Osprey down off Japan, body sighted

[NutLoose]

A US military aircraft with six people on board has crashed off Yakushima Island in south-western Japan, local officials say.

Japan's Coast Guard said one person had been found dead near the crash site of the CV-22 Osprey hybrid plane.

It posted photos of what is believed to be the plane's wreckage off Yakushima.

Japan's NHK broadcaster said the plane's left engine was on fire as it was trying to land at Yakushima Airport on Wednesday.

An eyewitness told local TV that the plane was circling, before exploding and crashing into the sea.

The aircraft was thought to be heading from Iwakuni base in the Yamaguchi region to Kadena base in Okinawa.

Japan's defence ministry said the aircraft disappeared from the radar at 14:40 local time (05:40 GMT) on Wednesday.

The Coast Guard received a distress call seven minutes later, saying the plane had crashed.

It then sent six boats and two helicopters to the scene. At 16:00, the helicopters spotted what looked like a part of the plane and a life raft, a spokesperson told the BBC.

Earlier reports said eight people were on board the aircraft, but that number was later revised down by the coast guard.
Japanese media said the CV-22 Osprey was trying to land at Yakushima Airport when it crashedYakushima, in Kagoshima prefecture, is located south of Japan's Kyushu island.

The Osprey is an aircraft that can function as a helicopter and a turboprop aircraft.

More than 50,000 US troops are stationed across Japan.

Some people living on the island of Okinawa, where the aircraft was headed, had previously voiced concerns about the safety of Osprey planes.

The aircraft has been involved in a string of fatal crashes over the years.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-67563915

[jolihokistix]

For what it’s worth I just watched the interview and the local bloke said the left engine (which was on fire) exploded with a ‘bang’ and he witnessed the propellor spinning off and away as the aircraft went down.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Including this accident, 15 crashes, 54 fatalities (so far).

How many more are required before the Yanks do something about this?

[Lonewolf_50]

Including this accident, 15 crashes, 54 fatalities (so far).
How many more are required before the Yanks do something about this? I suggest that you use the search function on this very sub forum to find the discussion on mishaps per 100,000 hours. Your response is idiotic.

[SASless]

I went to the epitome of aviation safety reporting and found this list summarizing V=22 accidents.

(Note: This is just door step info and not official or very informative)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_V-22_Osprey

[RAFEngO74to09]

The V-22 accident rate is in the 3>4 per 100,000 flying hours range - so less than the F-35, AV-8B, F/A-18 Super Hornet variants, CH-53G and UH-60

https://ig.space/commslink/v-22-osprey-does-it-deserve-its-controversial-reputation

[RAFEngO74to09]

The accident machine is now reported as a USAF - and therefore spec ops - CV-22B operating from Yokota Air Base.

The eye witness reported an engine fire and propeller loss - so obviously absolutely nothing you can do under those circumstances with that type of aircraft..

[RAFEngO74to09]

AFSOC has confirmed from 353rd SOW with 8 POB.

AFSOC Aircraft Mishap Release > Air Force Special Operations Command > Article Display (https://www.afsoc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3600634/afsoc-aircraft-mishap-release/)

[Lonewolf_50]

The accident machine is now reported as a USAF - and therefore spec ops - CV-22B operating from Yokota Air Base.

The eye witness reported an engine fire and propeller loss - so obviously absolutely nothing you can do under those circumstances with that type of aircraft.. Seems a novel / unusual failure mode. I had not heard of that one before this. Will be interested to see what the official report finds.

[DogTailRed2]

What is the survival rate v accident rate of the Osprey? I would imagine it's a particularly difficult aircraft to deal with or abandon due to it's unusual configuration.

[Lyneham Lad]

For the six souls who would appear to have lost their lives - RIP. Condolences to their families.

[lefty loose]

Wednesday November 29 2023, 5.00pm, The Times

(Fumio Kishida, the Japanese prime minister, ordered US forces in the area to suspend flights after the V-22 Osprey plunged into the sea.

Witnesses on the island of Yakushima described how the aircraft approached the local airport, apparently planning an emergency landing, but flipped over and crashed into the sea with its left engine on fire.

