What's the latest news of the V22 Osprey?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest model comes with "Cone Of Silence" option (?) !
Miramar welcomes whisper-quiet Osprey
By Jeanette Steele, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER Friday, December 18, 2009 at 5:35 p.m.
K.C. Alfred / Union-Tribune
Marines keep an eye on a new MV-22 Osprey, which was displayed during a news conference at MCAS Miramar on Friday.
The Marine Corps’ new helicopter-airplane combo, the MV-22 Osprey, has landed in San Diego. And to hear Marine officials tell the story, it did so with a whisper.
“If you are worried about noise, the MV-22 ought to be very welcome,” Osprey squadron commander Lt. Col. Evan LeBlanc said during a Friday news conference at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station.
An F/A-18 Hornet fighter jet roared by as LeBlanc stood on the flight line. “It’s not even close to that,” he said.
The Osprey is six times quieter than the helicopter it replaces, the dual-rotored CH-46, according to the Marine Corps.
Miramar has received one Osprey, the much-touted but also much-derided aircraft that takes off like a helicopter and flies like a plane. It could eventually get up to eight squadrons, while Camp Pendleton could get two. Both bases will need to build or renovate some hangars to accommodate the arrivals.
Ospreys were first sent to a war zone — Iraq — in September 2007. Now it’s also being used in Afghanistan, piloted by Marine squadrons from the East Coast.
Marine commanders tout the Osprey, which took nearly three decades to develop, as revolutionary. They credit its speediness with “shrinking” the battlefield in Iraq, its first real test. The aircraft also puts troops above the reach of ground rockets with its high-altitude flying.
But critics and skeptics continue to point out that Ospreys haven’t lived up to the military’s hype. The aircraft also has cost more than double the budgeted amount.
In a May report, the U.S. Government Accountability Office raised a list of concerns. The authors questioned the Marine Corps’ decision to stick to the MV-22 as its future prime method for transporting troops by air.
“Identified challenges could limit the ability to conduct worldwide operations,” the GAO report said. “Efforts are underway to address these deficiencies, but some are inherent in the MV-22’s design.”
The Osprey is marketed as a fast bird.
It’s rated for carrying 24 fully equipped Marines at a cruising speed of about 288 mph, compared with 155 mph for the CH-46.
But that advantage, and other features, have straind the Pentagon budget much more than expected. Initial estimates pegged the Osprey’s cost at $37.7 million each based on an order of 1,000 aircraft. Instead, the Pentagon is paying $93.4 million each for an overall order of 500.
In all, the Osprey has cost taxpayers $54.8 billion, including about $12.5 billion for research and development and roughly $42 billion for procurement.
There’s been another cost: lives. Four Osprey crashes — all during test flights — have killed 30 people.
President George W. Bush proposed ending the MV-22 program in 1989 and continued to seek cancellation through 1992. Congress rejected these proposals, mostly because of the Marine Corps’ strong support of the aircraft.
Miramar pilots who have flown the Osprey give it high marks.
“I feel perfectly comfortable in this aircraft,” said LeBlanc, who flew the Osprey on raiding missions in Iraq. “I wouldn’t fly it if I didn’t think it was safe.”
His squadron’s pilots and crews are undergoing Osprey training. They won’t be certified as combat-ready for up to two years, LeBlanc said.
By Jeanette Steele, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER Friday, December 18, 2009 at 5:35 p.m.
K.C. Alfred / Union-TribuneMarines keep an eye on a new MV-22 Osprey, which was displayed during a news conference at MCAS Miramar on Friday.
The Marine Corps’ new helicopter-airplane combo, the MV-22 Osprey, has landed in San Diego. And to hear Marine officials tell the story, it did so with a whisper.
“If you are worried about noise, the MV-22 ought to be very welcome,” Osprey squadron commander Lt. Col. Evan LeBlanc said during a Friday news conference at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station.
An F/A-18 Hornet fighter jet roared by as LeBlanc stood on the flight line. “It’s not even close to that,” he said.
The Osprey is six times quieter than the helicopter it replaces, the dual-rotored CH-46, according to the Marine Corps.
Miramar has received one Osprey, the much-touted but also much-derided aircraft that takes off like a helicopter and flies like a plane. It could eventually get up to eight squadrons, while Camp Pendleton could get two. Both bases will need to build or renovate some hangars to accommodate the arrivals.
Ospreys were first sent to a war zone — Iraq — in September 2007. Now it’s also being used in Afghanistan, piloted by Marine squadrons from the East Coast.
Marine commanders tout the Osprey, which took nearly three decades to develop, as revolutionary. They credit its speediness with “shrinking” the battlefield in Iraq, its first real test. The aircraft also puts troops above the reach of ground rockets with its high-altitude flying.
But critics and skeptics continue to point out that Ospreys haven’t lived up to the military’s hype. The aircraft also has cost more than double the budgeted amount.
In a May report, the U.S. Government Accountability Office raised a list of concerns. The authors questioned the Marine Corps’ decision to stick to the MV-22 as its future prime method for transporting troops by air.
“Identified challenges could limit the ability to conduct worldwide operations,” the GAO report said. “Efforts are underway to address these deficiencies, but some are inherent in the MV-22’s design.”
The Osprey is marketed as a fast bird.
It’s rated for carrying 24 fully equipped Marines at a cruising speed of about 288 mph, compared with 155 mph for the CH-46.
But that advantage, and other features, have straind the Pentagon budget much more than expected. Initial estimates pegged the Osprey’s cost at $37.7 million each based on an order of 1,000 aircraft. Instead, the Pentagon is paying $93.4 million each for an overall order of 500.
In all, the Osprey has cost taxpayers $54.8 billion, including about $12.5 billion for research and development and roughly $42 billion for procurement.
There’s been another cost: lives. Four Osprey crashes — all during test flights — have killed 30 people.
President George W. Bush proposed ending the MV-22 program in 1989 and continued to seek cancellation through 1992. Congress rejected these proposals, mostly because of the Marine Corps’ strong support of the aircraft.
Miramar pilots who have flown the Osprey give it high marks.
“I feel perfectly comfortable in this aircraft,” said LeBlanc, who flew the Osprey on raiding missions in Iraq. “I wouldn’t fly it if I didn’t think it was safe.”
His squadron’s pilots and crews are undergoing Osprey training. They won’t be certified as combat-ready for up to two years, LeBlanc said.
[They won’t be certified as combat-ready for up to two years, LeBlanc said.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UAE
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it's about time they finally got approval to install the "whisper kit" option, after all that was available decades ago on 'Airwolf'!!
(tiltrotors may be 'less noisy,' but they have not quite reached the 'whisper mode' yet)
(tiltrotors may be 'less noisy,' but they have not quite reached the 'whisper mode' yet)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does 32 troops include gear and the aircrew?
Enter the Osprey
January 3, 2010 12:36 am
An MV-22 Osprey spreads its wings over Yuma, Ariz., in 2009. The controversial aircraft has now entered the war in Afghanistan.
WHO CAN BLAME the Osprey for having a military-indus- trial complex? Since the abysmal failure in 1980 of the Iranian hostage-rescue attempt (aka, Jimmy Carter's Desert Classic), efforts to develop an aircraft that can fly long distances like a transport plane, yet hover, take off, and land like a helicopter, have been failure-fraught and hugely expensive. But the ungainly bird, used mainly by the Marines, may now prove its worth in Afghanistan
If so, it's high time--because tragedy and fiscal folly have long haunted the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey, as the tilt-rotor craft is officially known.
Between 1992 and 2000, three test crashes of the hard-to-fly, technically troubled hybrid killed 30 people. The first crash occurred in Fredericksburg's backyard when, to the horror of congressmen and others watching from Quantico Marine Corps Base, an Osprey plummeted into the Potomac River, killing all seven aboard. An even more terrible accident took place in Arizona in April 2000 when, during a simulated rescue mission, an Osprey loaded with Marines dropped out of the sky, killing all 19 on board. Eight months later a V-22 mechanical glitch in Jacksonville, N.C., claimed a four-man crew, including Lt. Col. Keith Sweaney of Stafford County, who was to have led the Corps' first Osprey squadron.
The Osprey's cost overruns form a parallel disaster. In 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to kill the whole program after its development budget had ballooned from $2.5 billion to $30 billion, but Congress blocked him. Now, some $54.2 billion will have been spent on the bird before its evolution is complete--an inflation caused by re-engineering requirements and unforeseen maintenance demands.
Moreover, in Iraq, where 12 Ospreys flew from 2007-09, the craft's performance drew jeers from the Government Accounting Office for mediocre performance. This isn't what one wants to hear about a craft that costs $120 million each to put into battle.
But the Marines, who stand by their awkward transport, believe that in sprawling, rugged Afghanistan the Osprey will show its mettle. It may. The aircraft is so fast, notes military.com, that it can make two round trips for every one a helicopter can complete, dropping up to 32 troops or 71/2 tons of material in a combat zone--say, the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province.
There, in the first big offensive since President Obama's Dec. 1 speech, 10 Ospreys are dodging Taliban bullets while supplying over 1,000 Marines and allied troops that they earlier helped ferry to the valley during "Operation Cobra's Anger." (Iraq's Ospreys arrived in Anbar Province just as the "Sunni Awakening" was cooling that place, so the craft's combat-effectiveness was hard to judge.) Lt. Gen. George Trautman III, the Marines' deputy commandant for aviation, says that the swift Osprey has turned the Afghan battle space "from Texas into Rhode Island."
In ancient times, people believed that the mere sight of the bird of prey from which the Marine aircraft takes its name caused fish to go belly-up. One doubts that the V-22 will have the same effect on Taliban fighters. But if the Osprey crucially helps the U.S. prevail in that difficult war, the plane will have earned its exceedingly costly wings.
January 3, 2010 12:36 am
An MV-22 Osprey spreads its wings over Yuma, Ariz., in 2009. The controversial aircraft has now entered the war in Afghanistan. WHO CAN BLAME the Osprey for having a military-indus- trial complex? Since the abysmal failure in 1980 of the Iranian hostage-rescue attempt (aka, Jimmy Carter's Desert Classic), efforts to develop an aircraft that can fly long distances like a transport plane, yet hover, take off, and land like a helicopter, have been failure-fraught and hugely expensive. But the ungainly bird, used mainly by the Marines, may now prove its worth in Afghanistan
If so, it's high time--because tragedy and fiscal folly have long haunted the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey, as the tilt-rotor craft is officially known.
Between 1992 and 2000, three test crashes of the hard-to-fly, technically troubled hybrid killed 30 people. The first crash occurred in Fredericksburg's backyard when, to the horror of congressmen and others watching from Quantico Marine Corps Base, an Osprey plummeted into the Potomac River, killing all seven aboard. An even more terrible accident took place in Arizona in April 2000 when, during a simulated rescue mission, an Osprey loaded with Marines dropped out of the sky, killing all 19 on board. Eight months later a V-22 mechanical glitch in Jacksonville, N.C., claimed a four-man crew, including Lt. Col. Keith Sweaney of Stafford County, who was to have led the Corps' first Osprey squadron.
The Osprey's cost overruns form a parallel disaster. In 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to kill the whole program after its development budget had ballooned from $2.5 billion to $30 billion, but Congress blocked him. Now, some $54.2 billion will have been spent on the bird before its evolution is complete--an inflation caused by re-engineering requirements and unforeseen maintenance demands.
Moreover, in Iraq, where 12 Ospreys flew from 2007-09, the craft's performance drew jeers from the Government Accounting Office for mediocre performance. This isn't what one wants to hear about a craft that costs $120 million each to put into battle.
But the Marines, who stand by their awkward transport, believe that in sprawling, rugged Afghanistan the Osprey will show its mettle. It may. The aircraft is so fast, notes military.com, that it can make two round trips for every one a helicopter can complete, dropping up to 32 troops or 71/2 tons of material in a combat zone--say, the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province.
There, in the first big offensive since President Obama's Dec. 1 speech, 10 Ospreys are dodging Taliban bullets while supplying over 1,000 Marines and allied troops that they earlier helped ferry to the valley during "Operation Cobra's Anger." (Iraq's Ospreys arrived in Anbar Province just as the "Sunni Awakening" was cooling that place, so the craft's combat-effectiveness was hard to judge.) Lt. Gen. George Trautman III, the Marines' deputy commandant for aviation, says that the swift Osprey has turned the Afghan battle space "from Texas into Rhode Island."
In ancient times, people believed that the mere sight of the bird of prey from which the Marine aircraft takes its name caused fish to go belly-up. One doubts that the V-22 will have the same effect on Taliban fighters. But if the Osprey crucially helps the U.S. prevail in that difficult war, the plane will have earned its exceedingly costly wings.
