How does a V-22 Osprey handle loss of an engine?

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - How does a V-22 Osprey handle loss of an engine? (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:11:18 PM EDT

1. Can the Osprey vertically land with only one engine? Or is this a situation for an airplane type of crash landing?
2. Can the osprey auto rotate once it loses engine power if already in vertical decent?

I am curious since the engines are on the opposite edges of the airframe and that looks like an awfully large amount of weight to conteract with pure thrust. It looks like it would flip over if one engine died when it was vertical.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:12:15 PM EDT

[#1]

If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:13:56 PM EDT

[#2]

Big drive shaft connects the two, in simple terms.

ETA Someone will be along in a min with stats and diagrams and tech info proving how smart they are.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:15:07 PM EDT

[#3]

Note the transmission interconnect shaft:

ETA:

Quoted:
Big drive shaft connects the two, in simple terms.

ETA Someone will be along in a min with stats and diagrams and tech info proving how smart they are.

I guess that's me.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:15:15 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:15:38 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Big drive shaft connects the two, in simple terms.

ETA Someone will be along in a min with stats and diagrams and tech info proving how smart they are.

Sho 'nuff:

Transmission Interconnect Shaft

Cool Image link... damn, beat by seconds

m

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:16:02 PM EDT

[#6]

Gravity wins?

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:16:16 PM EDT

[#7]

In before Keith and AeroE.

I would just assume they do, what Ospreys do best- crash.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:18:27 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:19:04 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
In before Keith and AeroE.

I would just assume they do, what Ospreys do best- crash.

Note the "24 crashworthy seats" in the diagram. Almost as if they were planning ahead...

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:19:25 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Note the transmission interconnect shaft:

http://madmikey.mu.nu/archives/Tiltrotor.jpg

ETA:

Quoted:
Big drive shaft connects the two, in simple terms.

ETA Someone will be along in a min with stats and diagrams and tech info proving how smart they are.

I guess that's me.

Is anyone else alarmed by the apparent age of that drawing? It looks Nam era.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:19:55 PM EDT

[#11]

Unless the fire that killed the one engine also burns through the cross-drive shaft...

And yes, this has happened in the test program.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:20:10 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yep.

IIRC they can't do a full load takeoff on one engine, but can cruise and land with only one.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:20:16 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Big drive shaft connects the two, in simple terms. .

Interesting I honestly had no idea, figured it was a crash and burn deal.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:23:36 PM EDT

[#14]

While one engine can keep the other prop spinning, if both engines go out it has no autorotational capability.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:25:04 PM EDT

[#15]

The Osprey can fly on a single engine and in most cases land on a single engine. Most times you "cube" out on cargo way before you get anywhere near "weighing" out. The only time I could really see them maxing out weight wise is if they are doing externals and than they would just pickle it and should be able to land on one engine.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:26:33 PM EDT

[#16]

Interconnected drive shafts for rotor craft work pretty well....

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:26:58 PM EDT

[#17]

Is anyone else alarmed by the apparent age of that drawing? It looks Nam era.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:31:14 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Is anyone else alarmed by the apparent age of that drawing? It looks Nam era.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

So, the age of an early concept drawing gives you reason for concern? You must wet your beds when you see a Da Vinci drawing of a flying machine.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:33:24 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

Back in the day flying out to rigs

'What happens if we lose an engine'

'Book says we carry out a safe landing on one engine'

'But we're at maximum weight'

'Yep'

'So what happens then'

'You can kiss your arse goodbye'

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:36:47 PM EDT

[#20]

anyone have an h-v diagram on the v-22?

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:39:36 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
The Osprey can fly on a single engine and in most cases land on a single engine. Most times you "cube" out on cargo way before you get anywhere near "weighing" out. The only time I could really see them maxing out weight wise is if they are doing externals and than they would just pickle it and should be able to land on one engine.

It's a military aircraft. They NEVER load them up to max gross...

How about a MV with full gas and a bunch of SF equipment?

I had a FedEx guy on the jumpseat way back when. His brother was one of the test pilots on this 'aircraft'. I told him I didn't want to be under one when it lost an engine. He said his brother said this aircraft will kill more Marines than the CH-53.

Maybe its gotten better.

TC

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:41:06 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

Back in the day flying out to rigs

'What happens if we lose an engine'

'Book says we carry out a safe landing on one engine'

'But we're at maximum weight'

'Yep'

'So what happens then'

'You can kiss your arse goodbye'

you continue flying as translational lift will more than compensate. since helis burn fuel like a teamster swills beer, it won't take long to get below the weight for single engine landing. plus you can exceed turbine inlet temperature maximums for a spell.

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:43:18 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
anyone have an h-v diagram on the v-22?

I bet its one scary looking graph...

Posted: 4/9/2010 12:58:17 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

Back in the day flying out to rigs

'What happens if we lose an engine'

'Book says we carry out a safe landing on one engine'

'But we're at maximum weight'

'Yep'

'So what happens then'

'You can kiss your arse goodbye'

you continue flying as translational lift will more than compensate. since helis burn fuel like a teamster swills beer, it won't take long to get below the weight for single engine landing. plus you can exceed turbine inlet temperature maximums for a spell.

More than enough helos have nosed in to prove that the best case is not always gonna happen…

Posted: 4/9/2010 1:07:05 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

Back in the day flying out to rigs

'What happens if we lose an engine'

'Book says we carry out a safe landing on one engine'

'But we're at maximum weight'

'Yep'

'So what happens then'

'You can kiss your arse goodbye'

you continue flying as translational lift will more than compensate. since helis burn fuel like a teamster swills beer, it won't take long to get below the weight for single engine landing. plus you can exceed turbine inlet temperature maximums for a spell.

