"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

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

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.

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.

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

"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

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.

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...

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...

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