| Author | Message | ||
     Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2241 Registered: 02-2002 |
Today marks the 100th anniversary of true powered flight. 100 years ago, the Wrights designed and built an airplane in a Dayton, Ohio bike shop. Then transported it to Kitty Hawk, NC. Taken from The National Air and Space Museum: "On December 17. The Wrights arose that morning to freezing temperatures and a 27-mile-per-hour wind. At 10:35 a.m., the Flyer lifted off the launching rail with Orville at the controls. The overly sensitive elevator control caused the Flyer to dart up and down as it sailed slowly over the sand, coming to rest with a thud 120 feet from where it had taken off. The flight was short�only 12 seconds�but it was a true flight nevertheless. A human had flown. Just think about that for a minute. Paul Morgan | ||
| Garth Petch (Garth) New Member Username: Garth Post Number: 26 Registered: 02-2003 |
And even further off topic, December 16 marks the centenary of the first elections in the modern Western world in which a woman was able to stand for election for their country's parliament. I leave it open to discussion as to which has the greater impact in shaping the modern world! Garth | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2242 Registered: 02-2002 |
Thanks for Hi-Jacking my thread Garth. | ||
| Garth Petch (Garth) New Member Username: Garth Post Number: 27 Registered: 02-2003 |
Paul Actually that was a quote from a 1 paragraph article in the newspaper. I did a bit of research after I posted it and discovered it wasn't an election, but a piece of legislation that gained assent that allowed women to be elected into a country's parliament. Moral: Never believe everything you read in the newspapers! Garth PS...sorry for hijacking, but I was just amused that with all the liftouts in the papers and items on the TV about flight, this centenary only warranted one paragraph on page 5 of 1 newspaper. | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 191 Registered: 09-2002 |
I'll help get it back- What do you think of Boeing building the first new airplane in about a decade? (BOEING will proceed with plans for its first new jetliner in 13 years -- a more fuel-efficient passenger jet intended to win over cash-strapped airlines and regain market share from Airbus. The board voted unanimously to begin offering for sale the 7E7 Dreamliner -- a 200 to 300-seat plane that will use at least 15 per cent less fuel than comparable jets.) When am I going to be going on float with a MV-22 det? Garth's post seems distinctly Canadian...Who let them in here? (  j/k) | ||
| Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco) Senior Member Username: Offroaddisco Post Number: 1637 Registered: 04-2002 |
Paul, wasn't the first true powered flight held in 1898? | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2244 Registered: 02-2002 |
Hey Ray, Yep we are building a new plane called the 7E7. I have seen the mock-ups and they are beautiful. A lot of people do not realize that our biggest competitor in the civilian market (Airbus) is subsidized by a dozen or more European Countries. So it's hard for us to compete with them. They to are building an amazing new plane. It's supposed to haul around 600 people! Damn, that's alot of peanuts. If everything keeps going well, you will be floating with -22 in '07. Funny thing though Ray; I'll probably be there with you. Hell, I'll even have some medicinal scotch in my room. | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2245 Registered: 02-2002 |
Al, No. You are missing one part of the equation. That is human controlled, machine powered flight. Augustus Moore Herring established his credentials as an aviation pioneer in the 1890s. He experimented with gliders and collaborated with leading aviation figure, Octave Chanute. The 1896 Chanute-Herring biplane glider was among the most significant pre-Wright aircraft. Herring built a powered version of one of his gliders in 1898 that was powered by a compressed-air engine. The craft lifted off the ground a few inches and traveled a short distance, but it was not a controlled, sustained flight. Herring was only attempting to get credit for having technically made the first powered flight, as his design could in no way be developed into a true airplane. See what I mean..... | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 192 Registered: 09-2002 |
Paul- I look forward to returning from fine dining in the wardroom to have an after dinner medicinal. And then we can fight to post one message on Dweb after 45 minutes of trying to get online...maybe bandwidth will be better then. I'm not too keen on the Airbus, although the shots of the DHL plane's wing post-MANPAD attack make it seem like its fairly stout. | ||
| Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco) Senior Member Username: Offroaddisco Post Number: 1638 Registered: 04-2002 |
I had someone else in mind. In 1898 he made a powered flight. In 1901 he flew from St. Cloud, around the Eiffel tower and landed back at St. Cloud. And no he wasn't French. It was a controlled, powered flight. | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2246 Registered: 02-2002 |
Yeah, I saw those pics of that DHL bird that took a SAM. Not bad at all.
