V-22 Osprey by popeye the sailor - FINISHED - Italeri - 1:48 scale - PLASTIC

[popeye the sailor]

after the failure in the middle East with Operation Eagle Claw,  the realization for a long range,  high speed,  vertical takeoff aircraft was raised by the U.S. defense department.  1981 was the start of the experimental JVX aircraft program.  in 1983,  Bell and Boeing was given a joint development contract to build such a craft.  

   within a few years,  the development of the V 22 was underway,  and by 1989,  the V 22 tiltrotor flew its first test flights.  it was a start........many design changes took place......an aircraft that can do both vertical and horizontal take offs was a huge undertaking........complex,  to say the least.  the U.S.M.C. took an interest in this type of craft......at the time,  the Army was overseeing the program.   President Truman proposed a joint merger between the two to oversee it,  but it was met with disputes.  the Marines had to win out,  as their CH-46 helicopters were slowly wearing out.  the cost to build the Osprey was beginning to mount as well.  the Bell XV-15 rolled out for testing in 1983.  through the years,  leading up to the Clinton administration,  the fate of the project took many hits...the cost wasn't outweighing  the benefits......defense secretary Dick Cheney tried his best to defund it.  it was Bill Clinton who kept it alive.  the JVX aircraft was designated the V 22 in 1985.  by this time,  the Army had backed out of the program,  and the Navy was directed not to spend any money on it either.

    there is a lot of history on the development of this program.........to cover it all would take me all night.  I started to tinker with this model a couple of evenings ago.

 

I had the dash and the cockpit deck in front of me ......the assembly of these three parts was confusing,  because of how the dash sat on the platform.  the front tabs were plain enough to see.......but there were another pair in the dash well.   cementing the dash together,  it was then fitted on the platform and leveled off as the cement set.

the bulkhead was added after........   dry fitting the fuselage sides together,  the flash burr was removed around the cockpit opening.

I had fitted the cockpit in to see if it would clear.......the picture must still be in the camera.  I'll get it out in a moment........there's more to show as well.  I also cleaned up around where the wings will locate.

looking inside,  it has the resemblance of a helicopter........the interior is similar to OC's Chinook.   the cargo door can be shown open or closed.......I'm choosing to show it in the open position.   more in a moment............

[popeye the sailor]

apparently,  I didn't get a picture of the dry fit.......we'll visit that soon     I figured I'd put some of the 'meaty' parts together....the main parts of the wings and the tail.

...the rotor/prop blades

I marked them so I could tell them apart due to their pitch.  I'll finish cleaning them up later.   when the wings were dry,  I added the parts that define the mating surface to the fuselage.

they didn't fit too good.......I will need to clean up the four corners,  fore and aft of the wings.  the cargo door halves will need to be separated,  if I want to show the door in the open position.   this went on without any problems.

if I panned the camera down a little bit more,  you would be able to see how the door{s} locate.  gluing is fun.....but paint is more fun    the interior parts got a coat of ghost gray.

when dry,  one section of the seats was painted green.......it's not olive drab,  but it's a military color and close enough to pass muster.  the aisle in the middle of the floor is to be painted gunship gray.  I used a brand X masking tape,  so I have a few touch ups to do.

the admiral had a doctor's appointment.....when we got back,  I cleaned up the four corners of the wings.  these areas need to have a smooth curvature, especially at the front corners.  the rear corners needed to follow a curvature of their own.

outside of that chigger in the middle,  they look good.  the chigger happened by my being stupid,  twisting the part off the sprue.  I have been a good boy,  using my nippers     more to come.......

[Old Collingwood]

There it is   -    great start Denis,   want some pics to  help with your build mate?

 

Sorry about the quality mate it was a borrowed camera.

 

OC.

Edited November 12, 2020 by Old Collingwood

[lmagna]

Nice start Denis. I have liked the lines of these ever since I saw my first one. They have to be about the loudest thing in the air though. like a Huey I always know when one flies over even if it is hidden by trees or whatever, but for different reasons. One is for the unique sound, and the other for the level of sound.

