V-22 To Iraq... Ought to be interesting

[sky's the limit]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/13/osprey/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The military's controversial V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft will head to Iraq for its first combat tour later this year, Marine officials announced Friday.

After 18 years and $20 billion in development, the plane will deploy to western Iraq in September to support Marine Corps combat operations for seven months, Marine officials said.

The plane, which is intended to replace the Corps' 40-year-old fleet of CH-46 helicopters by 2018, can fly like a plane and land like a helicopter, giving the Marines more flexibility in the field, officials said.

The V-22 can carry troops three times as far, twice as fast and has six to seven times more survivability than the CH-46 widely used now in Iraq, the military says.

The Osprey's performance has also been noticed by the Air Force, which has plans to use it as a special operations aircraft.

The aircraft has been redesigned after two fatal accidents in 2000 that killed 23 Marines. Accidents in 1991 and 1992 killed seven other people, but Marines say the plane's problems are in the past.

"It's been through extensive operational testing and evaluation, and it is our fervent feeling that this aircraft is the most capable, survivable aircraft that we carry our most important weapon system in, which is the Marine or rifleman, and that we will successfully introduce this aircraft in combat," said Lt. Gen. John G. Castellaw, deputy commandant for aviation.

Critics say the tilt-rotor design may still be too unsafe for the complexities of flying in combat operations.

The Marine Corps maintains it is a much more controllable aircraft in those situations.

Since 2003, the Marines have lost seven aircraft in combat operations. The Marine Corps says the V-22 can better avoid being shot down because it can fly higher than the missiles that have been targeting helicopters. In addition, people on the ground cannot hear the aircraft approaching, giving insurgents less time to prepare to shoot as it flies at low altitude.

"I flown the V-22, and I have taken it and used it in a tactical manner," Castellaw said. "The ability to maneuver this aircraft is far in excess of what we have with the existing helicopters."

CNN's Mike Mount contributed to this report.




Was wondering how long it was going to take for them to try out their new toy.

STL

[Glory.]

the sweetest new toy on the planet. If there was one thing I could do for a day I would probably fly that.

[Crazymax]

The more parts that move, the more likely it will break...

Max

[sky's the limit]

The more parts that move, the more likely it will break...

Max

Agreed, but it would be pretty fun to fly.... just not in a war zone.

stl

[2milefinal]

If someone put a V22/BA609 and a B787 in front of me and said "whitch one do you want", I would walk straight over to the V22/BA609.

[Glory.]

If someone put a V22/BA609 and a B787 in front of me and said "whitch one do you want", I would walk straight over to the V22/BA609.

I wish I could say that about a EC135 vs a V22

I never want to be put in that dilemma in my life

wait...

yes I would.

[husky]

How exactly does a V22 handle an engine failure?

This intrigues me, because they obviously couldn't land vertically, nor could they land like a airplane with the rotor deployed in the horizontal position.

[w squared]

Hmmmm....maybe the v-22 operates on the same general principal as a helicopter like the Chinook? If you lose one engine, the other can supply limited power to both rotors?

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just thinking out loud. It would seem like a reasonable proposition to me. Given that the aircraft has two engines and is designed to fly in an environment where nasty people are likely to throw things at it (like bullets), planning for an engine failure seems like a reasonable precaution. A driveshaft running though the center of the wing seems like a good way to get power from one transmission to the other.

I wonder what google will tell me.

[sky's the limit]

Either engine can power either rotor with enough power to facilitate a run- on landing from what I understand.


stl

[w squared]

That'd make a lot of sense. A fairly low price to pay from a weight and engineering standpoint in order to keep the aircraft from falling out of the sky if you lose one engine.