What's the latest news of the V22 Osprey?
Jack,
It doesnt depend....the quote read "the legacy helicopters it is replacing"
Pretty straightforward, as the V22 is replacing the CH46.
Do you have numbers for a CH46 OEI?
I guess it depends on which legacy helicopters you are going to use for comparison.
Pretty straightforward, as the V22 is replacing the CH46.
Do you have numbers for a CH46 OEI?
Jack Carson:
Sermetel(TM) and Rockhard(TM) coatings were both used at one point on Mg. From what little I know, Rockhard seems to have become the coating of choice. The company (parent company UK based) have a lot of different coating flavors and sealants, one of which is used on the Mg alloys in Sikorsky gear boxes based on a Sikorsky driven spec.
Rockhard clear stoving enamel protection magnesium aluminium (aluninum)
The real key to protection, in my opinion, is vigilance in the field and aggressive touch up.
Furia: I don't see V-22 as a C-130 replacement, but I appreciate your perspective. With USCG, however, traditionally cost has been a huge factor in any procurement. Osprey is very pricey.
Maybe as it matures USCG might find a niche for it.
If the cost comes down.
SASless:
Grrrr. Must get up on soap box here.
No, the US Navy does not operate Blackhawks. 
They operate Seahawks.
(Yes it's an S-70 variant ... but ...)
Sermetel(TM) and Rockhard(TM) coatings were both used at one point on Mg. From what little I know, Rockhard seems to have become the coating of choice. The company (parent company UK based) have a lot of different coating flavors and sealants, one of which is used on the Mg alloys in Sikorsky gear boxes based on a Sikorsky driven spec.
Rockhard clear stoving enamel protection magnesium aluminium (aluninum)
The real key to protection, in my opinion, is vigilance in the field and aggressive touch up.
Furia: I don't see V-22 as a C-130 replacement, but I appreciate your perspective. With USCG, however, traditionally cost has been a huge factor in any procurement. Osprey is very pricey.
Maybe as it matures USCG might find a niche for it.
If the cost comes down.
SASless:
Grrrr. Must get up on soap box here.
As the Air Force and Navy operate Blackhawks....there should be some commonality between the standards it would seem.
They operate Seahawks. (Yes it's an S-70 variant ... but ...)
CH-46 OEI Capabilities
I have limited experience in the CH-46D/E. I do know from flight experience that it had very good OEI capabilities above 40KIAS. It also demonstrated, as part of its FAA certification, satisfactory dual engine out autorotations. As part of my checkout we did OEI cut guns from a relatively high hover (mid to High IGE). It was a very docile maneuver.
JohnD
If the rotor on the 60 is so tolerant to damage why was it sucking rotor blades in peace time operations? The same vintage design on the 76 could not survive a small mark do to a lighting strike. Bell's blade desighs on the 412 and 58D which are similar in concept to the V-22 have demonstrated significant survivability. Pictures are available which shows what an RPG can do to a 58D (if did go off) and the ship recovered to its base.
The Sultan
If the rotor on the 60 is so tolerant to damage why was it sucking rotor blades in peace time operations? The same vintage design on the 76 could not survive a small mark do to a lighting strike. Bell's blade desighs on the 412 and 58D which are similar in concept to the V-22 have demonstrated significant survivability. Pictures are available which shows what an RPG can do to a 58D (if did go off) and the ship recovered to its base.
The Sultan
V-22 Ballistic Vulnerability
Sans,
Thanks and read the report. While it does not say exactly what they fired at the V-22, it reads that the UH-60M and 53K meet similar criteria. I can check into those two and find out what projectiles were fired at the rotors ( the 60M having a different construction blade than the A and L, the ballistic testing would have had to be redone ). I will advise on what I learn.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Thanks and read the report. While it does not say exactly what they fired at the V-22, it reads that the UH-60M and 53K meet similar criteria. I can check into those two and find out what projectiles were fired at the rotors ( the 60M having a different construction blade than the A and L, the ballistic testing would have had to be redone ). I will advise on what I learn.
Thanks,
John Dixson
UH-60 Blades
Sultan,
You wrote:
"If the rotor on the 60 is so tolerant to damage why was it sucking rotor blades in peace time operations? "
What does that mean?
Thanks,
John Dixson
You wrote:
"If the rotor on the 60 is so tolerant to damage why was it sucking rotor blades in peace time operations? "
What does that mean?
