The thrust of two rotors comment is false. They are connected. It is two engines connected to two props. If one engine fails, both props are powered by the remaining engine.

@larryjackson6238

10 ай бұрын

And that engine will take you all the way to the crash sight.

@robertdragoff6909

10 ай бұрын

I thought they had a backup system like that in place.

@Ken_Koonz

10 ай бұрын

​@@larryjackson6238That is better than going to the crash site rapidly. And inverted.

@sammcbride2464

10 ай бұрын

@@larryjackson6238 That is like saying a one engined plane will always crash.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

@@larryjackson6238 You are wrong... you will be in complete control just at limited speeds and altitude but can still fly back to base.

Another reason why the Navy is replacing the C-2 Greyhound with the CMV-22 Osprey is because the latter can carry the F135 engine which is used on F-35Cs and will allow aircraft carriers to replace their engines on board during deployment ...

@PilotPhotog

10 ай бұрын

Great point, thanks for commenting

@wayneyd2

10 ай бұрын

The C-2 can carry the same F-35 engine and go faster and farther.

@michaellove9831

9 ай бұрын

Correction, F135 Power Module is too big to fit in compartment of C2, also too much shock catching wire even if it did fit. Additionally it does not have in-flight refueling like V22 which has greater range than C2

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

@@wayneyd2 to even fit in the V-22 it takes a special trailer.

The technology is truly awesome. It takes a lot of work to learn how to fly and be comfortable flying a tiltrotor. This is an amazing machine. The new V-280 will also be an amazing tool our warfighters can use. Thank you BellFlight for these amazing aircraft.

Technically speaking Osprey has a better safety record than the Blackhawk etc but since carries a lot of people when it crashes it becomes the headline, this is not to descredit it's woes during development

@Facade866

10 ай бұрын

yeah, more that's because the Blackhawk is older and been in battle, the osprey has seen little battle and is new compared to military standards (oldest ospreys are 23 years old) and has still kept on crashing. more crashes will continue to come due to Bell's horrible design and shoddy building tactics, compared to Lockheed, Northrop, and Boeing, Bell is the most unreliable and unsafe, you can keep on blowing Bells horn, but it won't stop the marines that are being endangered due to Bell's lack of quality control, and a very hard to use aircraft.

@topkek1194

10 ай бұрын

You can't be serious. There's a reason they call it the crashhawk. The blackhawk killed more people in the same time than the V22 when it entered service in 2007

@Facade866

10 ай бұрын

@@topkek1194 if you were to look into the numbers for a second you would see that more than 5000 Blackhawks have been made with 114 deaths from accidents since it was tested and has been in service that means for every Blackhawk made 0.02 deaths have been caused but for the Osprey only 500 have been made with 54 total fatalities which means 0.11 deaths have been caused per tiltrotor built that is over 5x the amount of what the Blackhawk has caused from accidents and you still claim it is safer? and there has been 15 hull losses which means 3% of all Osprey's made have crashed beyond repair, compared to the Blackhawk's 0.48% of airframes to be made beyond repair from crashes that means ospreys airframes are more that 6x more likely to be destroyed in an accident. and all this info includes Blackhawk's history before the Osprey went into testing which is nearly 20 years and the Blackhawk is way older now, the osprey still has many more years in which it will continue to keep on killing marines due to Bell incompetence. next time look at the numbers before trying to disgrace the Blackhawk.

@locoparentis244

10 ай бұрын

Then don't fly either. Why risk more service members lives? Our nations best are not crash test dummies for military contractor to use. Send the design engineers and mechanics up instead... I bet safety issues resolved quickly or aircraft gets grounded.

@Facade866

10 ай бұрын

@@locoparentis244 there will always be some risk when flying aircraft especially helicopters, but these are very rare (even for the osprey) there will always be a risk associated when flying in them, it but the military should still try to minimize the risks.

Very informative video, like always. Thank you.

Usually, when personnel are in need of urgent medical care not available on board ship, a COD launch is very stressful on the patient. It's not likely for one of these individuals to be flown to a carrier or other ship. As you stated in the video.

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

There was an interesting Coast Guard Cost/Benefit analysis on acquiring them for use in medical evacuations near the U.S. coast. Their conclusion was that most medical events that required their assistance were well within helicopter range. Most calls were within a hundred miles of shore. There just wasn’t a business case in their mind.

