'This little medevac run makes for a nice story, but by itself it hardly justifies the existence of the V-22 - especially when you know more of the story.'

Really FH1100? Then please tell us 'more of the story' since you know so much. What was the status of the 53's? Were they on deck and spotted or were they in the slash? Had they just returned from a mission and in need of fuel or were they topped off? What missions had they performed earlier in the day? Did the crew still have crew day? Was there a crew assigned or would ops have to go cobble one together? Were they part of the same mission as the V-22's and in the same vicinity when this mission popped up? Who had been tasked during the planning to conduct such a mission if it cropped up? Whose aircraft was configured for a medevac? What was the maintenance status of the 53's? Were the daily and turn around inspections complete? Were the aircraft released from maintenance control? How long does it take to pull a 53 out of the slash, spread the blades and preflight it?

Please fill us in, since you know or are you just making a wild a$$ assumption based on a predetermined belief?

When a Marine or sailor needs a medevac the Air Boss doesn't care which platform does it. He turns to the tower flower (squadron ops rep) and asks "Whose the most ready", and that's who does it.

About the comment in Renos (that he highlighted) that it would have taken only one 46 to do this mission. Dan do you have any idea what the SOP is for over water flights beyond 25 nm from ship or shore? The fact that you highlighted that statement tells me you don't.

usmc helo

Pedro (H-46), the Jayhawks (H-60) and the H-53s routinely go farther than 25 miles out to sea for rescues and OPs.

Call CP OPs and learn, not puff.

usmc helo, heh, you're a piece of work. Your staunch, unwavering, unobjective, unquestioning "support" of the V-22 is...well...admirable, I guess...in a way.

What you're saying is that the USS Bataan (pictured below)

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/t...10080504-1.jpg

...had absolutely *no* other assets they could have used for the medevac. Heh. Yeah, you're probably right.

But my questions remains: What if the V-22 had not been able to land on the ship?

Darn it usmc helo, if you're right, I bet those aircraft are out there locating them thousand dollar tunas for their buddies who are in boats nearby…which is illegal. Worse yet, their using very expensive government property outside their flying limits while you and I foot their fuel bill! I'll be fishing the Gulf Stream off and on this summer and fall and I'll try and get a tail number of one of these scofflaws so I can call it in to the Fisheries enforcement boys and girls or Coast Guard. Thanks for the info usmc helo!!

BTW if you're every in eastern NC, here's a great outfit to fish in the Gulf Stream with: http://www.supervoyagerdeepseafishing.com/

Hmmmmmm....wonder what the sailor's injuries were that could not be handled aboard Bataan? I wonder if there were any additional medical teams embarked as well in addition to the ship's medical staff?

It does make sense to get an injured person ashore for the best treatment possible.....but in the presence of expert care and top notch facilities it is more a transport mission than a life saving flight. Granted the PR effect is nowhere as good if you call it what it was.

Svenestron,
You are correct, it would a moot point except that FH1100 made the following comment:
which implies that this was strictly a PR stunt and that all they really had to do was put the patient on a 53. Therefore my question to him about his knowledge of the status and availability of the other aircraft on board is valid. He is making assumptions that he can't back up. He assumes that there was a deck full of aircraft and crews available that could jump on the mission. How does he not know that maybe the 53's were down for a planned maintenance day after a hard week of flying? Maybe harrier ops were being conducted in which case the 53's would have slashed (the starboard portion of the deck for and aft of the island) with blades folded.
He makes the assumption that they ignored other available assets at eh expense of an injured sailor to conduct a PR stunt which is shameful.

FH1100,
On what ship? The Bataan? Why wouldn't it? It did so what's your point?

Dan,

Pedro is a dedicated SAR asset so yes they do go single ship further than 25 nm. The Jayhawk? are you talking about the USCG? They have nothing to do with the MEU. It's not a matter of wether or not the aircraft can do , it's a question of SOP. I suggest you read the MAG 29, 26 and 39 SOPs. I not only had to read them but abide by all them at different times in my career. For safety reasons, Marine RW (and now tiltrotor) assets do not operate further than 25 nm from ship to shore unless they are in a section or larger. 53's will on occasion. I This provides on scene command and control in the event of ditching, a second set of radios and comms, etc. If you really want to know this stuff why don't you reenlilst and deploy on a MEU like I have.

