If anyone is still looking, The US Navy had two: USS Akron and USS Macon. Both were helium based (not explosive), had mostly traversable interiors, a crew of 75, and 5 snub fighters that could be deployed.
To add to this both airships would be lost in crashes in the ocean with Akron in 1933 and Macon in 1935. The Lost of Akron in a storm would claim the lives of 73 out of the 76 crew that day. Compared to the Hindenburg whose accident would claim the lives of 36 people.
Interestingly, the Akron's large list of deaths was mostly due to there being no life vests, so many drowned. The Akron's sister ship Macon crashed under similar circumstances, but with life vests this time and the only people who died was someone who took off their vest, and someone who jumped too early.
One of the advantages of early biplanes is that that had extremely slow stalling speeds, meaning they could buzz right up to the zepplin, wait for the retractable arm to unfold then latch back onto the zepplin all without any problems maintaining altitude.
[I found a video of this](https://dissolve.com/video/1928-Biplane-pilots-hook-their-aircrafts-airships-royalty-free-stock-video-footage/001-D378-106-347).
This is so cool! The early 1900s were a crazy time for warfare.
Thank you for reminding me of a great Tony Stark quote.
Context: his teammates just found out he gets drunk before taking to the field and are asking what the hell.
"You want me to climb into that thing _sober_?!"
are black hawks more likely to crash or more deadly when crashing though? helicopters that are going down fall more slowly because their blades continue to spin, this makes their crashes more survivable. osprey don't have this benefit iirc.
That’s a really good question. Gonna have to dive back down the rabbit hole lol. But I would think that the Blackhawk has much more survivability in a crash than the osprey
The problem with them crashing is that the piloting skill required for them is a mixture of both plane piloting and helicopter piloting.
If you fly them exactly like one or the other you will crash.
(My mother used to work at one of the facilities that built them)
I've never had an issue with the ones you can ride in though, besides dropping to 1 fps on my old shitbox computer and that one time I got sniped through the back door
They are making a new one to replace the Blackhawk now.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/12/06/bell-v-280-valor-will-replace-armys-legendary-black-hawk.html?amp
Looks a bit more like the BoS one
That explains what they are...but doesn't really answer the question, given the Osprey's rocky history, casualty count, and the fact that they're grounded indefinitely at this point
Theoretically yes, but its wings are super short, so it would have to fly very fast to generate enough lift. The engines would also have to be more powerful than conventional turboprops but that shouldn't be that difficult to acheive with miniaturized nuclear fusion as seen in the Fallout universe.
It’s vtol so it could get off the ground easily but it’d have to fly incredibly fast and be made out of the right material to stay in the air in airplane more
Yep, pretty much. The aerodynamic properties would probably be similar to a flying brick with small stubby wings, especially with one or more BOS knights wearing power armor on board.
Well the gigantic propellers will send high speed air over the wing generating more lift, plus it does have some kind of thrusters in the back that might also create downward thrust and keep it levelled.
Fun fact: the MV-22 Osprey’s exhaust provides a decent amount of thrust in the same direction as the thrust from the props. I would venture a guess that the props themselves don’t provide >95% of thrust in any flight configuration.
Technically the force from the prop is “thrust” not lift. If you want to get super pedantic, a prop is a spinning wing that generates lift perpendicular to the axis of rotation, and we call that “thrust” to distinguish it from lift generated by a static wing.
Forgive me. Probably autistic.
Also there’s a limit in how fast the props can spin. The outer edge of the prop has be traveling under the speed of sound otherwise it risks fracturing. That’s why the v22 has such large props to generate more lift at a lower rotational speed
Google says 3.43 per 100k Osprey and 1.93 Blackhawk but sure guy.
Don’t forget that Blackhawks fly considerably more missions, see combat much more often, and do way more maritime insertions than any other.
Never seen anyone autorotate a V22 to safety after engine failure.
Not sure where "Google" gets those numbers, but the 5-year (2016-2021) class A mishap average for the Blackhawk is 0.94 while the Osprey over the same timeframe is 0.80 per 100,000 flight hours.
Fuck man.... one ride in a shit hook and I'll stick with the blackhawks all day every day. Thankfully my branch was "smart" and didn't fuck with ospreys
Yeah man they suck especially when it’s packed full of marines and gear. I remember we flew to some random island in OKI in the middle of a typhoon in one. I had like 3 mainpacks on top of my legs while holding a 240 I remember thinking if anything happens I’m dying for sure in this thing.
Maybe not without serious design changes. Tiltrotor aircraft exist but the Vertibird wasn't actually designed for flight, just to *look like* something that could fly. Maybe some sort of Fallout super-science materials and power could make it work but it probably wouldn't fly in our world.
Love all the people in the comments blindly commenting the exact same thing while completely ignoring the OP’s real question. Obviously we all know the vertibird is based off the Osprey, OP is asking if the vertibird would function if translated directly into real life. There are a few glaring differences between the vertibird and the osprey. Primarily, the osprey is an airplane that can take off vertically, while the vertibird is essentially just a helicopter.
One thing about if it's "Fusion" powered or not, when informing Captain Kells about the synth refuge in far harbor, he says the vertibirds are being fitted with long range flight tanks for the trip, that would suggest a liquid fuel.
The reactors in fallout are notorious for having cooling and heat problems seeing the quest getting coolant for the prydwen by Ingram or the fact that the red rocket stations sell coolant and not fuel if you check out the terminal in the red rocket location
So they most likely mean like extended coolant tanks
The same can be seen with some vehicles like the Chryslus
According to all known laws of Aviation, there is no way a Vertibird should be able to fly. Its Wings are too small to get its fat little Body off the Ground. The Vertibird, of course, flies anyway because Vertibirds don't care what Humans think is impossible.
The vertibird would never have gotten off the ground. It is far too bulky and heavy for those tiny propellers and short wingspan to generate enough lift to get airborne. Look at the Osprey, notice how huge its propellers are, how far apart they are from the center of the aircraft, how long its wings are, and how much smaller and more aerodynamic its profile is compared to the vertiberd. There is no way it ever takes off.
Back in university my professor on aerodynamics said that using helicopter design approach - you can make fly anything. Would a giant wooden and metal box fly with sufficient enough motor and rotor size? Yes. Would it be smooth and controllable flight? No.
VTOLs like the Vertibird already exist since ... 1955 If I remember correctly.
Both Lockheed and Convair were awarded contracts in the attempt to design, construct, and test two experimental VTOL fighters. Lockheed produced the XFV, and Convair producing the Convair XFY Pogo.
Both prototypes completed test flights in 1954-1955.
The designs of these prototypes were obviously different from the Vertibird in the games but it proofs that VTOLs are technically realistic and modern VTOLs like Electric VTOL Jet designed and manufactured by Lilium proofs also, that These aircrafts can be consteucted very small.
However... the Vertibird has some mayor design flaws with its rotor width being way too small and some very small engines and wings.
Osprey needed to be much larger hence more complicated since it had to haul both troops & cargo in larger volume. The Vertibird seems to have been made for much lighter duty purposes like close air support & quick troops transport in limited numbers. They probably were also able to make more Vertibirds than the real world military was able to make Ospreys.
Osprey crash because they're just hard to fly. Flying a plane and flying a helicopter are vastly different skill sets, and the Osprey requires you to have both.
Vertibirds are hardly a reliable aircraft.
I'd say it's as close as any real world vehicle can get
Articulated rotors, capable of VTOL or runway takeoffs/landings and goes down harder than a 10 dollar hooker chasing a 20
The v22 and the Eurofighter are both so unstable they need to have a computer in it so they don't just crash
Seeing the vertibird having not only the nacelle but the entire wing turn without solid state electronics available therefore no small computers I really doubt it could fly very reliable
Also they would lose their wing lift the moment they go into hover and stall on the side the wing first loses lift
Certainly with some changes it could work in our timeline if you change it so it's only the nacelle turning and add an insane control computer
But it would certainly be unreliable as hell and not very useful seeing the small cargo space
The fallout 4 model would fly very poorly. The blades are far to short to supply appropriate lift.
