What's the latest news of the V22 Osprey?

[SASless]

You need to run to another thread as your boy Dan Reno has thrown the Chinook under the bus. Apparently it is coming out that two competent pilots can not fly a Chinook in peace time without anyone shooting at them and expect to not crash in IMC. An Osprey would have flown above the fog.

What was it 29 dead because a Chinook can not fly in anything except VFR conditions?

Sultan....you being a newcome to pprune I must assume you have not gone back through the thousands of posts in that thread to gain any kind of understanding of the issues that were under discussion over the years.

The British Chinooks have a speckled history when it comes to RAF mods to the Avionics fit on the various models thus they are quite different from the US Army aircraft.

As to your post quoted here.....I find it offensive....flat stupid....and boringly typical of you standard attempted contribution to the discussions here. Dan Reno is not my "Boy", is not one of my many friends or acquaintances who frequent Rotorheads, and is no less a gentleman than you are as I find that to be an impossibility.

[Lonewolf_50]

Try to understand the RoE, Dan. You post it here, we argue it here. If you don't like that, sorry.

OOPS, I just noticed that Senior Pilot has spoken.

Nothing further.

@ SASless:

The Osprey is fast, quieter than helicopters in cruise....but in the final analysis....it takes guns to counter hostile threats. That is not the Osprey's strong suit....especially when compared to the helicopters it is to replace.

OK, so arm the Osprey. (Or, as they say, make sure AV-8 or other FW is around for fire support. )
That still won't change the fact that coming into an LZ that is hot will make for a bad day.
EDIT:
Case in point, even before Osprey, organic guns on Helicopters insufficient to handle Hot LZ, your chosen fight being Taku Ghar:

An AC-130 gunship, Nail 22, flew a reconnaissance mission over the peak prior to the landing and saw no enemy activity, but was called away to support other troops before Razor 03 and 04 arrived at the Landing Zone. At around 0245 hours, Razor 03 landed at the LZ and was immediately struck in the left side electrical compartment by an RPG

If Spectre is still overhead when Razors arrive, things change a bit, eh?

Plans only work right up to the point where contact is made with the enemy.

We are in violent agreement. That said, there are tools available now that weren't available thirty years ago. Some risks and unknowns can now be accounted for and dealt with, but certainly NOT all.

All the sensors failed at Takur Ghar....and helicopters got shot down....folks died. Be it today or forty years ago...when the shooting starts it is all the same.

That was sort of my point, except I think it's more lethal now, as there are more weapons choices.

Human presence and their capabilities to view the battlefield and make accurate judgements were overruled by Commanders literally thousands of miles away and completely isolated from the battlefield. Input from the guys on the scene was ignored.....and good brave men died as a direct result.

That hasn't changed much in the past century, and applies to more than vertical assault.

Need I refer you to accounts of that combat action to support my statements?

I think we mostly agree on that. I just find it curious logic to single out the Osprey as uniquely vulnerable to lead in an LZ. Maybe that isn't your point.

I don't think that anyone has made the claim that it is less vulnerable. If they have, then your call of "BS" gets my support.

A few weeks/months back, someone opened the line (I think in re the Lybian OPS F-15 pilot retrieval mission) about how Osprey is somehow "more stealthy" and quiter than a helicopter.

I made some criticisms of that approach.

Cheers.

[SASless]

LW,

As you rightly state....it isn't just the Osprey that is vulnerable in a Hot LZ....but at least the 53/60/47/46 have door guns and door gunners perhaps even Ramp Gunners if it all goes ugly. That is my point in comparing the Osprey and generic helicopters in that regard.

Door mounted Mini-guns certainly put out lots of Suppressive Fire.....M2-.50 cals not so much but they do heaps of hurt if they hit something....M-60's/M-240's make the aircrew feel better but do not compare in effectiveness.

That is a shortcoming of the Osprey in that regard.

The Razor's got whacked by RPG's.....which have been around forever. They are first class kit...simple...effective...and combined with Machineguns and small arms are definitely a threat to be reckoned with.

As you rightly say....in the absence of gun cover on site ready to provide immediate cover to the landing aircraft....very bad things are goiing to happen if the Bad Guys are where you alight no matter how fast you approach the site.

I am not saying the Osprey is "uniquely vulnerable" but due to the lack of adequate and effective defensive armament....it is more vulnerable than the aircraft it is supposed to replace.

At Takur Ghar....the aircraft were landing within very close proximity to a fortified bunker with automatic weapons and RPG's....with supporting infantry with RPG's and automatic weapons which made for a very tragic situation.

What was particularly troubling to me in the accounts of that fight....Medavac aircraft were withheld long after the immediate threat had been reduced with the onsite troops with wounded begging for help....a second SpecOps unit in an overwatch position telling their chain of command the area was secure enough for helicopters and neither chain of command coordinating their operations in such close proximity to one another.