Fixed It For Ya!
USMC V-22 Osprey Finds Groove In Afghanistan
Jan 12, 2010
By Bettina H. Chavanne
Washington
The V-22 Osprey’s range and speed, the twin talents of the aircraft most heavily promoted by the U.S. Marine Corps, are revealing themselves in Afghanistan, as readiness and reliability numbers begin to climb steadily throughout the fleet.
Lt. Gen. George Trautman, deputy commandant for aviation, says the level of hostile action experienced by the V-22s in Afghanistan is slightly higher than in Iraq. He calls Afghanistan “a different fight. There’s more kinetic work to be done.” Yet he takes exception to those who criticized the aircraft’s performance in Iraq. “Uninformed critics said we babied the aircraft [there],” he says, noting that the V-22 primarily ferried passengers and cargo, the primary mission of assault-support aircraft. “Because peace broke out, it didn’t do much in the way of [flying] into the heart of enemy assaults."
In Afghanistan however, the Osprey has flown several combat missions, one in support of Special Operations Command. “Just a couple of aircraft in the middle of the night, [flew directly] into the enemy stronghold,” says Trautman. “It was a complete mission success.”
Additionally, during major operations in Now Zad, in the Helmand Province, Marine Corps’ Ospreys arrived from different directions at 3 a.m. “with speed and range the enemy didn’t expect,” Trautman says. “The Osprey was the most important participant in getting a reinforced company into that town in short order.” More important, the Osprey flew “two loads in the time it took the CH-53 to do one.”
The aircraft has also been beefed up recently with an all-quadrant gun, which rolls on and off. There are five guns in theater for 10 V-22s, and Trautman anticipates more in the future.
Marine Corps senior leadership has been building its case against V-22 critics for decades. With operations in Afghanistan clearly demonstrating the flexibility of the aircraft in combat, the task stateside is to continue doggedly chipping away at low reliability and readiness numbers
These efforts are starting to yield results. The Osprey’s readiness rate has hovered at about 62% for months, but operations in Afghanistan have seen that number rising steadily, according to Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, who cites numbers in the 70-80% range. “It’s on that trajectory” to 90%, he claimed enthusiastically at the Pentagon last month Trautman, who is tracking V-22 readiness rates across the entire fleet, says Block B aircraft are at 65%. “We can trend up to the 70s [percent range] with aggressive sparing."
The goal for the Marines is “to drive home operational readiness and mission dependability,” says V-22 program manager Col. Greg Masiello. “My top three initiatives are simple: availability, affordability and execution.”
Both Trautman and Masiello push constantly for improvement, leaning on the Bell-Boeing manufacturing team to drive more efficiency into the maintenance process and support increased depot-level work by the Marines. Masiello calls it “a full-court press on readiness and reduction in cost,” with a focus on the overall fleet, not just operational aircraft. We spend lots of time putting plans in place,” Masiello says. “It takes discipline and tenacity to make sure we’re executing to plan.” He is looking beyond the current contract to a second multi-year contract. “The time to do that is now,” he insists, noting that thinking strategically, and garnering support for future efforts will pay off down the road. “I need to continue to purchase [the V-22] and provide stability in the industrial base and in fielding the aircraft.”
Topping Masiello’s wish list is a new, fully instrumented test aircraft—an unusual, and unusually urgent, request.
People ask why I’m prioritizing a developmental test aircraft” for an aircraft that has already been fielded, says Masiello. The program office, based at NAS Patuxent River, Md., already has one structural test aircraft in the hangar, but it is the No. 8 airplane. “It’s the oldest aircraft we have flying,” Masiello says. “And it’s exorbitant to operate,” costing about 330 maintenance man-hours per flight hour.
Why is a test aircraft so important at this stage in the V-22’s service life? Block C modifications are already underway, several new squadrons are being stood up stateside—MV-22s at Miramar, Calif., and CV-22s at Cannon AFB, N.M.—and the aircraft is flying at high tempo in Afghanistan. “We’re broadening the footprint of the program operationally,” Masiello says. “That brings some challenges to make sure we have the right support across the nation and the globe.”
Masiello’s primary focus for today’s fleet is building “a robust capability throughout our operating bases” and for deployed aircraft.
An up-to-date test article would provide the opportunity to field future aircraft with properly tested advanced capabilities. The services should know how best to exploit all the V-22’s capabilities today, Masiello says. Sometimes, he notes, “we don’t make huge changes on the aircraft, we tweak the software. Testing [software] on an instrumented aircraft tells me” if there are going to be any second-order effects that might require changes before being sent out to the fleet.
Looking much further down the road, a modernized test aircraft would eventually prove helpful in mapping out a service life-extension program (SLEP) for the V-22, Masiello says. “We need structural testing done . . . and envelope expansion” for high-altitude operations.
A new instrumented aircraft package costs $65 million, according to Masiello. He has put in a request for an Osprey test platform, but recognizes that a tight budget may limit his options, and says he hopes not to feel an “adverse impact” from the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review. Despite that, Masiello says an instrumented test aircraft is essential. “I believe it has to be done, and we’ll continue to champion the case.”
Throughout the fleet, Masiello says, he wants to ensure “we’re not addressing only new capabilities, but [examining] other inherent benefits to retrofitting [new capabilities] and prioritizing” which aircraft will receive the upgrade. As the fleet grows, so does the bill to maintain and upgrade it. Masiello says he has met with Bell-Boeing on reducing costs. “We’re making sure we set goals,” he continues. “We don’t target specific things like [operations in] Iraq or Afghanistan. It’s about the fleet in general.” The entire fleet, he adds, should always be “ready for combatant commanders to use where and when they need it.”
Trautman has had his own conversations with Bell-Boeing, with an eye to building aircraft readiness directly into the contract. “The key is getting contractual arrangements exactly right,” he says, “and allowing the contracts to catch up to the way the V-22 is actually performing.” One result of his efforts: in January, Bell-Boeing will sign a firm, fixed-price contract for performance-based logistics with the Marines.
“This is a very long program in development, but a very new aircraft in operational use,” Masiello says. “We’re learning every day what will help us mature it.”
Jan 12, 2010
By Bettina H. Chavanne
Washington
The V-22 Osprey’s range and speed, the twin talents of the aircraft most heavily promoted by the U.S. Marine Corps, are revealing themselves in Afghanistan, as readiness and reliability numbers begin to climb steadily throughout the fleet.
