Four Killed in CV22 Osprey Crash Afghanistan 09/04/2010

#2
Thats another bad mark on the already tainted Osprey record. A fair few incidents now.

Osprey Incidents
 
#4
USMC is being very carefull to avoid using their V-22's in any situation which might require aggressive maneuvering... from what I understand the USAF isn't being so cautious. Either way, good men have died and I'm sure the investigation will blame pilot error as that seems to be the pattern when Ospreys become dirt darts.
 
#5
It's a dog, kids. A hundred million dollar accident waiting to happen.
What use is a military aircraft you can't manoeuver aggressively?
Goes a bit faster than a helicopter, but carries less troops than an Mi-17 or a Sea King. Great!!
Thank god we had the sense to avoid this lemon completely.
 
#6
I didnt know the USAF opperated them?
 
#8
According to the article

The incident was the first known deadly crash of an Osprey since it entered active service in 2006, although numerous lives were lost in accidents while the aircraft was under development.
a series of fatal crashes and other incidents. In 2000, a crash in Arizona killed all 19 Marines aboard and a separate crash killed four Marines in Florida.
unlike fixed-wing aircraft, the Osprey can’t glide down to an emergency landing in case of a loss of power and its propellers lack the ability to keep rotating on their own even after the engines fail.
tells a story doesnt it? numerous lives lost while it was under development but it was still put into service!
 
#9
instinct said:
I didnt know the USAF opperated them?
USAF Sp Ops have them. not sure how many but they ordered another 28 in April
 
#10
Khyros said:
USMC is being very carefull to avoid using their V-22's in any situation which might require aggressive maneuvering... from what I understand the USAF isn't being so cautious. Either way, good men have died and I'm sure the investigation will blame pilot error as that seems to be the pattern when Ospreys become dirt darts.
You'd better tell that to the USMC pilots at Bastion who aggressively manouevre over my office every day (and night) :twisted:
 
#11
RoyogtheRovers said:
According to the article

The incident was the first known deadly crash of an Osprey since it entered active service in 2006, although numerous lives were lost in accidents while the aircraft was under development.
a series of fatal crashes and other incidents. In 2000, a crash in Arizona killed all 19 Marines aboard and a separate crash killed four Marines in Florida.
unlike fixed-wing aircraft, the Osprey can’t glide down to an emergency landing in case of a loss of power and its propellers lack the ability to keep rotating on their own even after the engines fail.
tells a story doesnt it? numerous lives lost while it was under development but it was still put into service!
The history of their develoment is quite enlightening in that respect. It's fair to say that the first paragraph of the 'Controversy' bit of the Wiki entry doesn't even begin to detail all the arguments that tis lemon caused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-22_Osprey
 
#12
They are a sobering example when a procurement system goes badly wrong. Throw in politics and people who are unwilling shut down a project and what you have is a litany of body bags
 
#13
Here's all you need to know about the Osprey and safety. The US FAA won't even certify tilt-rotors to carry civilian passengers. And they didn't bother to enter it as a competitor for the Presidential flight tender - far too dangerous a machine for the Main Man.
 
#15
Interesting that the project sponsor wants Obama to have one as his personal a/c...

We love you, honest!
 
#16
No foreign customers either. Strange, we all bought Sea Kings, Chinooks, Huey's; Apaches and even older stuff like the H-58 (Westland Wessex)... Let alone all the fixed wing stuff.

Maybe that's telling enough?
 
#17
The Israelis have been considering and subsequently evaluating the V-22 for a number of years to replace their CH-53s. I suspect that in due course they'll also be looking at the CH-53K however.

Closer to home, the RN studied an ASaC variant of Osprey for the Maritime Airborne Surveillance Capability (MASC) requirement. Although potentially very well suited to such a role, the issue was one of cost as significant modifications would be required to the airframe to accommodate the sensors and mission systems.

Regards,
MM
 
#18
Magic_Mushroom said:
Closer to home, the RN studied an ASaC variant of Osprey for the Maritime Airborne Surveillance Capability (MASC) requirement. Although potentially very well suited to such a role, the issue was one of cost as significant modifications would be required to the airframe to accommodate the sensors and mission systems.
Shh! You musn't mention MASC - after it it has no IPT of its own and no real funding. I presume some of the Merlin HM1s not being upgraded to HM2 will be adapted for ASaC type duties...

Haven't the Americans found that Osprey causes a problem aboard LHD decks - in that it melts the deck?
 
#19
Yokel said:
Shh! You musn't mention MASC - after it it has no IPT of its own and no real funding. I presume some of the Merlin HM1s not being upgraded to HM2 will be adapted for ASaC type duties...
MASC does have an IPT (or PT, or DT or whatever they're calling it these days at DE&S) and is arguably looking healthier than in recent years...at least until the SDR.

Yokel said:
Haven't the Americans found that Osprey causes a problem aboard LHD decks - in that it melts the deck?
Yes, but it's apparently manageable.

Regards,
MM
 
#20
Memory says Nick Lappos made some interesting comments on The C53/Osprey debate on the prunne forum.
I know at the time he was Senior Test Pilot for Sikorsky but he has always struck me as a reasonable person.
john
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads