And it's not like the Osprey is anti-helicopter... the American Helicopter Museum itself has a V-22 Osprey.
Many of the docents are helicopter folks but love to show you the inside of the Osprey.
Posted on 06/17/2006 6:41:18 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
Marine Ospreys exploring long-range deployments
June 17, 2006
Marines successfully completed two non-stop, coast-to-coast flights this week with a pair of MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, as a precursor to a transatlantic flight to England with the same Ospreys in July. The unconventional Osprey started life with some very bad publicity but now that the unconventional machine is working properly, it is beginning to offer an entirely new way of doing things, adding an important new tool to the Marine armoury. "Unlike conventional rotary wing aircraft, which must be transported into overseas theaters of operation aboard amphibious shipping or heavy lift transport planes, the V-22 can self-deploy thousands of miles over water to get itself to the fight," said Col. Bill Taylor, V-22 Osprey joint program manager. The Marine Corps is conducting the long-distance flights to develop tactics, techniques and procedures for long-range, over-water movements of MV-22s, in preparation for the first combat deployment in 2007.
That ability was proven during operational evaluation in 2005, when the Osprey demonstrated a projected range of more than 2,600 nautical miles on a single aerial refueling. The MV-22 can be configured with up to three mission auxiliary tanks in the cabin to enable these kinds of ranges. Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron 22 (VMX-22) launched two Ospreys from their home at Marine Corps Air Station New River, N.C., Monday, landing at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, Calif., nine hours and 2,100 nautical miles later. They returned to New River Thursday, making that flight in just eight hours. Altitudes on the flights ranged from 14,000 to 16,000 feet, with sustained ground speeds between 240 and 300 knots.
The aircraft were configured with two of the three available auxiliary fuel tanks. The VMX-22 crews completed two aerial refuelings en route with KC-130J tankers from Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 252 (VMGR-252), to further validate the Osprey's long-range fuel system capabilities in support of future combat deployments.
"We didn't have to do two aerial refuelings, but we wanted to fill up those [auxiliary fuel tanks] and burn them out a couple times, to increase our experience with the systems," said Lt. Col. Chris Seymour, VMX-22 executive officer and pilot of one of the two Ospreys. "The flights have gone extremely well."
"The mission planning computer systems onboard that help us manage our long range flights were accurate within a quarter percent of predicted performance," said Col. Glenn Walters, VMX-22 commanding officer. Actual flight time, for example, was just three minutes off from the predicted flight time, on a trip of more than 2,000 miles. "That gives us a great deal of confidence in over-water flights ... enabling us to make good decisions on how to get long distances," he said.
This week's overland flights were structured as rehearsals for the transatlantic deployment to England in July. VMX-22 will depart from Goose Bay, Newfoundland, July 10, flying direct to Great Britain along with two tankers from VMGR-252.
Once across the ocean, the aircraft will be turned over under a lease agreement to manufacturer Bell Boeing, who will operate the aircraft in the Royal International Air Tattoo and Farnborough International Air Show July 14-23. Farnborough and the Tattoo will be the Osprey's first international air show appearances since 1995.
The Marine Corps, however, is interested in other firsts. "This will be the first time that an assault support aircraft has ever flown across the Atlantic," Taylor said. It will also be the first time in more than 20 years that Marine Corps KC-130s have supported a transatlantic deployment, he said.
"This is invaluable as far as establishing the tactics, techniques and procedures for these types of missions in coordination with the KC-130s," Seymour said. "We're writing the book on how to do this."
The Marine Corps is using the opportunity to fly to England as a prudent first step to gain experience and refine skills, Taylor said, before VMM-263 takes the aircraft across the ocean into a theater of battle.
In March, Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263 (VMM-263) was established as the world's first tiltrotor combat squadron. They began receiving Ospreys in May, and will deploy with the MV-22 after the aircraft reaches initial operational capability in summer 2007.
Under the current program of record, the Marine Corps will purchase 360 MV-22s for missions including amphibious assault, ship-to-objective maneuver and sustained operations ashore. The Ospreys will ultimately replace all CH-46E and CH-53D helicopters for the Corps, delivering twice the speed and three to five times the range as those platforms. Manufacturer Bell Boeing began delivering the Block B combat configuration of the Osprey in December 2005.