Lt. Gen. George Trautman, deputy commandant for aviation, says the level of hostile action experienced by the V-22s in Afghanistan is slightly higher than in Iraq. He calls Afghanistan “a different fight. There’s more kinetic work to be done.” Yet he takes exception to those who criticized the aircraft’s performance in Iraq. “Uninformed critics said we babied the aircraft [there],” he says, noting that the V-22 primarily ferried passengers and cargo, the primary mission of assault-support aircraft. “Because peace broke out, it didn’t do much in the way of [flying] into the heart of enemy assaults."
In Afghanistan however, the Osprey has flown several combat missions, one in support of Special Operations Command. “Just a couple of aircraft in the middle of the night, [flew directly] into the enemy stronghold,” says Trautman. “It was a complete mission success.”
Additionally, during major operations in Now Zad, in the Helmand Province, Marine Corps’ Ospreys arrived from different directions at 3 a.m. “with speed and range the enemy didn’t expect,” Trautman says. “The Osprey was the most important participant in getting a reinforced company into that town in short order.” More important, the Osprey flew “two loads in the time it took the CH-53 to do one.”
The aircraft has also been beefed up recently with an all-quadrant gun, which rolls on and off. There are five guns in theater for 10 V-22s, and Trautman anticipates more in the future.
Marine Corps senior leadership has been building its case against V-22 critics for decades. With operations in Afghanistan clearly demonstrating the flexibility of the aircraft in combat, the task stateside is to continue doggedly chipping away at low reliability and readiness numbers
These efforts are starting to yield results. The Osprey’s readiness rate has hovered at about 62% for months, but operations in Afghanistan have seen that number rising steadily, according to Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, who cites numbers in the 70-80% range. “It’s on that trajectory” to 90%, he claimed enthusiastically at the Pentagon last month Trautman, who is tracking V-22 readiness rates across the entire fleet, says Block B aircraft are at 65%. “We can trend up to the 70s [percent range] with aggressive sparing."
The goal for the Marines is “to drive home operational readiness and mission dependability,” says V-22 program manager Col. Greg Masiello. “My top three initiatives are simple: availability, affordability and execution.”
Both Trautman and Masiello push constantly for improvement, leaning on the Bell-Boeing manufacturing team to drive more efficiency into the maintenance process and support increased depot-level work by the Marines. Masiello calls it “a full-court press on readiness and reduction in cost,” with a focus on the overall fleet, not just operational aircraft. We spend lots of time putting plans in place,” Masiello says. “It takes discipline and tenacity to make sure we’re executing to plan.” He is looking beyond the current contract to a second multi-year contract. “The time to do that is now,” he insists, noting that thinking strategically, and garnering support for future efforts will pay off down the road. “I need to continue to purchase [the V-22] and provide stability in the industrial base and in fielding the aircraft.”
Topping Masiello’s wish list is a new, fully instrumented test aircraft—an unusual, and unusually urgent, request.
People ask why I’m prioritizing a developmental test aircraft” for an aircraft that has already been fielded, says Masiello. The program office, based at NAS Patuxent River, Md., already has one structural test aircraft in the hangar, but it is the No. 8 airplane. “It’s the oldest aircraft we have flying,” Masiello says. “And it’s exorbitant to operate,” costing about 330 maintenance man-hours per flight hour.
Why is a test aircraft so important at this stage in the V-22’s service life? Block C modifications are already underway, several new squadrons are being stood up stateside—MV-22s at Miramar, Calif., and CV-22s at Cannon AFB, N.M.—and the aircraft is flying at high tempo in Afghanistan. “We’re broadening the footprint of the program operationally,” Masiello says. “That brings some challenges to make sure we have the right support across the nation and the globe.”
Masiello’s primary focus for today’s fleet is building “a robust capability throughout our operating bases” and for deployed aircraft.
An up-to-date test article would provide the opportunity to field future aircraft with properly tested advanced capabilities. The services should know how best to exploit all the V-22’s capabilities today, Masiello says. Sometimes, he notes, “we don’t make huge changes on the aircraft, we tweak the software. Testing [software] on an instrumented aircraft tells me” if there are going to be any second-order effects that might require changes before being sent out to the fleet.
Looking much further down the road, a modernized test aircraft would eventually prove helpful in mapping out a service life-extension program (SLEP) for the V-22, Masiello says. “We need structural testing done . . . and envelope expansion” for high-altitude operations.
A new instrumented aircraft package costs $65 million, according to Masiello. He has put in a request for an Osprey test platform, but recognizes that a tight budget may limit his options, and says he hopes not to feel an “adverse impact” from the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review. Despite that, Masiello says an instrumented test aircraft is essential. “I believe it has to be done, and we’ll continue to champion the case.”
Throughout the fleet, Masiello says, he wants to ensure “we’re not addressing only new capabilities, but [examining] other inherent benefits to retrofitting [new capabilities] and prioritizing” which aircraft will receive the upgrade. As the fleet grows, so does the bill to maintain and upgrade it. Masiello says he has met with Bell-Boeing on reducing costs. “We’re making sure we set goals,” he continues. “We don’t target specific things like [operations in] Iraq or Afghanistan. It’s about the fleet in general.” The entire fleet, he adds, should always be “ready for combatant commanders to use where and when they need it.”
Trautman has had his own conversations with Bell-Boeing, with an eye to building aircraft readiness directly into the contract. “The key is getting contractual arrangements exactly right,” he says, “and allowing the contracts to catch up to the way the V-22 is actually performing.” One result of his efforts: in January, Bell-Boeing will sign a firm, fixed-price contract for performance-based logistics with the Marines.
“This is a very long program in development, but a very new aircraft in operational use,” Masiello says. “We’re learning every day what will help us mature it.”
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks FH1100 Pilot !
I did a "Drive-By" cut & paste and didn't get a chance to preview.
It was from today's Aviation Week.com
USMC V-22 Osprey Finds Groove In Afghanistan | AVIATION WEEK
Again, 1,000 pardons all!
I did a "Drive-By" cut & paste and didn't get a chance to preview.
It was from today's Aviation Week.com
USMC V-22 Osprey Finds Groove In Afghanistan | AVIATION WEEK
Again, 1,000 pardons all!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now Hear This. Now Hear This !
Moderator
What happened to both mine and SASless posts? I think this happened before also. I take it posts are removed w/o reason so they can be removed again for the same reason?
