Osprey?

[Autorotate]

I have heard all of these arguments before. As a new H2P in the '46, I happen to think it's a fantastic platform. I just want to make two points:

1. My very good friend from TBS was among the first 4 Marines to select the Osprey out of primary. It wasn't even an option at that time (fall '04) on the preference card. He told me that he will be with VMMT-204 for up to 12 months. I know from a brief at HMM(T)-164 that the transition program for '46 pilots will last two years, with east coast squadrons transitioning first, and '53D (hawaii) pilots last.

2. While the Osprey is much faster and has better range than the '46, it does have a significantly larger footprint than the phrog. This makes it more difficult to maneuver while on the boat and when performing CALs. Also, according to a major I flew with at VT6 who was privy to much of the testing info, they were having problems when landing and taking off from unprepared surfaces (i.e. the blade wash was throwing debris hard enough that it was putting holes in the fuselage).

Finally, an opinion. Even in my admittedly limited experience with the '46, I have seen it do some crazy impressive things, maneuver-wise. I find it nearly impossible to believe that the Osprey is more maneuverable. My 2 cents.

 

[phrogdriver]

I have heard all of these arguments before. As a new H2P in the '46, I happen to think it's a fantastic platform. I just want to make two points:

2. While the Osprey is much faster and has better range than the '46, it does have a significantly larger footprint than the phrog. This makes it more difficult to maneuver while on the boat and when performing CALs. Also, according to a major I flew with at VT6 who was privy to much of the testing info, they were having problems when landing and taking off from unprepared surfaces (i.e. the blade wash was throwing debris hard enough that it was putting holes in the fuselage).

Finally, an opinion. Even in my admittedly limited experience with the '46, I have seen it do some crazy impressive things, maneuver-wise. I find it nearly impossible to believe that the Osprey is more maneuverable. My 2 cents.

The footprint is virtually the same as a CH-46 sideways, which does make for a tighter fit for spots 4-6 on the LHD, but doesn't increase the size of zone required by any appreciable amount.

The last OPEVAL tests didn't have any problem with austere LZs. While it does kick up more dust than a phrog, that's largely a function of gross weight. The V-22 can do a coupled landing from a hover, which allows you to land 0/0 if req'd.

"Manueverability" is a word that doesn't really mean the same as "responsive." The 46, for example, is famous for the left yaw deceleration whifferdeal, used by Marines to stop faster in LZs and by the Navy in vertrep. The 46 will tumble about the sky as fast as you can manipulate the controls--it's very responsive. Manueverabilty is about moving the velocity vector a different direction in a given time. To use the 46 again, it doesn't do a good job of making changes in direction without bleeding all its energy. As a young enthusiastic phrog guy, I believed the 46 was the most manueverable thing out there. Then I started getting in the manuals and seeing that its E-m diagram was dwarfed by just about every helo in its class.

What makes an aircraft manueverable? Things like roll rate and max AOB, max pitch up/down angles, and power (it does little good to turn sharply if you can't keep your energy up). I'm not going to go through the NATOPS ch4, but the V-22 has way bigger envelopes in all these things. Even in a hover, it may not be able to do the phrog tail swing, but it has a ton of lateral authority, because it uses both disc deflection and differential thrust to roll in VTOL mode. Fore and aft, it can't be beat, because of the nacelles.

Manueverability in the truest sense is not the ability to shake the aircraft to pieces, but the ability to displace the aircraft rapidly. The battlephrog may whip the tail around and stop pretty fast, but it can't change direction, speed, and altitude like a V-22. That's not terrible, through, since no aircraft with its mission that can either.