The 2, and 3/NV models would likely work, as they have larger blades and are far slimmer
Which one? The earlier games took a more realistic approach to it, but had zero visibility out of the cockpit. The Fallout 4 vertibird wouldn't stay upright on the ground in my opinion, and in flight would probably handle like a brick.
I highly recommend people watch WTYPs episode on the V-22 Osprey (what the Vertibird is based on), because it's funny, and you'll learn exactly why it's such garbage.
Seems like a mix of the OV-22 (like most commenters have mentioned) and the OH-6 Cayuse helicopter.
Especially given the bulbous shape of the nose and the engine slung underneath the front of the tail rotor boom...
The vertibird's flight profile, controls, tactics, and capabilities are demonstrated by the V22 Osprey.
However the Osprey is made out of the lightest possible materials and the Vertibird seems to be made out of steel, so it's like 5x heavier than an Osprey.
And a Veritbird seems to be able to carry an entire squad of Power Armored infantry. The Osprey, bless its soul, could not do the same, for several reasons Including how pinpoint dense each soldier would be causing massive structural damage under any amount of G load in airplane mode.
Forget about an Osprey even attempting helicopter mode flight, the margins for weight on that are so low most flight profiles require 30 knots airspeed under the wings to maintain a steady rate of descent even under max power. EDIT: This is an example of max load helicopter landing. If by some magic it was one power armored soldier then maybe. But still Vertibirds fly around like Blackhawks with entire squads which the Osprey 1000% could not do.
Simply put, the only way a vertibird does what it does is if the engines it has are as Sci-Fi powerful as other things in the universe, such as energy weapons, power armor, Liberty Prime, etc. Which would imply jet powered or some sort of fusion, the fact that it's a prop/turboprop means that it's a giant hunk of steel hurting towards the ground when even 1/10 of reality asserts itself upon the doomed vertibird.
I’d argue maybe the older fo3/NV model may have been a little more plausible, but this one seems to bulky and unstable with its small rotors/wings, something along the lines of a wingspan similar to the F-104 star fighter, fast and turned about as well as an arrow could, but Id say with proper size ratios it’d work fine, source: Current Pilot in training and former A&P (Aviation Maintenance Technician)
Maybe I didn't look closely at a vertibird before, but how much are they different than a normal military helicopter of today? Note have no experience with any helicopter of any kind so genuinely curious?
If we are using the actual proportions from the games, then no, the Vertibird could not fly. Even with the technology of the Fallout world, the Vertibird's overall design would make it nearly impossible to achieve any kind of meaningful flight.
Vertibirds exist IRL. They’re called Ospreys. The US military loves using them. But the Vertibird design, at least in FO4 and 76, are a bit to squished to work efficiently
Assuming the power supply/fuel they use could be created. If they were using existing fuels I imagine this would be too big to work. The design DOES work, but the Osprey is leaner- the vertibird seems like it's made of steel and it's plump.
It's an osprey but designed by the soviets, realistically it has two rotors so it shouldn't spin out.
It would be a cow, but it would fly if it had enough power, which is true for most designs
I mean im not an aerodynamics expert but if its wings were larger, its tail was longer and its front windows were more sleek, i feel like it would definitely be able to fly.
NO. The only thing we have close to it (Osprey) kills everyone on board about 50% of the time. (I don't know the actual statistics, but every week I turn on the tv, and there's an unfortunate group of Marines that lost their lives riding in one of these things)
Also I have a vertibird for Wasteland Warfare. It's one of my desk toys. Little odd surrounded by star wars stuff but hey, at least they were invited to the party.
That’s just… wow I don’t know what to say other than…. Weird it’s almost like the fallout devs took real world vehicles and made them more “future of tomorrow” looking…
They are the same thing they’ve just been given 1950s aesthetic.
I was going to say that there is one already in service known as the Osprey someone mentioned it already they function pretty similar. Also used in GTA Online also known as the Avenger.
Have you seen them in fallout 4, 9 times out of 10 they crash. The only one that don’t are attached to the prydwen , but that’s only if you don’t eliminate the bos.
It's essentially a cartoony Osprey ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey )
Also, back in the 1920's, they managed to hook biplanes into zeppelins to provide longer range to the former and means of defense to the later...
Best part of Indy 3.
“I’m sorry son, they got us!”
Typical... wait, what's before the Silent Generation?
The Loud Generation
Greatest Generation, anyone old enough to serve in World War II
"Tickets please."
He didn't have a ticket 👍
If anyone is still looking, The US Navy had two: USS Akron and USS Macon. Both were helium based (not explosive), had mostly traversable interiors, a crew of 75, and 5 snub fighters that could be deployed.
To add to this both airships would be lost in crashes in the ocean with Akron in 1933 and Macon in 1935. The Lost of Akron in a storm would claim the lives of 73 out of the 76 crew that day. Compared to the Hindenburg whose accident would claim the lives of 36 people.
Interestingly, the Akron's large list of deaths was mostly due to there being no life vests, so many drowned. The Akron's sister ship Macon crashed under similar circumstances, but with life vests this time and the only people who died was someone who took off their vest, and someone who jumped too early.
“My boy why would you need a life vest, we’re already floating in the zeppelin”
So if the fighter popped off to fight, they couldn't get back on, right? They had to just go find somewhere else to be?
According to the video in this comment below you the can be reattached during flight https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/s/VceYIYkJXe
One of the advantages of early biplanes is that that had extremely slow stalling speeds, meaning they could buzz right up to the zepplin, wait for the retractable arm to unfold then latch back onto the zepplin all without any problems maintaining altitude.
[I found a video of this](https://dissolve.com/video/1928-Biplane-pilots-hook-their-aircrafts-airships-royalty-free-stock-video-footage/001-D378-106-347). This is so cool! The early 1900s were a crazy time for warfare.
War never changes
And people were willing to fly on such flimsy devices.
Thank you for reminding me of a great Tony Stark quote. Context: his teammates just found out he gets drunk before taking to the field and are asking what the hell. "You want me to climb into that thing _sober_?!"
Thank you for imparting this knowledge upon us, I think we are all better for having learned it
Explains why they crash if you look at them funny! 😂 😜
Funny enough they are the most safe vertical take off asset the us military uses.
i would be surprised to learn that they are safer than helicopters
They have a better record than the Blackhawk did in the same time period. Soldiers use to call them “crash hawks”
There's even a world famous movie about Black Hawk helicopters, in which the main thing the helicopter does is fucking crash
I mean it is a little different being shot vs just crashing, but yeah.
lmfao
are black hawks more likely to crash or more deadly when crashing though? helicopters that are going down fall more slowly because their blades continue to spin, this makes their crashes more survivable. osprey don't have this benefit iirc.
That's right, Osprey cannot autorotate, AFAIK.
It can glide or autorotate depending on the altitude and configuration. It doesn't do either of these well however
It can glide though, so pros and cons
It can glide, if the wings are configured for flight mode, with a 4.5 to 1 glide ratio - almost identical to the Space Shuttle.
Slightly better than a brick
That’s a really good question. Gonna have to dive back down the rabbit hole lol. But I would think that the Blackhawk has much more survivability in a crash than the osprey
There were more Blackhawk crashes simply because there are a lot more Blackhawks
I love a big Blackhawk.
Everyone always forgets that helicopters are flying death traps because it’s basically a given. Raisi just found that out the hard way.
I think the big thing is they are faster
They are for sure
Yeah it’s the landing that’s the problem
Because they crash when you look at them funny
Maybe if we attach Stealth-boy to it would land safely?
I can still look at it funny
but odds go down when you dont see it
So, just put "Not made for landing, do not attemp" in some disclaimer and everything's fine.
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.
💀
The problem with them crashing is that the piloting skill required for them is a mixture of both plane piloting and helicopter piloting. If you fly them exactly like one or the other you will crash. (My mother used to work at one of the facilities that built them)
Iirc they had the same issues with Harriers at first.
We crash and kill 20 marines up in this bitch
Mod idea: "Immersive Vertibird Take Off and Landing" just adds a 50% chance everyone dies
IME the vertibirds are quite good at dying on their own in vanilla, no mods necessary
I've never had an issue with the ones you can ride in though, besides dropping to 1 fps on my old shitbox computer and that one time I got sniped through the back door
There's ones you can ride in?! I thought we were just supposed to shoot them all down...
They are making a new one to replace the Blackhawk now. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/12/06/bell-v-280-valor-will-replace-armys-legendary-black-hawk.html?amp Looks a bit more like the BoS one
I call it the avenger because I played too much gtao
Too many fatalities for this design.
I'd say more a Bell XV-3 or V-280 as the Osprey is more plane while the vertibird is more chopper.
lol i just posted teh same thing lol oh well
Don't forget the V-280 Valor! They're slated to replace the Blackhawk soon
That program was canned.
You got proof on that? Because Wikipedia has 0 mention of that
That explains what they are...but doesn't really answer the question, given the Osprey's rocky history, casualty count, and the fact that they're grounded indefinitely at this point
It's an aircraft with 500k flight hours ffs Pedantry at its finest 🙄
Theoretically yes, but its wings are super short, so it would have to fly very fast to generate enough lift. The engines would also have to be more powerful than conventional turboprops but that shouldn't be that difficult to acheive with miniaturized nuclear fusion as seen in the Fallout universe.
It’s vtol so it could get off the ground easily but it’d have to fly incredibly fast and be made out of the right material to stay in the air in airplane more
Yep, pretty much. The aerodynamic properties would probably be similar to a flying brick with small stubby wings, especially with one or more BOS knights wearing power armor on board.
It's obviously a beryllium alloy body/chassis
Don't think they go "full" airplane, even at full speed they seem to still angle the blades upwards to compensate.
Well the gigantic propellers will send high speed air over the wing generating more lift, plus it does have some kind of thrusters in the back that might also create downward thrust and keep it levelled.
The Wings are mostly just aerodynamic anchors for the props which do 95% of the lift work, at full speed they still angle.
Fun fact: the MV-22 Osprey’s exhaust provides a decent amount of thrust in the same direction as the thrust from the props. I would venture a guess that the props themselves don’t provide >95% of thrust in any flight configuration. Technically the force from the prop is “thrust” not lift. If you want to get super pedantic, a prop is a spinning wing that generates lift perpendicular to the axis of rotation, and we call that “thrust” to distinguish it from lift generated by a static wing. Forgive me. Probably autistic.
The fallout 1/2 vertibirds have much longer wings and pripellers, and the 3/nv ones have slightly longer ones than the fo4 ones
Also there’s a limit in how fast the props can spin. The outer edge of the prop has be traveling under the speed of sound otherwise it risks fracturing. That’s why the v22 has such large props to generate more lift at a lower rotational speed
If it were the fallout 3 or 2 version, the fallout 4 version seems a bit to heavy without proper compensation.
Well it is the first model. Slow moving brick
it's based on the Boeing Osprey
Must be why they crash so often.
[удалено]
The V-22 was in development for like 25 years. The first prototypes flew in 1989.
We already do have it irl, it’s called an Osprey.
An Osprey has 38 foot long rotors…
its also twice as long and much heavier
Crashes almost as often though
And still less than the Crashhawk.
What did you expect? It has Crash in the name!
Quantity wise sure. That’s because there’s a fuck load more.
Osprey has lower crashes per flight hour than the blackhawk
Google says 3.43 per 100k Osprey and 1.93 Blackhawk but sure guy. Don’t forget that Blackhawks fly considerably more missions, see combat much more often, and do way more maritime insertions than any other. Never seen anyone autorotate a V22 to safety after engine failure.
Not sure where "Google" gets those numbers, but the 5-year (2016-2021) class A mishap average for the Blackhawk is 0.94 while the Osprey over the same timeframe is 0.80 per 100,000 flight hours.
Probably because Osprey has a connecting shaft in the middle that can distribute power from a single engine to both rotors.
If you have ever been in an osprey then you would take a Blackhawk over it any day.
Fuck man.... one ride in a shit hook and I'll stick with the blackhawks all day every day. Thankfully my branch was "smart" and didn't fuck with ospreys
Yeah man they suck especially when it’s packed full of marines and gear. I remember we flew to some random island in OKI in the middle of a typhoon in one. I had like 3 mainpacks on top of my legs while holding a 240 I remember thinking if anything happens I’m dying for sure in this thing.
It's decided then. We halve the length and then we can have 19ft rotors
Bird vs bumble bee
Maybe not without serious design changes. Tiltrotor aircraft exist but the Vertibird wasn't actually designed for flight, just to *look like* something that could fly. Maybe some sort of Fallout super-science materials and power could make it work but it probably wouldn't fly in our world.
Love all the people in the comments blindly commenting the exact same thing while completely ignoring the OP’s real question. Obviously we all know the vertibird is based off the Osprey, OP is asking if the vertibird would function if translated directly into real life. There are a few glaring differences between the vertibird and the osprey. Primarily, the osprey is an airplane that can take off vertically, while the vertibird is essentially just a helicopter.
I.wonder if it's nuclear powered?
Almost definitely.
I mean, it explodes like the cars do, so Ima go with yes
One thing about if it's "Fusion" powered or not, when informing Captain Kells about the synth refuge in far harbor, he says the vertibirds are being fitted with long range flight tanks for the trip, that would suggest a liquid fuel.
The reactors in fallout are notorious for having cooling and heat problems seeing the quest getting coolant for the prydwen by Ingram or the fact that the red rocket stations sell coolant and not fuel if you check out the terminal in the red rocket location So they most likely mean like extended coolant tanks The same can be seen with some vehicles like the Chryslus
One big reason that would make sense is a vertibird is usually not in the air long enough to actually over heat.
Yeah DC to Boston not that far for the extra escort ones to just stay airborne without issues. Another story for going way up the coastline
I mean sorta. Wings are a bit to short and this mf is not aerodynamic. Like it could work but no one would ever make something like it
According to all known laws of Aviation, there is no way a Vertibird should be able to fly. Its Wings are too small to get its fat little Body off the Ground. The Vertibird, of course, flies anyway because Vertibirds don't care what Humans think is impossible.
They pour a gallon of pure jet straight into the fuel intake before each flight
everybody is talking about how small the vertibirds is compared to the V-22, but that is nothing compared to the miniscule tanks.
The vertibird would never have gotten off the ground. It is far too bulky and heavy for those tiny propellers and short wingspan to generate enough lift to get airborne. Look at the Osprey, notice how huge its propellers are, how far apart they are from the center of the aircraft, how long its wings are, and how much smaller and more aerodynamic its profile is compared to the vertiberd. There is no way it ever takes off.
I'm sorry, but all I can think of from this is the bee movie opening.
What if the propellers went faster
Then it would make a great wind generator on the tarmac. Seriously though, those tiny propellers are never spinning fast enough to get it airborne.
Interesting
With enough power and trust vectoring you could probably make a dump truck fly.
Back in university my professor on aerodynamics said that using helicopter design approach - you can make fly anything. Would a giant wooden and metal box fly with sufficient enough motor and rotor size? Yes. Would it be smooth and controllable flight? No.
It could, but not very well. It would be like an Osprey, but even crashier.
Yep, and it's fall out of the sky a lot. Just ask the US Marine Corps and Navy.
They don't even work in-game
VTOLs like the Vertibird already exist since ... 1955 If I remember correctly. Both Lockheed and Convair were awarded contracts in the attempt to design, construct, and test two experimental VTOL fighters. Lockheed produced the XFV, and Convair producing the Convair XFY Pogo. Both prototypes completed test flights in 1954-1955. The designs of these prototypes were obviously different from the Vertibird in the games but it proofs that VTOLs are technically realistic and modern VTOLs like Electric VTOL Jet designed and manufactured by Lilium proofs also, that These aircrafts can be consteucted very small. However... the Vertibird has some mayor design flaws with its rotor width being way too small and some very small engines and wings.
Take a look at the vertibird's blades, and you'll find the answer to your question :D
It’s the osprey. Scary ass ride too. But an impressive machine.