They were moved to the appropriate thread about Haiti, as were three other posts. As discussed before, and part of the T & C's, if you have an issue over where your posts are and can't look them up, then deal with it via PM, not in the thread.
Senior Pilot
What happened to both mine and SASless posts? I think this happened before also. I take it posts are removed w/o reason so they can be removed again for the same reason?
They were moved to the appropriate thread about Haiti, as were three other posts. As discussed before, and part of the T & C's, if you have an issue over where your posts are and can't look them up, then deal with it via PM, not in the thread.
Senior Pilot
I shall post this article....which comes from the US Naval Institute.
It is not my opinon but one that comes from a well respected source of information concerning Naval Strategy and current issues of the US Navy.
The Bold print is my doing.....but sets forth clearly what is at stake for the Marine Osprey units.
It is not my opinon but one that comes from a well respected source of information concerning Naval Strategy and current issues of the US Navy.
The Bold print is my doing.....but sets forth clearly what is at stake for the Marine Osprey units.
Five years ago, in days after the Indian Ocean Tsunami, I wrote an op-ed for the Boston Globe–a piece that, with the Haiti disaster, remains a relevant cautionary tale today:
The tsunami response, being hailed as one of the biggest U.S. military disaster relief missions in history, has been less effective than portrayed.
(snip)
With the Haiti earthquake, we’ll discover that a lot has changed in the space of five years.
Today, in the aftermath of this earthquake, the initial response will be enormous. Unlike the Indonesian Tsunami, our initial aid may end up becoming a long-term commitment–lest we wish to see a desperate human tsunami start out for the U.S. from a shattered Haiti. Help sent to Haiti, however, may also pull assets from Afghanistan, forcing policymakers into an ugly debate over the relative importance of the Western Hemisphere vs. Afghanistan and Iraq.
At present, prior commitments are taking a backseat to lending a needed hand. A whole raft of ships are heading to help. The USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) may stop off at Mayport to become, largely, a helicopter carrier (populated with Army helicopters, perhaps?). Not only will this highlight the importance of having a second carrier-ready port on the East Coast (and, in the process, hand ADM John Harvey’s call for strategic homeportingsome extra “omph!”), this will give the Carl Vinson crew a chance to grab extra gear for the task ahead.
The USS Bataan (LHD-5), USS Fort McHenry (LSD 43) and USS Carter Hall (LSD 50) are going to sea, and will likely prep for Haiti duties. Amphibs are the poor bloody infantry of disaster-response operations, and this deployment should be expected. That said, the USS Bataan is familiar with MV-22 “Osprey” operations, suggesting that the 24th MEU’s attached combat-ready MV-22 squadron may get it’s first real humanitarian/support to civil authorities mission. The ships with the 24th MEU may go as well, but we’ll see.
An Osprey deployment to Haiti will be high-profile test–an unexpected tasking, done under a full-bore media glare. It will likely not have the maintenance padding (the extra spare parts and private maintainers to allow for “aggressive sparing“) Ospreys enjoy on their overseas junkets. This is a real test. Now, to the Osprey’s benefit, this is low-altitude work in almost ideal conditions–and, as I’ve said before, a perfect way to demonstrate this platform’s effectiveness. If they go, expect to see the Osprey pressed into moving critically-injured foreign nationals from Haiti to Guantanamo for staging/stabilization and evacuation–a high-profile mission where speed is of the essence. (Might we see some of the first MV-22 operational landings on a U.S. aircraft carrier? I mean, in an emergency, anything might happen…)
Aviation, however, will be a sideshow (OK, an important sideshow). But the ports–and all the aid that will need to flow through them–are key. And the Coast Guard is already reporting that they’re damaged.
The earthquake’s havoc was challenging the ability to move supplies into the hardest hit areas, U.S. officials said. The damage threatened supply lines to the impoverished city and country, which relies in large part on ship-borne deliveries…
“The initial reports we are getting, it [the sea port] is very heavily damaged,” U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. James A. “Jim” Watson IV, director of Atlantic area operations, said in an interview from Portsmouth, Va. “If the port is severely damaged, that makes it very, very difficult” to get relief supplies in.
This situation offers amphibious vessels–the ones with well decks–an opportunity to really strut their stuff–giving the Marines another high-profile means to demonstrate why their next-generation big-deck amphibs need their well-decks returned.
As far as harbor exploitation goes, the USNS Comfort (T-AH-20) will likely have a hard time approaching a pier–meaning that her value as a large hospital will be reduced.
It’d be nice if the shallow-draft JHSVs were in service right now, but instead we’ll see if the former Hawaiian Superferries will be utilized or if the PCU Independence (LCS-2) gets orders to forgo commissioning and get underway for a mission. If the LCS-2 were sent, that’d be one heck of a familiarization cruise–but why not? Even if it just was to serve as a shuttle, what’s there to loose? Isn’t the LCS meant to be expendable? But, then again, the LCS-2 program office shouldn’t feel too bad…with the newly commissioned USS New York (LPD 21) stuck pier-side, the LCS-2 folks have some room to maneuver.
Will the local harbors need salvage expertise and resources? Will this disaster demonstrate our relative shortcomings in salvage assets? ADM Harvey may be right to worry about the utility of harbor infrastructure to blockade a port–but having a second port available won’t solve the problem. How would we be able to open a blocked U.S. port quickly–if we had to? Are we ready to do what we need to do–if we needed to do it? I don’t think so–and Norfolk isn’t the only problem, either.
We’re in the early stages of this thing–and we’re only looking at some initial signs and indications with this blogpost. I mean, in a few days we’ll probably be cheering as Navy Seabees start clearing blocked roads. There are a lot of ways this post-disaster situation may evolve. But, right here, right now, we’ve got an eerie warning of the future world–full of weak states crumbling under the blows of an unexpected natural disaster
The tsunami response, being hailed as one of the biggest U.S. military disaster relief missions in history, has been less effective than portrayed.
(snip)
With the Haiti earthquake, we’ll discover that a lot has changed in the space of five years.
Today, in the aftermath of this earthquake, the initial response will be enormous. Unlike the Indonesian Tsunami, our initial aid may end up becoming a long-term commitment–lest we wish to see a desperate human tsunami start out for the U.S. from a shattered Haiti. Help sent to Haiti, however, may also pull assets from Afghanistan, forcing policymakers into an ugly debate over the relative importance of the Western Hemisphere vs. Afghanistan and Iraq.
