That's awesome! Share them on Instagram and tag us so we can share them in our story!

@Andrew11 - do you by chance know if this is the platform mentioned on radio 12.2020 as being shopped as a air ambulance ?

not at all their is not humvee transport capacity

@@omnianti0 Hence "civilian", this one has to carry Jeeps XD

@@sim.frischh9781 im nearly sure this aw609 canot load a jeep at the limit a moto not a harley

And it looks better than the "drone version" aircrafts.

@@steve0826 BELL Eagle Eye tilrotor UAV drone

We are too! More info in this PR: www.justhelicopters.com/ArticlesNews/IndustryWideNews/tabid/434/Article/151650/Tokyo-Metropolitan-Government-evaluates-the-AW609-tiltrotor-s-unique-capabiliti.aspx

Some time ago they lost a prototype with the death of two test pilots, I immagine development stopped for some time.

@@walterF205 They claimed many customers were interested at the time it revealed years ago but so far I see nobody fly it which implies no sale at all.

@@kittenastrophy5951 Considering the type of aircraft, the first of its kind, at present it results 3 units bought by United Arab Emirates Air Force, (plus three options) ordered in November 2015, with deliveries starting in 2019, SAR version (Wikipedia)

@@walterF205 That's wiki. you know how reliable it is. Where is any photo in public domain of the actual customer operated? By the way, around that year , Dubai was bankrupted though it's just not the whole UAE, remember that ?

nothing related with usa really

@@omnianti0 Uh, originally developed with Bell Helicopter, a US company. Technology originally developed via the XV-15 and V-22 tiltrotors.

@@zf4hp24 is their use the exact same design with a shaft between two engines

@@omnianti0 Yes. Cross-shaft interconnect. There are several XV-15 Tiltrotor videos here on YT dating back to the mid-1980s.

@@zf4hp24 yes the xv15 looked good but sadly its ended it seem despit it had potential sales for civilian and others duno why is the new aw609 have some diference except the capacity

none in the usa want to afoard such marvel too much more for people like elon musk or bill gate

Its too expensive

@@georgewashington1621 it must cost more than reusable rocket for space travel

Nah, all Bell has to do is make the V280 cheaper and slap a civilian paint scheme on it. Then they're right back in the conversation. I see applications for both with the coast guard and in private sectors but, the price of tilt rotar tech has to come down significantly.

bell is not related or what

No it isn't. Just this version.

@@MyAccountIs17YearsOld did bell sell the design patent to augusta westland

@@omnianti0 no bell was involved in the design process with AW, however bell stopped being a primary partner some time ago. So it is a joint AW/Bell design.

@@kimjonglongdong3158 is their some trouble that prevent rich people to enjoy it i guess anyone want such advanatge

Since the AW609 is still in final program development, testing, and certification, not sure that a glide ratio has been published anywhere. Here's the website: www.leonardocompany.com/en/products/aw609 Regarding autorotation, probably the only aircraft we can look at for a reference is the V22. From what we have read, the V22 has extremely poor autorotational capabilities and most attempts in simulators end in crashes. They are operated more as an airplane than as a helicopter and conditions have to be absolutely perfect to perform an autorotation.

www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2014-06-02/test-pilots-take-autorotating-tiltrotor The AW609 has performed autorotation in testing. Though it is unlikely to be necessary given the dual engine linkage running along the wing.

Not really, should the V-280 be approved for production, it would lead to a whole new era of tilt rotor aircraft. Then again I don't think bell makes tilt rotors for the open market, or am I wrong. Still this thing is a really nice looking aircraft.

First flight was in 2003 -> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_AW609

Good thing this isn't an osprey then!

@@kimjonglongdong3158 I'm not saying it is.. The tech is very similar/the same so it will have the same issues. The US military has an insane budget which is why it keeps flying.

@@neomatrix3612 it's designed for the civilian market, hence one can infer that particular issue will have been resolved, especially considering the majority of pre-orders placed thus far have been by the uber rich, so I doubt they would want to be spending that much time/man-hours on maintenance.

@@kimjonglongdong3158 OK, hopefully that's the case. Cheers

While this aircraft is derived from the Osprey, it doesn't have the same capabilities as the Osprey to reduce complexity and cost. This tilt rotor transitions between flight modes slower and the rotors do not fold. The per hour maintenance costs will probably be quite high like any rotary wing aircraft. But the per mile cost offset by the speed. This aircraft will allow flight departments to combine helicopter and turboprop missions into a single aircraft.

Can it fly with just one engine?

You won't even notice! Engine driveshafts are mechanically connected, just like Airbus A-400M.

how?

@@omnianti0 Several V-22 accidents happen during its transformation from helicopter mode to fix wing aircraft mode. Also, using two propellers for hovering means the disaster of controlling if one engine failed.

@@taticaldroid9288 its a falacious logic to multiply the engine because its more chalenging to maintain synchrounously and bring more failure let considere the better helicopter of the world is it single or twin and all the basic vehicules and all the critical device if it was true why not 16engine as the piloted drone that made me laught so hard

@@taticaldroid9288 You do know since those kinks were fixed the V-22 has a better safety record then most helicopters, including the CH-47 and no I'm not counting combat operations. Also the props are connected to each other. meaning if even one engine fails you can still bring the aircraft down safely.

@@taticaldroid9288 A tiltrotor does not have a "fixed wing aircraft" mode. The stubby fixed wings do generate some lift (in forward flight) but most of the lift (again in forward flight) comes from the rotors themselves. You could replace the stubby wings with round beams and the tiltrotor would still achieve forward flight - with rotors in a nearly vertcal plane (unlike helicoptors, whose rotors are in a nearly horizontal plane in forward flight).

...like a helicopter?

*Harrier wants to know your location*

@@sebastiaomendonca1477 Yak-141

@@sentien13 V280 has twice the speed & more than twice the range of any helicoptor

@@samjubilee6593 yea but imagine...

Yes - exactly - saves so many moving parts. Because of electric motors instead of turbines (at the rotors), no hot downwash, so rotors & motors could rotate together (like V22 - but it has downwash issue), eliminating complex gearing.

💥💀

I really doubt it will survive engine failure even in horizontal flight. Edit: oh wiki says there IS a drive shaft between two engines (not rotors?) so i guess they had it covered.

I think so. There is no other way it could rotate on the z axis

If it's like the V 22 there is a driveshaft that runs the full length of the wing connecting the 2 power plants. One engine dies the other takes over. It works!

There is a link shaft so that one engine can run both rotors. Plus it can autorotate like a helicopter

The USCG would love to have this for the SAR mission.

@@JustaPilot1 if they wanted tilt rotor they would have probably gone with the V22. This is pretty tiny and probably hard to winch someone up and down from. the reason i said HEMS, is due to the high speed but ability to land in small spaces.

@@alexanderkruse5715 This (along with nearly identical V280) is better than V22 - because V22 tilts its turbo jet engines downward for takeoff, landing or hover, causing hot downwash. V280 and AW609 engines do not tilt; only rotor tilts so no downdraft problems. Both are smaller and cheaper (tho V280 not in production yet pending military contract) than V22. Also have less disk loading on rotors than V22. (Edit - Ooops, my bad - looks like the AW609 engines do rotate with the rotors. I have been following the development of the V280 Valor and had incorrectly assumed the AW609 engines remained fixed while rotor tilts, as does the V280...)

It can land conventionally with the nacelles part lowered. Propeller blades are too long to clear the ground if fully lowered to the horizontal

The Osprey has a mechanical link (a rotating rod) between the two rotors. It can fly and land safely if one engine quits.

their both are linked by a shaft

@P Aguero even if both engine fail it can use autorotation or glide at the condition the hydraulic work

The reason the Valor's engines don't rotate is to help reduce dust in landing ops as well as remove the big blind spot for door gunners, (Also so they cant shoot their own engines), It is not for the degradation of landing pads, although this is an unintended win in the design, its not a primary reason for why the nacelles were designed that way.

This isn't competitor with Valor. Could be it Leonardo NGCTR (Next Generation Civil Tilt Rotor), but it isn't for military use.

The valor is nice ....

@@marcspector4997 not yet ;)

This used to be a Bell/Augusta design, they sold it off.

Actually, the FAA's powered-lift rating can be acheieved ab-initio, i.e., with no prior experience in fixed or rotary wing aircraft.

The two engines are connected by a shaft. If one engine fail the other compensate the loss. If the Blades breake the they con down hehehe

Because the blades have to provide all the lift, the lift from the wings doesnt come into play until forward flight.

@@memorgan1 why not replace them with smaller jet engines. this looks ungainly and is A disaster waiting to happen.its already killed 90 people. and is VERY EXPENSIVE - 90 BILLION.

@@memorgan1 Even in forward flight the majority of lift comes from the rotors.

Aynen öyle bizim gemiler için alınsa fena olmaz aslında

entre 8 e 10 milhões de dólares