First flown in 1987 the Model 360 is a privately developed advanced technology rotorcraft, designed to research the company's other rotorcraft programs. The helicopter features advanced aerodynamics and extensive use of composite materials including the fuselage, rotor shafts, blades and hubs. Powered by twin Avco-Lycoming AL5512 engines (4200shp) the Model 360 has a 370km/h cruise speed. The aircraft's advanced cockpit features cathode ray tube displays, multi-function callouts, digital automatic flight control system and other improvements to reduce pilot workload.
P.Allen "The Helicopter", 1996
|Don Smith, e-mail, 26.11.2017||reply|
I crewed the 46 and always thought the 360 was much better suited for combat operations, streamline, versatile and great all weather dynamics. The 22 would have made a great supplement at a later date like the 53, but I find the 22 too lanky for Marine medium lift operations. The dynamic loading of the center of the wing reduces the flight envelope as well as adds excessive weight for strength and wing fold. The Osprey is getting the job done, but I think its weakness would be exposed in a Vietnam type of conflict.
|Jeff Clites, e-mail, 03.11.2010||reply|
I was a Navy H-46 pilot in the '80s and loved the bird. Wish we could of gone with the 360. Every thing I heard about the 360 was great - flew in excess of 200 knots, 30K lifting capacity, advanced cockpit, etc. But the V-22 was sexier with more flashy gadjets on it. Saw the XV-15 in '83 and thought it was great until I thought of the mechanics of it - very complex, especially when it 'grew' into the Osprey.
|Mathew Kurisummoottil, e-mail, 10.01.2011||reply|
My name is Mathew Kurisummoottil, Landmarks Worldwide Inc, Naperville, IL-60565, USA. I am looking for few Heloicopters around 40 units for my client in India Boeing 360 or 234 and Vetrol etc. Please contact me for more information Phone 630-854-2752.
|Alan, e-mail, 12.01.2011||reply|
I witnessed the 360 fly in two differnt air shows in the late 80's it was very impressive, and very fast at over 200 knots It is currently in The American Helicopter Museum in PA. I work as an inspector on the CH-47 assembly line, and have worked also on the V-22. I am not sure what the future of the V-22 will be, there are plenty of them out there now flying and proving to do what they are supposed to do. By the way, While the V-22 is not pressurized. it still has oxygen in the cabin if needed. The V-22's biggest problem is the cost which is about 3 times the cost of a CH-47. It may find itself on the chopping block again, but only because of the cost of the program. The aircraft is in service will continue to be for a long time. 3 times as fast, and about 2 and a half times the rang of a helicopter with the ability to fold up for storage on a carrier, right now there is nothing to compete, but there are some new promising designs. Carrier operations is what the V-22 was designed to do, and it will be a while before something else takes its place.
|RW, e-mail, 21.01.2011||reply|
Just a couple of comments.
Remember..this was an internal IR&D project, not subject to the critical review of a customer (...say NAVAIR). I think it's fair to say...had this been offered instead of the V-22 the developmental problems and delays would have been nearly as significant as those of the V-22 (as with any new aircraft program). This aircraft brought a lot of "new" to the table, and that in and of itself makes getting it to IOC very difficult, especially with a customer as demanding as NAVAIR.
I saw this bird fly many times. Quite impressive!! I did not see its first flight...but was on the other side of Rte 291 when it occurred.
I overhead a Boeing pilot say, after flying it with the chief test pilot: It's the fastest I've ever flown straight and level in a helicopter.
It is a shame it was not further developed. But...many of it's innovations are flying today.
|Paul Gahley, e-mail, 30.09.2011||reply|
I had the pleasure of flying on this aircraft, just before the first Gulf war. Very impressive and lots of new ideas were demonstrated. Cruising at over 200 kts in a Rotor Wing for the first time, is something I will not soon forget. Too bad it did not go into full production.
|Scott, e-mail, 03.12.2011||reply|
I was the original flight test engineer for the 360, taking over when it moved to the production flight test hangars up in Ridley Park, the move to Wilmington, Delaware and subsequent flights in 1987.
The air intake was originally a large opening on the top of the aft pylon. Later, holes were cut in the sides of the lower fairings (the fairing holes are visible in all the pictures above), to hopefully improve performance.
I was not thrilled with flying in this helicopter. There were a lot of corners cut (it was internally funded) and insufficient time was allowed to get things done correctly, IMO.
A case in point was the forward pylon clamshell doors. They were hinged in the back, so if the forward latch failed, one or both doors could be ripped off and potentially impact a rotor blade. Unfortunately, this came to pass; luckily nobody was injured.
|Tom Stites, e-mail, 08.06.2012||reply|
Fleet Legend: The 360 allowed BOEING to leverage BELL into a V-22 partnership. BOEING's 360 demo'd: advanced composite manufacturing, and adaptation of the H-47 power train into a H-46 footprint (almost). The Bell /Boeing V-22 partnership prohibited Boeing from marketing the 360 as a competitive alternative to V-22.
