Ahh, another country heard from!
gmachine:
I stumbled on your forum, and don't really intend to hang out here, but I was compelled to address at least one of the whacked out accusations.
Yes, here's yet one *more* anonymous guy who claims to have all the answers.
It's so simple! Even an idiot can figure this out!
Why is it that any critics of the V-22 are always...
always...portrayed as irrational, anti-progress, tin-foil-hat-wearing loonies just because we don't drink the tilt-rotor Kool-Aid?
gmachine:
Let me start by saying there are no "missing" V-22s, I'm pretty sure there are no aliens in a hangar in Ohio either, but if I find a link to an article that says otherwise, will you take that as gospel also?
Look you nameless putz, nobody said anything about space aliens. If you're going to take that attitude, perhaps your first post on this forum
should be your last!
The question arose as to how many V-22 the Marines have. This could not be answered clearly to Congress by the guy who is in charge of the program. Yet "gmachine" comes along and tells us how simple it is to figure out. Why, all we dimbulbs need is that mysterious spreadsheet! Well, okay, anyone care to publish it? Why is it so complicated? Sure, certain early airframes were modified to later specs...I get that. So just answer the question: HOW MANY DAMN V-22's HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO THE MARINES? Again, it's not like we're talking about thousands...or even
hundreds of aircraft for that matter.
Not even the almighty "gmachine" did that. What "gmachine" is trying to make us believe is that one single V-22 can actually be counted two V-22's if it was remanufactured from Block A to Block B.
If some general can't keep up with how many are in the inventory on any given day so what? Why should he bother with trivia like that? That's why we have databases.
Care to share some of that "trivia" with the public - you know, the ones who are footing the bill for this thing? Oh, and it's not like that general couldn't keep up with the number of V-22's "on any given day." Since they are only receiving "two or three per month," the general should have been able to give a count that is accurate down to two or three. Why couldn't he have said,
"Well, we've received 110 aircraft, but some of them count more than once because they've gone back to the factory to be remanufactured and thus appear on the list twice. So it seems like we have more V-22's than we actually do."
Wouldn't that have been so easy? Even a congressman could've understood that.
The V-22 proponents are passionate about "their" aircraft. Unfortunately, most of their enthusiasm for the ship stems from the,
Gee-whiz, it's-so-cool! factor. They think that the machine *is* vindicated simply because they've put their "heart and soul" into working on it. (It's not.) They think that "favorable reports from the troops that actually use it" justify the V-22's total existence. (They don't.)
I'm sure the V-22 is just super-duper coolio. I'm sure it's totally awesome, man...the neatest thing since sliced bread.
I mean, look at the way the rotors and engines actually tilt!!! OMG!!!
I'm sure the V-22 does some things very well. I don't deny that. And I'm sure that the flight crews love flying it. I'm sure the engineers who've worked on it have a lot of themselves invested in it.
But none of that means anything. None of that matters.
What matters is: What can the V-22 do *better* than the helicopter(s) it is intended to replace?
Is it faster? Yes. Twice as fast? No. It's just...well..."somewhat faster."
It can accellerate and decellerate faster!
Can it fly higher? Well, no. It is unpressurized. And it has no airframe and/or proprotor anti-ice.
Can it carry more than a CH-46? Well, no. Not really. Not inside the cabin.
Does it have a personnel hoist? Yes! Well, no. Well, it's supposed to. But...umm...no one has seen any pictures of a V-22 hoisting anybody yet, not even a crash-test dummy. Word is that this capability is "still being tested" or some such thing. (We'll have to leave the jury out on that one.)
Is it "cooler" than a CH-46? Yes!
Is it more expensive than a CH-46? OH HELLS YEAH!
Finally, we have to ask: Is it safer than a helicopter?
Here, the answer to that one is a resounding, "NO!"
When a helicopter gets into VRS it crashes straight down and hits upright, where the landing gear, structure and crash-attenuating seats can make the inevitable hard-landing survivable.
When a V-22 gets into A-VRS, it crashes inverted killing everybody onboard. It has already demonstrated this "unpleasant" characteristic.
V-22 proponents say this will
NEVER happen again. EVER! We solved it! See, we know about this phenomenon now. And we've made up these
rules that the pilots must fly by. (And pilots always fly by the rules in combat.) And that knowledge, combined with those
rules will allow flight crews to forever avoid the dreaded A-VRS. No more "Maranas." Simple!
Heh.
I know I harp on this A-VRS thing like a broken record. But I consider it a fatal flaw in the design. It
will kill more soldiers, guaranteed. It is why the civilian version will
never see widespread acceptance and use (if it is indeed ever certified).
Tilt-rotor proponents such as "gmachine" like to claim that the V-22 is "only" about 23 years old, originating in 1986. Trouble is, Bell has actually been working on the tilt-rotor design since 1953. And they have not been able to perfect it. Bell even pawned-off the development of the civilian model 609 to the Italians. I'm sure that when they handed over the prototypes and drawings and 5.25" floppy disks and stuff, Bell management said, "Yeah, good luck with that!" with a sarcastic roll of the eyes, happy to be done with it.
Yet we taxpayers are told that we must continue to throw good money after bad...to keep funding this defective, deficient design called the Osprey. But the V-22 is not even close to being workable. Twenty-three years since the first one flew and we're still being given the lame excuse that the design is "not mature," and has "teething pains." And, oh yeah, if you land it out in the field it sometimes starts a brush fire...and might...you know...burn itself up too.
Just one of those little..."teething pains" that we'll work out...eventually. (I know! Maybe they'll make a
rule that no V-22 shall ever be landed within 100 feet of any vegetation.)
Uh-huh.
"gmachine," I'm sure you've put a lot of hard work into the V-22 over the years. I'm sure you'd hate to think that it was all for naught...that it was all wasted time. But sadly, I must tell you that...it was. So sorry. I hope they paid you well, at least.
I don't care how "cool" it is. I say, enough already! Kill the damn thing! Stomp on it like a fleeing cockroach. Kill it before it kills more Marines.
(Thank you for reading all the way down to here. You're a better man than I am. Even I don't read the crap I write.)