Osprey exceeds expectations of critics

CNN:

Once derided as a white elephant, the U.S. Marine Corps' tilt-rotor aircraft, the V-22 Osprey, is proving its mettle in Iraq, military officials said.

The Osprey, which takes off and lands like a helicopter but flies like a plane, was designed to replace the Corps' aging and less-capable helicopter fleet.

But a series of accidents involving the planes left 30 people dead from 1991 to 2000, and critics said the Osprey never would be able to replace the Vietnam-era CH-46 Sea Knight, which was the Corps' airlift workhorse.

The military, which has ordered 360 of the aircraft, said the 10 deployed to Iraq are doing what they are supposed to do -- carrying troops faster, farther and safer than the copters can.

Last September, Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263 left for Iraq's western Anbar province on the first deployment of the V-22.

Since then, the planes have logged more than 2,000 flight hours, initially doing routine cargo and troop movements from base to base in an area about the size of South Carolina.

In December, commanders gave the planes a more risky mission called "aero-scout" in which a group of V-22s flies into a relatively unsecured location and drops off Marines for a search mission.

The planes sit on the ground until the Marines load up and then fly off to somewhere else for another mission.

The Osprey's speed has been a lifesaver, too, squadron officials said.

For instance, they said two V-22s were dispatched to fly a more than 130-mile round trip in the remote western desert to pick up a wounded Marine and get him to a hospital. The planes were able to do so in an hour, something no helicopter in the Marine inventory could do, squadron officials said.

Commanders in Iraq have allowed little media coverage of the V-22s since their arrival, wanting to get crews used to their mission and to keep insurgents from targeting the planes for propaganda purposes. The planes have not come under direct fire, officials said.

Critics said the plane is lightly defended, with only one rear-mounted gun.

But Marines said the Osprey has enough power and speed to get out of a hostile zone faster than any helicopter, and the aircraft can fly higher, allowing it to be out of range of shoulder-fired missiles.

The Osprey seems to have become a favorite of commanders who need to get to places quickly, including Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq. Petraeus used one to fly around the country on Christmas Day to visit troops.

...

"The rate of climb is exceptional, and it can fly about twice as fast as a Black Hawk [helicopter], without needing to refuel as frequently," Boylan said. "Beyond that, its automatic-hover capability for use in landing in very dusty conditions, even at night, is tremendous."

Petraeus chose the Osprey for that mission because it was the only aircraft in the inventory that could fly around the country without refueling and not rely on runways, Boylan said.

...


It is still a work in progress, but as the story indicates, the plane has great potential. It is that potential that drives the Marines' continued investment of time and money. They do need to add weapons to the aircraft. One rear mounted gun suggest that weapons for it were an afterthought. It could be that all of the development problems let the weapons system slip through the cracks. I think the Osprey has even more potential in places like Afghanistan. My speculation is that the other services will be looking for their own version of the aircraft in the near future.

Comments

  1. A true analogy of the BRUTE FORCE DESIGN of the Osprey is the...I present to you, ladies (and mostly gentlemen)...the:

    Sterling Engine. Of 1855, then 1859, then every decade since...it FAILED.

    Works great, in theory, just like declaring your undying love for every cute 19 year old blond you meet, as soon as you meet each one. Very efficient, but one or two that seem to respond well at first turn out to fall apart as soon as you try to rely on her to rock your world years into it, assuming you survive the first month or two.

    The guy who invented that stupid Segway (see http://www.rothmotors.com for a cheaper, lighter, faster, alternative) thought, circa 2005, that he could THROW MONEY at the problem, the 150 year old problem that a Sterling engine represented (heat kills lubrication and warps parts etc.), so Segways would be run on sterling engines. Didn't happen. His best invention was his first. Made lights blinky blink to Disco music.

    Computers changed everything. Allowed a mere $8000 to buy you a self-balancing (already built into the human brain atop a bicycle or skis or skateboards etc.) piece of obsolescence. No human could control the Osprey. It had a chaotic mode or two that randomly kicked in.

    So now they fixed it? Sometimes six dollars a head, for taxpayers in the USA are indeed worth it.

    I still wonder though. Is it really robust? Know how vertical take–off jets worked? A steam engine. They just pointed the exhaust downwards then a small tank of water sprayed a mist into the overheated mix. FZZZZZZZZT! Jet go up, high enough so jet engines kicked in before the contraption fell to the tarmac. Landing a bit harder. Much harder. Must slow to a stall in mid-air, just above tarmac, then hit the steam. Computers, again.

    Because if it blows up during tests, funding dries up.

    The Osprey is the obvious solution to a problem of having no runway. Still though, it's just a prop driven plane, with a new type of rubber band to launch it, and more precarious sling to catch it back. Biplanes did this way back when. Oddly enough, few propeller driven planes can efficient in any way whatsoever, unless they are biplanes in which the propellor is as wide as the wings.

    So the Osprey doesn't crash any more? I'll bet they just added a little three line computer code kludge: "while crashing, out of control, allow free-fall for three seconds instead of turning the engines on and off like a chicken with its head cut off."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare