Bell-Boeing start CMV-22B production

[chopper2004]

Bell Boeing to start production of the COD variant CMV-2BB for the Navy. It is replacing the legacy Grumman C-2A Greyhound...

Bell Boeing to begin U.S. Navy CMV-22B production work under $4 billion contract - Bell (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/167303-bell-boeing-to-begin-u-s-navy-cmv-22b-production-work-under-4-billion-contract)

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/926/28290938567_9e055aa46c_b.jpg


cheers

[Davef68]

Can they squeeze in a few for the RN?

[sandiego89]

From here : CMV-22B Osprey | NAVAIR - U.S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command - Navy and Marine Corps Aviation Research, Development, Acquisition, Test and Evaluation (http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.displayPlatform&key=89BACBFC-37A1-4CB9-AFCA-BBCD0266FE4E)
"As compared to the MV-22B, the Navy variant has extended operational range, a beyond line-of-sight HF radio, improved fuel dump capability, a public address system for passengers, and an improved lighting system for cargo loading. The CMV-22B will be capable of transporting up to 6,000 pounds of cargo/personnel to a 1,150 NM range.
The CMV-22B is expected to field with Initial Operational Capability (IOC) and deploy for the first time (projected) in 2021.

Weight: Max. gross, vertical take-off: 52,600 lbs. Short take-off 57,000 lbs (testing in progress to increase)
Airspeed: Cruise: 269 knots
Ceiling: 25,000 feet (7,620 meters).
Range: 1,165 nautical miles
Crew: 4 – pilot, copilot, crew chief, second aircrewman; 23 passengers

Not to minimize the work, but it does sound quite similar to the MV. Should cut down on surprises. I don't think the main cabin has pax air- at least in the MV, so ceiling may be seldom reached.

[Less Hair]

Could they replace the Hawkeye too with some radar version?

[ORAC]

Roll-out of CMV-22 accelerated and retirement if C-2A brought forward from 2027 to 2024.

https://news.usni.org/2018/10/01/navys-cod-transition-c-2a-cmv-22b-accelerated-first-v-22-deployment-set-2021

[Stitchbitch]

Could they replace the Hawkeye too with some radar version?

How about selling them Merlin crows nest? 😜

[cyrilranch]

How about selling them Merlin crows nest? 😜
that was proposed at one time under the marines program called TOSS about10 years back.
using taillift door as the antenna fixing point.

[TBM-Legend]

So what is the RN going to use as a COD?

[chopper2004]

I attended International Military Helicopter conference last week and picked up from Bell a copy of the CMV-22B brochure.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/898x675/a5838bb6_6002_4f7c_885e_00cc9cb18de1_95ed27c552b92ce12e36a63 613626e2f56eccf3e.jpeg

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/fbe0cdde_c264_4492_b4d2_3e5ec3dc69b9_4923910beaf5953b8b4020a 1c7da8e328799296a.jpeg

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x719/1b602696_a9b2_4af4_8d68_4b058ab1afd7_04893f5373af90bd6779b0a ce740260e9df3c821.jpeg

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x960/c94957ef_6510_4ba4_b2eb_01e1b05f9665_61ecd6465127803af4c7f15 fe5470eb056af119c.jpeg


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/928x696/53041f39_ac7a_4871_aa49_f4012aa69262_857d78c231dfa20fa4d19cd 61aa32d5d3caedf96.jpeg

[Evalu8ter]

The RN doesn’t have a COD. The usual nonsense trotted out is that embarked CH47 or Merlin will do the MITL role. Not really a player with a decent payload out to representative Blue Water Ops ranges. Unless, of course, you intend to operate QEC as a large LPH in the Littoral.....Crows Nest is a very cobbled together capability, restricted in usefulness by radar horizon and RIP speeds. V22 would be significantly better in both roles but, it seems, the money has gone and it’s not made in Yeovil....

[chopper2004]

it completes its first flight

Bell Boeing CMV-22B Osprey Successfully Completes First Flight - Bell (news) (http://news.bellflight.com/en-US/184965-bell-boeing-cmv-22b-osprey-successfully-completes-first-flight?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=v22&utm_source=facebook)


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x536/4da6898c_48e7_4bc4_8dea_46a9e762fa97_8cab283456bd3cbef81e43a 37411bff69fe4c2a6.jpeg

[cokecan]

The RN doesn’t have a COD. The usual nonsense trotted out is that embarked CH47 or Merlin will do the MITL role. Not really a player with a decent payload out to representative Blue Water Ops ranges. Unless, of course, you intend to operate QEC as a large LPH in the Littoral.....Crows Nest is a very cobbled together capability, restricted in usefulness by radar horizon and RIP speeds. V22 would be significantly better in both roles but, it seems, the money has gone and it’s not made in Yeovil....

i'm somewhat struggling to imagine what a COD aircraft can bring to a carrier that a Chinook and a 40,000 ton RFA thats 2 miles away can't?

