Osprey Headed Into Combat - Page 5




 
--
 
April 18th, 2006  
A Can of Man
 
 
The idea is they want an aircraft that can do BOTH. It'll have the payload and the vertical takeoff and landing of a helicopter but the speed and range of a fixed wing aircraft. Basically it'll up mobility like crazy for the Marines. If it works.
Heck, I could be sitting in one of these in a few year's time. It better work!
April 18th, 2006  
PJ24
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by moving0target
Do you think it would really raise more of a dust storm than something like the Chinook?
Yes, it does.

April 21st, 2006  
poacher63
 
Not arf! a quantum leap in vertical operations aircraft, the leap in Air Assualt capapility will be fantastic and as for Special Operations! Keep on watching this aircraft ,some of the best aircraft in history have had troubled beginings and are now considered 'classic'.
--
April 22nd, 2006  
PJ24
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by poacher63
Not arf! a quantum leap in vertical operations aircraft, the leap in Air Assualt capapility will be fantastic and as for Special Operations! Keep on watching this aircraft ,some of the best aircraft in history have had troubled beginings and are now considered 'classic'.
There's not much of a leap, actually. Yeah, it will get you there faster, but you better hope your LZ isn't hot 'cause um, there's no weapons on the thing. It's not the best platform for fast roping, which we do a lot of. It is impossible to preform ladder ops on it. The cabin is a very tight fit. There's no fields of view other than from the cockpit. Etc. Etc.

Is the idea of the A/C neat? Yeah, certainly. But the design is not very practical. Even the CV variant, which is the AF (Special Operations) version lacks practicality.

It's coming, we've gotten the first CV delivered already, and waiting on more. So, we'll have to adapt to it, but it's just not the most practical A/C out there.
April 22nd, 2006  
LeatherNeckRVA
 
Fast roping out of the Osprey does not appeal to me in the way fast roping out of a 53E did.
April 22nd, 2006  
poacher63
 
Gentlemen, i defere to your superior knowledge and experience in the matters of this aircraft, however with a bit of U.S ingenuity and adaption i'm certain the U.S forces will get the capability they're looking for.After all it has been an idea that has been what? 40 odd years in coming to fruition, it might be the first step but its the important one.
April 23rd, 2006  
MilidarUSMC
 
 

Topic: 46E crew chief


if anyone wants to hear the oppinion of the guy that is supposed to be replaced by the thunder chickens. i hate that damn thing. it can no way land anywhere close to where the 46 can land, my damn battlephrog should just be upgraded a bit and left alone, not replaced. the NATOPS has already been written for the 46, its still being written for the 22, theres gonna be a lot more blood shed for this damn AC. but whatever, what can ya do, id rather hop on a skid platform than a damn 22. down w/ the 22's!
April 25th, 2006  
G Connor
 
Thanks for the informed opinion MilidarUSMC. Change is never comfortable. Seems to me the 22 caused one of the biggest ethics crisis in the USMC when a squadron CO was found to be falsifying maintenance records to improve the performance numbers for the 22.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a service that holds honor so precious.
April 27th, 2006  
MilidarUSMC
 
 
if were thinking about the same incident about the runaway engine on a 22 that was in flight already and about the 22 that was doing startup that got a runaway eng and flew 30' into the air and crashed down, that was just b/c the crew that had the runaway engine in flight didnt think anything about it, from what i understand. but yes, falsyfying maint records is pretty shitty deal. especially on a new Airframe that needs all the feedback that it can get.
April 27th, 2006  
mmarsh
 
 
The battle for the MC-22 isnt just in the military, its also political. There are beaucoup bucks involved in the project...