V-22 Osprey Tilt Rotor

[[aps]gnat 28]

Geeezzz ... I give you a miracle "plane" that SHOULDN'T even be able to fly in ArmA .... and you want more.

- Cargo Load / Unload point: If that point is INSIDE the cargo area we are going to have all sorts of trouble getting AI (or even players) to board the unit, especially with the ramps shut.

@Miles

- Yep, I'll speed the ramp to a faster (unrealistic) speed, no problem

- Scripts. Not really interested at this stage. creates compatability issues etc. Maybe later

- Gunner: Yep, already bringing some BIS stuff across. The offical belly gun is a bit boring I think.

@altimeter - read the readme (again!!! ) Problem even dates back to OFP

@Commando84

Thanks mate

Quote[/b] ].... use a harrier-like flight model for the V-22? I'm sure it's tweakable so that it has VTOL rather than STOL.

Nop

Remember the ArmA AV8 is STOL, not VTOL and I havent seen anyone yet tweak ArmA so VTOL works (BIS themselves suggest its not possible/intended).

Aside from that, I can assure you (as several people including EricM have suggested) that the unit is MUCH MORE USEFUL having a helicopter config.

@DragoFire

Sure, that would LOOK nice but for the <20 people that might find an actual use for the "fold and rotate wings" thing, the work required (folding propeller blades ffs !!! ) to model and config it far exceeds the usefulness.

[miles teg 1]

Sounds good my friend! Yeah I know the cargo door in real life is likely opened far in advance to dropping off troops at a landing zone (if its even closed at all).

I'm looking forward to a version with a tail gunner on the rear ramp area. That'll give the enemy a nasty little surprise as they try and take pot shots at the Osprey as it takes off to leave.

For the people who hate the flight control system, keep in mind that what Gnat did is extremely difficult to do. It really is a major achievement and overall works quite well. Like flying in general in ArmA, it takes some time to adapt to the flight coontrols. But after awhile its not bad at all one you get the hang of it. Just don't make tight turns or slow down if you need to turn tighter.

Gnat, I know the hardcore USMC fans in ArmA are really loving this and can't wait to see it in USMC colors.

Rock on and I hope to see this baby taking off your ships that you were working on soon.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[max power 21]

Gnat @ June 10 2008,16:45)]

Quote[/b] ].... use a harrier-like flight model for the V-22? I'm sure it's tweakable so that it has VTOL rather than STOL.

Nop

Remember the ArmA AV8 is STOL, not VTOL and I havent seen anyone yet tweak ArmA so VTOL works (BIS themselves suggest its not possible/intended).

Aside from that, I can assure you (as several people including EricM have suggested) that the unit is MUCH MORE USEFUL having a helicopter config.

I think they said that you could make a unit hover by increasing its top speed (indirectly influencing the thrust, I suppose), but you have no control over how much power you're giving the hovering vstol aircraft, so you would just float up and up and up.

[Casimir 0]

HJust wanted to say great work Gnat. Took some pics using it. I love yoir work and i only hope that you continue with your work.

Dunno if i should really post these here but hell here goes.

Will get some more when my game has stopped being on a kamikazee mission with my firewall...

[Daniel 0]

Love the flight model the way it is, it feels natural and allows the aircraft to do all the things that are intended. From within the cockpit, watching the nacelles adjust their angle as you go into forward flight is very impressive.

If it's possible to do without wrecking the current flight model, perhaps the top speed should be higher.

[landdon 0]

Gnat,

You have done an outstanding job as always!  Keep up the outstanding work.  It would be great to see some in the different camoflage patterns, and lightly armed, I'm partial to a USAF version. I'm not certain but I believe they are pulling for a chin turret and I'm sure someone is going to sling a door gun mount in the tail or on the sides.  Great work no matter what!

[Benoist 0]

Gnat, I know that you did an impressive work, I asked for a plane FM in order to check witch one is better/easier to fly, If you can't, well, you can't, I'm happy with this version anyway.

[Dark SudoNix 1]

hey gnat, just a suggestion/thought... the grey color is a lil glossy... you should use the flat military grey as like the Ah1z in game... and maybe add some exhaust residue around the exhaust area... but deff. a flat grey color.

[Dark SudoNix 1]

Gnat,

You have done an outstanding job as always!  Keep up the outstanding work.  It would be great to see some in the different camoflage patterns, and lightly armed, I'm partial to a USAF version.  I'm not certain but I believe they are pulling for a chin turret and I'm sure someone is going to sling a door gun mount in the tail or on the sides.  Great work no matter what!

the marines are already doing that...

[Inkslinger 1]

1 last suggestion: could you make the landing gear manual? The way I land the gear doesn't come out quite fast enough.

Ive also managed to land going forward at nearly 100kmh without taking any damage as long as the gear comes out fully before I touch down and I can keep the nacelles around 45 degree angle.

It would be nice to have the nacelles manual but I'm happy with the way they are as with manual ones you'd most likely have problems with AI operating it.

[JeRK 0]

1 last suggestion: could you make the landing gear manual? The way I land the gear doesn't come out quite fast enough.

Ive also managed to land going forward at nearly 100kmh without taking any damage as long as the gear comes out fully before I touch down and I can keep the nacelles around 45 degree angle.

It would be nice to have the nacelles manual but I'm happy with the way they are as with manual ones you'd most likely have problems with AI operating it.

I agree that gear would be better if the gear were manual (with the KA too, would surely make life easier when the engine fails) but I don't think it's possible.

Rolling landings would be quite useful.

[Gedis 0]

um, i think there could be a script, when script detects that AI is flying the Osprey, it switches to auto-gear; when detects that Player is flying the Osprey, it switches to manual gear control for player. Just an idea...

btw, door gunners, well idea sounds great, i would want that, but the fact there is only M-240 on the ramp at back and that it probably be gun turret under the belly, idea of door gunners fades away...

Osprey woun't do much low flyings, because it's a fragile aircraft, so it decends from height to the lz, making door guns almost ineffective. Most of the time doors guns would conflict with ospreys speed, aerodynamics, those hanging engines and blades, so it leaves door guns usable in restricted way only, while flying as a helicopter.

BTW, that refueling probe should be retracted...

[shark-attack 2]

a great addition to the armoury..

well done gnat

if only we had a working fast rope set up this would be the bollocks

[Renegade Commando 0]

-When shooting towards the cockpit while onboard you can see thru the fuselage in the muzzleflash.

-How about putting an M-107 or M-109 in a bungee cord for the doorgunner (coastguard style).

-Is it possible to add the option to taxi while on the ground?

-Fastrope insertion? Hell yeah, second that!

[Dark SudoNix 1]

um, i think there could be a script, when script detects that AI is flying the Osprey, it switches to auto-gear; when detects that Player is flying the Osprey, it switches to manual gear control for player. Just an idea...

btw, door gunners, well idea sounds great, i would want that, but the fact there is only M-240 on the ramp at back and that it probably be gun turret under the belly, idea of door gunners fades away...

Osprey woun't do much low flyings, because it's a fragile aircraft, so it decends from height to the lz, making door guns almost ineffective. Most of the time doors guns would conflict with ospreys speed, aerodynamics, those hanging engines and blades, so it leaves door guns usable in restricted way only, while flying as a helicopter.

BTW, that refueling probe should be retracted...

you must have simply just seen a picture of a v22 without a refueling probe. i have never heard of a retractible refueling probe except for this one... which is only one Bird with it and its experimental... here is the link. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q2/nr_040402m.html

[Gedis 0]

you must have simply just seen a picture of a v22 without a refueling probe. i have never heard of a retractible refueling probe except for this one... which is only one Bird with it and its experimental...  here is the link.  http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q2/nr_040402m.html

now you have seen it

[thegunnysgt 1]

Just a thought, is there a way to open the rear doors completely, but have it where you can either close them fully or only close the bottom half and leave the upper half open.

[DragoFire 0]

Primary function

Amphibious assault transport of troops, equipment and supplies from assault ships and land bases  

Description

The V-22 Osprey is a multi-engine, dual-piloted, self-deployable, medium lift, vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) tiltrotor aircraft designed for combat, combat support, combat service support, and Special Operations missions worldwide. It will replace the Corps' aged fleet of CH-46E and CH-53D medium lift helicopters  

Variants

CV-22 Air Force Variant for their Special Operations missions maintaining maximum commonality with the MV-22. Aircraft avionics peculiar to the Air Force unique mission requirements constitute aircraft differences.

HV-22 Navy Variant for Combat Search and Rescue and fleet logistics support.

MV-22 Marine Corps Variant

:carry 24 troops 251 nm while the CH-46 cannot perform this mission.

:cruise at 225 Kts as compared to approximately 100 Kts for the CH-46.

:carry an external 10,000-pound load a distance of 66 nm as compared to the CH-53D and CH-46E, which could not carry this load.

UV-22 Army Variant

Payload

The V-22 has a large, open cabin with a rear loading ramp that provides easy access to the cabin. Numerous cabin and cargo systems have been designed for the V-22 and are available to satisfy a full range of mission tasks. The standard configuration is seating for 24 combat loaded Marines (a reinforced rifle squad) and one crewman. The seats are identical to the cockpit jumpseat except that the restraint system is a three-point lap belt and single shoulder harness.

The V-22 is designed to carry up to 24 combat troops. Their lives are primarily protected by features that keep the aircraft in flight; e.g., fire and explosion suppression features in the sponson fuel area that greatly reduce the likelihood of fire in areas that cannot be reached by the crew or passengers with fire extinguishers. In addition, the V-22 has been designed with a number features to improve the likelihood of surviving a crash.

The V-22 is fitted with two external cargo hooks, either of which can support a load of 4,538 kg (10,000 lbs). If the retractable hooks are used together for stability, the combined capacity can be up to 6,804 kg (15,000 lbs).