That is why I challenge those who say we use different tactics, equipment, and can rely upon speed and "stealth" to land in hostile controlled areas without having defensive armament on board the aircraft.

That is why when the Marine General said....."We land and are gone before they know we are there! (or words to that effect)"....I wave the BS flag!

I am not bashing the Osprey.....but rather those who insist upon pushing the compay line without giving pause when issues arise.

The danger is when one begins to believe one's own propaganda.....bad things are bound to happen!

Last thought....."Arm the Osprey." How does one do that? The reason it is not armed....is it really isn't practicable from the design of the aircraft. While hovering it might be feasible as the proprotors are overhead but in the airplane mode....it might be an intersting situation. Also....it would take a major redesign of the airframe I bet to allow the use of door gunners and door mounted guns. That is why they have tried to justify the belly gun concept as being the answer. Shall we discuss what a silly notion that is?

[21stCen]

LW,

Your post is spot on for almost all points made, but particularly the importance of air cover provided by support aircraft including the AV-8B. Both the Osprey and Harrier can be launched from the same platform. Other a/c like the AC-130 or A-10 would be great to have for providing air cover, but cannot be counted on in a theatre engagement launched from ship born platforms.

As has been stated previously on this thread, lines should not be blurred when applying intelligence support/limitations to vertical lift aircraft. To be valid they cannot be directed at the tiltrotor exclusively, they need to be applied across the board to all vertical lift aircraft.

The only place I would disagree is a mention that there was a claim that the Osprey is "more stealthy" than a helicopter. I have not seen any claims to that effect on this thread (see post 1012 and subsequent on p. 51). The 'boxy' nature of the Osprey fuselage is similar to the CH-47 and other helicopters and certainly does not have the angular design to provide the reflective qualities necessary to characterize it as 'stealthy' with regard to radar returns. The 'stealth qualities' that it does possess are the ability to get in and out faster and more quietly than conventional helicopters. True "radar stealthiness" based on physical design attributes of the aircraft more likely resides with the modified Blackhawks that were able to avoid detection on their recent visit to Pakistan.

[SASless]

The Stealthy Blackhawks were accompanied by Chinooks twere they not? Seems to recall most the SEALs were extracted by a Chinook after the crash of the one Blackhawk.

In my post....I was not referring to true "Stealth" ala Radar cross section but rather to it being a bit quieter than perhaps its gun cover like the Cobra, Harrier, for instance.

I am not all that convinced of the quietness but to my tired ol' helicopter pilot ears....it did seem so....although they are noisy. Anytime you get all those blades beating the air into submission there has to be some noise made.

[SansAnhedral]

A lot of the discussion here seems to be made under the assumption that the V22 has not already been deployed to and operating in hot LZs. At a recent display of the V22 I was speaking with a Marine aviator who was telling stories of getting hit by RPGs and having them fired clear through the fuselage, in addition to safely sustaining copious amounts of small arms fire in the Osprey.

[SASless]

Any photos of these RPG hits?


Here is what a Chinook looks like when it gets hit by one!

The aircraft was in the process of recovering a downed Army Cobra when it got hit by the RPG as it was just above translational lift speed on takeoff. The aircraft made a forced landing, the FE was killed, the other four crewmembers were wounded by ground fire after landing.

The photo is taken looking aft from the front of the cabin. The RPG entered from the right and below and departed through the small hole it made on the left side of the aircraft....the one the guys are standing by.

[Dan Reno]

"The Littoral Combat Ship and the Newly Enabled ARG"

"A New Capability for the USN-USMC Team"

"By Robbin Laird and Ed Timperlake"
"07/12/2011 - The USN is buying the LCS but its Con-Ops remain to be developed. No platform fights alone, and this asset is best understood in terms of the synergy which can be brought to it by how it is connected to other combat systems. The clear partner is the newly configured Amphibious Ready Group or the ARG, built around the F-35B.
These two forces – the LCS and the newly configured ARG – can be conjoined and forged into an enlarged littoral combat capability. But without the newly configured ARG, and the core asset, the F-35B, such potential is undercut.
This is a good example of how buying the right platform – the F-35B – is part of a leveraging strategy whereby greater value is provided for the fleet through the acquisition of that platform.
In a time of fiscal stringency, good value acquisitions need to be prioritized. Such acquisitions are able to leverage already acquired or in the process of being acquired capabilities and provide significant enhancement of capabilities.
They are high value assets, both in terms of warfighting and best value from an overall fleet perspective."



"A newly configured USMC ARG is emerging from several new assets:"

• The new ARG built around the LPD 17 has a larger deck to operate from, with modern C2 capabilities.
• The F-35B can be launched as a 360 degree presence asset to do electronic warfare, C4ISR and preparation for kinetic or non-kinetic strike.
• The CH-53K can take off from the amphibious ships and carry three times the cargo of a CH-53E, to include 463L pallets (normally used in KC-130s).
• The USMC Ospreys can support insertion operations with speed and range."

"What the newly equipped ARG does is provide a significant shaping function for the President. And this shaping function allows significant flexibility, any hard 3000 foot surface is available for the Navy/Marine amphibious forces to seize and hold. This world class uniquely American battle capability is a redefinition of the dichotomy between hard and soft power.
And such capability in turn draws upon the decade of innovation which the USAF has engaged in in shaping the Air Dropping Revolution. As the commander of the Tanker Airlift Control Center (TACC) underscored:

"Question: When you put that data out there about air dropping trends, it’s impressive in and of itself, but when you think of the CONOPS implications they are significant as well. I don’t even need to use roads to actually start inserting a force. Interestingly for the Marines when they’re looking at the amphibious ready group (ARG) and what they could do with the future ARG, with their MC-130Js that can land in 3,000 feet or less, the Ospreys and the B’s that they could put basically on almost any paved highway worldwide. They could be anywhere in the world, and then people say, “Well how would you supply them,” and I would say, “Well what do you think we’ve been doing in the last ten years?” So if we marry up this revolutionary air dropping capability with projection of force from the sea, we could have a much more flexible and powerful insertion force if we wanted to.
General Allardice: I agree. Our new air dropping capabilities can be used to support our global operations in new and innovative ways. And honestly, innovation is really the essential takeaway. Through collaboration we are able to optimize the performance of the global mobility enterprise and orient it toward the effect we need. There will always be a tension between capacity and requirements, but we have found a way to manage it that allows us to respond rapidly and address those tensions in ways that would be much more difficult without the processes we have in place."

"The USN-USMC amphibious team can provide for a wide-range of options for the President simply by being offshore, with 5th generation aircraft capability on board which provides 360 situational awareness, deep visibility over the air and ground space, and carrying significant capability on board to empower a full spectrum force as needed."

F-35B in Supersonic Flight Test (Credit: Lockheed Martin)

"Now add the LCS. The LCS provides a tip of the spear, presence mission capability. The speed of the ship allows it to provide forward presence more rapidly than any other ship in the USN-USMC inventory.
It was said in fighter aviation “speed is life” and in certain situations the LCS can be paid the same complement. The key is not only the ships agility and speed but it can carry helicopters and arrive on station with state-of-the art C4ISR capabilities to meld into the F-35B combat umbrella. Visualize a 40+ knot Iron Dome asset linking to Aegis ships and the ARG air assets."




"Inserting an LCS into the Maersk Alabama incident can see an example of the impact of speed. As one naval analyst put it, the impact would have been as follows:"

• LCS at 45kts would have been on scene in less than 7 hours (6.7), or 37% sooner than a ship transiting at 28 kts.
• LCS fuel consumption for such a sprint 40% less than the 28 kt sprint.
• LCS would consume less than 23% of her fuel capacity in such a sprint.
• A helo launch within 150 nautical miles from Maersk Alabama puts helo overhead within four hours (4.3) from the time of the initial tasking.
• Two H-60’s permits LCS to maintained a helo overhead Maersk Alabama for a sustained period of time.
• With a response time of four hours the probability of thwarting a piracy attack is increased—especially if the naval ship is called upon the first realization of the targeted ship’s entry into piracy infested waters.
• If an LCS was tasked to respond when Maersk Alabama encountered the first group of pirates craft on 7 April 2009, it would have arrived on scene well in advance of the attack on 8 April and may well have prevented it."

"And if you add the LCS to the USN-USMC amphibious team you have even more capability and more options. As a senior USMC MEU commander has put it:"

"You’re sitting off the coast, pick your country, doesn’t matter, you’re told okay, we’ve got to do some shaping operations, we want to take and put some assets into shore, their going to do some shaping work over here. LCS comes in, very low profile platform. Operating off the shore, inserts these guys in small boats that night. They infill, they go in, their doing their mission.
The LCS now sets up — it’s a gun platform. It’s a resupply, refuel point for my Hueys and Cobras.
Now, these guys get in here, okay. High value targets been picked out, there is an F-35 that’s doing some other operations. These guys only came with him and said hey, we have got a high value target, but if we take him out, we will compromise our position. The F-35 goes roger, got it painted, got it seen. This is what you’re seeing, this is what I’m seeing. Okay. Kill the target. The guys on the ground never even know what hit them."
USS Freedom (Credit: USN)

"In World War II the Imperial Japanese Navy Admirals were said to call the US PT, or Patrol Torpedo Boats—“Devil Boats”—The LCS is not a PT boat but the LCS ocean presence with 21st Century capabilities may make it a modern “Devil Boat” to vex any enemy combat action.
Similar to the PT boats of WWII the LCS by itself has limited staying power; connected to the ARG, the LCS announces presence and is connected to significant full spectrum combat capability.
Several LCS’s could be deployed with Osprey and F-35B cover. The F-35B provides the 360 degree multiple of hundreds of miles coverage. The LCS becomes a node in the combat system of the F-35 and any weapons on the LCS can be cued up by the F-35B.
With the new aviation assets, the Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) can be split at sea allowing it to cover hundreds of miles more than historical operations with unexpended speed and maneuverability.. And adding an LCS to each of the disaggregated elements can further enhance the presence and combat functions of the MEU.
An Osprey pilot has already indicated that Ospreys have already allowed the splitting of the Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) at sea."

"I saw so much potential for the short take-off vertical landing attack aircraft, fixed-wing aircraft and the V-22 working together. In the future, I would have those two, the V-22 and F-35 working very closely together and even for extended operations when you add the refueling piece. The paring of these two aircraft are far better than paring the V-22 with any of the helicopters."

Osprey in Afghanistan (Credit: USMC)

"Because of speed, range. And not only that. It’s the endurance of the aircraft itself. Basically you might say once it’s flying, it’s flying. And we had a lot of missions that required flight time above six hours, which is very taxing for the jet guys and for us, it is as well, but maybe not so bad because we can trade off in the cockpit. The fact is that you can have airborne assets, both as a package as well as a trap for sensitive site exploitations, being airborne all at the same time for hours at a time to respond to something that happens in the AOR. It will give you the maximum flexibility for response time down to something like thirty minutes, depending on where it is. And then sanitize the scene from there and then everybody returns home. It’s a capability that I’m not going to say it’s been overlooked but it just hasn’t been utilized like that."

"The LCS-ARG team cannot only levera"ge each other’s capabilities, but can lay the groundwork for a significant robotics revolution. The new maritime capabilities built around robotic vehicles, on the sea, under the sea, and over the sea, can be launched and managed by either LCS’s or LPDs."
As the Prospective Commander of the LPD-24 noted, “We have a lot more space of carrying robotic assets. And can work effectively with the LCS. We can easily work with the LCS, especially with her different mission capabilities. And if she needs to change out mission capabilities, we have the cargo space to fulfill her mission.”
And in an interview with the retired head of NAVAIR, Admiral Dyer now COO of iRobot provided a sense of how this team could work with the robotics revolution:"

"At iRobot, we have a vision of integrated Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAV’s), Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UAV’s) and Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUV’s). A way I like to think about that is to envision a littoral combat ship that shows up off the coast of some bad guy’s country. Let’s take a look at how different that will be compared to the way we do it today:
Let’s consider UUVs, which I think are one of the most exciting developmental areas that are underway. UUV’s are, by the way, the area where autonomy is needed more than anywhere else. Why? Well, while you’ve good radio frequency bandwidth when you’re airborne, you have very little bandwidth when communicating with UUVs. Underwater, you’re limited to acoustic modems for un-tethered operations. An acoustic modem is slower than your first dial-up PC connection to the web. But as you start to introduce more autonomy, you start to tremendously increase the utility of unmanned underwater systems. Autonomy is important for the future of all robots, but critically important for UUVs. That is what iRobot is building at our unmanned underwater systems group in Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina. But let’s continue with this Navy ship showing up with a Navy/Marine Corps team on an adversary’s littoral during the next decade. The preparation for entering that battle space will be tremendously improved in many ways by unmanned systems.
I worry that the Navy has not taken full notice of the IED threat. Our Navy’s interest in and focus on maritime IEDs (mines) is episodic and our attention has always been short. Unmanned systems will offer new capabilities at sea, just as unmanned ground robots have for ground forces. "

USS Freedom in Transit (Credit: USN)
"When asked how one would deliver such capabilities into the battlespace, the airborne assets of the LCS and the ARG were highlighted:"

"I believe UUV’s offer great potential but there are challenges. The prime challenges for UUVs are range and power,area coverage. UUVs have the disadvantages of being relatively slow and of limited search duration. So you can’t efficiently transit them; you have to deliver them to the area of interest. At iRobot, we’re coming at this problem with our Ranger program, which we’re funding atop some basic work sponsored by the Office of Naval Research. We are designing a Ranger UUV that’s “A-size.” “A-size” means it fits into a sonobouy launcher. And there are literally thousands of tubes out there on multiple patrol and tacair platforms. Marry the capability to air-launch with swarm capability and you cut out the transit time, greatly reduce the power requirement and introduce UUVs directly into the area of interest."