F-35B engine?

Chinook gearbox?

two dozen 500lb Paveways?

with a top range of 1000 miles or so, a CMV-22B isn't exactly blue water navy capability either - indeed i'd be interested to see the working that shows a UK operation in the last 40 years (or any other time period you can think of) where a Carrier group on operations could be supplied from land by a CMV-22B but not by Chinook...

[Mil-26Man]

i'm somewhat struggling to imagine what a COD aircraft can bring to a carrier that a Chinook and a 40,000 ton RFA thats 2 miles away can't?

F-35B engine?

Chinook gearbox?

two dozen 500lb Paveways?

Indeed, why can't the QE and PoW carry those things itself? They're big old ships, and with only a dozen or so F-35Bs set to be embarked at any time there must be plenty of space for spares and the like.

with a top range of 1000 miles or so, a CMV-22B isn't exactly blue water navy capability either

The CMV-22B had additional fuel for an extended range capability of 1, 150 n miles, but your point is a good one.

[sandiego89]

Rather smart looking in the white and gray scheme. Guess I'll be seeing more of these- I live near Norfolk, Virginia and am quite accustomed to C-2, E-2, F/A-18's, H-60's and the very distinctive sounding MH-53 which you feel more than hear....

[tdracer]

Good explanation of the needs for the Greyhound and CMV-22B here:

https://www.airspacemag.com/airspacemag/greyhound-and-osprey-180973131/

BTW, a bit confused by this little tidbit in Sandiego's post:
improved fuel dump capability
Why would a vertical takeoff aircraft require that? Surely if it's capable of a vertical takeoff, it can land at the same weight, or am I missing something?

[ORAC]

I am presuming, as with the Harrier, it can do a rolling take-off at far above its vertical landing weight.

[Evalu8ter]

Cokecan et al.
What can't it bring? Anything or anybody you didn't think about pre-deployment. If we had an infallible crystal ball or unlimited LIMs of course you could have the RFAs stocked against any possibility. The real world isn't like that….

[ORAC]

And with the shared supply network, the other users would be pissed off to find the spares were all stockpiled halfway across the Indian Ocean.

I am reminded of the past where RAF Rapier units couldn’t find any spares in the system - to find one army unit had taken about a dozen, which weren’t shown in the database, and had them stored away in a cupboard just in case they might need them in the future....

[sandiego89]

Good explanation of the needs for the Greyhound and CMV-22B here:

https://www.airspacemag.com/airspacemag/greyhound-and-osprey-180973131/

BTW, a bit confused by this little tidbit in Sandiego's post:

Why would a vertical takeoff aircraft require that? Surely if it's capable of a vertical takeoff, it can land at the same weight, or am I missing something?

Safe landing weight is often well less than takeoff weight. Also important if one of the two engines is lost (Osprey has emergency cross shafting where one engine can turn both prop-rotors) where dumping fuel quickly would be desired. You always want a good power/weight margin especially at sea for waive offs etc.

[beardy]

Was not the Greyhound designed around special weapon sizes?

[Asturias56]

IIRC it was the size of various jet engines that was the design driver

[ORAC]

Excellent article about flying the C-2A.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/16535/confessions-of-a-c-2-greyhound-carrier-onboard-delivery-pilot

[tdracer]

IIRC it was the size of various jet engines that was the design driver
Which is one disadvantage of the Osprey - from the Air & Space article I linked previously:On the plus side, the CMV-22 will fly farther with more weight—1,150 nautical miles with a 6,000-pound payload on a tropical day, versus 850 nm for the C-2. It will use a palletized cargo system that sailors can load beforehand, meaning it will spend even less time on deck than the bulk-loaded Greyhound. Vertical takeoff and landing makes for slow approaches to the carrier and ends the need for hair-raising, airframe-stressing arrested landings and catapulted takeoffs. The first CMV‑22 pilots are training to land at night, a task all but mythical for the C-2.

But the Osprey also has a few strikes against it. It has less interior space, and so cannot carry as many people or as much cargo; nor will it fit an assembled F-35 engine inside its protective canister, one of the COD’s primary requirements.

[T28B]

/not as a mod
Some of you may not be aware that the American Navy is not dependent upon air for resupply (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underway_replenishment) at sea.
The RAF is occasionally myopic in its world view.
This myopia appears to have infected some of our frequent contributors.

[GreenKnight121]

As for range... remember that every V-22 variant (including the CMV-22B) is equipped with a retractable refueling probe - thus its actual range is "tanker availability/crew endurance/engine run-time".

Note also that the C-2 Greyhound was NOT equipped for mid-air refueling (although this could have been easily done).

The CMV-22 actually has a higher max internal cargo weight than the C-2A* (even though a smaller internal volume) - and the height/width of the cargo compartment is similar** but not identical. The higher ceiling in the CMV-22B means that some cargoes fit in there that wouldn't in the C-2.

