USMC Tilt Rotor Ospreys to deploy to Afghanistan

#1
Ospreys to deploy to Afghanistan

October 20, 2009 5:52 PM

The Department of Defense announced Tuesday that Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 261 stationed at the New River Air Station would be the first MV-22 Ospreys to deploy to Afghanistan, beginning sometime next month.

About 200 Marines will deploy with up to 12 Ospreys, officials said in a statement. Earlier this year, Commandant Gen. James Conway said the Osprey’s speed and nimbleness meant it was “made for Afghanistan.” A squadron of Ospreys from New River deployed to Iraq earlier this year, but these are the first to land in Afghanistan. The region of the country they will deploy to has not yet been disclosed.

Squadron 261 is one of four operational Osprey squadrons currently stationed at New River.
http://www.jdnews.com/news/ospreys-69043-deploy-afghanistan.html
 
#2
I'd love to see the dust storm these kick up. :D
 
#4
Hmm fair one. Looks pretty insignificant. :twisted:
 
#6
jumpinjarhead said:
the Osprey’s speed and nimbleness meant it was “made for Afghanistan.”
Does Conway know what Density Altitude means? And is he talking about a different Osprey to the wallowing bullet sponges I've seen lumbering around Pendleton and Miramar? I'm friends with a couple of '53 pilots and they're glad they have nothing to do with it and instead are getting the 53K.
 
#7
crabtastic said:
jumpinjarhead said:
the Osprey’s speed and nimbleness meant it was “made for Afghanistan.”
Does Conway know what Density Altitude means? And is he talking about a different Osprey to the wallowing bullet sponges I've seen lumbering around Pendleton and Miramar? I'm friends with a couple of '53 pilots and they're glad they have nothing to do with it and instead are getting the 53K.
The debate over these aircraft has raged since their first announcement and continues to this day. Methinks our good friends at Boeing had a good deal to do with getting the program through many setbacks (that killed a goodly number of Marine crews).
 
#8
BrokenArrow said:
Hmm fair one. Looks pretty insignificant. :twisted:
During testing, it had a habit of picking fair-sized rocks which had a habit of puncturing the skin and breaking plexiglass.
 
#9
crabtastic said:
BrokenArrow said:
Hmm fair one. Looks pretty insignificant. :twisted:
During testing, it had a habit of picking fair-sized rocks which had a habit of puncturing the skin and breaking plexiglass.
Details...mere details... :?
 
#10
jumpinjarhead said:
crabtastic said:
jumpinjarhead said:
the Osprey’s speed and nimbleness meant it was “made for Afghanistan.”
Does Conway know what Density Altitude means? And is he talking about a different Osprey to the wallowing bullet sponges I've seen lumbering around Pendleton and Miramar? I'm friends with a couple of '53 pilots and they're glad they have nothing to do with it and instead are getting the 53K.
The debate over these aircraft has raged since their first announcement and continues to this day. Methinks our good friends at Boeing had a good deal to do with getting the program through many setbacks (that killed a goodly number of Marine crews).
We use it as a case study in the Defense Policy Formulation classes to show how the Capitol Hill sausage machine does business. If you want students to learn how the PPBS works (or doesn't- depending on how you look at it), it's ideal.

Short version:
Boeing- Look at this shiny bit of kit we have on the drawing board. We don't know how we're going to make it work, but it'll do everything the Marines want and more. And it'll bring lots of money and jobs to your districts.
Congress- We love it.
Marines- Ummm, about these 30 (now nearly 50) year old CH-46s... they're a bit long in the tooth.
Congress- Don't worry. It's all in hand, you're getting this Osprey thing
Marines- We don't want it. It won't work as we need it to, it's too small and it's too expensive.
Congress- Tough sh1t, you're getting it.

(Some years later)
Marines- Ok, We've been testing this for the better part of a decade, we don't like it we want helicopters which are twice as capable at half the cost and proven technology.
Congress- Tough sh1t, take it or leave it.
Marines- Ummm. OK, if it's between this and walking, we love it.
 
#11
crabtastic said:
jumpinjarhead said:
crabtastic said:
jumpinjarhead said:
the Osprey’s speed and nimbleness meant it was “made for Afghanistan.”
Does Conway know what Density Altitude means? And is he talking about a different Osprey to the wallowing bullet sponges I've seen lumbering around Pendleton and Miramar? I'm friends with a couple of '53 pilots and they're glad they have nothing to do with it and instead are getting the 53K.
The debate over these aircraft has raged since their first announcement and continues to this day. Methinks our good friends at Boeing had a good deal to do with getting the program through many setbacks (that killed a goodly number of Marine crews).
We use it as a case study in the Defense Policy Formulation classes to show how the Capitol Hill sausage machine does business. If you want students to learn how the PPBS works (or doesn't- depending on how you look at it), it's ideal.

