U.S. Marine Corps MV-22 Ospreys

#1
GULF OF AQABA (Oct. 4, 2007) - U.S. Marine Corps MV-22 Ospreys, assigned to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 263, Marine Aircraft Group 29, prepare for flight on the deck of the multipurpose amphibious assault ship USS Wasp (LHD 1). Wasp is on surge deployment to the Middle East carrying the Osprey to its first combat deployment. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Zachary L. Borden.
 

Attachments

#4
More:
 

Attachments

#5
The-Lord-Flasheart said:
Nice phot but I'd rather walk or swim than fly in an MV-22 thank you very much.
Serious question - why's that? Their design has always intrigued me and I've wondered about the pros and cons.
 
#6
The-Lord-Flasheart said:
Nice phot but I'd rather walk or swim than fly in an MV-22 thank you very much.
I have heard, its not the most reliable, and a chinnok(sp?) is a better option?

But what do I know?
 
#8
tiger stacker said:
looks nice but can it fight????
Fight? Only time will tell; however, it's designed really to transport troops not fight. I suspect it will be used mostly for special operations long range clandestine insertions, mostly at night.

I'm very interested in how it does in these routine operations for the USMC, especially in it's accident rate. I'd like to see it succed, as I think it has many useful applications of Special Operations forces in all of the branches. SEALS, RECON, DELTA and Special Forces.
 
#9
Trip_Wire said:
tiger stacker said:
looks nice but can it fight????
Fight? Only time will tell; however, it's designed really to transport troops not fight. I suspect it will be used mostly for special operations long range clandestine insertions, mostly at night.

I'm very interested in how it does in these routine operations for the USMC, especially in it's accident rate. I'd like to see it succed, as I think it has many useful applications of Special Operations forces in all of the branches. SEALS, RECON, DELTA and Special Forces.

Sort of contradicts your second para regarding its use as an SF platform. The two are extricably intertwinned are to fight the aircraft is a must for the user. The only advantage the MV22 has over, say an MH53 or MH47 is its cruise speed. As an SF delivery plaform, its an answer to a question no one really asked and has been politically 'fitted in' to the requirement.
 
#10
The-Lord-Flasheart said:
Trip_Wire said:
tiger stacker said:
looks nice but can it fight????
Fight? Only time will tell; however, it's designed really to transport troops not fight. I suspect it will be used mostly for special operations long range clandestine insertions, mostly at night.

I'm very interested in how it does in these routine operations for the USMC, especially in it's accident rate. I'd like to see it succed, as I think it has many useful applications of Special Operations forces in all of the branches. SEALS, RECON, DELTA and Special Forces.

Sort of contradicts your second para regarding its use as an SF platform. The two are extricably intertwinned are to fight the aircraft is a must for the user. The only advantage the MV22 has over, say an MH53 or MH47 is its cruise speed. As an SF delivery plaform, its an answer to a question no one really asked and has been politically 'fitted in' to the requirement.
I don't agree with you. This aircraft isn't really designed to replace the currant role of helicopters, nor will it do that.

I think that longer range, better performance at high altitude, as well as the speed, out performs the helicopters you mention, especially in such operations that I mentioned.

As for the definition of a 'fight' a fighting aircraft, we're talking about Apples & Oranges. The aircraft is designed to transport troops, not as a fighter to shoot down other aircraft, destroy tanks, etc. It's a transport aircraft.
 
#11
Hello Trip_Wire,

that is a very nice picture,thankyou for posting it.

The Osprey's additional speed will give only a limited improvement to survivability and then only if it is safe to fly high enough to go wingbourne.
Rate of delivery is then the main advantage but given that a larger number of similar sized helicopters or a similar number of larger helicopters could be purchased for the same price,there seems little point to the MV22.
Particularly as the marines are now short of funds to develop a replacement for their hard worked CH53s.
As the Osprey cannot move their vehicles and equipment,that is a major problem.
They could have developed a single aircraft to replace both types.
If you are going to spent so much money on quickly delivering troops hundreds of miles inland,it would be nice if they did not then have to walk.

I would go so far as to say the Osprey is as nonsensical as the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.
British defence procurement is often quite rightly castigated.
Here we have a fine example of why we should not rely on others doing things right.

