Bell MV-75 Cheyenne II (aka V-280 Valor)

[CTR]

It is.

they are

Low intensity gun threats are not high intense gun threats which forward helicopters must withstand. A new 64E will always be more survivable as updated than a delicate flight regime tiltrotor.

Shoulder fired is not part of the argument. DIRCM, new DEW etc...are 'bolt on' externals which can fit on any craft has never been part of this argument. etc. What is ur argument?.

With respect, to make this discussion more engaging and productive, please include with your comments data and sources that support your opinions. Otherwise, discussions on this platform devolve into Facebook.

 

[jsport]

The statement "a tiltrotor craft loses the entire rotation of one prop, regardless of distributed power, the craft flips over and... This has been known for decades" indicates a lack of understanding of Bell Tiltrotor drive system architecture and the survivability benefits created by separation of engines. Like on the Chinook, the XV-15, V-22, and MV-75 both rotors are interconnected. Unlike the Chinook loss of the interconnect shaft in flight is not catastrophic. This is because by positioning the Tiltrotor engines adjacent to the rotors power to both rotors is maintained following interconnect shaft failure. In the event of loss of one engine from ballistic damage, the interconnect shaft maintains power to both rotors.

Continuing the facebook conversation. If one side's rotors """""entire rotation is stopped""" the opposite rotor will flip the craft if it is still lifting. redunant drive systems have nothing to do with it.

Regarding the comment "in extemis transition under fire is not conducive to natural pilot reaction, Pilots often have to mix fixed wing piloting reactions w/conflicting rotorcraft piloting instinctual reactions" . On both the V-22 and the AH-64 lifting off is controlled using similar cyclic, collective, and directional controls. Only when the V-22 has altitude is conversion into airplane mode performed and the transition is seamless using a thumb wheel switch on the collective. Don't believe me? Google actual V-22 pilot statements

Hopefully, software has solved much..sounds great then. Still would not want to be jinking & jerking just off the ground & under fire. Clearly given what u have stated u R HIGHLY BIASED.

As far as getting out of a hot LZ as quickly as possible, the table below compare the the climb rates of the V-22 to the AH-64.

Aircraft	Fully Loaded Climb Rate	Max Rate of Climb (Clean/Optimal)	Primary Factors Affecting Load
Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey	~2,100 to 3,300 ft/min (10.6 to 16.8 m/s) depending on VTOL vs. Airplane mode	4,000+ ft/min (20.3 m/s)	Up to 20,000 lbs of internal cargo or 24 combat-ready troops.
Boeing AH-64 Apache	~800 to 990 ft/min (4.1 to 5.0 m/s) depending on weapon configuration	2,500 to 2,800+ ft/min (12.7 to 14.2 m/s)	Heavy ordnance, such as 16 Hellfire missiles or 76 Hydra rockets.

Climb rates dont account for all ergess maneuver while dealing w/ building & trees & wires.

Regarding your statement "Understand when that when the v-22 ingresses troops it hovers at longer distances forcing disgorged dismounts to walk drastic distances so the 22 an avoid groundfire potentials. Downwash is horrendous and thus not complementary to low hover." The V-22 was not designed to replace the Blackhawk or perform the same missions,

this is why Bell developed the V-280 Demonstrator to optimize a Tiltrotor for the Army needs. This is why the MV-75 has large sliding doors on both sides like the Blackhawk, engine pylons that don't rotate down to impede rapid troop ingress/egress. or block field of fire of door gunners. Finally, as Scott already stated, the MV-75 has much lower disc loading and down wash velocities versus the V-22.

Improvements on the V-22 are the least to be expected. A unloaded disc craft would best be accomplised by Karem.

Regarding the statement "Famously the Chinook is faster than the Apache and am not sure how much a tiltrotor can really manuver. Speed can transmit as the appearance of higher maneuver ability, for those who belive that. Tiltrotors have speed & range, and an inability to operate in urban enviroments due to dowwash and landing zone diameter. Most future ops will need to occur in urban areas where a MH-6 best operates not a V-22"

The CH-47 has a max speed of 170 knots, versus the V-22 max speed of 275 knots.

Never questioned the tiltrotor speed..the reason they make any sense.

The MV-75 is being designed to have low speed agility better than the Blackhawk it replaces. This agility was proven in flight testing of the V-280 Demonstrator.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRiZhCAmr6Y

for a tiltrotor thats great thanks for sharing...doesnt change minds.

The MH-6 has its mission, but it cannot perform the mission of Blackhawk or MV-75. Not sure why you even insert it into the conversation.

Given the predominance of urban ops, expanding the necessary landing diameter of your troop carrier makes little sense. SO, when hearing brag points, one has to point out operational realities.

 

[jsport]

With respect, to make this discussion more engaging and productive, please include with your comments data and sources that support your opinions. Otherwise, discussions on this platform devolve into Facebook.

I' ll do what u say when ur my boss. until then....

 

[NCQ]

Continuing the facebook conversation. If one side's rotors """""entire rotation is stopped""" the opposite rotor will flip the craft if it is still lifting. redunant drive systems have nothing to do with it.

If we're talking about strictly VTOL mode, this is also true of helicopters. If a Chinook lost a rotor it's not going to be any more stable than a tiltrotor in VTOL mode. If a Blackhawk lost a rotor, well, it's only got one so it's also not going to be flying much longer. Tiltrotors do at least have the ability to maintain forward flight with just a single rotor if it is in that configuration when it loses a rotor, or if it has enough altitude/time to transition after losing a rotor.

 

[jsport]

If we're talking about strictly VTOL mode, this is also true of helicopters. If a Chinook lost a rotor it's not going to be any more stable than a tiltrotor in VTOL mode.

just happened to be talking to someone who reinforced that...was quasi aware. but was discussing 64E

If a Blackhawk lost a rotor, well, it's only got one so it's also not going to be flying much longer.

belly flop is better than flip-over

Tiltrotors do at least have the ability to maintain forward flight with just a single rotor if it is in that configuration when it loses a rotor, or if it has enough altitude/time to transition after losing a rotor

yes, auto-rotate, thank you

 

[CTR]

Continuing the facebook conversation. If one side's rotors """""entire rotation is stopped""" the opposite rotor will flip the craft if it is still lifting. redunant drive systems have nothing to do with it.

If a helicopter or Tiltrotor in hover has """"entire rotation is stopped""" it falls out of the sky, there is no autorotation possible. But before the fall the stopped rotor will shear the gearbox mast and the rotor will depart from the aircraft. Does not make much difference if you are in a Chinook, and Osprey, a Blackhawk, or a Little Bird, it is a equivalently bad day.

In reality, catastrophic gearbox failures are almost always preceded by warnings like chip detection, loss of lubrication pressure, and elevated oil temperature.

On the V-22, if the aircraft is not already in airplane mode the recommended action is to convert into airplane mode. In airplane mode V-22 gearbox loads and rotor RPMs are reduced and cooling is increased by ram air. Loads on gearbox mast bearings are also greatly reduced. The recommend procedure is to perform a run on landing in airplane mode. The result is a heavily damaged aircraft but a survivable landing.

In cruise flight at altitude a helicopter pilot's options for mitigation following indication of potential catastrophic gearbox failure are limited because rotor RPM must be kept high and lift is generated by the rotor, even in autorotation.

This information does not infer a Tiltrotor bias on my part. It is a response based on readily available information from reputable sources (without the use of AI). No aircraft is perfect and no aircraft can perform all missions equally well.

The purpose of my detailed responses on this site is to encourage productive discussion and sharing of information. Respectfully, what is the purpose behind the content in your responses?