|hou, e-mail, 08.06.2010||reply|
top jewelry fashion blog life world choose handbag Tiffany Jewellery fashion life manoloblahnik sale xmas gift Ckloo jewellery dresses shoes blog jewellery ed hardy blog wedding sale
|David Ray, e-mail, 11.04.2010||reply|
Mack I believe we served together in HMM 264. As an old phrog guy and after completing the 3rd combat tour of a VMM and bringing all the aircraft home (by the way we launch all 12 and flew them to from Iraq to Souda Bay Greece with only minor problems (no worse than average cross country with a phrog). You don't need improved airfields and you don't need tech reps to keep them flying. What you need is just getting back to basics of Marine Aviation Maintenance and troubleshooting. The aircraft is more complicated and is maintenance intensive. However, nearly everything bad said about the aircraft was said about the phrog when it replaced the H34. As the maintainers get more time on the aircraft and we continue to kick the civilian reps out of the squadrons I believe readiness will improve. I still love the phrog but I was pleasantly surprised with our success in OIF and now in OEF with this aircraft.
|Jack Todd, e-mail, 18.01.2010||reply|
The 360 occurred because the VP-Engineering, Ken Grina wanted to build an all composite helicopter. Their was no customer or requirement--he controlled the IR&D budget for Boeing Helicopters and developed the helicopter very quietly---he was a visionary. Nobody bought it. When the V-22 engineering started engineering labor for his pet program dried up. It might have turned out to be a great helicopter!
|Mel Minson, e-mail, 31.08.2009||reply|
The 360 looks to have great bones. As an old H-46 mechanic (first bird I worked on) with two West Pacs VNE yjr big twins are close to my heart. Also did timeon C-1 and C-2 Grumman CODs and the V-22 is neither of the above. Biggest drawback that no talks about is the ingress noise, in helo mode you can feel the impact of blades on air in your bones. Not a good deal for anyone except the OEM.
|David Mackinnon, e-mail, 12.08.2009||reply|
On another note!!!
Has anyone really seen the "real performance specs on the v-22 Osprey? just how diffirent are the performance specs at "Helicopter altitudes" in "helicopter mode" vs the old CH46E? Has anyone figured out the great advantage to having an un-pressurized troop compartment on an aircraft who's true performance only really comes in to play at high /turbo-prop altitudes? it's great being able to carry 20+ heavily laden troops over 1000+ miles at high speed, but if they arrive at the combat zone hypoxic there's not much point is there? If it's un-defendable in the current configuration and there really isn't a practical escort for it how do you fly it into a hostile area? It can't auto rotate, it suffers from a serious problem engineered into it from the get go.....Boeing in all their wisdom placed at least half the rotor system over and just aft of the leading edge of the wings. In helicopter mode this is all fine and dandy intil you go into a high rate of descent and or a high angle of attack in a decent (combat ingress insertion)...at this point where does all the low pressure air from the leading edges go?...straight up into the rotor system!!! the higher the rate of decent the larger the low presssure envelope over the wing becomes making recovery at some point impossible....add high disc loading and you have a recipe for disaster!!! try engineering these problems out fo the aircraft!!! The Corps could have outfitted the entire medium lift fleet with MH chinooks (that actually work )with every bell and whistle for general operational requirements and cover spectial ops assignements for half the cost and already have the tactics and support equipment in place to operate them, not to mention almost 50 years of tandem rotor experience to back it up!!!....by the way has anyone seen or heard of a V-22 in Afganistan yet?
|andrew vmmt-204 usmc, e-mail, 30.07.2009||reply|
frogs all the way
|David Mackinnon, e-mail, 30.04.2009||reply|
Un-believable that the Marine Corps would make such a drastic blunder as to buying the most expensive Lemon in U.S. military history (V-22) VS buying a great improvement on an already fantastic time / combat tested platform like the CH46. Anyone who sees through all the hype with the Osprey will tell you it is impractical, overtly complicated and unreliable for the "boots on the ground" Marines. If you can't keep it up on a prepared strip in CONUS with factory support how are you going to fare in ocean to desert combat with limited tools and support equipment?...you won't!! Remember the old addage K.I.S.S......keep it simple stupid!! ......wished I could have flow on the 360!!
|Eric Bishop, e-mail, 10.03.2009||reply|
being a navy 46 driver would of loved to fly the boeing 360
wow what a heli this craft is.
|frank scandle, e-mail, 14.01.2009||reply|
yes I was a prduction control coordinator AND REMBER how the mechanics were complaning about drill bits burning out AND have to retool the problem
|LCDR G Prater HC 5 1986, e-mail, 26.09.2008||reply|
The 360 was never offered for production, a test bed only. The 360 was 1 foot longer and 1 foot taller than a H 46 as I recall making it not fit in Navy hangars on single spot ships. The v22 was held off for many many years, I could have ridden in the prototype while in flight school in83, and it did not get into production until I was retired. The PAX river events of the v22 were pilot error and the squadron events were truely bad judgetment when the records were altered. It should have been in the fleet years before but Cheney said it was too expensive of a helo. Anyone in SAR knows 150 knots is not as good as 300 knots. Oh well I'll take my H46 anyday. a 360 would have been fun.
|joe, e-mail, 13.07.2008||reply|
the intakes are located just behind the top of the aft clam shells.
|Mark, e-mail, 26.06.2008||reply|
As a Marine veteran and former CH-46 mechanic, I was very enthusiastic when it came to the "360". The MV-22 was just too "over the top". Now there are numerous MV-22 squadrons in the fleet. It's too bad that the 360 wasn't given more attention instead of just being used as a "test bed" for composite technology.
Do you have any comments ?
Virtual Aircraft Museum
All the World's Rotorcraft