[Edwardkenway]

Ooh I'm in on this. Good start Denis,  to be perfectly honest I dont recall ever seeing one apart from photos. It looks to be quite a beast!

[ccoyle]

1 hour ago, Edwardkenway said:

I dont recall ever seeing one apart from photos

 

I'd never seen one, either, until a few flew over my house some weeks back. And yes, they are quite loud.

[Canute]

Nice. I'll follow this Denis.

 

This beast can go a max of 280 Knots or 320 MPH or 530 KPH.  USAF uses them for Special Ops missions. Per the official AF website: "The CV-22 is equipped with integrated threat countermeasures, terrain-following radar, forward-looking infrared sensor and other systems that allow it to operate in various austere conditions." That's those bumps and such all around the jet.

[Old Collingwood]

Over here  the USAF  have a  permanent detachment  at Mildenhall airbase, the one above in my photo  was one of these.

 

OC.

[popeye the sailor]

thanks all for your kind comments   at 1:48 scale,  this should be a good size model.   there's some really nice detail too.  one thing I am going to do though,  is model it with the props in the raised position.  if I build it so they can be lowered,  I will need to eliminate a couple of parts.......I think it will look better if these parts can be seen.  I'll likely be making a base for it too........I wouldn't think this model is tail heavy,  but they do instruct weight to be added to the nose.  at one point in it development,  all four branches of the military was involved with it.  but around the point where Clinton took office,  the Army had backed out,  and the navy was juggling around the idea  that it might not work well if deployed for carrier service.  it would depend if the development team could come up with a way to fold the wings,  or the props.   the wings was a no go,  since.....in the event that the Osprey lost an engine,  the single engine could keep both props turning,  by means of an internal drive shaft,  connecting both engines together.  this was required due to the large blades......requires a lot of torque.

    paint isn't too tough......I've seen images like the ones you posted OC.......thanks for doing that    all the real good ones I've seen.....in any of the projects I've taken on in the past,  have been copyrighted.  I don't see the harm.......we're only using them for research,  but it must be respected.  I did notice that there are marked indentions inside the fuselage for a third pair of windows.....much like the Chinook.  there is no outside detail that would denote that there would be a third pair.......so I won't exploit it.

    I should have more to report by this evening........I'll see you then  

[mtaylor]

"President Truman proposed a joint merger between the two to oversee it,  but it was met with disputes.  the Marines had to win out,  as their CH-46 helicopters were slowly wearing out."

 

Denis, check that reference.. I don't think it was Truman.   Though lately, nothing would surprise me.

 

I've only seen one about 10 years ago.  It flew into the local airport for the annual airshow.   It is weird watching it take off and land.

 

 

[Canute]

Denis, which version is this, Marines or Air Force? MV or CV? And I'd bet it was Reagan.

Edited November 12, 2020 by Canute

[lmagna]

11 hours ago, Canute said:

This beast can go a max of 280 Knots or 320 MPH or 530 KPH.

I believe that speed is just at low altitude Ken I think at higher altitudes, 1500 feet or higher it increases to over 300 KN.

 

One design feature I always wondered about was why place the engines outboard at the wingtips? If they have to be coupled for safety when operating under one engine anyway, why not place the engines/transmissions inboard and just have the hubs and rotation mechanism at the tips. I am no where near being an engineer but I would think this would protect the engines and transmissions better and also allow the props more than 90 degrees of rotation promoting even greater potential slow speed maneuverability. 

[Egilman]

2 hours ago, lmagna said:

I would think this would protect the engines and transmissions better and also allow the props more than 90 degrees of rotation promoting even greater potential slow speed maneuverability. 

The idea for a tilt rotor aircraft came to light way back in 1951 or so... The first embodiment of the idea was the Bell XV-3...

