|
|
Yeah,
but it doesn't have the power on one engine to keep the bird in the air if
that happens in or close to hover (where it most likely will get hit by
enemy fire).
Also this thing is (supposedly) built to go into a hot LZ WITHOUT cover
(Apache or Cobra)!! This thing has NOTHING to fire forward or sideways!!
Newest "idea" is to set a heavy machien gun on the (rear facing) ramp!
Hindering the grunts leaving the damn thing.
Ohh maybe we need some cover after all! So now that we need cover again, the
speed advantage ( the only advantage it has...) is gone again, as now we
have to wait for the slower cover - but hey what now? Now we are not really
efficient anymore, as with the 2 smaller rotors we don't have the same disc
area as a similar helicopter, which can lift the same weight with nearly
half the power! Not even going into performance charts for altitude and
temperature......
The Tiltrotor has some very small niche applications, but it is definitely
no good for what it is intended...
But who gives a f*** about the guys on the ground, as long as the good
General in charge of the program makes it "look good" and he gts his
industry job after retirement......
And I thought Marines are the master sample of " Never leave one behind"
"All for one, one for all" - I guess from a certain rank on this doesn't
apply anymore...
Sorry for ranting, but when it goes about the Osprey (fine concept, but no
good for war....) I start to get angry...
Thomas J.
Actually, the Opsrey has the ability to turn both rotors with one engine.
It is quite a complex system.
>
> From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
> Date: 2006/02/03 Fri PM 04:33:31 EST
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: What about an air-cooled rotary?
>
> Russell Duffy wrote:
>
> > Check out the dimesional drawings. Is that big round disk on the
output
> > shaft a blower? I'd hate to think that he might have somehow procured
a
> > patent on that particular idea.
> >
> >
> > Looks like an enclosure for a flywheel. Note the starter poking into
> > it from the engine side.
> >
> > Just can't wait for that flying car to get finished. I imagine
> > they're still trying to get the MTBF (Mean Time Between FATALITY) up
> > to double digit minutes :-)
> >
> What is that hose looking thing coming off and around the engine?
> Forced cooling for an alternator?
>
> I can wait. Moller's whole concept is idiotic from the drawing-board,
> as is the Marine's newest money pit. It grates my last nerve that
> everyone doesn't see how foolish the concept is from basic principles of
> common sense. It's a completely "fail-disastrous" design, in that if
> you lose an engine there is no way to have a controlled decent.
> Helicopters have autorotation, planes have glide ratio, balloons tend to
> deflate slowly and don't depend on a complicated machine that's trying
> to throw itself apart in the first place. Anything designed to fly by
> balancing a load between running engines is criminal foolishness. An
> engine gives out (high likelyhood), what'r ya' gonna do now? ... DIE!!
>
> The Marines are doubly guilty. The operational profile for the Osprey
> is to insert and remove troops in close quarters with the enemy. One
> bullet to one engine and it's game over.
>
> Please excuse my rant. Do not archive. Off-topic. (Probably) complete
> bull$n17
>
> -- > ,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
> ----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
> o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
>
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
|
|