Sorry, my wording was incorrect. It can fly and hover on one engine only, and land in helicopter mode on one engine only. As you say it can do a rolling takeoff or landing with the rotors angled forward, which might prove useful in high and hot situations or if flying slightly overloaded. This is also true for several helicopters with a wheeled landing gear that may make a rolling takeoff to take advantage of translational lift when operating from airports.
@nakazatoGTR I'll say it again, just in case you missed it the first 7 times I said it. A tilt rotor a/c is much less safe than a fixed wing a/c or helicopter in low and slow situations. It cannot glide nor can it autorotate effectively in the event of catastrophic engine failure under these conditions.
@nakazatoGTR Also, the harrier is one of the most dangerous aircraft in US inventory for its own pilots because of its hybrid design. Its 'hybrid' design gives it no real advantage with a full combat loadout but in turn makes it an odd handling, comparatively slow, and comparatively under armed aircraft when set beside aircraft like the F-18A/B and C/D. The marines choice bomb truck is actually the F18-C/D due to its greater range, speed, and combat load when compared to the Harrier.
@YourFatClownAss I checked now: according to Wikipedia they are: "The V-22's two Rolls-Royce AE 1107C engines are connected by drive shafts to a common center gearbox so that one engine can power both proprotors if an engine failure occurs."
@nakazatoGTR The nice thing about the V-22 is that it has two engines, which are interconnected. If one should fail, the aircraft can fly safely on one engine. If both engines should fail (Which is very rare), then it can glide down should it have sufficient forward airspeed. Also, if you have sufficient airspeed and one engine working, you can make a running landing with the nacelles at a 60-degree pitch (As recommended by the manufacturer).
@mang8219 undergoing certification currently. It takes years for that to happen. same with any other new aircraft. the only other tiltrotor is strictly military but they are looking at it to be equipped for civilian use
@nakazatoGTR The 'single design deficiency' is one of the most important given the V-22 intended mission. Low and slow is when it will likely see fire and is when catastrophic engine failure is most likely to occur. You're telling me an aircraft pretty much falling out of the sky with no ability to glide/autorotate should it take sufficient fire or have a malfunction is acceptable?
@nakazatoGTR My point about the AH-64 was this: claiming a component can take "20mm hits" and that component actually taking 20mm hits and the aircraft staying in the air are two very different things. The AH-64 is supposed to be able to take 23mm cannon fire to the crew compartment as well as the engines. That 64's crew compartment was breached by the smallest caliber cartridge it would likely encounter. That's not to say the 64 is a bad bird, just that armor claims are all but worthless irl.
That is an interesting idea. I hope so. Are you certain the engine nacelles would rotate up in the event of midflight engine failure? If they are locked in the forward position, autorotation wouldn't then would it?
The engines are interconnected via a shaft running through the wingspar. The plane can fly and land both in airplane and helicopter mode on one engine only, powering both rotors. I doubt it can autorotate. It's not theoretically impossible, but the twisted blades make it rather unlikely.
Oops, sorry, I got one letter wrong. The full name is Bell XV-15, and it also has a wikipedia entry. I'd paste it in full, but I believe TH-cam disables links. The name of the page on wikipedia is Bell_XV-15 , though
@nakazatoGTR As for the armored nacelles argument. The AH-64 is supposed to be able to withstand up to 23mm cannon fire but has been brought down with small arms fire(7.62x39 and 7.62x54r) more than once. Armor on an aircraft is a hoakie concept in and of itself due to the weight limitations imposed. Additionally armor is never 100% effective to its limits. Would you trust a 20mm direct hit to a V-22's nacell in flight? Would you trust a 23mm cannon round to an AH-64 cockpit?
The V-22 Osprey can be pressureized, but that would add unnecessary weight and complexity. Mainly, the ability to pressurize is added for comfort, which isn't needed on a millitary model.
