http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22-survive.htm
An interconnecting driveshaft allows the Osprey to continue flying in the advent of an engine failure. Either engine can power both proprotors, although with reduced performance. The drive train subsystem is comprised of two proprotor gearboxes (PRGB), two tilt-axis gearboxes (TAGB), one mid wing gearbox (MWGB), an interconnect drive train, and an emergency lubrication system (ELS). The primary purpose of the drive system is to distribute engine power to the two proprotors, which generate lift and thrust. The drive system enables power distribution to the proprotors during all engines operating (AEO) and one engine inoperative (OEI) conditions.
Under normal operating conditions, each proprotor gearbox is powered by the nearest engine via the engine output shaft. In the event of engine power loss, the proprotor gearbox associated with the failed engine receives power from the opposite engine through the interconnect drive system. A sprag-type overrunning clutch between the engine output shaft and the helical input gears overruns so that the failed engine will not be back driven by the PRGB
Now I'm imagining an ugly picture: An engine failure followed by a gearbox failure.
Thanks for the info. The Marines are quite picky about their aircraft (notice they don't fly UH-60 Blackhawks) so if they like this one I guess that's that.
cll: "Now I'm imagining an ugly picture: An engine failure followed by a gearbox failure."
samPaine: "Now I'm imagining a bunch of shredded gears and ORCs before an engine failure."
I'm in agreement, if the Marines like it, then fine. But for me, as an engineer, it sounds like a wide diversion from the principle of K.I.S.S.
More systems == Less Reliable. Period.
Now maybe it's a reasonable trade-off for the added perfomance/capabilities, but it just sounds like a Rube-Goldberg Machine description, not an A-10 "overbuilt tough" description.