Osprey collection (merged thread)
I am re-reading Blackhawk Down at the moment -- picked it up from a pile of books as I was getting on my last flight. There are many pages of praise for the Blackhawk's ability to take hits and still keep going.
Any comments from anyone in the know regarding the Osprey, its ability to take a licking and keep on ticking, and extrapolations into its suitability for small wars / COIN rather than STOM and its target conops?
I know it has been a fickle beast in development, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will have a glass jaw once it is fielded. Also am semi-familiar with the Osprey-bashing that has gone on in the past regarding a variety of issues. But its ruggedness under fire is one area that I have no intel.
Marines to Deploy V-22 Osprey to Iraq
Story from this morning's NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/14/bu...l?ref=business
Quote:
The Marine Corps said yesterday that the V-22 Osprey, a hybrid aircraft with a troubled past, will be sent to Iraq this September, where it will see combat for the first time.
The Pentagon has placed so many restrictions on how it can be used in combat that the plane — which is able to drop troops into battle like a helicopter and then speed away from danger like an airplane — could have difficulty fulfilling the Marines’ longstanding mission for it.
In Iraq, the V-22 will begin to replace the Vietnam-era helicopters that are increasingly facing enemy fire. The limitations on the V-22, which cost $80 million apiece, mean it cannot evade enemy fire with the same maneuvers and sharp turns used by helicopter pilots.
As a result, the craft could be more vulnerable to attack, and may result in the Marines keeping it out of the thick of battle, using it instead for less dangerous tasks.
“They will plan their missions in Iraq to avoid it getting into areas where there are serious threats,” said Thomas Christie, the Pentagon’s director of operations, test and evaluation from 2001 to 2005, who is now retired. The V-22’s debut in combat ends a remarkable 25-year struggle for the Marines to build a craft they could call their own.
Heh. Nope, he knows why. Because he's heard that before, many times
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Uboat509
...a CSM just developed an angry facial tic although he is not sure why :D).
and knows he will hear it many more before someone solves the range problem for your alternatives. :D
Quote:
The chaos and disorganization of an airborne op are just not conducive to successful combat operations.
Disagree -- degree of training is important. We don't do that nearly as well as we could or should; the training system you've been under for 18 plus year is an impediment, not an aid, to training. That we're as good as we are is a tribute to many like you who overcame a bad process. Good training can slice through the disorganization bit easily.
The real issue is what you want done. Airborne operations are not suitable for many things (linkups over 24 hours being one) and an airmobile op is better if range and conditions permit, no question. However, there are some things they can do as well or better than most other methods -- including really noisy hoptiflopters. Chaos is part of all war, disorganization leads to LGOP tooling about doing their thing. Airborne Ops are just like SF Ops -- do it right and good things can happen; do it wrong and it can make things worse. Come to think of it, that sort of describes combat in general... :cool:
Is there a case for Tilt-Rotor
I'm not a fan of CV-22.
Why is laid out quite well here.
The carrier based SV-22 sub-hunter-killer may have had merit, but I just cannot make sense of the machine as it exists today.
V-22 Osprey is flying on tenterhooks
In an era when the US administration wants to reduce expenditure there are several major tactical aviation projects that could become large targets. One of those projects is the V-22 Osprey tilt-prop utility transport. Although the V-22 can fly fast and high – there are several alternatives in the form of slower and lower flying helicopters that are more flexible, rugged and less costly to procure and operate.
It is unlikely that US forces will receive anything like the 550-odd Ospreys that were envisaged a decade ago. So the V-22 – and especially the MV-22B of which the USMC was expected to receive some 450 aircraft - is " flying on tenterhooks ", or as some people prefer " flying on tenderhooks ".
any cutback will involve the MV-22B rather than the F-35B
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Strickland
....assuming that the F-35B isnt killed as a program.
The F-35B may prove to be a mistake but it won't be killed as a program. The F-35 Lightning II JSF was designed with a bulky high-drag fuselage in order to make space behind the cockpit for a vertically-mounted turbo-fan, air intake and exhaust plus door panels needed to meet the USMC requirement for STOVL capabilities. And the complications and compromises stemming from that decision have affected the eventual fighters’ performance and the overall JSF schedule and costs.
However, the USMC has not joined the USN in ordering the F/A-18E Super Hornet - and possibly also the F/A-18F twin seater – to succeed its obsolescing F/A-18C Hornet multi-role fighter. The USMC has instead staked the future of its fixed wing fighter force entirely on the F-35B to replace both the Hornet and the AV-8B Harrier VSTOL fighter.
A further reason for continued development of the F-35B is that its termination would prejudice arguments for multi-service rationalization and procurement, and leave both the Pentagon and the USMC with proverbial ‘egg all over the place’. So the F-35B will continue as part of a remorseless JSF project. Any reduction in expenditure on USMC aviation will have to come from somewhere else.
Cutting back the heavyweight CH-53K project is unlikely because its use as a flying crane is valuable and in the medium term almost irreplaceable, except by US Army CH-47 Chinooks. At the lightweight end the USMC has the UH-1Y Venom utility and AH-1W Viper gunship helicopter projects as upgrades of the Twin Huey and Huey Cobra. Both of those types are indispensable although the Venom might be supplemented by a batch of MH-60S Seahawks already in service with the USN.
That leaves in the middle the MV-22B Osprey. And it is often on the ground waiting for spares, repair of hydraulics or an uncomplicated mission and a tightly controlled flight plan.
Within USMC aviation the prime and probably the only realistic target for a sizeable cutback is the MV-22B.
Relentless is the new normal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Compost
From the link above:
Quote:
But the helicopters are wearing out. Fast. The pace demanded by the Global War on Terror is relentless, and usage rates are 3 times normal.
I think it might be better said that usage rates are 3 times projected.
de-conflicting without progress
Japan has budgeted for batch of V-22 Ospreys
mutual support or deathly embrace
The twin tilt-props of the V-22B Osprey are prone to excess disc loading and instability during rapid transition and vertical descent. Hence the slower short-range lower-flying UH-1Y Venom utility helicopter - supported by the AH-1Z Viper attack variant - is the preferred transport for air landing and recovery of lightweight USMC elements in contested situations. However USMC planners have proposed two promising new roles for its fleet of MV-22B aircraft.
Currently the F-35B Short Takeoff and Landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter is being worked up from interim to full operational capability from the same amphibious support ships which carry the MV-22B. But those ships lack both catapult and arrester gear. Without such gear - and preferably also an angled deck - the ships cannot be employed to launch and recover conventional fixed-wing aircraft heavily laden with air-to-air refueling kit and transfer fuel, nor the E-2 Hawkeye aircraft configured with an airborne early warning and control system. Consequently for those types of widely used support the USMC is still reliant on large CATOBAR aircraft carriers.
That reliance could be reduced by development of appropriate variants of the MV-22B. Proposals for such variants were reported during 2015 but there has not been any widespread news in 2016. Time will reveal if part of the MV-22B fleet can be productively employed in those less stressful support roles without displacing too many other aircraft. Time will also reveal if the capabilities of F-35B degraded to reduce weight and enable vertical landing are adequate for strike, close air support, and air combat.
still one legged imbalance
http://www.cobham.com/mission-system...-kit-for-v-22/, 25 Oct 2016;
https://news.usni.org/2015/07/29/dav...e-1-year-delay, 29 Jul 2015.
Better late than never but operation of the F-35B will still be handicapped by reliance on AWACS flown from USN CATOBAR carriers. Without AAR and AWACS aircraft on the same amphibious warfare ship the utility of the F-35B (and similarly of the JSF program) is less than dubious.