Perhaps The-Lord-Flasheart could comment on the safety aspects of tilt rotors,I assume they cannot autorotate and wonder about their gliding ability,but I am sure he is much better informed on that subject.

tangosix.
 
#12
The-Lord-Flasheart said:
Trip_Wire said:
tiger stacker said:
looks nice but can it fight????
Fight? Only time will tell; however, it's designed really to transport troops not fight. I suspect it will be used mostly for special operations long range clandestine insertions, mostly at night.

I'm very interested in how it does in these routine operations for the USMC, especially in it's accident rate. I'd like to see it succed, as I think it has many useful applications of Special Operations forces in all of the branches. SEALS, RECON, DELTA and Special Forces.

Sort of contradicts your second para regarding its use as an SF platform. The two are extricably intertwinned are to fight the aircraft is a must for the user. The only advantage the MV22 has over, say an MH53 or MH47 is its cruise speed. As an SF delivery plaform, its an answer to a question no one really asked and has been politically 'fitted in' to the requirement.
Why do we have all those SF C130Ks then Flashy? Not exactly 'combat' aircraft.............
 
D

Deleted 20555

Guest
#13
I did read somewhere that those things can't auto rotate - but someone more qualified on big whirly things could perhaps elucidate.

The article basically classed them as flying frigging death traps and even Dick Cheney tried to get them killed off......
 
#14
there are moves to fit the Osprey with a "common defensive weapon" (or similar) - IIRC its a retractable mini/chaingun affair that lives under the nose.

I've heard the bloke from boing has been spending a lot of time in MB recently ....... hoping for an export????

I hope not!
 
#15
Hello Deleted 20555,

there was at least one major crash during development,this may not be correct as it is from memory but I think there were twenty two Marines killed.
The phrase "ring vortices" springs to mind in connection with it but I know very little about that.
The question is,have they fixed the problem and even if they have,will it ever be as safe as a helicopter?
Time will tell.

tangosix.
 
#16
tangosix said:
Perhaps The-Lord-Flasheart could comment on the safety aspects of tilt rotors,I assume they cannot autorotate and wonder about their gliding ability,but I am sure he is much better informed on that subject.

tangosix.
From what I have read on the Osprey, autorotation was a requirement, but was found to be impossible (too expensive), was also supposed to be fitted with a forward firing Gatling (again too expensive), now has a M-60 on a bungee firing from the rear when the ramp is down.

A real boondoggle, great concept, let down by penny pinching and political infighting.
 
#17
The V22 - looks a great piece of kit, but every time they're mentioned on Arrse, the pilots all say that they're inherently dangerous and they wouldn't fly one. Irrespective of other considerations, that's good enough for me.
 
#18
DozyBint said:
The-Lord-Flasheart said:
Nice phot but I'd rather walk or swim than fly in an MV-22 thank you very much.
Serious question - why's that? Their design has always intrigued me and I've wondered about the pros and cons.

Reading up on the thing Dozy it appears to have been designed to crash, in fact for most of it's design life so far that's just what it's been doing!

A good give away is all the 'crash' proof seats quite clearly marked on the cutout view... very confidence building.... not!

Anyway as mere self loading freight I would agree with Flash on this one ... walk, swim anyday, I'd even prefer a lift in a Herc!
 
#19
I have flown in HH53s and had a very good look around the V22. There did seem to be less usable freight space than on the rotary type, or maybe it just appeared that way. The only advantage I can see over the CH53 is transit time reduction due to better performance. The thing that struck me most was that is seemed... 'delicate'? i.e. not very soldier proof. But I thought the same when I first saw the Merlin, so...?
 
#20
Hello BuckFelize,

I suspect they had a helicopter which carried twenty or so Marines (on a good day) and,as is usually the case with procurement matters,decided they needed something which did the same job but but better and at much greater cost.
Thus J.E.E.P.s become H.M.M.W.V.s and M113s become Bradleys.
Our own procurement is also plagued by the "more of the same" philosophy.

An interesting if dated article can be found here:

www.g2mil.com/V-22costs.htm

More authoritative articles can be found here:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/v-22-osprey-a-flying-shame-03930/#more

If you know anything about Merlins,I would be interested to know how wellthey are performing,having heard mixed reports.

tangosix.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top