Civilian Boeing V-22 Osprey

[McColm]

Usually when there's a military cargo plane or helicopter troop carrier there's the civilian or commercial equivalent marketed.
I can't find any information on a commercial version of the Boeing V-22 although Augusta/Bell are testing their own tilt wing aircraft aimed at the oil rigs or commuter routes but operating costs are high and the Osprey can't fly on one engine if the other one fails.
Putting that aside in Whiffland what if a commercial version had been built,   the seating could be two,  aisle and one with a maximum of 27 seats. Hand luggage only. Or reduced seating to 21 and a small cargo hold for the luggage. A combination of passengers and cargo when needed for short hops from the mainland to islands or oil rigs,  possibly an air ferry or firefighting aircraft.
A possible fuselage stretch,  I have tried this on the Airfix Fairey Rotodyne. You do loose a lot of the windows with the side sponsors fitted and you need to make or fill in the roof area as the rotor stack will need to be removed. Most of the parts from the 1/72 V-22  fit without too many alterations plus the fact you can use the leftover parts to create a mini-Rotodyne!
Using the parts for a kitbash on a 1/72 Chinook can also work but needs a lot of filler/puty to plug those gaps with the two rotor stacks removed..
With various decal sheets available a UPS, DHL or FedEx,  Parcel Force or Royal Mail livery can be applied. British Airways or other airline decals.

[Pellson]

Usually when there's a military cargo plane or helicopter troop carrier there's the civilian or commercial equivalent marketed.
I can't find any information on a commercial version of the Boeing V-22 although Augusta/Bell are testing their own tilt wing aircraft aimed at the oil rigs or commuter routes but operating costs are high and the Osprey can't fly on one engine if the other one fails.

...and the annoying fact that the payload/thrust ratio is ridiculously low in comparison to a "normal" helicopter, for several reasons, one of the big ones being that on the hovering Osprey, the downwash is pushing the wings down with considerable force, counteracting the lift from the rotors. So basically, it's an outrageously expensive way to move a relatively small load from a to b where there's no runway. But you will, admittedly, get there somewhat faster than the bigger helo load that's using half the fuel. 

[zenrat]

Usually when there's a military cargo plane or helicopter troop carrier there's the civilian or commercial equivalent marketed.
I can't find any information on a commercial version of the Boeing V-22 although Augusta/Bell are testing their own tilt wing aircraft aimed at the oil rigs or commuter routes but operating costs are high and the Osprey can't fly on one engine if the other one fails.

...and the annoying fact that the payload/thrust ratio is ridiculously low in comparison to a "normal" helicopter, for several reasons, one of the big ones being that on the hovering Osprey, the downwash is pushing the wings down with considerable force, counteracting the lift from the rotors. So basically, it's an outrageously expensive way to move a relatively small load from a to b where there's no runway. But you will, admittedly, get there somewhat faster than the bigger helo load that's using half the fuel. 

Is it?  I agree the wings are masking some of the props downwards thrust when in hover but surely said thrust is not pushing the wings down anymore than a transom mounted fan blowing on a sail will push a dinghy along.

[Pellson]

Usually when there's a military cargo plane or helicopter troop carrier there's the civilian or commercial equivalent marketed.
I can't find any information on a commercial version of the Boeing V-22 although Augusta/Bell are testing their own tilt wing aircraft aimed at the oil rigs or commuter routes but operating costs are high and the Osprey can't fly on one engine if the other one fails.

...and the annoying fact that the payload/thrust ratio is ridiculously low in comparison to a "normal" helicopter, for several reasons, one of the big ones being that on the hovering Osprey, the downwash is pushing the wings down with considerable force, counteracting the lift from the rotors. So basically, it's an outrageously expensive way to move a relatively small load from a to b where there's no runway. But you will, admittedly, get there somewhat faster than the bigger helo load that's using half the fuel. 

Is it?  I agree the wings are masking some of the props downwards thrust when in hover but surely said thrust is not pushing the wings down anymore than a transom mounted fan blowing on a sail will push a dinghy along.

Pushing down, negating lift, tomeytoes, tomatoes.. Whatever.. 

As with the fanned dinghy, the force from the fan on the sail will be about 100% counteracted by the force the fan is transmitting directly to thee dinghy, but in the opposite direction. Bu that doesn't mean there's no forces in action, just that they work in opposite directions. In n the Osprey case, the fan is significantly bigger tan the "sail", i.e. the wing, so only part of the force from the rotors will be taken up by the wings, a much smaller one in relation to the full fan force, but still. So force is still absorbed, working in opposite direction.

The bottom line is that the downwash hitting the wings does add a downward force which is counteracting the lift, and it is bigger than the lift lost if the rotors were pitched to neutral for a similar section of the circle, no wing interfering. That said, some pitching is actuated to minimise this problem, I'm led to believe, but I have only heard of it once, when talking to an unbearably cocky US Marines Pilot.

[Flyer]

My understanding is the rotor's rotate inwards towards the wings so that the downwash moves over the wings as if the wings were in slow forward flight, and the flaps are down when the nacelles are up so the wings may actually produce lift in the hover...

And the engines are shaft connected for if one fails so it could still land safely but probably not maintain height, but then not many twin engine aircraft can.

[Flyer]

Actually I can remember a while ago a forum member here saying something about working for Boing (I think) on the V-22 in some capacity. Just cannot remember who it was or where I seen what they wrote...

[kitnut617]

Actually I can remember a while ago a forum member here saying something about working for Boing (I think) on the V-22 in some capacity. Just cannot remember who it was or where I seen what they wrote...

Evan I think, I know he did work on the V-22 among other things equally interesting --

[scooter]

I did up one for FSX (and JustFlight's Cargo Pilot add-on) for FEDUps.

[zenrat]

Usually when there's a military cargo plane or helicopter troop carrier there's the civilian or commercial equivalent marketed.
I can't find any information on a commercial version of the Boeing V-22 although Augusta/Bell are testing their own tilt wing aircraft aimed at the oil rigs or commuter routes but operating costs are high and the Osprey can't fly on one engine if the other one fails.

...and the annoying fact that the payload/thrust ratio is ridiculously low in comparison to a "normal" helicopter, for several reasons, one of the big ones being that on the hovering Osprey, the downwash is pushing the wings down with considerable force, counteracting the lift from the rotors. So basically, it's an outrageously expensive way to move a relatively small load from a to b where there's no runway. But you will, admittedly, get there somewhat faster than the bigger helo load that's using half the fuel. 

Is it?  I agree the wings are masking some of the props downwards thrust when in hover but surely said thrust is not pushing the wings down anymore than a transom mounted fan blowing on a sail will push a dinghy along.

Pushing down, negating lift, tomeytoes, tomatoes.. Whatever.. 

As with the fanned dinghy, the force from the fan on the sail will be about 100% counteracted by the force the fan is transmitting directly to thee dinghy, but in the opposite direction. Bu that doesn't mean there's no forces in action, just that they work in opposite directions. In n the Osprey case, the fan is significantly bigger tan the "sail", i.e. the wing, so only part of the force from the rotors will be taken up by the wings, a much smaller one in relation to the full fan force, but still. So force is still absorbed, working in opposite direction.

The bottom line is that the downwash hitting the wings does add a downward force which is counteracting the lift, and it is bigger than the lift lost if the rotors were pitched to neutral for a similar section of the circle, no wing interfering. That said, some pitching is actuated to minimise this problem, I'm led to believe, but I have only heard of it once, when talking to an unbearably cocky US Marines Pilot.

Sorry, that was a bit serious.  And now my head hurts from thinking about it.

If the Osprey's wings tilted with the engines then almost all the thrust would be lifting it.

[PR19_Kit]

If the Osprey's wings tilted with the engines then almost all the thrust would be lifting it.

They did that OK with the XC-142, so there must have been some good reason NOT to do it on the V-22.

[kitnut617]

If the Osprey's wings tilted with the engines then almost all the thrust would be lifting it.

They did that OK with the XC-142, so there must have been some good reason NOT to do it on the V-22.

Considering almost 1/3rd of the wing does fold down, it probably isn't much of a problem. Plus they get the coanda effect with it --- But also keep in mind, the V-22 isn't a helicopter, watching the demo when I was at the Yuma Airshow a few years ago, the operational routine is to get into forward flight asap, it only has to take-off and land vertically. After lift-off and gained a few feet in height, the rotors were already angling forward and the aircraft just accelerated very rapidly.  But having said that, it did do a reasonably long hovering demo too.  Plus contrary to what has been said, it's not very loud either --- the rotors do give off a particular sound but's it's not like a helicopter.

[Pellson]

I saw a run-though of V-22 vs a standard helicopter (in this case, I think the latest H-53 evolution) and a standard STOL airlifter, such as the C-130 or C.27, originating in the question "If the tiltrotor is such a great idea, why isn't everyone buying it?", and after about twenty minutes of arguments, the conclusion was that it's great for one thing, which is getting a limited payload from one restricted place to another as fast as possible. In all other aspects, such as load vs fuel efficiency, versatility and whatever, it will be second best, either overtaken by a STOL airplane or a proper helicopter. Without going in to deeply and causing more headache, thee conclusion made sense. Hence, I think, that in the real world, there's a good reason for the V-22 only being bought by the USMC. Noone else has a similar specialised and the money to throw at it.

Regardless, it's a massively cool aircraft. We had then flying over us here some weeks (five-six?) ago when the USMC held an exercise together with some scandinavian countries. Strange, unmistakable noise. And a very, very strange sight indeed.

[PR19_Kit]

But the USAF, the USN and the JSDF also use them as well................

[Rheged]

Regardless, it's a massively cool aircraft. We had then flying over us here some weeks (five-six?) ago when the USMC held an exercise together with some scandinavian countries. Strange, unmistakable noise. And a very, very strange sight indeed.

Agreed about the sound and looks  of an Osprey.  The SAS at Credenhill (Hereford) have been playing with one for some time.......I have had one and occasionally two passing over our house an a regular basis

[kitnut617]

As I said, you can't class it with a helicopter, and even as a STOL, it's a unique platform. But you're right, it does have that single purpose you describe Pellson, which I seem to remember comes from some major embarrassing mishaps during rescue operations with the other types. Quite why they compared it with a CH-53 is beyond me though, two totally different platforms ---