>>> Amazing airplane seen at Camarillo air show.
>>> Roger Parker built this over a long period.
>>> As I recall he started in 1993. The fuselage was made
>>> in a female mold by Rich Trickle of KIS fame.
>>> The wings are glass over foam. This is the real thing
>>> and not a mockup. All parts work. Rather brilliant
>>> design and much like a VTOL F35. Roger was also friends
>>> with Vance Jaqua. Taxi test will be performed at Camarillo
>>> this week.
>>>
>>> Right now it is powered by a Toyota Supra turbo six that weighs
>>> 375 pounds. All three fans are driven by shafts
>>> and Boston right angle cast iron gear boxes so it is
>>> a bit over weight and under powered. Roger is looking for a gas turbine
>>> around 800 HP. He might eventually settle for a 300 pound, 800
>>> HP turbo 3 rotor if we are lucky.
>>>
>>> The rear ducts rotate 90 degrees from pure lift to pure thrust. He >>> is well
>>> aware of the drag on the ducts so his expectations of top speed are
>>> realistic.
>>>
>>> Counter rotating props are cut
>>> down IVO but those will not be used for the final design.
>>> He will need variable pitch props to control roll and pitch
>>> in the hover and VTOL mode.
>>>
>>> Roger, here is Perry Mick's web site address  on his ducted fan
>>> LongEZ for your info.
>>>
>>> http://www.bridgingworlds.com/duckt.htm
>>>
>>> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
>>
>> Pretty cool! I've made some sketches over the years trying to accomplish>> something similar with the canard configuration. I had one drawn up with
>> three turbofans, vectored thrust on the two rears, and the front one
>> only vectored downward and shutdown in forward flight. Another one with
>> large open props. Paul you might still have some of my old 3D sketches.>> More recently I saw a program on the Osprey, got me thinking about it
>> again. I was thinking of making a mini-Osprey with a more conventional>> (non-canard) layout with a Bonanza v-tail.
>>
>> Perry
>>
>> No doubt about it the V22 is faster than a ducted configuration.
>>
>> -- >> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
>
> Interesting.  There is a company working on something similar in a VTOL
> drone.  It will be interesting to hear how his gearbox and drive shaft> couplings hold up.  Tricky stuff, those drivelines.  The canard
> configuration does give him a wider cg tolerence which is always a plus
> during transition.  The buried nose fan seems like a good call.  The > trick
> will be the differential throttling to control pitch during transition.> STOL with this bird should be pretty easy.  VTOL will be an > achievement, but
> I don't see why he can't do it.  The Vanguard and Doak experimental VTOL
> aircraft in the 50's worked.
>
> I have to agree with Paul about the overall speed and bloc efficiency,> the -22 will have higher figures of merit.  But it is a complex > machine and
> having the usual problems until they get it right.  There is a tremendous> market for them in areas like oil rig supply and personnel movements.  If
> they can winterize it properly, they would be a boon to mining > outposts and
> isolated settlements around the arctic circle.  It is almost > impossible to
> maintain year-round runways up there, and frequently the ski-
equipped> aircraft don't have enough room.  A fairly small pad could be kept > open with
> standard dozers and blades.  The costs of any kind of transport up > there can
> be prohibitive, so a VTOL light freighter might very well be competitive> because of the lack of need for an infrastructure (like road > maintenance).
>
> George W
>

Wasn't there a big write-up about Japanese companies trying to buy the
V22 for civilian needs there, but DOD said no, so they started an R&D
company here and hired many former V-22 engineers in an attempt to
develop their own smaller version. Or, do I have it confused with
something else?

-dave

Bell is currently working on a civilian model which looks similar yet is
a fair bit smaller. Really it looks like a MU-II w/ the garrett's out on the
wing tips and longer blades. I think they said test flight's by 2012??
It has lots of merrit all over the world...  you could go from
downtown NY to DC faster than any other mean's. Same
w/ downtown San F to LA..  I doubt they could build them fast enough
for all the sales they would get if/when it's done..

The military has it's own rating for their -22 pilots.. wonder what the
civilian rating would look like..   [multi heli rating as well as
multi fixed wing..??]  :-D

Jarrett

I think somebody could build an experimental 2 place version with
two 13B's or two three rotor engines. You will need two double stage
planetary gear  box's to get the rotor RPM down and two fast acting variable
pitch props if not a full helicopter cyclical pitch. If not a cyclical pitch
set up perhaps a horizontal tail rotor for hover pitch control.

Perhaps hover pitch and yaw control can be handled by fast action
engine rotating differential servos.

It would be fun to build an RC model.