“It suddenly turned over through 180 degrees, as if it was flying on its back,” said Kosaku Hirata, 68, who was fishing at the time of the crash on Wednesday afternoon. “After flames became visible, it exploded and fell vertically. A loud sound was heard and there was black smoke.”)

‘Conventional’ fixed and rotary wing aircraft have the ability to maintain limited controlled flight by a combination of glide/autorotation when power failure is evident. I am unfamiliar with the emergency procedures to be adopted with the V22.

[ORAC]

Seems a novel / unusual failure mode. I had not heard of that one before this.
One of the very first crashes, fire in the engine nacelle. Fire occurred when the nacelle was moving from flight to landing configuration.

I mention that because this explosion and crash seems similar and occurred on final approach to the airfield for an emergency landing.

https://flightsafety.org/hs/hs_jul-aug93.pdf

[Uplinker]

Very sad. Always makes me nervous just thinking what-if a V-22 rotor was compromised - no way back from that. RIP to all.

Although the Chinook would presumably have similar fatal controllability problems if they lost a rotor or drive to a rotor ? Presumably the Osprey has cross-over driveshafts to keep both rotors turning if an engine fails? (Would not have helped here of course, as it sounds as if a rotor gearbox broke up).

[Lonewolf_50]

One of the very first crashes, fire in the engine nacelle. Fire occurred when the nacelle was moving from flight to landing configuration.

I mention that because this explosion and crash seems similar and occurred on final approach to the airfield for an emergency landing.

https://flightsafety.org/hs/hs_jul-aug93.pdf Thanks for the memory jog.
RIP, amigos. :suspect:

[sandiego89]

........Presumably the Osprey has cross-over driveshafts to keep both rotors turning if an engine fails? (Would not have helped here of course, as it sounds as if a rotor gearbox broke up)......

It does have have an emergency crossover drive-shaft. During the early program loss at Quantico the cross drive shaft was compromised by fire, and as you state likely irrelevant with a gear box/prop-rotor compromise.

[tdracer]

One of the very first crashes, fire in the engine nacelle. Fire occurred when the nacelle was moving from flight to landing configuration.


There is a 'nacelle drainage' requirement that is intended to help prevent fire when there is a flammable fluid leak in the nacelle. Difficult to meet in a conventional nacelle (especially on an aircraft that has been in service for a while - various bits of debris and FOD tend to block the planned leakage paths) - damn near impossible in something like the Osprey.

[SpazSinbad]

Osprey Crash Wreckage, Remains of 5 Airmen Located 04 Dec 2023
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/osprey-crash-wreckage-airmen-reamins-located/
"After a nearly weeklong search, U.S. and Japanese search teams have located the bulk of the wreckage of the U.S. Air Force CV-22 Osprey that crashed off the coast of southern Japan, along with the remains of most of its crew members...."
________________________

Long article with BIOs of the deceased airmen. AFSOC Aircraft Mishap Releases 03 Dec 2023
Air Force Special Operations Command Public Affairs
https://www.afsoc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3600634/afsoc-aircraft-mishap-releases/

[Lyneham Lad]

In The Times midday update (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-grounds-osprey-aircraft-fleet-worldwide-after-japan-crash-nnc8zjnrl).

The United States military has grounded its worldwide fleet of V-22 Osprey aircraft after a crash off the coast of Japan last week that killed eight service personnel.

The US air force special operations command (AFSOC) said: “Preliminary investigation information indicates a potential materiel failure caused the mishap, but the underlying cause of the failure is unknown at this time.”

Japan, the only other country that uses the hybrid tilt-rotor aircraft, which can land and take off vertically and fly horizontally, suspended flights for its 14 Ospreys immediately after the crash.

Last week’s crash (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-osprey-military-aircraft-crash-japan-lfvdr7qqx) happened during a training flight off the island of Yakushima, about 1,000km (620 miles) southwest of Tokyo. Witnesses said that the aircraft had flipped over and was on fire before it fell into the ocean. The bodies of two of the eight people on board have yet to be recovered.