Great overview of the basic plus and minuses. It clarified a few things I was not understanding completely.

The comments in the video about VRS are also incorrect. That argument comes from the stages of its early development and the desire of some people to not have it enter the fleet. In a AEI situation, it is also capable of gliding, just with a glide ratio below airplanes, but above helicopters.

Amazing content. Love it.❤😮

So, a nearly 60 year old less capable aircraft is being replaced by a current aircraft with many times the capability. a point missed is metal fatigue meaning the "lovable" old darling would soon start falling to bits in the air, this may kill the romance along with many people. Well done Navy. 😎👍

Can a tilt rotor aircraft roll or pitch while in vertical mode?

Ironically, helicopters produce asymmetric thrust during the entirety of flight. Just because a helicopter has one disk, doesn't make the thrust symmetric. Far from it. Even a coaxial hello produces asymmetric thrust. Sure, it's balanced, but leads to excessive vibration.

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

Helicopter blade loads due to asymmetric lift come from blades advancing on one side retreating on the other. It causes all manner of design headaches for the engineers. The unloaded blades tend to „twang“ depending on blade stiffness. Even turboprops have the same issue. At any angle of attack during cruise the upward and downward traveling blades generate different amounts of lift creating asymmetric lift and all manor of headache inducing gyroscopic forces. Lol

If there’s a back up engine then why all the crashes?

It simplify fly further and faster. No competition.

I really like tilt rotors. The only issue is they still have alot of teething to go through and unfortunately that will mean injuries and lives lost. hopefully they can fix the issues and make these even more reliable. I do think this technology would be beneficial in the civilian sector. Rescue helicopters being able to get to locations very fast and then hover to do their job would be great.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

8 ай бұрын

Even the Osprey is safer than the CH-46, CH-47, CH-53, and HH-60. It was the first of its kind. Hell the Black Hawk had 20+ crashes in its first 6 years of service.

@Handle1969

8 ай бұрын

What did they learn with the Osprey failures? Remember back to those days? Years ago! Why are they safer now? What about the new Army Bell V280? What does it have that they learned with the Osprey?

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

@@n3v3rforgott3n9many due to the poor EMI shielding.

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

@@Handle1969the Osprey has had many small improvements. The Valor improves by leaving engines horizontal and using a straight flat wing. There are other improvements butvthats the quick answer

Can the C-2 fly faster with its wings folded back?

I dont like the idea of neither being able to glide to the ground nor autorotate.

@Solnoric

10 ай бұрын

Pretty much every helicopter accident in military service happens at an altitude too low to autorotate

It's a useful tool in the toolbelt, I just think it's too soon to throw out all the similar tools and only rely on this one to handle all those jobs. I'd have preferred that we hedged our bets for one more generation of these tilt rotor designs before going all-in. But if all we're going to care about ever again is the Western Pacific and landing marines on the Spratlys and Paracels, then okay, this is the machine to have. That extra speed and range is going to be critical there. Hopefully we don't need to drop any of these wide bodies into central Taiwan though, that terrain looks rough.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

8 ай бұрын

Speed and range are king on a battlefield for a transport helicopter. It can land nearly anywhere a Black Hawk can but will spend half the time in the hot zone doing so.

i always wondered why we didnt have tilt rotors planes like in the movies. i guess technology isnt there yet.

One engine can run both proprotors but not for long.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

No they can run it for just as long... your speed and altitude are just limited.

Osprey are crushing so sickening

always better

Having understood the tilt rotor advantages pointed out by this video, I believe they are not necessary at all times. The militaries are putting all the eggs in the same basket. It’s like having a racing car full of novelties being employed for races as well as for go shopping. IMHO the “only one super model fleet to do everything” philosophy is a great error. An error that is being committed twice in the Navy Cargo and the Army UH replacement. This video focuses on safety issues and the operational possibilities. Both are fundamental. But nothing is said about operating cost. And that's a main factor as well. A follow-on video on this subject would be greatly welcomed.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

8 ай бұрын

So increased capabilities will come with increased costs. If you factor in that the Osprey goes twice the distance in the same time compared to other medium lift platforms it's costs get closer to the CH-47 and CH-53 although still greater. The Osprey is also the first of its kind with multiple design choices that had major drawbacks.

It's cal a V twenty-two not a V two two.

