I've watched them on exercise and at airshows. I've seen all kinds of vids and now I see the Commandant trying to build the future of the Marine Corps around a heliborne force...mostly using MV-22's to get Marines to hotspots.
On the surface it sounds good but as I and many others (thanks for crystalizing this Paralus) have stated. The MV-22 looks like a dead duck in the approach to the landing zone.
As Paralus pointed out. The Vietcong made a living off shooting down the ultra maneuverable Huey when it was in the landing zone area.
I expect the same to happen to a SPMAGTF-CR (Crisis Response) one day soon.
But back to the issue at hand. I don't have the expertise to fully flesh out my observations. If you're a Aviation Expert, Pilot, Crew Chief, Grunt with serious time in the cabin or even an arm chair general that has alot of knowledge on the subject I want to hear from you. I don't care if you think I'm full of it or spot on. The comparison airplane should be the MH-60 flying with an equal payload. Thanks!
hit one prop in cruising mode and the thing will flip over in mid-air and tear itself to pieces if the prop blade doesn't sever the pilots from the rest of the aircraft...
ReplyDeleteHit one prop while it's landing and it will flip over and tear itself apart in mid-air and possibly take-out the Osprey landing it's compliment in the right next to it.
Sol, I don't think you need an "aviation expert". Just take a piece of paper and compare it to a helicopter. Where at least you can afford to loss a helicopter. Regards,
ReplyDeletehttp://www.g2mil.com/scandal.htm
ReplyDeleteYou read this stuff? I do not believe everything that I have read there but it helped to clarify the Osprey to me.
Does anybody have accelerations values according to MV-22 and a comparable helicopter for approach and take off? How fast can an MV-22 get in and out on the last mile compared to helicopter?
ReplyDeletei'll dig that up. send me a private e-mail.
DeleteIsrael is working on an active protection system for helicopters that seems like a great idea. http://i-hls.com/2013/04/flicker-may-protect-helicopters-from-shoulder-launched-missiles/
ReplyDeleteThere are some proven issues with the MV-22 (and CV-22) on final approach and doing hover ops. It doesn't have door-guns, just a ramp gun. AFSOC tried to test a nose-gun and a belly-gun but those projects ran into some major issues and got scrapped. They Osprey has a nasty habit of setting LZs on fire, if there is grass or anything else flammable. A lot of FOD goes down the engines when the nacelles are pointing in the vertical, making the time between engine changes a lot shorter than a helicopter. The 8th SOS lost one about a year ago when it was hovering out at A-78 (a live-fire range) and dirty air from another CV-22 providing gun support made the mishap tilt-rotor crash.
ReplyDeleteI was an IP on UH-1Ns and Mi-17s at Hurlburt Field and a lot of my old Pave Low buddies flew CV-22s at the 8th SOS and they said it was a fun platform to fly. They all agreed, however, that it is not a helicopter. It isn't designed to do the things helicopters do and it has its own unique mission-set that shouldn't be confused with a rotary-wing mission set. Personally, I think the concept is valuable, but I'm afraid the USAF and USMC rushed this bird through test and production and it still has some issues that need to be addressed.
On FOD:
DeleteAir Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) is spraying landing zones in the New Mexico desert with epoxy to prevent damage to the engines of its CV-22 Osprey tiltrotors flying training missions there.
The finicky engines must be pulled off the aircraft and repaired roughly every 250-300 hours of flying time due to the amount of grit that gets inside them when the aircraft land and takeoff in the field, according to AFSOC's chief of requirements Brig. Gen. Albert "Buck" Elton.
On "training missions, we were wearing out our engines and that just wasn't acceptable," said Elton. "We can spray about a 300 foot radius helicopter landing zone" with a Rhinoliner epoxy to keep the dirt out of the CV-22s engines."
The engines need filters.
I agree John. I think the biggest problem with V22 is that we are using an incredible tool with an unique skill set to do regular helicopter stuff.
DeleteWow Don, that is incredible, I have never heard that one before.
Just saw this on a different site, talking about the Marine Corps, thought it was really good:
http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2013/10/state-of-marine-corps.html
Actually, the Belly gun works fine, it just eats into payload capacity in the thin Afghan air, so it is rarely used.
DeleteHere it is, made by BAE: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_RWS_RGS_on_MV-22_Slide_lg.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/baes-turret-to-trial-in-cv-22s-04618/&h=634&w=1024&sz=116&tbnid=P6Sck-ZZXysbRM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=145&zoom=1&usg=__ltzPZ7H_BYSQ4_CH5rTrSIwaU-M=&docid=xOT_hjdnvlCzVM&sa=X&ei=VzVxUuLnK6Td2QW9_oHwCQ&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAQ
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/baes-turret-to-trial-in-cv-22s-04618/
Who says it works fine, BAE? I wouldn't trust that article for any kind of objective evaluation of a weapon system. I know both the former squadron commander of the 14th Flight Test Squadron and pilot rep of the test team back in 2009 and they both gave it a big thumbs down (the pilot rep, a good friend of mine, almost got shot when it malfunctioned on the range). It also had an AD straight down into the heli-pad out at A77 when it tried to land and fix a "hot gun" issue. So 14th Flight Test advised AFSOC not to buy it. If the USMC wants it, I'm sure Amos will be stupid enough to sign off on it. Why not, it's only 10s of millions of dollars that the Marines can't afford right now...
Deletespot on John!!!
DeleteThe mh-60 can never equal the payload of an osprey. Aside from that the osprey is in small arms range for a much shorter time period.