The Osprey was travelling between a US Marine Corps base on Honshu island and the Kadena air base on the island of Okinawa.

Tony Bauernfeind, commander of the AFSOC, said: “The honourable service of these eight airmen to this great nation will never be forgotten, as they are now among the giants who shape our history.”

Residents of Okinawa, which hosts most of the American military in Japan, have expressed opposition to the deployment of the aircraft on the island because of its safety record. The Japanese Self-Defence Forces deployed Osprey in the Okinawa islands for the first time in October, for joint drills with American troops, prompting a protest from the island’s governor.

More than 50 people have died in crashes involving Ospreys, which are developed by Boeing and Bell Helicopter. Four military personnel were killed in a crash in northern Norway last year, and three US Marines died and 20 more were injured in August this year in a crash in northern Australia (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/record-defence-budget-flexes-japans-muscles-8psndk0jc) during a routine training exercise.

More than 400 of the aircraft are in service across the US air force, navy and Marine Corps.

The Osprey was the first tilt-rotor aircraft put into production. The aircraft have Rolls-Royce engines and can switch from vertical to horizontal flight in about 12 seconds.

The original development costs of $2.5 billion announced in 1986 had ballooned to about $30 billion two years later.

Minoru Kihara, the Japanese defence minister, said today that the country’s Ospreys would remain grounded until further notice, and that he expected the US to “share as much detailed information as possible” about the investigation into the aircraft.

[SLXOwft]

Over a third of the fatalities mentioned in The Times article were due to the tragic loss of 19 US Marines on 8 April 2000 when the starboard rotor of MV-22B 165436 of MX-04 stalled at 245 ft when conducting a simulated rescue.

[212man]

Over a third of the fatalities mentioned in The Times article were due to the tragic loss of 19 US Marines on 8 April 2000 when the starboard rotor of MV-22B 165436 of MX-04 stalled at 245 ft when conducting a simulated rescue.
The technical term is 'vortex ring state' (VRS). The subsequent, exhaustive, investigative test flights earned the Chief Test Pilot (Tom MacDonald) the SETP Kincheloe Award.

[MightyGem]

More on the grounding from Ward Carrol. If you can't see the YouTube link, click on "Quote".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jub8dVQVGSk

[Lonewolf_50]

They are probably getting some info from USAF on the material failure, and are likely doing some one time inspections.

PS: Ward Carroll's video is freaking excellent.

[SASless]

This article should raise some questions.

800 Hour Time Life Component based upon what criteria and data?

Engagement issues seen quite differently by the USMC and USAF.....are they sharing information and working off the same sheet of music?

Why the inability to determine what is actually causing the problem seen in all versions of the aircraft that is seen as a "just live with it" kind of problem?

This accident investigation is going to be very closely scrutinized by Safety experts I am thinking.....as much for how the three services have approached the problem.
The official report into that crash said Ospreys suffered 15 hard clutch engagement failures in roughly 680,000 flight hours. The investigation couldn’t find the root cause but found older aircraft tended to be more vulnerable, so the military mandated that a key gearbox part be replaced after 800 flight hours. It said that would reduce the odds of the problem occurring by 99%, without explaining how it reached that figure.

The Pentagon has awarded the joint venture between Textron’s Bell unit and Boeing contracts worth more than $60 million for new gearbox designs and systems to detect vibrations that might lead to failures. The Pentagon has already undertaken a range of design fixes for the Osprey, many of them ongoing, and revised training programs.



https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/u-s-military-struggles-to-stop-osprey-crashes-after-decades-of-flaws-d1341a69?st=zh5mapmp1tas7vl&reflink=article_email_share

[DogTailRed2]

What's the benefit of the Osprey over a Helicopter? Is it just speed?

[Video Mixdown]

What's the benefit of the Osprey over a Helicopter? Is it just speed?
And range. After that the pro's and con's get more complex. Payload, purchase & operating costs and training and support requirements all move in favour of conventional helicopters. Tiltrotors offer a unique capability but at a high cost. Like everything military, if you need a capability and there's no other way to achieve it the cost can be justified.

[JohnDixson]

SAS: in reading the WSJ article ( and the other stories I’ve seen to date ), I haven’t seen a statement as to how many hours were on the clutches in the Japan fatal.
Not being critical of the folks at Bell/Boeing working on this issue. It is very possible the condition of the crash damaged components has been such that determination of the failure mode is anything but clear. Or something similar. Maybe one or two key pieces have not been found. Whatever it is, it will be very frustrating to the group working the problem. Been involved in one of those….that took 6 months. Pretty sure it had a longevity effect on the good man in charge of that effort.

[jolihokistix]

Salvage vessel now arrived and in place, preparing to lift wreckage. (23 Dec., NHK report in Japanese)
オスプレイ墜落事故 機体主要部分を回収するサルベージ船到着 | NHK | オスプレイ (https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20231223/k10014297781000.html)

[fdr]

The technical term is 'vortex ring state' (VRS). The subsequent, exhaustive, investigative test flights earned the Chief Test Pilot (Tom MacDonald) the SETP Kincheloe Award.

The image below is consistent with the NATOPS GM which showed up in the public domain following the USMC bad day out in Norway last year. The hard clutch engagements are a design concern and I suspect that they are inherent to a system that has the laterally displaced rotor systems. The Marana event was within the onset boundary of the rolloff condition, but being early in the program, the comprehension at all levels of the implications of rolloff and the need to ensure that the operational tasks remained within the profiles & procedures ensuring that the crew remained clear of high risk conditions takes time to become rigidly adhered to.

I have hopes that the clutch issues will be resolved, the tilt rotor designs need the drive transfer system to be reliable and to be engaged when required. Differential torque transmission is always going to be challenging, whether the engines are fuselage or pod mounted.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1980x1016/screenshot_2023_12_23_at_8_05_00_pm_ac8cadb32ffa362560da513e b1d500cdd4aea10b.png


Brand, A., Kisor, R., & Blyth, R. (2004). V-22 HIGH RATE OF DESCENT (HROD) TEST PROCEDURES AND LONG RECORD ANALYSIS.

[SASless]

What does VRS have to do with this accident?

The witness reports the aircraft was on fire and a PropRotor departed the aircraft before it impacted the sea.

Not much to support the onset of VRS as being a contributing factor in that being true.

Are we diverging from the topic of this thread?

[fdr]

For this accident, VRS is not a likely factor, however, taking eyewitness accounts to narrow the scope of the investigation is not a great plan. The clutch and the VRS-related power fluctuations do have potential to be related. The envelope for VRS is well established, and should not 20 years later be a factor, but it was raised in the posts.

Do you suggest that a Prop-Rotor departed in flight? What is the source of that information? The Japanese PM noted that the left engine was apparently "on fire" and a later report indicated that the aircraft rolled over "180" degrees" to being upside down. Those are consistent with a failure of drive, and that comes back to anything that relatest to torque transfer to the prop rotor, which includes the clutch system. There have been enough hard engagements to be of concern, and the consequences of a hard engagement can include a loss of drive to the rotor, which has a fair chance of spoiling everyone's day.

Autorotation is not covered in the MV22 NATOPS or PCL, Perhaps the dash-1 covers something in that area. The suggested power-off sink rate of 18 m/sec is fairly impressive. The 609 and XV-3 were autorotated, the XV-15 had the blade tested in the wind tunnel at NASA Ames, and was estimated to have a sink of 2400 fpm... At 60-80 kias, 18 m/sec is a mighty steep descent. Auto is moot if they are upside down, which suggests a transmission failure assuming that in straight and level cruise it is pretty hard to get into VRS. A drive failure spoils their day and is consistent with reported events.

I think that the V-22 is a neat aircraft, but it has issues, the transmission/clutch is one matter, and the remote possibility of autorotation doesn't make for comfort in a combat aircraft. The IFR handling is tolerable and while it may occasionally be marginal according to the flight test reports early on in some phases, it is within acceptable standards.

[1] Maisel, M. D., Giulianetti, D. J., & Dugan, D. C. (2000). The History of the XV-15 Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft: From Concept to Flight.
[2] REPORT 301-099-005 NASA CONTRACT NAS2-8580. (1976). WIND TUNNEL TEST RESULTS OF 25-FOOT TILT ROTOR DURING AUTOROTATION.
[3] A1-V22AB-NFM-000 NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL NAVY MODEL MV-22B TILTROTOR
[4] A1-V22AB-NFM-500 NATOPS PILOT’S/ AIRCREW POCKET CHECKLIST MV-22B TILTROTOR
[5] Trail, S. B. (2006). Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment Meteorological Environment.

[5] 1-V22AB-NFM-500A1-V22AB-NFM-500

[ORAC]

Do you suggest that a Prop-Rotor departed in flight? What is the source of that information?
See post #2.

​​​​​​​For what it’s worth I just watched the interview and the local bloke said the left engine (which was on fire) exploded with a ‘bang’ and he witnessed the propellor spinning off and away as the aircraft went down.
​​​​​​​

[jolihokistix]

Osprey black box from fatal Japan crash found with data intact, U.S. Air Force says - Japan Today (https://japantoday.com/category/national/Osprey-black-box-from-fatal-Japan-crash-found-with-data-intact-U.S.-Air-Force-says)



WASHINGTON
The Air Force has recovered the flight data recorder from a CV-22B Osprey that crashed off the coast of Japan in late November with its data intact, which could provide valuable clues for investigators as to what caused the fatal accident. Eight Air Force Special Operations Command service members were killed in the Nov 29 crash, which occurred off the coast of Yakushima Island in southwestern Japan. The Osprey was on a routine training flight enroute to Okinawa.　Finding the voice and data recorder, or “black box,” is a critical part of the accident investigation; some black boxes in previous Osprey accidents have not survived those crashes. The recorder is being sent to a lab for data retrieval and analysis of the data is expected to take several weeks, the Air Force said. In addition, the Navy salvage ship USNS Salvor was able to recover most of the Osprey's wreckage from the sea floor and transport it to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni for analysis. The Air Force was able to determine within days of the crash that a material failure — that something went wrong with the aircraft — and not a mistake by the crew — led to the deaths. The military's entire Osprey fleet has been grounded since Dec. 6. The government of Japan, the only international partner flying the Osprey, has also grounded its fleet.

[OnePerRev]

Cause determined?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-pentagon-believes-it-has-identified-the-problem-behind-fatal-osprey-crash-and-grounding-of-fleet

[Lonewolf_50]

ASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon believes it has identified the mechanical failure that led to a fatal crash of an Osprey aircraft in Japan and the grounding of the fleet (https://apnews.com/article/osprey-crash-grounded-japan-air-force-920c0ad16e005adbb0ff22548d7b11c4) for two months, a U.S. defense official told The Associated Press.
The Pentagon’s Joint Safety Council is now working with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps on their plans to get Osprey crews ready to fly again, said Navy Rear Adm. Chris Engdahl, chairman of the council and commander of Naval Safety Command.

The Air Force investigation is continuing into the Nov. 29 Air Force special operations command CV-22 crash, which killed eight service members (https://apnews.com/article/osprey-crash-crew-air-force-japan-2198524cd99fab910e649b10c37fa6bd). The crash led to a rare grounding on Dec. 6 of about 400 Osprey aircraft across the three services. Japan also grounded (https://apnews.com/article/japan-us-osprey-crash-flight-safety-9f8fa6e142f87c989c017beb4fe70378) its fleet of 14 Ospreys following the crash.

The official who said the mechanical failure had been identified declined to say what the failure was. It has opened the door to discussions on return to flight because mitigations can be put in place. The official was not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
They think that they know what the problem is, but are going to take a bit longer to make that public.

[OnePerRev]

The Air Force said Tuesday that investigators have determined a parts failure occurred during an Osprey crash in Japan in November that killed all eight airmen on board, but the root cause of the crash is still unknown.