Sasless,
Generally no matter how well staffed the medical facility is they try to get serious injuries off the boat ASAP. Which honestly concerned me. If they weren't confident enough to treat someone when we were only 40 miles from Balboa, what the heck were they going to do when we were in the middle of the Pacific.

Of course this little V-22 medevac was a PR "stunt." OF COURSE IT WAS, let's not be naive. It was a patient transfer, that's all. The sailor was complaining about chest pains. Uhh, what? That means he was conscious? Come on, people, this was no life or death situation.

I asked what would have happened if the V-22 could not have landed on the ship. usmc helo, missing my point entirely, wrote back:My point is/was, what if it hadn't been an LHD? What if it had been a regular ol' boat...you know, the type that couldn't accommodate a tilt-rotor aircraft landing. Then what? I guess they would've had to use a regular ol' helicopter then...one with winching capability, like during the recent rescue of a crewmember of a cargo ship in the Atlantic of the Irish coast, which is detailed in another nearby PPRUNE thread which you can read here: http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/379...-atlantic.html

So the bottom line is that a sailor on an LHD got hurt. Of all the aircraft on the ship, they tasked a V-22 to run the guy into shore. And we're all supposed to stand and applaud the sheer usefulness and amazing capability of the V-22. Oh yeah, I'm sold!

But you know, it got me thinking (which is always dangerous). It was *only* 147 miles - about an hour by usmc helo. Perhaps if one of the r/w assets had been used, maybe they could've gone straight to the shore hospital instead of short-stopping at an airport for the transfer to a ground ambulance?

I still don't see this as a wonderful mandate for the V-22. Publicity stunt. A good one, but just a publicity stunt, that is all.

As I read this I think back to my 58T days out of Teeside slogging it to the Ekofisk single pilot and only two channel SAS using DECCA.

Now....the military fly two ship formations at a minimum when going over 25nm out....hmmmmmm?

I reckon the GOM guys going way down south in their single engine helicopters day in and day out are really being reckless.

As to Harrier landings going on.....and the helicopters being "slashed". How hard is it to land the Harriers while you "unslash" a helicopter....surely all of them were not stood down? Don't you have a SAR Alert Helo ready in case one of the Harriers makes like a turbojet powered yard dart?

Cmon here USMC....you're really digging for an explanation that isn't there.

It is not the use of the Osprey itself but the "sheer hype" that was made of a simple patient transfer flight.

Helicopter EMS operators do these things every day and you don't read about them.

Does not the Osprey have the ability to Hoist from a ship deck? Or did I miss something while I had lunch?

SASless - Am going flying with the USAF V22s next week so will have a look at these aircraft first hand, and obviously get some nice photos as well. :ok:

Ned

Ned you Dog!

Are you going to Eglin or New Mexico?

I bet the photos will be great as always!

Get them to discuss the various differences between the MH-53's and the Osprey's performance...and suitability for the mission. Get them to detail what tasking they have swapped off to the Army and Marines when they got involved with the 22. It might be wise to wait till you have all your piccies first!

Sasless, going to be at the 71st SOS at Kirtland for a couple of days.

If anyone wants to PM me some questions to be included in what we ask in the interviews then please do so. But please make them legitimate questions and not just witch hunt questions.

Cheers

Ned

Marines making a big push in Afghanistan....and where is the miracle weapon these days?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/542819/4_62_c320.jpg

SASless

Perhaps you didn't get the memo but one of its secret attributes is it has a stealth capability (which would be the ONLY reason on earth for keeping this POS around)!

Note that the photo in post 480 is a CH-53D from the 60's era, not one of the brand new CH-53E's from the 80's. The big differences are one engine, one rotor blade and a whole lot of payload up hot and high.

The payload of the phrog in that country is often nonexistent. It's often noted that in the Marine Corps the V-22 is primarily replacing the H-46, not the H-53. For Afghanistan it doesn't have to do much to be a great replacement.

