V-22 Osprey

Richard

Richard

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
9,076
Location
West Coast Resistance
Display Name
Display name:
Ack...city life
What happens to the cyclic control as the rotors tilt forward on the V-22? Would the uneven pitch of a helicopter's blades work in a 90* forward tilt?

BTW: A 'swashplate' on an airplane was the subject of a thread on the old AOPA forum but it quickly devolved into a debate of just what exactly does a swash plate accomplish.
 
Richard said:
What happens to the cyclic control as the rotors tilt forward on the V-22? Would the uneven pitch of a helicopter's blades work in a 90* forward tilt?

BTW: A 'swashplate' on an airplane was the subject of a thread on the old AOPA forum but it quickly devolved into a debate of just what exactly does a swash plate accomplish.
Click to expand...

Richard,

Cyclic is gradually phased out as the nacelles tilt forward to the point were there is zero cyclic at zero nacelle (airplane mode). There's really no reason for cyclic in airplane mode since the airplane style flight controls (elevator, rudder, flaperons) provide aircraft control.
 
Thanks for the come back. Do you do how the cyclic is reduced to zero at zero nacelle? Care to take a guess?


The cyclic for airplanes was one idea of how to eliminate asymetric thrust of the propeller blades.
 
Richard said:
The cyclic for airplanes was one idea of how to eliminate asymetric thrust of the propeller blades.
Click to expand...

I don't think what you would gain would be worth the added expense. Light singles don't need that much correction, (then again..you have seen my sideways drifting takeoffs) maybe the larger single you get the bigger the P factor is..but in my opinion, that would just be more parts that could fail, and higher annual costs. while a trim tab would suffice.

Michael
 
Michael said:
I don't think what you would gain would be worth the added expense. Light singles don't need that much correction, (then again..you have seen my sideways drifting takeoffs) maybe the larger single you get the bigger the P factor is..but in my opinion, that would just be more parts that could fail, and higher annual costs. while a trim tab would suffice.

Michael
Click to expand...

Think of it as proof of concept.
 
so if you added cyclic on a plane, what would you do, have one on the opposite side to counter balance the opposite in level flight? or have the cyclic shut itself down in straight and level. and how would the cyclic know when its straight and level unless you added a gyro? unless you made it manual...kinda like a trim tab....
 
Richard said:
...Do you do how the cyclic is reduced to zero at zero nacelle? Care to take a guess?

.
Click to expand...

The aircraft is fly-by-wire. The flight control computers phase out the cyclic at lower nacelle angles.
 
Steve said:
I don't believe the Osprey has a "cyclic" control that works identical to a helicopter. "Helicopter mode" is controlled either by engine tilt or by differential blade pitch between the rotors.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22-flt-cntrl.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22-conversion.htm

But all I know is what I read in the papers...
Click to expand...


Steve,

It definitely does have helicopter style cyclic on both proprotors. Take a look at the figure titled "Forward Stick Input" in the top link in your post. Forward flight in VTOL mode is accomplished through forward longitudinal cyclic input, just like a helicopter. The same thing applies for rearward flight. Lateral flight is accomplished through a combination of lateral cyclic input and differential collective. This is more a function of the aircraft's tandem rotor configuration than the fact that it's a tiltrotor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top