I almost feel sick- Osprey declared operational

[Bill]

V-22 IOC (Source: US Marine Corps; issued March 7, 2006)

MARINE CORPS AIR STATION NEW RIVER, N.C. --- The future of Marine Corps aviation took a large step forward as hundreds of Marines, Sailors, Airmen, Soldiers and family members gathered to watch a ceremony in which the first operational MV-22 Osprey squadron was activated here March 3.

“Commissioning (Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron-263) is a historic day for the ‘Thunder Chickens,’ for our Corps and for our nation,” said Maj. Gen. Thomas L. Moore, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing commanding general. “We have introduced a transformational aircraft into our nation’s forces with the ‘Thunder Chickens.’”

A transformational aircraft because it capitalizes on both the best aspects of the rotary wing and the best aspects of the fixed wing turbo-propeller, Moore explained.

“The (Osprey) is much more survivable than the (CH-46E ‘Sea Knight’) because of its range and it’s speed,” said Moore. “It’s a much more capable aircraft and we expect it to perform (excellent) in battle.”

A capable aircraft that has been in the making since the early 1960’s, some feel the delay has produced the best result.

“I have to tell you, waiting for something this good has been worth while,” said Gen. Robert Magnus, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps. “This is a tremendous aircraft. While we are at war, it is a tremendously more survivable platform for the Marines who are in the fight.”

VMM-263, home to more than 150 Marines and the successor to Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron-263 which cased its colors in June 2005, will carry on the proud name, “Thunder Chickens,” and also the legacy of the former CH-46E “Sea Knight” squadron.

Honored to carry on the name, “Thunder Chickens,” the Marines of VMM-263 are thrilled by the chance to become the first operational Osprey squadron, said Sgt. Maj. Grant VanOostrom, VMM-263 sergeant major.

“They are very excited because they see it as a culmination of those who have gone before them,” said VanOostrom. “They just happen to be the chosen ones who get to bring it into its current existence; we get to reap the rewards of others.”

And VMM-263 can be expected to reap the almost countless rewards, such as being able to travel at speeds of nearly 300 mph, twice the speed of any current helicopter, have up to five times the range of travel and carry three times the payload.

“The Osprey will allow us to self-deploy these aircraft from New River, or (Air Station) Miramar, across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, to anywhere this great nation wants to plant its flag within two to three days,” said Magnus.

Uncertain of the exact date when the Osprey will be supporting ground forces overseas, the squadron feels assured that it will be in the near future.

“We expect VMM-263 to be deployed within the coming year,” said Moore. “We can’t give an exact date, because we aren’t 100 percent sure.”

“There are two things the American people should know about this aircraft,” said Gen. Michael W. Hagee, 33rd commandant of the Marine Corps, during his visit to Marine Corps Air Station New River Feb. 24. “One, it will change the way we fight; it’s faster, larger, air refuelable and the technology is state of the art. Two, it’s the safest aircraft in our inventory. It’s been tested and proven ready to perform.”

And though tremendous efforts will have to made by the “Thunder Chickens” before the first Osprey squadron is ready to deploy, a sigh of relief can be breathed by the Marines, families and friends of the program who sacrificed so much to get to where the stand up could be possible, said Moore.

“We are bringing forth the new capability to replace what has been the backbone of Marine aviation in the CH-46,” said Moore. “With that capability, we take rotary wing assault support, now tiltrotor wing assault support, ahead into the future and assure the success of Marines in battle. We are committing the Osprey to the gunfight.”

-ends-

--------------------------------------

Twice the speed of any helicopter huh?

Pffft. Yeah...right.

[Blademaster]

Let me ask you something. Which one would you feel better? A rustbucket that has been flying over 30 years and is hold together with nothing but gum, spit and tapes and if something goes wrong, you drop like a rustbucket straight down or a brand new flying plane that has a dubious safety record but is brand new and has been retested time after time and when something goes wrong, it can land or glide like a plane?

[Bill]

Let me ask you something. Which one would you feel better? A rustbucket that has been flying over 30 years and is hold together with nothing but gum, spit and tapes and if something goes wrong, you drop like a rustbucket straight down or a brand new flying plane that has a dubious safety record but is brand new and has been retested time after time and when something goes wrong, it can land or glide like a plane?

I would feel best with a modern off the shelf Helicopter such as an updated MH-53.

I do not feel best with a 100+ Million dollar tiltrotor that may or may not actually work correctly, and that is incapable of autorotation or gliding.

Call me crazy.

[gunnut]

I have doubts about the Osprey. It seems too complex and hokey. The long delay is a testament to that complexity. Complex things aren't good in combat.

I would rather have more new conventional helos than the Osprey. But then again, I don't know enough about the program. It just seems like a pet project that was shoved down the Marine's throat by some big shot.

[Bill]

Personally i dont care how good it works.

To me, it costs too much, end of story.

[Garry]

I remember Chap once pointed out to an interesting design by Sikorskiy - S-69 ABC (XH-59) Advancing Blade Concept. It was basically a co-axial system made by Sikorsky but it was using unflexible blades unlike Kamov's.

This co-axial rotor system with non-flexible blades has exceeded speed of Osprey's but its maneuvrability and autorotation capabilities were increadibly higher due to co-axial gain. I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT WENT TO NOWHERE.... was there any problem with Advancing Blade Consept?

I read about weight of transmission was a problem but this does not sound persuasive... as we all know now that gains exceede these penalties with Kamov's helos.....

So in my view the development of this direction would have been much more promising than Osprey design.... ABC helos would have had higher maneuvrability.... higher speed and higher safety. Now the whole co-axial evolution is given to Kamov.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...34&postcount=3
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/h-59.htm
http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/sik_s-69-r.html

[Garry]

I would feel best with a modern off the shelf Helicopter such as an updated MH-53.

I do not feel best with a 100+ Million dollar tiltrotor that may or may not actually work correctly, and that is incapable of autorotation or gliding.

Call me crazy.

at 100 million dollar it is close to F-22 manufacturing cost!!! and it can carry less than Mi-17 which is worth just $5mln.... Well it has twice longer range and twice faster speed. But it is more than 20 times more expensive!!!

It is good and revolutionary design.... not doubts... but does its merits make it much better transporter than 20 conventional helicopters?

[jgetti]

Twice the speed of any helicopter huh?

Pffft. Yeah...right.

Actually, all helicopters are limited in forward speed by the rotor itself. On one side of the helicopter, the rotor is moving forward, the other side, it's moving backward. The speed of the rotor in the backward direction relative to the helicopter is basically the same for any helicopter speed. However, the speed of the backward moving rotor relative to the surrounding air changes with forward speed of the helicopter.

If the speed of the helicopter relative to the air gets too close to the backward speed of the rotor relative to the helicopter, then the backward moving blade is essentially not moving relative to the surrounding air and it stalls. Then you have a helicopter that's rolling and dropping very quickly.

So the twice the speed of a helicopter is believable to me. Whether or not anyone agrees with operational status of the V-22 is a whole other story.....

[jgetti]

at 100 million dollar it is close to F-22 manufacturing cost!!! and it can carry less than Mi-17 which is worth just $5mln.... Well it has twice longer range and twice faster speed. But it is more than 20 times more expensive!!!

It is good and revolutionary design.... not doubts... but does its merits make it much better transporter than 20 conventional helicopters?

Hold on there,, the F-22 cost is only in the $100 million dollar range IF developmental costs are not included. The $100 million dollar cost of the V-22 is with developmental costs included.

[Bill]

So the twice the speed of a helicopter is believable to me.

An Apache does 200mph(Hinds are even a little faster and i think so is the AH-1Z). An osprey only does 300mph.

Much faster yes, but certainly not twice as fast. A blackhawk can do about a buck 80, so it's still not twice as fast as that either.

It is twice as fast as some helos(early UH-1 only did about 135mph for instance) , but it's not 2x as fast as all helos. That's just a flat lie.

I sure hope that if they declared it IOC that it actually friggin' works.

Imagine what fools we'd be if we were paying 100 plus million per for aircraft that dont work.

[gunnut]

Imagine what fools we'd be if we were paying 100 plus million per for aircraft that dont work.

We had lots of those. That last example I can think of was the Sgt. York system. Something like 50 were made and declared operational when the project was cancelled because they didn't work as advertised. We sunk hundreds of millions of dollars in that project in the 80's.

Then we have the Commanche. We sunk another 2 or 3 billion dollars into that project. Fortunately, or unfortunately, it was cancelled before the 1st operational unit came off the assemply line.

[The_Burning_Kid]

At the rate and randomness that services cancel and curtail products, it is becoming a likely possibility that there are 2 year olds controlling the military and randomly pressing buttons on whether to cancel or go ahead with projects (F/A-18E/F over an upgraded F-14; cancelling of the Commanche; putting the Osprey into service; curtailing the JSF and F-22; retiring the Pheonix).

The real problem with the branches are that they make dum estimates and then project too many of an aircraft or product. The price is subjected to that and then if there is a slight increase, the branches immediately cut the production numbers and further increase the price, making it seem like the price of the project is just going up at an unrated pace. Then that's where politics come in.......

[highsea]

The Osprey has always been sort of an idea looking for an application. It's a neat concept that's very difficult to make practical. The SAR (Coast Guard) version has proven itself reliable and functional, so the concept can work. But is it that much better than say a Sea King for that function?

And will the Pentagon throw these quite expensive AC into a hot battlefield, knowing it's got a pretty good chance of getting shot up?

[jgetti]

The Osprey has always been sort of an idea looking for an application. It's a neat concept that's very difficult to make practical. The SAR (Coast Guard) version has proven itself reliable and functional, so the concept can work. But is it that much better than say a Sea King for that function?

And will the Pentagon throw these quite expensive AC into a hot battlefield, knowing it's got a pretty good chance of getting shot up?

A very good question, and not too different than the government's realization that realistically, JSF would never be used for CAS as a replacement for the A-10. They'll come around to that sooner or later. Luckily, the Chinook line is still ticking,, at least for the time being.

[Jimmy]

A very good question, and not too different than the government's realization that realistically, JSF would never be used for CAS as a replacement for the A-10. They'll come around to that sooner or later.

They figured that out a long time ago. The A-10 is sticking around for a while.