The XV-3 featured a Pratt & Whitney R-985 radial engine mounted in the fuselage with driveshafts transferring power to two-bladed, pivoting rotor assemblies mounted on the wingtips. It was originally designed with three-bladed rotors but they dropped one blade due to unsolvable instability issues which caused the loss of the first aircraft... On 18 December 1958, Bell test pilot Bill Quinlan accomplished the first dynamically stable full conversion to airplane mode, and on 6 January 1959, Air Force Captain Robert Ferry became the first military pilot to complete a tiltrotor conversion to airplane mode.

 

Bell XV-3, (2nd prototype & only survivor) at the Davis-Monthan during a public display in 2006... (in 2007 she was transferred to the US Airforce museum)

 

In her short experimental service life, she completed over 100 full flight transfers from vertical to horizontal flight, she also revealed the main issue with this type of aircraft...

Known as pylon whirl, which consisted of a condition of pitch-flap coupling, (rotors wanting to stay in line with the flaps during transition) exhibited by the tiltrotor demonstrated the aeroelastic dynamic rotor instability of the configuration. The final test was at the NASA 80' wind tunnel where the rotor heads disintegrated destroying the wings/rotors and seriously damaging the wind tunnel...

Edited November 13, 2020 by Egilman

[lmagna]

Pylon whirl which can bring on pitch flap is not strictly a condition unique to tilt rotor aircraft. It can also be experienced in conventional helicopters. Usually it is only experienced  when the pilot applies heavy applications of cyclic and collective corrections to the rotor during relatively low power or low speed maneuvers. One of the visible design items on conventional helicopters that is there to partly help with the condition is the horizontal stabilizer located on the outer end of the tail of almost all single main rotor helicopters. It's other use is to pull the tail down at higher speeds and allow the aircraft to fly at a more even keel instead of nose down all of the time.

 

May be different in tilt rotor aircraft, I don't know. Like I said I am not an engineer or even a pilot, and don't even get to play one on TV.

 

Other concept aircraft/designs of the time included the Hiller X-18, the Curtiss Wright X-19, Bell X-22, LTV XC-142 and Boeing Vertol VZ-2 to name just a few. All of them showed some potential especially the X-19 and XC-142 with speeds of over 400 KTs. But I think it would be safe to say that they were aircraft before their time and the concept needed more modern technology to make it practical. And even with the V-22 it was a close call. It became very close to being just another of those "almost" aircraft more than once. 

Edited November 13, 2020 by lmagna

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, lmagna said:

Other concept aircraft/designs of the time included the Hiller X-18, the Curtiss Wright X-19, Bell X-22, LTV XC-142 and Boeing Vertol VZ-2 to name just a few. All of them showed some potential especially the X-19 and XC-142 with speeds of over 400 KTs. But I think it would be safe to say that they were aircraft before their time and the concept needed more modern technology to make it practical. And even with the V-22 it was a close call. It became very close to being just another of those "almost" aircraft more than once. 

All of those advanced the knowledge & technology of short and vertical takeoff aircraft,  The XC-142 being the closest to an operational aircraft before the Osprey....

 

There are a couple of static models of her in the marketplace and one now OOP, very hard to find RC version.....

Sold for over $400.00 when it was in production....

[Canute]

Lou, this is conjecture on my part, but putting the engines in the fuselage would take up cubic feet better used for troops and or cargo. Losing top end speed must have been an acceptable trade off. It's still faster than any other helicopter.

 

The gyrations Boeing/Vertol went thru in designing the software for the control systems was one of several reasons for scrapping the bird. One of my squadron mates was working in Philly on their designs as a junior software engineer. Part of the issue was the old head running this tasking was a good wrench turner, but nowhere near knowing squat about software refinements.

 

Love all those X planes developed in the 40s, 50s and 60s. I've had a chance to see some in the various museums I've been able to visit. Very cool designs.

