this be one of those things? When I transitioned into P-3s one of the simulator items was a single engine, boost out landing. This was ONLY done in the simulator because it was an untrahazarous manuever. You do it right or you make a smoking hole. It took me few times to do it without crashing the aircraft (and I was about Fleet Average). The anti-Osprey crowd is clearly made up of "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with facts" advocates. You can overlay a general anti-Bush feeling (as anything that damages Bush's credibility is good, no matter that it's based upon lies, innuendo, and highly suspicious science). I figure we've spent the money, now let's see what we bought. If it works then we've made a big leap foreward. If it doesn't then the V-22 can join the ranks of other failed experiments like the rigid air ship. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
On Oct 19, 1:32 pm, Vince wrote:
no it's not among other things it puts no stress on the engine to engine drive shaft It does not simulate rotating one engine at full speed while the other idles. It does not test the cut out mechanism for isolating the non functioning engine Vince All those, and more were tested in LFT&E. Once they were proven to work, the simulated OEI test is valid. BB I guess everybody has some mountain to climb. It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet... |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
On Oct 19, 3:58 pm, "Gatt" wrote:
"Kerryn Offord" wrote in message ... BlackBeard wrote: But they have been talking about engine out on approach to a combat landing.. I assume it will be carrying a full load of 24 Marines when landing in a combat zone An engine-out combat landing... The Marines will have relieved themselves before disembarkation. Please be more careful with your attributions, I wrote none of that. BB I guess everybody has some mountain to climb. It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet... |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks"
BlackBeard wrote:
On Oct 19, 1:32 pm, Vince wrote: no it's not among other things it puts no stress on the engine to engine drive shaft It does not simulate rotating one engine at full speed while the other idles. It does not test the cut out mechanism for isolating the non functioning engine Vince All those, and more were tested in LFT&E. Once they were proven to work, the simulated OEI test is valid. nonsense The system was not tested "The Navy is conducting an aggressive LFT&E program on representative V-22 components and assemblies, in compliance with a DOT&E-approved alternative LFT&E plan. The V-22 program was granted a waiver from full-up, system-level LFT&E in April, 1997. The vulnerability testing that the program is performing is appropriate and will result in the improvement of aircraft survivability." http://www.airforceworld.com/heli/eng/v22.htm I've spent years teaching how the sum of the parts is not the same as the whole If they are so sure it works, its a piece of cake to test Fill it with sandbags, put a test pilot on board and cut off the engine Vince |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Bad pressure switches discovered in Ospreys" | Mike[_1_] | Naval Aviation | 0 | June 22nd 07 07:14 PM |
"Afghan war has lessons for U.S. pilots in Iraq" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 4 | February 23rd 07 06:07 PM |
"V-22s May Go To Iraq" | MikeLake | Naval Aviation | 0 | January 18th 07 02:05 PM |
Marine Corps Now Authorized To Use "Involuntary Recall" To Force Thousands Back To Iraq (for Israel, of course!) - see comments on page 1 of following URL: | dontcowerfromthetruth | Naval Aviation | 0 | August 23rd 06 09:23 AM |
OTA -- a new twist to "call me when you land" | Roy Smith | General Aviation | 6 | June 15th 06 06:02 AM |