LOL Ray, I will be armed with SAT phone equipment | ||
| Mark & Bev Preston (Markp) Member Username: Markp Post Number: 245 Registered: 02-2002 |
I think Boeing will do fine. They are offering a product that hits right when the market will need them. As for Airbus, the A380 is huge and in some configurations can seat 900. They have sunk a lot of research, time and money into it. It has to succed or could have a significant impact on Airbus financials. It is primarily targeted at the Southeast Asian market. Just last week two major Asian carriers said they would NOT be buying the A380. Not good for Airbus. Without that market it is a financial failure. Europe doesn't need the A380 and can't buy enough to justify it. Go Boeing. | ||
| Blue (Blue) Dweb Lounge Member Username: Blue Post Number: 940 Registered: 04-2003 |
Just 10 days before the Wright's first flight, a government-funded scientist failed & declared that human flight is impossible (at that point in time). He actually said that it will be another 100 years before man can fly. Look at how far we've come in that 100 years. | ||
| Will Cupp (W_cupp) Member Username: W_cupp Post Number: 215 Registered: 07-2003 |
Al, are you thinking of Charles Lindberg who flew from New York to Paris? He flew on May 20th, 1927 for 33 1/2 hours non-stop and alone. | ||
| David Marchand (Dmarchand) Member Username: Dmarchand Post Number: 226 Registered: 09-2002 |
This one's for you Paul, the Wright's on the MIT dome today: http://cache.boston.com/images/daily/17/planedome.jpg From www.boston.com. | ||
| Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco) Senior Member Username: Offroaddisco Post Number: 1639 Registered: 04-2002 |
Nope, The person I was thinking of was Alberto Santos Dumont. By some definitions he was the first. The Wright Brothers were inovative in their thinking. It's too bad most people don't even know about Dumont since he was a real pioneer in his day too. It's amazing what we have done in the last century. | ||
| Art Bitterman (Aardvark) Member Username: Aardvark Post Number: 81 Registered: 05-2003 |
Al- Santos-Dumont the chap you had in mind? Believe he used dirigibles (lighter than air aircraft) Not quite the same thing! | ||
| Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco) Senior Member Username: Offroaddisco Post Number: 1640 Registered: 04-2002 |
Anyone watching CNN right now? | ||
| Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco) Senior Member Username: Offroaddisco Post Number: 1641 Registered: 04-2002 |
Art, you're right... not the same thing but it was "true powered flight" and "controlled" flight. | ||
| Christopher Boese (Christopher) Member Username: Christopher Post Number: 249 Registered: 10-2002 |
Here's some good coverage NPR did on Santos-Dumont: http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1516810. He did work at first only with dirigibles (though he was a genius, like Zeppelin, with these), and only later built airplanes. The Wrights were the real heavier-than-air pioneers. What a great day. | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 195 Registered: 09-2002 |
Hey Paul, what's with this horse being drug out again? "�Vortex ring state,� a phenomenon that causes the V-22 to suddenly lose lift in flight, may be impossible to avoid under combat conditions, says Thomas Christie, the Pentagon�s director of operational test and evaluation. Also called �power settling,� the phenomenon appears to be triggered by a combination of rapid descent and slow airspeed. �The problem occurs when you get into an operational situation and . . . a pilot faces enemy fire or whatever, and suddenly has to do something that he might not have done otherwise,� Christie told Inside the Pentagon in a Dec. 15 interview. �That�s where the rubber hits the road.� http://ebird.afis.osd.mil/ebfiles/e20031218242899.html I thought this had been worked through and mitigated at this point through a variety of changes, is it more anti-Osprey propaganda? r- Ray | ||
| Michael Noe (Noee) Senior Member Username: Noee Post Number: 812 Registered: 03-2002 |
I thought the 7E7 was the next evolution of the MD-90 acquired in the McDonnell/Douglas "merger"? I don't think they can solve VRS unless they somehow keep the pilot from performing slow-airspeed/rapid descent. THis is not a V22 problem as I understand it. Sounds like BS. | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2248 Registered: 02-2002 |
Ray and Mike, Vortex Ring State, otherwise known as VRS is a very true reality that involves ALL rotary-wing aircraft. I do not know Thomas Christie's background as far as helicopter warfare is concerned, but if VRS happens (even in the -22) it's the pilots fault. period. Mike, The 7E7 is a completely new look at efficiency, comfort, and communication for both the airline customer and the passenger. The WSJ ran a cool article on it the other day. Check out: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/k62599.html http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/photo_1.html http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/k62609.html | ||
| Lewis Jones (Cutter) Senior Member Username: Cutter Post Number: 292 Registered: 10-2003 |
we really give all the credit (as the first)to the Wrights because they had the sense to have a photographer on site | ||
| Jamie (Rover_puppy) Senior Member Username: Rover_puppy Post Number: 531 Registered: 05-2003 |
