-
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
FlyinRock
Registered User
***********************************
HeyJoe
I'm glad I took time to read this thread. It helps me to step back and evaluate what I'm doing here in Uganda. This civil aviation academy is a disaster with the results of wars in the late 70's, early 80's and local/ regional politics.
They are expecting me to come up with miracles after years of neglect and decay. My plate is filled to overflowing........ I've been to 6 african countries in the past two months and all have problems that make our cumbersome system seem like a speed line! Zambia for example has not licensed a commercial pilot in 5 years now!
Semper fi
Rocky
Western Osprey Transition
HMM-161 out of Miramar will be VMM-161 by January 2010.
http://www.military.com/news/articl...rade-old-wings-for-new.html?col=1186032366495
HMM-161 out of Miramar will be VMM-161 by January 2010.
http://www.military.com/news/articl...rade-old-wings-for-new.html?col=1186032366495
http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/military/attack/V-22-Its-Time-to-Move-On_33915.html
Interesting article on the "realities" as the GAO sees it of the V-22 deployments. It reiterates the average 62% mission capable rate of the 3 squadrons. Also mentions that out of 105 Osprey's currently in the inventory, only 22 are combat ready. (Plus it mentions all the fun dollar amounts and figures before questioning the logic of keeping the program alive.)
Sadly there are plenty of programs currently ongoing where similar articles could be written.
Interesting article on the "realities" as the GAO sees it of the V-22 deployments. It reiterates the average 62% mission capable rate of the 3 squadrons. Also mentions that out of 105 Osprey's currently in the inventory, only 22 are combat ready. (Plus it mentions all the fun dollar amounts and figures before questioning the logic of keeping the program alive.)
Sadly there are plenty of programs currently ongoing where similar articles could be written.
For all sides of the argument and more information on the hearing that took place as a result of this report: http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2504
If you have a couple of hours of stash time to burn it is quite an entertaining session to watch in living color. Both Gen. Trautman and Col. Heckl demystify a lot of the 'unbelievable' numbers denoted in the report. Gotta love pissed off Marines.
Sadly, IMHO the hearing seemed more like a soapbox for the committee having already made their minds up rather than actually seeking something productive. Feel free to replace 'Congressman Towns' for 'committee' as there were others on the committee that actually seemed to have their Beltones turned on.
:icon_rage
"it is currently prohibited from flying through known or forecasted icing conditions"
Along with half the aircraft we own. Apparently they think we're dumb enough to want to fly through known severe Icing conditions.
"Furthermore, rotor downwash is dangerous and can blow people off the deck.''
Wow really!?! Damn Im glad they cleared us up on that.
Along with half the aircraft we own. Apparently they think we're dumb enough to want to fly through known severe Icing conditions.
"Furthermore, rotor downwash is dangerous and can blow people off the deck.''
Wow really!?! Damn Im glad they cleared us up on that.
Maybe I need to lend them my NATOPS manual, because, umm, that's not true.
I'll be the first to acknowledge that there are still reliability and maintainability issues with the aircraft. Those will improve with the maturity of the supply system, experience with the aircraft, and incremental improvements in components.
The machine simply blows everything else away in terms of capability and potential, both of which will continue to expand. I could go on, but it's all been said before.
These congressmen know that the bullet's left the chamber on this one. The Marine Corps is over one-third done with the transition. Cancelling it midstream would cost way more money than it would save. All of this is grandstanding for the cameras.
However, never let common sense get between a politician and a news camera. I think the V-22 will be fine, but I wouldn't be surprised if they try to kill it. Some congressmen would then advertise on TV,"Congressman Binotz saved the taxpayers 50 gazillion dollars by cancelling wasteful defese programs like the V-22 Osprey that killed 23 Marines." Meanwhile, no one mentions that starting a new procurement program for a medium lift program then cost the government 60 gazillion dollars.
...and the Marine Corps has a good ally in the V-22 with AFSOC. The MH-53J Pave Low is fully retired now. AFSOC and all their customers need the V-22 platform to work out, to mature. There is no way back and no other aircraft ready to take its place in an era of two ground theaters and a heavy reliance on the Special Operations community. The Marines will benefit from all the advances and resources AFSOC is pouring into V-22.
(It was the same with the H-53 by the way, very parallel story)
(It was the same with the H-53 by the way, very parallel story)
I'm unaware AFSOC doing anything to advance Marine 53s...E's or D's. Other than the 53J sharing a common airframe with the 53D and having the same genral shape there isn't much in common between the two. It even had different engines...the one's the D's are just getting now. Different ASE, Sensors, etc.
How did the 53 benefit?
How did the 53 benefit?
TTPs perhaps? Just spit-ballin, but I think that's what he meant.
What Chuck said, I kind of feel like it SHOULD be true, but I can't think of specific instances where it is true.
I'm sure that the program overall has benefited from the USAF's money and expertise. However, their biggest contribution is probably the inclusion of all kinds of Gucci specops gear in their aircraft that the USMC is never going to buy.
At the user level, they're actually somewhat detracting, in that, at least when I was there, the USAF PUIs got preferential treatment as far as getting scheduled to complete the FRS faster. On the plus side, though, some of the best guys I've met in the military were the AFSOC pilots I met there.
I'm sure that the program overall has benefited from the USAF's money and expertise. However, their biggest contribution is probably the inclusion of all kinds of Gucci specops gear in their aircraft that the USMC is never going to buy.
At the user level, they're actually somewhat detracting, in that, at least when I was there, the USAF PUIs got preferential treatment as far as getting scheduled to complete the FRS faster. On the plus side, though, some of the best guys I've met in the military were the AFSOC pilots I met there.
Saw two of the V-22's in Bahrain today, Very nice. I wish I had gotten there a bit earlier so I could talk to the crew and have a look around the aircraft. Of course I would have offered a tour of the Mighty War COD in return. 
