PDA

View Full Version : V-22


Mitch
08-01-2009, 01:14
How has the V-22 been performing in Iraq - thus far -- for those that know me, I have been opposed to this boodoggle aircraft for years - but, so far we have been lucky in Iraq - no Class-A incidents yet!


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=axdXXwjEYNYc

In addition to keeping the plane grounded, these constant repairs put the plane’s flying cost at $11,000 per hour, double the original estimate.


http://www.g2mil.com/V-22survive.htm

The Fuselage is not Crashworthy

Tiltrotors perform so poorly that dozens of compromises were made to shed weight on the V-22, like using a composite airframe and composite parts. Original plans called for strong Kevlar flooring to provide ballistic protection and support combat vehicles, but that was dropped. That decision along with the composite fuselage caused it fall short of Navy safety standards, which require the fuselage to survive the impact of a crash landing without breaking apart or collapsing. The film "Blackhawk Down" shows Blackhawk helicopters crash landing without disintegrating or collapsing.
As a result, Bell-Boeing invented the idea of "mass shedding." As a V-22 makes a controlled crash, pilots must land like an airplane on a runway and keep the proprotors forward in the airplane mode. This will cause the large proprotors to strike the ground first, which is supposed to cause both wings to break-off along with the heavy engines. This sheds much weight, so Bell-Boeing argues the aircraft is much lighter when the fuselage strikes the ground two seconds later. Their calculations show this allows the V-22 to meet the Navy standard.
This has never been demonstrated. It is only possible if the V-22 is in the airplane mode and if an open area is available to land. This is a difficult challenge for pilots since they always tilt the proprotors upward as they land, and will instinctively want to do that to reduce airspeed, especially if they have some engine power. Moreover, V-22s are most likely to be hit by ground fire while slowly landing or taking off in the helicopter mode with rotors up. Since a V-22 needs 2000 feet of altitude to convert to the airplane mode as it falls, it will hit the ground with no mass shedding to cheat Navy standards.

Mitch
08-02-2009, 00:09
Were 8 V-22s actually seen yesterday out at Camp Mackall?


http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/2009/08/v-22-osprey.html

"Yesterday I watched eight of these babies land at Camp MacKall Airfield, NC - it was like a scene out of a science fiction movie."

As reported in Sean Linnane's Blog on August 1, 2009.
Sean Linnane is the psuedonym of a retired Special Forces career NCO (1st SFG, 3d SFG, 10th SFG).

Pete S
08-02-2009, 01:27
I don't like it one bit.

The capabilities do not outweigh any potential gains.
Armament is also almost non existent.

This is the first I have heard of anything concerning crash survivability.
I would like to know about water ditching and egress, which the article doesn't mention.

Marpats are about the only thing the USMC has gotten right recently.
The EFV has been in the works for awhile and the MV-22 is nothing close to the miracle machine its made out to be.

JJ_BPK
08-02-2009, 04:01
Mitch & Pete

I agree they are to little for to much money. Between the F-22 and the V-22, I not sure which is a bigger drain..


Maybe it's the number 22???

swpa19
08-02-2009, 04:59
Maybe it's the number 22???


Could be. Maybe it started with "Catch 22"?

HowardCohodas
08-02-2009, 08:09
Could be. Maybe it started with "Catch 22"?

That's funny, right there!