Secretary of the Navy Dr. Donald C. Winter flew with VMX-22 earlier this year, to evaluate the aircraft first hand. "The significance of this program to the Naval services is not about hardware or technology," Winter said. "It's about what it will mean to our people. The Osprey can deliver Marines to battle more safely, bring them reinforcements over greater distances in greater numbers, and evacuate wounded more quickly. That all equates to lives saved, as we continue to prosecute the global war on terrorism."
3 auxiliary fuel tanks?
Fuel is payload!
What else can it carry when these 3 tanks are full?
Can the 2 Marines bring full backpacks or does that require a 2nd V22?
This is only one of many examples where congress has pretended they were engineers, and dictated either designs or whole programs, with the sole purpose of bringing jobs home and buying votes.
DoD would have bagged this program a long time ago!
My other favorite example is the Space Shuttle, with it's recycled parts. Congress liked the idea of recycling because of it's PR value. Aerospace engineers would have never recommended that approach as being most efficient and cost effective.
Curt Weldon wanted it more than anyone .Plant is in his district.
A very safe bet considering aircraft of all types get grounded each year -- even ones that you & I consider to be fairly reliable. Fleet groundings are routine when accident investigations begin to point toward something that doesn't get covered in maintenance cycles. If the MV-22 doesn't get grounded this year it will probably mean that they are not putting very many hours on the aircraft.
Isn't it pretty apparent that they are demonstrating a long-range ferry capability? Let's say you need to bring in a flight of MV-22's to meet an amphibious ready group. Pick up a Marine Recon element (already embarked on an LHD), and fly off the LHD to an inland target too far for the Sea Stallions. All you'd have to do is dump the ferry tanks.
Didn't the article say the Aux tanks were INBOARD?
Marines are called Marines, period.
Where did you discover the forty billion dollar figure?
No statement more accurately describes a helicopter! Or GPS-based navigation and fire control. Or grown men using model airplanes in battle. Or bar codes that track and inventory vehicles, supplies, weapons and even Marines. But these are better tools used to wins battles -- decisively.
Early in the last century, many thought that aviation was just a dangerous novelty, and not worth the number of men lost in its development. The debate continued at each major step until the Space Age -- which was made possible by a lot of bravery and sacrifice. Military life is inherently dangerous, which is why even we infantry officers hold test pilots in such high regard.
I am thankful that our young Marines have -- and will continue to have -- the best weapons and equipment that we can give them. Semper Fidelis...
We used to say that the SH3 didn't actually fly, it was so ugly that the Earth repelled it, others said that it just beat the air into submission.
As far as dangerous AC I think the Harrier had the more flight safety challenges and it is still difficult to fly.
The list of assets used to win battles and war is very long and growing daily.
It should also be noted that if it is designed to be dangerous to the enemy it is dangerous or as Rush has said in the past "a Tiger is a Tiger"
The Osprey is a fine addition to the Marines toolbox.
TT
Bump for later.
And it's not like the Osprey is anti-helicopter... the American Helicopter Museum itself has a V-22 Osprey.
Many of the docents are helicopter folks but love to show you the inside of the Osprey.
Thanks for that. I was wondering "wither the Osprey" just the other day (I have a fascination with military aerial equipment).
Very helpful, very useful, very interesting.
The Osprey has had its share of technical problems - just like every other aircraft in the inventory. The H-1 rotors had this annoying habit of flying of in negative g conditions (mast bumping). The H-46 back end kept falling off in flight. The H-53 tail boom would fall off in flight. The list can go on and on.
The crash that killed most those Marines in Pheonix(?) was a result of pilot error, not technical shortcomings fo the aircraft. Vortex ring state is a common phenomenon to all rotary wing aircraft and the pilots who crashed failed to keep their AC out of the state.
The Osprey has gone through very rigorous operational evaluation testing and passed. It's ready for the fleet.
BTTT
Again, I understand your emotional reaction. Almost every death is a sad event, but as a matter of perspective, do you know how many military personnel are killed each year in training accidents?
How many die in crashes of other aircraft? How many die in helicopters?
How about narrowing it down to each type. For instance, how many die in Blackhawks and its variants? How many of each type crashed during operational testing?
Come back with numbers and we can see how the Osprey stacks up and if it lives up to the reputation you're trying to give it.
" I'll make a bet I'll be sad to collect. I bet the first loss in an operational area is 'Not due to enemy fire.'"
Pretty safe bet. You could probably make that bet with every aircraft - fixed wing or helo. Sad fact is, the vast majority of aircraft lost are due to non-combat related incidents, be they mechanical failure or pilot error. This has been the sad fact since the first military flight.
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.