Thanks,
John Dixson
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mansfield, TX
Age: 48
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so this conversation has diverged to a back and forth discussing the merits of the effectiveness of a magic golden bullet and requests to basically post details of classified survivability reports of various US helos. Nothing good can come out of this..... [SMH]
Direction
TCU,
I tend to agree. I am curious about the 60M and am pursuing that. If classified I won't receive an answer to my inquiry. Too early for 53K blade specimens to be available anyway.
The thread had asked a question about the Army and the V-22. I'd guess hover payload is uppermost in the Army's mind, so they must be quite happy with the 47F. Certainly that hover chart included in the Bell.Boeing document on this thread, coupled with the V-22 empty weight getting to about 35K with the defensive gun, makes for a notable difference in hover payload between the two.
Update on 8/17: Received confirmation citing the unclassified (but SA proprietary) engineering report that the 60M had completed and passed the requisite 23mm testing: took the required number of hits while loaded, inboard and outboard blade specimens, at requisite shot angles and then completed the requisite fatigue test under the flight loads to confirm survivability.
Thanks,
John Dixson
I tend to agree. I am curious about the 60M and am pursuing that. If classified I won't receive an answer to my inquiry. Too early for 53K blade specimens to be available anyway.
The thread had asked a question about the Army and the V-22. I'd guess hover payload is uppermost in the Army's mind, so they must be quite happy with the 47F. Certainly that hover chart included in the Bell.Boeing document on this thread, coupled with the V-22 empty weight getting to about 35K with the defensive gun, makes for a notable difference in hover payload between the two.
Update on 8/17: Received confirmation citing the unclassified (but SA proprietary) engineering report that the 60M had completed and passed the requisite 23mm testing: took the required number of hits while loaded, inboard and outboard blade specimens, at requisite shot angles and then completed the requisite fatigue test under the flight loads to confirm survivability.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 18th Aug 2011 at 20:17.
The "Vision of the Future" article ...
In re the article:
Dan, do you remember the original LHX "vision" of the 80's, where there was only one pilot?
Guess that vision didn't work out.
Were you around for the Navy's "Helo Master Plan" in the 90's? It boiled down to "Sikorsky makes it" in a practical sense, except for the USMC element. ( Seem to also recall a Navy Secretary trying to build an all Grumman Air Wing for the carriers, F-14's and A-6's and naught else.)
With that in mind, I'll take the article you presented with a grain of salt. These vision things are mutable. But it is interesting to see what some of the Army planners are looking into. Thanks for the post.
I have reason to believe that scout roles will all become more and more UAV centric, with attack roles shared between UAV and manned, in the time line (2020-2040) that the article discusses.
I too may be wrong.
I think the assumptions on the breakdown between manned and unmanned is not going to be as rosy as this author proposes, nor the panel suggests.
As for the four engined C-130 tilt rotor ... that idea's been around since the mid 90's ... will be interesting to see if it ever comes to fruition.
Dan, do you remember the original LHX "vision" of the 80's, where there was only one pilot?
Guess that vision didn't work out. Were you around for the Navy's "Helo Master Plan" in the 90's? It boiled down to "Sikorsky makes it" in a practical sense, except for the USMC element. ( Seem to also recall a Navy Secretary trying to build an all Grumman Air Wing for the carriers, F-14's and A-6's and naught else.)
With that in mind, I'll take the article you presented with a grain of salt. These vision things are mutable. But it is interesting to see what some of the Army planners are looking into. Thanks for the post.
For industry, the implications of making the transition to JMR are stark. The military services currently support three large rotorcraft companies based in the USA, as well as two relatively recent entrants from Europe with the army's EADS North America UH-72A Lakota and the US Coast Guard's AgustaWestland MH-68. At least 25 basic helicopter and tiltrotor models are in service across the fleet, which include trainers, cargo, utility, scout and attack systems.
I too may be wrong.
I think the assumptions on the breakdown between manned and unmanned is not going to be as rosy as this author proposes, nor the panel suggests.
As for the four engined C-130 tilt rotor ... that idea's been around since the mid 90's ... will be interesting to see if it ever comes to fruition.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 17th Aug 2011 at 19:18.
RPG's and Helicopters
A Turkish Jandarma S-70 that met an RPG in an LZ ( a dangerous place to be no matter what one is flying) :
Thanks,
John Dixson
Thanks,
John Dixson
Last edited by JohnDixson; 18th Aug 2011 at 16:30. Reason: Added comment
http://defensetech.org/2011/09/23/th...on/#more-14707
The CV-22’s 800-mile Afghan CSAR Mission
While on a tour of Boeing’s V-22 assembly line Wednesday, DT learned that Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22 Ospreys performed an impressive combat search and rescue mission in June 2010 — nearly one year before USMC MV-22s rescued the pilot of that F-15E Strike Eagle that crashed in Libya in March.
Here are the details of the operation as relayed to DT by Bill Sunick, Boeing’s manager of V-22 business development.
On June 1, 2010 a helo carrying 32 people went down during a special operations raid near Kunduz in Northeast Afghanistan. A severe dust storm and the Hindu Kush mountain range foiled attempts by other helos to reach the stranded crew and passengers who were under small arms and mortar fire. Two CV-22s from the 8th Special Operations Squadron launched out of Kandahar in southern Afghanistan within two hours of being alerted and flew 400-miles straight to the site — over the 15,000-foot mountains and through “very low visibility” – and back to Kandahar with the 32 stranded troops in less than four hours.
“There was a mountain range in between” the American bases at Bagram and Kandahar “so conventional rotorcraft would have had to snake through the valleys and whatnot,” said Sunick. “V-22 flew over them. The guys went up, they went on oxygen, went over the mountains, went direct as the crow flies and then when they were coming close the weather was extremely bad, I think they had less than a quarter-mile visibility. Now you’ve got your [terrain following radar] sniffing things out for you, giving you a clear picture and so the guys were able to go in there. It was a hot LZ, they were under fire, they landed, picked all they guys up — 32 folks crammed in the back of the airplane — and they got out of Dodge and made it back.”
To put things in perspective, the Libyan rescue mission was about 260-nautical miles, round-trip.
Now, the V-22 had its share of development problems [nightmares, at times] and it’s still working through problems with fine sand wearing down engine parts faster than engineers would like and it’s mission ready rates when deployed are roughly 70 percent. Still, you can’t argue that the speed and ranges at which the bird flies combined with its VTOL abilities make it invaluable for missions like this.
(This post is adapted from a broader V-22 piece that we ran yesterday. I thought the rescue mission warranted its own write up.)
While on a tour of Boeing’s V-22 assembly line Wednesday, DT learned that Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22 Ospreys performed an impressive combat search and rescue mission in June 2010 — nearly one year before USMC MV-22s rescued the pilot of that F-15E Strike Eagle that crashed in Libya in March.
Here are the details of the operation as relayed to DT by Bill Sunick, Boeing’s manager of V-22 business development.
On June 1, 2010 a helo carrying 32 people went down during a special operations raid near Kunduz in Northeast Afghanistan. A severe dust storm and the Hindu Kush mountain range foiled attempts by other helos to reach the stranded crew and passengers who were under small arms and mortar fire. Two CV-22s from the 8th Special Operations Squadron launched out of Kandahar in southern Afghanistan within two hours of being alerted and flew 400-miles straight to the site — over the 15,000-foot mountains and through “very low visibility” – and back to Kandahar with the 32 stranded troops in less than four hours.
“There was a mountain range in between” the American bases at Bagram and Kandahar “so conventional rotorcraft would have had to snake through the valleys and whatnot,” said Sunick. “V-22 flew over them. The guys went up, they went on oxygen, went over the mountains, went direct as the crow flies and then when they were coming close the weather was extremely bad, I think they had less than a quarter-mile visibility. Now you’ve got your [terrain following radar] sniffing things out for you, giving you a clear picture and so the guys were able to go in there. It was a hot LZ, they were under fire, they landed, picked all they guys up — 32 folks crammed in the back of the airplane — and they got out of Dodge and made it back.”
To put things in perspective, the Libyan rescue mission was about 260-nautical miles, round-trip.
Now, the V-22 had its share of development problems [nightmares, at times] and it’s still working through problems with fine sand wearing down engine parts faster than engineers would like and it’s mission ready rates when deployed are roughly 70 percent. Still, you can’t argue that the speed and ranges at which the bird flies combined with its VTOL abilities make it invaluable for missions like this.
(This post is adapted from a broader V-22 piece that we ran yesterday. I thought the rescue mission warranted its own write up.)
MV-22 faces budget cuts, says USMC aviation chief
MV-22 faces budget cuts, says USMC aviation chief
Stephen Trimble Washington DC
The US Marine Corps' top aviation official has confirmed the Bell Boeing MV-22 Osprey is one target of budget reduction proposals now under review.
So far, there have been proposals to reduce MV-22 purchases by between six and 24 aircraft during the next five years, said Lt Gen Terry Robling, the USMC's deputy commandant for aviation.
The Marines had hoped to buy 122 aircraft over a five-year period starting in fiscal year 2014. Bell Boeing, the contractor, would receive a lump-sum contract for all 122 aircraft and, in return, would reduce the price by 10%.
If the proposed cuts are accepted, the five-year total will drop to between 98 and 116. At those levels, Bell Boeing can still meet the 10% price cut, allowing the Marines to sign a multi-year deal, Robling said.
However, Robling added that the Marines are concerned the Department of Defense could cut the MV-22 procurement account even deeper. Reducing the five-year total below 98 aircraft could make it impossible for the contractors to offer the 10% discount, he said.
If the multi-year deal is not signed, the USMC would have to buy its MV-22s on an annual basis instead, which would expose the programme to potential budget changes every year.
The MV-22 is entering a period of budget uncertainty, even as programme officials claim the aircraft has "turned a corner" on several of its most vexing problems.
The tiltrotor's safety record has been of no serious concern for several years, but its operational costs have been criticised by lawmakers.
The MV-22's cost per flight hour had hovered as high as $12,000 until about eight months ago, Robling said. However, the cost has since dropped to about $9,000 per hour, with a monthly, fleet-wide average low of $7,500, he added.
Stephen Trimble Washington DC
The US Marine Corps' top aviation official has confirmed the Bell Boeing MV-22 Osprey is one target of budget reduction proposals now under review.
So far, there have been proposals to reduce MV-22 purchases by between six and 24 aircraft during the next five years, said Lt Gen Terry Robling, the USMC's deputy commandant for aviation.
The Marines had hoped to buy 122 aircraft over a five-year period starting in fiscal year 2014. Bell Boeing, the contractor, would receive a lump-sum contract for all 122 aircraft and, in return, would reduce the price by 10%.
If the proposed cuts are accepted, the five-year total will drop to between 98 and 116. At those levels, Bell Boeing can still meet the 10% price cut, allowing the Marines to sign a multi-year deal, Robling said.
© US Navy
If the multi-year deal is not signed, the USMC would have to buy its MV-22s on an annual basis instead, which would expose the programme to potential budget changes every year.
The MV-22 is entering a period of budget uncertainty, even as programme officials claim the aircraft has "turned a corner" on several of its most vexing problems.
The tiltrotor's safety record has been of no serious concern for several years, but its operational costs have been criticised by lawmakers.
The MV-22's cost per flight hour had hovered as high as $12,000 until about eight months ago, Robling said. However, the cost has since dropped to about $9,000 per hour, with a monthly, fleet-wide average low of $7,500, he added.
If the mandatory budget cuts are imposed by the Debt Commission failing its task....it ain't just a few aircraft that shall be cut. The entire US Military will be on a Spam and Beans diet.
I should hope the Military Chiefs are preparing for such an eventuality as any hope the Politicians can find a way to cut spending in sort of logical/reasonable manner remains slim to **** all.
I should hope the Military Chiefs are preparing for such an eventuality as any hope the Politicians can find a way to cut spending in sort of logical/reasonable manner remains slim to **** all.
General Harvel says:
And that's the thing, isn't it? We all cling to our version of what we think is "the truth." Trouble is, it may or may not actually be...you know...The Truth. Your reality may not be my reality. And I sort of feel sorry for Brig. General Harvel in his opposition to others on the cause of this accident. But let's give him credit at least for not being a complete and total idiot. He's obviously an intelligent guy, and I doubt that he's intentionally lying. He probably honestly believes that this particular V-22 suffered some sort of extraordinary dual power failure at exactly the wrong time and place. His superiors in the Air Force disagreed.
I'll only make two observations and then leave it alone:
1) There were A-10's flying cover and relaying video of the mission. Did they not have IR capability? If so, can it be determined if the engines were producing heat? I ask because I don't know. Surely if the engines had "failed," then their exhuast heat signature would be diminished.