At present, prior commitments are taking a backseat to lending a needed hand. A whole raft of ships are heading to help. The USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) may stop off at Mayport to become, largely, a helicopter carrier (populated with Army helicopters, perhaps?). Not only will this highlight the importance of having a second carrier-ready port on the East Coast (and, in the process, hand ADM John Harvey’s call for strategic homeportingsome extra “omph!”), this will give the Carl Vinson crew a chance to grab extra gear for the task ahead.
The USS Bataan (LHD-5), USS Fort McHenry (LSD 43) and USS Carter Hall (LSD 50) are going to sea, and will likely prep for Haiti duties. Amphibs are the poor bloody infantry of disaster-response operations, and this deployment should be expected. That said, the USS Bataan is familiar with MV-22 “Osprey” operations, suggesting that the 24th MEU’s attached combat-ready MV-22 squadron may get it’s first real humanitarian/support to civil authorities mission. The ships with the 24th MEU may go as well, but we’ll see.
An Osprey deployment to Haiti will be high-profile test–an unexpected tasking, done under a full-bore media glare. It will likely not have the maintenance padding (the extra spare parts and private maintainers to allow for “aggressive sparing“) Ospreys enjoy on their overseas junkets. This is a real test. Now, to the Osprey’s benefit, this is low-altitude work in almost ideal conditions–and, as I’ve said before, a perfect way to demonstrate this platform’s effectiveness. If they go, expect to see the Osprey pressed into moving critically-injured foreign nationals from Haiti to Guantanamo for staging/stabilization and evacuation–a high-profile mission where speed is of the essence. (Might we see some of the first MV-22 operational landings on a U.S. aircraft carrier? I mean, in an emergency, anything might happen…)
Aviation, however, will be a sideshow (OK, an important sideshow). But the ports–and all the aid that will need to flow through them–are key. And the Coast Guard is already reporting that they’re damaged.
The earthquake’s havoc was challenging the ability to move supplies into the hardest hit areas, U.S. officials said. The damage threatened supply lines to the impoverished city and country, which relies in large part on ship-borne deliveries…
“The initial reports we are getting, it [the sea port] is very heavily damaged,” U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. James A. “Jim” Watson IV, director of Atlantic area operations, said in an interview from Portsmouth, Va. “If the port is severely damaged, that makes it very, very difficult” to get relief supplies in.
This situation offers amphibious vessels–the ones with well decks–an opportunity to really strut their stuff–giving the Marines another high-profile means to demonstrate why their next-generation big-deck amphibs need their well-decks returned.
As far as harbor exploitation goes, the USNS Comfort (T-AH-20) will likely have a hard time approaching a pier–meaning that her value as a large hospital will be reduced.
It’d be nice if the shallow-draft JHSVs were in service right now, but instead we’ll see if the former Hawaiian Superferries will be utilized or if the PCU Independence (LCS-2) gets orders to forgo commissioning and get underway for a mission. If the LCS-2 were sent, that’d be one heck of a familiarization cruise–but why not? Even if it just was to serve as a shuttle, what’s there to loose? Isn’t the LCS meant to be expendable? But, then again, the LCS-2 program office shouldn’t feel too bad…with the newly commissioned USS New York (LPD 21) stuck pier-side, the LCS-2 folks have some room to maneuver.
Will the local harbors need salvage expertise and resources? Will this disaster demonstrate our relative shortcomings in salvage assets? ADM Harvey may be right to worry about the utility of harbor infrastructure to blockade a port–but having a second port available won’t solve the problem. How would we be able to open a blocked U.S. port quickly–if we had to? Are we ready to do what we need to do–if we needed to do it? I don’t think so–and Norfolk isn’t the only problem, either.
We’re in the early stages of this thing–and we’re only looking at some initial signs and indications with this blogpost. I mean, in a few days we’ll probably be cheering as Navy Seabees start clearing blocked roads. There are a lot of ways this post-disaster situation may evolve. But, right here, right now, we’ve got an eerie warning of the future world–full of weak states crumbling under the blows of an unexpected natural disaster
As of 1512/20 Jan 10.....as reported by the Jacksonville NC newspaper.....the Osprey might be deployed to Haiti.
Also unclear was whether the MV-22 Ospreys of Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 162, the “Golden Eagles” — which trained up with Nassau in December in preparation for this deployment — would be flying over Haiti when the ARG arrived. It would be the first time the Osprey has been used in a major humanitarian assistance operation. Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway said Jan. 14 that the Corps had no plans to send the Osprey at that time, although the Marines would be “ready and willing” to send Ospreys if asked.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Single person V-22 Contender?
Updated January 21, 2010
NASA's Puffin: One Crazy Personal Aircraft
By Clay Dillow
- Popular Science
NASA just unveiled its Puffin aircraft design, showing just how completely personal, electrically propelled flight could change the ways we live and get around.
NASA Langley/Analytical Mechanics Associates
What's cooler than a hover-capable, electric-powered, super-quiet personal VTOL (vertical takeoff and landing) aircraft? If you answered "absolutely nothing," do read on, because NASA is preparing to oblige you.
The space agency's Puffin aircraft design was just officially unveiled, showing just how far personal, electrically propelled flight could change the ways we live and get around.
The Puffin is something of a personal V-22 Osprey, complete with vertical-takeoff and landing capability (but minus the squad of Marines). But rather than tilting the rotors forward for horizontal flight, the whole craft -- cockpit and all -- pitches forward, meaning the pilot flies from a prone position. During takeoff and landing the tail splits into four legs that serve as landing gear, and flaps on the wings deploy to keep the aircraft stable as it lifts and descends.
Don't let the cuddly name fool you; as far as specs are concerned the Puffin is no slouch. Its 12-foot height and 13.5-foot wingspan mean it's big, but of manageable stature. In theory it can cruise at 150 miles per hour and sprint at more like 300 miles per hour.
Since the craft is electrically propelled it doesn't need air intake, so thinning air is not a limitation, meaning it can reach -- again, in theory -- 30,000 feet before limitations on battery power force it to descend (clearly the pilot would need a pressurized cabin or oxygen tanks at that altitude, but we're just talking raw physical capability here).
The Puffin's range would be the most limiting characteristic, at just 50 miles, but that's simply a matter of battery density. Batteries are growing more dense by the day, so in coming years that range could be drastically improved.
