Posted on 06/17/2006 6:41:18 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
This is great news!
Forgive me if I just offer my personal opinion.
There is just something about the Osprey that just ain't natural.
I got a bad feeling in my bones about it.
You missed it.
Jobs in Ridley Park ping
If you want on or off the aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.">
You should state facts and stop exaggerating.
lot of good Soldiers lives
Marines aren't soldiers. How many lives have been lost in H-60 accidents and based on that number; several hundred, you no doubt have an extreme aversion to that platform.
The Marines didn't even want this did they?
They most certainly did.
I read it again and still don't see where it says they have been cleared to carry Marines or have carried troops with the roters in the upright position.
"The mishap investigation, having ruled out all other possibilities, soon focused on the extremely high rate of descent at low altitude as the primary cause of the accident. It was concluded that during the descent, the aircraft entered an aerodynamic condition called vortex ring state (VRS)."LtCol Gross explained that VRS is an aerodynamic condition in which the tangential airspeed at the rotor is small (associated with low forward airspeed) and the airspeed perpendicular to the rotor is high (associated with powered rate of descent). VRS typically becomes a concern below 40 knots forward airspeed at high rates of descent. To reach this condition, power must be applied during the steep descent. In layman's terms, when the induced velocity equals the vertical velocity, VRS may occur, causing a reduction in rotor lift or increased sink rate. VRS can occur as a rotorcraft settles down through its own vortex field at slow forward airspeeds.
When they knew where the VRS boundary was located, how the aircraft responded during VRS, and the proper recovery procedures and techniques, their focus turned toward avoidance of VRS. The engineers made two changes to the avionics displays that increased the pilot's situational awareness during low-speed, high-rate-of-descent flight.
With their test effort behind them, the Integrated Test Team at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Navy and Marine Corps test pilot facility, is confident they fully understand the location of the VRS boundary for the tilt-rotor, the aircraft roll-off characteristics during steady maneuvers within the boundary, and the immediate and effective recovery procedures. They have developed avionics warnings to aid pilots in avoiding high rates of descent at low airspeed and the fleet has a better understanding of the capabilities of the MV-22 Osprey and will be confident to fly in harm's way knowing vortex ring state never will be encountered again.
Lieutenant Colonel Gross was the government flight test director for the MV-22 program from August 2002 to August 2004 and participated in several test flights. He currently is assigned to the V-22 Joint Program Office at Patuxent River, Maryland. He would like to acknowledge Tom Macdonald's and MV-22 lead government engineer Ray Dagenhart's contributions to his article in Proceedings.
> The Osprey can deliver Marines to battle more safely, ...
Debatable. Jumping in is safer than the MV-22, based on
it's record to date. The MV-22 might become safer than
parachutes and existing helos, but it will have to prove
it by building a record.
> ... bring them reinforcements over greater distances in
> greater numbers, ...
Debatable.
> ... and evacuate wounded more quickly.
True, and that points to the real advantage of this thing,
(if it can establish a credible safety record). It can
exfil (not just wounded) faster than anything else in
the inventory. Ideal for quick-turnaround missions at a
distance.
This is great if we need to get troops from New River to Farnbourgh, but when will it carry a squad of Marines from Kandahar into mountains that border Pakistan?
I don't think the Osprey can take off or land unless its rotors are in the (mostly) upright position.
The Osprey will be a fine addition to our inventory. It, like all other aircraft we fielded, has had some problems. But, those problems are being addressed and what is learned will help the Osprey and future designs.
R&D is expensive, but education is never free, though often priceless.
"Great news"?
Bet it's grounded again within a year.
The test should have been a long sequence of Take offs and landings in a variety of weather. That's where our troops are going to be at max risk.
Damn thing was in design reviews in 1985.
It's a lousy implementation of a marginal concept!
Thanks for your post #11. That is the first I have ever read anything about what the testers did SPECIFICALLY to tackle this problem. Most other reports (I've read) just glossed over it and said they altered the flight parameters.
Okay, maybe I'm being a bit too optimistic. A guy can hope though, can't he? :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.