Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!olivea!oliveb!veritas!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: pur-ee!wb9omc@orchestra.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: V-22 Osprey
Message-ID: <1991Apr12.055549.14968@amd.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 16:41:42 GMT
References: <1991Apr10.024157.20540@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Lines: 19
Approved: military@amd.com


From: pur-ee!wb9omc@orchestra.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)


dnwiebe@cis.ohio-state.edu (Dan N Wiebe) writes:
>B) without the gouges, you might be able to tilt the engines just a bit
>forward (45 degrees, maybe 60) and do a short rolling takeoff like the
>Harrier can.  Given that this last is possible, would it result in
>significant fuel savings for a propeller-driven craft, considering that
>probably some percentage of its mission will be spent hovering anyway
>(otherwise, just send an Orion)?

	For those who watch Wings on the Discovery Channel, you have probably
seen the film of the Osprey doing pretty much this exact thing.  No, it
isn't limited to vertical takeoffs.  In fact, I got the impression that
it was preferrable to do the short roll as the VTOL stuff puts more stress
on engines and airframe, not to mention increasing fuel consumption.

Duane