https://www.reddit.com/r/Military/comments/k00c80/are_v22_ospreys_as_bad_as_their_reputation/
I pilot V-22s for a living if you have any follow up questions but this is the best I can do on mobile:
1. It has pros and cons. Not as much space as a C-17, but more space than a Blackhawk. I can pick you up from wherever like a helicopter, but also have the performance to drop you at whatever altitude and speed you want. It’s closer to the best of both worlds rather than the worst.
2. At sea level it’s more common to run out of space to put stuff than it is to hit the weight limit; 20,000lbs is 80+ troops with gear. As you go up in altitude you have to trade fuel weight for cargo but air refueling is much easier than helicopters. That’s assuming there is no runway, because if there is you can take off at like a plane and weight isn’t really a limiting factor again.
3. It will out perform any other rotor wing platform in adverse weather (including the 160th birds). I have personally flown through sandstorms, icing, fog, 50 mph wind shear, and picked my way through countless thunderstorms using the onboard weather radar. The icing system is fragile but when it works it’s just as capable as the best fixed wing platforms out there.
4. This one is fair, but it’s improving all the time and government logistics is half to blame here at least.
5. People say this crap all the time while being blissfully ignorant of all the redundancies built in. I have 3 hydraulic systems, 2 engines, 4 generators(+battery), 2 rudders, 3 flight control computers and I only need 1 of each of those to keep flying. So forgive me when I roll my eyes when some random dude says “iT cAnt EVen AutoROtatE” when he flies single engine helicopters over mountains where you wouldn’t be able to autorotate anyways.
Dareelbomb259
•
3y ago
•
Edited 3y ago
First off, sorry I'm late. I was literally going through my saved posts and found this lol. For reference, I spent 4 years as a CV-22 Crew Chief.
1. Jumping from it as a helicopter (i.e. fast roping) isn't much different, except that the downwash is greater so the SF guys need two boys to act as anchors for the rope instead of the normal one. As for jumping in airplane mode, I can't recall but they can only do either HALO/HAHO or static jumps. I believe static though because they Osprey can only go to 25,000 feet. So a C-130 or C-17 would be used for that.
2. If you compare it to other VTOL platforms, in most cases the CV-22 at least can carry more. Not only that, but it can get it there faster, and fly farther.
3. I agree. I wouldn't want to fly any aircraft in adverse conditions. But, if I was to, there are other aircraft I would rather fly than the CV-22.
4. Yes. Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes. They are ALWAYS breaking. The maintenance guides are contradictory. The Air Force for some reason has to order any replacement parts through the Navy. So not only are the manufacturers struggling to keep up with everyone, but we have to go to the Navy to get our parts. Not us as maintainers (that's taken care of elsewhere), but it means we're constantly out of stock world-wide (for the Air Force) on major parts. If the mission is desperate enough, sometimes we would have to take a part from the nearest Marine base with an IOU. Though the standard was to canibalize the part from a Phase aircraft—basically swapping them and putting the new one on the Phase aircraft when it arrives. But enough about the rant. Yes, unfortunately when the engineers were building this thing they had to throw everything they could at it, to the point that maintenance was not a consideration in many decisions.
5. Yes, we can both agree that in an emergency it goes from Jack of all trades to master of none. And I have no evidence in front of me, but I would be willing to bet that the Osprey is an averagely safe aircraft. Yes, 1 out of 3 aircraft that leave on a sortie return early because of maintenance problems. But they were able to make it back. From a guy who spent four years working on the damn things, there is a backup to the backup on nearly everything. The engines are even interconnected, so if one dies you can still get home. I don't know about the Marine's record (the Navy I'm pretty sure is clear), but the Air Force has only had two crashes. One during a deployment, which was a mixture of enemy fire and pilot error. And another, which was deemed pilot error (Vortex Ring State is an interesting learn). Ultimately, it's arguable whether any branch is using the Osprey to its full potential. That said, the Osprey absolutely has its problems with maintenance and that extra attention required of the pilots. But it is uniquely qualified, one that will be remembered for a long time (hopefully not in infamy but probably not), and one that our allies love and our enemies hate more. Edit: also, the point of the aircraft for the Air Force is an interesting story. Initially, it was supposed to replace the HH-60 to do CSAR. I mean, think about it: long range, large payload capacity, and VTOL capabilities?? Well, unfortunately, it's not very good in exposed and contested environments (it is very brittle, very loud, and has a very slow approach). So rather than have it as a dedicated CSAR aircraft, they kept the HH-60 and just kept upgrading it. They still use the Osprey for CSAR, but only in areas they know are safe Meanwhile the mission they found for the Osprey was infil and exfil of SOF units such as SEALs, Delta, Rangers, etc.
HH-60
No comments:
Post a Comment