คือเรื่องนี้จบแล้วนะ ล็อกฮีดมาร์ตินคงไม่มีสินค้าเข้าไปขายให้รัฐบาลอินเดียสนใจเครื่องบิน 2 เครื่องยนต์มากกว่า

I think of tilt rotor technology as analogous in its evolution as what the nifty fifties were to fixed wing aircraft technologies. There's argument suggesting tradtional rotorwing aircraft fit the analogy as well, but a line must be drawn. The fifies defined the core design phlosophies for all fixed platforms through the end of twentieth century and still today dominate. Yet we are seeing new novel approaches. Granted the evolution of tilt rotor platforms has not been as rapid as the aforementioned. Ponting out the roots of tilt rotor go back to mid 50's with Bell XV-3. Nonetheless, IMHO the future holds great promise for tilt "platform" technologes. Benefiting, like many things are today, from advancements in materials sciences and manufacturing techniques. Back to tilt rotor airframes and powerplant tech. It's not out of the question that the future will see aircraft such as depicked in the movie "Oblivion" staring Maverick a.k.a. Tom Cruise, realized.

Because they think is the latest and greatest. Also the lobbies want to sell them

مروحيات ينبغي الاعتماذ عليها حجم كبير بعيذة المدى

Personally, I don't believe the V-22 is worth the injuries and death it is responsible for.

@n3v3rforgott3n9

9 ай бұрын

Then you think the majority of aircraft aren't worth the injuries and deaths? Even the navy has said the V-22 is one of the safest aircraft they fly... you are going off of myths about them.

Stick to plane stuff vs. speculating upon potential conficts, Kissinger

He's wrong. The US Army has chosen to replace the Apache helicopter with the Bell V-280 Valor also.

@zachariahpalomino

10 ай бұрын

They are working in the Bell 360 to replace it.

@ameritoast5174

9 ай бұрын

no they have not. There is a competition right now between the Bell 360 Invictus and the Sikorsky Raider. One of these two will replace half of the apaches because they already have reached their frame limits. They will also take back the role the apaches have been doing which is recon since they retired their recon helis the Oh-58 Kiowa.

@titansboytc

5 ай бұрын

The valor is only replacing the Blackhawk and the bell 360 Invictus and S-97 raider is competing to see which one will replace the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior

Because they are game changers?

IMC, industrial Military (Congressional) Complex. The Osprey was “certified” by the FAA under a “special” category to allow it to fly. It cannot autorotate like a helo nor glide like a regular conventional aircraft. I remove my hat and salute all service members that have to fly in one. While in the Corps, I flew in all helos except the Cobra. I was out before the Osprey came online. Semper Fi!.

@chrissmith7669

6 ай бұрын

The FAA doesn’t certify military aircraft. That’s why retired military are registered as “experimental “ when bought by civilians. It could autorotate but with nacelles up the drag makes it difficult to perform well. Its short wings mean it can glide with both engines out but it has a low L/D compared to standard fixed wing. It is the standard emergency procedure its only real drawback is that when the land with nacelles down the blades “broomstick “ and the gearboxes are toast due to the shock loads. I rode all the Army aircraft back in the day and was bummed when they passed on the Osprey.

VTOL + STOL 항공기 에너지 효율은 STOL

The Osprey is a death trap!!!!

@xprettylightsx

10 ай бұрын

It has an exceptional flying safety record of over 100,000 flight hours without an incident

@larryjackson6238

10 ай бұрын

@@xprettylightsx . How many have died in this aircraft???

@xprettylightsx

10 ай бұрын

@@larryjackson6238 my friend… pilots “die” in every airframes lifespan.

@Appletank8

10 ай бұрын

@@larryjackson6238 The F-16 has just as many downed aircraft during development, but the problems were worked on long enough for countries across the globe to rely on it. The fact that the Osprey is a transport means it could injury many passengers at the same time, same as if a 737 crashes.

@locoparentis244

10 ай бұрын

​@@xprettylightsxOMG only pilots died in same plane? You don't count the other service members? Oh maybe you think they died of COVID.

they get shot down just as easy as the less expensive ones or they just crash on there own

V280 is too bulky.

@andrewreynolds4949

9 ай бұрын

Compared to a larger fixed-wing aircraft??

@makedemocrapsafraidagain4729

9 ай бұрын

@@andrewreynolds4949 Compared to anything, its stupid.