[popeye the sailor]

hi everyone........yea......there was a rush on the research here.  the Truman reference was probably the the initial call for the need of such an aircraft,  after the proposal of the Marshall plan.   transport aircraft that could get into tight places where an airstrip wasn't an option.  I did some looking in on this,  but couldn't find any correlations either.  there was The Berlin Airlift......that was quite an undertaking in his era  

 

I realize that there were quite a few variants of this aircraft .......and concept,  through the years of its development.  I really did focus on them,  since this is the model I'm building.   I'm sticking to that  

 

it doesn't say on the box,  but from the decal sheet and the box art,  it's Marine.....so if the abbreviations say anything more,  it's an MV.

the placement of the engines is exactly that.......a gyrocopter.  the Marines needed an aircraft that could take off and land in tight places.....they also needed speed on their side as well..   after the Iran hostage crisis,  this underscored the need for such an aircraft.  with the narcelles fixed on the wing,  the tiltrotor concept wouldn't work....it compromised the integrity of the wing and cramped the mechanism to operate it.  I think the length of the props was another issue.  as seen here,  they are large and likely longer than a conventional fixed wing plane.  being this large,  I believe also negated the need for a tail rotor.....especially if the engines were lowered to the fixed wing position during flight.  one drawback they found,  was during operations in the middle east.  as with helicopters,  the downward air currents from the props brought up dust clouds,  which clogged intakes and caused the plane to crash......I haven't read to find what the fix was.....but there were a few incidents caused by this phenomenon.

 

gone shopping..........be back in a bit  

[Old Collingwood]

I found this  thought you might find it interesting  I think its the same squadron  for your MV22B   Marine.

 

OC.

 

https://www.nellis.af.mil/News/Article/2394690/mv-22b-ospreys-fly-over-gulf-coast/

Edited November 13, 2020 by Old Collingwood

[Canute]

Italeri made the Marine variant, Denis. Thank you. I don't know what the differences may be between the two service variants. 

 

 

[mtaylor]

I'm guessing that there's an air filtration system on those engines, possibly similar to what the CH-53 uses.   The filters can be removed when in "clean air" environments.  But definitely needed for desert or jungle (not paved) fields.

[popeye the sailor]

thanks gents........when I got back from shopping,  I took some time to look at images.  I'd better get on with the update though,  before some other interruption happens.  the images kinda go along with what I have to show.  I did get a couple of pictures of the cockpit dry fit....it was still together anyway.

 

the dash has enough room.....I don't need to make any more adjustments.   here's a shot of the interior via the cargo opening...plenty of room in there.

the rotors will be mainly the same color....so I started to assemble them......numbered so I can keep track which is which

I did the interior paint which is a med gray......then added the gear buckets.

 

the tabs for the cargo door added here.  the images threw me somewhat......a couple of pictures showed the door as one long unit.....other pictures show it as split and in the positions shown in the kit.

I'm allowing the flash....some come out good,  others don't....

it can be seen that I added more paint to the cockpit insert....you'll see it better in further pictures    more paint was added to the passenger area.  the seats themselves are a red color.  looks like a dog's breakfast,  but I still need to touch them up.  

it did confuse me a little.....I goofed assembling it.  I had to take it apart and redo it...that went better than I thought it would.....it was a mess.  at one point I did a dry fit of both sections and I thought I had still goofed.  the cockpit section would not fit into the fuselage half.......off about 1/8 of an inch.  I later found that the passenger section bulkhead was in the wrong place......an adjustment later,  and all was good.

the rotor parts are assembled......along with the tires

there are a pair of fins that locate near the ends of the wing.....they were cemented in place.

the rotor blades have also been assembled and sanded....no picture yet.

