Hey usmc_helo, just a few corrections.
If NATOPS has removed the aforementioned prohibitions, then the V-22 community is extremely lax for not publicizing it. Because as of Congressional hearings that were held earlier this very year, this "myth" was again perpetuated and was unchallenged. Then again, the V-22 community has been typically poor at defending and generating support for the aircraft.
But wait...'ang on a tick! Even if those limitations have been removed from NATOPS (which I highly doubt), the prohibition against ACM, DCM, EVM and aerobatics is still in the
Air Force V-22 flight manual! Perhaps mcpave should study it a little more closely. Likewise, "abrupt, large amplitude" control inputs are still prohibited, and no exception is made for actual combat conditions, as is the case for the helicopters.
BZZZZZT! Sorry, try again.
You bring up the H-1. Uhh, why compare the V-22 to a helicopter design that dates back to the 1950's? Oh, right, LOL...because the V-22 does also! But seriously, aren't we trying to field improved aircraft? Don't we all know about the ability of the UH-1 to get into mast bumping? Aren't we trying to produce better designs than the ones that came before?
And no, the V-22 ain't one of them.
So don't be silly. We don't fly troops around in UH-1H's anymore. We put them in more-crashworthy Blackhawks...and more-crashable V-22's. In fact, with the advent of the AH-1Z and UH-1Y, the two-blade system will be a thing of the past. Manuevre as necessary, lads!
It will be interesting to see when mcpave has to fly his V-22 into an actual combat zone...you know, where he might need to make some abrupt, large amplitude and/or multi-axis control movements to avoid ground fire but cannot because of the prohibition in the AFM. He will in all likelihood make them anyway. He will do whatever is necessary to get the ship down and the troops out and the mission accomplished. And if - God forbid - he crashes and kills himself (along with everyone else onboard), it will go down as "pilot error." Bell-Boeing will wash their hands of it with a swift, "Hey, we warned you! This thing can't maneuver like a '53."
Finally, if you think I am narcissistic for having a blog...something you manly men wouldn't even consider...then so be it. I don't care. Lots of my friends have blogs - many of them ex-military guys just like you, usmc_helo. I like to fly, I like to read, and I like to write, and I don't make excuses for any of that. If I put out a magazine, would you call me similarly narcissistic? If I wrote a monthly column for a magazine, would you call me narcissistic? Grow up.
If you don't like my blog, then you're welcome to not read it. And I most heartily suggest you do just that. (Apparently, PPRUNE's programming doesn't allow links to blogs, but if you're masochistic enough to want to see mine, it's in my profile (as is my name, and what city I live in). Be warned, I am unbearably narcissistic!
Now, can we please get back to the V-22? Can someone...ANYONE...show me a picture or (preferably) a video of a V-22 hoisting someone on a Stokes litter? I mean, what if that famous "injured sailor" had been on something other than the Bataan - you know, what if he'd been on a ship that wasn't big enough to allow the V-22 to land?
Still waiting....
