Very cool picture of the OV-10 with the 20mm turret in the belly. I’ve never seen that before.
Neat OV-10 pictures. I’ve always really liked the Bronco gunship. In fact I have a couple of sketches around here of my Citation fuselage with the gun turret in the back!
Phil
Neat little project [:)]
Alright, I broke down and ordered my Mohawk and Osprey donor kits just a few minutes ago. So, that will make my entry in this little discussion. I hope to be getting started on that one soon.
Also started to modify my 1/48 V-22 to make my AV-22 gunship…I cut all the molded-on pax seating out of the back and started to pencil in some gunports on the port/left side to start working some ideas on the weapons. I’ll post some pics once I get something worth showing done.
LJ -
So how are you planning on painting this new Mud-mover of yours?
Question for all the Marines around here…
I’m planning on this being a USMC aircraft and was working on some unit markings. I’m trying to figure out the USMC system for squadron designation and I’m looking at a VMLA- prefix. Am I on the right path with that or tilting aginst a windmill? Don’t have a number yet - not sure if it should be a new number or take over an existing number. Suggestions welcome.
Trigger, No idea on the paint scheme yet. Too soon to even contemplate that. I doubt it will be standard greys, though.
VMLA- sounds about right to me, but I’m not an air winger, all those designations confuse this old grunt. I would guess that it would be a new unit, but it could also replace an old one as they transition over to the new airframe.
*Edited:*Heck, it’s a “What If” so you can mark it as VMX-1 if you really wanted to, Trigger!
Ya know, I thought about that. But I decided that I would want to display it along my MV-22B and I wanted the Osprey to have operational markings (any 1/48 CH-46 builders out their who won’t use the gray operational decals? [:D])
Trigger, I follow your thinking on the squadron designator, and allow me to offer my suggestions.
The “L” in your VMLA (assuming you took it along the lines of the HML/A) would connotate a “light” lift capability. Marine skid squadrons have an “L” designator because the Huey can be utilized in a light-lift role. I’m assuming your armed tiltrotors won’t be carrying much cargo, so we’ll leave the “L” out. [:)]
Where does that leave us? VMA? Sounds like a Harrier squadron, so maybe we’d need a new letter to denote the tiltrotor classification. That’s where I’m slightly confused.
The Osprey training squadron at New River was previously VMMT-204. Now that “T” was for training, not tiltrotor, I’m 95% sure. Later, the unit was redesignated as VMX-22. Not sure if the “X” is classifying the tiltrotor designation, or the training mission.
Maybe ridleusmc or supercobra, who are a little closer to the active-duty buzz than I am, can throw out a suggestion.
VMXA-???
For numbers, maybe you convert an existing Harrier, or God forbid, a skid squadron to the new airframe. Better yet, pretend the Corps got a budget windfall and just formed brand-new squadrons…[:D]
Now I would have thought X meant test/evaluation (as in VX-4) but then there’s HMX-1…
LJ - AH-1Wsnake’s got me thinking that I may stand corrected regarding your VMX-1. I thought that was an eval designation, but now I’m not so sure.
Not planning on converting a skid unit. I may be crazy, but I ain’t suicidal. If not a budget windfall unit, then maybe a former Harrier unit as I doubt they’ll replace AV-8Bs with F-35Bs on a one-for-one basis and some units stand the chance of being disbanded.
I’m pretty sure the X designator comes from experimental and means Test & Evaluation or Operational Evaluation. All our squadrons here at Pax River are designated with an X. That being said, I’m not sure how HMX-1 got that designation.
How about a new designation, like HMA? Just leave the L, M or H out, since it won’t be carrying much if any cargo. And to me it seems that a tiltrotor should be in an H squadron instead of a V squadron. Although maybe we do need a new designator for the tiltrotor, then we can put the V-22 in heavy tiltrotor squadrons and the escorts in light tiltrotor squadrons.
Phil
HMA-
I know is the designator for a Vietnam-era Marine Attack Helicopter squadron (HMA-773 flew AH-1Gs)
HML/A-
Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron (HML/A-269 out of New River)
HMT-302
Marine Helicopter Training Squadron
VMMT-204
Marine Medium Tiltrotor Training Squadron (this is from http://www.2maw.usmc.mil/MAG29/VMMT204/default.asp) and was formerly known as HMT-204 up until 1990. Intersting to note here is, there’s no H anywhere in the designation.
