Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pilots thrilled by CV-22 capabilities
Air Force Print News ^ | 6 October 2006 | Staff Sgt. Jeremy Larlee

Posted on 10/16/2006 9:10:13 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham

Pilots thrilled by CV-22 capabilities
by Staff Sgt. Jeremy Larlee
Air Force Print News

10/6/2006 - KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. (AFPN) -- When he talks about his new aircraft, the CV-22 Osprey, the lieutenant colonel's face lights up like a kid opening presents on his birthday.

After 10 years of flying the MC-130H Combat Talon II, CV-22 instructor pilot Lt. Col. Darryl Sheets, from the 8th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Fla., said he has enjoyed his time in the aircraft.

"When it's in the airplane mode, to me this is like a C-130 sports car," he said. "It is probably three times more responsive and is a joy to fly."

The CV-22 has two distinct flying modes. It is able to rotate its rotors in different positions to hover like a helicopter or fly like a traditional prop-based aircraft like the C-130.

Colonel Sheets said it was an amazing feeling when he hovered for the first time.

"I had a smile from ear-to-ear," he said. "The aerodynamics of this aircraft makes it extremely stable in hover and in the transition between the two modes. My hat is off to the engineers who designed it."

Hovering is old news for Capt. Paul Alexander, a CV-22 instructor pilot from the 8th SOS, who has 22 years of experience flying helicopters in the Army and the Air Force. But the ability to fly at altitudes of 25,000 feet, about 15,000 feet higher than the he was accustomed to in helicopters, and fly at cruising speeds about two times faster than a helicopter is exciting, he said.

"It's been a lot of years since I have eagerly looked forward to every flight I take," he said. "This is what is keeping me in the military after 22 years of service."

The two pilots are at Kirtland AFB to create the procedures for how the CV-22 will be deployed.

It is a humbling experience to know that generations of pilots will be using the work they created, Captain Alexander said.

"I'm living the dream," he said. "It is an exciting time for us because we are in on the ground floor and writing the book on how we are going to deploy this aircraft."

Colonel Sheets said learning how to operate the aircraft has been like going back to pilot school again. He believes the CV-22 will be an integral piece of the Air Force's special operation's arsenal for years to come.

"Every day is a challenge at work," he said. "Something new comes up daily and this aircraft never ceases to amaze me."


A CV-22 Osprey lands at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., Oct. 5 after flying an air-refueling mission. This versatile, self-deployable aircraft offers increased speed and range over other rotary-wing aircraft and can perform missions that normally would require both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft. (U.S. Air Force photo/Tech Sgt. Cecilio M. Ricardo Jr.)


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: cv22; kirtland; osprey; v22
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last
To: A.A. Cunningham
When it's in the airplane mode, to me this is like a C-130 sports car.

It's brick mode that's the problem.

61 posted on 10/16/2006 11:57:32 AM PDT by jordan8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: finnman69
It's a totally different type of aircraft.

Exactly.

BTW, the Osprey cannot autorotate in an emergency.

As with any compromise, it can't autorotate like a helicopter, and it's a more precarious design than a fixed wing.* The best (when it works) and the worst (when it doesn't) of both worlds.

Like I said, if the Marines like it, good for them. Otherwise, I wouldn't expect them to cotton to it in general.

* I'm not sure the flying bananas can autorotate with gearbox malfunctions either, can they?

62 posted on 10/16/2006 12:10:38 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Pentagon Leatherneck

What is the flight/maintenance ratio?


63 posted on 10/16/2006 1:25:00 PM PDT by B4Ranch (Illegal immigration Control and US Border Security - The jobs George W. Bush refuses to do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak

fyi


64 posted on 10/16/2006 2:12:52 PM PDT by GretchenM (What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? Please meet my friend, Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

Self-deployable means an Osprey unit can load their people and stuff in their planes and fly from where they are to where they need to be, refueling in midair enroute.

The capability hasn't been thoroughly tested yet. One pair of Ospreys went to Europe and back, but one of them lost an engine on the way out and had to land for a precautionary engine replacement.

The press, and anti-defense groups like the Center for Defense Information, a former Soviet front that has opposed every weapon since the M-2 carbine, had a field day with that, but at show's end, the two Ospreys redeployed to the USA with no drama. East to West in the northern hemisphere is the hard one cause the winds are against you. Of course, there is no reporting of the successes of this program in the MSM. Doesn't fit the template, you know. ("Military people are too dumb to get anything right, while being evil masterminds at all times. Defence contractors are all crooked, new weapons are all failures, and no one tells the truth except for lawyers and lobbyists").

To answer the guy that asked about accidents, there were three fatal crashes in the development of the Osprey, in 1992 and two in 2000. They led to design and operational changes (the accident that killed 19 was due to pilot error, so training in that aspect of the flight regime and the particular hazard that undid those marines has been reemphasized).

Many aircraft have suffered the crash of a prototype or crashes in the test program, off the top of my head I can think of the P-38, P-51, B-17, B-29, B-52 and F-14 as a few examples. "Sacrifices must be made!" (last words of aviation pioneer, and air crash victim, Otto Lilienthal)

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F


65 posted on 10/16/2006 3:37:12 PM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Build more lampposts... we've got plenty of traitors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GrandEagle

ping.


66 posted on 10/16/2006 3:38:51 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: miele man

Drive shafts are "inside" the aft section of the wing.


67 posted on 10/16/2006 5:22:20 PM PDT by e_castillo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
I left wondering, "is it possible their Americans are better than our Americans?"

Or their management is better than our management. It's hard to be a good engineer under a bad manager

68 posted on 10/16/2006 5:30:16 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

Man what are you talking about? Did you post this for another thread :)

-replaces the CH46
-it can land anywhere the 46 can
-it's bigger than the 46
-yes
-they should not touch each other


69 posted on 10/16/2006 5:59:27 PM PDT by e_castillo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar
Thanks for the Ping!
Looks like a heck of a good aircraft!
70 posted on 10/16/2006 6:06:40 PM PDT by GrandEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

Good news. Onward and upward.


71 posted on 10/16/2006 6:10:01 PM PDT by TADSLOS (Ezekiel 25:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

I spoke to a couple of fellows from Boeing recently who had been working with the squadron at New River. They had billed a press junkett to overcome past negative press releases. Invited everybody up for a flight, they all were anxious to get aboard, flew around for about 30 minutes and began their descent, engines rotated up and landed in a civilian vacant lot.

The press were then told that if they enjoyed BarBQ they could come on into the restaurant for an adhoc buffet. One of the press made a wry comment about southern BarBQ and how N/S Carolina really wasn't known for its BarBQ. That's when the crew chief told him not to worry, because this was West Virginia BarBQ. The reporter responded that they thought this was a dog and pony show, now with catered BarBQ.

The crew chief responded, "No, we're in West Virginia and it happens to be a restaurant beside an open field we can land in.

They had flown in about 20-30 nimutes over several states and had landed up north, whereas the reporters thought they had simply circled the airfield a couple of times. That distance travelled that quickly with such ease helped reinforce the significance of this aircraft as a replacement for the CH-46.


72 posted on 10/16/2006 6:19:03 PM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F

Compare these comments to those comparing an Amphibious tractor to a Bradley. One can become myopic on the amphibious role, whereas they might more frequently be used as mechanized transport.

Likewise with the Osprey. It provides a speed factor, thereby allowing a company lift from further out at sea or from more accessible land based airstrips or even a remote LZ with a refueler.

It expands the area of operations for that MAGTF commander to establish a line of departure further away from hostile environments, or more explicitly less densely defended areas.

The Osprey, IMHO, will greately enhance company level mobility in operational planning and engagement with less fixed tail. Maybe not more tooth to tail, but less targetable tail.


73 posted on 10/16/2006 6:29:42 PM PDT by Cvengr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

On 25 August 1965 a transmission part failure caused an asymmetric lift situation, which allowed the crew to validate the operation of their ejection seats.

Now there is understatement!


74 posted on 10/16/2006 6:38:56 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: e_castillo
"-it can land anywhere the 46 can..."

I'm not a big CH-46 fan but MV-22 cannot come into a LZ as quickly as any type of pure helo.
Larger cabin capacity than a 46, but not that much larger (I've been in both - MV-22 is much smaller than it looks).
Cannot be armed as a pure helo can.
Must operate MUCH further apart than "not touch each other"

The cruxt of my questions/concern was their over-all utility Vs their price-tag.

75 posted on 10/17/2006 4:21:38 AM PDT by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: tet68

Other than the Wright Flyer name me an aircraft that went from drawing board to operational status without "an incident!"


76 posted on 10/17/2006 7:06:44 AM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

No, was just tickled by the language, "which allowed the crew to validate the operation of their ejection seats.
".

Actually the Wright Flyer killed a young leutnant on his first trial hop with one of the brothers at the controls.

That may have been one of the first "pilot error" fatalities
I suppose.


77 posted on 10/17/2006 3:56:52 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: cll
notice they don't fly UH-60 Blackhawks

The Executive Flight Detachment at HMX-1 at MCAF Quantico operates the VH-60N Nighthawk.

78 posted on 10/18/2006 8:11:42 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tet68

how do you eject from a helo???


79 posted on 10/18/2006 8:23:15 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: azhenfud

The acoustic siganture of the Osprey is about 75% less than that of the CH-46E and CH-53D that it will be replacing. That along with a 95% reduction in its IR signature, its greater speed and different ingress tactics mean that there will indeed be plenty of unfriendlies that will be surprised to see it.


80 posted on 10/18/2006 8:23:44 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson