I remember seeing the prototype for the Osprey twenty or so years ago at North Island, I knew the Marine Colonel relieved over that Maintenance records incident ivolving the V-22 a couple of years ago, so I've always been a bit interested in the whole VTOL/Tilt rotor Osprey concept. The Osprey is basically the Undead Budget Item, no one can drive a stake through its heart and it just keeps on sucking out money, year after year.
It took twenty years and $19 billion. But at 4pm today, I'm told, the Pentagon's Defense Acquisition Board will announce its recommendation to go ahead with "full rate production" of the once star-crossed, accident-prone Osprey V-22 tiltrotor craft.
The fate of the hybrid aircraft has been very much in question, ever since a pair of Ospreys crashed in 2000, killing 23. This decision "gets the program off probation. It can't be summarily cancelled now," a source close to the program says.
The Osprey has a sort of interesting history, its genesis can be traced back to former Navy Secretary John Lehmann, he of the 600-ship Navy fame, who went to the Paris Airshow and saw the prototype.
But Lehman was smitten. "It was very easy to fly," he says, "far more stable than a traditional helicopter, and simpler and safer than a Harrier. I was convinced it was what we needed." Lehman pushed the plane through the Navy's acquisition process.
Let me tell you something about Lehmann, no disrespect to my NFO buddies out there, but Lehmann was a reserve A-6 BN. His discussion of how well something flies and handles gets all the weight of a boy scout talking about menopause as far as I'm concerned. Well, they may not be able to kill the program, but they may be able to mort a few flight crews, and I don't say that in jest. Believe me.
It's been 22 years, and the skies aren't exactly crowded with Ospreys. After more than two decades and $16.4 billion, the history of the V-22 is a sorry tale of cost overruns, shoddy construction, and managerial incompetence. Thirty people have died in four Osprey crashes, making the V-22 one of the killingest experimental planes ever. The program has teetered on the brink of elimination since almost the beginning.
This aircraft, for all its' Tom Swift and the Amazing HoverMachine coolness is still not ready for prime time. The article in Wired covers many things that will make your skin crawl when you see how much the test results have been 'cooked' to keep Program Managers happy to keep funding coming from Congress. IMHO, it looks like a lot of the folks talking this up are doing it because they know that the Marine Corps will not see an equivalent program funded for replacement aircraft anytime soon. I've often wondered why the CH-46 production line was not re-opened. Sure it's not as sexy as the Osprey, but the old 46's were made of metal and had tube avionics. A lot of work has been done in recent years in aviation to improve and lighten airframes, which could lead to longer ranges by allowing more fuel on board. Avionics are now out of the vacuum-tube era, and have been for decades which would also help with weight issues to some extent. A reengineered Sea Knight might have fulfilled the Marine and Navy missions pretty well, but hey, John Lehmann was about "sexy and cool", not about what works. I always thought he gave the NFO community a bad name (he liked to pretend he was a pilot). But maybe that was just me.
One other side note: anyone out there know what the Osprey's deck multiple is? Just curious.
posted by Jo Fish on 09.30.05 at 10:31 AM
Comments:
I once interviewed a retired five-star general who now works for a think tank about the Osprey, and he called it a "death trap." Said it was far too slow and was a sitting duck for hand-held missile launchers - and too expensive, to boot.
The Boston/DC corridor would be an ideal commercial application since no new airports have been built. Mid town to mid town would be ideal yet nothing commercial has sprung from the Osprey in 20 yr.
The Marines are planning to purchase 15 plus EH101's for the helo fleet to support the president. If the Osprey was so great, how come it was never considered for this purpose.
posted by: BobR on 09.30.05 at 12:56 PM [permalink]
There's NFOs and NFOs. THIS NFO knew that thing was a piece of crap the second he saw a picture of it.
Unbelievable.
The military industrial complex--half a trillion dollars a year and rising!
I have read where maintenance records were "cooked" as well to put this aircraft in a better light.