Neither can carry an assembled F135 engine in its shipping container (only the proposed CS-3 Viking could have), but both can carry all sections of a F-35 engine - including the lift-fan of the -B - in an open transport frame (which has been developed and tested), just not fully assembled.

They have similar cruise speeds (V-22 241kt, C-2A 260kt), and the CMV-22 can operate off a larger set of ships - all helo-capable amphibs, as well as flight-deck-equipped destroyers, etc - meaning many cargoes would not have to be landed on a CVN then transferred to an H-60 to be taken to their destination ship.

Yes, the CMV-22 has only a 26,000ft service ceiling compared to the 33,500 of the C-2A.



* C-2A "max useful load" (including fuel) 20,608lb; max cargo weight from land 15,000lb; max cargo weight catapult launch 10,000lb

V-22 max cargo weight 20,000lb internal, 10,000lb slung load single hook, 15,000lb slung load dual-hook

A comment on max cargo weight - this is where mid-air refueling helps. Many aircraft (fighters, transports, etc) cannot take off with both a max fuel load and max payload... either they take off with full fuel and reduced payload or full payload and reduced fuel. If you do the latter in the CMV-22B, then you just top off from a tanker once airborne.


** C-2A cargo hold
Length: 27 ft 6 in (8.38 m); Width: 7 ft 4 in (2.24 m); Height: 5 ft 5 in (1.65m)

V-22 cargo hold
Length: 24 feet, 4 inches (7.41m); Width: 5 feet, 11 inches (1.80m); Height: 6 feet (1.83m)

[RAFEngO74to09]

First CMV-22B delivered - 7 February 2020 https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-navy-receives-first-cmv-22b-osprey.html

[sandiego89]

I wonder if the CMV will also spend much time doing the VERTREP mission (sling load) to and from the replenishment ships. Can be much quicker than internal carry for certain loads.

[RAFEngO74to09]

First CMV-22B assigned to VRM-30 arriving at NAS North Island, CA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7bKh3eRkP4

[SLXOwft]

Which is one disadvantage of the Osprey - from the Air & Space article I linked previously:

Quote:
On the plus side, the CMV-22 will fly farther with more weight—1,150 nautical miles with a 6,000-pound payload on a tropical day, versus 850 nm for the C-2. It will use a palletized cargo system that sailors can load beforehand, meaning it will spend even less time on deck than the bulk-loaded Greyhound. Vertical takeoff and landing makes for slow approaches to the carrier and ends the need for hair-raising, airframe-stressing arrested landings and catapulted takeoffs. The first CMV‑22 pilots are training to land at night, a task all but mythical for the C-2.

But the Osprey also has a few strikes against it. It has less interior space, and so cannot carry as many people or as much cargo; nor will it fit an assembled F-35 engine inside its protective canister, one of the COD’s primary requirements.


TDRacer, as I am sure you are aware, the article is somewhat disingenuous regarding F135 transport - it doesn't fit inside the special container but it can be carried as GreenKnight121 said.

The (US) Marine Corps can transport their F135-PW-600s for '35Bs in MV-22s in what I will call a suboptimal manner (the engine is exposed to the elements during (off)loading).

NAWCAD Cargo Lab Refines Skid for F-35 Engine Power Module (https://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodlive.mil/2017/08/31/nawcad-cargo-lab-refines-skid-for-f-35-engine-power-module/)

NAVAIR says the USN will be using the CMV-22s to move F135s for its F-35Cs. I assume using the same methods.

CMV-22 ferry flight demonstrates successful fusion of developmental, operational test (https://www.navair.navy.mil/news/CMV-22-ferry-flight-demonstrates-successful-fusion-developmental-operational-test/Fri-04102020)

I hope the (UK) Royal Navy will get the same capability at some distant point. Also the RoRo refueling and RoRo ISAR capabilities.:)

[ORAC]

https://www.twz.com/news-features/cmv-22b-osprey-not-operationally-suitable-according-to-test-report

CMV-22B Osprey “Not Operationally Suitable” According To Test Report

Pentagon testers highlight major issues with the Navy’s Osprey as the entire V-22 fleet remains grounded following a deadly crash.

[BiISTAR]

CMV-22B Osprey “Not Operationally Suitable” According To Test Report

Pentagon testers highlight major issues with the Navy’s Osprey as the entire V-22 fleet remains grounded following a deadly crash.
that’s a fairly big oops moment!

[Lonewolf_50]

The Cv-22 USAF crash in November led to the grounding. Recent DoD press release is that they have figured out that issue and are working together, tri service, to implement a return to ops.
Marines have been firing them up and running them around on the ground, apparently, to keep the juices flowing.
I suspect that for the COD V-22 that issue being resolved removes obstacles.

[Sam W]

that’s a fairly big oops moment!

BiI

What was the last aircraft they did approve of on the first eval? I don’t remember any. As to low ice protection reliability; that seems to be a common thing on rotorcraft.