Posted on 02/09/2003 8:13:25 AM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
Osprey's flight tests `going well,' Pentagon official says
BY RICHARD WHITTLE
The Dallas Morning News
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - The V-22 Osprey's flight tests are "going well," Defense Undersecretary Pete Aldridge said Friday, adding that he will visit the program's Maryland office next week to assess its progress in detail.
"I'm always skeptical until I'm proven otherwise," said the Pentagon procurement chief, who previously had expressed doubts that the tilt-rotor troop transport would be suitable for combat missions.
But without declaring any change of heart, Aldridge allowed that the flight test program for the controversial Marine Corps aircraft "is laid out very well" and that he had "not heard any real problems yet."
Pentagon budgets in future years would increase funding for V-22 procurement "under the assumption that the flight test program is successful," he added.
The fiscal 2004 budget President Bush submitted to Congress this week requested $1.64 billion for 11 Ospreys.
A decision on whether to stick with that plan or cut funding probably will be made this summer or next fall, he said.
"If we start seeing some problems occur, we may have to readdress where we go," he added.
Built by Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. of Fort Worth in partnership with Boeing Co., the V-22 uses two huge wingtip rotors to take off like a helicopter, then tilts them forward to fly like an airplane. That gives it greater speed and range than a normal helicopter.
The Marines are convinced the Osprey's unusual capability will revolutionize the way they fight. But after two crashes in 2000 that left 23 Marines dead, critics urged the Pentagon to cancel the Osprey.
The Pentagon instead ordered a redesign of the aircraft and a new, rigorous round of flight tests that began last May.
Months ago, Aldridge - an aerospace engineer by training - said he was skeptical of the V-22's ability to land aboard ships because of its parallel rotors.
He and other critics also have argued that the wingtip rotors could make the aircraft unacceptably vulnerable to rotor stalls known as "vortex ring state" when descending rapidly.
On Friday, Aldridge noted that the program began shipboard flight and landing tests last month and has been doing "high rate of descent" tests with apparent success.
"They are not skimping on doing hard tests early," Aldridge granted. "They're right in that high rate of descent, where the vortex ring state problems exist. They're doing shipboard compatibility testing right now."
Aldridge said he would travel to Patuxent River Naval Air Station next week to "assess where they are, how well they have done, what's the plan for the future, what's the reliability look like in the airplane so far, because they've done a lot of work on that.
"So my trip next week should give me a little bit better indication of how they are progressing. I haven't heard any real problems yet, but we'll see after my trip."
© 2003, The Dallas Morning News.
Visit The Dallas Morning News on the World Wide Web at http://www.dallasnews.com
Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
The pilot error concern is no less valid than a design or mechanical one. Platforms requiring skills well beyond the "tricky to handle" precautions are a real flaw. If the bird is completely unforgiving if inputs are not perfect, that should be a factor in deciding it's future. We all have a tendancy to perform with great variability as human beings. Engineering needs to accomodate that. If I am flying it, I need lot's of accomodation!
I look at the last crash of the V-22 in the same light as the Apollo 1 fire. The Apollo space program was having a lot of problems that weren't being adequately addressed. After the Apollo 1 fire, it would have been real easy to just scrap the whole program outright and move on to something else. But the fire motivated everybody to step up and do what is right, and they wound up taking it to the moon, literally.
It seems to me that pilot error is almost another word for inadequate software. In principle, these machines could be all but crash-proof, assuming there are no mechanical problems.
Too bad none of the previous crashes were.
Were what? Your sentence is incomplete and makes no sense.
In your opinion, can this thing be made to work as desired?
Incorrect.
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.