Irobot's Sea Glider (Credit: Irobot)

"Using swarm techniques, which DARPA has funded iRobot and others to develop; you start to see the operations research numbers get much, much better. This isn’t something that’s awaiting better batteries and more power; it’s awaiting further development of a new concept."

"No platform fights alone, but often when the LCS gets discussed it is discussed only alone, but it has very little staying power in and of itself, as has been clearly noted by a senior USN Admiral in discussing the approach to LCS sustainment."

"Question: The LCS is really a collaborative ship, so you’re doing collaborative con-ops and the sustainment approach is part of those collaborative con-ops. It seems that what is crucial for a new built platform, whether it be air or whatever, is that you’re doing in terms of maintenance from the initial shaping of the con-ops. So presumably the relationship of the LCS to other ships is a key part of the distance support and not just to the shore.
Admiral McManamon: Part of what the exploration is doing is shaping the build as we get new information from the maintenance efforts. For the initial deployment for USS Freedom, much of what we are doing is ringing out the basic mechanics, the engineers, being able to put the ship in the water, being able to communicate with other ships, being able to talk to an operator or air assets, etx : all this has been extremely successful from February to the end of April this first year. And from this deployment we start to shape standards of performance. She was able to do the connectivity essential to distance support; she was able to operate in ways that took advantage of a 2,800 ton ship going 40 plus knots. As one of our commanders indicated just last week, there’s this whole psychological power to itself for a 2,800 ton ship to go after a go-fast and actually be able to sustain in, keep up and take it down, which we simply can’t do in the current environment with regular navy ships.
But did I design and build LCS simply to run after a cigarette runner? No. But does it give me that capability when I need it? Yes, and as we now understand that capability and that connectivity necessary to do the con-ops, I think that’s exactly what we’re moving forward with to shape future ships and operations."

"And the glue which generates LCS-ARG synergy are the aviation assets on the two entities, notably the Osprey and F-35B which have the speed and range to create a moving 360 degree combat and presence bubble over an operation. Without that glue, these platforms become disaggregated and vulnerable. Linked together, the resulting synergy creates a force multiplier effect.
And such a multiplier effect can have a significant deterrent effect. General “Dog” Davis, the Commander of the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing at Cherry Point, North Carolina, underscored such an impact when discussing the newly enabled ARG."

"I’m Muammar Gaddafi. I’m whoever, and I’ve got an ARG with this new gear embarked – and I can’t help but think its going to change the way I view that force. That ARG can reach out and touch me from long range, landing high-end infantry forces deep inside my territory, and do so with a speed that twice as fast as anyone else can. Our MEUs have never been used as effectively as they are today. These new capabilities are going to make them exponentially more potent and useful to our nation’s leadership.
The F-35Bs give the new ARG a very high-end air superiority fighter, that’s low observable if I want it to be. I can roll from Air to Air to Air to Ground quickly and be superior to all comers in both missions. That’s bad news for our adversaries. I can use the F-35s to escort the V-22s deep into enemy territory. With those V-22s we can range out to a 400-500-mile radius from the ship without air refueling. I can go deliver Marines deep in the enemy territory or wherever and do it at 250 miles an hour, so my speed of action, my agility is exponentially increased, and I think if you’re a bad guy, that would probably give you a reason to pause. It’s a very different animal that’s out there. We are good now, but will be even more so (by more than a factor of two in the future).
I also have significant mix and match capability. And this capability can change the impact of the ARG on the evolving situation. It is a forcing function enabled by variant mixes of capability. If I wanted to strip some V-22s off the deck, to accommodate more F-35s – I could do so easily. Their long legs allow them to lily pad for a limited period of time — off a much large array of shore FOBs – while still supporting the MEU. It’s much easier to do that in a V-22 than it is a traditional helicopter.
I open up that flight deck, or I can TRANSLANT or PAC additional F-35s. If I had six on the deck and I want to fly over another six or another four, we could do it rather quickly. Now the MEU has ten strike platforms. So if I need to have a TACAIR surge for a period of time, that deck provides a great platform for us. We’ve got the maintenance onboard that ship, so we can actually turn that Amphib very quickly from being a heliocentric Amphib to a fast jet Amphib. Conversely, I could also take the F-35s off, send them to a FOB and load it up with V-22s, 53Ks, or AH-1Zs and UH-1Ys.
Flexible machines and flexible ships. The combination is exceptional.
We will have a very configurable, agile ship to reconfigure almost on a dime based on the situation at hand. I think the enemy would look at the ARG as something completely different from what we have now. I think we have to change the way we do things a bit in order to allow for that, but I think we will once we get the new air assets. The newly enabled ARG, or newly whichever the term you’re using, will force our opponents to look at things very differently. We will use it differently, and our opponents are going to look at it differently."

"Finally, being connected to the newly enabled ARG can intelligently facilitate LCS modernization. The LCS can carry a range of assets, from missiles, to helos, to unmanned assets, to a complement of distributed “cyber warriors” all of which can much more potency by being part of the ARG team. The F-35B can perform the function of the battle manager, without the presence of large USAF aircraft, or a carrier presence. This is truly a combat revolution in the making.)"

"Do not reply to this neutral post"


"Do Not Reply" Why not? You were advised to either discuss the issue or stay away, not to continue with unattributed ramblings. Rotorheads are expected to stand up for what they post, whether it is a quote or an original contribution.

Senior Pilot

[SASless]

When is the VTOL version of the F-35 going to be operational?

"....Covered by F-35 and Osprey aircraft..." how does an Osprey "cover" a MEU's ships....dumping "****cans" (meaning a ship's rubbish cans) off the ramp maybe?

[OFBSLF]

When is the VTOL version of the F-35 going to be operational?

My bet? Never.

Are the LCSs operational yet? I was under the impression that the weapons packages were not yet complete.

[21stCen]

Marine pilots recount daring rescue mission

By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer
Posted : Saturday Jul 16, 2011 10:14:53 EDT

Minutes after an Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle crashed in Libya late on March 21, the pilot of the downed aircraft made a simple radio plea: “Tell my wife I love her.”
Air Force pilot Maj. Kenneth Harney and his weapons system officer, Capt. Tyler Stark, ejected safely but faced uncertain danger on the ground. They landed in rebel-held territory east of Benghazi, far from the heavily armed forces advancing on the port city in support of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, but didn’t know if the armed rebels posed a threat, too.
Harney followed Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape training “perfectly,” evading Libyans while on foot for nearly four miles, until a team of Marines rescued him in an MV-22B Osprey, Marine Col. Mark Desens, whose 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit responded from the amphibious assault ship Kearsarge, said during a June luncheon at a Washington think tank. Stark “did everything by SERE training wrong,” Desens said, and ended up in a Benghazi hotel that night after being taken in by Libyan rebels.

For the F-15 pilot, the fear was real, Marine officers said. It spiked when he heard dogs barking and guns firing, and saw vehicles with searchlights roaring toward him, said Marine Capt. John Grunke, an AV-8B Harrier pilot who responded to the call for help.
“Initially, when I made contact with him, I could see the vehicles he was talking about,” Grunke said. “I looked out … and I could see their searchlights on as they were making their way through the desert trying to find him.”
Grunke said he promised to assist the downed pilot. He dropped a GBU-12, a 500-pound laser-guided bomb, on an advancing vehicle after a low-flying show of force. He dropped another when other vehicles didn’t stay away from the airman.
“At that point, after two impacts, I got the indications that, ‘Hey, let’s take a step back,’” Grunke said. “I started soaking in the whole objective area, seeing if there were any other movements coming inbound of other vehicles.”
The comments about that night were made at the Institute for the Study of War, providing a better understanding of the situation as the 26th MEU, out of Camp Lejeune, N.C., launched a daring Tactical Recovery of Aircraft Personnel, or TRAP, mission.
Grunke and other officers with the unit said they were concerned they would face anti-aircraft fire, especially because they weren’t sure why the F-15E had crashed. The Air Force later determined an engine malfunction brought it down.
“That area was still contested,” said Marine Capt. Erik Kolle, who picked up the pilot in his Osprey. “We were planning for the worst case.”
‘Fearing for his life’
Dozens of Marines, two CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters, two Ospreys, two Harriers and a KC-130J tanker were involved in the TRAP mission, which remains one of the highest profile incidents in the U.N.-backed military intervention in the Libyan civil war.
The crash occurred on the third night of the operation, as NATO planes bombed military forces advancing on Benghazi. The plane was based at RAF Lakenheath, England, but was flying out of Aviano Air Base, Italy.
Stark, the weapons system officer took an unconventional path to safety, accepting shelter and medical treatment from Libyan rebels. He eventually left the country after resting in a Benghazi hotel room and rejoining U.S. forces, Desens said. Harney followed the conventional route, communicating his position to U.S. forces and searching for cover until he could be rescued.
The Harriers launched at 12:50 a.m., joining an F-16 already over the downed pilot and communicating with him by radio, Grunke said. The gravity of the situation quickly struck him when the tactical air-control squadron linked him with the radio frequency being used by the pilot.
“As I made my way to the target area and I took over, the F-16 [ahead of me] had just done a couple of gun attacks to deter the pursuers, and at that point, I took over as on-scene commander. I was probably 60 miles from his position, and I could hear him whispering to the other aircraft that were on station ahead of me about how he could see the pursuers,” Grunke said.
“That was really the first moment where I said, ‘This is really no longer training. That’s really a guy on the ground down there that is fearing for his life,’ ” Grunke said.
After dropping the two 500-pound bombs, Grunke ordered other Air Force pilots in the area to search elsewhere along the ground for intruders. He selected a possible landing zone for the TRAP mission, but had to leave shortly afterward because he was low on fuel.
Into the fray
At that point, the TRAP team was scrambling to reach the pilot. The Ospreys — each carrying about 15 reconnaissance Marines with Lejeune’s Battalion Landing Team, 3rd Battalion, 8th Marines — launched at 1:33 a.m. from the Kearsarge, about 130 nautical miles from the crash site. They crossed the beach line at about 300 mph, flying just 200 feet off the ground all the way to the landing zone, Kolle said.
The Osprey pilots could hear Grunke reassuring the downed pilot by radio that Marines were on the way. Sensing urgency, they “started cutting the corner a little bit” on the original route they had planned to avoid possible surface-to-air missiles, Kolle said.
The first Osprey — reportedly flown by Maj. B.J. Debardeleben — took the lead, but its personnel were unable to find the pilot before the aircraft was out of position to land. It circled back as Kolle landed his Osprey at 2:38 a.m. with the help of a laser designator from an F-16 overhead.
“I landed in front of him maybe 50 yards,” Kolle said. “We were on deck about five seconds and the crew chief said, ‘Hey, we got him.’ So I was like, ‘Roger that, we’re getting out of here!’ and they said, ‘Hold up, all the recon guys are off the back!’”
It took about 30 more seconds to get all the Marines on board and to take off, he said. The two Ospreys turned back toward the Kearsarge. The CH-53s, carrying a quick-reaction force from Lejeune’s 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines, never needed to land.
The QRF Marines had been on the Kearsarge only a matter of days, after being called in to supplement the MEU. They were needed because most of BLT 3/8, the MEU’s ground combat element, was in Afghanistan after being called off the ships in January.
Desens, who has since stepped down as the MEU’s commander, said uncertainty about the Libyan rebels complicated the mission, especially for the rescued pilot.
“If you’re that pilot and you’d just had a bad event with your aircraft, you probably didn’t have reason to believe” they didn’t mean him harm, he said. “It was terrifically uncertain early on.”

