Well...you know...
I've never known a pilot who disliked the aircraft he was flying. Most pilots *love* whatever turd they're assigned to, even if it's the biggest piece of crap to ever be pooped off an assembly line.
People denigrate the old FH1100. But you know what? I loved flying it. It did what we asked it to do, and did it very well. The brand-spanking-new R-66 won't be leaps and bounds "better" than an FH1100 from the 1970s. It might be a little faster and carry a little more, but I guarantee that it won't be nearly as robust, or as easy to service. The R-66 is evolutionary, not revolutionary. Just like the V-22.
But let's back up. Just because a pilot loves an aircraft doesn't mean sh*t. Should we put pilots in charge of military procurement? Of course not, they cannot be objective. They just want what they want. V-22 pilots think that the Osprey is the bestest tool for the job. The truth is that no matter what they claim, in most cases it doesn't provide *that* much of an improvement over a helicopter.
V-22 proponents will trot out specific scenarios in which it betters the capability of a helicopter (the laughable "Shiek needs to be across the country for a meeting with other shieks" thing). Yes, it flies fast. And yes, it can exit the scene with great speed...if it makes it in safely, that is.
Okay, fine. Big deal. Whenver a V-22 goes anywhere, it must do so with other assets. Because when it gets to the destination, it's just a big ol' vulnerable Grayhound bus coming into the station.
At the end of the day, it's still a flawed design. In helicopter mode, it is not "a" helicopter. It's
two-helicopters-connected-by-a-stick. Any idiot can see the problems inherent in this design.
One of the original test pilots on the V-22 has told us that they
stopped combat-maneuvering tests when they realized how much stress and strain it was putting on the
fuselage. But we shouldn't listen to him, eh?
Now we hear reports of mothballed V-22's that are no longer flyable. I suspect that the military and the manufacturer are hiding from us the fact that V-22 airframes are not lasting. I suspect that some V-22's are being retired before they have a catastrophic stuctural failure. We still do not have an accurate accounting of all V-22's that have been built so far and how many are still in service. That information will be hidden from the public for as long as possible.
I cringe when I think about the forces acting on the ends of a V-22's wings during extreme maneuvering. How heavy
are those engines and proprotors? And how heavy do they become in a 2g turn? What kind of forces do they exert on the wingspars during maneuvering that might involve both positive
and negative-g? Oh, and by the way, in airplane mode the V-22 is limited to negative .75g. Less than 1g negative?? For a combat aircraft??? That's like...what...a Bell 47?
And remember, those aren't just big props out there on the ends of the wings. They're pro
protors. How does extreme maneuvering in airplane mode affect those proprotors? What kind of flapping forces are they subjected to? We know that the swashplates aren't lasting anywhere near as long as hoped, so the forces have to be unreal.
The line pilots will never acknowledge the weaknesses of the design. They'll never admit what the real limitations are. We know that the original NATOPS warned pilots that:
- Air Combat Maneuvering and aerobatics are prohibited
- Abrupt multi-axis control inputs are prohibited
There are so many other dire warnings and limitations that to publish them here would require more bandwidth than the PPRUNE owners are probably willing to expend. Here's one that caught my eye though- and it's especially noteworthy in light of the most recent accident that we've all been discussing lately:
WARNING: Rapid full forward TCL (full throw in 1 second or less) may result in uncontrollable aircraft nose down pitch tumble departure exhibited during flight simulations.
There are other power limitations too. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine that when the pilot of the V-22 realized that his descent rate was too high, he jammed the TCL forward in an effort to save their lives. This may have had an undesireable effect on the aircraft handling, and it may very well have overtorqued/overtemped the engines, causing the smoke/vapor coming from
both engines that was visible in the camera footage from the A-10s circling overhead. Because no matter how badly Brig. General Harvel wants to believe otherwise, the likelihood of a
dual engine problem in that V-22 at that exact moment just defies belief and stretches logic to the breaking point. Sorry, General.
No what the
pilots say about how great the V-22 is, we have to take that with a huge grain of salt. BoomOpCT, you say we need to listen to guys like Mcpave and Ospreydriver? Hmm, they've both been strangely and coincidentally silent lately. I suspect that their commanding officer(s) got wind of their increasingly hysterical, increasingly irrational (and potentially harmful) posts on here and ordered them to back off.
Finally, the V-22 is just too damn expensive for the small increase in capability it provides over a helicopter. That alone justifies its cancellation. Dick Cheney knew this. We should have listened to
him back then. At least it's not too late.
BoomOpCT, you ought to rethink your career path in the Air Force. The V-22 will most assuredly be cancelled very soon. This will save the American taxpayers
billions of dollars. And it will probably save some lives as well. I'm a conservative American: I'm for BOTH of those things. Anyone who isn't does not have the best interests of this country in mind.