Article

2007-04-14 Iraq

A Combat Mission Two Decades in the Making

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Zenster 2007-04-14 00:12|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#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|| 2007-04-14 01:46|| Front Page Top

#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">RD 2007-04-14 04:10|| 2007-04-14 04:10|| Front Page Top

#3 Bet they ain't flying in formation.

Advise JarHed to avoid if possible.

Posted by Shipman">Shipman 2007-04-14 06:06|| 2007-04-14 06:06|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2007-04-14 08:15|| Front Page Top

#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">Jonathan 2007-04-14 11:08|| 2007-04-14 11:08|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2007-04-14 12:21|| Front Page Top

#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">Zenster 2007-04-14 13:55|| 2007-04-14 13:55|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2007-04-14 17:48|| Front Page Top

#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">rammer 2007-04-14 18:35|| www.blogoram.com]">[www.blogoram.com] 2007-04-14 18:35|| Front Page Top

#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.">Dave D. 2007-04-14 19:10|| 2007-04-14 19:10|| Front Page Top

#11 In exchange for a temperamental flight envelope

Not the way to open a sales meeting.

Posted by Shipman">Shipman 2007-04-14 21:17|| 2007-04-14 21:17|| Front Page Top

23:59 Zenster
23:52 Old Patriot
23:38 Old Patriot
23:03 Zenster
22:58 Zenster
22:48 borgboy2001
22:45 borgboy2001
22:43 RD
22:42 borgboy2001
22:40 borgboy2001
22:37 borgboy2001
22:35 RD
22:35 borgboy2001
22:15 Frank G
22:12 FOTSGreg
22:08 anymouse
22:08 Frank G
22:07 anymouse
22:05 FOTSGreg
21:58 FOTSGreg
21:57 ryuge
21:52 xbalanke
21:38 wxjames
21:31 Shipman