Osprey collection (merged thread)

[Compost]

The USA has agreed to sell six Bell Boeing V-22 tiltrotor aircraft to Israel, but US officials do not say which version of the aircraft Israel will receive.

See http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rotors-392483/

In my opinion Israeli procurement of the precariously arranged V-22 Osprey is foolish. However, Israel receives about $US2 billion in military assistance from the USA each year. So the V-22s will come cheap although operating them is likely to prove costly.

Any force that paid real dollars for V-22s would seem doubly foolish, or simply stupid.

[Compost]

Israel has decided to cancel its (provisional) order for six V-22s and intends to use the freed-up (military assistance) funds to instead procure more Namer heavy APCs.

See http://www.janes.com/article/45442/i...ers-over-v-22s

[Compost]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...obal-Hawk-E-2D

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rotors-406415/

[Compost]

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.

[Compost]

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.

[Compost]

It could seem strange that the Royal Navy and USMC are planning early combined deployment of the short takeoff vertical landing F-35B as the only type of fighter to be carried on the 70,000 tonne HMS Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier.
https://news.usni.org/2015/09/17/dse...abeth-carriers

The QE-class was specifically designed to operate up to 40 F-35B STOVL fighters together with non-catapult support aircraft. Hence it was optionally decided the ships scheduled for commissioning in 2018 and 2020 would be built with a bow ski-ramp similar to that developed for the Sea Harrier/AV-8 VSTOL fighter, and without launch and recovery facilities for operation of CATOBAR aircraft. That has caused the QE-class to be sometimes described as supersize Landing Platforms Helicopter. However, due to delays in the Joint Strike Fighter program the RAF/RN will not now receive their yet-to-be confirmed total of 138 or 148 F-35B fighters until well into the 2020s. So apparently the USMC as the principal operator of the F-35B may for several years be making up some or all of one particular shortfall that would affect the RN.

The USMC will anyway be interested in gaining first hand knowledge of how well the reduced weight undercarriage of the F-35B variant of the JSF withstands the stresses inherent in a short takeoff that includes transition to a ski-ramp. The USMC will also want to know if the gentle slope of the ski-ramp on the QE-class - which occupies about half the beam and 70 metres of port-side forward deckspace - enables short takeoff at a heavier weight than permissable from the flat deck of a typical USN amphibious warfare vessel.