Of course, the Puffin is so far just a cool digital rendering in a NASA-branded video, but let's not forget exactly who put men on the moon before we call the concept unfeasible. The coolest thing about the Puffin design is that it shows just how electric flight could revolutionize personal transportation.
Aside from the military applications (super-stealthy troop insertions with very low thermal signatures?) the quiet, uncomplicated, low-powered electric lift -- just 60 horsepower gets pilot and craft airborne -- shows how a world in which everyday folks get around modern cities via personal aircraft may not be as sci-fi as was once thought.
[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']Read more from PopSci at www.popsci.com.[/font]
NASA's Puffin: One Crazy Personal Aircraft
By Clay Dillow
- Popular Science
NASA just unveiled its Puffin aircraft design, showing just how completely personal, electrically propelled flight could change the ways we live and get around.
NASA Langley/Analytical Mechanics Associates
What's cooler than a hover-capable, electric-powered, super-quiet personal VTOL (vertical takeoff and landing) aircraft? If you answered "absolutely nothing," do read on, because NASA is preparing to oblige you.
The space agency's Puffin aircraft design was just officially unveiled, showing just how far personal, electrically propelled flight could change the ways we live and get around.
The Puffin is something of a personal V-22 Osprey, complete with vertical-takeoff and landing capability (but minus the squad of Marines). But rather than tilting the rotors forward for horizontal flight, the whole craft -- cockpit and all -- pitches forward, meaning the pilot flies from a prone position. During takeoff and landing the tail splits into four legs that serve as landing gear, and flaps on the wings deploy to keep the aircraft stable as it lifts and descends.
Don't let the cuddly name fool you; as far as specs are concerned the Puffin is no slouch. Its 12-foot height and 13.5-foot wingspan mean it's big, but of manageable stature. In theory it can cruise at 150 miles per hour and sprint at more like 300 miles per hour.
Since the craft is electrically propelled it doesn't need air intake, so thinning air is not a limitation, meaning it can reach -- again, in theory -- 30,000 feet before limitations on battery power force it to descend (clearly the pilot would need a pressurized cabin or oxygen tanks at that altitude, but we're just talking raw physical capability here).
The Puffin's range would be the most limiting characteristic, at just 50 miles, but that's simply a matter of battery density. Batteries are growing more dense by the day, so in coming years that range could be drastically improved.
Of course, the Puffin is so far just a cool digital rendering in a NASA-branded video, but let's not forget exactly who put men on the moon before we call the concept unfeasible. The coolest thing about the Puffin design is that it shows just how electric flight could revolutionize personal transportation.
Aside from the military applications (super-stealthy troop insertions with very low thermal signatures?) the quiet, uncomplicated, low-powered electric lift -- just 60 horsepower gets pilot and craft airborne -- shows how a world in which everyday folks get around modern cities via personal aircraft may not be as sci-fi as was once thought.
[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']Read more from PopSci at www.popsci.com.[/font]
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UAE
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V-22s Enroute to Haiti?
24th MEU Heads to Haiti
Posted 1/22/2010
MV-22 Ospreys from Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 162 (Reinforced), 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, quietly remain full stowed on the flight deck of USS Nassau
Jan. 19 for their upcoming deployment. The 24th MEU Marines and Sailors embarked vessels of the Nassau Amphibious Ready Group, marking the onset of their six-month deployment. The 24th MEU is among the most versatile military units in the world and stands ready to perform a full spectrum of missions ranging from humanitarian relief to full-scale combat operations. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Alex C. Sauceda)Note: Not sure about the comment "marking the onset of their six-month deployment"??
Last edited by 21stCen; 22nd Jan 2010 at 13:39.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by 21stCentury
V-22s Enroute to Haiti?
I/C
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Yes. The plan is that the Unit will continue onto the sandpit for its scheduled deployment after a few weeks assisting the relief effort.
There's an article on their pre-deployment work-up here.
I/C
There's an article on their pre-deployment work-up here.
I/C
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UAE
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks again IC,
That makes sense (6 months includes subsequent deployment to Afghanistan after the Haiti mission). I found the update on a blog site and wasn't sure of the accuracy.
21stC
That makes sense (6 months includes subsequent deployment to Afghanistan after the Haiti mission). I found the update on a blog site and wasn't sure of the accuracy.
21stC
Last edited by 21stCen; 22nd Jan 2010 at 16:18.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UAE
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Special Operations Squadron Opening with the CV-22
Members of the 20th SOS salute the flag during the squadron's reactivation ceremony. US Air Force image/Sgt. Heather R Redman
Green Hornets fly again
The 20th Special Operations Squadron, known as the ‘Green Hornets’, has reformed.
Gary Parsons - 18-Jan-2010
January 15: The 20th Special Operations Squadron, known as the ‘Green Hornets’, has reformed at Cannon Air Force Base in New Mexico with the CV-22 ‘Osprey’ tilt-rotor aircraft.
Now part of the 27th Special Operations Group within the US Air Force Special Operations Command, the squadron will provide support for Special Forces teams in potentially hostile and politically sensitive areas.
Colonel James Cardoso, commander of the 27th SOG, said "It should be clear that the machine alone, this new ‘steel horse we ride’, no matter how awesome it is, does not give the squadron its identity," he said. “The essence of the Green Hornets lies not in wonder of its machines, but in the spirit of its people and its leadership.”
The 20th SOS previously flew the MH-53M Pave Low IV, retired in 2008.
A question for you USMC folks.....
The 22nd MEU and USS Bataan embarked ten MV-22's for their deployment before Haiti occurred. Later, The MEU embarked CH-53's when deployed to Haiti.
The 24th MEU was originally scheduled to deploy to the Middle East with eight Ospreys and four CH-53's.
Now that the 24th is headed to Haiti and due to arrive today....they deployed with eight Ospreys.
The question.....why did the Bataan go with CH-53's and no Ospreys?
Followup question....did the 24th take CH-53's onboard when headed to Haiti?
Begged question....out of a hundred or so Ospreys in the Inventory....does the USMC only have eight to ten Ospreys that can be deployed at any one time?
The 22nd MEU and USS Bataan embarked ten MV-22's for their deployment before Haiti occurred. Later, The MEU embarked CH-53's when deployed to Haiti.
The 24th MEU was originally scheduled to deploy to the Middle East with eight Ospreys and four CH-53's.
Now that the 24th is headed to Haiti and due to arrive today....they deployed with eight Ospreys.