Downed F-15 Remains

[SASless]

So........we bomb and strafe the friendlies....the Harrier could not stay long enough due to a lack of fuel...the back up force flew in to the area on Sikorsky's....and Security was needed at the scene which was provided mostly by Air Force F-16's....organic infantry assets had been deployed to Afghanistan and replacements had to be flown in to replace them. The lead aircraft tasked to pick up the downed pilot missed the LZ and Chase landed. The aircraft started to leave with the pilot but not the Recon Marines who were doing the on-ground security task?

Did I get that right?

Important thing is both Air Force crew are back home safe and the Good Guys all got home unhurt!

Now....lessons learned from this?



One article noted seven Marine Aircraft involved....two each Harriers, Ospreys, and CH-53's, and one KC-130. In a previous post I suggested a KC-130 could serve as a FARP of sorts and that access to fuel would be of importance as would be shuttle time for the "Escorts" and "Airborne Security". If the Harriers operated as a pair....the Ospreys in a pair...and the helicopters also in a pair....then Time Over Target proves to be a problem for any aircraft that has to lead the parade and stay until everybody else departs. This proved to be the case here. Fortunately the Air Force was able to fill the gaps for the Marines this time.

The lack of coordination on the ground was complicated by the absence of liasion with friendly forces due to the half assed way this "Non-War" is being waged. This puts our guys and gals in harms way unnecessarily and also presents every opportunity for our attacking friendly ground forces by mistake.

Perhaps that Marine General I considered an idiot when he said "We are in and out so fast they don't even know we were there....." was referring to the Recon guys who almost got left in the LZ.

Where were the Air Force CSAR guys on this....I am sure they must have some of their own Ospreys in theater some where. Did they launch on this or was this a Navy only TARP task?

[SansAnhedral]

Textron: V-22 may sell to 10-12 foreign countries

Looks like more popular anti V22 rhetoric (no foreign sales) may become invalidated.

[Lonewolf_50]

Who can afford the V-22, besides the US DoD?

Oil Producer Shieks and Emirs
China
A few Russian Mafia bosses
A few Narco Cartel bosses
The Germans, if they wanted them, but I doubt they do
The Israelis? (Guess who really pays for the IV-22? (Heh, neat acronym there, IV ... sometimes I crack myself up ... ) The US Taxpayer via the usual shell game).
Richard Branson
Bill Gates
Warren Buffet
George Soros
Owner of Mexico Telecom
(and folks of that ^ ilk)

Outside of the above, who can afford a V-22?

Who is really paying?

It's a neat bird, but it ain't cheap.

