All things MV-22 Osprey

[ChuckMK23]

God, no. We build a waypoint set in JMPS (99% of the time it's a canned default one containing all the airports, NAVAIDs, IFR waypoints, Course Rules points, and HLZs in the local operating area), punch it to a "pebble" (ruggedized USB drive), and load that to the aircraft once we're APU hot.

If you ever have to do a long-range transit where 995 waypoints is legitimately not enough, a common technique is to load multiple pebbles, to be switched out at refueling stops.

But you have Foreflight MFB with worldwide flip coverage, yes?

 

[sevenhelmet]

God, no. We build a waypoint set in JMPS (99% of the time it's a canned default one containing all the airports, NAVAIDs, IFR waypoints, Course Rules points, and HLZs in the local operating area), punch it to a "pebble" (ruggedized USB drive), and load that to the aircraft once we're APU hot.

If you ever have to do a long-range transit where 995 waypoints is legitimately not enough, a common technique is to load multiple pebbles, to be switched out at refueling stops.

Sounds like how the Hornet community used to be.

“RAGE 11, I have a change to your routing, advise when ready to copy”

*sigh* “Okay. Here goes nothin’…”

We added an RNAV database around 2012 or so. So. Much. Better.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

Plus AI will sort out the wheat from the chaff.

BRRRT! BRRRT!

The jury is still out on what the future of AI is to be, especially with what we should or should not defer to its "infallible" decision making when dealing with an ever changing threat bogy environment.

Using a standard definition of AI (software that enable machines to perceive their environment and use learning and intelligence to take actions that maximize their chances of achieving defined goals) I am still not fully convinced that I want to leave it up to the machine to determine threat and take independent action for me in certain situations. I may be seen as a luddite, but I see three parts to the definition, and use for AI. 1) perceive their environment = detect event, 2) use learning and intelligence = compare to previous detected event, and 3) take action to achieve goals = follow established protocols for response to detected threats. Other than processor speed, how is this any different than previous generation programs? And what makes AI so special that I would be comfortable with deferring response action or inaction to the computer, without some human intermediator. Cue visions of either of the "War Games" movies.

I write this as a true question and wishing to become more informed.

 

[JTS11]

The jury is still out on what the future of AI is to be, especially with what we should or should not defer to its "infallible" decision making when dealing with an ever changing threat bogy environment.

Using a standard definition of AI (software that enable machines to perceive their environment and use learning and intelligence to take actions that maximize their chances of achieving defined goals) I am still not fully convinced that I want to leave it up to the machine to determine threat and take independent action for me in certain situations. I may be seen as a luddite, but I see three parts to the definition, and use for AI. 1) perceive their environment = detect event, 2) use learning and intelligence = compare to previous detected event, and 3) take action to achieve goals = follow established protocols for response to detected threats. Other than processor speed, how is this any different than previous generation programs? And what makes AI so special that I would be comfortable with deferring response action or inaction to the computer, without some human intermediator. Cue visions of either of the "War Games" movies.

I write this as a true question and wishing to become more informed.

Albert Scott Crossfield was a prominent American test pilot who had achieved speed records while flying experimental aircraft. He delivered a compact comical summary of human uniqueness in the form of an interrogative. Boldface has been added to excerpts:[1][2]

“Where can you find another non-linear servo-mechanism weighing only 150 pounds and having great adaptability, that can be produced so cheaply by completely unskilled labor?” Mr. Crossfield” inquired.

There are other versions of what is attributed to what he said, but still thought it was funny. Some aspects are probably eternal, I think.

 

[Griz882]

I write this as a true question and wishing to become more informed.

Because humans are inclined to more philosophically based concepts like morality, I doubt AI will ever be the final actor in the kill chain. I certainly believe we are far closer to AI driven devices that will occupy the “forward edge of the battle area” and execute their kill functions semi-autonomously by linking in a guy like @Swanee to bring SkyNet on line. In short, they will provide rapid and accurate information to allow the human actor to pull the trigger. That human may be one mile away, or thousands, but as technology advances I imagine they’ll get further and further back.

