Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 33Vortex on October 11, 2007, 02:39:51 AM
-
V-22 Osprey (http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,152041,00.html?ESRC=marine-a.nl) entered combat service in Iraq. Link to article. Yes this is aviation history, as it is a type of a/c never seen before in front line service, if one can talk about front lines in Iraq. It will be interesting to see how it perform under combat conditions.
-
The Osprey has lots of potential.:aok
-
Lots of potential- yeah it does. It was pushed out there by how much money has been thrown at it. God help our troops stick with choppers.
-D
-
This is a program that should have been shut down years ago. What is it's mission in Iraq going to be? This is nothing but a PR move. There is no mission in Iraq right now, that can not be solved by our conventional cargo planes and helicopters. This is a waste of money, time and maybe even more lives.
PS. That squadrons nick name is very fitting. Chickens can't really fly.
-
I too am leery of this machine.
But I will stop just a hair short of being a nay sayer about it. Just a hair.
Other then to be able to say. "We have an aircraft that can take off and land like a helicopter and fly like a plane."
What is the great need and advantage to having this aircraft. OR I should say this particular aircraft?
Yes I understand it is supposed to be able to fly faster and have greater range. But how much?
And how much faster and farther can it go at its most important stage? Which would be transferring from helo to fixed wing style flight when taking off and leaving an active combat area? Or landing at one for that matter? In which the question would be vise verse.
With its history of problems. I would have insisted on a complete A-Z redesign of the entire aircraft till it worked right the first time every time.
For our soldiers sake I hope it does well. Too much at stake for it not to.
but again. with its history of problems Im thinking that sometimes you have to put the facts ahead of personal wants and ego
And simply recognize a lemon as being a lemon that wont change to an orange no matter how much money you throw at it.
-
In the end it is all about the Marine corps wanting a new toy. That has always been the issue. The only call I agree with on this new toy issue is the call to upgrade their UH-1Ns to UH-1Ys and their AH-1W to AH-1Z. This upgrade will save money and push the Huey and Cobra though 2025.
The V-22 is supposed to be replacing the CH-46 Sea Knight which the Marine Corps is looking to retire around 2015. This is an aircraft that can be upgraded by Boeing and would push the CH-46 into 2020, but the Marines sunk to much of their budget into the V-22 program and the F-35 program. Which, the Marines plan to replace their F/A-18s with..all of them. I say if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
-
What a waste of Lifes and money....this program should have been killed a long time ago... so far 30 + people have died in a very unreliable platform.
what a shame
-
Great concept, but im worried about the fact that it cannot autorotate down to a safe landing incase of engine failiure or damage. Doubt its any good at gliding to a safe landing either.
If i had any say i would rather spend the money on more helicopters and smaller cargo planes that use short runways like the Spartan.
-
Agree with Dredirock and Nilsen. The inherent problems of having 2 engines, one on each end of the wing, plus the rotary engine design leaving the plane unable to glide to a safe landing. It all makes for a certain crash if one engine fails. No autorotation there baby, oh no, if one engine die it's bye bye. Still, it could work given the a/c get the service needed for safe operation. If it doesn't recieve the attention it needs, well... it's a ticking bomb. Anyone said expensive toys? This is a prestige project for sure. Still curious to see how it will perform in deployment.
-
A V-22 can't auto-rotate because it would be an extremely rare situation in which it would need to. If the V-22 loses an engine, the other engine will still turn both props.
The only time a V-22 would need to autorotate is if it lost both engines at the same time below 1600ft in helicopter mode. But even real helicopters have an altitude range at which autorotation will fail. For the Huey, I think this is inbetween 500 and 1000 feet.
-
And the drive connection between engine one and two cant get damaged due to groundfire?
-
Im not in any way against the thing, I just think its too expensive and "fragile" for frontline combat/SR duty. Its clear advantages over a helicopter is not large enough to justify it. History may prove me wrong, but im no supporter of it just yet.
-
About as much as the drive connection between main and tail rotor in an helicopter, Nils.