Short version:
Boeing- Look at this shiny bit of kit we have on the drawing board. We don't know how we're going to make it work, but it'll do everything the Marines want and more. And it'll bring lots of money and jobs to your districts.
Congress- We love it.
Marines- Ummm, about these 30 (now nearly 50) year old CH-46s... they're a bit long in the tooth.
Congress- Don't worry. It's all in hand, you're getting this Osprey thing
Marines- We don't want it. It won't work as we need it to, it's too small and it's too expensive.
Congress- Tough sh1t, you're getting it.

(Some years later)
Marines- Ok, We've been testing this for the better part of a decade, we don't like it we want helicopters which are twice as capable at half the cost and proven technology.
Congress- Tough sh1t, take it or leave it.
Marines- Ummm. OK, if it's between this and walking, we love it.

Sad but true (and typical). I was a Quantico years ago when one went into the Potomac with all hands.
 
#12
jumpinjarhead said:
crabtastic said:
BrokenArrow said:
Hmm fair one. Looks pretty insignificant. :twisted:
During testing, it had a habit of picking fair-sized rocks which had a habit of puncturing the skin and breaking plexiglass.
Details...mere details... :?
Don't have specifics to hand right now. It'll take me some time to dig through my notes. IIRC it happened out at Yuma, though. It's in either a GAO or CRS report that talks about how the OPEVALs were fudged.

Incidentally, there's a new CRS report out since it's that time of year in the budget process. Appendix B makes for interesting reading of what a clusterfcuk this project is.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL31384.pdf
 
#13
Crabby:

Thanks much for the CRS document link. I actually read the whole thing. I must say that your description of the program as a clusterfuck is far too charitable. I am not an aviator, my only technical knowledge is how to fasten and unfasten the seat belt. I am unlikely ever to be offered a ride in an Osprey. Having read the report however it would be a cold day in hell before you could get me into one of those things.

The only people who seem to like them are a bunch of Pentagon flag officers. I know the Navy and Marines make frequent helicopter trips between the Pentagon and Norfolk, Quantico etc. Perhaps they could replace the helicopters with Ospreys and send the helo's to support the deployed troops.
 
#14
Makes you wonder, given its apparent position at the cutting edge of technology and all singing- all dancing capability (speed, range, flexibility, payload blah, blah, blah), that it was never considered as a replacement for the VH-3D Sea Kings of HMX-1, huh? I mean, if you had this baby working as advertised, why would you need an expensive 747 to fly the President from DC to North Carolina? :roll:
 
#15
crabtastic said:
Makes you wonder, given its apparent position at the cutting edge of technology and all singing- all dancing capability (speed, range, flexibility, payload blah, blah, blah), that it was never considered as a replacement for the VH-3D Sea Kings of HMX-1, huh? I mean, if you had this baby working as advertised, why would you need an expensive 747 to fly the President from DC to North Carolina? :roll:
I suppose they wanted to wait and ask for new shiny helos (and really pricey according to the most recent proposal) that did not have quite as much "drama" on take off and landing on the West Lawn. "Boys and their toys....."
 
#16
well the merlin replacement would have worked until somebody decided rather than a helicopter they wanted a mini airforce one with flushing loo shower widescreen plasma etc :roll:
Osprey would probably make a great commuter plane having to stop rotate the wings hover land hover rotate the wings then zoom off.
think there's a fatal flaw there if people are trying to shoot at you :roll:
mind you I pointed out minimi and a ugl would have been a great investment 20 years ago :roll:
 
#19
meridian said:
$140k odd for a warmed over Jeep, seems like we arent the only ones that get bent over the table by equipment manufacturers

US cutbacks? A Nebelwerfer with only 4 barrels.Sos,old 7 out of touch! :oops:
 
#20
sapperbraindead said:
meridian said:
$140k odd for a warmed over Jeep, seems like we arent the only ones that get bent over the table by equipment manufacturers

US cutbacks? A Nebelwerfer with only 4 barrels.Sos,old 7 out of touch! :oops:
It's actually a towed 120mm mortar, the barrel is almost horizontal. I assume the things above the baseplate are stowed ammo.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
dogmonkey Infantry 1
Gravelbelly Weapons, Equipment & Rations 4
ExPara The Intelligence Cell 12

Similar threads

Latest Threads