 

[Hotdogs]

Because humans are inclined to more philosophically based concepts like morality, I doubt AI will ever be the final actor in the kill chain. I certainly believe we are far closer to AI driven devices that will occupy the “forward edge of the battle area” and execute their kill functions semi-autonomously by linking in a guy like @Swanee to bring SkyNet on line. In short, they will provide rapid and accurate information to allow the human actor to pull the trigger. That human may be one mile away, or thousands, but as technology advances I imagine they’ll get further and further back.

You're four years behind the curve.

 

[Griz882]

You're four years behind the curve.

I was replying in terms of the United States, but yeah, this stuff is wild.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

AI driven devices that will occupy the “forward edge of the battle area” and execute their kill functions semi-autonomously by linking in a guy like @Swanee to bring SkyNet on line. In short, they will provide rapid and accurate information to allow the human actor to pull the trigger.

Thanks, anything to minimize the Marine (or others) being in harms forward of the FEBA is alright by me. And keeping the final action to end another's existence in the hands of a human.

 

[Roger_Waveoff]

But you have Foreflight MFB with worldwide flip coverage, yes?

As of like a month ago, yes. Prior to that we either made do with MAGTABs (shitty Samsung Tab Active 2s running Aero App) or paid out of pocket for our own iPads and ForeFlight accounts.

 

[AircraftGeek513]

Besides the obvious safety-related stuff like the -119 gearboxes and ODSSHI, I'm looking forward to what VeCToR and V-FORCE bring as far as cockpit avionics. You don't realize how pathetic a limit of 995 waypoints is until you're trying to plan something as seemingly benign as a flight from San Diego to Tacoma and can only grab waypoints from like 7 miles either side of centerline. Yes, that is even with the Block C MCOI Integrated Avionics Processors. Meanwhile, every C172 with a GNS 430 or GTN 650 can go Direct-Enter-Enter anywhere in the world.

Or even just the ability to fly RNAV approaches. No, the completely federated Garmin system the Navy V-22s have doesn't count.

VeCToR seems to be the most interesting. V-FORCE is just bringing earlier aircraft into a late Block C configuration.

 

[AircraftGeek513]

Besides the obvious safety-related stuff like the -119 gearboxes and ODSSHI, I'm looking forward to what VeCToR and V-FORCE bring as far as cockpit avionics. You don't realize how pathetic a limit of 995 waypoints is until you're trying to plan something as seemingly benign as a flight from San Diego to Tacoma and can only grab waypoints from like 7 miles either side of centerline. Yes, that is even with the Block C MCOI Integrated Avionics Processors. Meanwhile, every C172 with a GNS 430 or GTN 650 can go Direct-Enter-Enter anywhere in the world.

Or even just the ability to fly RNAV approaches. No, the completely federated Garmin system the Navy V-22s have doesn't count.

Here is the full 2025 AvPlan

https://media.defense.gov/2025/Feb/03/2003636520/-1/-1/0/2025_MARINECORPSAVIATIONPLAN.PDF

And the FY 2025 budget docs for aircraft mods. Feel free to Ctrl-F for MV-22 stuff.

Request Rejected

 

[ChuckMK23]

As of like a month ago, yes. Prior to that we either made do with MAGTABs (shitty Samsung Tab Active 2s running Aero App) or paid out of pocket for our own iPads and ForeFlight accounts.

Last I heard from AFFSA - there was budget for every military aviator in DoD to have Foreflight MFB subscription to include global Jepp in addition to NGA FLIP.

There is something not right if you are using something else. Navy VR and USAF commercial derivative aircraft (C-40, C-37, etc) are using Jepp FD Pro like their Part 121 counterparts....

Even the JOGs , TPCs, ONCs, and Range charts on MFB are outstanding.

 

[Gatordev]

There is something not right if you are using something else. Navy VR and USAF commercial derivative aircraft (C-40, C-37, etc) are using Jepp FD Pro like their Part 121 counterparts....

Chuck, you have to have the device to run it on. That's where the expense is. Not every command can procure iPads, and technically, you're not supposed to be using personally owned ones. Also technically, in some aircraft, even issued ones were supposed to be in Faraday bags along with your phone. Not sure if that's still a rule (on paper, anyway).

This also extends to the Part 121 and 135 world. You can't just whip out your personal iPad (legally) to navigate while operating under a company's certificate. Obviously the specifics of this are hammered out in the OPSPECS.