Air Force Special Operations Command said in a statement that the two investigations into the deadly crash, a Safety Investigation Board probe and an Accident Investigation Board inquiry, are still ongoing.

"At this time, the material failure that occurred is known, but the cause of the failure has not been determined," Air Force Special Operations Command said. "Engineering testing and analysis is ongoing to understand the cause of the material failure, a critical part of the investigation."

This statement is odd.. Sounds like a part failure due to material failure, Sounds like they do in fact understand the material failure, but cannot explain how a material quality concern was not detected, nor an impending failure in a component. This does explain continued grounding however.

[OnePerRev]

Over-running clutches can fundamentally slip, and re-engage. Seems this application has had more than it's fair share. Maybe the metal had issues, but Problem here is the sudden torque spike from the other engine goes through a drive shaft that usually is not loaded much, and could actually be loaded in the opposite direction. This spike could be big enough to bust things, but looks like in the June 2022 case anyway, it caused the remaining side to also have the hard clutch re-engagement. This would never happen in any conventional design where the engines power a gearbox that then powers the rotors. By keeping the engines outboard, that shaft is doomed to experience loads that include this impact- and it appears that the design did not address this load. It is a fundamental catastrophic failure mode that should be predicted and mitigated. Maybe future tiltrotor designs would be better to have inboard engines, and just tilt the prop gearbox.

[ORAC]

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2024/03/01/pentagon-to-lift-osprey-flight-ban-after-fatal-air-force-crash/

Pentagon to lift Osprey flight ban after fatal Air Force crash

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon will lift the ban on flights (https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2024/02/07/pentagon-ids-possible-cause-of-nov-29-osprey-crash-that-killed-8/) by the grounded V-22 Osprey next week, U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Friday, following a high-level meeting where Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin endorsed the military services’ plans for a safe and measured return (https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2024/02/14/timeline-on-returning-ospreys-to-flight-remains-murky-air-force-says/) to operations.

The officials said that Naval Air Systems Command, which grounded the controversial tilt-rotor aircraft about three months ago, will lift it and allow the services to begin implementing their plans to get the Osprey back into the air. Austin met with the top service leaders, including for the Navy and Air Force, on Friday morning, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss plans not yet made public.

The Osprey has been grounded for almost three months following a Nov. 29 Air Force Special Operations Command crash in Japan that killed eight service members. The Japan incident and an earlier August Osprey crash in Australia that killed three Marines are both still under investigation. The Air Force has said that it has identified what failed in the Japan crash, even though it does not know yet why it failed.

The decision to end the flight ban is up to Naval Air Systems Command, but Austin had asked for an informational briefing on the matter because of the significant safety concerns and the fact that three of the services and a critical ally are involved in the program. While Austin does not have approval authority in the return to flight process, U.S. officials said his endorsement of the services’ plan was considered a key step.

In the months since, the services have worked on plans to mitigate the known material failure by conducting additional safety checks and establishing a new, more conservative approach to how the Osprey is operated.

[Sam W]

Finally, the V-22 has been cleared to return to flight. Details are few except that the problem was in the proprotor gearbox. Over the 30+ years of operation this gearbox has shown excellent reliability and no crashes have been attributed to it in over 750K flight hours, I can now see why it has taken so long to study this accident and why they stressed a material failure and not a design issue. The only problem I recall with the proprotor gearbox was due to maintainers using power washers to clean the outer gearbox of Mideast grime against the established practices. This resulted in corrosive cleaning fluid being blown past the mast seal and contaminating internal bearings and gears. If a corrosion pit is the ultimate source of this failure a plausible cause may be obvious.

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/03/08/v-22-osprey-fleet-will-fly-again-with-no-fixes-but-renewed-training/

V-22 Osprey fleet will fly again, with no fixes but renewed training

[RAFEngO74to09]

Fixes for one of the well-known problems with Hard Clutch Engagement funded from 2026 - $48M for 45 kits - full program in due course will cost $138M for 328 kits

U.S. Navy Budgets For V-22 Clutch Upgrade As It Narrows Down On Root Cause | Aviation Week Network (https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/us-navy-budgets-v-22-clutch-upgrade-it-narrows-down-root-cause)

[Sam W]

https://www.twz.com/air/how-the-marines-plan-to-fly-the-mv-22-osprey-into-the-2060s

While the Marines and Navy are flying their Ospreys again, it has been reported that the Air Force has not, almost two months after the ungrounding. The above indicates the Marines/Navy are going all in to keep the Osprey through 2060. Perhaps it is time to transfer the V-22 special op missions from the Air Force to the Marines along with their aircraft. Always seemed that is where they belonged anyway.

