I have had the 1/48 scale Kit for a some time now but have not built it
yet. I'm wanting to build the ''Gun-Ship'' version that they talked
about using at one time.
It looks like it's really a pretty good Kit.
It also seems that there are a LOT of
people on Both Sides that just seem to HATE ths thing. It's NOT a
PLane and it's NOT a Helicopter. Soooo they just HATE it for being
and doing Both tasks.
And I think that it WTLL one day I hope Prove that it really Belongs
in the Sky.
All Hail the ''Shy-Pig'' Long and Far may it Fly. I think that it's
really kinda KewL
... cyberborg ..........
I think most of the negative press is political.
Admittedly it is unusual for a transport to have the cutting edge
technology that the Osprey has, but it IS new technology.
It certainly has teething problems, but that is inherent in new tech.
Look at how long the F-22 has been in development. I think when early
teething problems caused a drop in funding, this was detrimental to
getting the bugs out quickly.
The Harrier went through very similar teething problems and IT was
almost cancelled also.
The CH-46 that the opponents want to just keep using is not the most
reliable thing around anymore either.
Another nifty fact about it; although it can't glide land if the engines
quit, like a aircraft...it also can't autorotate land like a helicopter
if the engines quit...so if the engines shut down, you are SOL:
We'll find out in a big hurry when they get to Iraq.
The V-22 has been in development since 1982, and is now actually going
to get operationally deployed, 25 years later.
To give some meaning to that, the B-29 was also a state of the art
pushing program technologically, that was first promulgated in January
of 1940. This program pace means that it would have been ready to bomb
Japan in 1965.
The V-22's development phase was longer than than many of the aircraft
that have served in the U.S. inventory's entire development period and
operational service life.
: Another nifty fact about it; although it can't glide land if the engines
: quit, like a aircraft...it also can't autorotate land like a helicopter
: if the engines quit...so if the engines shut down, you are SOL:
I am sure the V-22 can glide if it is in flight configuration.
You want a airplane that could/did NOT glide - the F-104. No way
no how could you consider the "glide slope" of the Starfighter a
"glide". Still, it was considered fairly successful, and widely
Besides - helos don't autorotate below a certain altitude/
airspeed either. I do not see the V-22 being any worse that a
helo in that respect when in hover mode.
The more interesting question is how long are you in that
transition/hover mode, and is the cross shafting of the engines
such that it is more damage resistant that helos are, where the
engines are, by necessity, very close together?
I also expect the V-22 has much better ditching manners than
a helo ever hoped to have.
Has Mitsu given up on their V-22 design, where the entire
wing rotated, unlike the nacells on the V-22?
No, it can't glide in a true sense - it has to "auto-rotate
forward"...what I don't know is how/if the ability to tilt the rotors is
affected if there is a dual engine flameout or a problem with the cross
A helo has to maintain forward speed to auto-rotate. The pilot has to
build enough rotational inertia in the mains to be able to flare into a
somewhat vertical landing before that rotational inertia dissipates as
forward speed bleeds during the flare.
The problem is that you can't land the thing with the rotors tilted, and
if the cross-shafting is damaged it's all over anyway...engines running
I seriously doubt that...
...now that's just as scary. Maybe more so.
No; thirty. And at least half of those were infantry they stuck in the back
of one for no apparent reason. For that reason the number of people killed
has little to do with whether it's a sound technology.
Originally it was supposed to be a tri-service craft (AF, Navy, and
Marines). That would have helped spread the cost.
The AF opted out (so did Navy, I believe). As an old AF officer, I
thought the AF was wacko. They always used to believe the world was
covered with long concrete runways, and their air defenses would
always prevent anyone from bombing their runways. So why go STOL or
The AF seems to be slowly changing its position on that. My fews
about air warfare soon changed after I left AF, became an aerospace
engineer, and talked to many users in other services.