Wait, what? You guys don't have the standard Jepp/Garmin worldwide database package? I thought it was DOD wide. Interesting.

I know you have slides and everything, but the other thing to understand is waypoint availability vs aircraft capability. While "everyone" has DAFIF available to them in JMPS, that doesn't mean every aircraft is capable of loading all of those waypoints (as mentioned by Roger_Waveoff). And that capability changes over time.

Why is this? Two basic reasons...1) computer power (RAM and processing speed) and 2) being hamstrung by the various contractors because the Navy accepted buying products that had proprietary code.

#1 is an on-going upgrade process tied to funding. As an example, I think it wasn't until Gen 5 computers that MH-60 got moving maps (the Sierra may have had it before that...I can't remember...but Romeo needed the extra power to do some other fancy stuffy on the mission side).

#2 was historically a big deal for both Super Hornet and MH-60. That was supposed to be in the process of being fixed but I'm not sure where that stands at this point. Trying to get something added that wasn't initially contracted would usually require paying extra money to LockMart, although there have been exceptions (Romeo HUD, for example).

 

[ChuckMK23]

Chuck, you have to have the device to run it on. That's where the expense is. Not every command can procure iPads, and technically, you're not supposed to be using personally owned ones. Also technically, in some aircraft, even issued ones were supposed to be in Faraday bags along with your phone. Not sure if that's still a rule (on paper, anyway).

This also extends to the Part 121 and 135 world. You can't just whip out your personal iPad (legally) to navigate while operating under a company's certificate. Obviously the specifics of this are hammered out in the OPSPECS.

I'm aware of all this. I teach the USAF Instrument Refresher Course regularly to active duty folks.

My point is that 1.) DOD has GSA purchasing agreements in place for iPad procurement that are relatively painless and its just money (typical aircrew 6" and 11 inch devices are delivered for under $1,000 generally through one of 5 resellers). And 2.) There are both DOD and DAF, and I assume Navy cyber configuration standards and tools already in place for aircrew iPad devices (e.g. mobile device management, authentication standards, on device encryption validation, etc - and there are a number of standard cases issued as well. In AF land I have seen most fleet types from T-6A, to T-1A, to A-10, F-16 and T-38. I am also spoken with Navy and AF C-40 folks and AF tankers crews (KC135).

DOD wide I think the infrastructure is in place to procure, configure and operate.

Also, reasonably familiar with 121 use of how air carriers issue and configure devices with the various pivot hard mounts and cases (through @mad dog and others) - so I get it vis a vis ops spec. This topic came up speaking to a 135 Cargo Caravan pilot - who has ops specs that require paper FAA pubs - but the reality is they all use their personal ipads and the paper pubs sit in the shrink wrap in a bag in the aircraft in case they get ramp checked.

Your points are fair - my point is the young guys need to advocate for themselves, put pressure on their leaders to get them the best tools possible.

I'd be interested in perspective from @kmac as well!

Good discussion!

 

[Gatordev]

1.) DOD has GSA purchasing agreements in place for iPad procurement that are relatively painless and its just money (typical aircrew 6" and 11 inch devices are delivered for under $1,000 generally through one of 5 resellers)

I don't think you appreciate how broke everyone is. Assuming 10 aircraft in a squadron, that's $10K! Per squadron. That's at least $50K-$70K in a Wing. That's a lot of money.

I am also spoken with Navy and AF C-40 folks

Any conversation that involves money and the Reserves is a different conversation. They have a significantly different funding set to get all the toys. Hell, at one point we had an OpsO just randomly decide to buy an IZLID. We had no way to use it, but he bought it.

Your points are fair - my point is the young guys need to advocate for themselves, put pressure on their leaders to get them the best tools possible.

A noble mission, no doubt, but again, the money has to come from somewhere.

This topic came up speaking to a 135 Cargo Caravan pilot - who has ops specs that require paper FAA pubs - but the reality is they all use their personal ipads and the paper pubs sit in the shrink wrap in a bag in the aircraft in case they get ramp checked.

Sounds like they need to put pressure on their leaders to get them the best tools possible. That's all there is to it, right?

I do get your points. There's a similar battle with management at my company about how we still can't use Foreflight legally for weather, and it sounds like the battle has been lost, which is ridiculous. But that doesn't change the reality.