The Corps went through the same kind of development problems with the Harrier as well. I think it turned out OK, but it took a long time. One former Marine author, Major Duncan, said that "if you want a Harrier for a lawn ornament, buy a house on the Cherry Point approach".
Seems to me that when you want to change the direction of the things that keep a plane off the ground, you're asking for trouble, but the Corps wants stuff that can carry a buncha grunts and take off and land on expeditionary airfields.
I think an updated CH-46 would have been wiser, simpler, and less expensive, but they wanted more speed, range, and load capacity, and this is what they chose. They've spent a tremendous amount of money on it, and now they're stuck with it, so they have to try and make it work. I wish them, and the young Marines put at risk in it, good luck.
I did my flying, as a white-knuckled rifle-totin' young Marine, in H-34s. I'da charged Hell with a bucket of water just to get out of the damn thing. 46s were just coming in. I rode in one of those and it was a Cadillac by comparison.
Susie, we haven't had a five-star general since WWII (Ike and Omar Bradley), so I doubt everything you say. The V-22 has had its problems, but it's a far better alternative than a goosed-up CH-46. (We Marine grunts used to refer to the CH-46 as the CH-23X2 since it had a bad habit of breaking in half during high-G maneuvers.)
The Corps' new (or relatively new) doctrine of over-the-horizon (OTH) assaults mandates something like the Osprey. Naval forces must now sit OTH because of shore-to-ship missiles like the Silkworm, and the '46s and CH-53s are too slow and can't fly high enough to make OTH work. (Wanna read about what a goatfuck OTH with helicopters looks like, read about the assault on Koh Tang Island in 1975 when the Marines went in to rescue the SS Mayaguez.) The Osprey is not slow; it's incredibly fast and has way more range than any rotary-wing craft (can't remember precisely off the top of my head, but something like a factor of 3 times farther).
Two of the accidents with the Osprey resulted from putting fixed-wing guys in what is basically a rotary-wing aircraft when it comes to takeoffs and landings. During one landing, the pilot encounterd ring-state vortex (Joe, help me with the technical term), which helo pilots are trained for but fixed-wing guys are not. He didn't know what to do and crashed the thing.
By all means investigate if book-cooking took place, but I think the Marines need the Osprey, and bully for them for finally getting it.
posted by: gene on 09.30.05 at 04:45 PM [permalink]
Oh, and while I don't have a number for the V-22's deck multiple, I believe its wing-folded footprint is about the same for a Harrier.
posted by: gene on 09.30.05 at 04:46 PM [permalink]
Ooops. Brain freeze. Wing-folded footprint the same as a CH-53, not a Harrier.
posted by: gene on 09.30.05 at 05:28 PM [permalink]
I got out of the AF in 1987 and at that time I understood this thing was a steaming pile of shit......I can't believe this thing is still around....Its the same mindset that spends billions on the new x whatever the fuck it is fighter to go up against all those new space age fighters Iraq has?????
Ever since I read David's Sling while working for defense contractors in the 80s, I've been afraid someone would find a copy somewhere and know immediately how to beat the crap out of our military procurement system. I really hope an old copy never falls into enemy hands...
Saw a 46 break right in half about a thousand feet up one day in Vietnam. 1967. Worst sight ever. Both pieces fluttered to the ground, one just crumpled and the other exploded. For a while after that we all agreed the best way to win the war would be to give the NVA a couple of 46's filled with M-16's.
posted by: TerryKindlon on 09.30.05 at 09:46 PM [permalink]
Air Force Special Ops is scheduled to replace its Low Pave, Pave Hawks, and C-130s with Osprey, which concerns me because they fly right over my house at low altitude on their way to the range.
It's too much technology with too many things that can go wrong. If you can't tilt the wing the aircraft is a write off - you can't ditch, or make any kind of an emergency landing if you can't tilt the wing. So the crew bails and the people on the ground have to absorb a V-22.
Les Aspin wouldn't let it die back when it should have.
