4 ms·
There is precedence for a fixed-wing rotor-based VTOL aircraft with the Osprey, at least aerodynamically. Operationally, the Osprey was a bit of a disaster. Bu
by gundmc 7y ago
There is precedence for a fixed-wing rotor-based VTOL aircraft with the Osprey, at least aerodynamically. Operationally, the Osprey was a bit of a disaster.
But I agree that flight (and ESPECIALLY manned flight) needs extensive experience in aerospace engineering.
- baybal2 7y agoOsprey is more of a true biaxial helicopter first, and a convertoplane second. V22 have 2 lateral DOF in which it can move without moving COM relative to point of aerodynamic force, and without changing its aerodynamic cross-section, so you don't get positive feedback to change of orientation in wind gusts. This thing cannot do that as far as a glancing look can tell. I am not an aeronautic engineer, just a motoglider pilot wannabe. If it looks borderline silly to even a man like me, it's scary to imagine what wool they must have pulled over for their mentors and industry advisers to go with that.
- zaroth 7y agoThey built the thing, and fly it around 600ft in the sky. It’s not vaporware. From what I can tell from the picture, it has 8 props, two wings, and a N-number of N221HV. Anything beyond that would be pure speculation.
- starpilot 7y agoI checked on LinkedIn, the company has guys with PhD's in aerospace engineering working for them. Do you want to inform of this shortcoming?
- baybal2 7y agoIf you have a ton of PhDs in thermodynamics, and the company is developing a perpetual motion engine, something is definitely wrong. Analogously, if the company is pilled to the brim with ex-Boeing engineers, but don't seem to recognise an obvious lack of airworthiness, they must probably doing that intentionally