The Army's New MV-75

[Retired W4]

As a former UH-60 Blackhawk instructor pilot I want a seat in the Q-course. Unfortunately the 101st Abn Div is not taking old guys. Maybe I could lie about my age.

Bell V-280 Valor Named MV-75 as Next Generation Bell V-280 Valor Named MV-75 as Next Generation MultiRole Combat Helicopter for U.S. Army

Bell V-280 Valor Named MV-75 as Next Generation MultiRole Combat Helicopter for U.S. Army

www.armyrecognition.com

 

[soFlaNative]

Article mentions "increased agility"... Really?

 

[Retired W4]

Article mentions "increased agility"... Really?

That I doubt. I just hope it does a little better than the Osprey. Maybe the USMC can do a trade.

 

[mckenney99]

For someone who has not followed aircraft designs, is there a real difference between this aircraft and the V22 Osprey that has been plagued by crashes/deaths?

 

[Retired W4]

For someone who has not followed aircraft designs, is there a real difference between this aircraft and the V22 Osprey that has been plagued by crashes/deaths?

ONE of the design differences is the V-22 engines rotate/tilt whereas the engine on the MV-75 are fixed with the rotors/props tilt. I have no idea how they do that.

Here is a picture of the XV-15, prototype to the V-22. I took the picture at the Dallas Convention Center, mid-1990's. They were built right down the road in Arlington.


More of a proof of concept than prototype.

 

[LVSteve]

If the latest Bell design eliminates that cursed clutch in the Osprey design, then I'll give it a cautious maybe. I'd have put my money on the Sikorsky SB-1 Defiant design so as not to have all my eggs in the tiltrotor basket.

Having observed the fickle nature of US defense procurement, I have to wonder if counter rotating rotors of the SB-1 looked "too Russian" for some in the Pentagon, despite the fact that the Sikorsky design uses rigid rotors in a different way to "regular" helicopters.

 

[Harv 24]

Not an aviator, but I think the Valor is the right choice for future conflicts, it has increased speeds and longer legs with more carrying capacity. The Osprey tech is older and helped get us to the Valor. Our fights in the pacific are going to need that speed and endurance.

Just my $.02

 

[fordson]

ONE of the design differences is the V-22 engines rotate/tilt whereas the engine on the MV-75 are fixed with the rotors/props tilt. I have no idea how they do that.

Here is a picture of the XV-15, prototype to the V-22. I took the picture at the Dallas Convention Center, mid-1990's. They were built right down the road in Arlington.

View attachment 762746View attachment 762748
More of a proof of concept than prototype.

Fixed engines with a tilting rotor……..Flex drive shaft… or some really smart gearing……? There may be a simple answer that I hadn’t thought thru….

 

[Juan Million]

What's wrong with the CH-47.

 

[Harv 24]

What's wrong with the CH-47.

Old design, If we want the best >mil in the world, we need to keep making great equipment to give our guys the edge against everyone.
Low and slow on the modern battlefield gets you in trouble.

 

[LVSteve]

What's wrong with the CH-47.

Too slow, radar cross section of a large barn, acoustic signature of Ted Nugent.

 

[DWalt]

Fixed engines with a tilting rotor……..Flex drive shaft… or some really smart gearing……? There may be a simple answer that I hadn’t thought thru….

Possibly hydraulics?

 

[LVSteve]

Possibly hydraulics?

Nooooo!!!! Hydraulic drives at those power levels can lead to all manner of "fun". Just look at the history of diesel-hydraulic locomotives.

The way you make this work is to have a "final drive" gear and the pivot for the prop-pod share the same axis. The only thing that needs to be looked at carefully is maintaining lubrication of the final drive gear interface thru all positions of the prop-pod.

 

[lihpster]

Too slow, radar cross section of a large barn, acoustic signature of Ted Nugent.

I would have said Foghat, but that works.

 

[fordson]

Nooooo!!!! Hydraulic drives at those power levels can lead to all manner of "fun". Just look at the history of diesel-hydraulic locomotives.

The way you make this work is to have a "final drive" gear and the pivot for the prop-pod share the same axis. The only thing that needs to be looked at carefully is maintaining lubrication of the final drive gear interface thru all positions of the prop-pod.

Yes, but that’s not the final answer. The thrust vector needs to rotate from horizontal to vertical - and back. The engine output/input shaft to the rotor head must rotate thru a 90* angle while providing power - that connecting interface is what I’m trying to get my head around.

 

[GnarlsR2]

"The thrust vector needs to rotate from horizontal to vertical - and back. ...- that connecting interface is what I’m trying to get my head around."

At my age that takes a little more than a cup of strong coffee!

 

[DHernandez]

For someone who has not followed aircraft designs, is there a real difference between this aircraft and the V22 Osprey that has been plagued by crashes/deaths?

Osprey gets bad press but actually has a higher flight success/reliability rate than most other military aircraft.

 

[LVSteve]

Yes, but that’s not the final answer. The thrust vector needs to rotate from horizontal to vertical - and back. The engine output/input shaft to the rotor head must rotate thru a 90* angle while providing power - that connecting interface is what I’m trying to get my head around.

I don't have a decent drawing package on this computer, Paint doesn't cut it, so I will try to explain again.

The engine is behind the prop-pod, with its drive shaft emerging from the front. This driveshaft is horizontal when viewed from the side and orientated parallel to the fore/aft axis of the aircraft. At the end of this shaft I would place a spur gear. This spur gear meshes with a "translation gear" (my name) with its axis at 90° to the driveshaft. This plane of this axis is horizontal when viewed from the front of the aircraft, so the gear looks like it is standing upright. by design, it is the same axis you want the prop-pods to rotate on.

To transfer power from the second gear to the propeller shaft axis, you use another spur gear. Now, if you think about it, if the prop-pod rotation axis coincides with the translation gear axis, the propeller shaft spur can "roll around" on that gear, allowing the propeller shaft axis to move from horizontal to the vertical. No fancy joints are required, its all done by the gears. The prop-pod can be rotated using gears attached to the engine pod which is fixed to the wing tips.

 

[Retired W4]

Pretty good explanation. I understood most of it. I would sure like to get into the factory to see it all work.

 

[fordson]

I don't have a decent drawing package on this computer, Paint doesn't cut it, so I will try to explain again.

The engine is behind the prop-pod, with its drive shaft emerging from the front. This driveshaft is horizontal when viewed from the side and orientated parallel to the fore/aft axis of the aircraft. At the end of this shaft I would place a spur gear. This spur gear meshes with a "translation gear" (my name) with its axis at 90° to the driveshaft. This plane of this axis is horizontal when viewed from the front of the aircraft, so the gear looks like it is standing upright. by design, it is the same axis you want the prop-pods to rotate on.

To transfer power from the second gear to the propeller shaft axis, you use another spur gear. Now, if you think about it, if the prop-pod rotation axis coincides with the translation gear axis, the propeller shaft spur can "roll around" on that gear, allowing the propeller shaft axis to move from horizontal to the vertical. No fancy joints are required, its all done by the gears. The prop-pod can be rotated using gears attached to the engine pod which is fixed to the wing tips.

Got it . Rather simple when you think about it. Wonder how close the actual design is to this explanation. Some of the on-line photos have purposely blurred the exposed engine/rotor pod when in the vertical position. They’re not sharing much on the prototype at this stage.