| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| A Combat Mission Two Decades in the Making |
| 2007-04-14 |
| After more than 20 years in development at a cost of billions of dollars, the long-troubled V-22 Osprey will head to Iraq in September for its first combat missions, the Marine Corps said yesterday. The tilt-rotor Osprey, a helicopter-airplane hybrid, has survived attempts by the Pentagon leadership to cancel it, criticism of its rising cost and unique design, and three fatal accidents since 1992. The aircraft, made by Bell Helicopter and Boeing, can take off, land and hover like a helicopter, then turn its rotors to fly straight ahead like a conventional plane. It will operate out of al-Asad air base in central Iraq for seven months. "The story of how we got here is a long one," Gen. James T. Conway, the Marine Corps commandant, said at a morning news conference at the Pentagon. "I'll just say that the quantum leap in technology that this aircraft will bring to the fight has been a road marked by some setbacks, lots of sacrifices and the success of these Marines standing before you today." A report in 1983 by the Pentagon's office of program analysis and evaluation concluded that the plane's concept was flawed. In the late 1980s and early '90s, Dick Cheney, the Defense secretary at the time, tried to cancel it. The aircraft's three fatal crashes -- one in 1992 and two in 2000 -- killed 26 Marines and four civilians. In 2001, allegations emerged that maintenance records for the aircraft had been falsified, which the commander of the Osprey's maintenance squadron later admitted was done to make the aircraft appear more serviceable than it was. The Osprey fleet was briefly grounded this year after the military found a glitch in a computer chip that could cause the aircraft to lose control. Intel Inside? Despite the project's problems, the Marine Corps has stayed loyal to the aircraft, arguing that the Osprey was now safe and needed in combat. "The Marine Corps has built its entire future concept of warfare around the V-22," said Loren Thompson, a defense industry analyst. The Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263, which is based in Jacksonville, N.C., will deploy to Iraq with 10 Ospreys after more training, including time in the desert in Yuma, Ariz. The Osprey's main mission in Iraq will be to transport troops and perform rescue missions. Marine Corps officials promote its ability to go farther and carry a bigger load than any of the helicopters it will replace, including the CH-46 Sea Knight, a Vietnam-era chopper that has crashed several times in Iraq. Lt. Gen. John Castellaw, the deputy Marine commandant for aviation, said the CH-46 "is old in the tooth, and its capability in terms of range and payload is not what we want." The V-22 would be able to survive the kind of attacks that have brought down helicopters in Iraq, I've always been concerned about the tremendous stresses that the moveable wingtip engine mounts must go through. How ruggedized are the rotors themselves? The loss of even a single blade would be likely to totally destabilize the entire craft and an autogyro landing doesn't appear to be an option. Marine Corps officials said. "By the time you see us and we're past you, the best you're going to do is one of those revenge shoots," Lt. Col. Paul Rock, commander of Squadron 263, said yesterday in a clearing near Quantico Marine Base in Virginia, where two dozen reporters had been flown to watch the Ospreys in action. As Rock spoke, two Ospreys kicked up wind for about 100 yards around. Bell Helicopter and Boeing have produced 54 Ospreys -- 46 for the Marines and eight for the Air Force. About $20 billion has been spent on the program, and the military is expected to ultimately pay $50.5 billion for the 458 aircraft it wants, according to a Congressional Research Service report. In March, the Government Accountability Office estimated the cost of each aircraft at about $109 million, up from the $40 million that each was projected to cost when development started in the 1980s. Skeptics argue that the Osprey is too expensive to be used widely or put in risky situations. It may be suitable for specialty missions such as long-range rescue or special-operations deployments, but "those relatively few missions don't justify putting all of the Marines' chips behind the V-22," said Jennifer Gore, spokeswoman for the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group. The Marine Corps could buy fewer Ospreys -- 50 or so -- and make a larger purchase of a cheaper helicopter, she said. I suppose it's time to give these exspensive birds some real time battle testing, but their seeming fragility remains a concern. Obviously, their forward speed makes them superior to the old Chinook class helicopters. The article also seems to infer that the Osprey is better armored. While this craft may not have the rotor interference problems of the old Chinooks, I still consider the tilt-rotor concept to have many issues of its own. Any in-house folk with better knowledge of this bird? |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #11 In exchange for a temperamental flight envelope Not the way to open a sales meeting. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-04-14 21:17 |
| #10 The place where the Osprey is built is about two miles down the road from where I work; I'm glad to see it finally getting put into service. As I recall, there were early problems with the transverse driveshaft that links the two engines, and allows either engine to drive both props in the event the other engine fails. The design problems with the driveshaft were fixed, as I understand it, and it's no longer a major concern. Nice to see this bird take to the air; let's see what she can do. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-14 19:10 |
| #9 I've been to the factory and understand how it's made. It has good construction and is one of the most sophisticated aircraft we've ever designed and built. In exchange for a temperamental flight envelope, we have combined a helicopter's vertical take-off and landing capability with the long range of a fixed wing plane. We will lose some of these planes and their crews and passengers; however, with it the commander has hundreds of miles of additional reach beyond the coast. The deterrent effect of that prospect is huge. We will probably never know how many potential situations were avoided simply because there was a battalion of Marines with V-22's just off shore, but I guarantee that our enemies will fear them. |
| Posted by: rammer 2007-04-14 18:35 |
| #8 I had read some time ago that the main problem leading to the earlier crashes was faulty hydraulics, presumably connected with the tilt rotor systems. One hopes that has been checked off the punch list |
| Posted by: Lemuel Unatle2956 2007-04-14 17:48 |
| #7 ... but that there is a problem with the flight envelope, and that when transitioning from forward flight to landing, if you descend too quickly Can't they avoid all these problems by reorienting only one rotor at a time? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-04-14 13:55 |
| #6 The only advantage I see is you can always cut the engines and glide, you'll ruin the props landing that way, but in an emergency, screw the props. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-04-14 12:21 |
| #5 Their solution was to limit the rate of descent during transition. iirc. So what happens when a pilot has to descend quickly to get out of a bad situation? This is a disaster waiting to happen. |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2007-04-14 11:08 |
| #4 My understanding is not that it is particularly fragile, (but of course I am probably wrong about this), but that there is a problem with the flight envelope, and that when transitioning from forward flight to landing, if you descend too quickly, there is some airflow problems to the rotors which causes an uncontrollable descent. Their solution was to limit the rate of descent during transition. iirc. I am sure someone here knows more about this than me... |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2007-04-14 08:15 |
| #3 Bet they ain't flying in formation. Advise JarHed to avoid if possible. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-04-14 06:06 |
| #2 wapo aside, I have some of the the same 'concerns' as ZEN does. solution, adopting Missouri as my home state visa vi V-22. Risks & Accidents: comparatively the V-22 is replacing >>Shit-hooks and >>CH53s, which will help its comparative stats.. The MV-22 replaces the current Marine Corps assault helicopters in the medium lift category (CH-46E and CH-53D), contributing to the dominant maneuver of the Marine landing force, as well as supporting focused logistics in the days following commencement of an amphibious operation. The Air Force variant, the CV-22, replaces the MH-53J and MH-60G and augment the MC-130 fleet in the USSOCOM Special Operations mission. [plus speculation of even more variants.] I've read that it is flying soon in part due to *restrictions* ie. original flight envelope was restricted in order to make the flight risks acceptable. Very Good V-22 Linky V-22 Design V-22 Missions/Requirements MV-22 Marine Corps Variant CV-22 Air Force Variant HV-22 Navy Variant UV-22 Army Variant V-22 Flight Control V-22 Propulsion System V-22 Conversion V-22 Blade Fold/Wing Stow V-22 Fuel System V-22 Cockpit V-22 Payload V-22 Survivability V-22 Maintainability V-22 Testing V-22 Vortex Ring State (VRS) V-22 Losses V-22 History - HXM V-22 History - JVX V-22 History V-22 Cost V-22 Specifications V-22 Performance V-22 Production V-22 Delivery Schedule V-22 Pictures V-22 References |
| Posted by: RD 2007-04-14 04:10 |
| #1 At last check the Army-DOD were still proceeding wid dev of larger, multi-rotor, follow-on versions of the Osprey capable of delivering armored fighting vehix. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-04-14 01:46 |