The question.....why did the Bataan go with CH-53's and no Ospreys?
Followup question....did the 24th take CH-53's onboard when headed to Haiti?
Begged question....out of a hundred or so Ospreys in the Inventory....does the USMC only have eight to ten Ospreys that can be deployed at any one time?
I was in my puny little, unmanly, takes-no-skill-to-fly JetRanger yesterday, departing the Destin, Florida aeropuerto for our hunting camp up in central Alabama. We were leaving way too close to sunset, thanks to my passenger being late (imagine that!). It had been one of those beautifully clear, warm, not-a-cloud-in-the-sky evenings...the days we use to justify and remind ourselves why we moved here to Florida. And now the sunset would be spectacular.
I was about to turn north, to go up the narrow corridor that is provided for general aviation traffic to transit the huge restricted areas surrounding Eglin Air Force Base. Just after making my departure call and lifting off, another guy reported in. "Destin traffic, Raven Three-One, a V-22, 10 east, transiting the area along the beach, 500 or below." This, I had to see. So instead of turning immediately northbound, I paralleled the beach eastbound a bit. Sure enough, there was the V-22, just offshore, scooting along with the nacelles at 45 degrees (or so). I've seen them fly many times, but never from the air, potentially this close.
I told him where I was and we called each other in sight. I couldn't resist. "How you liking that Osprey?" I asked. There was a pause. The pilot keyed the mic and paused again. "It's awesome," he said simply, his voice full of pride. And I smiled. "I'm sure it is," I said, pointing him out to my passenger as the tiltrotor flew by.
For all of the negative things I think about the V-22, for all of the things I could have said to him, none of that mattered right then. Politics aside, here was an U.S. Air Force pilot who was clearly loving what he was doing, loving the machine he was flying. From a pilot's standpoint, I kind of envied him. Not that I have any desire at all to fly the V-22, but I empathize with those who do. It must be super-cool to be able to hover, and then also be able to accelerate up to the speed of a turboprop fixed-wing and go somewhere.
I thought about this as I climbed to 4,500 feet and saw my groundspeed max out at 95 knots, 100 miles still to go. If I had a V-22 the trip would take me less than a half-hour instead of over an hour. And I'd get there while there still was some daylight left instead of after dark. Of course, I wouldn't be able to land the V-22 at our little helipad-in-the-woods at the hunting camp, but hey...we'd just figure something else out. "Have fun flying that thing," I mentally transmitted back to the V-22 pilot. I still don't think that the future of the Osprey is a guaranteed success, but it's sure got to be a blast to fly for the guys in the front seats.
I was about to turn north, to go up the narrow corridor that is provided for general aviation traffic to transit the huge restricted areas surrounding Eglin Air Force Base. Just after making my departure call and lifting off, another guy reported in. "Destin traffic, Raven Three-One, a V-22, 10 east, transiting the area along the beach, 500 or below." This, I had to see. So instead of turning immediately northbound, I paralleled the beach eastbound a bit. Sure enough, there was the V-22, just offshore, scooting along with the nacelles at 45 degrees (or so). I've seen them fly many times, but never from the air, potentially this close.
I told him where I was and we called each other in sight. I couldn't resist. "How you liking that Osprey?" I asked. There was a pause. The pilot keyed the mic and paused again. "It's awesome," he said simply, his voice full of pride. And I smiled. "I'm sure it is," I said, pointing him out to my passenger as the tiltrotor flew by.
For all of the negative things I think about the V-22, for all of the things I could have said to him, none of that mattered right then. Politics aside, here was an U.S. Air Force pilot who was clearly loving what he was doing, loving the machine he was flying. From a pilot's standpoint, I kind of envied him. Not that I have any desire at all to fly the V-22, but I empathize with those who do. It must be super-cool to be able to hover, and then also be able to accelerate up to the speed of a turboprop fixed-wing and go somewhere.
I thought about this as I climbed to 4,500 feet and saw my groundspeed max out at 95 knots, 100 miles still to go. If I had a V-22 the trip would take me less than a half-hour instead of over an hour. And I'd get there while there still was some daylight left instead of after dark. Of course, I wouldn't be able to land the V-22 at our little helipad-in-the-woods at the hunting camp, but hey...we'd just figure something else out. "Have fun flying that thing," I mentally transmitted back to the V-22 pilot. I still don't think that the future of the Osprey is a guaranteed success, but it's sure got to be a blast to fly for the guys in the front seats.
It is official....Channel 14, the local news channel on the TV, featured a segment about the 24th MEU and reported it was the first time the MV-22 has operated on a Humanitarian Mission. No photos or video of the aircraft flying.....but one has to assume they are now supporting USMC operations from the USS Nassau and other fleet units.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UAE
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ENC Marines Use Osprey In Haiti In Ground-Breaking Mission
Marines from Eastern Carolina are using MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft to help in Haiti, the first time the Osprey is being used in a humanitarian air or disaster relief mission. The 24th MEU is also helping with medical evacuations on helicopters.
Marines from Eastern Carolina are using MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft to help in Haiti, the first time the Osprey is being used in a humanitarian air or disaster relief mission. The 24th MEU is also helping with medical evacuations on helicopters.
Posted:
11:02 AM Jan 24, 2010Marines Eastern Carolina are using MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft to help in Haiti, the first time the Osprey is being used in a humanitarian aid or disaster relief mission.
The Ospreys are from to the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit from Camp Lejeune and New River in Jacksonville and took off from the USS Nassau Sunday morning.
(Click the photo tab to see the Osprey as well as the 24th MEU helping medevac Haitian victims.)
The aircraft, which can take off like a plane or a helicopter, are conducting aerial surveys of population centers and roadways in northern Haiti.
According to officials, the intent of the Osprey mission is to help gain awareness of the current situation on the ground in some of the outlying towns and areas that have not had a U.S. military presence.
The 24th MEU is also helping with medical evacuations on helicopters.
Two MV-22 Ospreys tilt-rotor aircraft from Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 162 (Reinforced), 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, launched from USS Nassau to conduct an aerial reconnaissance of population centers and infrastructures in northern Haiti Jan. 24. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Alex C. Sauceda)
This is the first time the Ospreys are used in a humanitarian aid or disaster relief missions. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Alex C. Sauceda)
Video Clip:
MADISON: Osprey launched to Haiti
Last edited by 21stCen; 25th Jan 2010 at 17:51.