Periodically, we get new people coming into this forum who are staunch defenders of the V-22. This "mcpave" is just the latest in a long line. They claim to be vague and various things (e.g. pilots or people "associated" with the program) and they never fully identify themselves. However, they tell us we're dead-wrong about the V-22. And they insult and make fun of those of us who haven't drank the Osprey Kool-Aid, telling us that we don't know what we're talking about because we haven't flown the damn thing. Or we haven't been with the program for as long as they. They don't give us any details; they just say we're wrong, wrong, wrong.
Well.
It is true that most of us get our news from third-hand sources - government reports, testimony-under-oath and such. For the most part, we consider these sources to be good and reliable. If we are told by someone associated with the V-22 that the aircraft can or cannot do X, then we believe it. Sometimes it's hard to get through the sugar-coating though.
Let's take the infamous NATOPS. Go read an excerpt from them here:
http://www.g2mil.com/Natops%20Extracts.PDF
Yes, it's from Carlton Meyer's g2mil site, but the link takes you to what is apparently a direct copy of the V-22 NATOPS manual.
In mcpave's defense, perhaps the Air Force isn't bound by the NATOPS restrictions. But look what the Navy manual says!
4.13 MANEUVERING LIMITATIONS- Air combat maneuvering and aerobatics are prohibited
- Abrupt multi-axis control inputs are prohibited
NOTE
During maneuvering at low airpspeed, accelerated stall can be acheived at moderate bank angles and/or load factor.
"Abrupt, multi-axis control inputs are prohibited." Geez-Louise! Is that still applicable? How does one come into a "hot" LZ and expect to *not* have to make abrupt, multi-axis control inputs if necessary? I don't get it. Do people really think that the V-22 will ALWAYS be landed in nice, big, quiet, undefended LZ's? In which war and on what planet has this ever happened?
You can read the whole thing if you open the .pdf file. It's very interesting, and sheds some light on the V-22's basic flight characteristics that can probably never be changed due to the twin proprotor design. I particularly liked this one:
12.4.23 STALL RECOVERY
WARNING
Rapid forward TCL (full throw in 1 second or less) may result in uncontrollable nose down pitch tumble departure exhibited during flight simulations.
Wow, don't be pushing forward on that stick too quickly, boys!
Okay, so this is what we're going by. If these NATOPS restrictions have been reduced, modified or rescinded, then let's hear about it! I'll certainly keep my big mouth shut if that's the case. But if they are still in place, then certain other people need to just shut up.
The V-22 is a HUGE mistake...a HUGE waste of money. That it can do certain things well is undeniable. But that does not justify the high cost in terms of hard money and soldiers' lives.