Lots Riding on V-22 Osprey

Defense Industry Daily ^ | 12-Mar-2007 | Defense Industry Daily

[68skylark]

I'm one of those who has been skeptical of the Osprey -- not hostile, just skeptical.

If it works well, it's going to be a great leap forward for the U.S. military.

[LiberalBassTurds]

I was in Amarillo, TX last week and saw one flying for the first time. Pretty weird looking to say the least. I'm no pilot, or engineer, but from a layman's perspective it just looked like one of those creations that we'd call "klugey" in the tech world.

LBT
-=-=-

[68skylark]

Pretty weird looking to say the least.

I think I know what you mean. I gotta give credit to the guys who are the engineers, pilots, maintainers, etc. -- they've got quite an unusual aircraft, and even if it proves to be not as good as its proponents hope, I suspect it will serve as the basis for new aircraft in the coming decades that will just get better and better.

[boomop1]

They fly training missions over my area every day and night.

[LiberalBassTurds]

I gotta give credit to the guys who are the engineers, pilots, maintainers, etc. -- they've got quite an unusual aircraft, and even if it proves to be not as good as its proponents hope, I suspect it will serve as the basis for new aircraft in the coming decades that will just get better and better.

Agreed. If it works for our folks in the field then it works for me. Gen II can only get better.

LBT
-=-=-

[finnman69]

Cool

it like the Aliens dropship ferrying around the APC

[sine_nomine]

I believe the F-111 was klugey when it came out, lots of problems. The enemy called it "Whispering Death" so it must have been fairly good with the kinks worked out.

Even tech failures are major breakthroughs. The Valkyrie crashed and was not pursued, but it spawned a new type of craft.

I am no expert, so I am open to correction.

[Pistolshot]

The Osprey is stationed here at Kirtland AFB. They make a heck of a noise landing and in flight but the transition stage from rotor to forward flight is amazing to watch and the craft appears very stable and fast.

Every deployment of a new system has it's teething problems. The turbines in the Abrahms, the guidance system for the Apache's and the rotor failures, the F-14 crashes during testing all come to mind.

[wideminded]

The Osprey is impressive in a lot of ways. I know that it can still fly if one of the engines goes out, but I've never been able to understand how it could survive a serious hit on one of the rotors when it is hover mode (or transitioning). I suppose most 2-rotor helicopters have a similar weakness.

[LiberalBassTurds]

Even tech failures are major breakthroughs.

Agreed. Edison's quote "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." comes to mind.

LBT
-=-=-

[sine_nomine]

I recall the moron press lords mocking the Abrams tank when it came out. Blah, blah, treads fall off. Blah, blah, too heavy. Russian tanks the gold standard, blah, blah. I cannot recall any tank competing with an Abrams.

[Constantine XI Palaeologus]

Ditto on the skepticism.

Since it's unarmed (at least the last time I checked--a year ago maybe), I don't like how it's so vulnerable in hover mode. Especially, if the Iranians do have proximity fused RPGs (I think I read this on another thread), or even regular HEAT RPG rounds it seems like other aircraft will have to support the landing (like helicopters). And now that I hear it's noisy (unsurprising, I suppose), I don't see how it's all that viable. Sure it's able to carry more than a helicopter, but I don't know about the tradeoffs.

Good to see it isn't crashing anymore, though.

[NickFlooding]

Hopefully it will prove out and be successful in deployment.

This would also be a great platform for the Navy's ASW missions and I can see it as very valuable for Coast Guard sea rescues.

[NickFlooding]

Film at 11:00.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=THZkfGbN37k

[RunningWolf]

I'm one of those who has been skeptical of the Osprey -- not hostile, just skeptical.

If it works well, it's going to be a great leap forward for the U.S. military.

Ditto, although I think I have been accused of being hostile to it because I am skeptical of it.

[RayChuang88]

I believe the F-111 was klugey when it came out, lots of problems.

The F-111 had two major problems in the early versions: 1) the weak wing spar that caused several crashes in low-level flight and 2) the engine inlet design that caused serious compressor stalls. Fortunately, redesigning the wing spar corrected the first problem, and the F-111D/E/F models introduced a new engine inlet design that eliminated the compressor stall problem. By 1972, the F-111 was devestatingly effective in low-level strikes in North Vietnam and during Operation Desert Storm, F-111D/E/F models equipped with the Pave Tack laser designator pod destroyed many Iraqi ground installations.

[RunningWolf]

While I think that your paralleling of the F-111 and its teething problems to the V-22 are apples to oranges, I totally agree with your 2nd paragraph.

Even tech failures are major breakthroughs. The Valkyrie crashed and was not pursued, but it spawned a new type of craft.

[Richard Kimball]

That's got to be one heck of a pilot to fly that thing.

[RunningWolf]

Yes, and I can envision in various atmospheric conditions/loads that he might get 'stuck' in the transition mode, and he cant fly the aircraft into full horizontal flight.

How can I imagine that scenario? It is the wing, it is very highly loaded IMO.

[sine_nomine]

Hey, I'm no engineer, but I am all in favor of huge defense expenditures. I think it's in the Constitution or the Bible or Shakespeare.