So from that, I know H is for Helicoptor, M is for Marine Squadron, A is for attack, L/A is Light Attack, the second M is for Medium, T is for training,
Is would seem the V is for V/STOL except for the fact that we have VMFA- and VMA- prefixes for Hornet and Harrier squadrons respectively. I suspect Hornets aren’t V/STOL capable (correct me if I’m wrong). Thus my confusion…
As far as I know, the leading V only designates a heavier-than-air aircraft, not a V/STOL. It was chosen way long ago when there was no such thing as a V/STOL aircraft. The V was chosen for reasons unknown but was to separate them from the Z, or light-than-air aircraft. You’re right, the Hornet does not have any V/STOL capabilities. So really the leading V and H designations are not really consistent. We need a new tiltrotor squadron designator, any ideas? We could use B for both helo and fixed wing, but somehow BMLA just doesn’t sound very good!!
Phil
V - Fixed Wing
H - Helicopter (and Heavy Lift eg: HMH-461)
X - Test and Evaluation (VX-9)
A - Attack
AW - All Weather
F - Fighter
M - Marine (and Medium Lift eg: HMM-264)
T - Training (eg: VMAT-203)
The first letter designates type, second Marine, subsequent letter(s) mission.
So far there are the following designations Marine-wise:
VMA, VMFA, VMFA(AW), VMAT, VMFAT, HMLA, HMM, HMH, HMT, HMX, VMX, and VMMT… soon to be VMM as well.
Thank you Matt!
VMMT-204 = Fixed-wing, Marine, Medium Lift, Training 204
So Tiltrotor does not have it’s own prefix and thus falls under fixed wing like the Harrier does since the engines move, not the wing.
VMM- would be an MV-22B combat unit. Then VMA- or VMAW- would most likely be the prefix of an attack (escort) Tiltrotor unit?
Does this mean we have to move this thread over to Aircraft now?
I don’t think the Aircraft guys would want us over there…they’re pretty set in their ways, you know. (I say that with tongue firmly in cheek)
Would it be VMA(AW) for an all weather tiltrotor squadron? I think I’ll go with that for now. Good scoop on the designations, too. Thanks guys!
I’m not an aeronautics engineer, nor do I paly one on TV. Do you think the wings look like they’d provide enoough lift in level flight? I know the F-104 had tiny wings but it had massive thrust, too.
That said, this looks way cool. Nice and creative, too.
Well, assuming you’re talking about my Citation, I compared the parts to the Bell 609 (commercial tiltrotor), and found that my config is very, very similar to it. So, since I don’t want to do any more surgery than I have to, I’m calling it good. But when you have some free time, look up some drawings of the V-22 or the BA609, and look at the wings. They look small to me on both of those configurations. I think that there is some benefit in lift in having the entire wing inside the slipstream of the proprotors. The air velocity will be higher over the wings than it would be on a non-tiltrotor.
Anyway, thanks, and BTW, I am an aerospace engineer, even though I don’t play one on TV.
Phil
Cool. I leraned something today. [:)]
LJ -
Keep it over here? That’s fine. More fun for us then! I like your VMA(AW)- prefix. I may use VMA-, VML/A- or your VMA(AW)- prefix if you don’t mind. I’m leaning towards inventing a whole new unit.
Para249 -
My imagination is going outside the box right now and I’d like to ask a few engineering questions if you don’t mind.
-
- What advantages are supplied by curved propellor blades on engines such as those that power the C-130J, and would those advantages apply to a helicoptor’s rotor disc? Disadvantages?
-
- If I had two sets of counter-rotating props per nacelle, would that offer me a chance at a decreased diameter of a rotor disc? Or do I need a large rotor disc to maintain stable and controllable vertical flight?
-
- Why three blades on Tilt Rotors (XV-3, XV-15, V-22)? Why not four? Or Five? Or Six?
All -
Am I the only one who’s design’s wings won’t fold for storage? I’m tenatively referring to my design as the AV-27A. No nickname yet; screaminhelo reminded me that the A-37 was the Dragonfly. Cottonmouth has a nice ring to it, but for some reason I’m digging the name “Thunder Bunny.” Suggestions are welcome.
Trigger, I’ve got no prob sharing the VMA(AW) idea, and who knows, I may be hitting you up to print some decals off for my bird.
Some nickname ideas: Noisy Cricket, Ladybug, and Battle Hamster…no, those would be Air Farce platforms… I was leaning toward Viper, but aren’t some F-16s called that now? I’ll have to think on it some more.