2) Ironically, this accident bears a strong resemblance to the infamous accident on 8April 2000 in Marana, Arizona that killed 19 Marines. In both cases the aircraft was running late and the pilots made an improvised, non-standard approach. Marana of course was blamed on A-VRS and this one wasn't, but the end result is basically the same: Crashed V-22.
And in this case, the preponderance of evidence that has been released to the public calls into question General Harvel's version of "the truth." Maybe he's right, but sadly, it does not seem so.
“My heart and brain said it was not pilot error. I stuck with what I thought was the truth.”
I'll only make two observations and then leave it alone:
1) There were A-10's flying cover and relaying video of the mission. Did they not have IR capability? If so, can it be determined if the engines were producing heat? I ask because I don't know. Surely if the engines had "failed," then their exhuast heat signature would be diminished.
2) Ironically, this accident bears a strong resemblance to the infamous accident on 8April 2000 in Marana, Arizona that killed 19 Marines. In both cases the aircraft was running late and the pilots made an improvised, non-standard approach. Marana of course was blamed on A-VRS and this one wasn't, but the end result is basically the same: Crashed V-22.
And in this case, the preponderance of evidence that has been released to the public calls into question General Harvel's version of "the truth." Maybe he's right, but sadly, it does not seem so.
The link mentioned in Dan's post (Osprey Down) makes some very pointed accusations about USMC Officers lying and altering standards to put forth an incorrect recounting of the Class A Accident Rate for the Osprey.
Has NCIS or DCIS investigated those accusations to determine if that is true?
Those are pretty serious allegations in my view. Either they are true and punitive action should be taken against the culpable individuals or those making the allegations should be proven to be liars.
Has NCIS or DCIS investigated those accusations to determine if that is true?
Those are pretty serious allegations in my view. Either they are true and punitive action should be taken against the culpable individuals or those making the allegations should be proven to be liars.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FH1100 said:
2) Ironically, this accident bears a strong resemblance to the infamous accident on 8April 2000 in Marana, Arizona that killed 19 Marines. In both cases the aircraft was running late and the pilots made an improvised, non-standard approach. Marana of course was blamed on A-VRS and this one wasn't, but the end result is basically the same: Crashed V-22
Perhaps the engines really did begin to decelerate due to running out of the 'ram air effect' during rotor transition to a hover. Besides, these engines have a history of having compressor stalls which were deemed normal by the mfg.
SASless
There is very little 'honor' left anywhere in government these days as compared to when you and I served. When everyone lies, you would turn out to be the fool willing to sacrifice everything for honor. These days, honor amongst men in power no longer exists.
2) Ironically, this accident bears a strong resemblance to the infamous accident on 8April 2000 in Marana, Arizona that killed 19 Marines. In both cases the aircraft was running late and the pilots made an improvised, non-standard approach. Marana of course was blamed on A-VRS and this one wasn't, but the end result is basically the same: Crashed V-22
Perhaps the engines really did begin to decelerate due to running out of the 'ram air effect' during rotor transition to a hover. Besides, these engines have a history of having compressor stalls which were deemed normal by the mfg.
SASless
There is very little 'honor' left anywhere in government these days as compared to when you and I served. When everyone lies, you would turn out to be the fool willing to sacrifice everything for honor. These days, honor amongst men in power no longer exists.
Last edited by Dan Reno; 18th Oct 2011 at 13:03.
Clearly David Axe has one to grid with this history of journalism on the subject of the Osprey. He must have been given a complimentary membership to the club by Bob Cox.
Step 1: When the aircraft makes progress, attack the validity of the statistics while simultaneously ignoring the safety rates of all other VTOL aircraft (i.e. AV-8B) in your reporting
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
Step 1: When the aircraft makes progress, attack the validity of the statistics while simultaneously ignoring the safety rates of all other VTOL aircraft (i.e. AV-8B) in your reporting
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: here
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reno says:
LMAO!!! Since you have nothing else you are now resorting to making up your own theories? Do you have anything to back your theory up with?
Dan why do you keep taking that quote out of context?
Wow, pretentious and disrespectful to those serving our government.
Perhaps the engines really did begin to decelerate due to running out of the 'ram air effect' during rotor transition to a hover.
Besides, these engines have a history of having compressor stalls which were deemed normal by the mfg.
There is very little 'honor' left anywhere in government these days as compared to when you and I served. When everyone lies, you would turn out to be the fool willing to sacrifice everything for honor. These days, honor amongst men in power no longer exists.