Wow, It must be those catlike reflexes pilots are known for...:icon_wink
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
All things MV-22 Osprey
- Thread starter Dave Shutter
- Start date
Wow, It must be those catlike reflexes pilots are known for...:icon_wink
WVUBetaHornet
Sweep the leg..
"It's unsafe. It can't shoot straight. It's already cost 30 lives and $20 billion. And now it's headed for Iraq. The long, sad tale of the V-22 Osprey."
Wow...sounds like Time isn't a big fan of the Osprey..:icon_tong
Good thing you found the article. I got the news as it was happening and wanted to say it, but didn't want to until it was open-source.
Wow, that video was something. I imagine it will be a huge failure in combat, just like the Maverick AGM and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle were. Because, as everyone knows, a journalism degree makes one an expert in weapons procurement.
Could ONE mainstream journalist invent something other than the "troubled V-22 Osprey..." angle?
Could ONE mainstream journalist invent something other than the "troubled V-22 Osprey..." angle?
Just to throw it out, I want the Osprey to succeed because at this point it has to work or a lot of Marines are going to die. If anybody is hoping it doesn’t work, they have serious issues. I think what frustrates me and a lot of others is all the money the Corps has thrown at the MV-22 Osprey (and UH-1Z/AH-1Z and F-35B) to make it work, at the cost letting the remainder of it’s fleet go to shit. HQ Marine Corps is pretty damn stubborn with their "toys". I would be interested to know if the Corps will be conservative in its employment of the Osprey in Iraq in order to set it up for success.
------------------------------------------------------
Most FW guys like the ejection seat. Seriously though, if they didn't get enough FW fellas to transition during the first push which had guaranteed orders back to their original community after 3 year orders to the MV-22, how do they expect to get anybody this time around not offering the guaranteed orders on the backside?
yep, but to take it a bit farther, I’ve heard that the “46 Mafia” (source term, not mine) runs the Osprey community and push back any ‘innovation’ to tactics that the FW guys bring to the table. After hearing what some of my Harrier buds have said about being attached to the ACE run by Phrog’s, this wouldn’t surprise me.
Don’t know anything about that. I'm sure the RW guys are more comfortable flying VFR at 50 feet & hovering while the FW guys are more comfortable flying IFR at 10k and at 200+ knots.
------------------------------------------------------
MAG-12 is in Iwakuni; there is one Hornet squadron attached to MAG-12 (others are UDP squadrons) … most guys don’t want to spend 3 years in Iwakuni, so the monitor usually asks for volunteers. Spend 3 years overseas and you normally get the orders you want on the backside.
No matter what they do as far as employment, someone will bitch. If it's aggressive and one gets pranged, as aircraft invariably do, people will say it's not ready. If they employ it conservatively, the critics will claim the Corps is hiding it. It would have shined during OIF I--ranging the whole battlespace and maybe even accelerating the advance significantly. Now, being able to do a long-range raid quickly is not as important, because we have bases that can reach the whole country anyway. It will make its rep on the casevac mission, IMO.
I don't know. I think the bigger obstacle is getting experienced guys to start over as copilots. That psychological factor plays more than anything else, at least according to one of our few jet pilots. If you're a decent f/w performer with some quals, and in f/w you've been an AC since you started, being a T2P is a slap in the face.
I think that by and large, f/w tactics HAVE been adopted. The ANTTP for the Osprey will soon be on the street and tactics shops from all over will see it. There are big changes from the way helos do things. I think some are probably 1) overdramatizing 1 or 2 battles they lost or 2) Not realizing that the training base for some of the things they want isn't there yet. Also, some of the f/w tactics ideas just don't transfer to aircraft with people and gear in the back.
The Osprey is fairly easy to hover. The aircraft is great IFR, so that's easy. LAT is new for helo guys, but some the jet guys are actually shocked at how low we fly based on the speed we're travelling, so it's a wash.
Jarhead and Phrogdriver .... good discussion points from both of you.
BZ
BZ
Ospreys Deployed!
Don't know if anyone saw this but they're looking at adding a turret machine gun to the osprey. options could include a 7.62 gatling or .50 cal.
I wish the Navy was getting some of these.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/10/defense_ospreygun_071009n/
Don't know if anyone saw this but they're looking at adding a turret machine gun to the osprey. options could include a 7.62 gatling or .50 cal.
I wish the Navy was getting some of these.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/10/defense_ospreygun_071009n/
Personally, I think the mistake was in trying to make the first service tiltrotor a combat-lift aircraft. There are so many demands for an aircraft in that role that trying to fulfill them all and make a safe, combat-worthy airplane AND work out all the TTP for a tiltrotor was just biting off to much at once. It wouldn't have been practical to try and make the first helicopters medium-lift combat transports, either. A light attack/ultility/observation tiltrotor, say a devlopment of the XV-15 as a replacement for the UH-1N, might have eased the teething problems by working out the Big Issues first.
The Osprey will work out its kinks and it'll do fine. Just like the Bradley, F-111, M-16, etc etc. Denouncing government programs gets your name in the papers.
The Osprey will work out its kinks and it'll do fine. Just like the Bradley, F-111, M-16, etc etc. Denouncing government programs gets your name in the papers.
Orcas for everybody
Its too bad the whole lift fan thing didnt work out, it just looks cooler.
20-ish years is a long time to digest that bite, I'd say.
Agree with the last, but not with the first. There's nothing a XV-15/BA-609 sized aircraft can do, save escort a V-22, that would justify the cost. The V-22 is justified because it can move troops downrange faster and further than anything else. We already have aircraft that can deliver ordnance long distances at high speed--they're called jets. If you need an observation platform, there are UAVs and STOL aircraft that are much simpler.
Now that we have an assault aircraft with this cabability, now there may be a need. Ideally we'd have both really to go at the same time, but that would truly be an acquisition risk.