VRS is considered an emergency situation. Vortex Ring State (Settling with Power) is a condition of powered flight where the helicopter settles in it's own downwash. Settling with power is a condition where the helicopter descends vertically at a high rate of speed even though power is being used. This condition is sometimes described as settling your own wake, or "downwash." Certain conditions must exist to create this flight situation. The helicopter must be making a near vertical descent with little or no airspeed tand the rotor system must be using some power from the engine. With these inputs, the downward thrust produced by the rotor system becomes equal to the flow of air upward through the rotor (caused by descent) and the net thrust is zero. A "vortex ring state" develops in the main rotor system. The helicopter actually descends in its own rotor downwash at a rate of descent which can approach 3,000 feet per minute. As this occurs, a roughness is felt and control effectiveness is reduced. Proper recovery technique must be used or the condition may get worse. Normal pilot reaction is to increase collective and add power. This response only aggravates the situation. (see Pauls post above regarding pilot error) Instead, the helicopter must be removed from the condition by increasikng speed in any direction, preferably forward, and/or reducing collective pitch. Another alternative, if altitude permits, is entering autorotation to get clear of the downwash, then making a power recovery. Settling with power CAN BE AVOIDED by using approach paths shallower than 30 degrees. When making steeper approaches, enough forward speed should be maintained to preven the main rotor system from ingesting it's own downwash. Making the approach into the wind is also an important factor in preventing the aerodynamic phenomenon. Situations which are conducive to settling with power are attempting to hover out of ground effect above the helicopter's hovering ceiling, hovering out of ground effect and not exercising precise altitude control, making steep approaches and allowing the airspeed to deteriorate during night landings by over concentration on the landing spot. | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2251 Registered: 02-2002 |
Very nice technical explanation. The problem lies with the " if altitude permits " clause. Most of the time it's too late and you end up on the 6 o' clock news. | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 197 Registered: 09-2002 |
Jamie, Excellent explanation, that helps me understand it a lot better within context. It also makes it apparent that in certain tactical situations a pilot is running the risk of VRS quite a bit in order to maintain the proper flight profile, as well as afford himself and the aircraft the most protection against other "emergency situations" like groundfire and to a certain degree, MANPADs. I had thought the Osprey had some built in software changes that dictacted the angles of the nacelles given certain situations that helped prevent this, but I guess it depends on how big of an envelope the bird is suceptible to VRS in too. In any case, I'm enjoying the education | ||
| Jamie (Rover_puppy) Senior Member Username: Rover_puppy Post Number: 536 Registered: 05-2003 |
Bottom line in any tactical situation, you're gonna go in and get your guys out, no matter what it takes. Way back when I was training, one of my CFI's was a Vietnam Vet. He had me doing crazy stuff - pushing the helicopter way beyond it's limitations overweight and out of CG. One of the best lessons I ever learned was when he got right in in my face and yelled at me - "You go in to get guys off the ground in enemy fire and there are too many guys (too much weight) for take off according to the charts, what are you going to do?? Tell a few of them to get out?? I don't think so!!" I learned a big lesson that day. Sometimes it is very hard for a "civilian brain" to consider extreme circumstances. Glad you're enjoying the education. Have you ever heard of the NightStalkers?? | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2252 Registered: 02-2002 |
Ray, There are some technical things I will not discuss on this thread regarding above statement. Sometime before or after you are stationed down here again, I will give you a complete tour of the Osprey and answer every one of your techinical and "situation" questions. Add my email; [email protected] to your Outlook contact list for future discussions. WARNING: I will not be at work again until January 5th. Got to love Baby leave Jaime, Nightstalkers....yes. What do you fly? Paul | ||
| Jamie (Rover_puppy) Senior Member Username: Rover_puppy Post Number: 538 Registered: 05-2003 |
Paul, I have been working so very very very diligently to be able to answer that question with: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang Unfortunately, I can't seem to persuade my rover to have even the slightest interest in flying. Gosh, I'm even willing to add big pink beautifulistc wings and decorate them with glitter. Still no interest. Oh well, I guess I'll just keep focusing on learning to drive... then just maybe???... one never knows, hope springs eternal... Jamie | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 198 Registered: 09-2002 |
Paul- Roger that, I'd prefer it in person anyway, I've got quite a few more questions that go beyond that one anyway. I'll be swinging through in March, and then likely again in June, with a PCS next Nov-unless I can scam my way back to the fleet for real before then. Jamie- I've heard of the Nightstalkers, in fact, when I was at AWS the AMC for the mission that ended up precipitating Blackhawk Down (both the book, then the movie) came and spoke to our class. Fascinating and extremely motivating. It certainly put the cinematography (sp?) of the movie into perspective when I saw the real footage of the little bird setting down at crash site 1, in the alley with a foot on either side of the rotor tips. I guess that pilot holding her down with one hand and shooting his MP5 with the other while the copilot loaded the survivors fully exemplifies what you were talking about... r- Ray | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2254 Registered: 02-2002 |
Man, when I first watched Blackhawk Down, I had chills go down my spine when that first -60 took that RPG to the tail rotor. Damn ugly scene. Ray, Looking forward to next year. Paul | ||
| Ray Gerber (Raygerber) Member Username: Raygerber Post Number: 200 Registered: 09-2002 |
Paul- In your post with the email address you mentioned being on leave. Now are you on Baby leave, or on leave, baby? As the two things have a slighty different meaning in context, one would be cause for congrats the other merely a "have fun" In any case, have fun! Blackhawk Down reaffirmed my love for General Electric, or more specifically the GAU series of miniguns... | ||
| Jamie (Rover_puppy) Senior Member Username: Rover_puppy Post Number: 548 Registered: 05-2003 |
(DISCLAIMER: The following post is submitted solely for the purpose of entertainment. It does not necessarily reflect the views of the poster) HELICOPTERS ARE DIFFERENT FROM PLANES The thing is, helicopters are different from planes. An airplane by its nature wants to fly, and if not interfered with too strongly by unusual events or by a deliberately incompetent pilot, it will fly. A helicopter does not want to fly. It is maintained in the air by a variety of forces and controls working in opposition to each other, and if there is any disturbance in this delicate balance the helicopter stops flying, immediately and disastrously. There is no such thing as a gliding helicopter. *********** This is why being a helicopter pilot is so different from being an airplane pilot, and why, in generality, airplane pilots are open, clear-eyed, buoyant extroverts and helicopter pilots are brooders, introspective anticipators of trouble. They know if something bad has not happened it is about to. Commentary: Harry Reasoner February 16, 1971 | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2267 Registered: 02-2002 |
Ray, Yes I am on Baby leave. Little Myra was launched on December 4th at 2214. The GAU is an amazing tool. The perfect way to efficiently remove all of those folks trying to do the same to you. Then mount that bad boy on a helo, and Metal Rain can commence. Ray, I got 2000 hours in Sikorsky products as a Marine Crew Chief. One of my favorite weapons (besides the SAW) was the XM-218 .50 cal machine gun. Nothing like | ||
| Ian Kreidich (Ian95rrc) Member Username: Ian95rrc Post Number: 117 Registered: 03-2003 |
I'd say an amphib landing on the ground, in a stiff crosswind, is an example of an airplane that doesn't want to fly nor land. It has no idea what it wants to do other than avoid the center line at all costs. I never knew you flew Jamie. That explains your desire to ship your rover via air. I used to work for an aeromedical helicopter crew that flew Dauphin 2's. They are incredibly sweet helos, even if they are made by frogs. This is a really great aviation website if you don't already know about it. http://www.hikoudo.com/ | ||
| BW (Bwallace35) Member Username: Bwallace35 Post Number: 80 Registered: 07-2002 |
If you're one for numbers . . . a vertical decent in excess of 300fpm is what one should avoid when all other conditions are conducive for VRS. | ||
| Michael Noe (Noee) Senior Member Username: Noee Post Number: 816 Registered: 03-2002 |
Wow. That seems like a scary low number.... | ||
| Paul D. Morgan (V22guy) Dweb Lounge Member Username: V22guy Post Number: 2271 Registered: 02-2002 |
That is a low number and I am curious as to which airframe BW is referring to. High Rate of Descent (HROD) numbers are different for every Helo out there. Also HROD numbers change by affected mission parameters: temp, alt, weight, and don't forget about how many engines and blades you have as well. | ||
| Michael Noe (Noee) Senior Member Username: Noee Post Number: 817 Registered: 03-2002 |
Hmmm. I can't wait to start talking like this with all the old guys at the field. What with "affected mission parameters", HRODs, "Vortex Ring State", "targets of oppurtunity"...I'll have those USAir and United captains reeling. | ||
| BW (Bwallace35) Member Username: Bwallace35 Post Number: 86 Registered: 07-2002 |
The 300fpm does not belong to a specific helicopter. You're absolutely correct about the conditions Paul and that's why that number is so low. Given these three specific conditions 1. Near vertical decent 2. Power applied 20-100% 3. Decent 300fpm or greater coupled with poor environmental conditions Paul mentioned, maintaining a rate of decent less than 300fpm is safe rate. Granted, most VSI "steam guages" tend to bump around - so, keeping the needle from passing 500fpm is generally what I aim for. | ||
| Chris Browne (Chris_browne) Senior Member Username: Chris_browne Post Number: 531 Registered: 02-2003 |
Airbus is as independent of Euro Govt as Boeing is independent of all those Military contracts and pork barrel politics.....callit degrees of separation.... I for one prefer being in an airbus as a passenger....its simply a nicer experience....and I've flown in everything from Comets onwards.... |