[DogTailRed2]

`Fixes for one of` - not sure I would want to fly an aircraft with `so many` potentially fatal failure modes.

[Lonewolf_50]

`Fixes for one of` - not sure I would want to fly an aircraft with `so many` potentially fatal failure modes. Then make sure that you never fly in a helicopter.

[Asturias56]

Then make sure that you never fly in a helicopter.

Yup - all that metal,thrashing around and vibrating at highspeed, and very limited "glide" capability

Sometimes you HAVE to use them but ....................

[Lonewolf_50]

Yup - all that metal,thrashing around and vibrating at highspeed, and very limited "glide" capability
Helicopters do not so much glide as plummet. (To paraphrase a certain sheep farmer)
Do you have any idea how many single points of failure there are in a rotary wing aircraft? As but one example, there was an Apache crash near Houston about 8 years ago where one of the rotary wings departed the aircraft during flight. There is more than one way that such a calamity can happen, (Yes, that one ended in tears).
But people get into helicopters every day.
Maybe DogTailRed2 is playing Chicken Little.

[rattman]

https://www.twz.com/air/how-the-marines-plan-to-fly-the-mv-22-osprey-into-the-2060s

While the Marines and Navy are flying their Ospreys again, it has been reported that the Air Force has not, almost two months after the ungrounding. The above indicates the Marines/Navy are going all in to keep the Osprey through 2060. Perhaps it is time to transfer the V-22 special op missions from the Air Force to the Marines along with their aircraft. Always seemed that is where they belonged anyway.

That report is wrong. USN returned them to flight 8th March. Took a few days before we got the confirmed flight but they have been regularly spotted airborne, particularly the ospreys COD doing supply runs to carriers

[henra]

https://www.twz.com/air/how-the-marines-plan-to-fly-the-mv-22-osprey-into-the-2060s

While the Marines and Navy are flying their Ospreys again, it has been reported that the Air Force has not, almost two months after the ungrounding. The above indicates the Marines/Navy are going all in to keep the Osprey through 2060. Perhaps it is time to transfer the V-22 special op missions from the Air Force to the Marines along with their aircraft. Always seemed that is where they belonged anyway.
I guess it is a balance of necessity and risk. For Navy and Marines the Osprey does play a more critical role in their 'every day business', e.g. in supplying the Carriers and moving troops in general, i.e. without them also others can't 'play'/are massively impeded in 'playing'. In case of the air force it is primarily the crews themselves who are impeded. That shifts the 'return on risk' towards a more prudent approach. I wouldn't read too much into that. It will be fixed and once the balance is considered as being acceptable they will resume flying. They are here to stay.

[henra]

Then make sure that you never fly in a helicopter.
I guess one problem with the perception of risk of the Osprey is that it looks like a chubby, benign Turboprop Transport aircraft - i.e. the ones which have to be actively forced out of the sky while its accident statistics are on a typical helicopter level (which it indeed is), compounded by its points of failure being novel (appearing additional ones while in reality being mostly simply different ones) compared to helicopters.

[Lonewolf_50]

Yes, henra. New tech brings with it its own failure modes. :ok:

[Sam W]

That shifts the 'return on risk' towards a more prudent approach. I wouldn't read too much into that. It will be fixed and once the balance is considered as being acceptable they will resume flying. They are here to stay.

An update on the Air Force’s effort:

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-v-22-osprey-return-to-flight/

Again, it seems that the special ops missions that the Air Force conducts with their V-22’s could better be done by the Navy/Marines using the Air Force’s CV-22’s at a substantial cost savings.