The Osprey is also fitted with a rescue hoist that consists of a hydraulically powered winch mounted on a removable boom and support shaft. The winch holds 76 usable meters (250 usable feet) of 0.4 cm (5.32 in) diameter corrosion-resistant steel cable. It has a rated capacity of 272 kilograms (600 pounds) with a 2.5 g limit load factor. Cable speed is variable between 0.13 and 1.37 m/s (25 and 250 ft/min). A stainless steel rescue hook is attached to the hoist cable. A remote hand-held control is provided for the crewman operating the hoist.

The V-22's cabin and cargo ramp are capable of accepting cargo pallets or containers as large as 68 inches wide, 66.23 inches high, and 250 inches long as long as the object is capable of achieving the necessary restraint criteria. The Osprey has a usable cabin volume of 739 cu ft and is designed to carry up to a 20,000 lb load internally.

The JORD requires that the MV-22 provide sufficient cargo space capacity for the safe aerial transport of loads such as one light vehicle with trailer and seating for a 4-member crew, or four tandem-loaded 48-inch x 48-inch skid boards/platforms or two 463L half pallets with a maximum gross weight of 4,000 lbs. each.

Weapon systems

Optional M240G 7.62mm machine gun mounted on the back ramp.

Optional two .50 caliber cabin guns (navy version) <span style='color:red'>amendment</span>

BAE Systems has developed a remotely operated weapon turret for the MV-22, the Remote Guardian System (RGS), which provides 360 degree coverage. The RGS can be belly-mounted on the MV-22 and can be armed with a GAU-17 7.62mm mini-gun or other gun up to 0.50 calibre. If funded by the USMC, the system could be ready for installation in mid-2008.

Note:

While looking through loads information on the Osprey, have found no refereance to door mounted guns like the UH-60. I personally think it'd be a dangerest thing to do, due to the location of the doors and the rotors, if fired in slow forward movement mode or fast there'd be a high chance of rotor damage if gun firing arc is too wide. If it was to be mounted it would be limited to a 35 degree fire arc.

Thus r/h gun would be +5 to +40 degree arc and l/h gun would be -5 to -40 degree arc. If rotors are vertical or 15 degrees off you could have the horizontal fire arcs increased.

[Inkslinger 1]

heres a pic of the Osprey with it upcomming hardware the 12.7mm turret system, and the retractable fueling pod.

http://www.putfile.com/pic/8287577

Also the link to the source:

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2001ewc/amos.pdf

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

heres a pic of the Osprey with it upcomming hardware the 12.7mm turret system, and the retractable fueling pod.

http://www.putfile.com/pic/8287577

[im]http://img2.putfile.com/main/6/16300503730.jpg[/img]

Also the link to the source:

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2001ewc/amos.pdf

That system was dropped as it:

a) weighed too much changing the cofg reducing the usable payload.

b) required extensive strengthing of the forward fuselage

c) cost a small fortune to do.

[ravendk 25]

Quote[/b] ]

b) required extensive strengthing of the forward fuselage

c) cost a small fortune to do.

But luckily, that isnt a issue for modmakers.

EI SFP Mod had a version of the CV90 with AT misiles on it, it only excist on the drawingboard but got made anyway..

Its still possible to make even tho its not made IRL and if made right it would be realistic too.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

But luckily, that isnt a issue for modmakers.

It is if you want realism... which is what most people say they want.  But if you are happy with your fantasy then go for it.

Edits for atrocious typing...

[manzilla 1]

Why not make both, time permitting of course. This game is little more than fantasy as it is. Having realistic addons is great but considering the fact that games will always be unrealistic by nature, a little fun with a turret system wont kill any body. If they don't think it be realistic, they can always simply not use it. Of course time and desire permitting.

[layne_suhr 0]

a little fun with a turret system wont kill any body

Except SLA of course

I honestly think that the gatling gun is not needed and just use the v-22 for transport for a number of reasons.

1.It would be hard to line up for a good attack in the V-22

2. Takes more time to make it in the model and also less time committed to fixing the V-22.

[miles teg 1]

I'd rather just see the little belly mounted turret which seems to me much more realistic as this is the main system currently talked about (not a nose mounted system).    Personally I would NOT like to see the unrealistic versions.  But it's up to the addon maker to decide whether he wants to spend hours of modelling and config work to make something that will never exist in real life.    

If you want the ultimate gunship you might as well stick rocket pods on it and load it with tons of missiles.  

But all in all, I'd be happy with just seeing a little rear map mounted machine gun position.

Regarding the real life info on it, personally I think that thing is a flying death trap. For it to be used, as that one picture shows, as a commando type helicopter for getting onto rooftops, would be insane. Are the engines even armored? Unlike a helicopter, where the engines are on top or upper sides (and thus harder to hit and more easily armored), this bird has them out in the open as big targets for any enemy rifleman/machine gunner to blaze away at.

What happens if one engine is lost in a hover? I can't imagine it doing anything other then cork crewing into the ground. Overall, I think it is a "GeeWhiz" toy for the Pentagon with lots of nice features that will come at the expense of human life.

Anyhoo.... at least its fun in ArmA to fly around in and definitely was a tremendous accomplishment to get the rotating engines to function correctly.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>