ReplyDeleteI don't know about that, I've flown plenty of dissimilar formation with MH-60s, they can get in and out of the zap zone a hell of a lot faster than a UH-1, an MH-53 or an Mi-17 (the three platforms I was an instructor on). I watched the CV-22s do plenty of tactical approaches at Hurlburt Fld and the LZs in NW Florida, they are about as fast as a large helicopter ie. slower than an MH-60. Besides, Blackhawks (and any other helo) do their tactical approaches and departures at treetop level, if possible. V-22s have to use a more conservative altitude for their approaches and they can't fly at the 100 foot separation that helos use (I think CV-22s use a 1000 foot separation, if remember correctly). We explored the idea of flying in formation with CV-22s using Mi-17s a few years back and it quickly became apparent that tilt-rotors are horrible dissimilar platforms to fly with. They fly a faster, higher profile and put out too much downwash. I shared the same airspace with them from 2006-2012, and saw both good and bad things in their capabilities.
DeleteI'm not saying the tilt-rotor doesn't have a potential use in tactical operations, but it is in no way, shape, or form, a replacement for the MH-60 or any other rotary-wing asset.
http://www.g2mil.com/V-22Amishaps.htm
ReplyDeleteBack in 2001, everyone thought that Brig. Gen. Amos would be forced to retire after he was caught telling lies about V-22 readiness and conspiring to hide V-22 failures from civilian leaders. The Inspector General even seized his computer. "
"The commander of the first Osprey squadron was taped ordering his maintenance crews to lie about the V-22's mission capable rates in the interests of obtaining approval for full-rate production. Last Nov. 21, Marine Brig. Gen. James Amos e-mailed a 'close hold' memo to Lt. Gen. Frederick McCorkle, stating his fear that a report of low mission capable rates of 26.7 percent for early November 'isn't going to help' in regard to the upcoming production decision. Significantly, the only non-Marines on the address list for the memo were the president of Bell Textron and a vice president of Boeing. Then, on Dec. 1, during a news conference convened expressly to explain why the V-22 was ready for full-rate production, Amos claimed that its mission capable rate for the first 13 days of November had been 73.2 percent."
General Amos was not forced to retire, but was rewarded with three more promotions and is now the top Marine - the Commandant! He continues to spin lies about the V-22's readiness, safety record, performance, and the need to keep Futenma open."
No wonder this guy is an ethically challenged Commandant; he was an ethically challenged GOWS. This guy is a straight up Courtney Massengale.
Once a douche, always a douche....
The legacy survives -- false Osprey readiness reports are still an issue.
Delete"Marines Brush Off DoD IG Criticisms Of V-22 Readiness Reporting"
http://breakingdefense.com/2013/10/marines-brush-off-dod-ig-criticisms-of-v-22-readiness-reporting/
Wow I didn't realize that it had THAT Many issues. I just thought its approach to landing was limited and left it vulnerable, seems like they need to rethink how many we buy and what missions they can do.
ReplyDeleteHere is a recent DFC that was awarded to an HH-60G CSAR pilot for an op in Afghanistan. You can read the description of everything they did with the HH-60s and realize that MV-22s or CV-22s would have had a lot of issues with a similar situation.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/10/30/airman-earns-distinguished-flying-cross-with-valor.html?comp=700001076338&rank=3
My old squadron commander, then-Lt Col Trask, once wrote a thesis on the CV-22 and it's tactical employment. Here is a sample paragraph:
ReplyDelete"The problem is in the target area, as the CV-22 transitions to the helicopter mode and into hovering flight. This is the point at which it is most vulnerable, and the point at which an intelligent foe will attack. This element of a mission profile will be very similar to a helicopter in the same situation, and there are techniques that have proven effective in dealing with threats. They involve an aircraft that can fly in formation and provide immediate suppression. Since the Osprey will most likely operate without other support aircraft, because of its unique flying characteristics, it will usually have to defend itself. Traditional escort aircraft do not have the ability to penetrate at night, at low level, in marginal weather, using terrain following systems. The chin mounted, pilot controlled gun on the CV-22 is one potential solution, though it will be very limited. There will undoubtedly be a need for more firepower in some cases. Weapons technology is such that it would behoove USSOCOM to begin looking at systems that could strap on to a CV-22 to make it a viable armed escort platform."
Here is the link: https://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/trask.htm
I do not believe the V-22 mission for a Hot contested LZ is viable even with a defensive packet. Last I heard the chin turret was unable to be traversed or elevated, the force of the gunfire upset the balance outside ground effect so the turret was cancelled.
DeleteThis Planning by HQMC never planned on making Hot kick in the door insertions, the HQMC plans on having an airfield to land conventionally that is secured prior to launching the V-22 feet dry.
The airfield would be taken first or bought from somebody willing to sell on the ground.
These clown are not planning to insert Marines anywhere this is all show and tell, bells and whistles with many blinkin' winkin' lights to distract from the screw ups that have brought us here.
This could be the reason the Marines are considering Para-Marines.
ReplyDeleteIf the first wave of a V-22 vertical envelopment is at risk while making the insertion to the LZ then perhaps a high speed approach by V-22 could simply drop Para-Marines to secure that LZ or prepare an LZ by a vigorous perimeter defense. Dropping engineers to blow an area for the landings.Or that FAE designed to blow everything down prior to the landing.
The V-22 can get there fast but still has to land like a Helo when it does, that's where it becomes nothing more than a Helo a clumsy Helo at that.
Osprey? Nope, The V-22 Death Trap maybe.