• 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

BAE to develop "teeth" for Osprey

BAE has been awarded a contract by SOCOM to develop a retractable turret mounted gun for the AFSOC CV-22 Osprey! No announcement has been made whether it will be installed in Marine Corps MV-22 variants.

061117b_lg.jpg


USAF photo
 
heyjoe said:
BAE has been awarded a contract by SOCOM to develop a retractable turret mounted gun for the AFSOC CV-22 Osprey! No announcement has been made whether it will be installed in Marine Corps MV-22 variants.

061117b_lg.jpg


USAF photo
Click to expand...

And that small quote encapsulates my issues with the V-22. We as a Marine Corps dont have the resources ro expertise to be lead agency on an aircraft program. We do much better letting someone else foot the development bill then buy that product with some modifications. If we let the AF design and build a turret then we can buy it cheapish. Should have done with the whole damn plane in the first place.
 
The -53K is the Marine Corps' version of the F/A-18E/F. It's the last iteration of "old school" technology. The Marine Corps needs a new helo SOON, so it's taking an upgrade of what's already out there, vice the Joint Heavy Lifter or something else revolutionary, like the Sikorsky X2.

As far as the Marine Corps running acquisition programs, I think that part of the problem is that we do not have a professional acquisition corps, like, for example, the Air Force. In the USAF, you can spend an entire career in acquisitions, whereas in the USMC, it's a late career transition for guys who want to cash out on retirement.

As far as the gun--it's a great thing, but not the be-all-end-all it's made out to be. They've been in-country for 5 months without guns on the side without getting shot down. I dare say the number of assault support helos actually saved by their gunners over the whole course of the conflict is miniscule.

Blowing huge sums of money on a gun when brownouts and MANPADS form more likely threats would be an emotional reaction, not one driven by facts. It's like people getting rid of guns because of the risk of accidental dischages, while keeping a swimming pool in the backyard. That pool is many times more likely to kill you than the gun, but the emotional response to the possibility of a child being shot is much greater. Having foolproof brownout landing capability or advanced missile countermeasures would save more planes than a gun, but which items drive the debate?

The Marine Corps is cheap. What else is new?
 
I would have to say that small arms/HMG/RPGs are a higher threat in OIF/OEF than MANPADs. I would want those guns -- however miniscule the number of saves from door guns -- they have saved my as-. I would want them.
 
More Osprey images from Nassau deployment

web_080220-N-6753R-075.jpg

080220-N-6753R-075 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Feb. 20, 2008) An MV-22 Osprey takes off the flight deck of the amphibious assault ship USS Nassau (LHA 4) after refueling. The Nassau Strike Group deployed in support of maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Rustum Rivera (Released)

web_080225-N-7945K-185.jpg


080225-N-7945K-185 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Feb. 25, 2008) The amphibious assault ship USS Nassau (LHA 4) leads a formation of ships during an Atlantic Ocean crossing of the Nassau Expeditionary Strike Group. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Andrew King (Released)
 
Are you talking about some kind of weapon to protect the tail, or the stinger used to protect the tail from ground contact?
 
They've been using GAU-15/16's from what I've been told. So the weight of a .50BMG isn't a factor.

You use what you have, not what you want. So that's probably what they could spare at the time.
 
p1brule said:
They're thought is that the superior speed of the Osprey will make it a less likely target than say a 53. So it may not require as much defensive firepower.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, that thing still lands like a helo. In flight is probably not much of a factor, but I bet they get major pucker-factor when its time to land. I guess they can always fly in backwards and let the tail gunner get some.
 
arming Osrprey

If they put forward firing weapons on the V-22, it'll look even more like.....

AerialHunterKillerMain.jpg






I'd hate to be around when the machines become self aware.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top