[SansAnhedral]

none of this same rhetoric for the CH53K? Same unit cost (that is unless it goes even further over budget). Israelis are buying those, but no complaints?

what about Japan? South Korea? Taiwan? Saudi Arabia? I think those governments might have budgets exceeding Richard Branson.

[21stCen]

Marine Corps Osprey squadrons transfer authority in Afghanistan

2nd Marine Aircraft Wing (Forward)
Story by Cpl. Samantha H. Arrington


Date: 07.21.2011
Posted: 07.21.2011 05:26
News ID: 74052
CAMP BASTION, Afghanistan - Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 264 transferred responsibility of providing aerial assault support to Marines and coalition troops on the ground in southwestern Afghanistan to VMM-162, at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, July 18.

With VMM-162 in place to support combat operations, the Marines of VMM-264, commanded by Lt. Col. Brian G. McAvoy, are now slated to return home to Marine Corps Air Station New River, N.C.

“Our goal when we do a transfer of authority is to have the replacements confident that they can pick up where we left off, and maybe do better,” said Sgt. Maj. George P. Aurelio, the VMM-264 sergeant major. “I think VMM-162 is going to do extremely well. I have the trust and confidence in their leadership that they are going to do everything they can to accomplish the mission and take care of their Marines.”

During the outgoing Osprey squadron’s seven month deployment to Afghanistan, VMM-264 completed 475 combat operation missions, transported 965,700 pounds of cargo and more than 23,000 passengers around southwestern Afghanistan.

“If someone was to ask me about my Marines, I would say they are truly magnificent. Now it’s time to go home and get some well deserved rest,” said Aurelio, a native of Mangilao, Guam. “When we get back we are going to have the Marines reset, refocus and rearm and get ready to do it again. It’s a never ending cycle. We’re going to hit the ground running again because we may be out here again.”

VMM-162 is also deployed out of Marine Corps Air Station New River, N.C. This will be VMM-162s first deployment to Afghanistan as a medium tiltrotor squadron using the MV-22 Osprey.

Sgt. Maj. Christopher G. Combs, the VMM-162 sergeant major, alongside the squadron’s commanding officer, Lt. Col. Michael S. Ducar, will lead the nearly 200 Marines of the squadron during their deployment.

“The squadron is excited to be here,” said Combs, a native of Forestport, N.Y. “I think we are going to perform phenomenally. I am 110 percent positive that they will be able to go above and beyond what is expected of them.”

“We’re going to continue to provide the same uninterrupted assault support to ground troops,” said Lt. Col. Michael S. Ducar, the VMM-162 commanding officer, and a native of O’Fallen, Mo. “We’ve got an exceptional group of Marines here and we’re going to carry on the fight.”

[Lonewolf_50]

Sans, I think Saudi fits in with the oil sheikhs I mentioned earlier.

Taiwan? South K? Maybe. Japan? Maybe. Have they flown the fatigue life out of their 53E variants? But I suppose they can indeed afford a V-22.

As to why on the difference in noise, 53K is heavy lift, and has more payload than V-22. (It also hasn't yet had a spectacular crash near DC during a development flight ...)

It covers a different part of the mission mix.
K is less risk, tech wise.
K is less controversial in its development timeline.
Note: the GAO report from last year and program move to the right is a concern. Cost is still a concern. GAO report seemed to indicate to me that program has mostly sorted out such problems.

Given that large helicopter tech is pretty mature, there isn't as much need to hype this aircraft, so it makes sense there isn't as much blather about it as Osprey. Nearly thirty years to IOC (Osprey) isn't an impressive timeline, is it?
That's what can happen when one takes risk with bleeding edge or new tech.

[SASless]

VMM-264 completed 475 combat operation missions, transported 965,700 pounds of cargo and more than 23,000 passengers around southwestern Afghanistan.

I am 110 percent positive that they will be able to go above and beyond what is expected of them.”

My Gawd Mi'Lord! I take back everthing I ever said about the unjustly maligned Osprey!

Any aircraft that can carry 2033 pounds of cargo and 48.42 passengers (most of which were wearing combat gear).....is one hell of a machine!

Bull Crap....Bull Crap....the making of a US Marine! (a refrain from a song much favored during my Army days....comes to mind as I read this PR piece from the Marines!)

Or....is my calculator lying to me again when I run Osprey numbers on it?

[SansAnhedral]

Is every passenger and every pound lifted on a "combat operation mission"?

I read that blurb as 3 distinctly seperate factoids.

[ron-powell]

>My Gawd Mi'Lord! I take back everthing I ever said about the unjustly maligned Osprey!

>Any aircraft that can carry 2033 pounds of cargo and 48.42 passengers (most of which were wearing combat gear).....is one hell of a machine!

Maybe there was more than one aircraft involved in each “combat operation mission”.

Just sayin’……