[popeye the sailor]

the narcelles have been started as well.......work in progress    checking out the dry fit,  I added the wing,  and noticed the gaps on both sides in the front.

in some of the images,  they are there......in others they are not.  I do have some sheet styrene.....I may patch them up.   it doesn't mate up too good either......figures that I'm out of putty.

this time I won't forget the interior dry fit.......please excuse the horrible paint work.....

this shows the spacious area forward of the seats.......I think there should be a bulkhead here.   looking on the starboard side,  the main entrance door is located there.

the cargo opening is forgiving.......once the wing is in place,  it will be the only way to view the interior

 

the flash can be annoying.........  another thing I noticed is that they give you five round window inserts.  not counting the little one in the main entrance door,  there are only three round windows.  if you look at the picture above {and others that show the interior surface,  you can see the outline of additional windows.   there are no signs or them on the outer surfaces.  there's one on each side......makes one wonder what the tooling significance of this is.   most interesting.

[Old Collingwood]

Thats some great progress Denis, I understand you with hick up  - bet it was less than clear destructions  - I swear they expect us to be mind readers, keep up the great work   should be a stunner when built.

 

OC.

[Old Collingwood]

Re- windows, could be some spares incase you  goof them like i did on my Wokka.

 

OC.

[popeye the sailor]

I just assembled the blades on the rotors.........they are massive!  unless the wings were a significant height off the ground,  it would be almost impossible to fly in fixed wing mode.   the six initial prototypes flew trials in helicopter mode in March of 1989.........in September Of 1989 in fixed wing mode. looking at these blades.......you would think otherwise.  two crashed between '91 and '92.......trials halted until '93.  two completed successful sea trials aboard the U.S.S. Wasp in 1990. by this time modifications brought them up to the V22B standard variant.  there is an image on the Wiki.........the wing does fold.....wait till you see how!

 

Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey - Wikipedia

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, popeye the sailor said:

the wing does fold.....wait till you see how!

Yep it rotates clockwise to a fore & aft position, and the blades fold as well.... It's still a monster sized aircraft on a carrier deck though....

[Canute]

As always, an interesting build, Denis. Nice job, fixing the faux pas.

 

Italeri may have been doing the interior marks for the AF version, but never did release a modified kit. There would be a lot of drilling of good sized holes to add them to this one, too. Probably entailed some significant mods to the molds or making new molds, either of which costs Euros.

[Old Collingwood]

Denis with the props  (Lou /  Mark  help me with this)     I would imagine are set up to only  go into the fully  flat 90deg  position  when in flight off the ground, I wouldn't be supprised if there is some kind of  auto safety  device  where on the ground the props can only be set at  certain limits of movement.

 

OC.

[Canute]

I'd bet there was a lockout of some kind to prevent tilting the nacelles from the vertical position, on the ground. As long as they've been around, I've never read about that happening.

 

The issues with landing in dust-storms, induced by the aircraft, were a n early problem, but they have some kind of blind landing system to assist them.

[popeye the sailor]

yea.....WOW....so you saw it!   I was amazed to see how they accomplished this!  there was extensive testing on carrier decks,  as I mentioned starting with the Wasp.  of course there is no information on how these two crashed.....there were two other crashes in 2000 that almost sidelined the whole project.

   I'm sure you might have read this.   I took the model and tried to simise how to modify it,  but I would need to cap the opening off,  and create a pivot for the wings.......it would be an awesome mod if I could fold the wings too,  but they are fixed on the rotor.   

 

Ken.....it would be something if Italeri came up with a kit......likely more expensive too   

 

that wouldn't be the case OC.......scroll down in the link and there is a diagram of the Osprey with wings fixed and in helicopter mode.  with the height and the dehydral of the wings,  it must make up for the size of the blades.  planes are set up for thrust and lift.......to add in the helo equaison changes these numbers and factors in for gyro { whatever that is}.   all have adjustable pitch for prop or rotor blades........I'm sure these are trimmed when changing to the different modes.  they have tested the craft in both modes,  so it must have the ability to take off in fixed wing mode.

 

I just got home from work..........I took the rest of the week off {since I hate work}............I'll get to more later,  if not tomorrow     hope to have some pictures too!