Bell solves BA609 tiltrotor torque mystery

Flightglobal.com ^ | 06/10/07 | John Croft

[Boundless]

> Doesn’t Rotax manufacture engines?
> I don’t get the flying on a tether part.

You are correct. I was thinking of Moller.
http://www.moller.com/
which presently has trademarks on “Rotapower” and “RotaFan”

[Boundless]

> Now, for all the naysayers who would prefer
> America should never take a risk ...

I’ve no problem with risk, as long as it’s plainly stated.

Tilt-rotors are much riskier than fixed wing, and probably
riskier than traditional rotary wing.

And my statement about cert wasn’t an endorsement of the
present FAA posture. It’s just a political reality that
novel flying machines have to face, and they can’t assume
they’ll get a special type rating. I’m encouraged that
the FAA isn’t very much standing in the way of commercial
suborbital vehicles, which are clearly extremely risky.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Can this thing auto-rotate like a helo?
Guess: barely, and only if the blades are horizontal.

Helicopters can attempt to autorotate, there's no guarantee that said attempt will be successful; most aren't. Any idea what the disc loading on the 609 is and don't guess?

Can it glide like a fixed wing?
Guess: barely, and the touchdown speed will be dangerously high.

Any idea what the glide ratio on the 609 is and once again, don't guess?

[aruanan]

After being briefed on the quirk, Hopkins says Bell engineers homed in on the most unlikely of culprits - the placement of the exhaust port on the left engine.

I bet Richard Feynman would have spotted this immediately.

[G Larry]

You should read some of the V-22 blogs first.