I have no inside information but I think it’d cause some serious heartburn if they came up with a drastically different track
-
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
CMV-22B Osprey Rollout
- Thread starter Ozarky
- Start date
They've already selected at least one HSC dude for a CMV-22 slot at HX-21 (via TPS).
Also, I am forced to reiterate, CMV is the DUMBEST type designation, EVER.
Dangerous stuff.
I'd wager that that would be to help prevent a manning crunch during VRM standup when both VRCs are still active and there's at least one VRM. I don't think RW experience is going to be a need to have for VRM; there are several VRC types flying the V-22 now without issue. The V-22 is really an airplane that lands like a helo, not a helo that goes fast.
True, but it is the landing that gets people in trouble, not flying straight and level. Vortex ring state.
If you fly the profile then VRS won't be an issue. after the Marana mishap a bunch of analysis was done and showed that the V-22 is less susceptible to VRS then traditional RW a/c. Plus, there's an FRS and a NATOPS to train people to a published profile.
Per Wikipedia (so who knows):
“The USMC variant of the Osprey received the MV-22 designation and the U.S. Air Force variant received CV-22; this was reversed from normal procedure to prevent Marine Corps Ospreys from having a conflicting designation with aircraft carriers (CV).”
interesting. Just like the H-53, the USAF seems to be taking the lead on the V-22. Do the Marines cross train with the USAF CV-22 types? Share flight techniques and profiles? Do the Marines take advice from the USAF dudes on how to operate the V-22 and vice versa?
Interesting t/o and landing profiles in this video - Looks like the USAF favors the roll-on to the runway or maybe it's just training. I'd be totally interested in seeing how the flight controls are moved during t/o and landing - and how much displacement in the stick, power lever are are put in and how a pilot knows when to rotate nacelles with thumbwheel vs just add power and lower the nose.
Interesting t/o and landing profiles in this video - Looks like the USAF favors the roll-on to the runway or maybe it's just training. I'd be totally interested in seeing how the flight controls are moved during t/o and landing - and how much displacement in the stick, power lever are are put in and how a pilot knows when to rotate nacelles with thumbwheel vs just add power and lower the nose.
Last edited:
There’s an AF cadre at VMMT-204. Most of my flights in the RAG were actually with CV instructors. I don’t think that was intentional but just the way the scheds gods (Birdman) worked it. There’s also a CV exchange tour for 1 pilot ever few years.
Running T/O and landings are preferred whenever you have a runway available. The power margins are much better and it’s just easier on the equipment.
The fly-by-wire controls negate the need for large control deflection at low speeds. Nacelle movement is based on air speeds. For a 60 degree RTO you rotate at 60 knots and once you get the gear up you’re clear to roll nacelles down. There’s a corridor for nacelle movement based on airspeed that helps prevent you from racing the nacelles forward or back too quickly.
Interesting to see the MV rudder on the CV bird. I always marveled at how we ended up with CV rudders so I guess it stands to reason the AF guys had our parts.
Running T/O and landings are preferred whenever you have a runway available. The power margins are much better and it’s just easier on the equipment.
The fly-by-wire controls negate the need for large control deflection at low speeds. Nacelle movement is based on air speeds. For a 60 degree RTO you rotate at 60 knots and once you get the gear up you’re clear to roll nacelles down. There’s a corridor for nacelle movement based on airspeed that helps prevent you from racing the nacelles forward or back too quickly.
Interesting to see the MV rudder on the CV bird. I always marveled at how we ended up with CV rudders so I guess it stands to reason the AF guys had our parts.
What are you talking about AF is taking the lead? It's a joint program but some parts are service specific due to different mission requirements.
Last edited:
This would surprise me exactly zero. Gotta keep the helo stink off all those amazing tailhook pilots. ?
What drove the need to put an HF comm radio on CMV-22? It seems liked quaint/dated technology where satcom voice is probably easier.
Assuming equipped with HF can you talk to ship on it over the horizon? What other scenarios is old school HF used other than listening to BBC.
Assuming equipped with HF can you talk to ship on it over the horizon? What other scenarios is old school HF used other than listening to BBC.
I can see why VRC would want this, they have done their job and done it very well for decades and probably could use fewer new 'bright idea fairies' when transitioning to a new airframe. Nothing against helo folks, I've just seen to many bright idea fairies come into communities thinking they needed to change things from the long-established norms but they mostly just add work and pain to the mix.
Bandwidth, cost and reliability are several good reasons. There isn't an unlimited amount of SATCOM bandwidth, SATCOM can get expensive and those satellites might not always be available.