@nakazatoGTR Yes, a V-22 can glide, BUT while vertical taking off/landing and operating bellow stall speed it CANNOT glide without a good amount of altitude. It is safe to say while taking off/landing and other low speed operations, a VTOL transports bread and butter, a V-22 will NOT have sufficient altitude to gain enough speed to begin a glide.
@SixCeroSix Losing engine power is far more likely than a complete airframe failure as with the case of a aircraft losing a wing or helicopter losing its rotor. A tilt rotor CANglide provided it has sufficient speed/altitude. But considering the majority of a tilt rotors flight envelope is low and slow it cannot glide and is incapable of autorotation creating a very dangerous situation that isn't present on a fixed wing a/c or helicopter.
If one engine fails, there is double redundancy as both powerplants are connected by a drive shaft through the wing. You run on one engine until you land.
@nakazatoGTR Not only does the Space Shuttle have larger wings, its fuselage type is that of a lifting body AND it travels at an extremely high rate of speed to attain its glide slope. As I said, in a low and slow situation the a tilt rotor cannot safely autorotate like a helicopter can nor can it safely glide like a fixed wing aircraft can making it less safe than either type of aircraft in the event of a low and slow engine failure. What does astrophysics have to do with anything?
Perfect for rich people. Instead privatejet, take one of these. They are about 500kmh fast, what is slower than privatejet, but you can start direct from your home/office and you save time you would need to the airport.
@nakazatoGTR um.. no they had a 30mm fire up through the underside of the Apache at less then 100meters. Choppers are not tanks but they can take some hits.
it was a Bell/agusta project but now is developed just by agusta : is an italian tiltrotor! agusta develop its crashworthiness sistems in partnership with politecnic of Milan into the LaST lab, the best crashworthiness lab in the world
@li7in6 You miss the whole point of the aircraft, which is two fold Standoff and Capability.. They worked the bugs out of the chip and they seem to be performing quite well. There is inherent danger anytime you go up in anything, however there is a measure of acceptable risk that is taken into account when weighing the operational gains. This craft is a whole new ballgame operationaly and strategic wise and it fits the needs not the wants of the Marine Corps quite well.
I hope this thing is more reliable than the V-22 osprey. it's smaller which might be a plus. after all the mechanical trouble and crashes the v-22's have had, many believe they should never have been put into service.
You are confusing the BA609 with the X15. They do look similar, but as you can see the X15 had a twin tail setup as the V22, while the BA609 has a T tail. The 609 is the rototype of a commercial executive tiltrotor, while the X15 was a pure prototype. This plane still flies, and is nearly through the flight test programme. AFAIK orders have already been placed for the production run, and they are already being assembled.
@SixCeroSix Your assertion that 'the ends justify the means' due to the profound effect tilt rotor technology may or may not have on humanity is also debatable. As I said from the beginning, tilt rotor aircraft have major safety deficiencies compared to fixed and rotor wing aircraft. If a loss of power occurs in a large portion of their flight envelope they simply fall out of the air.
@YourFatClownAss Autorotation with assymmetrically mounted rotors, one of them being out, would probably be completely unflyable, so yeah, a bit safer. :) One big issue with this thing is of course that it can't land like a normal plane, due to the big propellers/rotors. As for that thing I saw in the magazine, I think the idea was to create a cheap, simple and efficient way to haul cargo shorter distances. Don't think they ever made it.
Is there any airline that currently uses a tiltrotor plane? A few year ago, I read that the Australian golf player, Greg Norman, ordered a civilian version of tiltrotor plane. Has he received it yet ?
Everything is different but the concept is the same. The 609 is smaller and has a "T" tail. The Osprey has an "H" tail. The avionics and flight controls are different.
I agree, any aircraft that is completely dependant on engine power to fly safely is a big risk. There is no built-in safety in the system, a chopper has a good chance to land safely despite engine failure, a airplane too. With this aircraft, forget it. Unless you have some sort of ballistic chute that can reduce rate of descent to survivable speeds, and that very quickly, but I find that solution unlikely.
