Skip to comments.
Chips are down, and so is V-22
DelvoTimes.Com [PA] ^
| 02/10/2007
| WILLIAM BENDER
Posted on 02/10/2007 7:48:10 AM PST by brityank
Chips are down, and so is V-22
By WILLIAM BENDER, wbender@delcotimes.com
02/10/2007

 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
A computer chip problem has popped up in Boeing's V-22 Osprey. |
 |
Months ahead of its scheduled deployment, the V-22 Osprey has been temporarily grounded due to a computer chip that couldnt stand the cold. The problem was detected in the flight control computers of "some" Ospreys, according to a statement released Friday by Marine Corps headquarters in Washington, D.C.
As a result, all of the Marines MV-22s and Air Forces CV-22s - less than 60 altogether -- have been grounded until the chips can be replaced.
"Testing found that in extreme cold temperatures, the chip could fail to perform as required in this specific role. Built-in test procedures in the flight control computer that are performed before flight detected the failure," the statement said.
The tilt-rotor aircraft is manufactured jointly by Boeing Co. in Ridley Township and Bell Helicopter in Texas.
The Marines are planning to deploy the V-22 -- most likely to Iraq -- during the second half of this year. Corps spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Fazekas said the latest problem is not expected to push back the deployment date.
The chips in the V-22s flight control computers must be built to withstand subzero temperatures. But the faulty chip, manufactured by Texas Instruments, was not functioning properly at around 30 degrees Fahrenheit, according to Boeing spokesman Jack Satterfield.
"If its malfunctioning just below freezing and its supposed to function at well below zero, obviously theres something wrong," Satterfield said.
Officials at Texas Instruments could not be reached Friday.
Replacing the chips might not take any longer than 10 days, according to Bell spokesman Bob Leder. "Its not a big deal," he said.
Leder said an alert would be sent out to warn military and commercial operators that use the chip in their aircraft that cold weather could affect its performance.
The failure was detected during a pre-flight engineering check and has not occurred during flight in the Osprey, the Marines said.
News of the grounded fleet, while not tied to the design or production of the V-22, follows recent reports of other problems with the aircraft.
Tests conducted last summer at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico showed that the Air Force version of the V-22 was prone to"frequent part and system failures" and "high false alarm rates in the built-in diagnostic systems," according to a recent Defense Department report.
An aircraft mishap board is also investigating the cause of a December engine compartment fire.
U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, a V-22 proponent and member of the House Armed Services subcommittee that oversees the program, said he is not deterred by Fridays announcement.
"The Marine Corps is correctly going to test all systems where this chip might be, but the belief is that this is just a problem with chips, from one supplier, which does not work properly below a certain temperature," his spokesman said in a statement. "Once the faulty chips have been replaced, the fleet will be up and running again."
TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: marineaviation; usmc; v22osprey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
1
posted on
02/10/2007 7:48:12 AM PST
by
brityank
To: Tribune7
2
posted on
02/10/2007 7:49:04 AM PST
by
brityank
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
To: brityank
Bad chip in the BIT computer (in this case) and the USAF finding lots of BIT failures last summer?
Might (just maybe) be connected. One hot, one cold, but extreme temperatures both ways.
3
posted on
02/10/2007 7:51:19 AM PST
by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: brityank
Ya cant blame the manufacturer. The Gov lays out the specs.
We test to -15F
4
posted on
02/10/2007 7:55:22 AM PST
by
mylife
(The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
To: brityank
I know the technology involved in this beast is a nightmare of complication, but you would think that an aircraft in development as long as this one has been would have the kinks worked out by now.
And by the way - can anyone share with me the specific roll this aircraft could play that isn't already covered by more "conventional" aircraft? Seems like a rather expensive game if it truly isn't going to be any better than what we already have...
5
posted on
02/10/2007 7:56:05 AM PST
by
TheBattman
(I've got TWO QUESTIONS for you....)
To: TheBattman
It doesn't look like it wants to fly.
To: TheBattman
They come pre-painted with a bullseye on them.
7
posted on
02/10/2007 7:59:47 AM PST
by
pipecorp
( Al Lahsucks boat steersman hell)
To: TheBattman
Insertion of SOF typs way beyond helicopter range.
Better yet, extraction of them is combat zones.
The old method was "verticle extraction." You float a rope on a balloon, and a C-130 flys by and catches the rope, snatching you out of the jungle.
Watch out for trees.
8
posted on
02/10/2007 8:01:23 AM PST
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: Hostel
PING to her husband who works on these birds for DynCorp
9
posted on
02/10/2007 8:03:37 AM PST
by
Severa
(I can't take this stress anymore...quick, get me a marker to sniff....)
To: brityank
"due to a computer chip that couldnt stand the cold. "
You would think that would be part of testing 101 for a manufacturer.
10
posted on
02/10/2007 8:04:09 AM PST
by
HereInTheHeartland
(Never bring a knife to a gun fight, or a Democrat to do serious work...)
To: patton
To: LiveFree99
12
posted on
02/10/2007 8:05:28 AM PST
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: HereInTheHeartland
"Testing 101"
It is and thats how it was found. I think you will see similar problems identified in other types of aircraft including commercial aircraft before this is all over.
Problem is that the aircraft has to be cold soaked. In other words, sitting outside without any systems running in below freezing weather.
To: brityank
I know this bird has had its share of problems, but there is something good to be said about the design, at least of the onboard management systems, that this malfunction was caught before it resulted in a crash. Sure, it should have been caught way earlier, before these chips even left the manufacturer, IMHO.
No machine made by humans is ever going to be perfect, but at least the designed-in redundancy was working and detected a real problem that can be easily fixed.
I have mixed feelings on the Ospry. If they can get it to work reliably, it will be an awesome asset for the Marines, as well as the other services, and plenty of civilian organizations. If not, its going to be a hugely expensive boondoggle. I hope its the former.
To: brityank
I wouldn't want to fly on one.
15
posted on
02/10/2007 8:17:00 AM PST
by
SIDENET
(No votes for RINOs.)
To: brityank
Maybe Al Gore can heat the chips up with a "global warming" speech.
16
posted on
02/10/2007 8:19:19 AM PST
by
reg45
To: TheBattman
So, name another aircraft that can carry 20 troops at 300mph, take off and land vertically, and in case of an engine failure while cruising, actually glide instead of falling out of the sky like a Sea Knight/brick.
As "bad" as the Osprey is, it's still far better than the CH-46 Sea Knight, and it's killed less Marines.
17
posted on
02/10/2007 8:20:15 AM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: brityank; A.A. Cunningham
No biggie. These kinds of issues happen more than you think with newly fielded equipment.
18
posted on
02/10/2007 8:20:18 AM PST
by
TADSLOS
(Iran is in the IED exporting business. Time to shut them down.)
To: SIDENET
I'd rather fly on an Osprey than a CH-46, which is the aircraft it's replacing.
I've been on a Sea Knight, and it's *really* frightening - especially when the ONE turbine sputters on landing...
19
posted on
02/10/2007 8:21:30 AM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: TheBattman
The primary use is "over the horizon" deployment. Transport ships can remain out of sight, out of radar range, and out of surface fired gun and missile range, while the V-22 speeds in, much faster than a helo, to insert troops.
While true that there are still kinks to work out, the military thinks in terms of trade offs. Lose one V-22 and all the troops and crew aboard, or lose an amphibious assault ship and all of it's crew, marines, and equipment.
It's cold and heartless, but that is the nature of war.
20
posted on
02/10/2007 8:21:47 AM PST
by
Sergio
(If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson