Question for the USMC aviators that might be here. When I was at Pendalton recently was talking with some of the aviators there and they were saying that the V22s in theatre were primarily flying the trash and ass runs and werent being used on any front line delivery of troops or special ops etc and that the 46s were still being used for this.

Just wondering what your thoughts were.

Ned

This can't be true! Say it ain't so!
 

Pentagon may buy fewer V-22 Osprey aircraft



Rob Cox - Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Published: Wed, May. 06, 2009 03:31PM

Modified Wed, May. 06, 2009 03:47PM


A senior Marine general said for the first time Wednesday that the service may consider buying fewer V-22 Ospreys than planned and instead add more helicopters to its aircraft fleet.
The Marines have long held they need to buy a minimum of 360 V-22s, built by Bell Helicopter and Boeing, to replace their aging fleet of Vietnam-era transport helicopters, and were not interested in buying less-costly helicopters instead.
But in a conference call with defense reporters, Lt. Gen. George Trautman III, deputy commandant for aviation, eased away from that position when asked about defense think tank recommendations that the Marines should buy helicopters as well as V-22s.


"I don't think this is an urgent question, but we're prepared to discuss it going forward," Trautman said.
The Marines were the only service whose prized weapons programs escaped largely unscathed from the major defense budget overhauls that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has proposed. Those measures will be in the budget the Obama administration is expected to release Thursday.
But Gates let it be known recently he also plans to challenge the Marines to better justify some of their costly future weapons buying plans.

Why no 22's to Afghanistan?

I would think with the distances involved the 22 would be the ticket.

Someone asked previously if the 22 had the kahunas to operate at those altitudes in the helicopter mode....and if we add the new gun system....how would that figure into the payload availiable?

Since so many Chinooks have been shot down by RPG's during landing/takeoff in hostile landing zones.....are the Marines afraid to risk a 22?

SASLess - Spoke to some friends flying the USAF V22s and they said the altitude kills the V22s performance in Afghanistan.

Maybe a V-22B version will have upgraded engines, who knows.

Ned

MV/CV-22B still has 1107s, so that'd be the V-22C... ;)

As to the earlier question regarding ash & trash runs, the MV-22 was widely said to be operating away from the frontline during its initial period in-country, which led to eyebrows being raised over last July's claim about 1,400 combat sorties being flown.

Let's get this straight....seven months (approximately 200 days), ten aircraft, two thousand hours, one thousand-four hundred sorties.....that gives a rate of 28.57 flight hours per month per aircraft....with an availibility rate of 68.1 percent and an average sortie duration of 1.43 hours?:uhoh:

So....each aircraft would have flown about 140 sorties in 200 days....assuming just one sortie per day which gives a 70% availability rate just by dividing days in country by sorties at a single sortie per day.

I would hide my face in shame if I had to brag about that being a "good" performance.:ugh:

Who is smoking dope?:rolleyes:

Even the ragged old CH-47A's I flew in Vietnam averaged 90% availability rates and flew 120-140 hours per month with average flying days of 8-10 flight hours.

Granted their avionics systems amounted to nothing compared to the 22 but Lordy.....less than 30 hours per month? A commercial operator would go broke at that rate!

Did we not have an article posted that reported Bell-Boeing stockpiled One Hundred Million Dollars worth of spares in anticipation of the deployment?

Yet the Crew Chief is quoted as saying they had problems getting parts but did not have to make any major component changes.

Any Comment there USMC HELO?

These days, ANY flight over Iraq is deemed a 'Combat Sortie' just as long cross country flights stateside to impress the public with accumulated flight hours is all bogus. A Cessna delivering guard mail qualifies in this theater as performing 'Combat Sorties'. What's really pathetic are those who come to a forum defending such a trash heap rather than quietly putting their time in and hoping to be reassigned to something that actually supports the marines (and silently cursing his luck for having to fly the MC's biggest aviation mistake to date). Bragging about this flying junk pile just sullies our marine officers' overall credability. Perhaps Carlton was only 99% correct with his predictions that were gleamed from the FACTS but at least he retained his honor in the reporting of this colossal screw-up. Nick predicted this.

V-22 Defensive Armament
 

The detailed information on the BAE RGS system is hard to come by ( cannot find the total system weight incl ammo anywhere ).

I did, however, just read an article that stated that the two turrets ( one for sensor package, one for gun/ammo box ) in fact take the place of the two cargo hooks.

So the USMC has two non-interchangeable versions of the V-22: one for landing troops in harms way and the other for ash/trash and sling missions? I'm making the assumption that a switchover takes more than 15 minutes.

Someone tell me I've got bad data.

Thanks,
John Dixson

John,

That gets back to my argument about the V-22's claimed speed advantage over helicopters. When you hang a slingload under the thing it has the same speed capability as a helicopter because the load determines how fast you can fly. Granted some hi-density loads ride better and would allow higher speeds but that applies to helicopters as well as the 22. I bet a 46 is just as fast as the 22 in that regard. Plus the cargo hook is not taken up by a kid's X-Box turret as it totes along two gunners and a pair of Ma Deuce's (.50 Caliber Browning M2 machine guns).

No matter how you paint this Pig.....she still Oinks!:ugh:

Latest word is the Marine General Air Marshal has admitted the USMC is willing to buy fewer 22's and buy more helicopters. Is this a crack in the armor of the Osprey proponecy?:uhoh:

For an article with a discussion of some issues relating to the V-22...

V-22 Osprey: A Flying Shame?

Sasless,
VMM-266 7 month deployment ended spring 09:
(3040 hours/10 aircraft)/7 months = 43.4 hours/aircraft/month
[It was stated that 266 deployment was approximately 6 months, I rounded to 7. If it was closer to 6 then it’s 50.6 hours/aircraft/month]
HMM 161 7 month deployment ended spring 09:
(4300 hours/12 aircraft)/7 months= 51.1 hours/aircraft/month
All 3 VMM deployments to Iraq:
(9000 hours/10 aircraft)/19 months = 47.3 hours/aircraft/month
HMM 161 3 deployments to Iraq:
(9100 hours/12 aircraft)/21 months= 35.7 hours/aircraft/month
[I assumed that 161 did 3 7 month deployments (USMC standard). If you cut them down to 19 months to match with the VMMs you get 39.5 hours/aircraft/month]
http://safetycenter.navy.mil/media/approach/spotlight/HMM-161.htm
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/us-marine-mv-22b-osprey-al-qaim-iraq
http://www.mnfwest.usmc.mil/public/InfolineMarines.nsf/(ArticlesRead)/35A69C71EB704814852575940036A13C
http://www.mnfwest.usmc.mil/public/InfolineMarines.nsf/(ArticlesRead)/601B28055877F5DB8525759A002FB917
Considering the ebb and flow of Ops Tempo and mission requirements I think the numbers compare pretty well. Considering that a V-22 will make 240 over the ground it can make 2 trips to Al Qaim in the same time it takes a 46 to make 1 (unless it’s a Bullfrog in which case the 46 takes longer). Given that, assume someone you care is wounded at AQ and needs to get back to Al Asad for treatment. (Last I was there AQ only had triage). Would you rather they spend 19 minutes on a V22 or 38 on a 46? He’s your friend not mine so it’s up you.

Ned's right, the V-22 will probably not perform well at altitude. That's a problem.
Could someone please define for what the "frontlines" are in Iraq?

"I don't think this is an urgent question, but we're prepared to discuss it going forward," Trautman said... Since they are coming after F22, F35, VH71 and every other expensive program, probably a smart move and not V22 specific. At $105m+ I wouldn't be surprised to see the 53K mentioned either.

Dan Dan Dan,
“What's really pathetic are those who come to a forum defending such a trash heap rather than quietly putting their time in and hoping to be reassigned to something that actually supports the marines (and silently cursing his luck for having to fly the MC's biggest aviation mistake to date). Bragging about this flying junk pile just sullies our marine officers' overall credability(sp).”
From this I can only assume that you think I’m a V-22 pilot and I am defending the V-22. As I have stated before I have not flown the V-22. I doubt I ever will. Could you please tell me what I have said to defend the V-22? I’ve only questioned what you and others have written and pointed discrepancies. Why does that sully my credability and make me pathetic? You have yet to respond with something anything useful.
If you have so much faith in Carlton then perhaps you should push stronger for his RAH-60 Gunhawk (http://www.g2mil.com/gunhawks.htm) with some of your Sikorsky buds on here, or any of his other not so brilliant ideas.
By the way Dan, this is PPRUNE, Professional Pilots Rumour Network. Why do I get the feeling you’re neither professional nor a pilot?

usmc helo

As usual you're right. I'm just an amateur misspeller compared to you Sir. (BTW, thanks for providing spell checking for this forum.)