@germany2010ful $12 Million I believe. Considering the Osprey was 60-70 million a unit, this should be much more effective, and aimed at the civilian market. Let's hope the Italians get it right, because this can change everything from corporate suit's zooming around to much faster Coast Guard and Air Ambulance responses. I doubt this'll get it perfect, but in cost alone it's a big step forward, let's see if it works in the field however.
That exactly it, these can go over 350 mph in airplane mode, the fastest helicopters in the world would consider 220 mph very dangerous. I can see these being used for rescue missions... saving lives can use faster vehicles.
if it was just one crash i might be inclined to agree but it has been several crashes, and many fatalities. and the aircraft has been grounded several times as a result.
Neither the Osprey nor the 609 can land in airplane mode. The blades would hit the ground. A run-on landing with a 30 degree tilt in the nacelles is possible though.
@zulu3006 They are not safer than helicopters which have the ability to effectivly autorotate from low altitudes and low airspeeds. Power failure in a tilt rotor in a low and slow scenario will result in a crash as there is not inherent safety measure built into the design. It can neither glide as effectively as a fixed wing a/c nor can it autorotate as a helicopter.
@aaron8862006 All tilt rotors have a large danger zone when traveling low and slow such as shortly before landing or shortly after takeoff. During this time the A/C does not have the altitude or the speed to initiate a glide/autorotation should there by a catastrophic power failure. Fixed wing aircraft can safely glide in such situations and helicopters will have sufficient head speed to autorotate to a safe landing. A tilt rotor will simple fall out of the sky in such situations.
@nakazatoGTR You get your information strait for the bell website? Well now, That must be as unbiased a source as they come. Here's a little tip. A company will never down talk something they are trying to sell. Of coarse Bell is going to have nothing but good to say about their V-22, BA-609, and the tiltrotor concept as a whole. Ask someone at Chevy who makes the best cars/trucks. Then go ask someone at Ford.
This thing seems very un realistic, just saying the engine size and blade size would be half that for a forward flying plane. Well I guess they are using them so they must come in handy for carriers, or a ship with no landing surface.. But then wouldn't a helicopter work? Is it because these can go faster in the air in airplane mode?
@nakazatoGTR Not all military aircraft are bad. Many modern a/c have proven to be greater successes than they were even intended to be such as the AH-1, F-15, A-10, and F-16. All came in within budget, did the job they were designed to well, and were redesigned for missions they never were intended for and succeeded at those too. A key designed for many locks within budget is a success. A key that needs its one lock designed around it that is way over budget AND kills marines is not a success.
What type of licence I need to fly it???...ATPL(H) or ATPL(A)??....I'm confused......by the way I think that an helicopter pilot can fly much better than a aeroplane pilot in it cause it land and take-off vertically...
@215alessio still prefer the airbus a 340, 380 or the boeing 777 :) I if 1 rotor spins out of controll the whole thing is doomed to crash. the small wings and heavy engines don't allow it to glide and it isn't fuel efficient either.
@li7in6 And in the event of a power failure tilt rotor aircraft do in fact glide contrary to popular belief. All of the "safety deficiencies" you've noted are no different from the kind you'd find on any other aircraft out there. If a helicopter loses its rotor it "falls out of the air" as well. And if a fixed wing craft loses its wings it also "falls out of the air" the risk with this aircraft are really the same as with any other. If it worries you so much don't fly at all.
@nakazatoGTR The AV-8 has proven itself as a bad bird on its own unreliable, finicky, and dangerous merits and is hated/feared even by its own pilots. The VTOL F-35 has yet to prove itself one way or the other so I reserve judgment, I do know it hasn't claimed even close to as many lives as the V-22 during its development so that counts for something.
![ค้างคืนโรงเก็บกระสวยอวกาศร้างกลางทะเลทราย [Around The World Ep. 3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E5bWZQhABJE/mqdefault.jpg)
This was the prof of concept test bed. It was what sold the fiesability of an operational tilt rotor.
I love this video. My step dad worked on the tilt roter and was standing out there watching it fly!!! It’s amazing
they had a rough start ,but I hope we start to see more of them
My absolute favorite Yewtoob vid! Reverse-peddle turns with a nod to the camera....hell yeah.
Amazing Video & Fantastic Aircraft, Excellent!!! Regards
Sorry, my wording was incorrect. It can fly and hover on one engine only, and land in helicopter mode on one engine only. As you say it can do a rolling takeoff or landing with the rotors angled forward, which might prove useful in high and hot situations or if flying slightly overloaded. This is also true for several helicopters with a wheeled landing gear that may make a rolling takeoff to take advantage of translational lift when operating from airports.
@Aviat92 Not sure about this one, but Ospray has both rotors linked with one shaft and it can land with one engine propelling both rotors.
I saw this craft stopping in for fuel at KLYH on it's last flight. It's now on display at the Udvar-Hazay Air and Space Museum in Northern Virginia.
@nakazatoGTR I'll say it again, just in case you missed it the first 7 times I said it. A tilt rotor a/c is much less safe than a fixed wing a/c or helicopter in low and slow situations. It cannot glide nor can it autorotate effectively in the event of catastrophic engine failure under these conditions.
@nakazatoGTR Also, the harrier is one of the most dangerous aircraft in US inventory for its own pilots because of its hybrid design. Its 'hybrid' design gives it no real advantage with a full combat loadout but in turn makes it an odd handling, comparatively slow, and comparatively under armed aircraft when set beside aircraft like the F-18A/B and C/D. The marines choice bomb truck is actually the F18-C/D due to its greater range, speed, and combat load when compared to the Harrier.
Thats what they said about the Wright Flyer too. And the first jet. And the first helicopter. And the first space shuttle. And now the VTOLS.
Crazy
@YourFatClownAss I checked now: according to Wikipedia they are: "The V-22's two Rolls-Royce AE 1107C engines are connected by drive shafts to a common center gearbox so that one engine can power both proprotors if an engine failure occurs."
Now that they have better computers the safety of this type of aircraft will continue to inprove, helps to have a good programmer too.
NICE CONCEPT, NICE LOOKING PLANE
I'm serious. All the offices, waiting area, and maintanence areas can be in a one or two story building, with the tiltrotor landing on top.
@nakazatoGTR The nice thing about the V-22 is that it has two engines, which are interconnected. If one should fail, the aircraft can fly safely on one engine. If both engines should fail (Which is very rare), then it can glide down should it have sufficient forward airspeed. Also, if you have sufficient airspeed and one engine working, you can make a running landing with the nacelles at a 60-degree pitch (As recommended by the manufacturer).
@mang8219 undergoing certification currently. It takes years for that to happen. same with any other new aircraft. the only other tiltrotor is strictly military but they are looking at it to be equipped for civilian use
Nice to see a civilian version of a tilt rotor aircraft (BA 609 tilt rotor)
@nakazatoGTR The 'single design deficiency' is one of the most important given the V-22 intended mission. Low and slow is when it will likely see fire and is when catastrophic engine failure is most likely to occur. You're telling me an aircraft pretty much falling out of the sky with no ability to glide/autorotate should it take sufficient fire or have a malfunction is acceptable?
@nakazatoGTR My point about the AH-64 was this: claiming a component can take "20mm hits" and that component actually taking 20mm hits and the aircraft staying in the air are two very different things. The AH-64 is supposed to be able to take 23mm cannon fire to the crew compartment as well as the engines. That 64's crew compartment was breached by the smallest caliber cartridge it would likely encounter. That's not to say the 64 is a bad bird, just that armor claims are all but worthless irl.
That is an interesting idea. I hope so. Are you certain the engine nacelles would rotate up in the event of midflight engine failure? If they are locked in the forward position, autorotation wouldn't then would it?
The engines are interconnected via a shaft running through the wingspar. The plane can fly and land both in airplane and helicopter mode on one engine only, powering both rotors. I doubt it can autorotate. It's not theoretically impossible, but the twisted blades make it rather unlikely.
Oops, sorry, I got one letter wrong. The full name is Bell XV-15, and it also has a wikipedia entry. I'd paste it in full, but I believe TH-cam disables links. The name of the page on wikipedia is Bell_XV-15 , though
excellent video.
@nakazatoGTR As for the armored nacelles argument. The AH-64 is supposed to be able to withstand up to 23mm cannon fire but has been brought down with small arms fire(7.62x39 and 7.62x54r) more than once. Armor on an aircraft is a hoakie concept in and of itself due to the weight limitations imposed. Additionally armor is never 100% effective to its limits. Would you trust a 20mm direct hit to a V-22's nacell in flight? Would you trust a 23mm cannon round to an AH-64 cockpit?
@AeroSail727 also there are some delays and what not that have added time before the craft becomes available
The V-22 Osprey can be pressureized, but that would add unnecessary weight and complexity. Mainly, the ability to pressurize is added for comfort, which isn't needed on a millitary model.
@nakazatoGTR Yes, a V-22 can glide, BUT while vertical taking off/landing and operating bellow stall speed it CANNOT glide without a good amount of altitude. It is safe to say while taking off/landing and other low speed operations, a VTOL transports bread and butter, a V-22 will NOT have sufficient altitude to gain enough speed to begin a glide.
no, but it can fly and land with only one engine running, the same as all twin engined helicopters. The rotors are interconnected.
does this one have a one way bearing so it can do auto rotations?
@SixCeroSix Losing engine power is far more likely than a complete airframe failure as with the case of a aircraft losing a wing or helicopter losing its rotor. A tilt rotor CANglide provided it has sufficient speed/altitude. But considering the majority of a tilt rotors flight envelope is low and slow it cannot glide and is incapable of autorotation creating a very dangerous situation that isn't present on a fixed wing a/c or helicopter.
If one engine fails, there is double redundancy as both powerplants are connected by a drive shaft through the wing. You run on one engine until you land.
I like this music - video clip very well made. Agree it is a matter of taste, i am young, so suppose this electro stuff fits my brains quite well.
@nakazatoGTR Not only does the Space Shuttle have larger wings, its fuselage type is that of a lifting body AND it travels at an extremely high rate of speed to attain its glide slope. As I said, in a low and slow situation the a tilt rotor cannot safely autorotate like a helicopter can nor can it safely glide like a fixed wing aircraft can making it less safe than either type of aircraft in the event of a low and slow engine failure. What does astrophysics have to do with anything?
Perfect for rich people. Instead privatejet, take one of these. They are about 500kmh fast, what is slower than privatejet, but you can start direct from your home/office and you save time you would need to the airport.
is there a chance to get a version of this video with no music (so we can listen the original sound engine) ?
It strrongly resembles Bell's XV-15, the technology testbed for both this and the Osprey. It flew successfully for many years.
g.
@nakazatoGTR um.. no they had a 30mm fire up through the underside of the Apache at less then 100meters. Choppers are not tanks but they can take some hits.
What do you mean by having the props at 90degrees? Parallel or perpendicular to the ground?
it was a Bell/agusta project but now is developed just by agusta : is an italian tiltrotor!
agusta develop its crashworthiness sistems in partnership with politecnic of Milan
into the LaST lab, the best crashworthiness lab in the world
wow.. thats great.. i want one now
Agreed, I'd never want to fly a tilt-rotor a/c. The concept is inherently dangerous.
@truck501 Let's just hope it doesn't have an engine failure while in vertical mode, shall we?
A snowball's chance in hell of succeeding in the marketplace.
@li7in6 You miss the whole point of the aircraft, which is two fold Standoff and Capability.. They worked the bugs out of the chip and they seem to be performing quite well. There is inherent danger anytime you go up in anything, however there is a measure of acceptable risk that is taken into account when weighing the operational gains. This craft is a whole new ballgame operationaly and strategic wise and it fits the needs not the wants of the Marine Corps quite well.
whats the music playing in this video its sweet!
I hope this thing is more reliable than the V-22 osprey. it's smaller which might be a plus. after all the mechanical trouble and crashes the v-22's have had, many believe they should never have been put into service.
One engine landing? No problem. Combining gearbox transfers power to both nacelles. Same with V-22 and other two rotor multi-engine systems.
Thanks for leaving a comment on my video. Tiltrotor planes are indeed quite unusual, aren't they?
awesome music! What is it?
@Akinyamok why?
Hm, more than five years have passed since this demonstration video, but why don't we see these plane/helicopter-hybrids FAR MORE these days yet?
its a beauty. How much for it???
You are confusing the BA609 with the X15. They do look similar, but as you can see the X15 had a twin tail setup as the V22, while the BA609 has a T tail. The 609 is the rototype of a commercial executive tiltrotor, while the X15 was a pure prototype. This plane still flies, and is nearly through the flight test programme. AFAIK orders have already been placed for the production run, and they are already being assembled.
It's considered a powered lift aircraft and I don't believe there are any in service yet.
This is one hell of a sweet ride,i think troop transport or copter is going to be decomission soon,
@SixCeroSix Your assertion that 'the ends justify the means' due to the profound effect tilt rotor technology may or may not have on humanity is also debatable. As I said from the beginning, tilt rotor aircraft have major safety deficiencies compared to fixed and rotor wing aircraft. If a loss of power occurs in a large portion of their flight envelope they simply fall out of the air.
@YourFatClownAss Autorotation with assymmetrically mounted rotors, one of them being out, would probably be completely unflyable, so yeah, a bit safer. :) One big issue with this thing is of course that it can't land like a normal plane, due to the big propellers/rotors.
As for that thing I saw in the magazine, I think the idea was to create a cheap, simple and efficient way to haul cargo shorter distances. Don't think they ever made it.
That WAS going to my point exactly, but you got there first (no sarcasm on my part).
Is there any airline that currently uses a tiltrotor plane?
A few year ago, I read that the Australian golf player, Greg Norman, ordered a civilian version of tiltrotor plane. Has he received it yet ?
I love it! :D
anyone knows which date the qtr is ready for testing? for help quad tilt rotor
What happens when one engine fails?
Everything is different but the concept is the same. The 609 is smaller and has a "T" tail. The Osprey has an "H" tail. The avionics and flight controls are different.
it's the crystal method, and it's very good music, ok?
so, where can i buy it?
That's sick!
anyone know the price of this plane?
I agree, any aircraft that is completely dependant on engine power to fly safely is a big risk. There is no built-in safety in the system, a chopper has a good chance to land safely despite engine failure, a airplane too. With this aircraft, forget it. Unless you have some sort of ballistic chute that can reduce rate of descent to survivable speeds, and that very quickly, but I find that solution unlikely.
how much for this ? what's the pirce for comercial use ?
is it noisy?
What is that music?!
@germany2010ful $12 Million I believe. Considering the Osprey was 60-70 million a unit, this should be much more effective, and aimed at the civilian market. Let's hope the Italians get it right, because this can change everything from corporate suit's zooming around to much faster Coast Guard and Air Ambulance responses. I doubt this'll get it perfect, but in cost alone it's a big step forward, let's see if it works in the field however.
They're known as Tiltrotor Aircrafts, I'd prefer if they were classified as Heliplanes though
It was developed INTO the osprey. So infact its older than the osprey.
That exactly it, these can go over 350 mph in airplane mode, the fastest helicopters in the world would consider 220 mph very dangerous. I can see these being used for rescue missions... saving lives can use faster vehicles.
Hats off to this pilot!
I guess the pilot feels like hes flying a chopper and a plane at the same time.
if it was just one crash i might be inclined to agree but it has been several crashes, and many fatalities. and the aircraft has been grounded several times as a result.
TurboPro is very nice, and i'd like it
the v-22 has deployed, with marines, overseas... trust me, i saw them in the gulf...
Neither the Osprey nor the 609 can land in airplane mode. The blades would hit the ground. A run-on landing with a 30 degree tilt in the nacelles is possible though.
@zulu3006 They are not safer than helicopters which have the ability to effectivly autorotate from low altitudes and low airspeeds. Power failure in a tilt rotor in a low and slow scenario will result in a crash as there is not inherent safety measure built into the design. It can neither glide as effectively as a fixed wing a/c nor can it autorotate as a helicopter.
@aaron8862006 All tilt rotors have a large danger zone when traveling low and slow such as shortly before landing or shortly after takeoff. During this time the A/C does not have the altitude or the speed to initiate a glide/autorotation should there by a catastrophic power failure. Fixed wing aircraft can safely glide in such situations and helicopters will have sufficient head speed to autorotate to a safe landing. A tilt rotor will simple fall out of the sky in such situations.
good idea :D... but its actually old :P. Have you played Command & Conquer :). The idea you are talking about reminds me of the Orcas ;)
seems umm tiny?
So it's an airplane that doubles as a circus ride?
Or, as usually happens when an engine is lost, they can fly back to base and land it.
wonderful technology - Mike w Riyadh
@nakazatoGTR You get your information strait for the bell website? Well now, That must be as unbiased a source as they come.
Here's a little tip. A company will never down talk something they are trying to sell. Of coarse Bell is going to have nothing but good to say about their V-22, BA-609, and the tiltrotor concept as a whole. Ask someone at Chevy who makes the best cars/trucks. Then go ask someone at Ford.
if they lose an engine they would be flying with props at 90 degrees, they would need to land horizontally and smack the blades on the ground
This thing seems very un realistic, just saying the engine size and blade size would be half that for a forward flying plane. Well I guess they are using them so they must come in handy for carriers, or a ship with no landing surface.. But then wouldn't a helicopter work? Is it because these can go faster in the air in airplane mode?
@nakazatoGTR Not all military aircraft are bad. Many modern a/c have proven to be greater successes than they were even intended to be such as the AH-1, F-15, A-10, and F-16. All came in within budget, did the job they were designed to well, and were redesigned for missions they never were intended for and succeeded at those too. A key designed for many locks within budget is a success. A key that needs its one lock designed around it that is way over budget AND kills marines is not a success.
Yes they are, but amazing what technology is achieving too.
What type of licence I need to fly it???...ATPL(H) or ATPL(A)??....I'm confused......by the way I think that an helicopter pilot can fly much better than a aeroplane pilot in it cause it land and take-off vertically...
@215alessio
still prefer the airbus a 340, 380 or the boeing 777 :) I if 1 rotor spins out of controll the whole thing is doomed to crash. the small wings and heavy engines don't allow it to glide and it isn't fuel efficient either.
Eu só fico curioso pra saber como ele se comporta voando mono, se tem motor crítico ou dois moteres críticos
@li7in6 And in the event of a power failure tilt rotor aircraft do in fact glide contrary to popular belief. All of the "safety deficiencies" you've noted are no different from the kind you'd find on any other aircraft out there. If a helicopter loses its rotor it "falls out of the air" as well. And if a fixed wing craft loses its wings it also "falls out of the air" the risk with this aircraft are really the same as with any other. If it worries you so much don't fly at all.
Is that heli or plan ??????
@nakazatoGTR The AV-8 has proven itself as a bad bird on its own unreliable, finicky, and dangerous merits and is hated/feared even by its own pilots. The VTOL F-35 has yet to prove itself one way or the other so I reserve judgment, I do know it hasn't claimed even close to as many lives as the V-22 during its development so that counts for something.