Having flown with a number of units from both Kabul and KAF I think you will find that no matter what the helo is, it is going to struggle there. Only one that it didnt bother - from what I saw - was the Chinook.

Would be nice to see some V22s operating over there on direct action stuff. Who knows the USAF might even have some there already working with the Special Ops guys at night :E

I for one think its a great aircraft/helo/hydbrid :) but thats just my opinion and besides all the guys on the front lines flying with them, well they just have to work with what they got.

Ned

Not quite accurate Jolly.....

The vaunted Osprey is intended to replace the CH-46's and CH-53A/D's but not the CH-53E soon to be CH-53K's.

A quick google search will find numerous official sources for that statement.

Some other thoughts....

I wonder if the 53D in the photograph is one of the aircraft moblilized from Davis-Monthan AFB and restored to service for service in Afghanistan. Funny how with all the 22's the Marines have to dip into the mothballed aircraft stashed in the desert.

Again, anyway you look at it.....there is real evidence that refutes the propaganda being put forth by the Marine Corps about their Osprey program.

If we divide the total number built by sixteen or whatever the number each squadron is assigned....we come up with a heck of a lot of squadrons but as I understand it the manning right now is only four squadrons....three operational and one soon to be.

The numbers just don't add up....either in aircraft or performance....or in past deployments.

Or so it seems to me.

No Ospreys, for now, to Afghanistan - MarineCorpsTimes.com

The company I fly for just picked up a Beechcraft King Air 200 in addition to our 206B, and I am now (presto!) a combination helicopter/fixed-wing pilot. Flying this new aircraft is as interesting as it is instructive. For instance, on short hops when we have to stay down below 10,000 feet, our true airspeed and fuel burn are truly horrible. To get maximum efficiency out of the King Air, we have to take it up high - into the 20's. We typically cruise it at 25,000 feet or above. Of course, we're pressurized so this is no problemo.

And it got me to wondering about the magical V-22. Everybody keeps talking about the wonderful capabilities...how it's "this times" faster than a helicopter, or carries "this much" more than a helicopter, and has "this much" more range.

Oh really?

Well, what altitudes are these comparisons done at? How does a V-22 carry 24 Marines on a long, fast flight? Can it even do that? V-22 proponents say that it'll carry this much "load" over a given distance. But what if that "load" is soldiers? Will they have to wear oxygen masks and cold-weather gear if their destination is ultimately a hot desert? What are we, back in WWII B-17's?

I guess what I'm getting at is this: What is the real world performance of the V-22? What if it has to stay below 10,000 feet due to passenger considerations? How fast it is below 10,000? What is the fuel burn below 10,000 feet? How far can it go at that speed and fuel burn?

We often get bamboozled by the manufacturer's hype. Figures lie and liars figure. Yes, I'm sure the V-22 has amazing capabilities...that it can fly very high and very fast and very far. But can it do all of that together with two dozen living, breathing human beings onboard?

To wit: On this much-ballyhooed recent 147-mile medevac flight from the Bataan, what altitude did they fly at and at what airspeed? And the big question - just how much "better than a helicopter" was that?

Aviation Week & Space Technology leaps to an interesting conclusion from last week's USS Battan medevac mission:

"This was the first time the aircraft had been used to conduct such a mission from the sea, and it demonstrated the tiltrotor would be suitable for use as a combat search-and-rescue platform."

Who knew the CSAR mission was so simple? And to think people have been getting worked-up over steep-descent VRS, suppressive fire and OEI performance... :hmm:

I/C

How does landing on a LHD flight deck.....then flying ashore to an airfield connote anything remotely comparable to flying a CSAR mission into hostile territory...doing a winch pickup...then exfil'ing to a safe location?

Did I just miss something while taking a kip?

40 MV-22 are MISSING! - How is this possible?
 

Exerpt from article below: ...."the bigger story is the 40 missing MV-22s, which some Generals insist do not exist, despite the facts found in Congressional budget documents that were recently compiled by the Congressional Research Service. Timid reporters may want to write about "allegations" of missing MV-22s, but this is a fact -- 40 MV-22s are missing!"

Source: http://www.g2mil.com/V-22missing.htm