I won't waste anymore finger tip wear going over why the V22 is junk. So, if you don't know that by now, then you are simply misinformed or plain.... If you do know the FACTS and still want to worship at this bloodsuckers altar, then you need to stand back, take a deep breath and revaluate your reasons. Stop wasting our time rehashing the hundreds of prior comments proving the point that the V22 is a POS.

Semper Fi means loyailty to flesh & blood, past, present and future marines, not loyailty to an inept weapons manufacturer.

Deep breath Dan, :* count to 10...someone get his blankie..stat!

Specifically, what is that you disagree with in my post, you were a little unclear

Calm Down USMC.

You won the war you flew in. Dan may never have got past Flight Sim simple level so give him a break. As to SASLESS how did your war go?

As to the V-22:

If an aircraft can fly three times faster, carry 3 times the load, and go (what?) five times as far as the type it replaced, why should anyone think the flight hours should not be lower for the same mission?

Dan and SAS thanks for proving the V-22 does its intended job with the intended benefits.

The Sultan

V-22 Missions
 

USMC Helo:

For the hypothetical medevac from Al Qaim to Al Asad, and comparing the H-46 to the V-22, why would one use a helo or tilt rotor for that distance anyway? There are airports at both ends of that trip. Certainly the justification for the V-22 rests upon its VTOL capability , not its ability to fly from airport to airport.

Which brings me to something else noted in your last posting:

"Ned's right, the V-22 will probably not perform well at altitude. That's a problem.
Could someone please define for what the "frontlines" are in Iraq? "

Re the V-22 discussion, Iraq is becoming irrelevant, if the President's recent speech accurately describes future US military focus in that area. Afghanistan is absolutely relevant, though, and so it is appropriately pertinent to inquire as to the hover payload performance at typical Afghanistan altitudes and for typical V-22 combat configured aircraft. That means WITH the new defensive armament system, whatever it weighs ( to include the weight of the install mods to the basic aircraft as well as the (6) major pieces/parts and ammo that goes with it ).

Thanks,
John Dixson

It is odd, at least to me, to see the deep emotional investment and attachment people have for the V-22. It blinds them and removes all objectivity. No amount of reasoning will sway them that it is the best...the absolute best aircraft ever invented. The best!

Me, I neither love it nor hate it. I just believe that it's unworkable. I mean, come on, fifty years of development! And it's still not-ready-for-prime-time? Why don't we just admit that it never will be truly "ready" and move on to something more practical? Like...oh...compound helicopters? Oh heavens no - they're just not as sexy as that tiltrotor thingee.

No matter how strongly we might wish for a magic carpet, there are certain limits that tell us we'll never be riding around on one. So too with the V-22 and its civilian counterpart. I predict this with some confidence: If Agusta/Bell ever does get the thing certified, it will be stillborn to the marketplace. Agusta will sell damn few of them, certainly not enough to amortize the tooling, much less make a profit. Eventually they will quietly pull it from production, just like Beech did with the Starship. A single high-profile (perhaps fatal) accident - something that is almost inevitable - would accelerate the process.

On this board, usmc helo champions the advantages of the V-22 over a CH-46 - because...you know...those are the only aircraft that can be compared to each other. Of the greater speed of the V-22, he notes:

Quote:

---

Given that, assume someone you care is wounded at AQ and needs to get back to Al Asad for treatment. (Last I was there AQ only had triage). Would you rather they spend 19 minutes on a V22 or 38 on a 46? He’s your friend not mine so it’s up you.

---

And that there is the canard...the red herring of the V-22. It's these emotional plays for sympathy that are so smarmy. If a soldier is injured so badly that an extra 19 minutes is going to make the difference between life and death, the guy's a goner. What is this, the Korean Conflict? We're not fighting wars with fronts anymore. I'm sure "triage" in the modern battlefield is light years beyond what it was in the 1950's. If the triage site is set up well enough to handle a V-22 medevac, an extra 19 minutes isn't going to kill the guy. (And it will have to be a big site. In my mind I have a cartoon-like vision of a V-22 landing at a M*A*S*H compound and blowing the tents away, leaving surgeons operating out in the open and the nurses showers exposed.)

But you can't tell that to the V-22 proponents. If the tiltrotor can save just one life! by speeding a soldier to better medical facilities 19 minutes faster than a CH-46, well...well...well then by God we just have to have it! It's worth whatever we have to pay for it!

It's so silly.

All the money that's been dumped into the tiltrotor program over the last fifty years could have been better spent on something else. Bell knows it - has known it - for a long time. But as long as the stupid government wants to keep giving them and Boeing money to produce this turkey, they'll happily take it. Let's hope that sooner or later, someone with brains, guts, objectivity and authority looks at the V-22 and says, "You know guys, this ain't working. Let's come up with something better."

Let's use the high number....51.1 hours of flight time per month and less than 70 percent readiness....seems awfully low notwithstanding the USMC overall fleet averages shown.

I know the Marine Corps places very high importance to Readiness Stats as they must be reported daily no matter it is not a work day, holiday, or Stand down.

Do we have any figures for helicopters assigned to the same area of operations?

Sultan,

My war went fine.....we were winning when I left on a stretcher while on my second voluntary tour.

You do puzzle me as to why you ask such a question....might you explain what you are seeking as to a response and what your question is predicated upon?
Usually here we deal with the questions and try to avoid being obnoxious but perhaps that is lost on you somehow?

If my asking about the cost of the 22 being unusually high for the capability it provides....as shown to be very limited in reality when we all can see how useless it will be in places like Afghanistan then we have to wonder about allocation of resources by the USMC.

Surely the Marine Corps looked beyond sea level operations from ship to sandy beaches at the shoreline and considered they would be in the mountains at some time in the future.

Just who is it in Congress that is so intent upon keeping Bell and Boeing funded by means of this project?

Did the Marine Corps feel those two companies needed contracts to keep them alive or something and thus bought into the Osprey as way of doing that?

Regarding the V-22 development period taking over 50 years starting with the the radial engine XV-3 in the 1950's -- that's a bit of an exaggeration. That's the same as saying the S-92 started development with the original helicopter design by Leonardi Da Vinci in 1493. I don't think anyone would agree that the S-92 development program took over 500 years. The V-22 has taken a VERY long time in development (JVX program in the early 80s), and the program costs are very high for the capabilities offered. The point is that the a/c is here, the Marines and Air Force truly believe in it based on what they've seen, and it will be successful in performing missions that no other aircraft in existance can accomplish.

Regarding V-22 external load capability:
V-22 sets unofficial world record: external loads

PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL AIR STATION, Md. (August 19, 1998) Flight testing the new V-22 Osprey tiltrotor has broken new ground in its class and among all rotorcraft.

The most significant accomplishment of the past week has been the demonstration of the V-22's ability to carry external loads at very high speeds, said John Buyers, Bell-Boeing V-22 program director at NAS Patuxent River. A 10,000 pound load, attached to the aft external cargo hook was carried at a speed of 220 knots. This is the maximum
payload for a single hook on the V-22, while 15,000 pounds can be carried using dual hooks. A Marine Helicopter Support Team conducted the hookups. They have developed procedures for working underneath the V-22 during 15 hookups made during tests.

This is the fastest airspeed any rotorcraft has carried an external load, no matter what the weight, said Buyers. From all indications, this constitutes a new unofficial world record. The capability will significantly increase the
productivity of vertical lift operations on the battlefield, according to Buyers.

Reports show that pilots felt the aircraft was stable and predictable over the load during hookup procedure and they are unaware of the load during normal flying...

Any helicopter can fly at Vne with a hi-density load such as Ammo or water blivets....it is the aerodynamic loads that are the problem and that is where the hight Vne of the V-22 is not a factor.


How fast did they go with a CONEX container under the aircraft?

Or.....say a couple of pallets of plywood?

Have they lifted an "N" model to test recovering a downed aircraft?

Did they do a test to determine production rates Vertrep'ing and compare that to the 46's rate?

Any helicopter cannot fly at 220 kts with a high density load (which is less than the V-22's Vne). You are correct in that aerodynamic limits of loads carried externally do exist regardless of whether they are carried by a helicopter, fixed-wing, or tiltrotor.