However, the rotating engine pods add a whole new level of complexity.
-
Originally posted by Heater
What a waste of Lifes and money....this program should have been killed a long time ago... so far 30 + people have died in a very unreliable platform.
what a shame
Agreed!
-
A little reading material. Adds several other issues like heavy downwash, poor visibility, carrying capacity etc
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/v-22-osprey-a-flying-shame-03930/
-
Wouldnt you tink this plane would be better in areas where short take off would be needed. I mean..its a frickin desert!
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Im not in any way against the thing, I just think its too expensive and "fragile" for frontline combat/SR duty. Its clear advantages over a helicopter is not large enough to justify it. History may prove me wrong, but im no supporter of it just yet.
the V22 is NOT a combat aircraft, it is a transport aircraft.
-
autorotation hasn't helped much in Iraq and Afganistan. Only a few choppers have managed to land their crew safely after a critical hit. Either they've crashed and died or flown back home for repairs. Choppers doesn't glide all that well if something happens to the blades or the controls.
Besides, most of the crashes in Iraq and Afganistan have happened while travelling. Osprey will be much faster and harder to hit, I'd also say it has a better chance of surviving a hit because of the wings.
-
Originally posted by john9001
the V22 is NOT a combat aircraft, it is a transport aircraft.
That doesn't mean much. People have died in Blackhawks and Chinooks during non-combat transport flights. That's the bad thing with terrorists, freedom fighters, enemy combatants etc. etc., when they can be anywhere.
-
Time did a hack job on it.
It is not a chopper.
Isn't this the thing the Marines are using to replace the seaknight helo that sucked when it was new and used in Vietnam, and still sucks? It can not be worse that that.
-
As an airplane, the V22 will do fine. Its the getting to and from the airplane part of the flight envelope that causes the problems.
All helos are accidents just waiting to happen....
If there is a mission for this thing, it will be in wherever combat troops need to be deployed. I will wait and see how it is implimented and how likely it is to be brought down by enemy fire before I declare it a waste. Plenty of people have died in helos and airplanes over the last 100 years........30 deaths a program ends not.
-
Boy you guys don't keep up with stuff do you? The V-22 has turned into a VERY reliable and SAFE aircraft. 30+ people died in the original PROTOTYPE aircraft. I have a friend of mine that works up at Pax River and was involved in the testing of the V-22. He's told me that since those crashes they have fixed the problems and it's a solid aircraft now. I tend to believe him.
As far as it being an expensive program. When has pushing the bounderies of technology not been expensive in dollars and human lives? Take the space program for instance. How about the early days of aviation when there were no computers to assist in the development of planes. They built it and some test pilot would take it up and see what happens. Many died before they got it right, and then sometimes watermelon just happens.
The V-22 fills a role that can't be matched by any other aircraft in the world and it does it very well.
-
Originally posted by john9001
the V22 is NOT a combat aircraft, it is a transport aircraft.
And your marines dont use their trainsport aircraft in dangerzones? Im sure the marines will be glad to hear :)
-
I wish you guys were around when they were first introducing helicopters. Terribly unsafe machines, arent they?
-
I'm not saying this as an insult, but I can't believe how ignorant some people are of the V-22 and aeronautical engineering in general.
As a general rule of thumb, if an aircraft supercedes the performance of its predecessor by 10%, its considered a remarkable feat. Most new aircraft do not even hit the 10% mark.
-
I used to sit and watch V-22's all day when I lived in Hurst, Tx next to the Bell plant. They have a small test landing area just off Raider Rd. Those things are amazing. The transition from hover to level flight is just seconds. It's MUCH faster than a Blackhawk, carries a heavier payload and is more fuel efficient. It is also very, very quiet compared to a helo.
It will do a fine job for the Marines. I haven't heard anything about it, but I suspect a "Spooky" version will be made by the Marines. You could pack that bad boy down with with some serious firepower. I think the best application will be SAR with the Coast Guard.