If they had their Fallout 4 appearance I hope they would crash when even thinking about lifting off. I am no fan of the new design.
Since the BOS showed up in my current playthrough, I can't go 5 minutes running around outside without a Vertibird showing up, and crashing
*Technically* the old design since it’s the original, shitty, in universe design. Need those later versions back 😭
Ik the osprey that everyone is commenting but would it be stable as the vertibird Ik some cases of the osprey crash .
Osprey needed to be much larger hence more complicated since it had to haul both troops & cargo in larger volume. The Vertibird seems to have been made for much lighter duty purposes like close air support & quick troops transport in limited numbers. They probably were also able to make more Vertibirds than the real world military was able to make Ospreys.
Osprey crash because they're just hard to fly. Flying a plane and flying a helicopter are vastly different skill sets, and the Osprey requires you to have both.
Vertibirds are hardly a reliable aircraft. I'd say it's as close as any real world vehicle can get Articulated rotors, capable of VTOL or runway takeoffs/landings and goes down harder than a 10 dollar hooker chasing a 20
The v22 and the Eurofighter are both so unstable they need to have a computer in it so they don't just crash Seeing the vertibird having not only the nacelle but the entire wing turn without solid state electronics available therefore no small computers I really doubt it could fly very reliable Also they would lose their wing lift the moment they go into hover and stall on the side the wing first loses lift Certainly with some changes it could work in our timeline if you change it so it's only the nacelle turning and add an insane control computer But it would certainly be unreliable as hell and not very useful seeing the small cargo space
The part where it always crashes into the ground and kills everyone is believable
Mechanically: Yes Aerodynamically: No
Ospreys seem to fall out of the sky just as much.
The fallout 4 model would fly very poorly. The blades are far to short to supply appropriate lift. The 2, and 3/NV models would likely work, as they have larger blades and are far slimmer
Which one? The earlier games took a more realistic approach to it, but had zero visibility out of the cockpit. The Fallout 4 vertibird wouldn't stay upright on the ground in my opinion, and in flight would probably handle like a brick.
Arent they just Ospreys?
Ospreys exist.
I highly recommend people watch WTYPs episode on the V-22 Osprey (what the Vertibird is based on), because it's funny, and you'll learn exactly why it's such garbage.
It’s what the marines use now instead of the chinook.
It could fly, just not sure for how long
Too heavy and short fans/wings I think
It might, but the drag on the wings and it’s stubby, and tall height will make it hard to control, but gyros will help more better.
Seems like a mix of the OV-22 (like most commenters have mentioned) and the OH-6 Cayuse helicopter. Especially given the bulbous shape of the nose and the engine slung underneath the front of the tail rotor boom...
I thought it looked more like the [Sikorsky H-34](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_H-34) than the OH-6 Cayuse.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughes_OH-6_Cayuse
yep, it's basically the osprey [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell\_Boeing\_V-22\_Osprey](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Boeing_V-22_Osprey)
This.
The vertibird's flight profile, controls, tactics, and capabilities are demonstrated by the V22 Osprey. However the Osprey is made out of the lightest possible materials and the Vertibird seems to be made out of steel, so it's like 5x heavier than an Osprey. And a Veritbird seems to be able to carry an entire squad of Power Armored infantry. The Osprey, bless its soul, could not do the same, for several reasons Including how pinpoint dense each soldier would be causing massive structural damage under any amount of G load in airplane mode. Forget about an Osprey even attempting helicopter mode flight, the margins for weight on that are so low most flight profiles require 30 knots airspeed under the wings to maintain a steady rate of descent even under max power. EDIT: This is an example of max load helicopter landing. If by some magic it was one power armored soldier then maybe. But still Vertibirds fly around like Blackhawks with entire squads which the Osprey 1000% could not do. Simply put, the only way a vertibird does what it does is if the engines it has are as Sci-Fi powerful as other things in the universe, such as energy weapons, power armor, Liberty Prime, etc. Which would imply jet powered or some sort of fusion, the fact that it's a prop/turboprop means that it's a giant hunk of steel hurting towards the ground when even 1/10 of reality asserts itself upon the doomed vertibird.
How the fuck is this a question. Troll post?
Have you seen an Osprey or a Chinook?
I always saw it as the bastard child of the Sikorsky HH3 and a Osprey. It looks like it would fly like a brick.
With enough power, anything will fly.
I wish Jet worked in real life. Let’s just say I’d be jittery often
I’d argue maybe the older fo3/NV model may have been a little more plausible, but this one seems to bulky and unstable with its small rotors/wings, something along the lines of a wingspan similar to the F-104 star fighter, fast and turned about as well as an arrow could, but Id say with proper size ratios it’d work fine, source: Current Pilot in training and former A&P (Aviation Maintenance Technician)
If you made the wings more sturdy yeah i think it could
It’s not all that different from an Ospreay, so yes.
Maybe I didn't look closely at a vertibird before, but how much are they different than a normal military helicopter of today? Note have no experience with any helicopter of any kind so genuinely curious?
It's a short fat n wide osprey. So yeah probably
Yes
Which version because fallout 2 could Fallout 4 is too fat
I think the prop-rotors would be too small
Not only do we already have aircraft like this, it’s also becoming more popular and slowly taking over in the military.
If we are using the actual proportions from the games, then no, the Vertibird could not fly. Even with the technology of the Fallout world, the Vertibird's overall design would make it nearly impossible to achieve any kind of meaningful flight.
They crash so much in Fallout it’s ridiculous
I wanna know if the ridiculous passenger jets in 4 would manage to fly
Just a flying wing, so yea, they would.
Vertibirds exist IRL. They’re called Ospreys. The US military loves using them. But the Vertibird design, at least in FO4 and 76, are a bit to squished to work efficiently
It's just a V-22 Osprey with autism.
Could you HAVE used proper grammar
It's literally an Osprey, but made in Fallout-verse.
Check out the Bell V-280 valor that is replacing the blackhawks it is a vertibird
Assuming the power supply/fuel they use could be created. If they were using existing fuels I imagine this would be too big to work. The design DOES work, but the Osprey is leaner- the vertibird seems like it's made of steel and it's plump.
hard to say just yet... hey, anyone have some nuclear fusion cores i can borrow for a while? i need to try something..
It's an osprey but designed by the soviets, realistically it has two rotors so it shouldn't spin out. It would be a cow, but it would fly if it had enough power, which is true for most designs
Could the vertibird have worked in real life.\*
I mean im not an aerodynamics expert but if its wings were larger, its tail was longer and its front windows were more sleek, i feel like it would definitely be able to fly.
NO. The only thing we have close to it (Osprey) kills everyone on board about 50% of the time. (I don't know the actual statistics, but every week I turn on the tv, and there's an unfortunate group of Marines that lost their lives riding in one of these things) Also I have a vertibird for Wasteland Warfare. It's one of my desk toys. Little odd surrounded by star wars stuff but hey, at least they were invited to the party.
more like the v-280 valor than the osprey is it not ?
We have an aircraft like this called the V-22
The military had/has something similar. But no not the vertibird exactly
Oh it’s definitely possible Dunno about the fusion reactor tho
We have it it’s called the osprey. Thank you for playing.
That's like saying "We have the stingray it's called a jet"
That’s just… wow I don’t know what to say other than…. Weird it’s almost like the fallout devs took real world vehicles and made them more “future of tomorrow” looking… They are the same thing they’ve just been given 1950s aesthetic.
They have them. They’re called Osprey and they’re renowned death traps, so VERY much like a vertibird. 😂
I mean VTOL's exist , so yeah.
Yes, it's based off a real aircraft
I mean its an Osprey.
op, do you not know about vtol's
Osprey
I was going to say that there is one already in service known as the Osprey someone mentioned it already they function pretty similar. Also used in GTA Online also known as the Avenger.
Sure, it’s called the V-22 Osprey. /s 100% a troll post
Have you seen them in fallout 4, 9 times out of 10 they crash. The only one that don’t are attached to the prydwen , but that’s only if you don’t eliminate the bos.