Pentagon Orders 11 New Osprey Aircraft

AP ^ | Thu May 15, 2003 | AP

[klpt]

The Pentagon on Thursday ordered 11 new V-22 Osprey aircraft for $817 million, giving a boost to a program plagued by deadly crashes and other problems.

The program had been in danger of being eliminated after 23 Marines died in crashes during testing in 2000. The aircraft's maker, a joint venture between Boeing Co. and Textron Inc.'s Bell Helicopter unit, had to redesign parts of the aircraft to fix hydraulic and other problems.

The Osprey has fixed wings and propellors that can tilt upward so the craft can take off and land like a helicopter, then tilt forward so it can fly like an airplane. The Marine Corps wants to use the Osprey as a replacement for its aging fleet of transport helicopters. The Air Force and Navy are interested in using the Osprey, too.

A December 2000 crash in North Carolina that killed four Marines was blamed on a design flaw that allowed electrical and hydraulic lines to rub together while the rotors were being tilted, causing the hydraulic lines to burst.

The hydraulic and electrical lines have been rerouted to solve that problem, the Pentagon said in a statement.

The deadliest crash was blamed on an aerodynamic condition called "vortex ring state" that happened during an unusually rapid descent. Nineteen Marines died in that April 2000 crash near Tucson, Ariz.

The Pentagon ordered another round of testing for the Osprey after the redesign, and military officials have said those tests have gone well. Ordering 11 more Ospreys to be built is a signal that the program has passed those tests.

The Osprey has a longer range and flies faster and more quietly than the Marines' current fleet of transport helicopters.

The new Ospreys will be built at factories in Ridley Park, Penn., and Fort Worth and Amarillo, Texas.

[oldironsides]

Thank Rep.Curt Weldon for this order. I know it is good for his district but is it good for pilots and passengers?
It has a spotty safety record. Not that the record means much to Weldon.

[ElectricStrawberry]

Hope they work out the problems. Politics aside, this bird has proven that it is not safe for American troops.

[TomB]

Hope they work out the problems. Politics aside, this bird has proven that it is not safe for American troops.

Many weapons systems started out with similar problems. I remember story after story of problems with the Apache helicopter.

The B-26 Martin Marauder is another example of a problem-plagued aircraft that eventually went on to serve with disctinction.

[LibKill]

Nice Pic, but where are the guns?

I believe that military aircraft should have guns.

[narby]

Hope they work out the problems. Politics aside, this bird has proven that it is not safe for American troops.

Every radically new aircaft has its teething problems. I remember there was a series of crashes of 737 aircraft when they were new. And it wasn't even "radical".

The "ring vortex" thing, or what I was taught was "descent with power" will happen with any helecopter type aircraft. Just like stalling a fixed wing aircraft will bring it down if no recovery is made, "descent with power" was purely a pilot screwup and can't be blamed on the aircraft.

If this thing wasn't radical, and there weren't politics involved, no one but those involved would have paid attention to the crashes.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

A December 2000 crash in North Carolina that killed four Marines was blamed on a design flaw that allowed electrical and hydraulic lines to rub together while the rotors were being tilted, causing the hydraulic lines to burst.

The aircrew should have immediately landed the aircraft just as they were taught in the simulator and just as the NATOPS manual is written instead of repeatedly pressing the FCS reset switch which exacerbated the software anomalies.

The deadliest crash was blamed on an aerodynamic condition called "vortex ring state" that happened during an unusually rapid descent. Nineteen Marines died in that April 2000 crash near Tucson, Ariz.

That crash was a result of pilot error. Major John Brow improperly flew the aircraft. Any rotary winged aircraft will enter VRS when improperly flown. Brow proved that you can't execute a 2000+fpm descent from an altitude of 200 feet at less than 40 knots ground speed and survive.

[narby]

The B-26 Martin Marauder is another example of a problem-plagued aircraft that eventually went on to serve with disctinction.

The P-38 was another aircraft that had a "killer" reputation when it was first introduced. The real problem turned out to be inadequate training. Many pilots hadn't even been trained in multi-engine aircraft.

After Bob Hoover and some factory test pilots made the rounds as bases giving additional training and doing airshows to prove the AC was good, confidence in the AC was great.

Hoover developed his single engine Shrike Commander airshow originally in the P-38. He'd shut off an engine and continue to perform airshow manuvers. The regular Air Corps pilots of the day were amazed because they didn't think the thing would fly at all single engine.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Politics aside, this bird has proven that it is not safe for American troops.

To the contrary, this bird has proven very safe when flown properly and in accordance with the NATOPS. The UH-60 has killed hundreds of American troops. Think it should be grounded?

[Robe]

You have to remember the every aircraft ever built has had it’s Airworthyness Certificate written in blood, the hills around Edwards AFB are named after pilots who gave their
lives to the future of aviation.
The first passenger ever in a fixed wing aircraft lost his life in the demonstration, the pilot was Orville Wright.
The Pilots assigned to these aircraft fly ‘em because they BELIEVE that it is good for the Corps, good for aviation in general. We need this aircraft and the capability it gives
our Marines, they are currently flying around in 40 year old aircraft and technology.
When helicopters first were introduced, they were falling out of the sky like sparrows.
Yes, more pilots and troops will die in the development of combat aircraft, it is the nature of the beast,and GOD bless their souls for it.
Freedom isn’t free , it takes it’s fee in blood and lives.

[ElectricStrawberry]

I was infantry from 89-96 and hated every time we had crashhawks giving us the ride. Take a Huey any day.

[hchutch]

Serve with distinction? Heck, it ended up being the instrument through which Tom Lanphier avenged Pearl Harbor by shooting down Yamamoto.

[JETDRVR]

I agree, this is a radical acft that should be flown radicly:) .....count me out sheez that whole tilt rotor thing, looks neat but I dunno.

[LS]

We could add the M-16, which had so many glitches that no one wanted it at first. Now, I think it is considered one of the best 2-3 rifle weapons in the world.

[pa_dweller]

Not to belabor a point but the Lockheed Electra also had a very rocky start as a commercial plane, killing passengers by diving into the ground. The design was purchased by the U.S. Navy and is known and flown as the P3 Orion.

The P3 Orion is still in widespread service and is the most produced aircraft of its type. Today the Electra is still in limited passenger airline service around the world, although one well-known operator Reeve Aleutian in Alaska folded in 2001.

[Rodsomnia]

Our enemies drool at the thought of Americans flying over their heads in those flying fireball coffins.

We should limit Osprey flight to congressional junkets only.

There is a vehicle out there to fit the Marines needs but the Osprey is not it.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

This thing doesn't look like it wants to fly.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

There is a vehicle out there to fit the Marines needs but the Osprey is not it.

Really? What vehicle meets the JORD requirements if it's not the Osprey?

The Marine Corps and the Air Force would strongly disagree with you.

[taxcontrol]

A thougth:

The Osprey is a plane designed to work like a helicopter. Has anyone considered takeing a helicopter an getting it to fly like a plane?

I imagine a Chinook (sp?) with retractable wings between the two rotors. Counter rotating rotors and some outboard turbofan engines with directed thrust for navigation.

Wings would be folded in low speed flight and would then be extended for higherspeed level operations.

[Space Wrangler]

Drag would be the problem. The tilt-rotor way is the only way to go. You have to be able to use the rotors in both environments. A helicopter can only achieve a top speed less than the speed of the rotor. If a helicopter flew faster than the rotor was moving, the rotor couldn't catch up, and lift would be gone. So says my ground instructor in Commnache 4 anyway ;>)