All things MV-22 Osprey

[Swanee]

Regarding the two-piece flight suit: I have one from the AF. Maybe ours are different, but they fit like crap. They're definitely made for a skinny body type. If you are muscley at all, or have a typical ANG body type, you'll probably like the one piece flight suit better.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Regarding the two-piece flight suit: I have one from the AF. Maybe ours are different, but they fit like crap. They're definitely made for a skinny body type. If you are muscley at all, or have a typical ANG body type, you'll probably like the one piece flight suit better.

All the AD and Reserve rated (pilot) folks I work with wear the AF OCP 2 piece *flight* suit anytime a non-blues uniform is called for, Apparently its bad form to wear "regular OCPs" if you are a pilot - he he.

The Massif NAVAIR 2 piece flight suit is completely different cut from AF and frankly it's a nicer garment. You can tell NAVAIR carefully crafted the fit/wear requirements for Massif.

 

[Odominable]

I thought the cut of the Massif pants was weirdly tight but liked the shirt. We wore patches the same way they did in the video 3 years ago at Camp Pendleton, so nothing odd there from my perspective.

 

[Griz882]

…or have a typical ANG body type, you'll probably like the one piece flight suit better.

In the guard they call that “robust.”

 

[sevenhelmet]

In the guard they call that “robust.”

Homer Simpson would agree with you.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Homer Simpson would agree with you.

"Mmmmmm, donuts"

 

[hlg6016]

Old school belly filling plain donuts, Not those confections my daughters like to eat.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Whew. Sympathies for what plopter crews are dealing with.

If you are CMC or commander of AFSOC, you have your big staff brains gaming your options right now.

If there is another CAT A, the fleet is likely done. Then what?

Does the core design of the V-22 exceed our ability to operate and maintain it?

Is it up to SECDEF to call it?

https://news.usni.org/2024/12/09/navy-marine-v-22-ospreys-under-operational-pause-after-afsoc-incident

 

[phrogdriver]

Whew. Sympathies for what plopter crews are dealing with.

If you are CMC or commander of AFSOC, you have your big staff brains gaming your options right now.

If there is another CAT A, the fleet is likely done. Then what?

Does the core design of the V-22 exceed our ability to operate and maintain it?

Is it up to SECDEF to call it?

https://news.usni.org/2024/12/09/navy-marine-v-22-ospreys-under-operational-pause-after-afsoc-incident

"The fleet is likely done?" Oh, bullshit to the third power. That's absolutely fucktarded, no matter what some grandstanding congressperson wrote in some letter. Live in the real world with the rest of us.

No one is getting rid of over 400 aircraft and the largest fleet in the Marine Corps. The entire doctrine of the USMC has the Osprey central to it. Even if you wanted something else, 360 aircraft with 24 pax capacity don't magically appear.

The USAF might prematurely sunset theirs, mostly because the Vice Chief fucking hates the Osprey and the USAF has mismanaged their fleet to an alarming degree. They are acting as chaos muppets here. If they weren't being drama queens, the other services would have freedom to act more rationally.

The Navy can slow down their C-2 sundown, but there's no such thing as a new-build tailhook cargo plane. This is happening for them, too.

 

[Griz882]

The USAF might prematurely sunset theirs, mostly because the Vice Chief fucking hates the Osprey and the USAF has mismanaged their fleet to an alarming degree…

A former graduate student of mine flies Osprey’s for AFSOC and he has noted the same thing - they are genuinely treated as carbuncles on the AF ass. I find it surprising, but then again this is the same service who wants the F-35 to do an A-10’s job and in my very humble opinion the AF has always had “unusual” priorities stuck in the 1950’s.

 

[sevenhelmet]

A former graduate student of mine flies Osprey’s for AFSOC and he has noted the same thing - they are genuinely treated as carbuncles on the AF ass. I find it surprising, but then again this is the same service who wants the F-35 to do an A-10’s job and in my very humble opinion the AF has always had “unusual” priorities stuck in the 1950’s.

I think fundamentally, they're afraid to look the least bit "Army", because they fear looking like the service they came from. So they gravitate toward the shiny, expensive toys, even when they're less effective (e.g. F-35 for CAS, versus the A-10, which they hate to their institutional core.) Not surprised their "look at my cool toys" mindset pits them against the V-22. It's almost lizard-brain visceral.

Ironically, they end up losing relevance anyway, but that's OK- their core competency is really strategic airlift and tanking, with a decent side of high-end air superiority.

 

[Flash]

I find it surprising, but then again this is the same service who wants the F-35 to do an A-10’s job and in my very humble opinion the AF has always had “unusual” priorities stuck in the 1950’s.

I think fundamentally, they're afraid to look the least bit "Army", because they fear looking like the service they came from. So they gravitate toward the shiny, expensive toys, even when they're less effective (e.g. F-35 for CAS, versus the A-10, which they hate to their institutional core.) Not surprised their "look at my cool toys" mindset pits them against the V-22. It's almost lizard-brain visceral.

The fixation on the A-10 on both sides of the argument would be funny if folks weren't so serious about. It is true that the USAF seems to both loathe and love the A-10 and has tried to get rid of them for over 30 years, but it is also true it is an aircraft well past its prime and is much more vulnerable to modern air defense threats than aircraft like the F-35. Those threats include ones that can be encountered when doing many missions...to include CAS.

But like many things nowadays it is the money that will finally kill it, the unique fleet and the costs to maintain it along with the personnel is just too much nowadays. I imagine they'll use the same justification for killing the CV-22 as well, eventually.

 

[DanMa1156]

In the guard they call that “robust.”

“Rubenesque.”

 

[Griz882]

With reference to the A-10, I get that the airframe is outdated, but I don’t think the mission is. I also think it is unusual that the AF proposes using a high end fighter for a low end fight - all that tells me is that Army infantry will be calling on rotary air support more and more. I’d also add that the AF is very wedded to maintaining near antique airframes like the F-15 and B-52…and yes they can still do the job as many claim the A-10 could.

 

[phrogdriver]

With reference to the A-10, I get that the airframe is outdated, but I don’t think the mission is. I also think it is unusual that the AF proposes using a high end fighter for a low end fight - all that tells me is that Army infantry will be calling on rotary air support more and more. I’d also add that the AF is very wedded to maintaining near antique airframes like the F-15 and B-52…and yes they can still do the job as many claim the A-10 could.

The B-52 is deployed to areas that are low threat or where it has such standoff the threat doesn’t matter.

The old F-15Cs are almost all on interceptor duty with the ANG, flying form on Bears.

The Es and EXs are, save for the low observable piece, pretty state-of-the art.

All are Mach 2 jets. Not really a fair comparison with the A-10.

Life is about trade offs. We can’t have every conceivable tool that we want. If we need to beat up some guys in Hiluxes, F-16s can still do that, albeit at a higher CPFH. But A-10s are next to useless in a peer fight where the stakes are higher.