Tuesday, December 09, 2014
A bit more on the forward firing V-22...
Warfare Technology Blog posted the below pic of a nose mounted gun system for the V-22. Go to his house for more info. One thing is becoming obvious. The V-22 in the assault role is faltering. The idea that the V-22's speed would protect it is another instance of hope being trumped by reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Naaaahhhh... V-22 is pretty average airplane, pretty lousy helicopter, in the moment he do a transformers thing he is both lousy aircraft and lousy helicopter in the same moment. He can be an taxi... but you don't send a taxi to the core of fighting.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't it be nice if the Marines had a VTOL aircraft that was much cheaper to operate, could fire guns, rockets, precision guided munitions and even air-to-air missiles? Oh and if it was salty-friendly ready to work off of USMC flat-tops and FRAPS.
ReplyDeleteYou mean this one:
ReplyDeletehttp://hd-wallpapers.com/download/pandora-aircraft_1920x1080_46-hd.jpg
So you are instaling half a ton in the nose how do you balance the aircraft and account for for and aft trimm
ReplyDeletehow do you account for it in a AH-1Z? they system shouldn't weigh anymore than that in any attack helo flying today so i don't see the problem.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIn an attack helo, the rotor system, engines, weapons stations, fuel tanks are pretty stable in terms of cg / cl. In the MV-22, both the cg / cl are more dynamic, depending on fuel quantity / location, engine tilt/angle, interior loading, etc... - a more complex problem. Too much weight on the nose creates a long moment arm that would have to be trimmed out. If the aircraft wasn't designed from the start with a nose gun, it might be difficult to counterbalance the installation without adding weight elsewhere on the aircraft. Also, the nose structure needs to be strong enough to support its installation, and absorb recoil forces and other aerodynamic loading. My take re: rocks vs guns is that the rocks impart lessor weight, structural, and cg issues vs a gun installation.
Deleteaeronautical engineering...or engineering of any type is not my wheel house. i bow to those that are better informed.
DeleteCobra was designed with a gun from day one and at that time with a pretty light weight minigun or grenade launcher pack. As it grew so did the powerpack that is is behind the rotor that balaces it out to a degree + you can be certain that tailboom lenght was tweaked a bit and components distribuited so that it in balance.
DeleteOut of balance aircraft is a dog to handle in best case and crash waiting to happen in worst case scenario.
CG issues prevent Kamov KA50-52 from having a tandem seat and a swiveling gun in front.
Gun mounts are no big deal if craft was designed to account for that from the start. I would rather bet that the retractable center mounted gun will/can be slaved for forward firing duty. Think of WW2 medium bombers
Fly by Wire would likely take care of the trim or you could just roll half a ton of fire power onto the ramp. say a Mk19 and a GAU 19 that would give you quite the gunship other then the lack of armor.
ReplyDelete...reminds me of the Bradley
ReplyDeleteWell the Helo gunship was invented as an escort...now we can have something even better--an escort jet.
ReplyDeleteNot the hideously expensive F35. The Scorpion that Raytheon came out with can not only fly at over 500 knots but also as slow as 150 knots...there is video of them being used to intercept Cessna 172's and helos. The 250 knot cruise speed of an Osprey should be simply a matter of engine setting. It can carry rockets, guns, and even sidewinder missles. And at a cost of $20 million, it is half the cost of the Osprey it is escorting. At a flight cost of less than $4000 an hour it might even cost less to fly than an MV22. They can fly alongside as escort, dash and soften the landing site with hydra missiles, and then loiter with gun pod for fire suppression. Their onboard ISR can also supply battlefield surveillance. Or it can carry flare/chaff launchers to help distract fire from the Ospreys. They can also operate from roadways---prototype did that while in a National Guard exercise.
Hmmm...for the price of an F-35 the USMC could buy 1 Hornet and 1 Scorpion...Nah.
So like this?
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O3Onyas984
How much would yet another tilt-rotor cost? The Scorpion is cheaper and can do conventional light close air and fly at twice the speed of any tilt-rotor. And the Valor looks to be slightly smaller than an Osprey. adding on some rockets and a gun doesn't make smaller better...especially if we end up paying just as much money. if Boeing made a tilt-rotor the size of a C-130, it would be worth 100 mill just to have the ability to bring in light armor. Otherwise it is just a fast chopper.
DeleteAnd Sikorsky now has a helicopter just as fast...possibly faster...than the osprey. If we were to spend money on a new VTOL aircraft, I would rather it be a real helicopter.
And even if we had a herc sized tilt-rotor I would want a scorpion jet for an escort.
so you end up with a escort faster then the Escorted. and said Escort can't be launched by the Marines off a LHA/LHD Valor is nice as a concept but I also don't think it will get the contract from the US. ( Boeing by the way is betting on Sikorsky's Defiant) perhaps some other nation. although Valor's wing and rotor system, will probably be the basis for a life extension on Osprey down the line.
ReplyDeleteAFSoc was looking at using Osprey as a Gunship earlier this year.