More than enough helos have nosed in to prove that the best case is not always gonna happen…

but did they auger in due to a lost engine?

Posted: 4/9/2010 1:11:25 PM EDT

[#26]

Loose both engines with no auto rotation capability...forget it.

Posted: 4/9/2010 1:17:09 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Is anyone else alarmed by the apparent age of that drawing? It looks Nam era.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

So, the age of an early concept drawing gives you reason for concern? You must wet your beds when you see a Da Vinci drawing of a flying machine.

da Vinci's flying machine didn't go to regular production in 2005.

Posted: 4/9/2010 1:22:48 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yes but, it cannot HOVER with only 1 engine. Airplane mode only.

Posted: 4/9/2010 2:55:35 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yes but, it cannot HOVER with only 1 engine. Airplane mode only.

Well that's a big WTF when it comes time to set it down, just sayin'.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:01:23 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

That stuff works until it's hit by AAA fire or breaks from metal fatigue. I don't want to ride in any aircraft that might be subject to such massive asymmetrical thrust problems if things go wrong.

I've been thoroughly trashed in forums every time I bring up my distrust of the Osprey design. There's a whole lot of Osprey cheerleaders out there.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:02:57 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yes but, it cannot HOVER with only 1 engine. Airplane mode only.

Well that's a big WTF when it comes time to set it down, just sayin'.

Yep.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:05:02 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yes but, it cannot HOVER with only 1 engine. Airplane mode only.

Well that's a big WTF when it comes time to set it down, just sayin'.

There are intermediate angles the engines can turn to so the rotors dont hit the ground.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:08:34 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

Yes but, it cannot HOVER with only 1 engine. Airplane mode only.

Well that's a big WTF when it comes time to set it down, just sayin'.

There are intermediate angles the engines can turn to so the rotors dont hit the ground.

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3222/bellboeingv22osprey.jpg

Right. Well, I'm guessing they are pushing a fine line with the tilt and how much power to weight ratio they have. Tilt them too far up on one engine and you will burn off your rotor speed without proper TQ/power and burn into the ground like a meteor.

Big time FAIL

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:08:38 PM EDT

[#34]

Does it use a Sprag clutch like the Phrog? I know that is what allows the 46 to auto rotate. Been 11 years since I flew on the Phrog but still remember natops and the limits for her.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:11:15 PM EDT

[#35]

The other engine carries the aircraft all the way to the scene of the crash.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:12:46 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Does it use a Sprag clutch like the Phrog? I know that is what allows the 46 to auto rotate. Been 11 years since I flew on the Phrog but still remember natops and the limits for her.

No auto rotation.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:17:50 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Is anyone else alarmed by the apparent age of that drawing? It looks Nam era.

Glad I'm not the only one thinking that.

So, the age of an early concept drawing gives you reason for concern? You must wet your beds when you see a Da Vinci drawing of a flying machine.

Well, you have to keep in mind that the majority of the aircraft designs that the .mil use were on the drawing boards in the 60's-80's...

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:21:27 PM EDT

[#38]

It crashes and everyone dies.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:24:51 PM EDT

[#39]

the F22 started the design phase in the late 80's didn't it?

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:26:57 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
It crashes and everyone dies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYeLishJ_Js

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:28:30 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Does it use a Sprag clutch like the Phrog? I know that is what allows the 46 to auto rotate. Been 11 years since I flew on the Phrog but still remember natops and the limits for her.

No auto rotation.

I've been told that the Osprey has "some" autorotation.

Don't know if it was true (or perhaps my leg was being pulled), but it was a pretty credible source.

Posted: 4/9/2010 3:41:21 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Does it use a Sprag clutch like the Phrog? I know that is what allows the 46 to auto rotate. Been 11 years since I flew on the Phrog but still remember natops and the limits for her.

No auto rotation.

I've been told that the Osprey has "some" autorotation.

Don't know if it was true (or perhaps my leg was being pulled), but it was a pretty credible source.

I wish some one knowledgeable would chime in on that subject. Dual engine failure with no auto rotation and poor glide path= death machine. (I'm speaking as a UH-1H crewcheif from the "70s)

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:01:03 PM EDT

[#43]

Big problem with that design.

That, and the transition.

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:15:32 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Does it use a Sprag clutch like the Phrog? I know that is what allows the 46 to auto rotate. Been 11 years since I flew on the Phrog but still remember natops and the limits for her.

No auto rotation.

I've been told that the Osprey has "some" autorotation.

Don't know if it was true (or perhaps my leg was being pulled), but it was a pretty credible source.

If it has already transitioned to verticle.
If its in "cruise mode" not so much.
But I really don't know.

This guy didn't think much of the design.
http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Leishman_0207_RDS.pdf

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:18:45 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
anyone have an h-v diagram on the v-22?

I bet its one scary looking graph...

I've seen one and it's not pretty.

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:24:32 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If an osprey loses an engine the other engine spins both propellers.

So they claim…

I'm pretty sure they forgot one engine operations in the test plan.

I was curious as the one that went down in afghanistan could have been ground fire

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:31:03 PM EDT

[#47]

"No thanks..." says the guy who makes a living flying in the "Crashhawk."

Posted: 4/9/2010 4:32:55 PM EDT

[#48]

What always got me is this isn't a "pure" design. It's not an airplane and it's not a helicopter. But it does both...

By which standards do you judge it?